And he backed off those positions and flip flopped like a true politician right after the debate. Did you not hear the news? He isn't for that anymore.
Do you consider him being basically a weather vane with his flip flopping back and forth on nearly every issue to be a good thing? There's no way to tell where he truly stands on any issue because all we've seen is his con man shtick
I am not a Trump supporter, but can someone please explain to me what the specific objection is that the Black Lives Matter hooligans have with Donald Trump? I am not playing dumb. I follow all this sort of stuff pretty carefully and I really do not know. As far as I can tell, the objection is that he does not submit and conform to the left's political correctness agenda. So the BLM hooligans are taking it upon themselves to force him to conform by trying to silence him. But why them? What does Trump's refusal to conform to the Democrat left's political correctness speech codes have to do specifically with Black Lives Matter or the larger black community? I do not get it.
As far as politician skills (the context of the discussion you quoted) go yes it is. All politicians do it for a reason. Clinton being pro gay marriage when DADT was passed in 1993 would have been untenable.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/15/doj-trump-s-early-businesses-blocked-blacks.html Stuff like that perhaps? Oh...but that's just trying to force white people to conform by allowing blacks to work and live along side them! Stupid liberal PC crap! This man should not be allowed in gov't. He's a disgrace for everything America stands for.
He has since disavowed him multiple times but still (also he has condemned David Duke multiple times in the past making many of us think he is lying in this video): <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/e9geYl9J_Mc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
There's a pretty big difference between what most politicians do and what Trump does. Trump isn't actually a politician, he's just a con man pretending to be one.
It really only depends on how you see Trump, if you are part of the vast majority of the country, or even a part of the majority of the Republican party, you see Trump as the terrible person that he is and you see his cult like followers as being even worse. If you are part of that cult, you probably don't mind that they made you shave your head and kill your parents when you joined....after all, it was the only way to save them.
lol wut yeah i dunno why they're so pissed, it's definitely in the interests of the black community to expand history's largest prison state
http://www.theatlantic.com/special-report/mass-incarceration/ what specific grievances would BLM have about a candidate who bucked the bipartisan consensus on breaking up the prison state and is trying to blow it up with emotional delusion. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/criminal-justice-reform-gop-primary Jesus, I want Trump to win the primary. But you people who are tentatively supporting him have no idea how much damage he's already caused, which is fair enough because he has no idea either.
So was the crime bill racist or not? Does Clinton get credit or scorn for putting thousands of blacks in prison and thus saving thousands of black lives or scorn for cheerleading the racist act?
The reason for crime falling off a cliff wasn't some crime bill, it was just the natural result of the legalization of abortion. Just over 20 years after Roe vs Wade the preemptive death sentence of untold thousands of would be criminals started to show benefits.
1) Decrease in crime was not perfectly correlated with increase in incarceration, and America has always lived in a paradoxical world with sky-high homicide rates in the developed world along with sky-high incarceration rates. 2) That criminal justice bill may not have been racist in intent, though it was certainly racist in outcome. America has never coped with the systematic racism it generates to this day. 3) I have no problem saying that the Clintons sponsored a bill that had a disproportionately devastating effect on minority communities. Do you want to call it racist for the ra ra Trump crowd? Sure, why not. I have very little love for either Clinton and their fear of "superpredators". They're only useful insofar as they are vessels for slightly more acceptable policy on some fronts.
The people calling it racist are the BLM crowd, so swing and a miss there. More police and prisons and a dramatic drop in homicides but you aren't impressed. Alright. I understand you have to play both sides and a number of illogical issues.
So you are saying there is a statute of limitations that a politician should be judged on about their past? What is that time frame?
People who think in Trumpism tend to receive all of their critiques as people yelling "racism"--there are very substantiative topics that BLM is bringing up, but nobody gives a s**t because everybody on both sides has had their head turned to mush. Availability of abortion is actually more strongly correlated with reduction in crime, more so than prison times--if you're willing at all costs to reduce crime, which anybody who embraces a prison state that imprisons more people than almost every country in history would do (a ***** performing one at best compared to any other developed country). http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/ Btw, I play one side--Trump being nominated is the safest guarantee of Democratic policies in the Executive and Judiciary for decades to come, something I wholeheartedly support
and why the f**k would that matter to you or anybody? Based on your posts, I'd imagine you wouldn't be attractive enough for me to care either way. --- Do data and hard facts upset you or do you find particular pleasure in diverging from them?
