Donald Trump and the aftermath of his presidency

[AlterEgo]

That's an almighty example of false equivalency there. Donald Trump (or indeed Steve Bannon) would be proud of it. Some of them were throwing stones/wearing masks so they deserved to be mown down in the street? Some chased the assailant with weapons so they're as bad as the guy who had just used a vehicle as a weapon?

Nonsense. :roll:

How disappointing and intellectually dishonest of you to suggest that.

That's a good example of reading what you want to read and not actually paying attention to what I said. Not once did I imply moral equivalency; I simply stated the facts available to anyone who has watched the video of the car being driven into the crowd. Fact: there were violent antifa in the crowd, you can see them, and the confrontation that happened in C'ville over the last few days is not a one dimensional event. Now, Trump is rightly criticised, consistently, for having a black and white worldview which does not allow for nuance or circumspect. I simply appeal to other people to be a bit more open minded.

You know, it's also a fact that on Bloody Sunday in 1972, a significant minority of protestors were rioting, throwing stones, and inciting confrontation. That's simply the truth, which eventually came out. That doesn't mean the murders that followed on that day were morally equivalent, or "okay", or in any way acceptable. It was however, a complex event with many intertwining causes. The same is true of civic strife in the USA. Bloody Sunday remains a gross injustice, in the same way that it is grossly unjust for someone to be deliberately hit with a car by a white supremacist on an American street.

I think you need to reread my post, specifically the bit where I denounced the far right demonstrators as fascists and condemned the murder as just that - murder, which was disgusting.

You're allowing yourself to be blinded by the crime of a single deluded Nazi nutter and allowing this to set the tone for the entire conflict.

There is a tremendous fear of telling the truth. Both neo-Nazis (fascists who admit to being fascist scum) and antifa (fascists who fight other fascists but don't realise they are fascist scum themselves) are disgusting and abhorrent groups who do nothing to foment good community relations or build civic society. Condemn the murder of the innocent civilian. Condemn white supremacists. Condemn, also, left-leaning fascists. Condemn everything which is destructive.

 

[najaB]

Condemn the murder of the innocent civilian. Condemn white supremacists. Condemn, also, left-leaning fascists. Condemn everything which is destructive.

I agree. However, if you watch the end of his statement on Saturday you'll see that Trump failed miserably, twice: first time, second time.

 

[AlterEgo]

I agree. However, if you watch the end of his statement on Saturday you'll see that Trump failed miserably, twice: first time, second time.

Condemning that murder is absolutely the first thing that he ought to have said before anything else, and it's appalling he felt he could get away without doing so.

I wonder who advised him to issue his statement condemning racism, as it didn't seem to come unprompted.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

How disappointing and intellectually dishonest of you to suggest that.

That's a good example of reading what you want to read and not actually paying attention to what I said. Not once did I imply moral equivalency; I simply stated the facts available to anyone who has watched the video of the car being driven into the crowd. Fact: there were violent antifa in the crowd, you can see them, and the confrontation that happened in C'ville over the last few days is not a one dimensional event. Now, Trump is rightly criticised, consistently, for having a black and white worldview which does not allow for nuance or circumspect. I simply appeal to other people to be a bit more open minded.

You know, it's also a fact that on Bloody Sunday in 1972, a significant minority of protestors were rioting, throwing stones, and inciting confrontation. That's simply the truth, which eventually came out. That doesn't mean the murders that followed on that day were morally equivalent, or "okay", or in any way acceptable. It was however, a complex event with many intertwining causes. The same is true of civic strife in the USA. Bloody Sunday remains a gross injustice, in the same way that it is grossly unjust for someone to be deliberately hit with a car by a white supremacist on an American street.

I think you need to reread my post, specifically the bit where I denounced the far right demonstrators as fascists and condemned the murder as just that - murder, which was disgusting.

You're allowing yourself to be blinded by the crime of a single deluded Nazi nutter and allowing this to set the tone for the entire conflict.

There is a tremendous fear of telling the truth. Both neo-Nazis (fascists who admit to being fascist scum) and antifa (fascists who fight other fascists but don't realise they are fascist scum themselves) are disgusting and abhorrent groups who do nothing to foment good community relations or build civic society. Condemn the murder of the innocent civilian. Condemn white supremacists. Condemn, also, left-leaning fascists. Condemn everything which is destructive.

Note the section of your post I bolded. By stating that the car was pursued by "fascist hooligans within the crowd who had baseball bats, helmets, and masks" DOES read to me as an attempt to create a false equivalency. If that was not your intention then I apologise for my misinterpretation, though you may wish to consider how you phrase such arguments in the future.

Baseball bats are not cars. A violent reaction to violence is not the same as the initial aggression. I don't doubt that there were some absolute tools on the counter-demo, but their actions on that day were NOT representative of the whole group, any more than the idiot with the car was representative of the White Nationalist/Pro-confederacy march.

But, as soon as you call both sides by their names, there's an obvious difference between the two in terms of ideology and in terms of respect for humanity. This is not a subject anyone should be comfortable sitting on the fence over.

 

[AlterEgo]

Note the section of your post I bolded. By stating that the car was pursued by "fascist hooligans within the crowd who had baseball bats, helmets, and masks" DOES read to me as an attempt to create a false equivalency. If that was not your intention then I apologise for my misinterpretation, though you may wish to consider how you phrase such arguments in the future.

It was certainly not what I intended to convey and your apology is accepted.

 

[jon0844]

It's so sickening that we have such extremes on the left and right that want to start a war (just as you have extremists in Israel and Palestine that have no desire for peace).

Trump brought the far right out of the closet, just as Farage did here. They always existed, of course. Now they're emboldened and think it's their time.

But the far left are just as bad, perhaps in different ways, and the pulling down of a statue today (much like the destruction of the Saddam statue by troops which was so bad many news agencies edited later footage of the event) was in my opinion totally unwarranted.

By all means seem to move the statue to a museum, but don't try and erase history or hide the bad things/people that existed. These people need to be seen by future generations to stop the same mistakes being made again.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I eagerly await news of these Far Left atrocities that have apparently been taking place throughout the West... I must have missed the bit where a white evangelical church was machine-gunned by atheist extremists, or all that forced homosexual conversion therapy that the "Gay Mafia" imposed upon unsuspecting conservatives. :roll:

Very Bad Things have been done in the name of left-wing ideologies IN THE PAST. But to say that the two extremes are equally dangerous as they present themselves today simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Unless the right are just better at it, of course.

 

[J-2739]

I eagerly await news of these Far Left atrocities that have apparently been taking place throughout the West... I must have missed the bit where a white evangelical church was machine-gunned by atheist extremists, or all that forced homosexual conversion therapy that the "Gay Mafia" imposed upon unsuspecting conservatives. :roll:

Very Bad Things have been done in the name of left-wing ideologies IN THE PAST. But to say that the two extremes are equally dangerous as they present themselves today simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Unless the right are just better at it, of course.

Not really similar, but you get quite a lot of SJWs that force their views onto other people.

 

[najaB]

But to say that the two extremes are equally dangerous as they present themselves today simply does not stand up to scrutiny.

The extremes are, have always been and always will be dangerous. There are just more right-wing extremists and extremist organisations today than left.

 

[DaleCooper]

Not really similar, but you get quite a lot of SJWs that force their views onto other people.

For the benefit of those who, like me, didn't understand SJW it apparently means "social justice warrior".

 

[jon0844]

I eagerly await news of these Far Left atrocities that have apparently been taking place throughout the West... I must have missed the bit where a white evangelical church was machine-gunned by atheist extremists, or all that forced homosexual conversion therapy that the "Gay Mafia" imposed upon unsuspecting conservatives. :roll:

Very Bad Things have been done in the name of left-wing ideologies IN THE PAST. But to say that the two extremes are equally dangerous as they present themselves today simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Unless the right are just better at it, of course.

I don't think it's as easy as trying to keep a tally, just as it fails when people try and give 'scores' on what goes on the Middle East.

It's the fact that extremes on both sides have no desire for any sort of peace, rather to create and maintain hatred to further their own agendas.

These are people you don't want representing you ever - even if you have views that might sometimes veer over to one side or another. I am concerned about some immigration policies, but don't want the far right representing me. I am concerned about social issues, but hardly want this new wave of SJW/Momentum style people representing me.

People who demand the ability to say what they like, but shoot down anyone that says anything they disagree with. The whole safe space/triggering/snowflake stuff that is very real and destroying Universities and colleges that must be free to teach history - good and bad - and allow people to talk about things, not hide it.

I don't want groups going out to goad others into attacking, so as to start filming and saying 'look, see how bad they are?' and try and score points. Social media and short video clips out of context are everywhere these days. Everyone is a 'journalist' but really they're not. Journalists have ethics but as time goes on, most are being made redundant or quitting because they're being replaced by citizen journalists/bloggers/activists. Hence why you end up with an activist helping write a 'story' about ram-packed trains..

Anyway, all of this is not how you resolve differences, which there will always be, in a civilised society.

Back to the original discussion, Trump still needs to call out his own supporters (for they are clearly Trump supporters) and not give a wishy washy response about it being all sides - because of what actually happened.

But it is still true that both sides are at fault here. I can't help but feel that someone like President Obama would have been able to make that point very eloquently, and perhaps far better than I tried to.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Not really similar, but you get quite a lot of SJWs that force their views onto other people.

For the benefit of those who, like me, didn't understand SJW it apparently means "social justice warrior".

Again, not the same as using violence against one's political opponents. So-called Social Justice Warriors often end up undermining the causes they claim to support, but that's a problem with their approach not their position.

Too many people seem to be influenced by the old Cold War "Reds Under The Bed" propaganda, which is no more accurate than the tales of American Imperialist Cannibals which are force-fed to North Korean* schoolchildren.

I'll say it again, there is simply no comparison between the present-day dangers of right-wing versus left-wing extremism. The worst a leftist extremist will do 99.99999% of the time is call you a bigot. The rightist extremist may well beat/shoot/hang their opponents. Yes there are idiots on both sides but the threat those idiots pose is not of the same level.

*There's your "Left Wing extremist", though once you're at that level, the colour of the jacket of the person with the whip-hand is pretty much academic.

 

[DaleCooper]

This is priceless, typically callous and incredibly stupid.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40940044

My bold.

US President Donald Trump has posted an image of a train hitting a CNN reporter three days after a hit-and-run left one person dead at a far-right rally.
The cartoon, which Mr Trump deleted after tweeting, depicts the cable network logo being run over by a "Trump Train" symbolising his supporters.

 

[fowler9]

Here is how I see the difference between the White Supremacists and the Antifascists. White Supremacists think they are better than everyone else and are against people of colour, various religions etc. Antifascists in general don't want to bring down the white race, just the Fascists. Anti fascists wouldn't exist without a load of racist bigots existing. White Supremacists would exist without the Anti Fascists.

 

[Busaholic]

I agree. However, if you watch the end of his statement on Saturday you'll see that Trump failed miserably, twice: first time, second time.

''White man speak with forked tongue.''

 

[EM2]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40943425

US President Donald Trump has again blamed both sides for the violent unrest in Charlottesville, Virginia, which left one protester dead and others injured.
In a statement on Monday, he had condemned white supremacists.
But in New York on Tuesday he also blamed left-wing supporters for charging at the "alt-right".
He also defended the time it took to make his statement, saying he had wanted to establish all the facts.
Mr Trump had been accused over the weekend of failing to condemn the far-right specifically.
Heather Heyer, 32, died and 19 others were hurt when a car was driven into people protesting against a far-right march in Charlottesville on Saturday.
Mr Trump said that the car driver was a disgrace to himself and his country.

"When you say alt-right..." Mr Trump said in an exchange with a reporter, using a term for right-wing groups.
"Okay, what about the alt-left that came charging at... the alt-right? Do they have any semblance of guilt? What about the fact that they came charging... with clubs in their hands?"

Mr Trump's remarks were welcomed by David Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, who tweeted: "Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40933391

US President Donald Trump said there were "very fine people on both sides", as he defended his response to a violent rally in Charlottesville involving white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups.
His comments came as US business leaders moved to distance themselves from the president over his position.
Four executives have quit a White House business panel.
Other firms, including Walmart, issued statements criticising the response.
Mr Trump made the comments at a news conference on Tuesday afternoon.
"I think there's blame on both sides," he said.

https://twitter.com/TheLeadCNN/status/897555021465763840
I can't quote for this link as it's a video but according to the Donald, it was all OK, because the Nazis had all the right paperwork...

There's a two-minute video clip of his press conference here:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/897555520231362561

 

[Tim R-T-C]

How long before he blames them for getting in the way of the car...?

Who would have thought 12 months ago that the US President defending White Supremacists, KKK and Nazis after a terrorist attack perpetrated by a supporter of theirs would be a welcome relief from him trying to start a nuclear war?

Wonderful times...

 

[DaleCooper]

How long before he blames them for getting in the way of the car...?

...and condemns jaywalking as a terrorist act.

 

[DarloRich]

Trump has handled this terribly. He has been shown to be utterly clueless. He is right ( and I suggest reading the posts by alterego above) that there are bad people on both sides but his response was weak, self serving and frankly amateur

However, to have to be dragged to the microphone by political and public pressure to give a stilled, scripted speech criticising nazis (nazis ffs!) simply isnt good enough. An act of domestic terrorism was carried out and he couldn't be bothered to condemn it strongly and immediately.

Sad.

 

[AlterEgo]

The worst thing about the whole charade is his flip flopping - firstly saying both sides were at fault without even acknowledging the murder of a citizen who was doing nothing wrong. Then it appeared someone leaned on him to be more contrite. That lasted a day, and now he's back to being inflammatory. It's just sad.

 

[najaB]

The worst thing about the whole charade is his flip flopping...

This adds credence to the idea that Trump's statements merely echo the position of the last person he's been talking with/TV show he's been watching.

 

[DaleCooper]

This adds credence to the idea that Trump's statements merely echo the position of the last person he's been talking with/TV show he's been watching.

I think you give him too much credit. In my opinion he says exactly what he believes and only retracts it when one of his aides tells him that it's ill-advised (i.e. stupid and damaging).

 

[AM9]

I think you give him too much credit. In my opinion he says exactly what he believes and only retracts it when one of his aides tells him that it's ill-advised (i.e. stupid and damaging).

Let's hope that this above all will kill any stupid idea of a state visit here for good. Even the most right-wing racist politicians here in the UK wouldn't handle sucha situation as badly as the President of what claims to the the most important country in the world.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Let's hope that this above all will kill any stupid idea of a state visit here for good. Even the most right-wing racist politicians here in the UK wouldn't handle sucha situation as badly as the President of what claims to the the most important country in the world.

Remember the "good old days" when we had George "Dubya" to protest?

 

[najaB]

I think you give him too much credit. In my opinion he says exactly what he believes and only retracts it when one of his aides tells him that it's ill-advised (i.e. stupid and damaging).

I would agree with you if he didn't have a long history of changing position on issues. He's been pro-life and pro-choice, pro-gun control and a 2nd Amendment fundamentalist, for higher tax and for lower tax, a Democrat and a Republican, for the Iraq war and against it, etc.

 

[DaleCooper]

I would agree with you if he didn't have a long history of changing position on issues. He's been pro-life and pro-choice, pro-gun control and a 2nd Amendment fundamentalist, for higher tax and for lower tax, a Democrat and a Republican, for the Iraq war and against it, etc.

Changing his opinion is just one facet of his character as is his tendency to blurt out his (ever changing) beliefs, the two facets are not mutually exclusive. He's just a "Vicar of Bray".

 

[baz962]

As a side note just seen an episode of fresh prince of bel air with Donald Trump playing himself

 

[Economist]

Whilst all of the recent circus concerning what he has and hasn't said (in response to North Korea and now this) has been going on, I really do wonder what has been happening behind the scenes, i.e. legislature.

The focus on Trump himself smacks of a deliberate attempt to distract the people from the nitty-gritty details of which legislation is being passed and which is being removed (with the exception of the Affordable Care Act of course). This, in my opinion, will have a greater effect on people's day to day lives than the recent headline-making stuff.

Bread and circuses at it's finest.

 

[DaleCooper]

As a side note just seen an episode of fresh prince of bel air with Donald Trump playing himself

Now he's playing with himself.

More news:

Bush presidents wade into Trump furore over Charlottesville

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40946386

Former Presidents George HW Bush and George W Bush have called on the US to "reject racial bigotry, anti-Semitism and hatred in all forms".They are the latest Republican figures to weigh in on the backlash to Donald Trump's latest remarks blaming "both sides" for violent clashes in Virginia.

 

[najaB]

The focus on Trump himself smacks of a deliberate attempt to distract the people from the nitty-gritty details of which legislation is being passed and which is being removed (with the exception of the Affordable Care Act of course).

Very little in the way of substantive legislation has been passed. The majority of the potential damage has come by way of his judiciary appointments - IIRC something like 47 Federal Court judges and one Supreme Court justice.