President Trump & the USA

[Lionator]

8 minutes ago, MattP said:

The Democrats slide into the sewer of antisemitism continues - I get the feeling the desire to promote certain candidates has taken precedence over due diligence.

 

For those who don't know, Stephen Miller is Jewish.

If she's targeting him because he's Jewish then that's antisemitic, however IF (emphasised) the quotes in the article are true, then its damning on Miller's part and has nothing to do with his heritage.

 

It's like saying Benjamin Netanyahu is a POS. It's not because he's Jewish, it's because he's a blood thirsty war monger. Hating Erdogan also doesn't make me Islamophobic. 

[Guest MattP]

16 minutes ago, Lionator said:

If she's targeting him because he's Jewish then that's antisemitic, however IF (emphasised) the quotes in the article are true, then its damning on Miller's part and has nothing to do with his heritage.

If this was a one off you could give her the benefit of the doubt but (similar to what's happening in Labour here) she has now made numerous comments like this that always seem to be directed at Jews or Jewish groups - given she was only elected a few months ago that's quite an effort.

 

Can Jews really be white nationalists though? 

 

The Dems are losing their heads completely - we've got this and Candace Owens being referred to as a Nazi.

[Guest MattP]

She's going to be a star as well - already shredding Democrats.

 

 

[ealingfox]

8 minutes ago, MattP said:

If this was a one off you could give her the benefit of the doubt but (similar to what's happening in Labour here) she has now made numerous comments like this that always seem to be directed at Jews or Jewish groups - given she was only elected a few months ago that's quite an effort.

 

Can Jews really be white nationalists though? 

 

The Dems are losing their heads completely - we've got this and Candace Owens being referred to as a Nazi.

 

Have you actually read the article that was quoted?

[Guest MattP]

Just now, ealingfox said:

Have you actually read the article that was quoted?

Yes.

[ealingfox]

Just now, MattP said:

Yes.

 

Well the person that wrote it is the person who described Miller as a white nationalist, not without good cause on the basis of that article, and he is Jewish himself. Of course a given person of Jewish faith or heritage could be a white nationalist. Why could they not?

 

In fact in characterizing Jewish people as a homogenous, groupthinking organism you're actually falling foul of an antisemitic trope yourself. Your beloved Donald Trump was doing the same thing over the weekend as it happens.

[Finnegan]

They're not "losing their heads completely" are they, they're just stooping to the level of the Trump administration. Presumably because they think shit slinging and click bait headlines is just the new American politics, an example set by the Reps under Trump. 

 

You could fill a book with the amount of offensive, unpleasant shit just said about AOC alone, let alone any other Democrat supporter. Christ, you could write a series longer than Game of Thrones just quoting mud slung at Hillary. 

 

Calling a white far right Republican a white nationalist isn't antisemitism, it's just emotive hyperbole meant to make him look like a Nazi to pander to the Dems voters. Just as calling her antisemitic is partly an attempt at discrediting her criticism and partly pandering to the Reps Jewish backers. 

 

It's all just a horrific ugly shit storm of silly name calling but then that's what Trump wants politics there to be, because its about the only thing he's actually good at. 

[leicsmac]

15 minutes ago, MattP said:

If this was a one off you could give her the benefit of the doubt but (similar to what's happening in Labour here) she has now made numerous comments like this that always seem to be directed at Jews or Jewish groups - given she was only elected a few months ago that's quite an effort.

 

Can Jews really be white nationalists though? 

 

The Dems are losing their heads completely - we've got this and Candace Owens being referred to as a Nazi.

Not in the American History X sense, probably, as those guys hate Jews as much as they do any other skin colour but their own.

 

In the sense of believing yourself superior to other demographics based on skin colour alone, irrespective of religion?

 

Absolutely. Because that is *exactly* what Mr Miller is and does. Those quotes are only the tip of the iceberg.

[Guest MattP]

19 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

They're not "losing their heads completely" are they, they're just stooping to the level of the Trump administration. Presumably because they think shit slinging and click bait headlines is just the new American politics, an example set by the Reps under Trump. 

 

You could fill a book with the amount of offensive, unpleasant shit just said about AOC alone, let alone any other Democrat supporter.

But I thought the whole mantra of the Democrats was "when they go low, we go high"?

 

Everyone is shit slinging from the idiots at the top like the President to the low intellect Democrats like AOC and Omar and none of them can claim one side is worse than the other, in fact I'd say the worst bit of behaviour seen so far from anybody was Pelosi at the SOTUA.

 

If this is the game they want to play then fair enough, but Trump will do it better than anyone they have.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, MattP said:

But I thought the whole mantra of the Democrats was "when they go low, we go high"?

 

Everyone is shit slinging from the idiots at the top like the President to the low intellect Democrats like AOC and Omar and none of them can claim one side is worse than the other, in fact I'd say the worst bit of behaviour seen so far from anybody was Pelosi at the SOTUA.

 

If this is the game they want to play then fair enough, but Trump will do it better than anyone they have.

It's a fair point, the last paragraph in particular.

 

However, my guess is that some folks have thought that eight years of (relative) civility ala Obama got them not much done and Trump elected in response, so what's the point if it isn't effective?

 

I'm not a fan of stooping down for the exact reasons stated above (it's not effective either), but I can see why some have decided that's the way to go.

[Buce]

13 minutes ago, MattP said:

But I thought the whole mantra of the Democrats was "when they go low, we go high"?

 

Everyone is shit slinging from the idiots at the top like the President to the low intellect Democrats like AOC and Omar and none of them can claim one side is worse than the other, in fact I'd say the worst bit of behaviour seen so far from anybody was Pelosi at the SOTUA.

 

If this is the game they want to play then fair enough, but Trump will do it better than anyone they have.

1

1

 

You lose credibility when you make Trumpian soundbites like that.

 

I seriously doubt that you know them well enough to make a judgement on their intellect.

Edited 10 April 2019 by Buce

[MC Prussian]

9 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

You lose credibility when you make Trumpian soundbites like that.

 

I seriously doubt that you know them well enough to make a judgement on their intellect.

In the case of AOC, it has been revealed that she is simply a mouthpiece for the organization that got her elected in the first place.

I'm not saying she's stupid, she clearly isn't, but I don't consider her smart either - she isn't acting on her own behalf, she and her pals at the Justice Democrats are deceiving the public.

Just another classic case of a group pushing their own agenda.

Edited 10 April 2019 by MC Prussian

[Guest MattP]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It's a fair point, the last paragraph in particular.

 

However, my guess is that some folks have thought that eight years of (relative) civility ala Obama got them not much done and Trump elected in response, so what's the point if it isn't effective?

 

I'm not a fan of stooping down for the exact reasons stated above (it's not effective either), but I can see why some have decided that's the way to go.

Have they stopped to think this might be why they didn't take the Senate though last year? 

 

All they have done since Trump got elected is try to remove him and throw insults - there had been no policy, no attempts at winning back voters. Now we know there has been collusion with Russia it should have dawned on them the only way they are getting rid of him from the Whitehouse is via the ballot box.

 

I hope they realise how many middle of the road people they will be turning off with this identity politics offensive, if they do lose next time they only have themselves to blame.

 

1 minute ago, Buce said:

You lose credibility when you sound like Trump.

 

I seriously doubt that you know them well enough to make a judgement on their intellect.

I think we have seen more than enough already to see that she isn't too bright - whether it's the GND, the childish responses in the house or the litany of lies she spouts as fact to her millions sycophants on social media. Anyone who believes morality superseeds evidence shouldn't be in a legislative position.

 

She's the Sarah Palin of the American left with a bigger mouth and Social Media following. Hopefully she'll be back bartending in a few years.

[Buce]

3 minutes ago, MattP said:

Have they stopped to think this might be why they didn't take the Senate though last year? 

 

All they have done since Trump got elected is try to remove him and throw insults - there had been no policy, no attempts at winning back voters. Now we know there has been collusion with Russia it should have dawned on them the only way they are getting rid of him from the Whitehouse is via the ballot box.

 

I hope they realise how many middle of the road people they will be turning off with this identity politics offensive, if they do lose next time they only have themselves to blame.

 

I think we have seen more than enough already to see that she isn't too bright - whether it's the GND, the childish responses in the house or the litany of lies she spouts as fact to her millions sycophants on social media. Anyone who believes morality superseeds evidence shouldn't be in a legislative position.

 

She's the Sarah Palin of the American left with a bigger mouth and Social Media following. Hopefully she'll be back bartending in a few years.

6

 

 

None of which relates to the intellect. Can intellectuals not be childish? Or tell lies?

 

I'm not saying your criticisms aren't valid, but they aren't evidence of 'low intellect'.

[leicsmac]

20 minutes ago, MattP said:

Have they stopped to think this might be why they didn't take the Senate though last year? 

 

All they have done since Trump got elected is try to remove him and throw insults - there had been no policy, no attempts at winning back voters. Now we know there has been collusion with Russia it should have dawned on them the only way they are getting rid of him from the Whitehouse is via the ballot box.

 

I hope they realise how many middle of the road people they will be turning off with this identity politics offensive, if they do lose next time they only have themselves to blame.

 

 

 I say again - while civility in the way you suggest might have won Obama the White House twice, it didn't really help with enacting policy as the Repubs took advantage of that good nature and merely obstructed most everything they could and it helped result in the current situation, so why exactly should the Dems be going for it again?

 

I agree that mudslinging isn't the way to go either in terms of effectiveness, so perhaps there need be a third option?

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

The Democrats slide into the sewer of antisemitism continues - I get the feeling the desire to promote certain candidates has taken precedence over due diligence.

 

For those who don't know, Stephen Miller is Jewish.

I think we agree on many things regarding US politics, and I concur that Ilhan Omar has shown to be antisemitic in her rhetoric on more than one occasion. And for that she should be called out for - or even investigated.

 

Here, however, she walks on a fine line. I suppose Stephen Miller can be a white nationalist, but I wonder why the "white" is so important here. Anyone can be nationalist, in spite of their cultural, religious or racial background. Black nationalist, yellow nationalist, red, brown, white, whatever. What's it good for? It's just stating the obvious that he's white. I think that part is dumb from a rational point of view. But of course she does it intentionally to pander to her voting base.

 

Miller can be nationalist, little wrong with it. He can be proud to be American or proud for Israel, seeing that he's Jewish. It depends on to what side you tend to, more to the right, or in a more classic conservative sense or more liberal? She doesn't make that distinction.

 

Also quite telling that she's pushing "outrage" on the Numero Uno Faux Outrage online platform. Opinion before facts for her as a politician. Ugh.

[ealingfox]

9 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

I think we agree on many things regarding US politics, and I concur that Ilhan Omar has shown to be antisemitic in her rhetoric on more than one occasion. And for that she should be called out for - or even investigated.

 

Here, however, she walks on a fine line. I suppose Stephen Miller can be a white nationalist, but I wonder why the "white" is so important here. Anyone can be nationalist, in spite of their cultural, religious or racial background. Black nationalist, yellow nationalist, red, brown, white, whatever. What's it good for? It's just stating the obvious that he's white. I think that part is dumb from a rational point of view. But of course she does it intentionally to pander to her voting base.

 

Miller can be nationalist, little wrong with it. He can be proud to be American or proud for Israel, seeing that he's Jewish. It depends on to what side you tend to, more to the right, or in a more classic conservative sense or more liberal? She doesn't make that distinction.

 

Also quite telling that she's pushing "outrage" on the Numero Uno Faux Outrage online platform. Opinion before facts for her as a politician. Ugh.

 

Conflating Judaism and Israel is antisemitic bro.

[Carl the Llama]

We've always known Miller's a bit of an alt right nutjob haven't we? How's this news to people?

[Finnegan]

@MC Prussian

 

White nationalism isn't being a nationalist and also happening to be Caucasian. She's not describing him as a nationalist and also pointing out his ethnicity for no apparent reason.

 

He is being accused of being a white nationalist, as in someone who wants to "protect" the "sovereignty" of the white race and keep the USA a white dominant nation. 

 

It's one tiny half rung on the ladder below white supremacist. 

[MC Prussian]

40 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

@MC Prussian

 

White nationalism isn't being a nationalist and also happening to be Caucasian. She's not describing him as a nationalist and also pointing out his ethnicity for no apparent reason.

 

He is being accused of being a white nationalist, as in someone who wants to "protect" the "sovereignty" of the white race and keep the USA a white dominant nation. 

 

It's one tiny half rung on the ladder below white supremacist. 

I understand that.

But you can read it either way.

 

However, I haven't read anything from him that would made it clear that he is in fact seeing "Whites" superior to other races, because there's this contention of the definition of "white nationalism" just being a smokescreen for "white supremacy".

 

Miller happens to be white and is most definitely a "nationalist", in the sense that he wants to protect the interest of the United States first and foremost, which is part of his job. But beyond that?

 

All I see right now is a well-known Muslim congresswoman who has openly uttered antisemitic nonsense in the past claiming that a hardliner on US immigration is a closeted white supremacist.

That's just rhetoric, trying to help her own cause.

 

Edited 10 April 2019 by MC Prussian

[Finnegan]

Not, you cannot read it "both" ways. There isn't another way to read it. 

 

A white nationalist is a white nationalist. She would not use those two words in conjunction if she did not mean to imply he was a white nationalist. 

 

You wouldn't call, let's say, a Brexiteer from Newport a "Welsh separatist" because they happen to be Welsh and also want the UK to be separate from the EU. Welsh separatism is an ideology that calls for Wales to be a sovereign state. 

 

Just because "a white nationalist" could be a Caucasian who happens to subscribe to nationalistic politics, regardless of race, in terms of semantics it doesn't mean that that's why anyone would use the phrase. 

 

White nationalism is a well known ideology. She knows what she's saying. 

 

Just to be clear: I'm not saying he IS a white nationalist. I'm saying it's what he's been called by his detractors and "white" was not an irrelevant descriptor. 

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

We've always known Miller's a bit of an alt right nutjob haven't we? How's this news to people?

It isn't, or it shouldn't be.

 

In this case most of the time ignorance is denial and obfuscation dressed up.

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47860012

 

An interesting longshot candidate?

[Finnegan]

I might be doing the Americans a disservice but I can't imagine the US electing a gay president at all. 

 

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

I might be doing the Americans a disservice but I can't imagine the US electing a gay president at all. 

 

FWIW I doubt it at this time too but if he has a decent run perhaps there's a chance for him in the future.