Politics

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

Hillary Clinton was literally mentored by a Klansman. Trump has zero control over who endorses him.

Never did I defend Hillary. In fact I think her stances on race issues are generally speaking fairly conservative (see the super predators remark). The fact, though, that the first response when an obvious red flag is pointed out is "Hillary is worse" is stupid. It's like when WikiLeaks exposed the awful shit going on with the Clinton Foundation, everyone went out and said "But Trump's is worse!!".
Also I like how you didn't respond to to the rest of it lol.

Uh, no. Blueflower literally responded to PDS' post which isn't "dodging" in any way.
Refusing to see that Hillary has the same issue doesn't mean she doesn't have it. I don't think that that is a "meaningless connection."

When Hillary is see

Once again, you can't control whom you're endorsed by. Being endorsed by the KKK doesn't constitute "hate" on Trump's part.

Firstly, it should be either "by whom you're endorsed" (don't end sentences with prepositions) or "who you're endorsed by"

Grammar pickiness aside, the fact that his rhetoric is such that the KKK finds it appealing is DEFINITELY an issue, and it's not like they're just picking out random quotes and twisting it. When you say about Mexicans "they're bringing drugs, they're rapists, and some, I assume, are good people" (smearing the majority and saying only some are good people when the logical thing is the opposite), that's not something that has to be misinterpreted to be racist; it inherently is.

Spoiler

[close]

Lmao, this is as good an argument as "but my best friend is black". If you want bigoted people in his administration, try his VP for Christ's sake.

[Dude]

I don't know about Trump, but personally I wouldn't want ____ friends if I was a _____ist.

I don't know about Trump, but personally I wouldn't want any friends if I was an artist.

Oooh, exploitable

[mikey]

FoF: Some people shouldn't be allowed to argue

[BlackDragonSlayer]

Lol, the ol' "I can't be a ____ist, I have a ___ friend!"

I don't know about Trump, but personally I wouldn't want ____ friends if I was a _____ist.

As it is said, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."

[FireArrow]

Hillary Clinton was literally mentored by a Klansman. Trump has zero control over who endorses him.

Uh, no. Blueflower literally responded to PDS' post which isn't "dodging" in any way.
Refusing to see that Hillary has the same issue doesn't mean she doesn't have it. I don't think that that is a "meaningless connection."
Once again, you can't control whom you're endorsed by. Being endorsed by the KKK doesn't constitute "hate" on Trump's part.

You're both 100% right in the most irrelevant way. We're not talking about trump being a bigot, we're talking about Trump symbolizing bigotry therefore making a bunch of bigots come out and do horrible things under the justification of "Trump got elected." Kefka is saying that Trump should step up and say he doesn't support those things so they can all fuck off before any more hate crimes happen; but for some reason he has yet to do so.

pls don't get triggered by my use of the b word noc

[Dude]

pls don't get triggered by my use of the b word noc

its ok I established what it means.

[Olimar12345]

I don't know about Trump, but personally I wouldn't want ____ friends if I was a _____ist.

My comment went right over your head, so I'll try to explain this as clearly as possible. Often people who are obviously prejudice in some form will use the age-old excuse that the accusations made against them can in no way be true on the grounds that they have some form of affiliation with that group of people. For example, it is common to hear a response similar to this when someone is accused of being a racist: "I'm not a racist! One of my best friends is black!" Setting aside the inability to confirm or deny the legitimacy of this person's reasoning, it is obvious that this individual is only saying this to diminish the claims made against them. Simply responding in this manner proves in no way how you feel about a certain group of people, and is more often seen as an spineless excuse. So, if this example person really was a racist and used that response as an excuse to diminish the situation, does this mean that there is no way they can be a racist?

So going back to your picture: that image is extremely stupid and meaningless because it is saying that Trump's tangible bigotry can easily be dismissed because he is affiliated with these people.

[Sebastian]

My comment went right over your head, so I'll try to explain this as clearly as possible. Often people who are obviously prejudice in some form will use the age-old excuse that the accusations made against them can in no way be true on the grounds that they have some form of affiliation with that group of people. For example, it is common to hear a response similar to this when someone is accused of being a racist: "I'm not a racist! One of my best friends is black!" Setting aside the inability to confirm or deny the legitimacy of this person's reasoning, it is obvious that this individual is only saying this to diminish the claims made against them. Simply responding in this manner proves in no way how you feel about a certain group of people, and is more often seen as an spineless excuse. So, if this example person really was a racist and used that response as an excuse to diminish the situation, does this mean that there is no way they can be a racist?

Ah, ok. I understand what you mean. I do agree with you as well.
I also agree that most of the time they say something like this, they are speaking over their actions. Actions speak louder than words in my opinion.

[Dude]

Actions speak louder than words in my opinion.

like grabbing women by the pussy, right

[mikey]

We should just stop talking about all the terrible things he's ever done or said.  We've already heard it all, we've already pointed it all out, and we've already made all the hair, orange face, and small hands jokes we could possibly think of

[Dude]

We need to dig deeper..

[Dudeman]

We need to dig deeper..

*loud Inception BWEEEHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH*

[Tobbeh99]

Am I the only one noticing that there seems to be GREAT Change in the world at the moment?

In the US, you seem to have a republican candidate "standing up for the people" and the liberal candidate seems to be "part of the establishment". And here in Sweden weird stuff has happened as well, we, for the pretty much first time in history has had a "strong" nationalistic party rise up to like 17% of votes. You can also se here how the socialistic "Socialdemokraterna" are becoming more "afraid" and has a politic revolved around saving lots of money and they just seem very weak as a party, going out "flirting" with companies and trying to be very much in the middle. And the Liberal/Konservative party "Moderaterna" was before trying to market itself as "the new worker's party" (which obviously pissed off the Socialdemokraterna). Then you have the left environmental party "Miljöpartiet" which has just dropped down from like 10-13% to like 4% and they're barely in the parliament (we have a 4% bar for what party can enter the parliament). And on the other hand you have the Liberal green party "Centern" gaining lots of ground and they're now up in like 10% or so. Other changes in the Swedish politics include: The decline (and name-change) of the social-liberal party "Liberalerna" (former known as "Folkpartiet") from like over 10% back some 8 years ago, to like 6% now; The increase of the Socialistic/Communistic "Vänstern", they're usually a small party around 4%, but now they've gone up to like 8% now; The increase of the Feministic party "Feministiskt Initiative" from barely being a party at all to having an effect at the parliament as they're up in 3% now.

To draw some conclusion about what has happened in the Swedish politics, and perhaps also the politics in the world:
-The increase of extreme-parties, whether left or right, or environmental, feministic or liberal.
-The decline of established parties, and also a more timid approach from the "middle parties".

I personally think we live in a time of strong change, but not necessarily a bad one. I think it'll be exiting to se what the future can hold for us, with Trump as president, the increase of right-extreme movements and parties, the anxiety, self-reasoning and divisiveness in the left, having 2 strong nominations for the election: Bernie Sanders and Hilary Clinton. So we'll see what happens in the future!

[Sebastian]

Exciting? Oh yes.....it will be....."exciting."

[Tobbeh99]

Exciting? Oh yes.....it will be....."exciting."

Lol I actually mean it! Idk about you but personally I see stuff happening all the time. I was shopping a pair of jeans today at Dressman. I was there for like 2 weeks or a month ago and I thought that the "Men's fashion" seems to have been more picky and more like "Women's fashion" where you buy all kinds of accessories and stuff, it's not that you just buy a nice Shirt and a pair of Jeans and you're fine. When I was there, a couple of weeks ago, and wanted to try a shirt I was going to buy, the staff were kind of picky and cared a lot about the security it seemed. I have to get to the counter and tell the staff about what shirt I exactly wanted to try out in order to try it. Before when I go to a different Dressman at the suburbs where I live, I have always been able to just try out stuff I want to. And to get to the point, now when I shopped, I could just pick a pair of jeans a try them, nothing crazy at all, nothing about asking the staff and all that stuff, simple and easy. And it seems just one thing of many things that has happened lately. The enviromental movement seemed to have risen again. Yu-Gi-Oh is coming back again, they're even going to make a new movie I think. So times seems to change, and change very quickly! And that, I think is exciting.