Is Trump racist?

[AmericanNation]

Since we can't read Trump's mind--then we can't definitively know his actual views on race.

Given that, we are left to interpret his actions and public statements.  The public record has shown that he's a racist that has incited racial violence and xenophobia.  I see no reason to believe he's doesn't actually hold these views.

Did I miss something?
What could you possibly be talking about?

[yankeesfan]

Since we can't read Trump's mind--then we can't definitively know his actual views on race.

Given that, we are left to interpret his actions and public statements.  The public record has shown that he's a racist that has incited racial violence and xenophobia.  I see no reason to believe he's doesn't actually hold these views.

Did I miss something?
What could you possibly be talking about?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/politics/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protester-confrontation/

Just a sample

[SteveRogers]

To everyone saying, "No, he just pretends to be," can you explain how that makes it less racist? When you denigrate another race for your benefit at their expense, it's racism regardless of whether you're doing out of sincerely held beliefs or out of opportunism.

And yes, I know Islam is a religion and not a race, but it's highly correlated with race, and Trump is seizing on a sense of "otherness" to stoke the flames of hatred and scapegoat a group of people because they look different than his supporters. I guess it'd be more accurate to call him a bigot, but I'm not gonna split hairs here.

This is kind of what I'm trying to understand.
You have this vague boilerplate "otherness", "stoke the flames of hatred" based on nothing or very little and than you jump to yelling "racist".

How do you make that jump?

Example:
Trump says : illegal immigration is a problem, it causes a lot of harm, we need to fix it.
'Jumpers' say: Trump is a racist, he hates Mexicans, and he's ginning up blind hatred of others.

...doesn't your brain consider other responses?  I mean that is so non linear, unless that is your response to everything you disagree with. 
 

You have to look at Trump's statements in context and as a whole. Trump paints all Mexican immigrants with a broad brush, claiming that they are by and large rapists and murderers. And he says that children of immigrants aren't real Americans regardless of what the 14th Amendment says. And he hints that all of his opponents with hispanic surnames are ineligible to be president. When you put all that together, yes, you can infer a motive.

But I was focusing on his "ban all muslims" platform. He wants to impose a religious test for travel to America, a blanket ban of all those who practice Islam. Throughout human history pretty much anyone who has painted a billion people with a broad brush like that has been a racist.

[SteveRogers]

To everyone saying, "No, he just pretends to be," can you explain how that makes it less racist? When you denigrate another race for your benefit at their expense, it's racism regardless of whether you're doing out of sincerely held beliefs or out of opportunism.

And yes, I know Islam is a religion and not a race, but it's highly correlated with race, and Trump is seizing on a sense of "otherness" to stoke the flames of hatred and scapegoat a group of people because they look different than his supporters. I guess it'd be more accurate to call him a bigot, but I'm not gonna split hairs here.

If I believe in climate change, but want to be a Republican politician and say I don't believe in climate change, does that mean I really don't believe in it?

I'm not saying it makes it any less despicable that he's pandering to racists for votes. I thought this thread was solely about his personal views, not his morality.

But see I think you have to have real evil in your heart to treat a group of people that way, regardless of whether you believe your professed reasons for doing so. And he's doing it on the basis of race. So he's a racist.

[ag]

I don't think his views on immigration, however bad they may be make him a racist, so no.
The fact that he is pro torture is the thing that I dislike most.

It is not, merely, his views/statements on immigration. I am telling you as a rapist... or, possibly, a good person.

[AmericanNation]

Since we can't read Trump's mind--then we can't definitively know his actual views on race.
Given that, we are left to interpret his actions and public statements.  The public record has shown that he's a racist that has incited racial violence and xenophobia.  I see no reason to believe he's doesn't actually hold these views.

Did I miss something?
What could you possibly be talking about?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/politics/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protester-confrontation/
Just a sample

At first I thought you had a really good point, but if you think about it for 5 seconds...
I mean an agitator that is a member of a group that actually incites racial violence almost as part of it's mission (black lives matter) managed to agitate people at a private event -- he was trying to get what he got. 
Do you have something better? That was almost good.

[RogueBeaver]

To quote what was said of Allan Shivers, "he could teach it flat or he could teach it round." I don't think Trump believes in anything very deeply except his own greatness.

[yankeesfan]

Since we can't read Trump's mind--then we can't definitively know his actual views on race.
Given that, we are left to interpret his actions and public statements.  The public record has shown that he's a racist that has incited racial violence and xenophobia.  I see no reason to believe he's doesn't actually hold these views.

Did I miss something?
What could you possibly be talking about?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/politics/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protester-confrontation/
Just a sample

At first I thought you had a really good point, but if you think about it for 5 seconds...
I mean an agitator that is a member of a group that actually incites racial violence almost as part of it's mission (black lives matter) managed to agitate people at a private event -- he was trying to get what he got.  
Do you have something better? That was almost good.

I think my first article should suffice, but since you asked nicely here's another instance that took 5 seconds to find on Google:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/19/homeless/iTagewS4bnvBKWxxPvFcAJ/story.html?s_campaign=bostonglobe%3Asocialflow%3Atwitter

I can't believe you don't realize that Trump is dangerous for the people he's demonizing.

[ag]

Ford was not an antisemite. He loved Jews.

[AmericanNation]

You have to look at Trump's statements in context and as a whole. Trump paints all Mexican immigrants with a broad brush, claiming that they are by and large rapists and murderers. And he says that children of immigrants aren't real Americans regardless of what the 14th Amendment says. And he hints that all of his opponents with hispanic surnames are ineligible to be president. When you put all that together, yes, you can infer a motive.

But I was focusing on his "ban all muslims" platform. He wants to impose a religious test for travel to America, a blanket ban of all those who practice Islam. Throughout human history pretty much anyone who has painted a billion people with a broad brush like that has been a racist.

Ok, I can see that a little here a little there adds up to something argument.  
The thing I have a problem with is when you look at the individual things, their is often NOTHING there.  So, when you assume all the pieces in your mosaic have something to them (when they don't) you exaggerate everything many times over.

Your Examples:
1)Trump paints all Mexican immigrants with a broad brush, claiming that they are by and large rapists and murderers.
2)he says that children of immigrants aren't real Americans regardless of what the 14th Amendment says.
3) he hints that all of his opponents with hispanic surnames are ineligible to be president.

Your Examples De-sensationalized
1) Trump talks about illegal immigrants...  he points out that they commit crimes... which is true.
2) He raises legal arguments about the 14th amendment that are sound regardless of how you feel about them.
3) I know about the Cruz thing, are you implying something about Rubio ? (I don't know about that).  
He raises another constitutional issue with *some* basis.

...nothing is there unless you are trying to fit into a racist narrative ahead of time.

[Ebowed]

He has recently gone birther on Rubio, for the record.

[RaphaelDLG]

Is the Pope Catholic?

[Likely Voter]

Who knows what is in his heart, but he has certainly made nativism (which appeals to racists) as the cornerstone of his campaign

[AmericanNation]

Since we can't read Trump's mind--then we can't definitively know his actual views on race.
Given that, we are left to interpret his actions and public statements.  The public record has shown that he's a racist that has incited racial violence and xenophobia.  I see no reason to believe he's doesn't actually hold these views.

Did I miss something?
What could you possibly be talking about?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/politics/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protester-confrontation/
Just a sample

At first I thought you had a really good point, but if you think about it for 5 seconds...
I mean an agitator that is a member of a group that actually incites racial violence almost as part of it's mission (black lives matter) managed to agitate people at a private event -- he was trying to get what he got.  
Do you have something better? That was almost good.

I think my first article should suffice, but since you asked nicely here's another instance that took 5 seconds to find on Google:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/19/homeless/iTagewS4bnvBKWxxPvFcAJ/story.html?s_campaign=bostonglobe%3Asocialflow%3Atwitter
I can't believe you don't realize that Trump is dangerous for the people he's demonizing.

This is amazing, That would have been an example of something if not for the first two words of the headline:  "South Boston"
2 guys start a fight in "South Boston" wasn't Trumps fault the last 10,000 times, but now it is. 

I guess talking about illegals is your dehumanizing, but I've always been fascinated when the left starts calling people "dangerous".

Whenever Pat Buchanan (on MSNBC) would say something like "shouldn't we pay some attention to the well being of white middle class people?" or "Do people lose their rights when they are white male middle class?"  Every employee of MSNBC would automatically say "Pat that kind of thought is DANGEROUS!"  ...they would never explain why.

I understand if you think Trump is a buffoon, but Pat wasn't, he just raised valid points and debated politely and logically.  The response was the same though hysterics from the left.  P.B. was about the least dangerous guy in the world. 

[Adam Griffin]

We're four pages in and so it's probably already been covered, but the real question here is: "Does pandering to racists - even when you're not one - make you racist in effect?".

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that people like Wallace, Maddox and Talmadge weren't actually racist in terms of their personal beliefs, but they merely understood the electorates of their times and gave the people what they wanted as a form of pandering.

Trump's racist commentary and dog-whistling goes back decades. His presidential campaign is nothing new when it comes to him making racist statements. However, he is also a master marketer and understands what it takes to get into the hearts and minds of a wide swath of the country. On the other hand, one can argue that he has plenty of ways to draw attention to himself without resorting to racial dog-whistles, and it's no secret that his lineage isn't the most tolerant or racially-progressive one in terms of past acts.

I think my initial question is the best way to look at it. If you are not racist but pander to racists with racist commentary - whether direct or subtle - is that sufficient behavior to qualify as a racist? The history books tend to think so. If Trump continues along this trajectory, whether or not he is successful in his bid, he will likely be remembered as one.

[yankeesfan]

Since we can't read Trump's mind--then we can't definitively know his actual views on race.
Given that, we are left to interpret his actions and public statements.  The public record has shown that he's a racist that has incited racial violence and xenophobia.  I see no reason to believe he's doesn't actually hold these views.

Did I miss something?
What could you possibly be talking about?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/politics/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protester-confrontation/
Just a sample

At first I thought you had a really good point, but if you think about it for 5 seconds...
I mean an agitator that is a member of a group that actually incites racial violence almost as part of it's mission (black lives matter) managed to agitate people at a private event -- he was trying to get what he got.  
Do you have something better? That was almost good.

I think my first article should suffice, but since you asked nicely here's another instance that took 5 seconds to find on Google:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/19/homeless/iTagewS4bnvBKWxxPvFcAJ/story.html?s_campaign=bostonglobe%3Asocialflow%3Atwitter
I can't believe you don't realize that Trump is dangerous for the people he's demonizing.

This is amazing, That would have been an example of something if not for the first two words of the headline:  "South Boston"
2 guys start a fight in "South Boston" wasn't Trumps fault the last 10,000 times, but now it is. 

I guess talking about illegals is your dehumanizing, but I've always been fascinated when the left starts calling people "dangerous".

Whenever Pat Buchanan (on MSNBC) would say something like "shouldn't we pay some attention to the well being of white middle class people?" or "Do people lose their rights when they are white male middle class?"  Every employee of MSNBC would automatically say "Pat that kind of thought is DANGEROUS!"  ...they would never explain why.

I understand if you think Trump is a buffoon, but Pat wasn't, he just raised valid points and debated politely and logically.  The response was the same though hysterics from the left.  P.B. was about the least dangerous guy in the world. 

From the article:
Police said Scott Leader, 38, told them it was OK to assault the man because he was Hispanic and homeless.

“Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported,” he allegedly told the police.

---
This is what the criminals from the article said.  They're not my words, they're from the article.  I am blaming Trump for inciting racial violence because that is what he is doing.  I'm providing sources and articles detailing these examples.  This is pretty straightforward stuff.  I'm getting the feeling that you're being purposefully obtuse here.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Trump is responsible for a lot of the hatred that is occurring in the country right now. A lot of the hate crimes that are going against immigrants Muslims, Sikhs  can be directly attributed to Trump and the things that he has said when you go and you do the research on attackers or in this case suspects, a lot of support Trump or they believe it's okay to do this because Trump says its okay now I don't know whether or not he is racist or xenophobic I could give him the benefit of the doubt and say he isn't but he is stoking the flames and by extension that makes him a racist / xenophobe.

[Deblano]

He is the least racist person ON EARTH!

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

The answer should be obvious when you have white supremacist groups supporting your campaign

[Coolface Sock #42069]

The answer should be obvious when you have white supremacist groups supporting your campaign

Hey, he has a great relationship with the blacks.

[AmericanNation]

---
This is what the criminals from the article said.  They're not my words, they're from the article.  I am blaming Trump for inciting racial violence because that is what he is doing.  I'm providing sources and articles detailing these examples.  This is pretty straightforward stuff.  I'm getting the feeling that you're being purposefully obtuse here.

Do you know anything about south boston?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6zhqOcfqQA
When Matt Damon does the same thing was that trumps fault ?  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1Y6QvIdCBY
If he brought up Trump in court instead of "Proverbs from the Plymouth Pulpit"
would you be making the same case?
I'm not being Obtuse I just have this thing where occasionally I like people to base what they are saying on reality.  
You've produced a race-baiting agitator and two thugs from south boston... These people would be in fights if Donald Trump didn't exist, thus your thesis that Trump incited them to racial violence is complete crap, unless you actually have something (else).  Which I would be willing to see as I am not a Trump supporter.    

[yankeesfan]

---
This is what the criminals from the article said.  They're not my words, they're from the article.  I am blaming Trump for inciting racial violence because that is what he is doing.  I'm providing sources and articles detailing these examples.  This is pretty straightforward stuff.  I'm getting the feeling that you're being purposefully obtuse here.

Do you know anything about south boston?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6zhqOcfqQA
When Matt Damon does the same thing was that trumps fault ?  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1Y6QvIdCBY
If he brought up Trump in court instead of "Proverbs from the Plymouth Pulpit"
would you be making the same case?
I'm not being Obtuse I just have this thing where occasionally I like people to base what they are saying on reality.  
You've produced a race-baiting agitator and two thugs from south boston... These people would be in fights if Donald Trump didn't exist, thus your thesis that Trump incited them to racial violence is complete crap, unless you actually have something (else).  Which I would be willing to see as I am not a Trump supporter.    

There's a great deal of irony in you denigrating the whole population of South Boston to further your agenda and argument.  It's what Donald Trump has done to many different groups of people, including immigrants and Muslims.  I can tell you're a lost cause.  You basically see eye-to-eye with Trump on the validity of sweeping generalizations. 

[Asian Nazi]

Trump is responsible for a lot of the hatred that is occurring in the country right now. A lot of the hate crimes that are going against immigrants Muslims, Sikhs  can be directly attributed to Trump and the things that he has said when you go and you do the research on attackers or in this case suspects, a lot of support Trump or they believe it's okay to do this because Trump says its okay now I don't know whether or not he is racist or xenophobic I could give him the benefit of the doubt and say he isn't but he is stoking the flames and by extension that makes him a racist / xenophobe.

TRUMP isn't the one who decided to start cutting off people's heads or knock down the Twin Towers.

[AmericanNation]

---
This is what the criminals from the article said.  They're not my words, they're from the article.  I am blaming Trump for inciting racial violence because that is what he is doing.  I'm providing sources and articles detailing these examples.  This is pretty straightforward stuff.  I'm getting the feeling that you're being purposefully obtuse here.

Do you know anything about south boston?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6zhqOcfqQA
When Matt Damon does the same thing was that trumps fault ?  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1Y6QvIdCBY
If he brought up Trump in court instead of "Proverbs from the Plymouth Pulpit"
would you be making the same case?
I'm not being Obtuse I just have this thing where occasionally I like people to base what they are saying on reality.  
You've produced a race-baiting agitator and two thugs from south boston... These people would be in fights if Donald Trump didn't exist, thus your thesis that Trump incited them to racial violence is complete crap, unless you actually have something (else).  Which I would be willing to see as I am not a Trump supporter.    

There's a great deal of irony in you denigrating the whole population of South Boston to further your agenda and argument.  It's what Donald Trump has done to many different groups of people, including immigrants and Muslims.  I can tell you're a lost cause.  You basically see eye-to-eye with Trump on the validity of sweeping generalizations.  

Apparently:
you (don't) know what irony means
I denigrated all of south boston
I have an agenda
an open mind is a "lost cause"
any generalization is "sweeping"
Any PART of a population is "the whole population"  

...of course all of these things you said aren't true.

[yankeesfan]

---
This is what the criminals from the article said.  They're not my words, they're from the article.  I am blaming Trump for inciting racial violence because that is what he is doing.  I'm providing sources and articles detailing these examples.  This is pretty straightforward stuff.  I'm getting the feeling that you're being purposefully obtuse here.

Do you know anything about south boston?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6zhqOcfqQA
When Matt Damon does the same thing was that trumps fault ?  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1Y6QvIdCBY
If he brought up Trump in court instead of "Proverbs from the Plymouth Pulpit"
would you be making the same case?
I'm not being Obtuse I just have this thing where occasionally I like people to base what they are saying on reality.  
You've produced a race-baiting agitator and two thugs from south boston... These people would be in fights if Donald Trump didn't exist, thus your thesis that Trump incited them to racial violence is complete crap, unless you actually have something (else).  Which I would be willing to see as I am not a Trump supporter.    

There's a great deal of irony in you denigrating the whole population of South Boston to further your agenda and argument.  It's what Donald Trump has done to many different groups of people, including immigrants and Muslims.  I can tell you're a lost cause.  You basically see eye-to-eye with Trump on the validity of sweeping generalizations.  

Apparently:
you (don't) know what irony means
I denigrated all of south boston
I have an agenda
an open mind is a "lost cause"
any generalization is "sweeping"
Any PART of a population is "the whole population"  

...of course all of these things you said aren't true.

Take a breather.  You look like you've lost the ability to write sentences and have resorted to arguing in haiku.