In a Basket of Deplorables

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Trump beat a YUGE field of 17 other Republican candidates. The people are tired of these lying politicians and they rejected those 17. Now we have a choice between a lying psychopathic politician whose deplorable actions in Libya and Benghazi are not being ignored. She wants to do to America what Merkel has done to Germany! That nation is on the verge of civil war! Same as in France. It appears the majority of Americans are not for the utter destruction of our nation and culture.

So, there is a real choice this election, and I hope Trump wins.

a reply to: ketsuko

So, what you're saying is "Sure, a lot of Trump supporters can be seen as "deplorable", but a lot of Clinton's supporters can also be seen as "deplorable" too!"?

Although, I don't see how Omar Mateen's father can be charged with his son's crimes. And, if it's his fundamental approach to his religion that bothers you, I direct your attention to Mike Pence and his disturbing fundamentalist outlook.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: ketsuko

So, what you're saying is "Sure, a lot of Trump supporters can be seem as "deplorable", but a lot of Clinton's supporters can also be seen as "deplorable" too!"?

Although, I don't see how Omar Mateen's father can be charged with his son's crimes. And, if it's his fundamental approach to his religion that bothers you, I direct your attention to Mike Pence and his disturbing fundamentalist outlook.

Last I checked, Omar Mateen father's approach to his religion led to his son massacring gays and would see women locked in their houses under burkas with no education.



And that lobby votes for Hillary because she wants to import more of them.

But my point is that it's easy to label someone as deplorable and them point at the opposition and say, "Look! You embrace them ..."

Well this is a two party country. If we let people who have no felony convictions vote and "thought crime" is not yet a felony, then you cannot scrub the "deplorables" out of your voting base on either side. So it's poor form to start pointing fingers. I would have thought Hillary would know this after watching what her own party did to light up Romney after he was caught on film making his 47% remarks last cycle, but I guess not. And I very much remember how outraged you were about those remarks too ... what was the problem again? Were you a part of the 47%?

Because that's the same argument you are trying to make here.

a reply to: ketsuko

Last I checked, Omar Mateen father's approach to his religion led to his son massacring gays and would see women locked in their houses under burkas with no education.

So, you're against freedom of religion? Last time I checked, Mike Pence wanted to divert HIV/AIDS funds to state sponsered "Gay Conversion Therapy".

a reply to: windword

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Yep, that's what I heard too.

Do you disagree with the correctness of that statement? Do you really think Mexican doctors, Mexican scientists, Mexican engineers are crossing the border packed like sardines in the back of rattle-trap trucks or are wading that mud hole they call the Rio Grande? No. The people coming across are typically unskilled, non-English-speaking individuals who have no idea what they are getting into but are desperate enough to try anyway.

Do you think none of the people coming in are criminals?

Do you think none of the illegal immigrants are murdering or raping Americans when they get here?

Mexican illegal immigrants are not Mexico's 'best' as in most capable, most skilled, most successful. The illegal immigrants do have problems, the very reason they are willing to endure the treatment they receive from the Coyotes during the illegal crossing. The drug issues in the US are tied to illegal immigrants smuggling drugs. Many of the illegal immigrants go on to commit heinous crimes once here. And then there are also some who do not smuggle drugs or commit felonies when here.

His statement is completely factual and provable.

But illegal immigrants, along with many legal immigrants if the MSM is to be believed (cough, cough, hack, hack), are saying this true statement about illegal Mexican immigrants is a characterization of all immigrants. They are placing themselves in the group of criminals. How is that different from people being concerned about Hillary's statement?

• Trump used specific, provable charges; Clinton did not. One cannot be a murderer unless one is convicted of murder. One cannot be a rapist unless one is convicted of rape. One cannot be a drug smuggler unless one is convicted of drug smuggling. One can be called a racist without ever committing a racist action. One can be called a sexist without ever committing a sexist act. One can be called a homophobe without ever committing a homophobic act (what is that anyway? Running in terror screaming because someone is gay?).
  
  
• Trump's general characterization was 'not their best' and 'has problems.' That is not a complete condemnation, but an indication of present, possibly temporary, deficiency. Clinton's general characterization was 'deplorable,' which is defined as 'unforgivable' (thank you for posting the definition). That is a permanent deficiency.
  
  
• Trump's statement was concerning foreign citizens who have broken US laws. Clinton's statement concerned US citizens who have broken no laws.

Yes, Hillary qualified her basket of 'deplorables.' By doing so she took a label that was subjectively defined and equated it with specific yet typically improperly used and socially poorly defined accusations. There's another English word you might want to look up: Connotation:

noun
1.
the associated or secondary meaning of a word or expression in addition to its explicit or primary meaning: A possible connotation of “home” is “a place of warmth, comfort, and affection.”.

the act of connoting; the suggesting of an additional meaning for a word or expression, apart from its explicit meaning.

2.
something suggested or implied by a word or thing, rather than being explicitly named or described:
“Religion” has always had a negative connotation for me.

3.
Logic. the set of attributes constituting the meaning of a term and thus determining the range of objects to which that term may be applied; comprehension; intension.

I'm of the opinion we can safely ignore #3, since I see no logic in you argument. Only excuses.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Do you disagree with the correctness of that statement?

Yes I most emphatically do!

Do you really think Mexican doctors, Mexican scientists, Mexican engineers are crossing the border packed like sardines in the back of rattle-trap trucks or are wading that mud hole they call the Rio Grande?

No, I don't think that's the way Mexico sends us their engineers, scientists, doctors, or anyone for that matter. I don't think Mexico sends us criminals or illegal aliens.

Do you think none of the people coming in are criminals?

Are you asking me if hardened criminals are entering our country illegally from our southern border more so than from our northern border or from airports? I'd have to say that I don't enough information on that.

But illegal immigrants, along with many legal immigrants if the MSM is to be believed (cough, cough, hack, hack), are saying this true statement about illegal Mexican immigrants is a characterization of all immigrants

Trump didn't qualify his statement with legal or illegal entry. He just said that Mexico is sending us their hardened criminals. His statement insinuates ALL MEXICANS.

Hillary's statement qualified the overall nature of terrible, awful, deplorable people to racists, sexists and homophones, and the like. Do you disagree that those are deplorable characteristics?

Trump supporters are now celebrating their deplorableness. Nice!

I don't see Mexicans celebrating their rapiness.

I think we're gonna need a bigger basket.



I don't know if Trump is genuine in his views and image as being portrayed, but I can tell you that the people following and believing in the message are. That's who Hillary insulted, the people who believe in the ideals represented by the Trump campaign (again, I'm not saying he means what he says or doesn't have problems, he's human of course he does) and are tired of government corruption, among a great many other things.

TheRedneck has been absolutely spot on, as per usual.

Hillary herself "apologized" for using the phrase, which indicates her recognition of the massive effect it has had on her public perception. And we know that is all she cares about is the perception rather than the reality of any situation.

I've estimated her actual public support to be somewhere around 5% in the past, I'd say she's loosing some of that and may be down to around 3% or so.

The next big act coming up under the big top will be the debates, with the twists and turns this election has had so far, I don't know if I want to see what they're going to pull out of the clown car next.

The media circus we're subjected to on the day the votes are tallied will be a spectacle not to be missed. Her support is completely fabricated and she lacks any real, definable base.

On that day we will see how far (((they))) are willing to go to push their point.

When do the hunger games start back up?

a reply to: windword

Yes I most emphatically do!

Which part?

That statement from Trump was not a single sentence. Are you saying none of it is true?

No, I don't think that's the way Mexico sends us their engineers, scientists, doctors, or anyone for that matter. I don't think Mexico sends us criminals or illegal aliens.

I see. So you believe there are no people in America who came here from Mexico. Interesting, if wholly ludicrous, concept.

Trump didn't qualify his statement with legal or illegal entry. He just said that Mexico is sending us their hardened criminals. His statement insinuates ALL MEXICANS.

For someone who started this portion of the discussion based on definitions, I am certainly having to define a lot of words for you.

Context:

noun
1.
the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect:

You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.

2.
the set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.

3.
Mycology. the fleshy fibrous body of the pileus in mushrooms.

Again, I believe #3 is out of context in this discussion.

The statement was a part of his overall discussion of a wall along the US-Mexican border. That is the context. Do you think a wall is needed to keep out legal immigrants? Do you think people are legally applying for immigration to the US and when accepted are sneaking across the border at night?

Hillary's statement qualified the overall nature of terrible, awful, deplorable people to racists, sexists and homophones, and the like. Do you disagree that those are deplorable characteristics?

That depends on individual connotations, since those terms appear to not follow dictionary definitions. Let's take the first one:

If 'racism' means the habitual practice of actions intended and designed to denigrate or deny basic human liberties to others because of their race or national origin, yes, I would consider that a textbook definition of the word deplorable.

If 'racism' means one has light-colored skin and has a difference of opinion with someone of darker-colored skin, no, I do not consider that racism or deplorable.

If one is raised in a culture where certain words or phrases which are considered racist in some cultures have innocuous connotations in their culture, and uses those words or phrases regularly in the context of their own culture, no, I do not consider that racism or deplorable.

All of those (and more) are used, however, to label people as racists. Only the first fits a dictionary definition.

TheRedneck

I'm seeing a lot of side-stepping and redefining of words by many here.

Hillary chose to insult Trump and his supporters.

It backfired on her.

What's so hard to comprehend?

a reply to: TheRedneck

That statement from Trump was not a single sentence. Are you saying none of it is true?

The following is untrue and/or misleading.

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.

I see. So you believe there are no people in America who came here from Mexico. Interesting, if wholly ludicrous, concept.

There's a difference between people who come from places, and people who are sent here from places. Trump's implication is that Mexico is involved in some kind of planned US invasion by deliberately infiltrating our country with their worst criminals. And, he's going to punish Mexico by forcing them to build and pay for a border wall.

This is the kind of ignorant and hateful sentiment that Trump encourages. It's deplorable!

a reply to: DBCowboy

What's so hard to comprehend?

The concept that they or her could ever say or do something that is not acceptable by everyone else.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I see.

So it's not enough to accept that she said it, we somehow have to agree with her.

0_o

a reply to: TheRedneck

I know.

How dare she say something that they see as so self-evidently true, and then have it turn out to be so self-evidently offensive and blatantly bigoted to too many?

a reply to: windword

The following is untrue and/or misleading.

According to DHS status indicators, over 199,000 criminal aliens have been booked into local Texas jails between June 1, 2011 and August 31, 2016. During their criminal careers, these criminal aliens were charged with more than 533,000 criminal offenses. Those arrests include 1,066 homicide charges; 63,382 assault charges; 15,647 burglary charges; 62,907 drug charges; 645 kidnapping charges; 38,234 theft charges; 41,894 obstructing police charges; 3,515 robbery charges; 5,603 sexual assault charges; and 7,984 weapons charges. Of the total criminal aliens arrested in that timeframe, over 132,000 or 66% were identified by DHS status as being in the US illegally at the time of their last arrest.

Source: www.txdps.state.tx.us...

They even have a pretty picture:


Your assertion is hereby proven false.

There's a difference between people who come from places, and people who are sent here from places. Trump's implication is that Mexico is involved in some kind of planned US invasion by deliberately infiltrating our country with there worst criminals. And, he's going to punish Mexico by forcing them to build and pay for a border wall.

I thought you had me there! I went back and looked at the quote, I went to YouTube and listened to video replays... and still I never heard nor saw any reference to the Mexican government.

Now I will admit I wear glasses, and I will admit that my hearing is not the best (too much Lynyrd Skynyrd at 140 dB in my youth. People told me not to do that, but I couldn't hear them over the Lynyrd Skynyrd at 140db), but I never could see it nor hear it. Please kindly point out to me where he mentioned the Mexican government?

While you're searching for this, consider something: Trump has indicated increasing border security (which is nothing more than not telling officers to not do their job) and using the funds obtained from arrest and property seizure of Mexican drug smugglers to finance the wall. Quite impressive, and since there is some circumstantial evidence that the smugglers are backed by portions of the Mexican government, it meets all his criteria.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

So when he says "Mexico sends its people" what does that mean to you?

Do you believe these people travel of their own free will or are they being ordered to do so by "Mexico"?

a reply to: daskakik

It simply means they are encouraged to come here illegally by their situation in Mexico, be that excessive crime, poverty, or something else. It means the Mexican government is doing nothing to prevent it by allowing those situations to exist without improvement.

'Mexico' can refer to a government body, a geographic area, a people living in that geographic area, or the culture/conditions of the people living in that geographic area.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

That's some word yoga.

That is the thing with Trump though, isn't it, say vague things and let people fill it in with what they want.

I like the way you start off pointing the finger at the mexican government and then end up saying that it could mean many things. Almost like the first part of your post didn't even convince you and you need to have other options.

a reply to: TheRedneck

You're deliberately side stepping the issue and projecting what you want it to be. Mexico isn't, with forethought, sending their criminals to the US. So, you're whole set of diatribes are irrelevant.

Putting all but "some who I suppose are good people" Mexicans into a criminal basket is deplorable. Defending such stereotyping is deplorable.

originally posted by: poncho1982

No, it's because we feel we were shoehorned into that group falsely on someone else's "feelings" on the matter with zero proof, and a lot of generalization.

But go on with your false narrative.....

You mean like how Muslims are shoehorned into being grouped as Terrorists. Or how Illegal Mexican Immigrants are shoehorned into being Rapists and Murderers??? Something like that??