That’s what I’ve read, that he was an entitled little prick (heh!) who punched teachers and abused classmates.
It’s impossible to be unbiased about anything, for the same reason you can’t speak without an accent.
Even then, there could be (and maybe inevitably would be) bias in which facts are presented (and perhaps in how they’re presented).
Certainly, though, you could at least avoid value-judgmenty words like “idiot” or “hero.”
What I was going to say. I have to think most of his MAGAts are people who were mostly unaware of the full extent of Trump’s rep in his pre-political spheres.
I don’t think you could make an unbiased video of Trump without first acknowledging that he is a narcissist first and foremost. I have often suspected he might have some kind of attention deficit disorder. I think the racism charges against him are unfounded. He is a nationalist which I see no problem with that based on my own interpretation of nationalist. I think he would play the system for all he could get away with but that is not so unusual in itself. My biggest beef with him is what I see as an inability to comprehend complex issues and his refusal to listen to his experts. But even that might not be as bad as it seems, it would lean toward just maintaining a status quo. Because of our checks and balances I don’t believe he could get too far out of line. He knows any power he has lies in his supporters and he puts a lot of energy into maintaining his support. One good thing I have seen in him is that he takes human life very seriously regardless of race of status he does not like seeing young people and civilians die needlessly in wars. He seems to get drunk off of the image of being powerful. In spite of saying some really dumb things I believe he is a rational actor. I think his obsession with loyalty has torn the party in half. He doesn’t seem to know the meaning of the word loyalty when it comes to him being loyal. This might prove to make him weak when selecting a cabinet as none of the truly bright people we have would want to work for him. I could see him doing a good job for four years but I would much rather see someone else.
He said that immigrants from Africa, Asia and South America “poison our blood.”
Of course you don’t.
Stranger
Gandhi was a nationalist (anti-Colonial nationalism, to be precise).
I believe the majority issue is with things like white nationalism and nationalist socialism (i.e. Nazism). To be fair, for many the assumption is that the word “nationalist” refers to these specific types but that doesn’t match historic usage and isn’t universally shared.
Personally, I’d avoid using the word outside of the context of white power and Nazism, since there’s nothing to be gained by using a term that is so liable to be taken wrongly (ditto with Socialism). But, likewise, I’d want to verify what someone meant by “nationalism” before kicking them off a pier. They’re probably confusing it with patriotism.
Ok, I read the definition and if it is correct and unbiased, I would remove myself from identifying as a nationalist. I was not aware that there are ethnic components to it.
Technically, it’s saying that there’s some collective “us” and the state should serve that collective body, precisely.
The problem is that “us” tends to exclude anyone with outside identities - Jews, gypsies, Muslims (in the case of India), etc.
Well, I just got a Straight Dope badge for my first “one box”. I have no idea how because I linked to the NPR article the same way as any other link I have completed here. 
And as it turns out (to nobody’s surprise really), they are NOT Christian at all! Not even a tiny bit!
We have had a lot of unscrupulous businesspeople make business decisions that were also racist in nature without them actually being racist, it was all about money. I do believe he holds some racial biases but I don’t believe he would play them out in his governing.
I applaud the entirely unbiased way in which you recounted that event.
I read through the Housing Discrimination papers from the FBI investigations released through FOIA, some time ago.
My read was that there were two or three cases of people being asked to show proof of employment prior to being shown an apartment. Those people happened to be African American.
The investigation didn’t seem to cover the question of whether this was due to corporate policy or the choice of those particular building managers, nor did it demonstrate whether the proof of employment check was only sometimes requested or consistently, nor whether it was targeted only to African Americans or just anyone who didn’t look like they might not be able to afford a unit. Plausibly, they could have demonstrated all of that, I’m not saying otherwise. But, in what I read, they didn’t demonstrate any evidence along those lines.
As best I recall, I believe that the Trump Org never admitted to wrong, paid no fines, etc. and the government backed out after a few threats.
Again, as I recall, this was also all or largely under the watch of Fred Trump, not Donald. Hunter is not Joe. Fred is not Donald.
@Atamasama referenced Wikipedia.
I would submit that a panel of historians, academics, and writers from both sides of the political aisle (but not at the fringes) could collaborate on a reasonably neutral biopic of TFG.
I suspect there would be some serious hashing out, compromise, and go-arounds – akin to jury deliberations in a hotly contested, high-profile trial.
But I think they’d get there.
His talk of our nations blood being poisoned is pretty racist. Anyway, here’s an article that recounts a lot of it:
In terms of slathering Trump with the racist label, I’d personally go with Birtherism and things like calling Mexicans rapists.
I’m quite happy to believe that Trump has some racist bents. I just don’t think the housing discrimination case presents a clear picture. And even if it did, it would be towards his father.
Fair enough!