That’s exactly what he is saying. “…They [Mexicans] are rapists…”
He did not say, specifically “Mexicans are rapists,” These words you quote are different than those words plain and simple.
If one cares little about accuracy and adherence to factual representations of what was said of course their is no difference and I am just a pedant; if someone cares about those things then their is a material difference.
“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.”
Mexicans are rapists to me means he is speaking about Mexico or Mexicans as a whole. This would imply that there is something inferior about all Mexicans, as if somehow being born in Mexico makes one an inferior human being.
The difference between that and the quote above is the quote above is talking about a subset of Mexicans, the “not . . .best” Mexicans. To me this has a much different meaning. What it means to me is not that all Mexicans are inferior, just the ones that are getting sent to the U.S.
I don’t agree with Trump on either statement, but to me a more serious conversation would entail talking about the fallacies of what he actually has said instead hyperbole resulting from what he has not said.
Well Trump cleared it all up anyway…
Trump replied, “Well, somebody’s doing the raping, Don. I mean, you know, somebody’s doing it. Who’s doing the raping? How can you say such a thing?”
He is saying that Mexico produces many many rapists, and that they are being sent over to the US. He is also saying that there are so many that it is such a huge problem that we need to build a wall to keep them out. In other words a yooge problem meriting yooge expense and public concern.
He is also implying that it is endemic to Mexico and that the Mexicans are so devious as to be sending them over to us as a solution to their problem. What problem? Mexican rapists.
He is associating Mexico with rapists for political gains.
That’s correct.
He’s just talking about the Mexicans that “they” are “sending” us.
the Mexican government forces many bad people into our country, because they’re smart.
It’s Mexican Americans he’s saying are the rapists; there’s no implication concerning Mexicans in Mexico.
Of course, he’s dead wrong. It’s simply not true that Mexico’s government sends convicts northward.
It may be Trump has all the answers, but someone could ask him about why these smart Mexicans are going to be dumb enough to a pay for a wall that would lock their rapists into the country.
To me this is a much more well thought out response the Trump’s actual words and gets beyond hyperbolic knee jerk reactions.
I believe what you say is an accurate depiction of the situation, but I do not agree with the assumptions of many of Trump’s detractors that all of Trump’s supporters (or Trump himself) are patently racist or xenophobic. I think the main concern of Trump’s base is bread and butter economic issues.
Sure, keep repeating that to the ones that know already who is Trump kowtowing to.
Via The Young Turks:
Trump Supporter Tells US Citizen “Get Out Of My Country”
"Trump Supporter or staffer: This [Trump and his campaign] it is not about you**, get out of my country, get out**…
Jorge Ramos: I am a USA citizen too!
Trump Supporter or staffer: Well, whatever! No Univision, no, its not about you, it’s not about you…
Jorge Ramos: “It’s not about you”? It is about the United States.
Cenk Uygur [on the studio commenting on that:] Oh man, that pisses me off! It’s not your f****** country?! You don’t own us you don’t own the country. I know you used to own everything and you hated that you don’t do that anymore… Pointing at him and jabbing your finger at his face. That’s the guy who’s built a career as a journalist in this country and he say he says “I’m a citizen” [and gets for a reply] “No, Univision!?!” What does that mean you knucklehead? Idiot! so no, this is the Trump supporter there."
One encounter featuring one Trump supporter presented by a liberal talk show is not particularly compelling evidence to me. By that logic, Philip J. Berg’s actions would somehow prove that Clinton supporters are birthers.
They may all be rampant racists and xenophobes, I would just need better evidence to believe such.
It was in the link I posted, as usual this it is just an attempt at ignoring that Trump is indeed kowtowing to guys like Arpaio, that already admitted to using racial profiling and was investigating the judge in his own case of contempt of court in order to get dirt on the very same judge that was preceding in his case…
And did you forget also that Arpaio just like Trump is a birther?
The reality is that a guy like Arpaio was even avoided by the Republican senators of the state (MCCain and Flake) and they advised Trump to not get buddy buddy with Arpaio Trump ignored that advice; the choice is clear, Trump is either an incompetent tone deaf enabler, or Trump is a racist asshole. Choose the poison.
BTW, as usual there was no public refutation from Trump to what that supporter did say to Ramos, it is indeed just a seal of approval of that kind of follower.
"President Trump, your national security advisers agree that North Korea has just successfully tested a H-bomb delivered with a rocket which has the range to be capable of reaching the US west coast.
Sir, this is your chance to be remembered as great."
As a pragmatist, what do you reckon he’d do?
A Trump presidency might be kinda fun if it wasn’t for that whole “Commander in Chief” aspect of it.
I think he would do what he was advised to do. I imagine the advisors he would use would have similar experience to the advisors anyone else picks. The only thing I see that would be different from anyone else is the way he would try to sell whatever decision he was advised to make to the populace - that would be interesting.
He is really all over the map with his political views - a little more than half the time he given to the Democrats, a little less to Republicans and for a couple years he was involved with some small third party I can’t remember the name of. It’s all on Wikipedia I’m sure.
Getting back to the OP the point is that I am not particularly afraid of a Trump presidency because he is not a severe ideologue and has no particular axe to grind - those types (e.g. Cruz) scare me much more. To me he is just a flamboyant business man that actually does identify with the man in the street; in some ways despite, in some ways because of, his upbringing. This is not to say I am particularly in favor of Trump - the only candidate I really like is Sanders.
So you think he’s going to act on the advice from the same advisers anybody else would pick? That makes him great … how?
And for a guy whose whole schtick is he’s not of the establishment, why would he select the same establishment advisers?
They may not know where the bodies are buried, but they can sure make a bunch of 'em!
Trusting in advisors to get an incompetent or inexperienced president through his term didn’t work out so great with Bush.
I don’t think that Trump will win the general election. For all I know, he might drop out tomorrow or fail to win a single state in the primary. But I agree with your point. He should not be totally dismissed as a hopeless idiot who’s destined to lose. The chance of him winning is large enough that it shouldn’t be totally ignored. In addition to your points, I have a few others:
[ul]
[li]Democrats tend to be overconfident. They though Reagan would never be President. They thought Dubya would never be President. In the last election, they felt sure that many Repub Senate and Governor candidates would lose, who instead won, sometimes by big margins.[/li][li]Hillary has massive vulnerabilities. She’s dishonest, sleazy, a flip-flopper, and has less charisma than most bricks. She claims to support the middle class and oppose big money, yet takes zillions from zillionaires. As Senator, she cast a lot of bad votes. (For the Iraq War, just to name one.) She’s married to a man who committed sexual harassment at the very least. She was part of the unpopular Obama Adminstration and had a bad record as Secretary of State.[/li][li]Trump is good at exploiting her vulnerabilities. He’s already shown this by making an issue out of Bill’s sexual behavior and getting the whole media to talk about it for days. He’ll doubtlessly be able to launch other surprise attacks that the Hillay campaign isn’t prepared to deal with.[/li][li]Events may play in Trump’s favor. For example it’s likely that Al Queda and ISIS will commit major terrorist attacks between now and November. Each gives Trump a chance to play the tough guy and makes Hillary look like a wimp.[/li][li]“It’s the economy, stupid.” Several economic indicators are looking not so good right now. If the economy slips into recession, this always hurts the incumbent party.[/li][/ul]
As I said, I don’t expect Trump to win. I think his many, obvious negatives would pull him down, despite all this. But it would be foolish to say that he has zero chance of winning.
Do you know this quote to be wrong:
"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. Their rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
I just changed one word, in the second to last sentence “they’re” to “their”. It seems to be a more reasonable translation and interpretation. The parallel construction is broken either way, and this just simply seems to be a more logical read.
And given that, he’s simply saying that some of the people coming here (or Mexico is sending here, are rapists. That’s seems to be factual and a not anywhere near the least fair interpretation that “He’s saying all Mexicans are rapists!”
Tortured reasoning always confesses.
Love the OP’s assumption that all right-thinking persons would naturally be “worried” about a Trump presidency. The only thing that worries me is the prospect of Trump not being elected, and thus a wall along the Mexican border not built, and Islamic immigration not halted.