# Who, here is voting for Trump? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 6, 2016, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989 "2016-08-06T22:02:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/241 "2016-10-27T20:34:49Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > If Politifact is something that can be trusted as a source I was very happy when they fact-checked that Obama did not personally go into the desert, plant a flag in the ground, and declare the existence of the Islamic State, but I was _sorely_ disappointed when they failed to subsequently point out that Trump was also wrong on a related matter: ISIS doesn’t give out MVP awards so Clinton and Obama couldn’t possibly be considered for them. This was even more egregious on the part of Trump and I am a bit upset at the obvious pro-Trump bias of Politifact in this regard. Otherwise they are of impeccable character, I have it on good authority. I can endeavor to correct my citations regarding the bylaws of the group mentioned above and whether or not Hillary used a private server in lieu of a government email address if anyone wishes. Please ask. I have not posted here in many years and don’t know what the SDMB considers the right sources. For instance I would never pay attention to the NYT, but it seemed to pass muster. It’s a confusing year. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/242 "2016-10-27T20:40:06Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > I am not aware of this. Can you explain in more detail? From Politifact: To electronically transmit classified information, State Department employees must use a specific closed system, not their usual @state.gov email addresses. Clinton has said she viewed classified information in hard copy in her office, and she used other secure channels when traveling. Some emails now made public actually show Clinton’s team discussing how they couldn’t email each other classified information over the private server and instead had to move the conversation to a more appropriate venue. So State Department rules say you can’t email classified information, even to .gov email addresses. Instead, there’s a separate, non-email, system for handling classified information, which Hillary used. Some classified information was sent to her email address, but it was done without her knowledge and was improperly marked. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/243 "2016-10-27T20:41:06Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > I was very happy when they fact-checked that Obama did not personally go into the desert, plant a flag in the ground, and declare the existence of the Islamic State, but I was _sorely_ disappointed when they failed to subsequently point out that Trump was also wrong on a related matter: ISIS doesn’t give out MVP awards so Clinton and Obama couldn’t possibly be considered for them. This was even more egregious on the part of Trump and I am a bit upset at the obvious pro-Trump bias of Politifact in this regard. > > Otherwise they are of impeccable character, I have it on good authority. > > I can endeavor to correct my citations regarding the bylaws of the group mentioned above and whether or not Hillary used a private server in lieu of a government email address if anyone wishes. Please ask. I have not posted here in many years and don’t know what the SDMB considers the right sources. For instance I would never pay attention to the NYT, but it seemed to pass muster. It’s a confusing year. You have nothing to say about the stats themselves? About how Trump seems to lie _much_ more than Clinton? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/244 "2016-10-27T20:58:27Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > This is a curious reading of the events. Yes, Trump does not like Duke or white supremacists, as far as we both see from earlier times. When asked about a specific event, which Trump was unfamiliar with, Trump did not immediately say “Well Duke is a huge racist so anything he does up to and including eating broccoli must be bad, I DISAVOW.” Then the reporter of course did not care to repeat his question about _what_ Trump was supposed to be upset about and Trump simply hedged. **To be clear** : you know Trump doesn’t like Duke and racist people and has specifically said so and you are willing to accept this as a fact worthy of mention _but then_ when asked about some event he wasn’t clear on he was supposed to go on a tirade against David Duke because the reporter dropped his name? Is this your position, specifically, that he wasn’t cavalier enough in his position on David Duke, which you yourself were already clear on? If not, can you please clarify it for me? Because to a first approximation this is not even guilt by association. Please, there are many more items that showed how Trump does disparage minorities and even Jews. > **[Here Are 13 Examples Of Donald Trump Being Racist](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-racist-examples_n_56d47177e4b03260bf777e83)** > > He claims to have "a great relationship with the blacks," which is totally something a normal person would say. And I was not born yesterday, but many on the right just want to tell us how incapable of seeing the obvious is to them: > **[PBS airs segment with Trump-supporting family, doesn't notice mother's white...](https://www.salon.com/2016/03/17/pbs_airs_segment_with_trump_supporting_family_doesnt_notice_mothers_white_supremacist_tattoos/)** > > The Tillys were so inspired by Trump, they volunteered for him — oh, and they have neo-Nazis tattoos > [@](#): > > It’s hardly surprising that, beyond passive endorsements, neo-Nazis are actually investing sweat equity in Trump 2016. What’s more surprising, though, is Gawker picked up on the nationalist hand tattoos (on her left hand, Grace has an “88,” apparently a stand-in for when the requisite surface area isn’t available to inscribe “Heil Hitler”) before, presumably, several rounds of PBS staffers green-lit the segment. > > PBS posted an update on their original write-up of the profile, relaying Tilly’s subsequent claim “that these tattoos are not representative of neo-Nazi positions but are connected to her family’s Celtic religious beliefs,” which, of course, in no way accounts for the “88” tattoo. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/245 "2016-10-27T21:22:12Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And I was not born yesterday, but many on the right just want to tell us how incapable of seeing the obvious is to them: > > [http://www.salon.com/2016/03/17/pbs\_airs\_segment\_with\_trump\_supporting\_family\_doesnt\_notice\_mothers\_white\_supremacist\_tattoos/](http://www.salon.com/2016/03/17/pbs_airs_segment_with_trump_supporting_family_doesnt_notice_mothers_white_supremacist_tattoos/) I’m not sure it’s valid to use the fact that a white supremacist supports Trump as evidence that Trump is bad. I’m sure there are plenty of awful people who support Hillary. We should judge the candidates by their actions, statements, and who they endorse, rather than the revere ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/246 "2016-10-27T21:45:34Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > I’m not sure it’s valid to use the fact that a white supremacist supports Trump as evidence that Trump is bad. I’m sure there are plenty of awful people who support Hillary. We should judge the candidates by their actions, statements, and who they endorse, rather than the revere True, but remember the not born yesterday Part? Every single time an issue like that popped in his campaign Trump and surrogates ignore it. And continue ignoring and not condemning supporters like that, no matter how guys like Joe Arpaio get in trouble with the law with things like racial profiling Trump still keeps them joined to his hip. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/247 "2016-10-27T21:51:38Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > Since it was such a big deal to people I have given this matter a lot of thought and the only conclusion I came to is that there is an extremely fine hair in US politics on this matter. On racism? I don’t think it’s that “fine” – it’s just that racist statements can get politicians in a heap of trouble. > [@](#): > > This is true. Your phrasing was far more incendiary to my ears. Yes, he did revise it later. It sounds like he heard significant, meaningful dissent and he responded immediately. That he even had the instinct to ban a religion from entering the country is highly bigoted, IMO, and reflects very poorly on him. > [@](#): > > My recollection was that there was also the issue of the association the Judge was a part of. I do not have these things handy so I had to look it up. Politifact I guess passes for a cite here: “The group’s bylaws state, ‘The purpose and goal of this association is to promote the interests of the Latino communities throughout the state and the professional interests of the membership.’” You can check the article here:[PolitiFact | Trump wrongly casts California lawyers group as strongly pro-Mexican](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/07/donald-trump/trump-wrongly-casts-california-lawyers-group-stron/). Of particular interest is the idea that judges were biased against latinos and people with “spanish-sounding surnames.” I wonder what your ire for these people accusing judges of bias would have been in 1977. Don’t they know judges are special people? How fine this hair must be. Soon, I suppose, we’ll finally be bald, if we don’t invent a new class of sorites paradoxes where judges enter quantum states of biased/unbiased over time and space in matters our abstract algebra is not yet up to task for. (Finally, an application of the monster vertex algebra! 😛 ) Ethnicity should never enter the conversation – any conversation – about whether a judge is biased for or against a candidate. Further, by singling out Mexican ancestry, he’s directly implying that white (or non-Mexican) judges are not biased. > [@](#): > > This is a curious reading of the events. Yes, Trump does not like Duke or white supremacists, as far as we both see from earlier times. When asked about a specific event, which Trump was unfamiliar with, Trump did not immediately say “Well Duke is a huge racist so anything he does up to and including eating broccoli must be bad, I DISAVOW.” Then the reporter of course did not care to repeat his question about _what_ Trump was supposed to be upset about and Trump simply hedged. **To be clear** : you know Trump doesn’t like Duke and racist people and has specifically said so and you are willing to accept this as a fact worthy of mention _but then_ when asked about some event he wasn’t clear on he was supposed to go on a tirade against David Duke because the reporter dropped his name? Is this your position, specifically, that he wasn’t cavalier enough in his position on David Duke, which you yourself were already clear on? If not, can you please clarify it for me? Because to a first approximation this is not even guilt by association. Trump said “I just don’t know anything about him” when asked about Duke. That’s not credible – he directly criticized him years before, and it’s not reasonable to believe that he hadn’t read about this criticism prior to being interviewed. It’s my position that Trump lied about not knowing who Duke was, and what he stands for, and he likely did this because he wants the support of white supremacists and was worried that a strong disavowal would lose that support. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/248 "2016-10-27T21:55:10Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Please, there are many more items that showed how Trump does disparage minorities and even Jews. > > [Here Are 13 Examples Of Donald Trump Being Racist | HuffPost Latest News](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-racist-examples_us_56d47177e4b03260bf777e83) Is there something in particular you wish me to address in the context of this thread? I stopped reading at another silly recount of the Khan job. > [@](#): > > And I was not born yesterday, but many on the right just want to tell us how incapable of seeing the obvious is to them If you want me to say racism doesn’t exist you’ll be waiting a while but if you have something specific I’ll be happy to address it. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > You have nothing to say about the stats themselves? About how Trump seems to lie much more than Clinton? Nothing much, no. Politifact’s ability to research is not what I find disingenuous about them. What they’re willing to call a “Pants on Fire” “lie” and what they aren’t is suspect, and therefore so is such an aggregation. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/249 "2016-10-27T22:11:29Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > On racism? I don’t think it’s that “fine” – it’s just that racist statements can get politicians in a heap of trouble. The hard line appears anew. Then I suppose we can agree to roundly condemn this group the Judge belongs to? > [@](#): > > That he even had the instinct to ban a religion from entering the country is highly bigoted, IMO, and reflects very poorly on him. Not to me, though this is of no substance for my support of him so it might be getting off track with respect to the OP. > [@](#): > > Ethnicity should never enter the conversation – any conversation – about whether a judge is biased for or against a candidate. Further, by singling out Mexican ancestry, he’s directly implying that white (or non-Mexican) judges are not biased. Oh, to be back at the Zimmerman trial when Latinos were white. Simpler times. > [@](#): > > Trump said “I just don’t know anything about him” when asked about Duke. That’s not credible – he directly criticized him years before, and it’s not reasonable to believe that he hadn’t read about this criticism prior to being interviewed. Trump was asked a complex question regarding David Duke and white supremecists “support.” It was not at all clear what Trump was supposed to be addressing from the question, which, in its entirety, was “I want to ask you about the Anti-Defamation League, which this week called on you to publicly condemn unequivocally the racism of former KKK grand wizard David Duke, who recently said that voting against you at this point would be treason to your heritage. Will you unequivocally condemn David Duke and say that you don’t want his vote or that of other white supremacists in this election?” This isn’t an unfair question by any means but I’m pretty sure if someone dropped this on me my first response would be, “I’m sorry, what is it you want me to do?” It sounds like an infowars tirade. David Duke! KKK! ADL! GRAND WIZAZZZAARRD!!1 Tapper’s “clarification” after Trump said he didn’t know what he was referring to was, “OK. I mean, I’m just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here, but…” Which is just about the worst paraphrase imaginable for the pile that came out of his mouth, that was actually a question about a question of another party had about what yet another party happened to say. It sounds like Trump misunderstood the question as if it were an accusation that Trump was somehow in cohoots with Duke when he responds, “I don’t know any — honestly, I don’t know David Duke. I don’t believe I have ever met him. I’m pretty sure I didn’t meet him. And I just don’t know anything about him.” To this, you say > [@](#): > > It’s my position that Trump lied about not knowing who Duke was, and what he stands for, and he likely did this because he wants the support of white supremacists and was worried that a strong disavowal would lose that support. It’s my position that he thought the question was about an _association_ between him and David Duke and to that extent Trump simply said he didn’t know David Duke _in this regard_. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/250 "2016-10-27T22:16:46Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > Is there something in particular you wish me to address in the context of this thread? I stopped reading at another silly recount of the Khan job. It seems that you don’t know that Trump still prefers to pick on silly recounts. [http://fusion.net/story/362890/donald-trump-khan-family-cruelty/](http://fusion.net/story/362890/donald-trump-khan-family-cruelty/) > [@](#): > > Donald Trump just doubled down on his cruel, \*\*pointless \*\*fight with the Khan family Of course that is one of the reasons we should not give the presidency to Trump, he is truly bound to seek petty revenge and hatred that overrides any sense he would get. Not gonna give him more power to do so. > [@erislover](#): > > If you want me to say racism doesn’t exist you’ll be waiting a while but if you have something specific I’ll be happy to address it. Why of course, none of the examples pointed out qualify for you, as usual for many Trump supporters. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/251 "2016-10-27T22:30:26Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Why of course, none of the examples pointed out qualify for you, as usual for many Trump supporters. It surprises you that people don’t think Trump is a racist, or that when they support Trump they do so without racism, or is everyone just automatically a racist or what are you even fucking saying, dude? Just say it, please. Don’t drop a hit piece from HuffPo and pretend like you have no obligation in the conversation. (Unless you wrote the article. Did you write the article?) ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/252 "2016-10-27T22:43:27Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > The hard line appears anew. Then I suppose we can agree to roundly condemn this group the Judge belongs to? Why? What did they do or say that’s racist? > [@](#): > > Not to me, though this is of no substance for my support of him so it might be getting off track with respect to the OP. Wow. This kind of reaction probably goes part of the way towards explaining things like the Holocaust – undoubtedly many Germans were indifferent to the possibility of banning or expelling Jews from Germany, since they weren’t Jewish. All that’s required for evil to triumph is the indifference of decent people. > [@](#): > > Trump was asked a complex question regarding David Duke and white supremecists “support.” It was not at all clear what Trump was supposed to be addressing from the question, which, in its entirety, was “I want to ask you about the Anti-Defamation League, which this week called on you to publicly condemn unequivocally the racism of former KKK grand wizard David Duke, who recently said that voting against you at this point would be treason to your heritage. Will you unequivocally condemn David Duke and say that you don’t want his vote or that of other white supremacists in this election?” This isn’t an unfair question by any means but I’m pretty sure if someone dropped this on me my first response would be, “I’m sorry, what is it you want me to do?” It sounds like an infowars tirade. David Duke! KKK! ADL! GRAND WIZAZZZAARRD!!1 Tapper’s “clarification” after Trump said he didn’t know what he was referring to was, “OK. I mean, I’m just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here, but…” Which is just about the worst paraphrase imaginable for the pile that came out of his mouth, that was actually a question about a question of another party had about what yet another party happened to say. It sounds like Trump misunderstood the question as if it were an accusation that Trump was somehow in cohoots with Duke when he responds, “I don’t know any — honestly, I don’t know David Duke. I don’t believe I have ever met him. I’m pretty sure I didn’t meet him. And I just don’t know anything about him.” To this, you say > > It’s my position that he thought the question was about an _association_ between him and David Duke and to that extent Trump simply said he didn’t know David Duke _in this regard_. I don’t find that credible at all, especially in light of the weakness of his later disavowals. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/253 "2016-10-27T22:44:57Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > It surprises you that people don’t think Trump is a racist, or that when they support Trump they do so without racism, or is everyone just automatically a racist or what are you even fucking saying, dude? Just say it, please. Don’t drop a hit piece from HuffPo and pretend like you have no obligation in the conversation. (Unless you wrote the article. Did you write the article?) What is that supposed to mean if not a “killing the messenger” fallacy from your part? The problem remains, racists and bigots are indeed getting a lot of oxygen thanks to ignoring the sizeable number of racists that are in the Republican tent. I already do know that many are not racists, unfortunately they are however \*\*very \*\*tolerant of racists like Trump. It is a form of reprehensible behavior IMHO and even Mitt Romney did notice: [http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/mitt-romney-donald-trump-trickle-down-racism-224209](http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/mitt-romney-donald-trump-trickle-down-racism-224209) > [@](#): > > Mitt Romney argued on Friday that Donald Trump’s rhetoric could make racist and misogynistic sentiments more permissible in America. > > The 2012 Republican nominee hammered the presumptive Republican nominee’s past comments on race, saying on CNN’s “The Situation Room” that if Trump were to become president, his words would pose an even larger danger. > > “I don’t want to see a president of the United State saying things which change the character of the generations of Americans that are following,” Romney said. “Presidents have an impact on the nature of our nation, and **trickle down racism and trickle down bigotry and trickle down misogyny — all of these things are extraordinarily dangerous to the heart and character of America.** ” > > When anchor Wolf Blitzer asked Romney directly if he thought Trump was racist, the former Massachusetts governor again focused on the implications of Trump’s rhetoric. > > “I think his comments time and again appeal to the racist tendency that exists in some people and I think that’s dangerous,” he said. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/254 "2016-10-27T23:15:39Z")
I’m sorry that Jake Tapper asked Donald a “complex” question. Why are his voters not concerned with his inability or refusal to come up with a reasonable answer. And it happens over and over. And each time it needs to be “explained.” The trumpsplaining is destroying any civic discourse we have. It is insensible. Just look around. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/255 "2016-10-27T23:31:25Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > It surprises you that people don’t think Trump is a racist, or that when they support Trump they do so without racism, or is everyone just automatically a racist or what are you even fucking saying, dude? Just say it, please. Don’t drop a hit piece from HuffPo and pretend like you have no obligation in the conversation. (Unless you wrote the article. Did you write the article?) Where would anyone get the idea that racism is part of the Trump deal? You made the racist case for Trump in your first post. It was the last item on your agenda, but by far the most vehement and passionate. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/256 "2016-10-27T23:46:15Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > – undoubtedly many Germans were indifferent to the possibility of banning or expelling Jews from Germany, since they weren’t Jewish. The suggestion that there is some kind of moral equivalence between expelling and killing people, one one hand, and stopping immigration on the other is frankly quite suspect. I do not lock my door because I hate my neighbor and he does not lock his door because he hates me. The extension of the wall and door in my residence is the border of a nation, and it can be closed metaphorically or literally. And when I tell my friend my door is always open to them I still expect them to knock first. > [@GIGObuster](#): > > The problem remains, racists and bigots are indeed getting a lot of oxygen thanks to ignoring the sizeable number of racists that are in the Republican tent. The republican tent that has largely rejected Trump if not actually supported Clinton? Or some other one? > [@](#): > > It is a form of reprehensible behavior IMHO and even Mitt Romney did notice: Why are democrats so in love with Republicans all of a sudden? Reagan this, Romney that, HRC worked close with GWB here… 2016 is literally bizarro land. Four years ago Romney was Hitler. You have those articles handy? I remember the pictures. Well, it’s old hat to me, maybe it works on the young kids. I think you mistake people tired of being called racists for nothing for being ok with racism. I assure you they’re not the same thing, though such assurances probably don’t mean much. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2016, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/257 "2016-10-27T23:51:05Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > You made the racist case for Trump in your first post. It was the last item on your agenda, but by far the most vehement and passionate. Did I? I thought I explained why I no longer considered myself a Democrat. When Sanders said whites didn’t know what poverty was like, when Clinton decided she had to lecture me on hard times—what’s the buzzword now? Dog whistle? She wasn’t talking to me. I’m a deplorable. I might even be irredeemable. She was talking to you. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2016, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/258 "2016-10-28T00:00:08Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > Did I? I thought I explained why I no longer considered myself a Democrat. When Sanders said whites didn’t know what poverty was like He shouldn’t have said that, and the fact he did say that is probably in part responsible for the fact he isn’t the Democratic candidate. > [@](#): > > when Clinton decided she had to lecture me on hard times—what’s the buzzword now? Dog whistle? Mind providing the full quote? > [@](#): > > She wasn’t talking to me. I’m a deplorable. The “deplorables” are specifically the racist, sexist, and xenophobic elements of Trump’s base, like the nice lady with “88” tattooed on her hand referenced earlier. Not a label I personally would claim for myself. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2016, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/259 "2016-10-28T00:05:43Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > The suggestion that there is some kind of moral equivalence between expelling and killing people, one one hand, and stopping immigration on the other is frankly quite suspect. I do not lock my door because I hate my neighbor and he does not lock his door because he hates me. The extension of the wall and door in my residence is the border of a nation, and it can be closed metaphorically or literally. And when I tell my friend my door is always open to them I still expect them to knock first. This wasn’t about immigration. Trump singled out Muslims. He said he wanted to ban Muslims from entering the country. That’s no different than wanting to ban Jews from entering the country. Religious bigotry has been responsible for the worst atrocities in human history, and indifference to religious bigotry has allowed these atrocities. Many or most Germans in the 30s were indifferent to mistreatment of Jews. You are indifferent to Trump’s proposed mistreatment of Muslims (which is awful, but still not nearly as awful as the Holocaust). I’m not indifferent - I strongly oppose religious bigotry in whatever form it takes. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2016, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989/260 "2016-10-28T00:07:28Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > The republican tent that has largely rejected Trump if not actually supported Clinton? Or some other one? The one that still shows that he has 40% of the vote, no matter what he does. > [@erislover](#): > > Why are democrats so in love with Republicans all of a sudden? Because is very easy to find Republicans that do realize that Trump is not what conservatism was supposed to be. > [@erislover](#): > > Reagan this, Romney that, HRC worked close with GWB here… 2016 is literally bizarro land. Four years ago Romney was Hitler. You have those articles handy? I remember the pictures. Well, it’s old hat to me, maybe it works on the young kids. I think you mistake people tired of being called racists for nothing for being ok with racism. I assure you they’re not the same thing, though such assurances probably don’t mean much. And that is the reason why I’m looking at a lot of conservative media that does show character, they indeed know that country should be ahead of party. Specially when the party is going astray. You have this all wrong, we are not looking at Romney or Reagan because they were misguided then, we look at them to see how wrong many Republicans that will vote for trump are. Incidentally, Romney and others do know how foolish the current path the Republican party has by supporting Trump. From the conservative The Weekly Standard: [http://www.weeklystandard.com/trump-has-played-the-rnc-for-fools/article/2005100](http://www.weeklystandard.com/trump-has-played-the-rnc-for-fools/article/2005100) > [@](#): > > Trump Has Played the RNC for Fools > > By Jay Cost > > The Republican National Committee has mishandled the Donald Trump situation from the word “go”. Rather than recognizing him for what he was—a toxic interloper who would rain destruction upon the party brand—it instead treated him just like any other candidate. > > It looked the other way as Trump insulted John McCain and Megyn Kelly last summer. > > It sanctioned a debate format—nine or so candidates, with each getting just seconds to talk—that made Trump, the master of quips, but otherwise vacuous, look good. > Trump supporters chant ‘drain that swamp’ during rally > Yahoo > > It responded to his threats to run as an independent with a nonsensical pledge, which only hurt those decent Republicans like Jeb Bush who refused to endorse him. > [@](#): > > That’s right. The RNC handed Trump the tools he needed to build his own database of loyal followers, which he can cultivate after the election. So, our Trump troubles will not end on November 8, thanks in large measure to the Republican National Committee. He will be around for as long as he pleases, causing trouble as he sees fit. > > If current polls are to be believed, Hillary Clinton will be declared the winner of the presidential election at approximately 9:01 PM EST on November 8, 2016. > > At 9:02, the top officers of the RNC should resign. That includes Reince Priebus, chairman; Sharon Day, co-chairman; Tony Parker, treasurer; Susie Hudson, secretary; John Ryder, general counsel; and Lew Eisenberg, finance chairman. Bruce Ash, chairman of the rules committee, should also resign. > > If the RNC were a publicly traded company, the shareholders would demand such a house cleaning. It’s not unreasonable for conservatives to demand the same. It is not the Democrats who are so in love with Republicans all of a sudden, it is the Republican leaders and the most respected conservative sources that before claimed that Democrats were only making a caricature of the Republicans. They and many conservatives have found now that there are many conservatives that are preferring the caricature indeed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-here-is-voting-for-trump/761989.md?page=14)