Yeah, but he’ll never get those. But he might get the smart ones. 
How about you tell me how he is not:
- successful
- has not created thousands of jobs and has made bringing jobs back to the U.S. a big part of his platform
- for the rule of law
He leveraged inherited wealth into four bankruptcies. That’s basically a textbook example of failure.
Whereas I imagine that people are, generally, way smarter than that.
I imagine that most people are capable of at least some measure of nuanced thought, and that they do not quite so readily commit the fallacy of the excluded middle.
I imagine that most folks - Latino or non-Latino, Hispanic or non-Hispanic - realise that, in reality, the choice isn’t between on one hand Mr. Trump, and on the other hand “people who exploit children and put foul language into their mouths.”
I imagine that most people easily realise - as it seems that you do not - that, when it all comes down to it, the choice is between any number of politicians, all of whom should be judged on their own positions, merits, virtues, vices and stupidities, rather than on the language and the tactics of a vanishingly small number of their detractors.
But let’s say that I am wrong.
Let’s say that, as soon as someone sees this video, he or she immediately falls sway to the mysterious delusion that the choice really is between Mr. Trump and “people who exploit children and put foul language into their mouths.”
Even so: Do you really expect it to reach out to so many people that this will have a statistically significant effect on the primaries - let alone the actual election? I sure don’t.
In fact, I put it to you, Sir, that this is but a mere blip, a hype, a fleeting outrage, a trifle, a vacuous hue and cry, a weak and distant “bloggbävning”, here today and gone tomorrow.
Come election day, few but you will remember, and fewer still will care.
He’s a very successful promoter, especially of himself. He’s been an utter failure at many other things, such as his silly birtherism investigations.
He’s rich and spent a lot of money, so he’s created jobs. He’s also fired a whole lot of people (that was kind of his thing for a while).
Considering his birtherism, his many ridiculous lawsuits, his open claims of manipulating politicians, and many other episodes of buffoonery, I think he’s more for manipulation and exploitation of laws rather than their rule.
And jobs? We’re talking about a man whose catchphrase is, “You’re fired.”
The central problem with this theory (and there are many, many problems) is that magellan imagines only two possibilities:
- Support for the makers of the ad, or
- Support for Trump.
I certainly believe there are Hispanic Americans who will support conservative candidates, whether Bush!, Rubio, or another member of the Insane Clown Posse. There may even be some who are dumb enough to vote Republican because they don’t like potty-mouthed children, although I strongly doubt that.
But the idea that someone would support the biggest racist in a field of racists, based on said potty-mouthed children? Uh, no.
Thanks for the perfect example of the use of “racist” as begging the question. You and others may feel comfortable because he said things you don’t like about race (talk about a desire to ignore nuance), but many do not.
And I have no idea why you think that I think that support for Trump or the douchebags who made the video is binary. It’s but one data point.
Well, Im confuse that someone who knows what the excluded middle is would well, exclude it. And I agree with most of what you wrote. But when you try to imply that it is my position that this video will be some magical toggle switch for people, you exclude an awful, awful lot.
You’re most welcome! That’s not what it was, of course, but I’m happy that you’re happy.
Here’s why:
No, he’s right. If success, job creation and the rule of law happen to coincide with his Presidency, Trump will probably allow it.
Oh, so you just imagined that I thought it was binary. Thanks for the clarification.
No, he just read where you presented the options as binary. You can get pissy about other people’s interpretation of your words, but you’re not allowed to be pissy about the words themselves.
Ah, so he’s not *against *them.
Heh. Whatever makes you happy, dude.
…and thus you’re perfectly hunky-dory with this.
So a six year-old girl said “fuck”.
What’s the big deal? Did she spontaneously combust, or something?
I raised my daughters to curse sparingly. I myself avoid swearing unless there is actual injury or it is funny. The girls are classy, well educated young ladies who know when to say “fuck.”
No. But it’s trashy.
As long as the law does not touch predatory, false institutions of higher education.
And Trump ain’t?