Still Believe "Anti-Establishment" Trump Will Clean Up Politics?

a reply to: TheRedneck

I've seen very few of our frequent ATS posters that I would consider alt-right, so why not chill with the victim complex? The label fits the people that claim it, maybe you should take it up with them. What part of Trump's campaign CEO embracing the label for himself do you not get? The label embraces racism, that isn't my fault.

Maybe you need a few minutes to let that settle in? Your response is just another whiny-ass attempt to ignore the ugly that surrounds Trump. I don't buy into the completely idiotic notion that calling out racism is racist.

Continue to be a useful idiot, the alt-right is actually laughing about the fact that they are destroying traditional Conservatism. And they are destroying it. How about denying ignorance and start looking into it for yourself? Or maybe reconsider commenting about something you don't have time to research.

a reply to: Kali74

Maybe. While the SJW types which are almost entirely the liberal mainstream are destroying America. DESTROYING IT. And the world to follow...

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

While the SJW types which are almost entirely the liberal mainstream

No, they aren't. Stop the histrionics.

DESTROYING IT.

Nope. And neither are the alt-right. They are both small factions in their respective areas of the spectrum.

You use SJW like you whine that liberals use racist. I think you need a mirror.

a reply to: Kali74

I've seen very few of our frequent ATS posters that I would consider alt-right...

That's good to know. Too bad others using the label aren't so... generous?

The label embraces racism, that isn't my fault.

Thank you for openly admitting that. Now couple that with the fact that is is typically applied to anyone who supports Trump or refuses to support Clinton, and you have exactly what I said it was.

I don't buy into the completely idiotic notion that calling out racism is racist.

Racism is the belief that an individual is inferior in some way based solely on their race. If I state that "all green people are stupid," that is racist. You can replace green with any other color, even white, or even any other racial characteristic, and you can replace stupid with any derogatory characteristic. Considering the fact that racism is typically considered synonymous with a lack of intelligence, saying "white people are racist" is indeed the definition of racism. Saying "white people are alt-right" is just as much so, based on your statement reposted above.

Perhaps racist is not the correct terminology here however, since the group in question is not all of any specific race. Would you feel better if I changed my terminology to "bigot"?

the alt-right is actually laughing about the fact that they are destroying traditional Conservatism.

So many comedians out of work...

Do you really think I am a "traditional conservative"? I would LOVE to see this mess called "conservatism" thrown out of society so far it doesn't even get mentioned in the history books. I want the government out of my life, not farther in it. I want government smaller and more efficient, not bigger and more bloated. I want the military out of everyone else's business and protecting us. I want the border laws followed, not skirted.

Traditional conservatism is little different in practice than rampant progressivism. The two differ on some issues, but not many. Conservatives today want laws that control what people do, while progressives want laws the control what people think. I want 80% of all those laws gone. They both want higher taxes. I want taxes to go down.

This is a good example of exactly what I have been claiming. You hear me say that Trump has a good idea, and you immediately determine my entire political platform, who I associate with, how intelligent I am, and who else I support politically.

Yeah, that would be called being a bigot. I stand corrected.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Thank you for openly admitting that. Now couple that with the fact that is is typically applied to anyone who supports Trump or refuses to support Clinton, and you have exactly what I said it was.

No you don't because that isn't remotely close to the truth. Why can't we discuss the faction of Trump supporters that actually are self identifying alt-rightists without Conservatives on ATS losing their damn minds and devolving into denial that they exist?

It's like you all need to be cradled every five minutes and reassured that us big bad Liberal Progressive SJW Lefties meanie head bullies don't think all Conservatives are racist skin heads. We don't. That's your own echo chambers rattling around in your heads.

Do you really think I am a "traditional conservative"? I would LOVE to see this mess called "conservatism" thrown out of society so far it doesn't even get mentioned in the history books. I want the government out of my life, not farther in it. I want government smaller and more efficient, not bigger and more bloated. I want the military out of everyone else's business and protecting us. I want the border laws followed, not skirted.

That's pretty much the definition of Conservative. Politicians not adhering to that doesn't change the definition it just makes them liars (shocker!). If you want to reject that... *shrug*.

This is a good example of exactly what I have been claiming. You hear me say that Trump has a good idea, and you immediately determine my entire political platform, who I associate with, how intelligent I am, and who else I support politically.

I did no such thing, not even close. I never assumed you were alt-right. You dismissed the alt-right as a new conspiracy theory made up by ______. I disagreed. My disagreeing with you should not have ever been interpreted the way you have interpreted it, there's no justification for doing so. You did all the assuming, not me.

Correction, I did assume one thing about you... this:

I want the government out of my life, not farther in it. I want government smaller and more efficient, not bigger and more bloated. I want the military out of everyone else's business and protecting us. I want the border laws followed, not skirted.

I assumed you were a Conservative as I understand Conservatism to be. Looks like I was right.

a reply to: Kali74

We can't discuss 'a faction' because we have all seen how that plays out. It starts as a faction, moves to a 'substantial number,' then to a majority, and finally is assumed to be all Trump supporters. It's a ploy I have seen many times, and as dumb as most on the left seem to think I am, I do eventually catch on.

I know, I know, you're going to next act shocked at how harshly I am judging you, since you don't think that way. My advice is to separate yourself from the progressive left, then, because they do think that way.

And you can drop the 'coddling' argument... that dog don't hunt. No one is asking for coddling; I am demanding an honest discussion of policy without the silly labeling, and am calling the labeling what it is - BIGOTRY.

I assumed you were a Conservative as I understand Conservatism to be. Looks like I was right.

Really? Are you seriously expecting me to believe that anyone today interprets conservatism that way? I haven't been in step with Washington conservatism for decades.

• I want immigration reform... after we lock down the open border.
  
• I want the government out of the marriage issue... for everyone.
  
• I support social programs... as long as they don't trap people in poverty.
  
• I want to keep the progressive tax system... just lower it across the board.
  
• I like Bernie's education reform, for the top 50% of students.

Those are NOT Republican values, and I highly doubt they are the values you attributed to me.

At least you admit making a broad assumption.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I am demanding an honest discussion of policy without the silly labeling

Then why are you engaging in labeling and lumping together, yourself?

There's no point in addressing anything else in your post until you address that.

a reply to: Kali74

Call it fighting fire with fire. I wasn't the one who started the labeling.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I didn't label you or anyone else as anything. The closest I've come is assuming that you fit the correct definition of Conservative.

Who cares? Corruption? Doesn't matter. If Hillary is corrupt it's ok for Trump to be corrupt.

This is what American politics has devolved into. Kindergarten level pointing of fingers at the opposition and ignoring everything bad about one's chosen candidate.

"But she's worse!" "No, he's worse!" "Nuh-uh!" "No way!" "Yes way!" and on.. and on... and on...

Great recipe for success.

I've come to the conclusion that most grown ups are actually children pretending to be grown ups, this pretty much proves that hypothesis.

a reply to: Kali74

Correct. theantediluvian did. You seemed to think I was somehow wrong to call him out on it.

If you want to start over, without the silly labels, that's fine by me.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

He didn't do any such thing either.

This is hardly news. Everyone knows Trump used the system to get favours for his business.
As one poster has already said, the Trump attacks are becoming noticeably more desperate.

a reply to: Kali74

The thread is open for all to see.

I'll take as a "no, thanks, I want to keep my labels."

TheRedneck

Double post

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I've read all the posts. I know exactly where you think you were labeled. You're wrong and now you've shrunk away from being wrong about me labeling you on top of it. You don't seem interested in having any kind of fact based discussion on the topic of alt-right.

a reply to: Kali74

You're absolutely right. I have no interest in trying to mix facts with labels. I oppose bigotry; I do not try to debate it.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

How silly. No one in this thread is labeling you but you're just going to pretend it happened and then act as if you're taking the moral high ground. Since when did the motto of this site become: Wallow in ignorance?

Do I think he will clean things up... Nope..

But out of the two major candidates... I think he is the only one with the smallest of chances to doing so.

Hillary will 100% of the time be business as usual, trump will be 99.9% business as usual... so there is a tiny itty bitty chance he will do something.

Though I am still voting third party, but not for Johnson.

a reply to: Kali74

No one is labeling me... now. I refuse to allow it.

I just offered to restart the conversation on a new footing with only one requirement: you drop the labels. You refused. Now, is anyone expected to believe from that action that you are capable of defending your positions without resorting to the use of labels? I think not. It verifies that without labeling others, you are unable to defend those positions.

You show your weakness, and the weakness of those who resort to labeling others. You show your hypocrisy, and the hypocrisy of all who rely on labels, when you continue to cling to them rather than speak of facts. You show these things every time you try to defend your label-based bigotry.

Understand something: the purpose of a debate is not to persuade the other party involved. It is to persuade those reading. I believe I have done so, by pointing out the bigotry and hypocrisy in your statements.

What have you convinced others of?

TheRedneck