A look inside the basket of deplorables

Post Reply New Topic

Yes, I read most of the thread. For clarification, I think saying half - or even saying deplorable - is both plausible and stupid.

My Dad is already a proud 'clinger,' and I predict that he will reclaim the term deplorable. I don't really want to know, and I don't intend to have any political discussions with him or call him a deplorable. That's his word.

It seems implausible that these folks will suddenly realize how racist they've been acting and eschew it. That would hurt. More likely, as the world changes, their attitudes will continue to imperceptibly moderate until there are only a few left clinging those hideous ideas.

On Twitter loads of accounts already claimed that word even in their usernames, as if somehow words can be redefined... at this rate everyone will rename themselves after their crimes... if they're crimes at all if their overlord is elected.

I really don't think "the Trump campaign has had open racism as a considerable selling point" is disputable.

I mean, from his announcement speech, on predominantly Mexican illegal aliens and quoting a narrative put forward in the mass media shortly beforehand by Ann Coulter's book Adios America: "They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Add to that Front National-esque statements on Muslim immigrants and the already-normalized Southern Strategy "tough on black peo-uh, I mean crime, yeah" talk that Nixon cribbed from George Wallace, and you have a very hate-driven campaign. We might quibble on whether it's half, but it's clearly a significant number and not surprising that the David Dukes of the country have flocked to him. And it's larger than that if you include blind attraction to his cult of machismo, which I've seen a lot of, in the "deplorables" basket.

No... it's an adjective.

I as a Trump supporter am offended by this thread and it should be locked.

KKK should be offensive too... but somehow it's not even a terrorist group even after a century of murder.

I think everyone can agree that there were some racists in the KKK

What did y'all 'deplorables' think of the debate?

I put it in quotes, and my own father probably self-identifies as such, remember?

There's nothing wrong with declaring people guilty by association: it just means you can't be assed to be fair and you're not afraid of the people you're boldly and proudly being unfair to.

So, I think the suggested argument is that saying these nasty people are deplorable is declaring Trump and his other followers of guilt by association, is that right?

If so, then there may be some who are doing that, but that's not what motivated me about looking at the deplorable views of some who have been emboldened by the Trump campaign.

I think Trump is directly guilty of inciting bigotry of several kinds.
That and not any sort of guilt by association is the problem.

Trump says things that make people feel hated for their race, ethnicity, religion or gender, and those words make other hateful people feel vindicated, and encouraged to spread those bigoted ideas.

I don't think all (or even most) Trump fans are guilty of fostering these ideas nor do I wish to imply such a thing.

I do think it strange that people who aren't racist, xenophobic or misogynist are more or less comfortable with someone who says these kinds of things. I am guessing that they are willing to overlook those things in order to focus on what they see as the main point.

If this is the same sort of far-right psychopaths who somehow decide that standing outside of a shop specifically shooting at women and children is fine, then 'deplorable'... could actually be an understatement.

I don't know which incident you are thinking of Mootoo. It seems to me that people who attack civilians to make a political point come in all political varieties.

One problem in the US is the "Christian Identity"/Neo-Nazi types like those listed here