Trump: " we dissolved 60 years of prejudice and hatred with the elimination of one civil rights executive order"

[Outlaw]

As people? No. As white men in the mid-70s who have spent their lives profiting off the backs of black inequality, I reckon they're probably equally anti-black.

As political campaigners? I think the 2016 Trump campaign was more interested in making an explicit gambit to bring in the black vote than the Romney 2012 campaign. The Trump 2016 campaign saw an opportunity to drive a wedge in the Democratic coalition by cynically highlighting the deep history of anti-blackness of their opponent, the Clintons, often parroting the arguments of black intellectuals like Michelle Alexander. Mind you, this gambit eventually paid off for the Trump team in 2020 when they won the largest share of the black vote in modern Republican history.

My question is who was essentially who would have governed in the least anti black manner? Is your answer Trump?

It doesn’t matter what Trump campaigned on because unless it comes to greed or racism he lies

 

[88m3]

not looking good for both sides gang

 

[pete clemenza]

"Merit based"?? A guy that inherented hundreds of millions and blew it all and went bankrupt? A guy put in office by Nazi Musk and Putin? Then put in unqualified cabinet leaders? "Merit based"?

 

[pete clemenza]

I have seen so called black people on this very site upset at African and Caribbean day celebrations and complain that those same groups have no business celebrating Juneteenth. Let's not throw stones now..

To piggyback off this, I'm hearing that alot of black festivals, conferences, summits, celebrations, etc. will be reduced and cut back of corporate sponsorship & brands now that major companies are deadening need to be involved with such affairs to celebrate our culture. It's getting spooky.

 

[King Kreole]

My question is who was essentially who would have governed in the least anti black manner? Is your answer Trump?

The Republicans held the House in 2012, so in a world where Romney won the election they'd probably retain the Senate as well. Assuming they would both have slim majorities in Congress, my answer is probably Trump on the basis of the fact he faced more opposition from the Democrats and public due to his boorish affect which mobilized people to push back against him. For all the bluster and agita, Trump was a fairly impotent President. Romney's genteel affect would have had him privatizing social security and gutting the social safety net with record low voter turnout rates in the midterms. He's a far more competent ideologue and right-wing zealot than Trump.

 

[Art Barr]

White people have always believed that any laws/rules leveling the playing field/correcting/undoing their unfair practices/laws is a prejudice directed specifically at them.

Prolific posting


For exposing their racist narcissistic madness.


Art Barr

 

[Outlaw]

The Republicans held the House in 2012, so in a world where Romney won the election they'd probably retain the Senate as well. Assuming they would both have slim majorities in Congress, my answer is probably Trump on the basis of the fact he faced more opposition from the Democrats and public due to his boorish affect which mobilized people to push back against him. For all the bluster and agita, Trump was a fairly impotent President. Romney's genteel affect would have had him privatizing social security and gutting the social safety net with record low voter turnout rates in the midterms. He's a far more competent ideologue and right-wing zealot than Trump.

Romney wouldn’t freeze Medicaid. It’s time for you to concede this debate

 

[jerniebert]

 

[DetroitEWarren]

The pompous, long-winded routine might feel clever, but it's transparent. You're not addressing the actual issue, you're deflecting with a smug attempt to reframe the conversation as some kind of intellectual inquiry. Flipping the table? No, you just can't reconcile someone not falling for your tricks and arguing on your terms. What's really happening here is that your original point was so off-base and disconnected from reality that all the condescension and verbose hand-waving in the world can't cover it up. And that burns you up. You think you can worm your way out of it by being smarmy, but it's not working.

And come one now, your accusing others of being dishonest brokers is just a lazy way of trying to project your own desperation.

You talk smart and post intelligently, but you have zero understanding of people, and sometimes, that's more important than book smarts breh.

 

[King Kreole]

Romney wouldn’t freeze Medicaid. It’s time for you to concede this debate

Of course not, he's not a fukking moron like Trump. He would work with the Republican congress to pass permanent cuts to Medicaid and Medicare spending and completely fukk over millions of people quietly. His stated plan was to "reform" Medicaid and Medicare by ending their federal funding and moving them to a system of block grants to the states, which would have been catastrophic for the millions of Seniors and low income individuals and families who rely those programs for basic healthcare because the Red states would strangle those programs the same way they've done Medicaid expansion in Obamacare. The Trump administration's freezing of Medicaid was a perfect example of how stupid they are, because they've ginned up so much opposition that they're now scrambling to reverse most of the damage. Romney's evisceration of healthcare would face no such opposition.