The American Politics Thread

and just called... thus completes the blueification of northern virginia... I'll drink to that...

and Donnelly closing the gap in IN. Not familiar with Indiana as I am with Va in which you can watch over the course of the night a contest in which the whole state is red.. go to a blue win by 100's of k's in votes. Not sure how much he has left in the urban, suburban centers but looks like most all the rural vote is in.

SteveG wrote: Logan wrote: I hate Trump as much as the next guy, more so if he is a Trump supporter, but is Trump definitely a racist? He panders to racists/ white supremacists, which seems opportunistic to me, but I don't know his ideological views when it comes to race issues. Have people become so immune to Trump's antics that his racism is now questioned? Greg, Trump has no spoken ideology other then calling himself a nationalist, which in itself has racist overtones. But this is simple logic: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it's a duck. But to illustrate, here's the latest Trump racist rant and backlash as told by the NY Times: ... Media Giants Recoil From Caravan Ad Called Racist.

Sorry snipping out the article, but its full of code. I have now watched the ad itself.

I've heard it as "then it probably is a duck."

It provides evidence but not certainty.

The duck test is a sort of proof by association (proof in the logic sense). If any assumptions are off or if the observer is in error then the argument fails. It could be that you mistook a duck for a goose (though they are in the same waterfowl family and a goose can be called a duck), or it's a robot cleverly designed to act and look like a duck, or it's a human who is a very good duck impersonator, maybe its some new breed of species with duck-like qualities without being of the anatidae (my nickname for my wife incidentally) family. Maybe it's an alien species with amazing mimicry skills. Knowledge which is reliable should be confirmed in various ways to make as certain as one can of the veracity (one cannot be absolutely sure of anything including that one can cannot be certain of anything, but the more evidence one has and the more approaches to discerning a thing, the more probably an assertion).

While I suspect that Trump has racist tendencies and he appeals to racists, that ad does not prove that he is racist. I would even question that the ad is surely racist. I still think that he's an immoral opportunist with sociopathic traits who is fine with appealing to racists and culturalists and may be racist himself.

The caravan ad is meant to appeal to people's fears, it appeals to xenophobes, and appeals to people's cultural and ethnic biases, and no doubt appeals to genuine racists (in the sense of those who consider a particular race or races inherently superior to another), but it does not prove Trump to be inherently racist.   I'm not sure if Hispanic even is a race (many reject the concept of race altogether) as Hispanics are of mixed "races" (diverse genetics). It's closer to ethnicity. But yes, I'm sure many people think, oh no, the brown hordes are coming and they're bringing crime and Trump knows that and appeals to that sentiment. While guilt by association is considered to be an ad hominem fallacy, who he is associating with and trying to appeal to does say much about his character.

And being nationalistic does have racist overtones, and racial nationalism has more than overtones, but one can be nationalistic while not being at all racist. Racism need not be a motivating factor in the nationalism, though historically, and now, it has tended to be a factor. Trump clearly appeals to White Nationalists and he has low to no moral character. As for me, I prefer internationalism. Like most people, I have cultural and sub-cultural biases but I don[t see my race as superior in any way.

I like the thought that as more people get their DNA tested, people will care less about racial purity and even concepts of race. I'm blonde haired and blue eyed, but I had mine done and I'm like 20 percent Ashkenazi Jew, which I didn't know, and have Malay blood (which I did know). We're all originally African according to what is thought to be true.

I think that if Trump felt that he would benefit from showing, say, migrants, in a positive light, then that's what he would do as I think that he's an immoral, narcissistic, selfish opportunist and bullsh*t artist who only really cares about himself (and that which effects himself).

No surprise the Rs hold the senate, hopefully the house can follow through with the polls this time and turn blue. 

That 'other party' has taken the house and the US returns to a two party checks and balances system as opposed to a one party monarchy.   

Edited by Easy Money - November 06 2018 at 23:20

SteveG wrote:   (clipped from NYT article) Divisive, over-the-top political ads are the hallmark of this year's age-of-rage midterm battle, as candidates across the country accused their opponents of being terrorists, criminals, and in one case, deserving of a golf spike to the face.

 

Somewhat relieved.  I had heard the Senate was a long shot but it would have been swell to have the Dems completely handcuff Trump for the remainder of his term.  Now he's got leverage and also a handle to blame Dems with (the really bad Dems won't let me do business in Congress).

HackettFan wrote: Logan wrote: Man With Hat wrote: Logan wrote: I hate Trump as much as the next guy, more so if he is a Trump supporter, but is Trump definitely a racist? He panders to racists/ white supremacists, which seems opportunistic to me, but I don't know his ideological views when it comes to race issues.   From a practical standpoint, what's the difference? If you are a racist or just pander/empower/support/etc racist the end results, the real world results, are the same.  If one is only interested in the utilitarian standpoint, then okay, but from a non-teleological philosophical and psychological standpoint, and the lexicological angle, the difference can be of interest. The psychological standpoint is only as good as the "utilitarian" standpoint, unless one just sticks it in an unexaminable black box. Since you hadn't done that with your other diagnoses (narcissism, etc.), I don't understand the your distinction. One can only ever infer cognitive states from outward behavior. I concede that it is true that asserting things about other people's psychological states is rude, especially so in some other cultures and even the case in our culture as well. However, that is also largely a byproduct of separating the notion of racism from behavior and ethical conduct.

That's a very interesting post, and I am very interested in theory of mind. I was being a bit glib and did not phrase things well by putting forward such apparent separation (the framing is off and I actually think quite holistically). I wasn't disagreeing with Phil, as I think he made an interesting point and it is one that I have thought about too. I am interested in both the utilitarian perspective and other aspects that relate to ethics (deontology for instance). I infer that Trump is likely to be narcissistic due to his behavior (the consequences are important to me) and I don't mind someone inferring that he probably is racist due to his behavior -- I'm quite agnostic on that matter, but then I like to be ultimately agnostic on all things. Basically I think all I was badly trying to say is that while I have an interest in the consequences of whatever his mindset is, my interest goes beyond that. I'm interested in the pursuit of truth and accuracy. I know that I could have answered much better and if I could be assed, I would heavily edit my long post to provide more nuance, clarification, and to change some words (I did read the article). I happen to suspect that Trump is racist (at least in some senses of the word) and I infer that by his actions.

Rushing a bit, and if this discussion continues, I might have a more cogent response later.

EDIT: just to add, I am very interested in Trump's motivations, including whether he is motivated by a sense of personal racism or whether he is not racist himself but exploits racist tendencies in elements of his base. And of course his bases motivations are very interesting. At the least he does empower racists and in one way it doesn't really matter that much if he himself is inherently racist and is merely an opportunist. Trump is such a boor and I'm not more above being insulting towards him than he is to others.

Edited by Logan - November 07 2018 at 10:26

Yeah, that makes perfect sense to me.