White House: Trump's comments "disqualify" him from presidency

[Livewire]

Several things:

1. The White House meant this figuratively, Barack can't literally ban Trump from running. The statement, however, is correct.

2. Early polls aren't exactly trustworthy; they don't always correlate to future primary success at this stage in the campaign. The blowback against Trump has begun, and it will take awhile to reflect in the polls and even then the polling from November-December '15 will probably account for jack **** when New Hampshire, Iowa, etc., have their primaries in the next few months.

3. That being said, even accounting for the unreliability of early polling, the public support for Trump is as frightening to me as it is utterly ****ing stupid. This vitriol from him is not discourse, and it is not acceptable in american politics. He is a national disgrace, his message is nothing but vile demagoguery pandering to the worst this country has to offer and I honestly question your sanity if you're seriously a supporter of his. Vote Rubio, Kasich, Christie, Jeb Bush even, somebody, anybody, Republican or Democrat, with a brain who at the very least can conduct themselves with some decency and has a sense of decorum on a national stage like this. Going back to what the White House statement intended, these kind of comments and this sort of behavior from him disqualify him from a moral "right" to hold office and to be a part of the electoral process.

 

[Kanzler]

Trump doesn't even dislike Muslims. He's said wonderful things about them when he was doing business with them. He's only saying all this now because he knows what some Americans want to hear.

 

[«Chuckles»]

Not sure what the Vietnamese have to do with this thread. I agree that it's your nation's obligation to keep you safe. But at the same time humanitarian aid should given to those who need it. I wonder if people who are so against accepting refugees would change their mind if there's ever a nuclear war between NATO and Russia.

Back in the Vietnam war we had a big refugee crisis. That didn't stop for a while because Vietnam was decolonized so quickly and then the civil war happened and it was just not great for them. So here in Australia we had some politician who was anti Asian and stuff but it wasn't like we were accepting those Buddhists in Myanmar (I believe) who are basically committing genocide the local Muslim population.

You generalize when you're incapable of understanding the complexity that exists in the real world.

I do I'm just choosing to believe in what I think is the best case of action.

Muslim Population = 1.7 billion
Percent that is a Terrorist = It's estimated to be about 15-25% however I believe it's more like 7%
So there we have 119'000'000 extremists right.
Now I hope that the Muslim community can agree that they have problems with some of their fellow members. Especially the whole problems they have with Sunni and Shi'a which is a lot like the Catholic - Protestant problems Ireland and England went through with the UVF (Ulster Volunteer Force) and IRA (Irish Republican Army).
So we have heaps of 'extremists' that interpret their religion in a way that endorses the killings of infidels.
Now there's always going to be some of these extremists in with the general populous. These people are giving Islam a very bad name one worse than what Winston Churchill predicted.
I think a better education on the different sects on Islam needs to be pushed. Because it's kinda similar to the problems we had with Christianity before. Extremists not tolerating the other sects. Except these Extremists are targeting everyone.
Now Trump has brought up the whole stop them coming to his country thing. I think that for now that is a good plan of action until things stabilize in Syria and the countries affected by Arab Spring. At least Trump wants the West to get out of destabilizing these Middle Eastern countries which I hope everyone can agree is a good thing.
We see in France now after the Paris attacks. I think it's in the best interest of everyone that if we don't let something like that happen we won't see a huge jump in Nationalism on behalf of the population.

Put in the hard work now so it's all good later on

Trump may or may not be unconstitutional, but it's highly unlikely he'd take the decision anyways because he will upset everybody except for the far right.

The problem with all the other candidates is that they aren't self-funded so they have to worry about upsetting people otherwise their money stops. That's a definite edge that Trump has in this election. You can see it with Clinton because she has changed a lot of her views but I guess that's the way it works.

Trump doesn't even dislike Muslims. He's said wonderful things about them when he was doing business with them. He's only saying all this now because he knows what some Americans want to hear.

Well that is politics. We'll definitely see if Trump will want to go forward with this after the Turkey - Russia situation gets fixed.

 

[Mana1]

Muslim Population = 1.7 billion
Percent that is a Terrorist = It's estimated to be about 15-25% however I believe it's more like 7%
So there we have 119'000'000 extremists right.

What are you even talking about.

 

[Ivysaur]

2. Early polls aren't exactly trustworthy; they don't always correlate to future primary success at this stage in the campaign. The blowback against Trump has begun, and it will take awhile to reflect in the polls and even then the polling from November-December '15 will probably account for jack **** when New Hampshire, Iowa, etc., have their primaries in the next few months.

Actually, it already started registering- the Fox poll of South Carolina registered during its first two days of polling that Trump's support was on 30% but, the two days after he proposed his "ban all muslims"policy, backlash took his support down to 38%. And when I say "took down", I mean "shoot up". The lowest result he's got in any poll taken after his statement is 34% (YouGov-Economist), one of his biggest results ever, and the best numbers he's got since then is a whooping 42% (Gravis-One America News). Other "serious" polls like CBS-Times (all taken during or after his outrageous proposal) put him at 35%, or 37% for Ipsos-Reuters. They are not going down, quite the opposite, and there comes a point when you just give up saying, "well, this time he must have finally gone too far, right? Right???".

It's true that "early polling might not reflect the end result", but he's leading, he has been leading for months, there is about a month and a half before the actual voting starts and he's still leading and only going up. Maybe in a football game a poor team may score some unexpected goals early and hold on to them and still lose because their opponents, stronger in theory, can come back up. But here the "favourites" are floundering, he's been scoring more and more goals and there are fewer and fewer minutes in the clock for anybody to mount a serious comeback effort. He's not just going to self-destruct overnight, that much should have been clear by August. And maybe the polling in July does mean **** by February, but the polling in Mid-December should start to be pretty worrisome.

 

[Kanzler]

USA USA

it'd be ****ing brilliant if he actually gets elected.

 

[Foxrally]

Right, it's been great hearing outsider views, and reading through the thread, some opinions have been, ah... intriguing. Well, as a Muslim Arab living in the Middle East, allow me to show you these matters from the perspective of an inside person. (don't worry, I don't bite when I'm in the RT)

First, I'll voice my thoughts on Trump (this isn't really related to my religion/ethnicity, just a general opinion). I think the major reason Donald Trump is the currently the #1 runner among the republican party is that the man is straightforward. Yes, he's racist, xenophobic, short-sighted and with as many leadership qualities as I would have in this forum - but he says what's on his mind, without the sugarcoating filter. He's probably not the first presidential candidate with similar views - but he's the first to have voiced them in such a direct way. People are scared, and they're sick of lies and pretty words - they want honesty (which is the same reason Sanders is gaining popularity among the democrats). Trump not only appeals to those fears, but 'fattens them up' and reaps the benefits to gain supporters.

Let's give an example. ISIS robs a bank, claims responsibility. The news reports it. ISIS has successfully created fear.
Trump sees this, and makes a speech themed "Muslims/Refugees are thieves." This accentuates the fear that was first created by ISIS themselves. People, being already scared, begin to see Trump as the voice of reason, and a protector. They begin to see Muslims as "the enemy side." And that's where ISIS wins.

ISIS wants a war. And you see, you can't have a war if nobody want to fight. Then it just becomes a one-sided attack. ISIS can't afford to do the latter, so they resort to the best solution - create the war. They fuel everyone with rage and reasons to hate each other. To the Muslim: "The US are not Muslims! They are killing fellow Muslims in other countries! America is evil!" To the American: "The Muslims are attacking you! They are jeopardizing your safety! Muslims are evil!" and they follow this up with terrorism.

As you see there, ISIS feeds on the former, and Trump on the latter. What do you see in common here? That's right! Extremism. Generalizations. Impulsive reactions.

Another thing so many people tend to forget is - ISIS targets whoever doesn't agree with them. That means you, me, every American, every refugee and every sane human on this earth. This means that when Trump says he wants to ban all Muslims from the US, he is doing exactly what ISIS wants him to do - herd up the sheep.

----------

The following is going to be me addressing some of the mistakes, false interpretations and outright lies about Arab/Middle Eastern culture and Islam. I can't remember the amount of times I've had to give these kind of talks to foreigners who have recently moved to the Middle East - so much negativity is assumed about the region and its people it's crazy. Just goes to show empathy isn't an instinct, but something that you learn over time.

Those who don't follow the Quran are infidels in the eyes of their version of God.

fgsdfhskaj No. This is so false that if it were any more false a rift would open between time and space. In the Quran there are sections known as Surahs (think of them as chapters). There is an entire chapter dedicated completely to the idea of "Islam is your religion, others have their own religion, don't touch theirs and don't let them touch with yours". It clearly states what a Muslim's attitude to other religions should be: no interference and no disrespect. Also, what do you mean by "their version of god? Didn't you just say that all Abrahamic religions worship the same god?

They look different, talk different, eat different. It's a different culture, ethnic group, geographic region.

Th... That is the literal definition of cultural diversity. Cultural diversity is what defines the US as a modern society. It is what makes it the land of the free which millions travel to every year for life-changing opportunities. Hell, 2 states/cities that are an hour away would probably have completely different dialects! Haven't you seen African Americans? Indian Americans? Latino Americans? Asian Americans? They all "look different", "talk different", "eat different". Does that make them not American? Is there a particular set you must fit into to be called American?

Women aren't really treated as humans but more like goods. Punishment is much more severe and less lenient than what it is like here in the West. [...] The Quran says to slaughter infidels.

I will try to answer this in the only way that won't get me interacted: No. This is not true. You clearly have very limited knowledge of Islam and Middle Eastern culture, so do not make completely false statements which further hinder your credibility.

Ahmed and the Clock Gang.

I... I just... Yeah, the Roundtable isn't the forum for me guys, sorry.

I'll be watching this thread just to correct any mistakes made on Islam or Middle Eastern culture, so go wild ;)

 

[Drake.]

And maybe the polling in July does mean **** by February, but the polling in Mid-December should start to be pretty worrisome.

Eh, I don't know. Trump's supporters so far are clearly the more radical conservatives, so when the actual voting starts, I have no doubt that the increased participation from moderates will hugely dampen Trump's chances of winning. He may still win the primary, as a lot of center-leaning Republicans and moderates don't vote in primaries, but I am fairly confident that he won't stand a chance in the general election.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

Yes, he's racist, xenophobic, short-sighted and with as many leadership qualities as I would have in this forum

Just a correction here, but you cannot be racist to a theology and he is not specifically targeting Mexicans and other Hispanics or Latinos. He is specifically hunting down those who got here illegally. Carry on.

I will try to answer this in the only way that won't get me interacted: No. This is not true.

Could you care to explain the fact that there was a Saudi gang rape victim to was sent 6 months to jail and whipped just because there was no male guardian? How about the fact that the UAE police arrested another rape victim for illicit sex? What about Gulnaz with her 12 year sentence for being raped and having a child in Afghanistan? Why can't Saudi women vote and drive and why are women only have a witness in Yemen as well as being unable to leave the house without permission? It seems to paint a picture where these government seem to ignore the other half of their population solely on their gender.

In the Quran there are sections known as Surahs (think of them as chapters). There is an entire chapter dedicated completely to the idea of "Islam is your religion, others have their own religion, don't touch theirs and don't let them touch with yours".

Cool, I can get quite a few verses from the Quran that seem to be pro-violence. How about I in fact do that?
I'm not about to post like 50 pages of them, so I'll just say three example verse numbers.

Quran (3:151), because it is ok to terrorize the non-believers.
Quran (4:95), because it gives incentives to fight in the form of "a mighty reward".
Quran (8:12), because decapitation and cutting off fingers is an average Tuesday night.

Christianity also had this kind of ****. While there is no point in attacking Islam for something it's sister religions have done in the past, there is no point in calling it the "Religion of Peace" if I can find a few verses such as this. These verses breed Jihadists.

 

[Kanzler]

Could you care to explain the fact that there was a Saudi gang rape victim to was sent 6 months to jail and whipped just because there was no male guardian? How about the fact that the UAE police arrested another rape victim for illicit sex? What about Gulnaz with her 12 year sentence for being raped and having a child in Afghanistan? Why can't Saudi women vote and drive and why are women only have a witness in Yemen as well as being unable to leave the house without permission? It seems to paint a picture where these government seem to ignore the other half of their population solely on their gender.

Gulf Arabs don't represent all Muslims.

Cool, I can get quite a few verses from the Quran that seem to be pro-violence. How about I in fact do that?
I'm not about to post like 50 pages of them, so I'll just say three example verse numbers.

Quran (3:151), because it is ok to terrorize the non-believers.
Quran (4:95), because it gives incentives to fight in the form of "a mighty reward".
Quran (8:12), because decapitation and cutting off fingers is an average Tuesday night.

Christianity also had this kind of ****. While there is no point in attacking Islam for something it's sister religions have done in the past, there is no point in calling it the "Religion of Peace" if I can find a few verses such as this. These verses breed Jihadists.

I can see why Muslims would want to call it the "Religion of Peace", because if they didn't, then that would give everybody, who want to, free license to denigrate their religion and their followers even further. "Religion of peace" only came about post-9/11 and is a statement that "no most of us don't want to kill everybody on behalf of our religion". If we can't even accept that Muslims can genuinely practice their religion as a peaceful religion, then there's really nothing stopping us from thinking and doing whatever we want to them.

We frequently criticize Christian fundamentalists for the things they do that we dislike - and we criticize them as fundamentalists. Somehow this intellectual clarity is lost when we talk about Muslims, as if there is no difference between a moderate or radicalized Muslim, or an Arab or an Iranian Muslim, or a Muslim loyal to the country they have immigrated to or a Muslim loyal to extremism.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

Gulf Arabs don't represent all Muslims.

Jihadists don't represent all Muslims either. But if you insist, must I mention the Sharia patrols in London? After all, the Gulf does have a majority of Muslim countries, unlike a lot of over areas in the world where the majority aren't Muslim countries if there are any. Should I also mention the Armenian Genocide and other dick moves by the Turkish? After all, they specifically targeted the Assyrians and Greeks around the same if not the same time. Even in the Ottoman Empire before these genocides, these groups were 2nd class citizens.

Now, for the rest.

1. I can see why Muslims would want to call it the "Religion of Peace", because if they didn't, then that would give everybody, who want to, free license to denigrate their religion and their followers even further. "Religion of peace" only came about post-9/11 and is a statement that "no most of us don't want to kill everybody on behalf of our religion". 2. If we can't even accept that Muslims can genuinely practice their religion as a peaceful religion, then there's really nothing stopping us from thinking and doing whatever we want to them.

We frequently criticize Christian fundamentalists for the things they do that we dislike - and we criticize them as fundamentalists. Somehow this intellectual clarity is lost when we talk about Muslims, as if there is no difference between a moderate or radicalized Muslim, or an Arab or an Iranian Muslim, or a Muslim loyal to the country they have immigrated to or a Muslim loyal to extremism.

1). I don't give a **** whether a religion is denigrated or not. Most religions, once at their extremes at one period of time will always lead to another pointless war over theologies. It's human nature; we're all warmongers. Christianity has had it's terrorists and extremists, from the Catholics and Protestants, Ásatrú and it's extremist tendencies in America, as well as other Pagan groups lashing out. Then we have the Zionists who fought the Arabs over religion and culture and the zealots of the Roman age such as the Roman people blessing a god of war. A God of War. (Also, excuse the font change. It won't let me change it to normal due to copy and pasting.)

It is our freedom of speech, after all. Same for religion.

2). There are those who do and those who don't. It doesn't stop me from criticizing and mocking the extremists. I see a difference, I'm merely just pointing to the extremists as our problems. Maybe you could get me at the point of using only Gulf Arabs, but that's probably because I don't give a **** about multiculturalism either.

 

[Eruption]

As an outsider, this both pleases me and terrifies me in a way.

First of all, it pleases me because I would prefer a Democrat President and surely Trump would absolutely ruin the Republicans' chances of winning over moderate voters. It also terrifies me that in such a modern, developed society so many people can hold views such as this. The fact that both he & Carson haven't become outside candidates for the nomination worries me no end. I mean I'm not a great fan of our Conservative Party who are basically scum, but they're very moderate compared to people like this. It is nice to see a slight move out of big tent politics in the US, but not necessarily if this is the substitute.

EDIT: Having read through the thread after making my initial comments, I would like to add something else. First of all, Went/Ivysaur has made some well researched arguments and has responded to people reasonably even when they haven't necessarily made the best counter-arguments.

Secondly, at some point it was said that Islam cannot work in Western society, it already has proved to be compatible in many countries. Our population is 4.5% Muslim in comparison to 0.9% in the USA and we are doing perfectly fine. Muslims in the West are mostly normal participants in a multicultural society who just want to get on with life like me or you. Politics such as this just make one section of society scapegoats for the real problems facing America. Frankly it should have no place in a country that advertises itself as the land of the free and one of the most multicultural nations on the planet. I suppose it's easier to scapegoat this particular demographic as I suspect in many states, the concentration of Muslims is much lower and therefore most people have no experience with them.

 

[Somewhere_]

Just a correction here, but you cannot be racist to a theology and he is not specifically targeting Mexicans and other Hispanics or Latinos. He is specifically hunting down those who got here illegally. Carry on.



Could you care to explain the fact that there was a Saudi gang rape victim to was sent 6 months to jail and whipped just because there was no male guardian? How about the fact that the UAE police arrested another rape victim for illicit sex? What about Gulnaz with her 12 year sentence for being raped and having a child in Afghanistan? Why can't Saudi women vote and drive and why are women only have a witness in Yemen as well as being unable to leave the house without permission? It seems to paint a picture where these government seem to ignore the other half of their population solely on their gender.


Cool, I can get quite a few verses from the Quran that seem to be pro-violence. How about I in fact do that?
I'm not about to post like 50 pages of them, so I'll just say three example verse numbers.

Quran (3:151), because it is ok to terrorize the non-believers.
Quran (4:95), because it gives incentives to fight in the form of "a mighty reward".
Quran (8:12), because decapitation and cutting off fingers is an average Tuesday night.

Christianity also had this kind of ****. While there is no point in attacking Islam for something it's sister religions have done in the past, there is no point in calling it the "Religion of Peace" if I can find a few verses such as this. These verses breed Jihadists.

You sure these verses are not put out of context? Because Bible verses out of context look the same way, but in context, there is nothing bad. For example, the Bible's definition of slavery is much more different than what people think- it is actually talking about debt slavery where it says to treat these people who owe you right, and then it continues to say debt it bad to prevent debt slavery.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

You sure these verses are not put out of context? Because Bible verses out of context look the same way, but in context, there is nothing bad. For example, the Bible's definition of slavery is much more different than what people think- it is actually talking about debt slavery where it says to treat these people who owe you right, and then it continues to say debt it bad to prevent debt slavery.

I'm sure "smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them" means decapitation and cutting off fingers. I'd rather not search it up in such a time any more due to our ****ing government and it's spying shenanigans though.

 

[Kanzler]

Jihadists don't represent all Muslims either. But if you insist, must I mention the Sharia patrols in London? After all, the Gulf does have a majority of Muslim countries, unlike a lot of over areas in the world where the majority aren't Muslim countries if there are any. Should I also mention the Armenian Genocide and other dick moves by the Turkish? After all, they specifically targeted the Assyrians and Greeks around the same if not the same time. Even in the Ottoman Empire before these genocides, these groups were 2nd class citizens.

Exactly what am I insisting? The Ottomans obviously do not represent all Muslims. Neither do the Sharia patrols - I'll tell you what they are, they're a manifestation of right-wing nativism in an Islamic context. But we're going to blame them because they're Muslim, not because of their disgusting far-right politics, aren't we?

1). I don't give a **** whether a religion is denigrated or not. Most religions, once at their extremes at one period of time will always lead to another pointless war over theologies. It's human nature; we're all warmongers. Christianity has had it's terrorists and extremists, from the Catholics and Protestants, Ásatrú and it's extremist tendencies in America, as well as other Pagan groups lashing out. Then we have the Zionists who fought the Arabs over religion and culture and the zealots of the Roman age such as the Roman people blessing a god of war. A God of War. (Also, excuse the font change. It won't let me change it to normal due to copy and pasting.)

Well you should, because regardless what you think about religion, innocent people get caught in the fray. Give people an excuse to generalize and denigrate a group of people and I guarantee you that people in the denigrated group will get hurt. Have enough people talking like that and innocents will suffer.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

Exactly what am I insisting? The Ottomans obviously do not represent all Muslims. Neither do the Sharia patrols - I'll tell you what they are, they're a manifestation of right-wing nativism in an Islamic context. But we're going to blame them because they're Muslim, not because of their disgusting far-right politics, aren't we?



Well you should, because regardless what you think about religion, innocent people get caught in the fray. Give people an excuse to generalize and denigrate a group of people and I guarantee you that people in the denigrated group will get hurt. Have enough people talking like that and innocents will suffer.

Do you want me to rip a new asshole out of our despotic government? Because I WILL bring a long rant regarding how much down the shitter in Fascism we are becoming. I could go on and on, especially on the recent pile of **** TPP.

No, regarding denigration, innocents will always be targeted. It is human nature; we are all inherently evil. What are you going to do to change a whole species of psychopaths? Because that is all humankind is. A species of delightful maniacs who pretend to be the highest animal when all our reasoning goes to petty things, such as slitting the throats of neighbors of different nationalities, ethnicity, religious theology, political ideology and other factors. We made a graveyard of the globe over these very reasons, and for what exactly? Innocents are being targeted in Syria. Innocents are being targeted in Paris, San Bernardino, the Spanish Inquisition of long ago, the Jewish during the Holocaust and Roman rule, the pagans when Christianity took root in Europe as well as many others.

The only reason why I am picking specific countries is because they are the ones currently with problems or had problems. I have nothing wrong against most Muslims, just those such as ISIS and co.

 

[Kanzler]

No, regarding denigration, innocents will always be targeted. It is human nature; we are all inherently evil. What are you going to do to change a whole species of psychopaths? Because that is all humankind is. A species of delightful maniacs who pretend to be the highest animal when all our reasoning goes to petty things, such as slitting the throats of neighbors of different nationalities, ethnicity, religious theology, political ideology and other factors. We made a graveyard of the globe over these very reasons, and for what exactly? Innocents are being targeted in Syria. Innocents are being targeted in Paris, San Bernardino, the Spanish Inquisition of long ago, the Jewish during the Holocaust and Roman rule, the pagans when Christianity took root in Europe as well as many others.

Right, so with all this in mind, wouldn't it be a good idea not to speak of a group of people with sweeping generalizations?

 

[Thepowaofhax]

Right, so with all this in mind, wouldn't it be a good idea not to speak of a group of people with sweeping generalizations?

Sweeping generalizations? Each rape case mentioned has happened, the Armenian genocide has happened. The Middle East has been periled with strife for years. /If anything, I'm only generalizing the Middle East since they are the only group I've seen problems yet. Not the Indonesians and other Islamic Asian countries and not areas with predominate Muslim demographics outside the Middle East. Except maybe with the Quran.. I've had a shitty day, so w/e.

Anyways, I will always be critical with extremist groups. Not just of Islamic origins, but of all origins.

 

[gimmepie]

Anyways, I will always be critical with extremist groups. Not just of Islamic origins, but of all origins.

The problem is not you, it's that whilst you personally claim to be critical of only the extremist groups, you are fully in support of a man who is willing to make life hell for an entire religion in response to this minority.

You say one thing, but then speak in defence of a man who is quite happy to do exactly what you say you don't want to. You can't have it both ways, either you only want to target extremism or you support Trumps anti-Islam ideals. The two aren't compatible.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

The problem is not you, it's that whilst you personally claim to be critical of only the extremist groups, you are fully in support of a man who is willing to make life hell for an entire religion in response to this minority.

You say one thing, but then speak in defence of a man who is quite happy to do exactly what you say you don't want to. You can't have it both ways, either you only want to target extremism or you support Trumps anti-Islam ideals. The two aren't compatible.

I never said I was in full support of him. I said I'd rather support him than Clinton or Sanders. There is a big ****ing difference there. You seem to be unable to discern that. I'd rather him rot in Hell for wanting to shut off the damn internet anyways.

Here is what I said:

I'm afraid this is only a denunciation. Until there is proper paperwork, he is not actually officially disqualified. It's not like the rest of our candidates are candied-ass Fascists anyways. They're bought by corporations, the Democrats demand our liberties be stripped and the Republicans are nationalistic. We have to pick our poison, and I'd rather have a Nationalist like Trump than a batshit Authoritarian like Clinton or a Socialist like Bernie (definitely helped Russia in the 70s, eh?).

Where in this post have I said I fully support Trump? It's quite simple.

Edit: And while I have spoken of him wanting political correctness dead as a reply to Ivy, he is also hypocritical. He wants to take down the internet to stop the flow of information.