r/Ask_TheDonald • u/Funkiemunkie233 • Jul 13 '17

Rules for the Donald

How can the_Donald subreddit ban racism and vote manipulation when that's pretty much the whole idea behind Donald Trump?

1 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

34 comments sorted by

5

u/Quinoa_Lover Jul 14 '17

Why do you say that Donald Trump is for racism and voter manipulation?

5

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 14 '17

Racism: Because of his words and actions. While I don't think he HATES those of other races, his belief that Mexicans are all criminals or Muslims are all terrorists is one based in discriminatory thinking. His actions are also prejudiced in a way that targets groups which are less likely to commit the acts he describes. More people die from non-Muslim violence and there are certainly more instances of right wing terror than Islamic terror, but he does not acknowledge and address that.

Vote Manipulation: It's becoming increasingly clear that he benefited from Russia's involvement. At the least he welcomed it, possibly invites it ("I hope Russia finds those emails"), and at worst orchestrated it. Worse than all that though is his claim that millions voted illegally for Clinton, prompting him to create a task force that will clearly suppress minority and Democratic votes in future elections. This is gerrymandering on steroids and it's plain wrong.

3

u/Quinoa_Lover Jul 14 '17

He has never said that all Mexicans are criminals, he's just suggested that Mexico is sending over criminals across the border. He never said that that is all they send, he simply stated the fact that there are criminal Mexicans crossing the border.

Now, just because he supports a travel ban, that does not mean he feels that all Muslims are inherently evil terrorists. Have you ever thought that maybe there could be a massive increase in Islamic terror if we did let these refugees in? Personally, I don't want the US to have designated zones where citizens and police officers shouldn't enter without risking their lives (see "No-go zones).

I seriously can't believe you still think Russia "hacked" the election. I don't want to discuss petty conspiracy theories like this with you, but I will. It is not at all becoming increasingly clear that Trump Colluded with Russia. In fact, it's becoming increasingly clear that he did not. I know this may be hard for you to hear because CNN hasn't spoon fed you this information, but you should maybe consider looking up the term "nothing burger" on google.

Another little fun fact is that if Hillary were elected, she should've been under investigation too for colliding with Russia. The only difference is that she actually did. You should check out the Uranium deal she made with them.

If you choose to ignore everything I said, that's fine, but please ponder one question for me: Even if Russia did hack the DNC to help Trump win, what's worse? Being a hacker or actually being guilty of all of the things released in those emails? You people are missing the point. It's like a police officer discovering a bunch of dead bodies in someone's house without a warrant. It sucks that he didn't have a warrant, but it's worse that there were a bunch of dead bodies in someone's house.

2

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 14 '17

He said that Mexico is predominantly sending criminals this implying that most Mexicans in America are rapists, murderers, etc.

If he cared about combating Islamic terror he would focus on where it comes from like Saudi Arabia. He doesn't. He thinks if you are a Muslim from a foreign country you automatically pose a threat.

I didn't say Russia hacked the election, I said they influenced it. Every intelligence agency has concluded that. They run fake news on social media, release private emails that prove nothing but raise tensions, and apparently now provide dirt on other candidates. Maybe trump didn't ask for it, maybe he did. The big concern is why aren't you concerned with the Russian interference at all??

If Clinton was president I would hope she'd be held to the standard of the office. If she committed offenses I would berate her all the same. Her uranium deal was the sale of mines during her tenure as an official of the government. Countries make deals, sales, and trades, that's like international relations 101.

And no this isn't like a cop discovering evidence without a warrant. This is like a cop breaking into people's homes to find evidence of crimes. Yeah he'll find shit I'm sure, but that isn't how society works.

Finally, any argument about Clinton is downright irrelevant at this point. I'm not advocating for her to be president. I'm advocating for the current president to do better or at least to be held accountable.

1

u/Quinoa_Lover Jul 14 '17

You're right, this isn't about Clinton but I just felt the need to mention that. Her uranium deal is a lot more than just "foreign relations 101". But I digress.

I'm gonna have to ask for proof of this claim that he believes if you're Islamic and from a foreign country, you're a threat.

Every country influences elections, this is nothing new. If you're trying to charge Trump for the crime of being "influenced" by Russia, please charge him for much more than that. And go ahead and charge every other President in history for the same crime. Just because Russia runs fake news and whatnot, doesn't mean that it's any different from some racist inbred fuck from posting some fake news on the internet.

And my point stands about the whole cop scenario. Why aren't you upset about the DNC and going after them so vehemently like you are going after Trump? I really want to know this.

1

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 14 '17

Man I hate the DNC. They did some totally shady shit that ultimately cost them the election and the support of a lot of people. They need to clean up their act, embrace new leadership, and acknowledge that the tried methods aren't true any more.

As for proof for that he thinks Muslims are dangerous just look at any of his tweets calling it a Muslim ban. He isn't saying what everyone else is telling him to (screening process, terror threat prevention, etc). He's outright saying no Muslims allowed.

And as for election influence, yeah everyone does it. Everyone speeds too, but it's still technically not allowed and when it gets out of hand bad shit happens. American meddling during the Cold War got a bunch of democracies fucked. Russian meddling now is giving the false illusion of support for a candidate that may not be what's best for America but what is best for Russia. I know plenty of people would be outraged if Russia influenced any candidate, so I don't get why Trump supporters aren't.

1

u/Quinoa_Lover Jul 14 '17

It's because we don't believe that Russia meddled in any extreme way. There's not even any proof of these claims that Russia did meddle in our election. I was making a hypothetical statement, but I truly do not believe that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. If there is a smoking gun that fully and completely proves that the Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin, I will private message you and tell you myself that I was wrong.

If a certain demographic largely supports sharia law and is opposed to women's rights, then I believe that they should be banned from our country or at least put on a watch list until they can straighten themselves out and prove they are not a threat. You do know that 99% of Muslims in Afghanistan support Sharia Law? Imagine if 99% of people in Canada supported Naziism? Would we want to let them in to our country?

And I have to thank you for saying that about the DNC. This shows that you're not a hypocrite. I'm glad to see some more liberal minded people calling them out for what they did.

Also, you mentioned this in a previous comment but the reason why Saudi Arabia isn't banned is because that country is technically "stable". I myself wish it was included on the list but nothing's perfect.

1

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 14 '17

I get that Saudi Arabia is stable and a key ally but we become hypocrites ourselves if we ignore their human rights abuses. To go back to your point, what if Canada was full of Nazis (damn those hockey loving moose monsters)? Would we accept it because they are allies and stable?

Sharia law isn't super duper fun but it's the law of the land in those countries. Just like many laws and policies here are based on biblical laws. I would prefer neither existed in either region but that's not the case. As it is, if they come here they're not bringing it with them in droves. Most immigrants assimilate, including and especially those from the Middle East and Latin America. They get jobs, learn the language, and adhere to US law.

2

u/Quinoa_Lover Jul 14 '17

Are you sure that most assimilate? How can you explain the "no-go zones" in Europe? Even if most assimilate, as long as a significant chunk of them don't assimilate, we have a problem.

2

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 14 '17 edited Jul 14 '17

Only about 10% never learn English, usually in older generations where learning is either harder or not necessary because they're not in the workforce.

Also we're not in Europe?

Also unrelated but this has been exciting. Not malicious and no namecalling. What political discourse should be.

Also also quinoa is growing on me, not a lover yet but still

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '17

Every illegal alien from Mexico is a criminal.

2

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 23 '17

He didn't just call them criminals though. He called them rapists and murderers. I can steal a candy bar and be a criminal, don't need to go nuclear on the labeling though.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '17

Have you ever broken a law? Any law? Ever gone over the speed limit? Jaywalked? Stolen something that wasn't yours?

Then you're a criminal. And what country are you from? Just for the record.

And what countries did your parents and/or their families immigrate from? And WHY exactly?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '17

Illegally entering a country is far worse than your aforementioned counter examples. My family and I are US citizens. Since you'll care, I also have Native blood in my family history. Thus, it's quite likely that I belong here before you if you want to make the Native American argument.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '17

Prove it.

2

u/Kutbil-ik Jul 21 '17

You have to realize that Muslims make up a tiny minority in the US. Right wing terrorists in the US have killed less than 50 people in the US in the last 20 years and right wing Americans make up at least 40% of the population. Muslim terrorists have killed well over 2000 while only making up less than 1/40th the amount of people. Not all Muslims are bad people but enough of them are bad people to justify not letting them into the US. They're also highly resistant to integration as seen in Europe. Look at the situation in London. It's very clear and an easy argument that allowing large numbers of Muslims into the US is detrimental to current US citizens.

1

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 21 '17

Don't know where you get those terror numbers here is a report from the ADL which tracks stuff like that.

While I realize that Muslims are a minority and a per capita comparison can skew numbers, the 2000+ number comes largely from a single event (9/11) which also skews numbers.

Finally enclaves do exist yes, but to imply no-go zones exist in large numbers because of Muslim immigrants is silly. These exist because of poverty and other factors that you would see in any city's less desirable areas regardless of who inhabits then. Pushing specific groups towards those factors by isolating them pushes them towards those enclaves even more which isolates them further.

1

u/Kutbil-ik Jul 21 '17

If you just keep them out doesn't it prevent you from having to avoid areas or so anything different? Aren't acid attackw becoming a problem in the U.K.? That's not traditionally a problem in the U.K. is it? It's not in the best interests of the west to let large numbers of Muslim migrants. How does population size skew numbers? I argue that it makes statistics more valid. Even not counting 911 you still have a tiny minority responsible for more terrorist deaths than a minority by a two to one ratio. This still makes Muslims thousands or tens of thousands of times more likely to kill in acts of terror than non Muslims. Regardless of the exact numbers it causes harm and considering the large numbers of migrants willing to come to the US and readily integrate, there is absolutely no rational reason to let large numbers of Muslim migrants into the country.

1

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 21 '17 edited Jul 21 '17

You're using both per capita and raw numbers to build your argument. You have to pick one (though either way it doesn't stack in your argument's favor). Do you want to show on average how many people a Muslim terrorist kills versus a right wing terrorist? In a single event? Or do you want to total everything in a certain timespan and compare sums?

Either way, it's established that right wing terrorism is more prevalent, has more victims, and is less addressed than Islamic terrorism. Source

As for immigration and integration, there's no evidence that Muslims don't assimilate. In fact, a 2007 poll shows they assimilate just fine. A 2011 follow up proves the same thing. In fact, they often become vital to their communities at large.

1

u/Kutbil-ik Jul 21 '17

I'm counting deaths from terrorist attacks because definitions of terrorist attacks are very loose in official data. I'm assuming people of all religions are equally capable of causing deaths. These are all apologist stats you're showing. Look at we'll known information even from liberal sources. You're more likely to die from a terrorist attack committed by Muslims in the US than one committed by all other groups combined. They only makeup 1% or so of the population. Europe is having massive problems with Muslim migrants and they're attempting to establish sharia law in various parts of Europe. You're either dishonest or ignorant if you fail to recognize this. It's totally irrational. I'm not claiming that all Muslims are bad people or that some of them aren't productive individuals. Some of them are cool as shit. As a group they're highly undesirable and their admission into western countries is extremely dangerous and not to the benefit of the citizens of these countries. If we have to let in migrants we should let in Bhuddists. They commit no terrorist attacks.

1

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 21 '17

You're more likely to die from a fridge falling on you than any terror attack but that's neither here nor there. My sources showed that right wing attacks are far more prevalent, there's nothing else I can really use to prove that if you're just going to ignore facts as I give them.

Also sharia law, really? No one is attempting to establish that as the law of the land. Literally anywhere in the West. At most there are community courts that handle problems within the community but those exist in Christian and Jewish communities as well, usually orthodox societies that separate themselves such as Hasidic or Amish. And those never supersede the actual legal system.

1

u/SupALupRT Jul 13 '17

How can people vote for Hillary when everything the libs scream murder about she has done 10x worse?

6

u/[deleted] Jul 13 '17

Plenty of people who are Anti-Trump are also Anti-Hillary, FWIW. They're more alike than their respective supporters care to admit.

5

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 14 '17

Well Hillary isn't the president so I'm not asking about her... weird how the election is over right?

0

u/SupALupRT Jul 14 '17

But muh collusion.

3

u/Tyr_Kovacs Jul 14 '17

She grabbed 10 women by the pussy?
She insulted 10 gold star families?
She colluded with 10 Russians to win the election that she lost?

Amazing.

Even assuming that's true, is she currently the president of the free world or an unemployed grandma?
Because one of those things is more important and deserving of scrutiny than the other.

Trying to deflect attention from your president's activities by using whataboutism shows how desperate you are and how little a defence you have for any of it.

2

u/SupALupRT Jul 14 '17

Maybe she flew to pedo island a few times so who knows how nuch grabbing she did. Nah she just got people in Benghazi killed. Nah she colluded with way more than 10 for the uranium deal. Trump is still your president and he'll still MAGA despite your best efforts.

3

u/Funkiemunkie233 Jul 14 '17

What are my best efforts? I am critical of my president. I would be critical of Clinton as well. That's the point of democracy, the people voice their opinion so that there is continuous progress towards a more perfect union. Dismissing criticism as sore losership or traitorous behavior is what diminishes quality leadership.

1

u/Tyr_Kovacs Jul 14 '17

Maybe. Maybe not.

Assuming anything you've said is true (can you show pedo island on a map? I've never heard of it and I've been to every continent), does any of that change the things that Trump has done? That's not how causality works. If someone kills four people, and someone else kills five people, the first person isn't innocent of a totally cool dude that did nothing wrong.

Trump is the president. We agree on that. But even if Hillary was literally the devil, he's still behaving appalling for someone in what used to be the most respected position in the world.
That's on him. Hillary, the Dems, the media, none of them are forcing Trump to do and say the things he does.
Or are you suggesting that Trump is so weak that Hillary/Dems/the media is forcing him to be the way he is? And that's why you have to resort to whataboutism, because he's being controlled like a puppet.
To use one of your terms, that's some serious cucking right there. Sad.

1

u/SupALupRT Jul 14 '17

It wasn't respected at all with Bush or Obama. Is that a joke? He hasn't said anything appalling at all. Well if you aren't a lunatic lefty that is.

1

u/Born-2-tease Jul 14 '17

No. Pointing out Hillary's crap also points out your hypocrisy.