By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
As you're so interested in his 'rants' (despite blocking him) his last post included the following paragraph: "The fact you're bleating on about racism to me - I have 2 mixed race children - I am far more concerned about Islamic extremism impacting their lives than I am about racism. Why can't you just accept that people have genuine concerns?"
As always, thanks for your contribution to the discussion, I look forward to more of these erudite posts of yours in the future.
I'd sooner have parents paying attention to their kids online activities and fulfilling their parental duties. You have to be 13 or older to open an X, Tik Tok or Facebook account yet for some reasons a vast number parents either allow or are oblivious to their young kids having accounts which they bring all the maturity of their age onto.
"He didn't get shot in the ear. A bit of debris clipped him and he's fine."
It's tone deaf remarks like this that really don't help your point and if anything makes you come across as being disingenuous overall. In your follow up comment you refer to it as a "shooting incident" which means you cannot even bring yourself to name it what it was - a failed assassination attempt on Trump's life in which a former firefighter Corey Comperatore tragically lost his life while shielding his family. A bit of debris clipped his ear... out of thin air I suppose? Shameful comment.
"He won't debate her? Why not? If she's so under qualified and he's so good at thinking on his feet t should surely be a great opportunity for him?"
I'd very much like to see a Trump/Harris debate. It would be the first time a democratically elected nominee debated a non-elected nominee who has been thrust upon the Democratic Party in what amounts to a coup. As for him not wanting to debate her - wrong. At the start of the recent interview with the National Association of Black Journalists (where the legacy media got their gotcha clip that has gone viral thanks to the algorithm) Trump explains he was invited to it under false pretenses as he expected VPOTUS Harris to be there, but of course she wasn't. Furthermore, from the aggressive tone of the activist, sorry, journalist asking the question it's clear this was not a genuine attempt to debate Trump but some kind of ploy to entrap Trump saying something that could be used against him. Now it doesn't really matter whether you like him or not, this 'introduction' of Trump at the event was extremely unprofessional and puts the whole clip of him talking about VPOTUS Harris in a whole different context - as proved by the reaction of some in the crowd and the vast majority of the comments under the video, including this: "I as a black man am sooo happy he responded in that manor call it out. And also putting the lack of class on her end on everything" and "I am a black woman embarrassed by the lack of basic courtesy shown here by that journalist in blue towards a previous president of the USA .She has a spirit of provocation and confusion ..very ratchet behavior indeed." I could go on but you get the point. In any case, bring on the Trump/Harris debate.
You're right there, it isn't important in my eyes as I'm not an American citizen and have no say in the matter (and I'm not sure if I'd vote for Trump if I did). Is race an important issue in America? Absolutely, and I didn't suggest it wasn't at all important but from the evidence of this latest 'gotcha' moment by the legacy media it comes across as if that's all that's important to African American voters (and any other group for that matter, although I'm yet to see the Asian American Journalists Association grill Trump on VPOTUS' background). You can see the Youtube algorithm working at full capacity to push and make it front and centre news...
RE: your link - don't for one second think I'm here to defend Trump; if you see my first post commenting on this clip you'll see my reaction to it. But the decent thing to do for anyone is be impartial when talking about such things, and of course because you detest orange man you can only see his faults and fail to point out the other side. Here are just two examples:
VPOTUS Harris basically saying to POTUS Biden (before he endorsed her): "Vice President I’m not saying you’re a racist......but you’re a racist" - if we're going to bring up Trump's historical timeline of comments then absolutely Biden's history of supporting segregation should be front and centre of the debate.
POTUS Biden apologising for being openly racist and everyone being absolutely OK with it (CNN I'm looking at you). Imagine for one second that Trump had uttered those words.
Now I fully expect a predictable response of: "that's whataboutism" or "that may be racist - but not as racist as Trump." Sorry, but racism is racism, and should be called out - anything less is hypocrisy. For example, calling all African Americans (and other groups) mentally retarded for voting for Trump is inherently racist, yet because you broadly agree with the person who said it you let it slide.
In any case, the point I was trying to make is that race is not the only issue that should be at the forefront of any group's mind, because both sides have their murky past when it comes to it. Pandering to one group based on race alone becomes transparent after a period of time, especially after America has voted in an African American as POTUS for two terms - and this is illustrated by the increase of support for Trump from these various minority groups. Take this highly intelligent and brilliant young woman's video calling out VPOTUS Harris' pandering to the African American community:
One last point - you brought up BLM, and I'm glad you did. It's interesting to note that BLM's official Twitter/X account said the following about Harris' elevation to the Democrat's candidate for POTUS: "Kamala was selected, not elected." and "... we are abolitionists and would never encourage our community to vote for someone simply because they are Black."
Oh I don't know, maybe as journalists they should ask the candidate for the Presidency questions about the things people in America really talk about - like the price of gas, groceries, healthcare, the spike in crime, immigration, the war in the MIddle East.... I could go on. Pretty much like any other group. This isn’t that complicated, even though the media likes to pretend it is, so it always boils down to race.
Dr Emma Hilton, developmental biologist at the University of Manchester: "The power gap between a male and female punch is 162%. That is, males can punch 2.6 times harder than females. It's the biggest performance gap I've found to date."
Agreed. The correct response to the race baiting should've been that Harris is first and foremost an American and that he'd prefer to concentrate on her failings in the role of VPOTUS etc. The race card seems to be the only option left to the Democrats and legacy media now, which I think says more about them than it does of Trump.
Not a good look is it? Even in a clipped interview such as this one, which doesn't contain the rest of the interview for the full context it's poor judgement on his part to bite the clear race baiting by the legacy media and respond in such a manner.
However, I'd argue it's not as bad as openly insinuating any African America, Asian American, Latino American, LGBTQIA+ American, or Female American who votes for Trump being severely mentally retarded - which has been done openly on this thread without any repercussion or comment from yourself or others for that matter. The hypocrisy is palpable.
Thanks for another downvote, added to the collection. I tend to steer clear of talking to people who are openly racist, homophobic and misogynist, so good day to you.
Not going to lie, that's bit stalkery mate. I'm not sure if it's a technophobe thing, but you can literally click on my username and see when and where I have posted in the last God knows how many years, which I'm sure the person who upvoted your comment can confirm and explain to you seeing as he moderates the site. Some QPR related, a lot of them non-QPR. Now a crime it seems.
I've posted my opinions here, which are my own, in a respectful way. If that bothers you then by all means add me to the list of people you've blocked. I will say I'd love to see you add more to the debate other than your usual one liner quips about how bad orange man is - at least many of the other posters on the thread with Trump derangement syndrome will take time to posit their thoughts on the matter. Some I agree with, some I don't. Or don't add anything. It's a free country - you can just sit and petulantly downvote everything I type like Esox - I've been collecting those like a badge of honour.
What many fail to comprehend, mostly thanks to legacy media spin, is that Harris has been completely set up up as a pansy by her own party to take the fall in this election. She is not the Democrat's preferred choice of candidate at all, as all the big hitters in that party would rather sit this one out and sully their chances for the 2028 election. So we'll hear the rhetoric of she's the first woman of colour to run for president as the Democrats pat themselves on the back and others have done on this thread. It's embarrassing - even Black Lives Matter have expressed their displeasure on X by saying "Kamala was selected, not elected." and that they "...would never encourage our community to vote for someone simply because they are Black."
Some good points well made, and a refreshing change to the usual "I don't like orange man no matter what" - it's unfortunate you resort to ad hominem attacks rather than address the point I was making. Can I not quote Sowell? Do you disagree with the quote I used? Careful with your answer, as there are some on this thread who would accuse you of racism for calling out a free thinking African American like Sowell.
I won't go into why those communities have shifted towards voting for Trump, as that would be highly presumptuous of me as a straight white middle aged man - as members of a colourblind meritocracy I'm sure they have a good reason for it, foremost probably being the desire to have a strong economy, less chances of a global war and better future for their children without having to worry about the state deciding what's best for them at the expense of their parental rights.
And for what it's worth, I agree with Sowell's assessment of Trump. In an ideal world we'd have better options, but we are where we are - and the prospect of someone who isn't even supported fully by their own party becoming President is not a good option. The Democrats really messed up when they refused to even acknowledge the rise of RFK Jr.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
