2016 POTUS Election Thread

[Cowboysrock55]

And Crocks how is this a Liberal issue there are plenty of people on the right saying the same thing.

Because it's always been the Liberal agenda that the Republican party is racist. It just happens to be that some Republican's are piling on that agenda because they don't like Trump.

 

[2233boys]

Trump said "But we're building a wall. (1) He's a Mexican. We're building a wall between here and Mexico. (2) The answer is, he is giving us very unfair rulings."

Mr. Trump said U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel had (3)“an absolute conflict” in presiding over the litigation given that he was “of Mexican heritage” and a member of a Latino lawyers’ association. Mr. Trump said the background of the judge, who was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants, was relevant because of his campaign stance against illegal immigration and his pledge to seal the southern U.S. border. “I’m building a wall. It’s an inherent conflict of interest,

(1) He is an American Citizen
(2) Several experienced trial lawyers have taken a look at the record, and their conclusion is: No. Not only has Curiel adhered closely to the applicable law in every particular, but many of his rulings have been highly advantageous to Trump and Trump University. http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-trump-judge-20160608-snap-story.html

(3) Plain Retarded and questioning his judgement solely on his race is text book racism.

 

[Kbrown]

Racist or not, this all confirms that Trump is a vulgar troll whose stated intent is to lash out immaturely against anyone who doesn't give him his little way.

Sure is a lot of nose-holding going on this election.

 

[townsend]

Because it's always been the Liberal agenda that the Republican party is racist. It just happens to be that some Republican's are piling on that agenda because they don't like Trump.

It's no secret that the GOP became the new home of dixiecrats after the civil rights movement.

There's a very clear conection between former slave states and current red states. But the GOP used to be the home of business minded moderates.

There used to be a more diverse Republican constituency. But now Trump is their nominee. So I think it's safe to say that Republicans have become the official party of racists.

So the liberal agenda has been solely fulfilled by the republican voters.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I agree he has every right to question the judge.

But his own words were "This judge cannot rule on my case because he is mexican and I am building a wall".

And how can you inject him being mexican into the discussion and say its blown out of proportion when asked to clarify it and then make that statement?

As usual you are ignoring what actually happened in an attempt to downplay the significance of it.

And since you want to ignore the facts this is how all of this started.



Notice him calling him mexican before any other claims of bias.

Sounds like a question about illegal immigrants to me. The Judge being of Mexican heritage and the wall to keep illegals out may have a bias to it.

Again to me it can be construed as something that might be a bias toward Trump. If it were me I might take heed to some of the same issues but it would be because of questioning a judge's motivations on his rulings.

It is not at all unreasonable to raise question about a judge and explore various facets that may affect their judgements.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Racist or not, this all confirms that Trump is a vulgar troll whose stated intent is to lash out immaturely against anyone who doesn't give him his little way.

Sure is a lot of nose-holding going on this election.

That's probably true. But it's the way he is and everyone can readily see that for what it is.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Trump said "But we're building a wall. (1) He's a Mexican. We're building a wall between here and Mexico. (2) The answer is, he is giving us very unfair rulings."

Mr. Trump said U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel had (3)“an absolute conflict” in presiding over the litigation given that he was “of Mexican heritage” and a member of a Latino lawyers’ association. Mr. Trump said the background of the judge, who was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants, was relevant because of his campaign stance against illegal immigration and his pledge to seal the southern U.S. border. “I’m building a wall. It’s an inherent conflict of interest,

(1) He is an American Citizen
(2) Several experienced trial lawyers have taken a look at the record, and their conclusion is: No. Not only has Curiel adhered closely to the applicable law in every particular, but many of his rulings have been highly advantageous to Trump and Trump University. http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-trump-judge-20160608-snap-story.html

(3) Plain Retarded and questioning his judgement solely on his race is text book racism.

Maybe it wasn't solely based on his race. Maybe it was questioning whether his race might be a factor on his judgements. If I were involved in a lawsuit I certainly would explore what might affect a judge's rulings.

 

[Kbrown]

That's probably true. But it's the way he is and everyone can readily see that for what it is.

About as much I do of professional minorities casting everything as prejudiced, I tire of privileged whites whining about their own supposed oppression.

How about everybody shut up?

 

[Jiggyfly]

Sounds like a question about illegal immigrants to me. The Judge being of Mexican heritage and the wall to keep illegals out may have a bias to it.

Again to me it can be construed as something that might be a bias toward Trump. If it were me I might take heed to some of the same issues but it would be because of questioning a judge's motivations on his rulings.

It is not at all unreasonable to raise question about a judge and explore various facets that may affect their judgements.

What question?

He called him Mexican at the rally before saying anything else.

What was his purpose for calling him Mexican?


And for the record I don't think Trump is racist but he is race baiting with the best of them.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

(3) Plain Retarded and questioning his judgement solely on his race is text book racism.

Me thinks you don't understand what you're saying. Implying that a person of Mexican heritage would stand up for other people of Mexican heritage isn't textbook racism. Implying that someone must be retarded because of their Mexican heritage is racist. But other then your lack of understanding of that, you're mostly correct.

 

[Jiggyfly]

Maybe it wasn't solely based on his race. Maybe it was questioning whether his race might be a factor on his judgements. If I were involved in a lawsuit I certainly would explore what might affect a judge's rulings.

The question you keep ignoring is why bring up his race at all?

 

[Jiggyfly]

Me thinks you don't understand what you're saying. Implying that a person of Mexican heritage would stand up for other people of Mexican heritage isn't textbook racism. Implying that someone must be retarded because of their Mexican heritage is racist. But other then your lack of understanding of that, you're mostly correct.

I actually agree it's not text book racism but it sure is race baiting.

 

[townsend]

What question?

He called him Mexican at the rally before saying anything else.

What was his purpose for calling him Mexican?


And for the record I don't think Trump is racist but he is race baiting with the best of them.

He's more infant than old school racist.

He can't handle not getting his way. He's like that kid who sued UT when she thought she didn't get in because she was white, not because her grades weren't very good.

Republicans might call it "victim mentality".

He harasses Megan Kelley when she criticizes him, has a big pity party meltdown when Cruz wins Iowa. He can't just take his lumps like a man.

That being said, it doesn't matter who he is outside of the statement. If a civil rights champion had made the same inference, it would still be super racist.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I agree he has every right to question the judge.

But his own words were "This judge cannot rule on my case because he is mexican and I am building a wall".

And how can you inject him being mexican into the discussion and say its blown out of proportion when asked to clarify it and then make that statement?

As usual you are ignoring what actually happened in an attempt to downplay the significance of it.

And since you want to ignore the facts this is how all of this started.



Notice him calling him mexican before any other claims of bias.

Sounds like a question about illegal immigrants to me. The Judge being of Mexican heritage and the wall to keep illegals out may have a bias to it. Again to me it can be construed as something that might be a bias toward Trump. If it were me I might take heed some of the same issues but it would be because of questioning a judge's motivations on his rulings. It is not at all unreasonable to raise question about a judge and explorevarious facets that may affect their judgements.

All I heard Trumps say about the judge was that he was Mexican and that's ok but he should have recused himself. The rest of the clip was the bantering between attorneys and spokes people arguing the point and giving their opinions as to what the thought was done. What did I miss?

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I actually agree it's not text book racism but it sure is race baiting.

Agreed, it is.

 

[Jiggyfly]

Sounds like a question about illegal immigrants to me. The Judge being of Mexican heritage and the wall to keep illegals out may have a bias to it. Again to me it can be construed as something that might be a bias toward Trump. If it were me I might take heed some of the same issues but it would be because of questioning a judge's motivations on his rulings. It is not at all unreasonable to raise question about a judge and explorevarious facets that may affect their judgements.

All I heard Trumps say about the judge was that he was Mexican and that's ok but he should have recused himself. The rest of the clip was the bantering between attorneys and spokes people arguing the point and giving their opinions as to what the thought was done. What did I miss?

Why are you ignoring the beginning when he calls him Mexican at the rally?

What was the purpose of that?

 

[Cowboysrock55]

 

[L.T. Fan]

Why are you ignoring the beginning when he calls him Mexican at the rally?

What was the purpose of that?

All I heard him say on the clip was he is Mexican and that's okay but he should have recused himself. He actually said he should have recused himself first.

I can only guess that he was making the point of his heritage and that was the reason for him to recuse himself because of the possible biases Trump thought he may be harboring against him. Who really knows but it would and sense if Trump questioned his motives for his rulings and immediately said he should have recused himself. Only Trump can explain why he said what he did.

 

[2233boys]

Me thinks you don't understand what you're saying. Implying that a person of Mexican heritage would stand up for other people of Mexican heritage isn't textbook racism. Implying that someone must be retarded because of their Mexican heritage is racist. But other then your lack of understanding of that, you're mostly correct.

He said he couldn't be fair because he was Mexican. It's racism. It's sad you'd spend all this time defending it.

 

[2233boys]

Maybe it wasn't solely based on his race. Maybe it was questioning whether his race might be a factor on his judgements. If I were involved in a lawsuit I certainly would explore what might affect a judge's rulings.

I just can't anymore. Exactly why I don't post much here. anymore. Peace