Trump won't win the Hispanic vote

[Theodarzna]

So you're saying Democrats are better politicians than Republicans, then?

Considering their policy of stabbing their voters in the back? No, they merely depend on the notion of "You have no other choice, we own your vote!"

[Pangean]

What was the website?

Is there proof Trump/his tweeter knew this?

So you are arguing he/his campaign is just incompetent?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/...remacist-site/

[Wells]

Considering their policy of stabbing their voters in the back?

*tiniest violin in the world*

[Arewn]

Regarding Mexicans in particular, I would actually expect a lot of them to be in favor of Trump.
From my understanding, the drug cartels and Mexican governmental corruption are funded in no small part by american money. Tighter borders will restrict cash flow from the illegal activities funding them, and should by extent be good for both the American and Mexican peoples.
Not to mention how dangerous it is to make the crossing illegally. That's really not something you should want your people to go through.
Furthermore, Trump isn't after Mexican immigrants, he's specifically campaigning against illegals and has spoken in support of regulated, legal immigration from the country.
Finally, if I was a legal immigrant, I would be pretty annoyed with those who travel to or stay in the country illegally. After going through the time and effort to do it the right way, these other people circumvent all of that and reap the benefits. That would piss me off.
So leaving aside criminals, I don't see why more Mexicans don't support Trump beyond media hysteria and stupidity.

[unbound]

According to all the liberals/progressives/democrats, the main stream media, and establishment Republicans... there is not a snowball's chance in hell the Trump could EVER win the Hispanic vote (or the black vote or the female vote for that matter.)

You sure about that?

I see reports like this quite often. I have a feeling that a lot of people (blacks, latinos, women) are afraid to say they support Trump in public due to being ostracized for going against the "group think". I believe that a lot of people that actually publicly state abhorrence with Trump will be pulling his lever in the PRIVATE voting booth come November.

lol

Do you understand that when polling says, for example, that 62% of latinos intend to vote for Clinton and 23% intend to vote for Trump, that means 23% are looking to vote for Trump? That means over 6 million latino voters. Of course you will find some of them proudly supporting their candidate.

More than anything else, you need to revisit your math classes...

[Noxx79]

Regarding Mexicans in particular, I would actually expect a lot of them to be in favor of Trump.
From my understanding, the drug cartels and Mexican governmental corruption are funded in no small part by american money. Tighter borders will restrict cash flow from the illegal activities funding them, and should by extent be good for both the American and Mexican peoples.
Not to mention how dangerous it is to make the crossing illegally. That's really not something you should want your people to go through.
Furthermore, Trump isn't after Mexican immigrants, he's specifically campaigning against illegals and has spoken in support of regulated, legal immigration from the country.
Finally, if I was a legal immigrant, I would be pretty annoyed with those who travel to or stay in the country illegally. After going through the time and effort to do it the right way, these other people circumvent all of that and reap the benefits. That would piss me off.
So leaving aside criminals, I don't see why more Mexicans don't support Trump beyond media hysteria and stupidity.

Ask trump: he's the one who said a judge of Mexicsn heritage would be biased against him.

[alexw]

What was the website?

Is there proof Trump/his tweeter knew this?

Its from 8chan. The thread can be seen here -

http://archive.is/E0Dto

No idea if they knew but grabbing an image from 8chan or from someone linked to it.... well you would think they'd think twice and then think no its probably not a good idea to do..... but apparently not....

[Theodarzna]

*tiniest violin in the world*

I mean if your a blinded idiot who follows "My party right or wrong!" thinking than sure, its all roses and sunshine, but the DNC, really starting with the Clinton's has been engaged in a power play at the expense of its own voters and considering how anaemic its power has been idk if it has much to show for it.

[Wells]

I mean if your a blinded idiot who follows "My party right or wrong!" thinking than sure, its all roses and sunshine, but the DNC, really starting with the Clinton's has been engaged in a power play at the expense of its own voters and considering how anaemic its power has been idk if it has much to show for it.

No one said the DNC is flawless. But then most of us understand that banding together to get most of what you want is better than sticking to your pride and getting none of it.

As for the Primary, Clinton got more votes. She won, that's really all it is.

Do you really expect people to watch a 70 minute video?

[Kraenen]

So you are arguing he/his campaign is just incompetent?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/...remacist-site/

Says something strange about you when you assume asking questions about sources and evidence is akin to taking some position.

- - - Updated - - -

Its from 8chan. The thread can be seen here -

http://archive.is/E0Dto

No idea if they knew but grabbing an image from 8chan or from someone linked to it.... well you would think they'd think twice and then think no its probably not a good idea to do..... but apparently not....

It remains unclear where Trump’s campaign obtained the image. A spokeswoman for the campaign did not immediately respond to questions about the original tweet or who was responsible for sending it out. Trump’s twitter account remained silent on the issue Sunday.

Apparently it was posted by an anti-Hilary tweeter on June 15, then posted on /pol/ on June 22. Seems to paint a different picture than the ones people want to see.

[Theodarzna]

No one said the DNC is flawless. But then most of us understand that banding together to get most of what you want is better than sticking to your pride and getting none of it.

As for the Primary, Clinton got more votes. She won, that's really all it is.

Do you really expect people to watch a 70 minute video?

Nobody said Judas' was flawless, but from the perspective of people getting nailed to a cross that is little comfort.

I argue none is achieved either way. Stabbed through the heart or stabbed through the back..... either or.

[Wells]

Nobody said Judas' was flawless, but from the perspective of people getting nailed to a cross that is little comfort.

I argue none is achieved either way. Stabbed through the heart or stabbed through the back..... either or.

God damn this is some melodramatic drivel. But then, you've already stated you don't have to worry about, say, losing your health insurance should Trump be elected. Nor do I assume you have to worry about having your reproductive rights rolled back should the GOP take the Executive. Nor would I suspect you to have to worry about having your rights rolled back, as many LGBTQ people are. etc etc.

Standing and dying for your pride is a privilege for those who are insulted from the results of their stand.

[Spiffums]

So the people who hate Trump say he doesn't stand a chance?

[Pangean]

Says something strange about you when you assume asking questions about sources and evidence is akin to taking some position.

I guess the question mark threw you but it's what is used when asking a question. Now if you feel a position has been assigned to as a result of being asked a question all that does is say something strange about you that when you assume asking a question is akin to assigning you a position.

And I note you didn't answer the question. How about you give it a shot?

- - - Updated - - -

Apparently it was posted by an anti-Hilary tweeter on June 15, then posted on /pol/ on June 22. Seems to paint a different picture than the ones people want to see.

So the date of original posting of the image changes what exactly?

[Noxx79]

Says something strange about you when you assume asking questions about sources and evidence is akin to taking some position.

- - - Updated - - -





Apparently it was posted by an anti-Hilary tweeter on June 15, then posted on /pol/ on June 22. Seems to paint a different picture than the ones people want to see.

The tweeter, now deleted, was full of racist content. So.. Either they pulled it from a racist tweeter OR a racist message board.

This changes things... How?

[Theodarzna]

God damn this is some melodramatic drivel. But then, you've already stated you don't have to worry about, say, losing your health insurance should Trump be elected. Nor do I assume you have to worry about having your reproductive rights rolled back should the GOP take the Executive. Nor would I suspect you to have to worry about having your rights rolled back, as many LGBTQ people are. etc etc.

Standing and dying for your pride is a privilege for those who are insulted from the results of their stand.

You are free to hate the working class and the poor, but all those issues are settled as matters of law.

And actually having a uterus does make abortion a thing for me. However I don't roll on trifle wedge issues. Abortion rights have been on the retreat for decades, the Democrats abandoned their posts ages ago.

Gay rights was a court decision, the Dem's passed nothing.

Finally we have no assurance Hillary will appoint liberal judges, Perhaps the sort that will say a gay homeless man and say "I don't want you dead for being gay, just dead for being homeless," Ah the Wells version of liberalism, fake, identity politics and that is it.

[Thepersona]

Nobody said Judas' was flawless, but from the perspective of people getting nailed to a cross that is little comfort.

I argue none is achieved either way. Stabbed through the heart or stabbed through the back..... either or.

theo, i'm a sanders supporter, i don't like clinton, but please, see the alternative. at least clinton wouldnt leave your country 20 years in the past regarding some policies, and if somehow the senate doesnt pass the TPP all will be fine and dandy.
it's called realpolitik and pragmatism

[Theodarzna]

theo, i'm a sanders supporter, i don't like clinton, but please, see the alternative. at least clinton wouldnt leave your country 20 years in the past regarding some policies, and if somehow the senate doesnt pass the TPP all will be fine and dandy

The TPP will likely be hammered through via lame duck, or Hillary will absolutely pass it. The alternative is not voting for Trump, but Hillary does actually, shocking enough earn peoples votes. Being the same sort of Judas' as her husband vs. being Trump, is effectively the different between an arrow through the chest or an arrow through the back.

[buck008]

You are free to hate the working class and the poor, but all those issues are settled as matters of law.

And actually having a uterus does make abortion a thing for me. However I don't roll on trifle wedge issues. Abortion rights have been on the retreat for decades, the Democrats abandoned their posts ages ago.

Gay rights was a court decision, the Dem's passed nothing.

Finally we have no assurance Hillary will appoint liberal judges, Perhaps the sort that will say a gay homeless man and say "I don't want you dead for being gay, just dead for being homeless," Ah the Wells version of liberalism, fake, identity politics and that is it.

Wait, who hates the working class and the poor now? Where did you pull that from?

[Wells]

And actually having a uterus does make abortion a thing for me. However I don't roll on trifle wedge issues. Abortion rights have been on the retreat for decades, the Democrats abandoned their posts ages ago.

Not surprised you're so badly informed. The DOJ has been part of attempting to preserve abortion rights these last 8 years. A GOP DoJ means that doesn't happen anymore. And "the Dems haven't been good enough on abortion, so who cares if someone even worse gets in power" is pants on head retarded.

Gay rights was a court decision, the Dem's passed nothing.

Again, not surprised you're this badly informed. There have been multiple significant expansions that you can thank the Executive under the democrats for either in part or in whole. The death of DOMA, and the expansion of military service rights being two high profile instances.

Finally we have no assurance Hillary will appoint liberal judges

No, but voting Clinton has a much better chance of getting them appointed than voting Stein does.

Perhaps the sort that will say a gay homeless man and say "I don't want you dead for being gay, just dead for being homeless," Ah the Wells version of liberalism, fake, identity politics and that is it.

Its fascinating to me that you can't tell the difference between pragmatism and the people on the other side of the political spectrum.

- - - Updated - - -

Wait, who hates the working class and the poor now? Where did you pull that from?

I'm not in favor of protectionism so I hate poor people or something. She's already stated before that because she hasn't seen me condemn TPP before she gets to assume I favor it.

- - - Updated - - -

theo, i'm a sanders supporter, i don't like clinton, but please, see the alternative. at least clinton wouldnt leave your country 20 years in the past regarding some policies, and if somehow the senate doesnt pass the TPP all will be fine and dandy.
it's called realpolitik and pragmatism

Yup. Democracy isn't about just getting what you personally want. Its about consensus building and working with people who somewhat disagree with to avoid policy from people you really disagree with.

Though being called "not a real liberal" is a nice change of pace.