Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trying, yes, succeeding no. what is does is make for good copy because so many people are furled by these notions. Just look on here, any mention of this and it is a big debate! Most intelligent persons do not pay the likes if David Duke any mind.
The USA and the world around us is so pc minded there is no sense of need to have intellectual debate because pc, which is impossibe, since politics is a practical profession, based on compromise, and is NEVER correct or incorrect, is portrayed as something one may assume true, or untrue with mathematical precision, is portrayed in terms of absolutes. There is no right attitude, all we have is consensus opinions.
There is a right attitude. It involves character and integrity. Which some people do still possess.
You're the funny one. Unable to grasp that people actually change, and the world changes, in a period spanning almost 60 years.
Indeed, in about 60 years, Mr. Trump was a Democrat, then a Republican, then a Democrat, then a Republican, then Reform Party, then Independent, then a Republican.
See, people can change . . . . . . . or . . . . . . not. Hmmm.
I offer up a quote from 2016, Trump "I disavow David Duke".
Yet you continue to rail on about it and call him racist. Can't have it both ways unless you are simply holding Trump to a different standard than Hillary.
Thanks for clarifying this to the OP, but I highly doubt she/he'll come back and acknowledge your point.
Wrong again. Just did so.
And BTW, you don't need to talk about me in the 3rd person. If you have something to say, then say it directly to me. Then again the topic isn't about me.
I offer up a quote from 2016, Trump "I disavow David Duke".
Yet you continue to rail on about it and call him racist. Can't have it both ways unless you are simply holding Trump to a different standard than Hillary.
Well then, all of the democrats should be satisfied, and this should be the end of this nonsense.
For some reason, I don't think they will be satisfied.
It's not about paying the likes of David Duke any mind.
It's about the people running, about their ethics, about their perspectives.
When the likes of David Duke lends his support to one candidate, there's something about that candidate that Mr Duke likes. And when that candidate feigns ignorance (because that candidate has spoken about Mr Duke in the past) rather than disavowing that support immediately, that raises questions. Why would the candidate not disavow that support immediately? What does the candidate think he gains by feigning ignorance? And when that candidate is called out because the candidate has spoken about Mr Duke in the past, and the candidate claims an earpiece is to blame, that he could not hear the question, EVEN THOUGH the candidate practically repeated the question back to the interviewer, specifically citing Mr Duke's name back to the interviewer along with the phrase "white supremacist", is he telling us that we are all that gullible?
Trump does not like Duke. He was confused, and that is a problem, as he did not want to dissuade any southern state voters.
Now really, what he should have done: He should have chucked a bit and then said, " I do not support or desire the support from anyone who is supports white supremacy, the very idea is contrary to the values in American society today."
Then Trump is not as aware as i am, and that is one reason I might vote for Hillary, she does seem as aware as i am.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.