It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Maybe the presumptive nominee isn't racist. He just plays one on TV. ;)
Hidden behind all that though, are some interesting points about the nation, its problems, and that is what I want to have discussed. Everyone is focusing on the sideshow, which is unfortunate because if he loses this election, it's back to square one and nothing will change.
Right now, with Donald, most can't get past that first criteria, because he is not fit to be POTUS.
I firmly believe that this will not work in the general election. He will have to have a command of the facts and demonstrate this conclusively going forward, or he will be trounced. He will have to articulate a clear vision for the country at the convention. I have said this before and I stand by it.
The email scandal and this racist nonsense are just sideshows. The issues facing the nation are too important to waste time on this.
It's already working, though. He's running neck and neck with Clinton in many of the swing states that the election will come down to.
I don't believe the racist thing to be nonsense because, whether or not he actually is a racist, that's what he's choosing to portray himself as in the media. So, on some level, he's comfortable with that depiction, otherwise he'd try to distance himself from it.
I did believe that the email thing was a sideshow until the FBI Director made a fool out of himself and put on display the fact that there are two different justice systems: one for us average Joes and one for people like the Clintons. Not that we didn't already know it, but to actually hear people in such high ranking offices like the Director of the FBI and the Attorney General all but admit it publicly was somewhat shocking.
Thanks for using this line so I wouldn't have to. :))
However, they are both in the past. The way the candidates conduct themselves and present their points of view in the next four months are what will count. This is the home stretch in a marathon campaign. It is only now that really matters in my view.
Regarding him running neck and neck with Hillary in swing states, that's because he has articulated points that are resonating in those states. She will have to take note and have an answer to this. I've said all along that she is a weak candidate, and the wrong person for them to have fielded this year, but we are where we are. She'll have to step up with Tim Kaine (likely VP pick).
Donald trump. 1991.
“I have black guys counting my money. … I hate it,”
“The only guys I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes all day.”
“‘Laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that.”
So that's why he was sued long ago for not renting to black folks, eh? Because he's the furthest thing POSSIBLE from being a racist. And the whole Birther thing (which I note you haven't yet addressed) was just to build up his cred with the racists 7 years ago in preparation for this presidential run, is that it?
If you want to defend his points re: trade with China, immigration, etc., by all means do so. But don't try to pretend that on the issue of racism, this sow's ear is any sort of a silk purse because it plainly isn't.
RE: Him being sued for not renting to black folks - I can't comment because I don't know the facts on that. Was it because they were black or because they were poor and couldn't pay? What was the outcome and what were the findings (not the allegations)?
Basically, in the early-70s, the feds brought a Federal Case against Trump & his father for a company-wide systematic policy against renting to blacks based solely on race, not on ability to pay. Roy Cohn was involved in the negotiations on Trump's side & there's a name you might want to research as well. (Google is your friend, use it.) What was the outcome? A settlement, of course. Not that Trump will ever admit to any wrongdoing, but again, "from my knowledge of his career over the years" that's jusr par for the course.
At the end of the day if people want to believe he's a racist, then that's fine. He will be confronted on that on the biggest stage and he will have to answer for it shortly, if the media do their research.
You all know who you're voting for then? That's fine with me.
EDIT: I just brushed up on my obviously previously inept google searching techniques and the relevant few paragraphs in my copy of the Art of the Deal. My take is there was discrimination. Trump claims he didn't want to rent to welfare recipients irrespective of colour or race, but the fact that there was finally a settlement suggests that there was discrimination against African Americans. The facts show that The Trump Company was in fact renting to African Americans, but that there was an attempt to have a quota on the number and % in the buildings, with rental employees saying they were told to prioritize renting to "Jews and Executives". It also appears that this was something Trump Senior had advocated.
Donald fought the case and hired Roy Cohn, a defense attorney who two decades earlier had been a top aide to Sen. Joseph McCarthy during his infamous effort to root out communists in government. Trump's reason for hiring Cohn was because he was a fighter - Cohn countersued the government for $100m for false accusations and the case was eventually settled.
You're right, in 1973 Trump was charged by the U.S. Dept. of Justice of discrimination in making housing available to minorities to rent and buy. Trump rental agents testified they they would add an additional sheet of paper marked with a huge 'C;' for 'colored people' Here are just a few of the cases presented:
Alfred Hoyt, a black man, was told there were no two-bedroom apartments at Trump’s Westminster apartment complex in Brooklyn. His white wife, Sheila, was offered a two-bedroom apartment the very next day. They were admitted to the building after filing a complaint with the New York City Human Rights Commission.
Henrietta Davis, a black woman, tried to rent an apartment at the Fontainebleau in Brooklyn in 1972. She said she was told by the super that he had no authority to accept rental applications. And yet when Muriel Salzman, a white Urban League tester, went to the Fontainebleau directly after Davis, she was told that two apartments were free and she could rent either of them.
Godfrey Jacobs—a black tester for the Urban League—was told there were no vacancies at the Beachaven Apartments in Sheepshead Bay. Yet George Sim Johnston, a white tester, was offered a rental at that building on the very same day.
Beverly Best, a black woman, tried to rent at the Beachaven complex in December of 1972. She says she was told by phone that an apartment was available but when she showed up in person the next day to fill out an application, she was told there were no vacancies. She was only admitted to the building after she filed a complaint with the New York City Human Rights Commission.
In typical Trump fashion he sued the federal government and delayed the case for two years. In 1975. Trump quietly settled the case and agreed to send a list of ALL available units first to minority organizations.
@bondjames will not respond to facts. Oh those lSE brainiacs.
I don't cry out. You're welcome to think what you want of me. I did not equate or draw any connection between intelligence/education and racism though, and wanted to clarify that - a member here misunderstood my statement.
Keep in mind that Trump isn't the only one to have questionable business practices. Any one in the position of these two candidates has dirt under their nails. That's just a fact of life. I've never said the man was a saint. I just don't get as excited as some here about either of their failings.
I'm interested in how the candidates portray themselves in the next four months and how they present their take on the various issues and their vision for the country. Ultimately, the one who does the best job of that will win this election. That would be a fair outcome to me. I'm not telling anyone how to vote and I'm not criticizing anyone for their vote. That is democracy.
Yes, @BeatlesSansEarmuffs. So basically in a nutshell: Trump condones awful, despicable things. If in his tiny tiny cold heart he really is not a racist, not bigoted, but chooses to "act" that way to garner publicity and votes from low lifes, then he is okay? Or more clearly and accurately, he is still totally at fault, responsible for his words and deeds; a coward, and worse than a publicity hound. :O) No longer funny or amusing. Completely and utterly unfit to be president of any country, including - dare I say it - Freedonia. ;)
Yes, so we will run in circles on this thread. I could use a laugh when it comes to politics at this point. Let's just shake the dust off - we all know who we are voting for at this point and trying to convince others will just drive us crackers. So here ya go, grab a cigar or a bicycle pump and join me with Groucho and the boys (note: this film is from 1933)
From what I can see, Hillary is selling Knowledge, Experience, a Steady Hand and Consistency. She was also selling 'Integrity', but the email scandal revelations may have hurt her a few weeks ago, and put a dent in that. It also played into Donald's branding of her as 'crooked'.
The current poll tightening is on account of the fact that it was taken during and just after the Comey findings and the Lynch/Clinton airport meet. Trump may possibly take a small lead post-Repub Convention and then Clinton should level or go ahead post-Dem Convention. All of this is as I expect and how it's always played out. It's just one big drawn out circus for ratings until the last weeks of the campaigns.
I think he is guilty of discriminating under the Fair Housing Act with respect to African Americans who can rent in his New York properties, although the case was settled. He claims it had to do with income and welfare recipients, but I don't agree. I think he wanted to limit the number of African Americans in his properties, particularly those of not well off means.
If he is a racist, there is no way he will be elected president of the United States. That case will be prosecuted against him vigorously by his opponents, and they will win it.
Have you read my previous post @CommanderRoss? With all the quotes from Mr Trump...and the context I wrote?
Regarding the shootings today in Baton Rouge -another 3 dead policemen-......I must say, my mind can't cope with all the shit that June and July of 2016 gave us. Three terrorist attacks in France in the last two years, a terrorist attack in Belgium, A huge terrorist attack in Turkey. A terrorist attack in the USA. Race-based violence in the USA that reminds me of the 1960's. A failed Coup d'Etat in Turkey. A, for me at least, shocking Brexit vote. Donald Trump who adds more fire to the race debate.
I mean, most people know I am quite a staunch poster of politics in here. But even I can't cope up anymore. I have arrived at a point where my mind is so saturated that I prever to masturbate, watch a movie or go to the swimming pool (:|
Seriously though, it's getting nuts out there...
:-O
Any one of these recent events could have magnified global spill over & long term consequences. Scary times indeed.
[-(