Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 177: Still In Our Mom's Basement

(+) Yeah! (+)

Mr Lasastryke posted...

Corrik posted...

Then it was Trump just trying to find a way out of a judge that he thought would rule against him.

welcome to "corrik interprets every racist trump comment as not being racist," episode #376

god Corrik's backup defense is so fucking empty

"He wasn't racist, he just thought the judge would rule against him"... yes.... and why did he think that about the judge? Because of his race.

Like he makes it look like he admitted the "thinking the judge can't be impartial because of his race is racist" argument except he just goes back to an empty statement of the original subject without actually accepting the conclusion that was just reached about it. It's just a step back to the start.

The dishonesty and illusion of debating with Corrik is just a ridiculous game of snakes & ladders
---

I love that one of Corrik's qualifiers for racism is original content.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-9hgxaD5mPf8/VlTIY4X28SI/AAAAAAAAxiQ/MC6f00-nGuQ/s1600-h/donald%252520trump%25255B4%25255D.png

Remember when Trump shared fake racial stats on Twitter?

Holy shit how have I not seen this.

Not only is this racist, it is offensive how dumb this is, and mind boggling how dumb (and racist) you would have to be to share this.

At least he deleted that one!

This seemed so impossibly racist and dumb, even by my extremely low expectations, that I thought it had to be fake.

But I googled it:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/nov/23/donald-trump/trump-tweet-blacks-white-homicide-victims/

He literally posted it WHILE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. I somehow didn't even hear of this probably because of all the other stuff going on.
---

StealThisSheen posted...

We thought Corrik was lawful neutral, but he's literally just a Trumper.

We thought he was lawful neutral because he always goes "If Trump says something racist, he should be punished," or "If Trump does X, he should be punished"

But then no matter what happens, he just goes "Trump didn't say/do X"

If he does do something, he should be punished. He has not definitively done anything wrong at this point. Just because you have 14 liberals in here clamoring that he did something wrong doesn't mean 14 conservatives don't see it the complete opposite. You are looking for racism. I know it when I see it. I can outright tell you Roseanne's comment was racist. Wasn't exactly debatable.

Nothing you have shown so far has been not debatable. You are just screaming that it is with a like minded group to back you up. Go post the same shit on NeoGAF and see how many disagree with you.
---

"As long as SOMEBODY disagrees with you, it's not racist"

Okay that's enough to block this shit
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-9hgxaD5mPf8/VlTIY4X28SI/AAAAAAAAxiQ/MC6f00-nGuQ/s1600-h/donald%252520trump%25255B4%25255D.png

Remember when Trump shared fake racial stats on Twitter?

Holy shit how have I not seen this.

Not only is this racist, it is offensive how dumb this is, and mind boggling how dumb (and racist) you would have to be to share this.

At least he deleted that one!

This seemed so impossibly racist and dumb, even by my extremely low expectations, that I thought it had to be fake.

But I googled it:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/nov/23/donald-trump/trump-tweet-blacks-white-homicide-victims/

He literally posted it WHILE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. I somehow didn't even hear of this probably because of all the other stuff going on.

Yeah, that statistic seems so mindboggling skewed that it likely was posted from racist origins. Just like the Muslim videos he reposted were of hate group origins also.
---

---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-9hgxaD5mPf8/VlTIY4X28SI/AAAAAAAAxiQ/MC6f00-nGuQ/s1600-h/donald%252520trump%25255B4%25255D.png

Remember when Trump shared fake racial stats on Twitter?

Holy shit how have I not seen this.

Not only is this racist, it is offensive how dumb this is, and mind boggling how dumb (and racist) you would have to be to share this.

At least he deleted that one!

This seemed so impossibly racist and dumb, even by my extremely low expectations, that I thought it had to be fake.

But I googled it:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/nov/23/donald-trump/trump-tweet-blacks-white-homicide-victims/

He literally posted it WHILE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. I somehow didn't even hear of this probably because of all the other stuff going on.

Its also accidentally anti-police if you think about it

In the attempt to illustrate that police kill more whites than blacks, apparently 3% of all white people killed in a year were at the hands of law enforcement.

Thats a problem!
---

Corrik posted...

Not my fault so many of you actively go out looking for racism and can't handle it when someone shows you it is not as definitive as you say.

i literally said trump's racist quotes are usually "low-key racist." i'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if he said stuff like this once or twice, but after 86 times you're starting to see a pattern. he doesn't keep getting the benefit of the doubt over and over and over again. saying low-key racist stuff 86 times is just as bad as saying something as blatant as "all black people suck" once. if anything, it's WORSE. if you say a super racist thing once it could still be a mistake - at least then you can still legitimately go "oh geez i was super drunk when i said that what the hell was i thinking i'm so sorry." when it's continual behavior it becomes harder to argue that every single time it was a "mistake" or a case of "poor communication."

don't see how this point is taken away by you going "nope, in this case trump meant [insert the not racist interpretation]. not racist" ad nauseam.

(also the judge curiel thing was DEFINITELY racist jesus christ why are we still talking about this)
---

Also apparently the only races that kill people are white black and police
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-9hgxaD5mPf8/VlTIY4X28SI/AAAAAAAAxiQ/MC6f00-nGuQ/s1600-h/donald%252520trump%25255B4%25255D.png

Remember when Trump shared fake racial stats on Twitter?

Holy shit how have I not seen this.

Not only is this racist, it is offensive how dumb this is, and mind boggling how dumb (and racist) you would have to be to share this.

At least he deleted that one!

This seemed so impossibly racist and dumb, even by my extremely low expectations, that I thought it had to be fake.

But I googled it:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/nov/23/donald-trump/trump-tweet-blacks-white-homicide-victims/

He literally posted it WHILE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. I somehow didn't even hear of this probably because of all the other stuff going on.

Its also accidentally anti-police if you think about it

In the attempt to illustrate that police kill more whites than blacks, apparently 3% of all white people killed in a year were at the hands of law enforcement.

Thats a problem!

That is kind of funny.
---

Corrik posted...

Nothing you have shown so far has been not debatable. You are just screaming that it is with a like minded group to back you up. Go post the same shit on NeoGAF and see how many disagree with you.

the judge curiel thing is not debatable.

(i legit want to go to neogaf and ask "was the judge curiel thing racist?" now. curious what would happen!)
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

Corrik posted...

Not my fault so many of you actively go out looking for racism and can't handle it when someone shows you it is not as definitive as you say.

i literally said trump's racist quotes are usually "low-key racist." i'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if he said stuff like this once or twice, but after 86 times you're starting to see a pattern. he doesn't keep getting the benefit of the doubt over and over and over again. saying low-key racist stuff 86 times is just as bad as saying something as blatant as "all black people suck" once. if anything, it's WORSE. if you say a super racist thing once it could still be a mistake - at least then you can still legitimately go "oh geez i was super drunk when i said that what the hell was i thinking i'm so sorry." when it's continual behavior it becomes harder to argue that every single time it was a "mistake" or a case of "poor communication."

don't see how this point is taken away by you going "nope, in this case trump meant [insert the not racist interpretation]. not racist" ad nauseam.

(also the judge curiel thing was DEFINITELY racist jesus christ why are we still talking about this)

Do you think Abraham Lincoln was racist?
---

lmfao using 2018 GAF as a moral compass holy shit
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Also apparently the only races that kill people are white black and police

I feel like Trump pondered this and decided it must be true because "Asian people all know kungfu and use it non-lethally, and Mexicans just sleep all day."

But this was before he figured out 100% of hispanics are murderers, of course
---

I blocked Rascik over a year ago, welcome to the party.
---

CelesMyUserName posted...

lmfao using 2018 GAF as a moral compass holy shit

Actually I used it as an opportunity end of the spectrum. Though, it likely is more center. The point is, just because you are echo chambering what the answer is you want does not mean everyone agrees.
---

Corrik posted...

Do you think Abraham Lincoln was racist?

probably. back in those days most white people were racist.
---

Corrik posted...

Yeah, that statistic seems so mindboggling skewed that it likely was posted from racist origins. Just like the Muslim videos he reposted were of hate group origins also.

Which is why even sharing it indicates racism. Because you would look at that, and as a rational person, would say "there is no way in hell that black people were responsible for 80% of all homicide related deaths against white people". That's bonkers crazy, and the only way you even remotely entertain that notion is if you are racist and afraid of black people. There is no other way you would think that.

"Hey did you know Italians are responsible for 75% of all the arson in the US in a given year?" No one is going to believe a clearly false statistic like that unless you are biased against the group in question.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

I blocked Rascik over a year ago, welcome to the party.

TheRock who literally responded to me in multiple different threads recently with quotes still acting like he blocked me. That is cute. Hope your attention is working out for you.
---

Corrik, would it be fair to say that no reasonably smart person who didn't want to be known as a racist would say something that would definitively prove he was racist?
---

Corrik you gotta give up on this one my dude

You can say something racist without an outright slur being in there. Saying someone can't be impartial because their race is tangentially involved is definitely racist unless you cite some examples of them holding white guy to the same standard or there is evidence other than the race of the judge presented.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Corrik posted...

Yeah, that statistic seems so mindboggling skewed that it likely was posted from racist origins. Just like the Muslim videos he reposted were of hate group origins also.

Which is why even sharing it indicates racism. Because you would look at that, and as a rational person, would say "there is no way in hell that black people were responsible for 80% of all homicide related deaths against white people". That's bonkers crazy, and the only way you even remotely entertain that notion is if you are racist and afraid of black people. There is no other way you would think that.

"Hey did you know Italians are responsible for 75% of all the arson in the US in a given year?" No one is going to believe a clearly false statistic like that unless you are biased against the group in question.

See, I kind of see where you are coming from on this. But, I also know people who are not racist who get in the same trap of sharing shit they think is legit news. I have told people that stupid Senate shit was wrong that gets shared constantly. And good the amount of Infowars stuff I see on my timeline is wild. I actually thought some of that shit was legit til I looked into it some.
---

I'm confused how we only think it's racist because this is an echo chamber when even red sox agrees on the Judge point, and Paul Ryan (known B8 Liberal?) also said it was racist.
---

Remember that time Trump literally shared a meme image from 8chan with Hillary shown with lots of money and the Star of David superimposed behind her?

Then he took it down and reposted it with a circle instead of the star, lol.

And then complained about people seeing 6-point stars being anti-Semitic now, despite the image being definitively traced back to 8chan /pol/

Which ALSO is worrisome because it probably means he has staffers that visit there!
---

Lopen posted...

Corrik you gotta give up on this one my dude

You can say something racist without an outright slur being in there. Saying someone can't be impartial because their race is tangentially involved is definitely racist unless you cite some examples of them holding white guy to the same standard or there is evidence other than the race of the judge presented.

I mean, you are welcome to your opinion. I can point to more definitive racist comments by Abraham Lincoln than Donald Trump. And, I would not consider Abraham Lincoln a racist. I would consider him a product of his times.

Should Trump know better on a statistic like that? I mean, probably. Do I think he is definitively a racist for sharing it. Not really.

You are correct in you do not have to be crazy over the top to be racist. I do think it had to be something that can be definitively established because it is a heavy term to toss around. If you have to explain why it is racist, I think it mostly fails the definitive statute off the bat. Racism is blatant and common sense. Not needing to be explained.
---

red sox 777 posted...

Corrik, would it be fair to say that no reasonably smart person who didn't want to be known as a racist would say something that would definitively prove he was racist?

I think that is a fair thing to say. Sure.
---

Heres the Paul Ryan quote if anyone wants it sourced

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/paul-ryan-trump-judge-223991
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Its also accidentally anti-police if you think about it

In the attempt to illustrate that police kill more whites than blacks, apparently 3% of all white people killed in a year were at the hands of law enforcement.

Thats a problem!

Out of curiosity I checked.

The total number of police related shooting deaths in 2015 was 965 (through December 24 of that year, but eh lets just assume no one was shot and killed that final week): https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/12/26/a-year-of-reckoning-police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.bd8f2db64c8b

The total number of all homicides was 15,696 (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/murder).

I do not believe police related homicides are in there, because that is just "murder". If you check the chart it doesn't list police related as one of the categories, so I'm going to assume no: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/expanded_homicide_data_table_10_murder_circumstances_by_relationship_2015.xls

Which means that there were 965 police related shootings in a total of 16,661 deaths (murder + police shootings). That is roughly 5.8% of homicides, so that number is likely low on that racist chart!

Someone can correct me if I made a mistake in the data somewhere!
---

Well fry my grits, police kill more than even I thought
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Its also accidentally anti-police if you think about it

In the attempt to illustrate that police kill more whites than blacks, apparently 3% of all white people killed in a year were at the hands of law enforcement.

Thats a problem!

Out of curiosity I checked.

The total number of police related shooting deaths in 2015 was 965 (through December 24 of that year, but eh lets just assume no one was shot and killed that final week): https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/12/26/a-year-of-reckoning-police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.bd8f2db64c8b

The total number of all homicides was 15,696 (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/murder).

I do not believe police related homicides are in there, because that is just "murder". If you check the chart it doesn't list police related as one of the categories, so I'm going to assume no: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/expanded_homicide_data_table_10_murder_circumstances_by_relationship_2015.xls

Which means that there were 965 police related shootings in a total of 16,661 deaths (murder + police shootings). That is roughly 5.8% of homicides, so that number is likely low on that racist chart!

Someone can correct me if I made a mistake in the data somewhere!

I linked a lot of police shooting case numbers recently when I was debating the overblown case of cops killing excessively. I can't remember the exact numbers. I can probably pull them up off of GAF though if it interests you.
---

From that Ryan article

"We are all encouraging Donald Trump to quit the outrageous comments, to concentrate on unifying the party and talk about the issues that the American people are concerned about," McConnell said on Fox Business Network. "He needs to change and go in a different direction if he's going to win in November."

Oh Mitch, Mitch. Oh Summer 2016 Mitch. If only you knew.
---

Abraham Lincoln was arguably a racist even by the standards of his times. It's not like there weren't a huge number of people who supported abolition way before he got around to it. He was just less racist than, like, other prominent white politicians in the same time period.
---

Sweet Summer Child Mitch
---

Wow, topic actually had some good come out of it.

Enormous props to Sheen for going all the way in on the block.

Big props to Jakyl for finally drawing the line.

Hopefully we can get a few more regular users to finally get it together and acknowledge that Corrik is not worth engaging and should not be responded to, and maybe we can eventually get him to leave in frustration.

These are the first steps, Reg. We can do better.
---

I'm not saying the statement makes him a racist alone, just that it's a racist leaning statement. It seems your standard is if there's no slur in there it's not racist which is kinda dumb

You've got enough of those in Trump's case that I can definitely say thinking he's racist has some basis in reality and isn't just being hateful even if I'm not entirely sure he is either.
---

Corrik posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Corrik posted...

Yeah, that statistic seems so mindboggling skewed that it likely was posted from racist origins. Just like the Muslim videos he reposted were of hate group origins also.

Which is why even sharing it indicates racism. Because you would look at that, and as a rational person, would say "there is no way in hell that black people were responsible for 80% of all homicide related deaths against white people". That's bonkers crazy, and the only way you even remotely entertain that notion is if you are racist and afraid of black people. There is no other way you would think that.

"Hey did you know Italians are responsible for 75% of all the arson in the US in a given year?" No one is going to believe a clearly false statistic like that unless you are biased against the group in question.

See, I kind of see where you are coming from on this. But, I also know people who are not racist who get in the same trap of sharing shit they think is legit news. I have told people that stupid Senate shit was wrong that gets shared constantly. And good the amount of Infowars stuff I see on my timeline is wild. I actually thought some of that shit was legit til I looked into it some.

In my experience, people share fake news when it is stuff they believe deep down.

You see liberals share (and believe) fake stuff about conservatives (and not fake news about a cause they supports). You see conservatives share (and believe) fake stuff about liberals (and not fake news about a cause they support). And you see racists share and believe fake stuff about other races. It's because that's what they want to believe.

Someone who believes in global warming isn't going to share a fake story debunking climate change because they'll actually look into it before sharing it. A conservative who supported Bush isn't going to share a fake story saying that Bush said this racist thing on a hot mic because, again, they'd look into it. That's why that particular post is so damning. Someone who isn't racist would know better, or look into it first.

People share fake news when it fits the narrative they want to believe. You are very rarely fooled by fake news that works against your beliefs, because you'll want to investigate that first.
---

What 68 unarmed civilians shot by police in 2017 in over 1.5 million volatile situations dealt with by the police a year.

It is no joke.
.0045% of the time a situation like this even occurs. And that is not counting times it is justified even then, such as a person attacking a cop without a weapon, etc.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-nationwide-police-fatal-shootings-2017-20180106-story.html

Officers fatally shot 94 unarmed people in 2015, but that number has been lower in the past two years, with 51 killed in 2016 and 68 in 2017.

There is like a 1 in 50,000 chance a cop could shoot an unarmed civilian. That includes people who attack cops while unarmed. Think about that.

We also have one of the highest crime rates of developed 1st world countries (behind basically just Mexico).

The problem is not top down. The problem is bottom up. And all the "fuck the police" mentality and such, that is originally harbored by criminals who dislike the police because of the threat they pose, that the general populace has picked up on has only exacerbated the problem. We are respecting and complying with cops less and less as a society and making their job just that much harder and harder to do.

If the populace was less violent, you would have less cases of this even happening at all.
---

Corrik posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Its also accidentally anti-police if you think about it

In the attempt to illustrate that police kill more whites than blacks, apparently 3% of all white people killed in a year were at the hands of law enforcement.

Thats a problem!

Out of curiosity I checked.

The total number of police related shooting deaths in 2015 was 965 (through December 24 of that year, but eh lets just assume no one was shot and killed that final week): https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/12/26/a-year-of-reckoning-police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.bd8f2db64c8b

The total number of all homicides was 15,696 (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/murder).

I do not believe police related homicides are in there, because that is just "murder". If you check the chart it doesn't list police related as one of the categories, so I'm going to assume no: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/expanded_homicide_data_table_10_murder_circumstances_by_relationship_2015.xls

Which means that there were 965 police related shootings in a total of 16,661 deaths (murder + police shootings). That is roughly 5.8% of homicides, so that number is likely low on that racist chart!

Someone can correct me if I made a mistake in the data somewhere!

I linked a lot of police shooting case numbers recently when I was debating the overblown case of cops killing excessively. I can't remember the exact numbers. I can probably pull them up off of GAF though if it interests you.

Oh, I'm not saying any of these were unjustified. It was just "people killed by cops". I'm not assigning blame for any of them in that post.

That racist meme said "number of whites killed by cops was 3%" which, going by the actual statistics, is probably low! I just wanted to see what the actual numbers were.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

People share fake news when it fits the narrative they want to believe. You are very rarely fooled by fake news that works against your beliefs, because you'll want to investigate that first.

This is very true. I have been duped by fake news that told me something I wanted to believe before.
---

I guess you were moreso looking for total shootings instead of unarmed. I posted another one with all the information from blunt weapons, to handguns, and etc. Including by race. And also Including cops killed by criminals. I must have posted that one on Reset tho.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Corrik posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Its also accidentally anti-police if you think about it

In the attempt to illustrate that police kill more whites than blacks, apparently 3% of all white people killed in a year were at the hands of law enforcement.

Thats a problem!

Out of curiosity I checked.

The total number of police related shooting deaths in 2015 was 965 (through December 24 of that year, but eh lets just assume no one was shot and killed that final week): https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/12/26/a-year-of-reckoning-police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.bd8f2db64c8b

The total number of all homicides was 15,696 (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/murder).

I do not believe police related homicides are in there, because that is just "murder". If you check the chart it doesn't list police related as one of the categories, so I'm going to assume no: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/expanded_homicide_data_table_10_murder_circumstances_by_relationship_2015.xls

Which means that there were 965 police related shootings in a total of 16,661 deaths (murder + police shootings). That is roughly 5.8% of homicides, so that number is likely low on that racist chart!

Someone can correct me if I made a mistake in the data somewhere!

I linked a lot of police shooting case numbers recently when I was debating the overblown case of cops killing excessively. I can't remember the exact numbers. I can probably pull them up off of GAF though if it interests you.

Oh, I'm not saying any of these were unjustified. It was just "people killed by cops". I'm not assigning blame for any of them in that post.

That racist meme said "number of whites killed by cops was 3%" which, going by the actual statistics, is probably low! I just wanted to see what the actual numbers were.

The trap I sort of meant was. Let's say Infowars posts a bunch for articles you like. You reshare them. Then one comes up like this and you reshare it because you reshare all their other shit. That is the trap I mean.

Not saying this of course happened in this case here precisely.
---

I like how none of us really even went into the housing discrimination lawsuits.

Or pardoning Arpaio
---

Corrik posted...

I guess you were moreso looking for total shootings instead of unarmed. I posted another one with all the information from blunt weapons, to handguns, and etc. Including by race. And also Including cops killed by criminals. I must have posted that one on Reset tho.

Yep, total shootings. That wasn't meant to be a post about excessive force or unjustified police killings, because the vast majority of those were almost certainly justified. I was just curious because Jakyl said 3% seemed high and I wasn't sure if it was or not!
---

Lopen posted...

I'm not saying the statement makes him a racist alone, just that it's a racist leaning statement. It seems your standard is if there's no slur in there it's not racist which is kinda dumb

You've got enough of those in Trump's case that I can definitely say thinking he's racist has some basis in reality and isn't just being hateful even if I'm not entirely sure he is either.

There has to be no slur. Don't think that.

I am saying that there is a bunch of comments that you could apply as racist sure if you wanted to. But, I do not see any comments which have ever been definitively racist. And after 70 years if you can have recordings of him talking about females, I would think surely something exists at some point in his life. Someone would have trapped him by now.

Am I saying Trump is NOT a racist? Not really. I am saying he could be, but I see nothing definitive to label him as such. And that is a label I do not personally toss around a lot without definitive proof.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

People share fake news when it fits the narrative they want to believe. You are very rarely fooled by fake news that works against your beliefs, because you'll want to investigate that first.

This is very true. I have been duped by fake news that told me something I wanted to believe before.

I think that's pretty natural. "Oh this just sounds right!" - something like that you won't look into. That's why you have to be careful on sources, etc, so that you know you're following actual news and not just what you want to hear.

Which, again, is why I found sharing that racist meme so damning.
---

Corrik posted...

But, I do not see any comments which have ever been definitively racist.

ok, let's try again.

trump's comment about judge curiel not being able to handle his case fairly because of his heritage was definitively racist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrNvFD_lMIE" data-time="
---

So republicans might have closed the generic ballot but on an individual level?

https://www.politico.com/amp/story/2018/05/29/joe-manchin-patrick-morrisey-west-virginia-poll-610385

Ouch.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

So republicans might have closed the generic ballot but on an individual level?

https://www.politico.com/amp/story/2018/05/29/joe-manchin-patrick-morrisey-west-virginia-poll-610385

Ouch.

The first pool was +morrisey. Second +manchin.

Though Republicans have good pools in all but a few races.

Sherrod, Casey are def locks to get re-elected. McGaskill has a slight lead. Repubs have slight leads in most recent polls in quite a few states including Florida.

Manchin is prob a lock also on the recent poll.
---

Corrik posted...

I am saying that there is a bunch of comments that you could apply as racist sure if you wanted to. But, I do not see any comments which have ever been definitively racist. And after 70 years if you can have recordings of him talking about females, I would think surely something exists at some point in his life. Someone would have trapped him by now.

I actually agree with this that's why I am of the "he's probably racist but" mindset but there are more than enough racist leaning statements from the guy that it's totally reasonable to think he is
---