What does it have to do with plausible? You're saying that he's racist for doing something even though it could be perceived as racist, whereas originally you were saying he was racist because he was wrong and just assumed it would be terrible because it's a black congressman. Those are very different arguments.
The whole reason I got involved in this was because you were saying he only called it crime-infested because he was retaliating against a black congressman and using incorrect statistics, whereas my point was that he's repeatedly talked about inner cities being crime infested and that if you look at the actual statistics for the county, as well as the census reports, you'll see that that descriptor is not inaccurate beyond being the usual hyperbole Trump uses in every sentence.
whereas my point was that he's repeatedly talked about inner cities being crime infested
Well he already had a history of making that a race issue well before this occurred. Shown by the link I provided which mentioned the connection that people had already made over 3 months ago.
And the point wasn't that he was racist because he was wrong. It was that
because it was a black man that he was attacking, he fell back on a narrative that he'd previously and repeatedly used with racial connections, regardless of whether that had anything to do with the facts. If there was a
single incident where he critiques a white opponent using the same logic as this then you might have a point. But the fact is so far he had a reputation for making a connection between inner-city decay and
black people, continuously. so when he makes a connection between a
black leader and inner-city decay, then it's takes a bit of stretching
not to see that as the same race connection he constantly made during the election.
And the point you made that he "didn't care about the rebukes" he'd received for connecting black people to urban decay: Whether he "cared" is irrelevant. His connection between "inner city" and "black crime" in his speeches was well known and widely talked about. So he knew people were picking up on it.
So when he launches a personal tirade against a black leader using the exact same language, it's not believable to say that the race of the person he was attacking never entered his mind when writing that. He would at least have had to be aware of how other people would make those connections about what he wrote.
You know, just google "trump inner city" and 10/10 links on the first page are about Trump equating urban decay with black people or talking to black people about it. Basically any time he mentioned "inner city" in a speech, he mentioned black people within the next 1-2 sentences.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/trump-african-american-inner-city/503744/https://www.thenation.com/article/donald-trumps-imaginary-inner-cities/
Author
Topic: Doc Helgoland's Asylum for the Politically American: T+0 (Read 1427291 times)