[consteval]

This is, largely, because a lot of republicans have a difficult time expressing their views without using tools like racism and misogyny.

Just take a look at the Trump rallies. Even if you agree with 100% of Trump's policies, look at how he talks about women. Could you repeat what he says in the workplace? No, you'd get fired. Not for being republican, but for sexual harassment.

If you were able to support anti-immigration policies without calling entire classes of people "garbage", then maybe people wouldn't get mad at you. But for a lot of republicans, they just can't do that. They don't know how to word their policy support without saying something incredibly offensive.

Or, for example, it's one thing if you're pro-life. But a lot of republicans will use words like "slut" and "whore", and even President Trump wants to "punish women". Again, this just isn't acceptable speech in most social situations.

Until your average republican and, hell, our president, figure out how to address these topics without being offensive, people will get offended.

[cynicalpeace]

This is basically all TDS.

Does my Colombian immigrant wife somehow hate immigrants and women because she thinks Trump would be better than Kamala?

[consteval]

Of course she doesn't. But, can she express that without saying it in a way that says "I hate immigrants"?

This is what I'm pointing out. Having republican beliefs is fine. Can republicans voice those beliefs without bigotry? Often no. For Trump, certainly not. For many, they can't either.

If you just say "Trump addresses immigrant better", then okay. If you say "they're eating the dogs, they're eating the cats, we have to clean up our country" then... yeah you're getting pulled into HR.

[cynicalpeace]

I have never heard Trump say he hates immigrants. His wife is literally an immigrant. Do you actually believe he hates immigrants?

Actually hating immigrants and being politically (and sometimes factually) incorrect are two different things. The latter is forgivable.

[consteval]

Calling people criminals, dangerous, insinuating they eat house pets, etc, counts.

Just like you don't need to say "I hate women" to be a misogynist, you don't need to say "I hate immigrants" to send that message. You just don't.

Also I don't care about Melania. "I have a black friend" type arguments are shallow and worthless.

[valval]

Why does this not lead you to believe that he dislikes immigrants who are criminal, dangerous, or eat house pets? Why do you think it represents his attitudes towards all immigrants?

In reality, when Trump talks about immigrants he talks about illegal and problematic individuals. On top of that, he also talks about not immigrants a lot.

[sanderjd]

It's essentially the first thing he said when he kicked off his campaign in 2015.

[kthielen]

For some reason you're willing to drop the context.

He's talking about people coming through the border without being vetted, who are dangerous to the country.

Do you think that people should be able to come into the country freely without any vetting at all?

He was pointing out a specific problem, maybe your imagination turned that into the much more general "all immigrants are bad" when he's never actually said or suggested anything of the kind?

[cynicalpeace]

> It's essentially

So he didn't say it.

[sanderjd]

This may be news to you, but human language is often nuanced and indirect. It is a perfectly reasonable short-hand to say that he hates immigrants when his political career was launched on painting them as criminals, drug dealers, and rapists.

This kind of "but he didn't actually say the word hate" pedantry is unconvincing.

[kthielen]

> If you say "they're eating the dogs, they're eating the cats, we have to clean up our country" then... yeah you're getting pulled into HR.

Trump was just repeating the same thing that many other people heard, a resident at a town council meeting in Springfield, Ohio claimed that some group of migrants there had eaten someone's pets.

Was it true? Who knows? People tend to repeat a lot of things they hear but haven't verified themselves. For example in that same debate, David Muir falsely repeated the lie that crime was down nationally. Do we take David Muir to HR?

That kind of obvious logical inconsistency, coupled with the assumption of moral authority (which for whatever reason seems to be the subtext for so many of these conversations), rubs a lot of people the wrong way.

[consteval]

> Trump was just repeating...

So then Trump didn't do his own research and will pretty much just believe anything? Wow, it sounds like you think Trump is an idiot.

I don't understand this line of thinking from conservatives. When Trump is criticized on the things he himself has said people will argue we shouldn't listen to Trump, because he is stupid and he lies. So he's stupid and he lies... and yet you support him?

Either he is a strong leader, in which case we should take what he says at face value, or he is a fraudster, in which case we should expect misinformation. You can't have both. Talking down about the person you support reflects very poorly on you.

> David Muir falsely repeated the lie that crime was down nationally

Crime IS down nationally.

And you understand this isn't the type of thing that would get you fired from a job?

While people on the left may often be wrong, they aren't wrong in a way that can be interpreted as racism, sexism, or homophobia. This won't get you sent to HR - and that's the difference.

Conservatives have a really hard time supporting their position without using tools which are unacceptable in professional environment. If you don't support immigration, then great! Now defend that without racist rhetoric. Trump can't do it, so if that's your role model then you better find someone else.

[idunnoman1222]

the men in your life are dishonest with you. You will never know what people really think (and no one will be able to explain why to you because you won’t hear them)

[consteval]

I absolutely hear them, but they're incapable of voicing their beliefs without bigotry.

You can say, for example, that there are challenges to gender-neutral bathrooms. Okay that's fine. You can't say "those dirty pervy <slurs> are molesting our little girls!". Do you see how that's now bigotry?

How many republicans are able to do 1 without ever touching 2? Very, very few. Certainly Trump can't, and Cruz can't either. If those are your role models then it's no wonder you can't express your beliefs.