President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

The Black Lives Matter crusade against the police continued to cost lives and destroy civil peace in 2016.

What if it's true?

This is a big problem with liberals. Even things that are true, they will argue are "racist" and not worthy of discussion. Which often means we can't get to the root of the problem, because agreeing to what the problem is, is impossible.

 

Name one who you think can.

 

She could, you know, offer some evidence that goes beyond the vaguely circumstantial and the "neener, neener, dumb liberals are lying" argument.

 

What I have seen of the "other" side of the BLM movement is to paint the BLM protesters as violent, racist cop-killers.

Meanwhile, the anti-BLM folks don't seem to have any criticism for police who actually can be seen shooting people running away from them or holding a toy gun or any number of circumstances that land the officers in court or jail.

 

Evidence? The plebs in flyover country are supposed to listen to their betters, not ask for actual proof. Now that you mention it, that does sound a bit like East Coast elitist bias...

 

Nobody has posted anything that shows a lack of familiarity with their work. Once again, YF is trying to build an argument around evidence that does not exist.

Edit: I posted that before I saw that he decided to narrow it down and attack me on this one, but the point stands. Will somebody please explain the concept of evidence to YF? He clearly needs the help and I'm tired of trying to educate him.

 

By the way, YF, the one (1) source that woman cites in support of her "Ferguson effect" theory, doesn't actually support her theory at all.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/249895.pdf

Not only does he say the "Ferguson effect" is near impossible to measure, he notes that it is made so because there are two distinct and equally plausible interpretations of what it even means.

 

LOL. OK OOP. I'm sure you've read and considered many City Journal articles.

(It's obvious you're unfamiliar with the Manhattan Institute and their publications. It's OK to admit it. I won't (can't) think any less of you.)

 

How is it obvious? You are so fond of crying when there isn't enough evidence in an article you don't like. Give us yours. Give us one post in which I wrote something inaccurate about it or asked a question that showed a lack of understanding.

Better yet, stop trying to distract the thread from the massive beating you are taking from all sides on this one. Nice try, but you fail, YF.

 

I think it's a bit early to speculate. Jimmy Carter had barely stepped foot in the Ga governor's mansion 1974. Two years later, he was elected. The fact that he failed as president is irrelevant to this discussion.
If Trump is as much of a disaster as his inadequate background suggests he could be, opportunity will knock. Agree on the general point that Dems have failed to develop a farm system.

 

If Trump shits the bed, any and all of them.

If he fulfills 70-percent of his campaign promises - particularly those aimed at blue-collar workers - then none of them.

 

I'm not sure YankeeFan has considered the prospects of Trump actually governing beyond, "BUT HILLARY/LIBS!!!!/DEMS!!!"