There is nothing wrong with speculating. But the notion that Trump is racist is an alternative fact, an anti-Trump smear that has been bandied around for quite some time, so much so that people have feared coming race wars and a Hitlerian future. These lies are going to get people killed.

You have “alternative facts” aka fictions. — Noah Te Stroete

Well, where do you get your facts from? CNN? MSNBC? Bloomberg? Huffpost? NYT? BBC? Young Turks? WashPost? Daily Beast? I must guessing here... can you append the list? Hoest question, I would be curious to learn.

It certainly seems you are firmly stuck in the TDS echo chamber. Would love to be surprised.

They have been marching and rallying for decades, as is their right. They were used as a bogeyman to smear Trump. — NOS4A2

You don't know what you're talking about.

(Do I even need to say that?)

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/02/20/hate-groups-white-power-supremacists-southern-poverty-law-center/2918416002/

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/white-supremacy-white-nationalism-entered-political-conversation/story?id=64998396

The El Paso shooter is not a fluke or an anomaly. He is part of a resurgence of white nationalist violence in the United States, a wave of killings that are themselves part of a very long history of political violence by American racists and white nationalists.

In the years after the Civil War, the Ku Klux Klan and other terrorist groups launched a wave of killings aimed at intimidating newly freed black people and restoring the antebellum racial order. Around the same time, an increase in immigration from East Asia and Mexico in the late 19th and early 20th centuries led to a wave of lynchings and mob violence targeting migrants, including large-scale race riots in Los Angeles in 1871 and in El Paso in 1916.

At various points in the 20th century, white supremacists reacted viciously against continued immigration from ethnic and religious minorities and tried to suppress movements for black civil rights by force. In 1963 alone, they assassinated NAACP field secretary Medgar Evers and killed four black girls in a bombing attack on the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama.

The 2015 attack on a black church in Charleston, South Carolina; the 2017 fatal car attack in Charlottesville, Virginia; the 2018 shooting at a synagogue in Pittsburgh; this weekend’s shooting in El Paso — these are not isolated incidents, but evidence that we are once again in the midst of a wave of white racial violence.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/8/6/20754828/el-paso-shooting-white-supremacy-rise

When Barack Obama took office in January 2009, white supremacists were fragmented and without charismatic leaders. That quickly changed with the arrival of Richard Spencer, Matt Heimbach and Milo Yiannopoulos, a generation of new leaders who created and captured a following that capitalized on white unease over a black president.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/ten-years-later-the-gathering-storm-of-white-supremacist-terror-is-here

Okay. I can only infer what’s in his heart from what comes out of his mouth and from his policies. If we don’t infer the same thing based on the evidence, then I don’t find this communication productive. I sincerely hope there is no violence.

But the notion that Trump is racist is an alternative fact — NOS4A2

You don't know what you're talking about.

Trump's history of racism is well-documented and you know nothing about it.

Mostly MSNBC. I find them to be fair in their analysis of Trump.

Trump’s dad was KKK. — Noah Te Stroete

All the Evidence We Could Find About Fred Trump's Alleged Involvement with the KKK

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mvke38/all-the-evidence-we-could-find-about-fred-trumps-alleged-involvement-with-the-kkk

Mostly MSNBC. I find them to be fair in their analysis of Trump. — Noah Te Stroete

MSNBC is extremely biased.

I’ve read the same well-documented nonsense you have. But then I went further. You’re stacking the deck without telling the other side of the story.

"Claims such as '2500 of the worlds leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate' are disingenious. Giving the impression that the IPCC consensus means everyone agrees with everyone else (...) is unhelpful. It does not reflect the uncertain, exploratory and sometimes contested nature of scientific knowledge."

Mike Hulme, IPCC lead author

.... its all very simple and clear, isn´t it. — Nobeernolife

What's the source?

But then I went further. — NOS4A2

"...went further" because the facts you found failed to confirm your bias.

That’s not my impression. I think they state the seriousness of the situation at an appropriate level.

That’s not my impression. I think they state the seriousness of the situation at an appropriate level. — Noah Te Stroete

Impressions are deceiving.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/msnbc/
https://www.adfontesmedia.com/msnbc/?v=402f03a963ba

Something like this is probably the best we can do to out our biases.

"...went further" because the facts you found failed to confirm your bias.

Because I’m not as credulous as you. Would a racist endorse Jessie Jackson’s presidential campaign twice? Would a racist date a half-black woman? The man has done business with more races, more nationalities and more people of different backgrounds than you or I could ever imagine. You guys have promoted a fiction and elevated that fiction to truth.

These lies and the subsequent free press given to people like David Duke, the KKK and other white nationalists have directly contributed to any rise in the far-Right.

Would a racist endorse Jessie Jackson’s presidential campaign twice? — NOS4A2

You don't know what you're talking about.

Your view is void of psychological depth. Trump will do whatever benefits Trump. He is a master PR-man (his only gift) and you are his dupe.

"Trump never endorsed Jackson, at least according to Jackson.

“There is no evidence at all,” the longtime civil rights activist told The Daily Beast. “I think he promised to endorse David Dinkins [for mayor in 1988] and did not. He never promised to endorse me.”

Jackson ran twice for president, first in 1984 and then in 1988. The first time he did it as a matter of political activism. Jackson felt that black Americans could further their policy objectives if they were viewed as viable presidential candidates. The second time, he won nearly 7 million votes and 11 states in the Democratic primary, and spooked the party establishment. Virtually no white Democratic official backed his campaigns outside a youngish ex-mayor of Burlington, Vermont, named Bernie Sanders.

Though Jackson praised Trump in the late ’90s, he said he was wary of the man, owing to his demonization of the Central Park Five—the group of young black kids Trump wanted executed after they were wrongfully jailed for the near death of a Central Park jogger."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/jesse-jackson-donald-trump-endorsing-me-is-fake-news


The Rev. Jesse Jackson has condemned recent outbursts by President Donald Trump against lawmakers of color as "dangerous, divisive and diversionary" and says he believes they fuel white nationalist extremism.

In an interview, the longtime civil rights leader called Trump's vilification of African Americans an attempt to divert the nation's attention from its real problems, including Russian election interference, border detentions and a tax cut benefiting the richest Americans at the expense of the poor.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/ap-interview-jesse-jackson-slams-dangerous-trump-rhetoric-64753325

https://apnews.com/afs:Content:2601590439

Because I’m not as credulous as you. — NOS4A2

You are so credulous you're blinkered to how credulous you are.

Would a racist date a half-black woman? — NOS4A2

Yes, if he wanted to grab her pussy.

he man has done business with more races, more nationalities and more people of different backgrounds than you or I could ever imagine. — NOS4A2

Irrelevant. Trump's avarice may overrule his racist inclinations at times. Trump will do what benefits Trump.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/trump-racism-comments/588067/

I suppose the Atlantic is fake news too.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/

Now I get to watch as you scurry off to find anything that confirms your biases.

Now I get to watch as you scurry off to find anything that confirms your biases. — NOS4A2

In other words:

Trump good: Real news.
Trump bad: Fake news.

Suppose you were able to support the view that Trump isn't a racist.

It's incontestable that Trump is happy to deploy racism if it accords with his PR strategy.

Fake news?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/us/politics/trump-blacks-african-americans-girlfriend-charlottesville.html

Trump once dated a black woman who said Trump wasn't racist.

That's what you call evidence.

Just sad.

Your evidence is...what exactly?

Mostly MSNBC. — Noah Te Stroete

Yep, that figures.

I find them to be fair in their analysis of Trump. — Noah Te Stroete

LOL! You are not serious, are you???

Something like this is probably the best we can do to out our biases. — ZzzoneiroCosm

Whoever compiled that media bias chart is simply demonstrating his/her bias. CNN "neutral/skews left"? That is just ridiculous.

Eh. Like I said, it's about the best we can do. Laypersons have no way to access the facts directly.

Reading from a vast array of biased and unbiased sources can ease the dizzies.

1. Mike Hulme was not and is not a lead author for the IPCC. 2. That quote is taken out of context.

The IPCC collects research over various fields. Climate researchers are specialised in sub-fields. What Mike actually said can be found in this paper, which you should read in its entirety. All in all, Mike is quite positive about the work the IPCC has done. He's certainly not a climate skeptic so bringing him up is rather a laughable example of confirmation bias on your part. See: http://www.mikehulme.org/wp-content/uploads/the-five-lessons-of-climate-change.pdf

As I said. Stupid.