Future of Humanity Doesn't Look So Good

So for the sake of argument, I assume you're not trolling and I'll actually answer you. Fair enough?

So let's examine historical "facts" again?

1) Democrats are the ones who enabled black slavery. Democrats are the ones who seceded from the union b/c of slavery. This isn't an "opinion," but historical fact. The Confederacy was in fact, Democrat controlled states. The Ku Klux Klan was in fact formed by Democrats and to this day still Democrat controlled.

Factually again, it was the Republicans who abolished slavery at a great resistance from the Democrats. In fact, not only so, years later, it was again the Democrats who try to stop women suffrage and blacks civil rights movement. Again, blacks and women's right to vote was pursued and established by Republicans. These are not "disputable," but historical fact.

2) Republicans do not crack down on illegal immigration? Who are you referring to? If you're referring to the RINOs, they're called RINOs for a reason right? Republicans In Name Only. If these are who you are referring to, you are correct. As I've mentioned several times, I'm not a Republican. I've said on countless occasions about the truth behind the 2 party system, which is in reality a Demopublican oligarchy.

HENCE, why I supported Trump. Not because he is a Republican, but because he is not a politician. He destroyed the Republicans in the primary and then destroyed the Democrats in the final election. The Republicans are the ones who started the Russian dossier and started the "never Trumper" movement, which later carried on by the Democrats after Hillary's loss. If the Republicans and the Democrats hate him so much, that is a pretty big hint he is something different.

Now, that is the only way I think you could possibly meant b/c the otherwise is saying Republicans under Trump don't crack down on immigration, which then makes it a little strange to accept given the massive anti-Trump protests over the "zero-tolerance" immigration policy and the child/adult separation at the border, along with the building of the wall, wouldn't you say?

""(the Klan is) to this day still Democrat controlled." I don't believe that to be the case. If you have proof, I'd like to see it."

Why do you need me to do the work for you? Especially in these kind of talks, most people don't even trust the source of the person they're debating with. If I give you some source, will you accept it? Or question it? We have the internet these days to make it quite convenient to do research.

But the question is, what "year" do you consider modern? From the top of my head, is Senator Byrd considered more modern? White? Truman? Do you know there has been over a hundred KKK leaders since it's creation? But the only one when you ask people that they know about is David Duke b/c of modern widespread media? So out of a hundred of KKK leaders who were Democrats, there's this 1 Republican KKK leader and suddenly KKK belongs to the Republicans?

Furthermore, if you look up Duke, you'll know he has been part of 5-6 political parties in his lifetime including Democrats. His affiliation is not exactly credible. But perhaps what is the most unknown to people? While the media covered stories of David Duke's endorsement of Trump in 2016, none of them covered how the grand wizard of the Knights of the White Dragon, a Southern California KKK chapter, endorsed Hillary Clinton.

"I don't deny that the Democrat Party supported openly racist policies in the past, but I don't believe they still do today."

What do you think of their "Taco Bowl" campaign? Or the fact they lump all minorities together? Isn't that call "profiling?" They say that all minorities support Democrats? Well, I'm a minority of Asian decent, I do not support Democrats. Where is my voice? They profiled "illegals" as all Latin Hispanics? Yet there are plenty of legal Hispanics working and living in America. Isn't that racist to insinuate? Isn't it racist to profile "white" people? Bias towards or against any racial group is racist, correct?

"As far as RINOs, it seems convenient to simply label them"

That is the IRONY. If you really are a "liberal," why aren't you separating the DINO from the Democrats? RINO meaning these people claim to be Republicans, but they do not really support the Republican agenda. Correct? It is not unreasonable to say today the Democrats are split into 2 sides, the traditional Democrats and the new socialist Democrats. So which one do you belong to? or you will support anything that labels themselves Democrats?

#2

The reason I was never interested in politics before was because Democrats and Republicans were more or less the same. They're the two sides of the same coin. There weren't that much distinction.

If you're a real liberal and/or Democrat, you support the working class, yes? You would NEVER support a candidate that mocks the working class as deplorables. You would NEVER support a political party that mocks working class as white uneducated rednecks. etc.. etc.. Right?

"I was referring to people like Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, and other Republicans who have supported amnesty and other policies that aren't very tough on illegals."

Dude, I hate Rubio. I hate Ryan. I hate Cruz. I hate Bush. But not because they're RINOs, but because I'm not a Republican and I generally just hate politicians. This is what I find most hilarious about a lot of liberals. They still only see 2 sides. They think anyone who doesn't support them must be conservatives, Republicans, etc... This is why they absolutely refuse to engage and converse. It is all about being triggered, reading someone of opposing view? Oh that must be some "cons" "Trumpster" etc..etc... This is why they lost and why they will keep losing b/c they can't accept the truth, the "independents" elected Trump. And if you're going to win support back to your party, you need to win back the independents. Attacking them as the oppositions is not going to win them back, it just keep pushing them away.

Try to see the point of view of someone like me. I ask, "Why should I vote Democrat?" And the only answer I've been getting? Are either 1) Trump is a racist! or 2) You're a racist!

Why? Why would I want to support Democrats? They're not doing anything to reason with me, to win me over. If anything, I've gotten it many many times, "Go vote Trump, we don't want your votes. You're a racist. You're a Deplorable."

Honestly, are you part of that group? If not, perhaps it is time you either change your political affiliations or try to fight for your group from being taken over by these people.

#3

"But different doesn't necessarily mean better. "

True, example would be Jimmy Carter. But an even more modern example would be Obama, right? Try to see it apolitically. He was elected b/c people were tired of the politicians, both the old Democrat/Republicans. Here's a fresh "young" junior senator, who just happened to also be part black, etc... completely different from anything before, so the people overwhelmingly voted for him.

Now, let's skip the Rep/Dem arguments over Obama. But we do accept factually, Obama did "not" satisfy the America's need for something different, right? Even the liberals admit that "Trump tapped into American's anger at the political system." So we can at least agree, Obama did not give Americans that voted for him what they wanted.

So yes, change can be dangerous.

Let me tell you why I voted for Trump. One of the difference between him and Obama is that majority of the media endorsed Obama while majority of the media attacked Trump. That alone speaks volumes. I do not trust the media, long before the election. Never did, never will. I majored in communications before dropping out realizing what it really is. Media is about "selling" and nothing sells more than outrage. Everything is 1/2 truth, manipulated quotes, biased stories. It is a very dishonest industry.

But the 2nd thing from that is, Obama was elected with ease. Everything was based on words. Trump faced criticism from the media from the getgo. They attacked him fiercely more than any other candidate in history. Yet, he persevered. He didn't quit. He took it all and fought back and he actually won. That speaks volumes. He literally "won" his presidency and I don't just mean the electoral process.

But yes, I had my doubts. I don't trust people in general. He made a lot of promises during his campaign and I'm well aware of people who say things that people's ears itch to hear. And even if he was convicted to his promises, I had spoken then that he is still just human and human beings inevitably cave in to social peer pressure, etc...

But so far I'm quite impressed with him. He has done much against the ongoing criticism of his enemies. He dealt with foreign issues without care of the public opinion. And he continues to follow through his campaign message.

#4

When he was first elected, in the first 2-3 months, the left were mocking him "well, why hasn't he locked up Hillary? Where is that wall?" I mean, seriously, is that really fair? We really expect all that to be done in months? Presidents are given 4 yrs, 8 at most. The left's continuous "unfair" criticism of him tells me I voted correct. This is yet another thing the left doesn't see. Everything they're doing is actually pushing voters away from them.

But I digress and I posted a lot. If people are willing to converse, I'm more than happy to converse. If I have treated you unfairly earlier, I apologize. I too can be biased and I faced a lot of rotten liberals before, perhaps I too jumped a gun a bit to assume you were just trolling.