Grumps

I agree with EVERYTHING you just said. What does that have to do with homer's comment?

And to you, that is the only alternative, right?

I sincerely appreciate your willingness to say that, and I apologize for being offensive. I see this situation not as an US vs. THEM, but as a THEM vs. THEM. I don't relate to white supremacists (or even white southern heritage supporters) and I don't relate to opposition groups who think that confronting the idiots in that format is a good idea. I understand that growing up in the majority makes it very hard-to-impossible for me to understand why you feel disrespected by my feelings. I pray that I can learn to see things more from your perspective. Like you, I think that people usually have an agenda.

If you don't specifically and exclusively denounce white supremacists then you are not going to get far in this thread.

Classy!

I don't mind that you think I am not being serious, but just assume for a minute that I AM serious. Maybe you could learn something by trying to understand instead of criticize. Maybe I am not the only person here who thinks different from you and WANTS to understand and be understood. For example, I don't believe those guys are really Nazis and probably not even white supremacists. I think they are that smart or motivated. I think they are pathetic little trolls who feel most important when they make people angry. I admit that I may be underestimating them and that doing so would minimize the importance of their actions and the actions of the counter-protesters.

Absolutely I think he could have handled the situation better, but I (seriously) don't automatically assume "moral equivalency" when I hear two people/groups being denounced. If a 12 year old and a 3 year old are arguing and their Dad says to them both that their behavior is unacceptable, I don't see that as saying that both children are equally responsible. Some of my inability to understand as you all do is that I don't think that the white supremacists matter at all. I don't think they are a powerful group who are trying to get more powerful and take over the country. I think these guys mostly live in their mothers' basements and love to feel important by making other people angry. I could easily see dismissing them as pathetic little nothings. If we as a country had ignored them then I think they would have gone back to their basements for more video games. NOW they feel important, but it is not because of Trump.

Apparently these are the HORRIBLE words Trump said: Trump said. “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. On many sides.” So, "on many sides" is the offensive part? Who were the white supremacist fighting with? Whoever they were, they also had helmets and clubs and shields. The white supremacists SHOULD be condemned, but why should the white supremacists be the only group to be condemned for violence? Anyway, I can just add this to the many things these days that make me shake my head.

I find it fascinating that Trump got bashed so bad for his Saturday comments. Maybe it is because I am very literal, but when you have multiple groups at odds with other with hate and violence, I don't see why it is inappropriate to lump them all together. I think that the right calling out Obama for not saying "radical Islamic terrorism" was pretty lame, when he was condemning their actions. Similarly, I find it lame to bash Trump for calling out all hate and bigotry. It is bizarre to make the leap that Trump didn't specifically condemn white supremacists because he either is one or because he doesn't want to tick them off.

Trump obviously handled it poorly, but what we KNOW is that he denounced hatred and bigotry and today denounced the white supremacist portion of the crowd. But there WERE fist fights. There WERE two different groups with shields and sticks. Today Trump denounced the half that will get the media off his back. Now maybe everyone will be happy, but I doubt it. Next we will hear what else Trump should have said and didn't, or didn't say fast enough.

Can you explain which part of this quote is displaying support for white supremacy? "We ALL must be united & condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. Lets come together as one!" I am sure it is there, I just keep missing it!

So are you saying that you know when the car was driven into the crowd and when the driver's identity was known and when the motives of the driver were known? Do you know when the deceased family was contacted? Do you know what all groups were represented at the riot? Do you think it is wise to single out a group known to be involved and not mention any of the others. I don't know the sequence of events so I don't know what else he needed? Do you? I just think that getting the needed information before making a statement is the wiser option. Why is that hard to understand? I don't like Trump as president, but that doesn't mean I should assume that EVERYTHING he does is stupid.

There is always the possibility that he wanted to have good information about this topic before he made a statement. It is amazing what all Trump is claimed to have meant by not saying what everyone wanted to hear.

Obviously, I don't know what Trump is thinking, but in the video footage I saw, there were two groups of protesters fighting against each other. People on both sides had sticks and helmets and shields. Were there ANY good guys in there fighting? It seems short-sighted to call out only one side in a fight with two groups of hate-filled law-breaking hoodlums.

I apologize if I am incorrect. I assumed that your title was implying that Trump as POTUS was making white supremacists feel empowered to be vocal with their racist views. Based on that assumption, I used similar reasoning to imply that Obama as POTUS was making black cop haters feel empowered to be vocal with their racist views. Please explain all (or some) of my errors.