Donald Trump

Donald Trump's Nativist Campaign is Rallying Racist Supporters

The candidate's aggressive opposition to immigration is a big part of his appeal.

|

credit: Gage Skidmore / Foter / CC BY-SA

To the extent that Donald Trump's presidential campaign is about any actual issue, it is about opposition to immigration. Trump has, among other things, proposed deporting 11 million unauthorized immigrants currently in the United States, expressed support for reducing legal immigration levels, jeered at immigrant "anchor babies," and called for an end to birthright citizenship, even though it is constitutionally required.

Trump's slogan, the catchall phrase that binds his scattershot campaign together, is "Make This Country Great Again." In combination with his immigration platform, the clear implication of the slogan is that America has, over the years, become a not great place, and immigrants are at least one reason—perhaps the primary reason—why.

Nativism is at the core of Donald Trump's campaign; it is one of the keys to his appeal. And amongst his supporters and admirers, that aggressive nativism often shades into outright racism.

You can find these expressions of racism in quotes from Trump's supporters gathered by reporters following the candidate on the trail.

Here, for example, is what one 53-year-old Trump supporter from Alabama recently told The New York Times he hoped the candidate would say at a rally:

"Hopefully, he's going to sit there and say, 'When I become elected president, what we're going to do is we're going to make the border a vacation spot, it's going to cost you $25 for a permit, and then you get $50 for every confirmed kill,' " said Jim Sherota, 53, who works for a landscaping company. "That'd be one nice thing." 

This is, perhaps, not a statement that is meant to be taken entirely literally in its implied threat of violence. But given its proximity to a Trump rally, and the aggressive anti-immigrant sentiment in Trump's campaign, it seems fair to assume that it is meant to be taken seriously as a statement of undisguised hostility toward immigrants in the U.S.

In a separate indident, however, Trump's anti-immigration rhetoric was channeled into violence: In Boston last week, two brothers were arrested last week for urinating on and beating a homeless Mexican immigrant. According to the police report, one brother said that not only that they had targeted their victim because he was an illegal immigrant, but that "Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported."

Another reporter who covered Trump's Alabama rally, the Post's Dave Weigel (formerly of Reason) also shared this quote gathered from an interview with a white farmer in Alabama:

"You probably think we're prejudiced, but my whole life we had niggers work for us in the field. And they were niggers. My daddy called them niggers. I'm not ignorant. That's just the way I was raised. There's black people and there's niggers. You live around here, you know the difference."

Yes, one would probably think that the speaker of this quote is prejudiced.

Meanwhile, a video from Trump's Alabama rally appears—it is somewhat difficult to hear—to capture one of the attendees screaming "White power!"

Also at that Alabama rally, Weigel and another Washington Post reporter spoke to a 60-year-old woman visiting from California. Here's how she described her interest in Trump's candidacy:

"There is no more California," Burns said. "It's now international, lawless territory. Everything is up for grabs. Illegal aliens are murdering people there. People are being raped. Trump isn't lying about anything — the rest of the country just hasn't found out yet." 

[Update: Weigel notes on Twitter that Burns is black.]

This might not be a strictly, literally racist sentiment, but it is predicated on the same unfounded terror at the spread of immigrant crime found in Trump's own generalized fearmongering about the issue, and in specific ehoes the candidate's loud insistence that illegal immigrants from Mexico are criminals and rapists. In doing so, it reflects the essence of Trump's nativist sales pitch: America is not great, and the reason it is not great is because illegal immigrants are ruining it.

You can see this sentiment expressed more directly in a video showing an interaction between Univision reporter Jorge Ramos, who was booted from a Trump campaign event after forcefully pressing him on immigration. From the podium, Trump dismissed Ramos, saying, "Sit down, you weren't called. Go back to Univision."

Outside, a Trump supporter confronted Ramos even more bluntly. "It's not about you," he says to Ramos. "Get out of my country. Get out." He's also following Trump's lead, using language that, like Trump's "Go back to Univision" remark, is focused on ejecting Ramos. Watch:

It is true, of course, that all of these statements, several of which were previously gathered by Raw Story, come from individuals of no particular power or influence. It is hard to say precisely how representative they are of anything or anyone beyond themselves. They are anecdotes, not data.

But there are enough anecdotes to spot a possible trend. And what these anecdotes illustrate is Trump's obvious appeal to individuals with racist sympathies. That same appeal is on display in the multiple statements in favor of Trump by white nationalist leaders.

Former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke, for example, recently followed a radio-show rant about, as CNN describes it, "Jewish domination of the media," with kind words for Trump, saying that, amongst the GOP field, the businessman is "the best of the lot." In specific, Duke praised Trump's immigration proposals.

Duke isn't the only one. As Buzzfeed reports, multiple white nationalist leaders and writers have expressed support or admiration for Trump and his policies, with many focusing on his approach to immigration.

Trump said yesterday (as he has also said in the past) that he doesn't want Duke's endorsement, and it is obviously true that just because a political figure has attracted support from racists does not make that figure a racist himself.

Yet what is also clear is that Trump is running a campaign that, largely as a result of its hostility to immigrants, is attractive to individuals who openly harbor feelings of racial animosity. His platform and his policies, to the extent that they can be determined, have had the effect of rallying racists around his candidacy, and serve as an appeal to the racist mind.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

335 responses to “Donald Trump's Nativist Campaign is Rallying Racist Supporters

  1. OMG did you know that racists were going to vote for Goldwater?

    Really, this grows tiresome.

    1. It’s only going to get worse. Buckle up.

      1. I get that they want to chase the media zeitgeist and talk about Trump. Fine, whatever. But easily half of the diatribes about him, including this one, have fuck all to do with anything substantive, never mind libertarian.

        1. He sounds like Ron Paul to me:

          “Ron Paul wants border security now,” his new campaign ad asserts. “Physically secure the border. No amnesty. No welfare to illegal aliens. End birthright citizenship. No more student visas from terrorist nations.”
          Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2008/01/454…..GizXUL2.99

          Interesting that they didn’t write article after article trying to do anything they could think of to attack him every single day.

          Although to be fair I think the reason staff was busy making the “libertarian” case for Barack Obama back then.

          1. Actually it doesn’t. Paul is not calling Mexicans rapists or advocating silly notions of loading 11 million folks on buses and transporting them with their suitcases back to Mexico. Trump is a jerk who is playing and pandering to well meaning frustrated but unfortunately low information voters. I am not sure what his end game is and I half believe he started this and somehow just got caught up in it. He has not the temperament to be a President especially when he realizes he has to operate within the confines of the Constitution. He reminds of a character in a British film who purposely was set on trying to fail but everything tried succeeded. He has said and done things that would have crushed a typical candidate. He just keeps getting stronger. Yet in the end He will find a way to take himself out of it.

            1. Crazy,

              Rand is adopting most of Trumps immigration policy, but with a too-restrained approach. Since he isn’t switching over to that with real enthusiasm, and doesn’t bring it up on his own, he may loose some libertarian leaning Repubs without stealing any of Trumps support. If he can push the same enthusiastic strong border, along with the rest-including the anchor baby thing-can put him neck and neck with Trump-but he will need an acting coach.

              Also, for those suggesting anti-illegal immigrant folks are all racist isn’t true. Along with racist yahoos are many like me who are not racist, but simply not in approval of the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama policy of aggressive, proactive refugee resettlement, very lax enforcement on the borders, and lax or absent enforcement on visa overstays.

          2. Does Donald Trump want to end the war on drugs?
            Does Donald Trump want to get rid of the IRS?
            Does Donald Trump oppose pointless military exercises overseas?

            On the issue of immigration, Trump isn’t very different than Ron Paul. To imply those two are alike in any other aspect is fucking silly.

          3. Does Donald Trump want to end the war on drugs?
            Does Donald Trump want to get rid of the IRS?
            Does Donald Trump oppose pointless military exercises overseas?

            On the issue of immigration, Trump isn’t very different than Ron Paul. To imply those two are alike in any other aspect is fucking silly.

          4. Does Donald Trump want to end the war on drugs?
            Does Donald Trump want to get rid of the IRS?
            Does Donald Trump oppose pointless military exercises overseas?

            On the issue of immigration, Trump isn’t very different than Ron Paul. To imply those two are alike in any other aspect is fucking silly.

            1. One time would have been enough.

        2. …nor to do with honesty..

          Trump is ok with LEGAL immigration (that “big, beautiful door” on the wall?).

          It is ILLEGAL immigration that he has problems with, much as I do.

          Does reason.com share this inability to at least base their articles on a truthful premise?

    2. Hillary was a Goldwater Girl, so there’s that.

    3. Are supporters of Deez Nutz also racist? I certainly don’t want to vote for someone who has racist supporters….that is actually a huge concern for me. Is Jeb Bush racist? I was thinking he might be less racist than Deez Nutz, but not sure.

      1. Not sure about racist, but Deez Nuts are pretty adamant about stronger enforcement of dog leash laws and support the outlawing of certain types of bird feeders.

        1. Damnit, “Deez Nuts supporters” is what I meant.

    4. Yes, the racism grows tiresome.

      1. It certainly worked in Obama’s favor.

        1. Der only brown people are racists!

    5. Yes it does get tiresome but so does Trump’s incoherent xenophobic rhetoric. There is no talk of substantive issues with Trump. His typical rant is “I will be the greatest” “I am amazing” “Everyone else is a loser” “Did I tell you I am really rich?”, This is really tiresome.

      1. I’m enjoying the show. The system is fucked with Bush/Clinton?Sanders/Biden, so why not go down enjoying popcorn and a beer ?

    6. The last couple of weeks I was under the impression Fox News had bought out Reason. I couldn’t have been more wrong. It’s obvious to me now that Reason has gone over to the Socialist Party.

      But for Suderman to have to stoop to lies about Trump is just disgusting:

      “Yet what is also clear is that Trump is running a campaign that, largely as a result of its hostility to immigrants”

      Wrong Suderman! Trump is running a campaign that is hostile to people who break the law! Get your facts correct or go back to your coloring book.

    7. The trouble with you libertarians is your fatal attraction to rationality.

  2. This is, perhaps, not a statement that is meant to be taken entirely literally in its implied threat of violence.

    Or hopefully indicative of the mindless Trump supporter in general.

    1. Unpossible that this sort of statement could come from a Moby as well.

  3. “There is no more California,” Burns said. “It’s now international, lawless territory. Everything is up for grabs.”

    I want to go to there.

    1. I want to loot with you, baby. I smash, you grab.

      1. Finally, my big hands will be useful for something!

        1. Nikki’s Hands: They aren’t just for sex-choking no more!

    2. I call dibs on Catalina!

      1. Will your lawless Catalina-fiefdom be exporting delicious buffalo meat to the mainland?

        I would like to set up a trade agreement with you, with full knowledge that we will eventually stab each other in the back because lawlessness and immigrants.

      2. Sorry, Wrigley is reclaiming it from the Conservancy he created.
        It will be declared an independent state, so that the Cubs can have a safe place to hide from the withering scowl they receive each Fall from George Will.

    3. Illegal aliens are murdering people there. People are being raped.

      God damn it, I’m living in The Purge and nobody fucking told me?

      *cocks shotgun*

      It’s rapin’ an’ pillagin’ time!

    4. California is finally the kind of place I’d like to live! I guess all the progs moved to Colorado.

    5. When California turns into Somalia, who needs any more proof that the libertarian moment has arrived?

  4. Anyone seen my shocked face? I can’t find it anywhere..

  5. 400 posts? 500 posts?

  6. Outside, a Trump supporter confronted Ramos even more bluntly. “It’s not about you,” he says to Ramos. “Get out of my country. Get out.”

    People forget Ramos was one of the few journalists to actually confront in an interview the hated Obama on any issue in his presidency.

    1. Ramos is an activist, not a journalist. He is the face of those who whine and complain that there are some who don’t want open borders, he believes he has the right to cut in line ahead of everyone else who is following the rules and waiting, rights that go above and beyond anyone else. One picture here is that some think they have a right to be here, a right to bypass any law they deem troublesome, and that we have the obligation to accept this. I don’t have a “right” to go to and live in mexico, or any other country, I ask for permission. Trump gave a picture of his immigration plan, he had ramos deported from the room, then let him back in with permission. Ramos was rude and trump showed a lot of restraint dealing with him. I heard no question from ramos, just grandstanding.

      1. Right! Ramos is a slug. An anti American POS. this is the one time I actually cheered fro Trump. Ramos was rude and a jerk. Trump is a bigger jerk and Ramos wasn’t prepared for it.

  7. WHYCOME I CANT BUY NO BLACK AND WHITE TV NO MORE? I DONT LIKE ALL THOSE COLOREDS MIXIN THEMSELVES TOGETHER!

    1. WHYCOME I CANT BUY NO BLACK AND WHITE TV NO MORE?

      My 4th edition of the Yokel Style Guide says the word is spelled “caint”.

      1. BOOK LEARIN IS FOR FAGOTS

      2. Look at you, Mr. Fancy Jackal, with your fancy 4th edition.

        The first edition was good enough for Jesus and Moses, and durnit it’s good enough for us.

  8. “Hopefully, he’s going to sit there and say, ‘When I become elected president, what we’re going to do is we’re going to make the border a vacation spot, it’s going to cost you $25 for a permit, and then you get $50 for every confirmed kill,’ ” said Jim Sherota, 53, who works for a landscaping company. “That’d be one nice thing.”

    I don’t know if I can do my yellin’ yokel voice anymore. What’s the point, when even stupider yokels than the character really exist? I mean, no amount of WHYCOME MEXICAN FAGGOTS NOTSPEAK ENGLISH HUH??? can top this.

    1. Hey, I called it several days ago – make the border a free-fire zone, guys like this can go shoot them dirty Messkins, I can go shoot guys like this.

      1. Do people who go to the border to shoot Messkins need to wear an orange vest or something?

        If you’re a Mexican please don the Bright Yellow vests provided for your convenience.
        If you’re here to SHOOT Mexicans, please don the Bright Orange vests provided for your convenience.
        If you’re here to shoot the retarded inbred hicks here to shoot the Mexicans please don the desert cammo pattern vests provided for your convenience.

        1. I figure it’s like a shirts v skins situation.

  9. I do not want to defend Trump, but you are really going with charaterizong the Ramos incident as a racial thing? Ramos attempted to hijack Trump’s press conference to deliver a speech. It was a rude act of activism on Ramos’s part, not journalism.

    You should have enough to criticize Trump over without making this kind of reach of logic.

    1. He’s not really focusing on Trump in that incident; he’s focusing on Trump’s supporter, just like with all the other quotes. Trump’s supporter turned “go back to Univision” into something else.

      1. Bullshit.

        Univision reporter Jorge Ramos, who was booted from a Trump campaign event after forcefully pressing him on immigration.

        This is a deliberate mischaracterization of what happened. Ramos was booted from the event for thinking that he was more important than every other journalist there who also had questions for Trump and by proceeding to hijack the Q&A portion of his presser. After a cooling off period, Ramos was admitted back into the presser and allowed to have a five minute editorializing lecture with Trump that I’ve never seen any other journalist granted in any comparable presser ever.

        1. Such fiery First Amendment support from the libertarians today.

          1. Oh Tony, you do understand that simply asking for the basic decorum of waiting until one is called on to begin asking their questions is not some form of stifling the media, right? And the fact is that even after the incredible rudeness (not rude to Trump mind you, rude to his journalistic peers who are also entitled to ask questions of candidates) of demanding his voice be heard first and foremost, Ramos was later allowed back into the presser and given carte blanche to enter into his speech/attack for a full five minutes.

            But you’re just being typically dishonest as always because you believe your lies in service of tearing down a perceived bigot are more important than factual reality.

            1. Hm, I was under the impression that there was no politeness clause to the First Amendment. Jesus, just genuflect to your dear leader already, liberty lover.

              The significant factor is not whether we can pedantically squirm out of this being a racial thing, it’s whether Trump will destroy the Republican party forever, and how soon.

              1. What race is Ramos?

                1. He is from Uranus.

              2. Nor is there any clause in the first amendment requiring a person to answer any questions whatsoever. A candidate can choose not to engage the media whatsoever (in fact, your BFF Hilary is using precisely that strategy). That’s not acting as a form of prior restraint, which would be an actual first amendment violation.

                Of course, you might have known that or you just are stupid.

                1. If someone did that to Hillary Clinton you’d jizz yourself. Fucking manners police, really? This is about perception.

                  And Libertymike, Jorge Ramos is whatever race the guy who told him to go back to his country outside of the presser room thinks he is, that’s what’s relevant.

              3. Trump is on his way to do exactly that .. The Ramos thing was the funny meeting of 2 egomaniacal leftist jerks. make no mistake Trump is a progressive. The party is doomed with 2 corrupt losers running both Houses Trump clearing the way for a Hillary victory. We are doomed. Hell Trump will make Joe the retarded ex-Senator look like a political/ diplomatic sage. One last time… we are doomed!

              4. Its Tony, the whiny, control freak, fucktard on his retard soap box again. Hey Tony, did you break the other soap box by standing on it because your empty head got too big? Idiot, go finger yourself over at the Huffpo, you statist piece of shit. I don’t like Donald Trump but I am glad he made you piss you in your retard tracksuit, fucking bottom feeder.

                1. I’m glad you could take a break from fucking your cousin to say that. I’ll take a look at that head thing.

    2. I think any of Trump’s supporters like him for these typr of reasons and not necessarily for policy.

      People have had so much PC shit crammed down their throats from the Democrats and liberals they are sick of it.

      The rape culture, men in womens bathrooms, anti illegal immigration you’re a racist, war on women, if you don’t want to call a man in a dress she your a bigot and the list goes on.

      I think Trump support is just the backlash.

      People are tired of being called insulting names and having their motives impuned by the proggs and Trump is the pendelum swinging back.

      1. People are tired of being called insulting names and having their motives impuned

        That’s what trans people are saying.

        1. But when you make such an open display of your mental illness, and expecting everyone to act like it isn’t that, instead of seeking a cure, you should expect it.

          1. Is it a mental illness according to psychiatric consensus?

      2. Progs like Suderman, who is wrong in at least half of his statements.

    3. gasp! Now that you mention it, he didn’t call on any black journalists. See? Proof positive he’s a racist. And asians, he didn’t call on any asians…..and only a few women….it gets even worst.

      That’s a pretty good leap, maybe reason will do an article on how he only called on whites and mostly men.

  10. Weigel said so? was it on the internet too?

  11. Trump is great.

  12. Snowden attracts some of that Trump Luv

    Trump discussed Snowden’s disappearance and said that spies “in the old days used to be executed.” He said that authorities needed to find Snowden, arguing that the NSA leaker could provide other governments with classified information about U.S. surveillance programs.

    “This guy is a bad guy,” Trump said. “You know there is still a thing called execution. You really have thousands of people with access to the kind of material like this. We’re not going to have a country any longer.”

    1. I’m glad Trump is here to tell us that we still have the option of execution. He’s very informative that way.

    2. Maybe he’s pandering for the neo con vote.

  13. Of the 62% of people living in America that are White, I’m impressed at how many are so racist and callous towards other people.

    The poor latinos that come here are reacting to natural human instinct. They are trying to find a better life because the wealthy and the elites of their home country can give too shits about them.

    If elected President, Donald should start with taking down the Statue of Liberty.

    The Fact is, Immigration Department wasn’t established until people of colour started coming to America.

    As a progressive-leaning libertarian, I can’t help be seeing the Red-States America as one great big Alabama.

    There’s a Jew that maintains my lawn. Not only does he support Trump, he proudly owns a Confederate Flag…Ain’t that America.

    1. As a progressive-leaning libertarian, I can’t help be seeing the Red-States America as one great big Alabama.

      Give me a fucking break. Do you even live in the South? I live here and I’ve lived all over. There’s racist dumbasses all over, of every creed and color. A dumbass with a megaphone is attracting some of them. This article is non-news.

      1. I love that Trump is winning in New Hampshire and this article has a quote from a woman in California and this poster concluded the southerners are the only problem.

      2. I live in NYC and pretty much consider the rest of the red-state country (especially the South) one Great Big Mississippi.

        But I’m just being silly.

        Look, Donald trump, an apparent racist lives in my City. So I can’t fight you on this.

        1. I live in NYC

          So, you admit to living in Deep Blue territory and apparently you never leave the confines of Manhattan. Why should anyone take you or anyone like you seriously?

          1. This guy feels more like a constructed character than a genuine commenter, Restoras, so it’s probably best NOT to take him seriously.

            1. Well said. Besides, its use of the word ‘silly’ makes me think it’s a Bosock.

              1. The claim that the only reason anyone can be against unchecked illegal immigration sounds more like the Tony

            2. I live in NYC and pretty much consider the rest of the red-state country (especially the South) one Great Big Mississippi.

              Has to be a troll, as this is a perfect caricature of a blue-stater.

            3. From an article I read, “”Now let’s get back to Jorge Ramos. The blue-eyed, light-skinned Ramos — let’s be candid he is a European Mexican…”

              I bet his accent is fake.

              1. Born in Mexico City, but whatevs, OK sure, his accent is fake.

        2. “But I’m just being silly.”

          ignorant is a more apt description

        3. When I read rubbish like this I am struck that someone would take the time to write this. I travel to NYC monthly and quite frankly the place sucks. Interestingly enough New Yorkers love the filth, the smell of garbage, the influx of panhandlers, the unmanaged crowds the traffic and leftist politics that elected a commie mayor.

    2. Of the 62% of people living in America that are White, I’m impressed at how many are so racist and callous towards other people.

      Of the 62% 100% of people living in America on Earth that are White, I’m impressed at how many are so racist and callous towards other people.

      Incidentally, Mexico has far stricter rules regarding immigrants than we do, so…

      The Fact is, Immigration Department wasn’t established until people of colour started coming to America.

      Yeah, America had no immigration laws before the 70’s and there certainly weren’t any non-whites immigrating before then.

      1. Yeah, America had no immigration laws before the 70’s and there certainly weren’t any non-whites immigrating before then.

        Itchy Puss (having trouble typing that with a straight face) overstated it, but many of the first very restrictive immigration laws the federal government passed were directly in response to Chinese and other immigration from Asia, as well as the ‘swarthier’ and most dastardly southern and eastern European races: the Page Act, the Alien Contract Labor Laws, the Chinese Exclusion Act (most famously).

        So, there’s something to the argument that the flood of labor from these places did prompt the federal government to interfere more in immigration.

        1. Was it due to the color of their skin or the flood of labor ?

        2. I’m pretty sure that was sarcasm?

      2. Can you imagine the screams of terror, if our Congress decided to paraphrase Mexico’s immigration laws into ours?
        No one born of non-native parents could own property, or ever become citizens?
        That would be worth the price of admission.

    3. The Fact is, Immigration Department wasn’t established until people of colour started coming to America.

      And here I thought most of the black people came to this country long before any kind of immigration laws.

    4. They are trying to find a better life because the wealthy and the elites of their home country can give too shits about them.

      Whereas in this country, the amount of “shits” they are given by the elites is determined by how useful they are deemed.

      As a progressive-leaning libertarian

      Words have meaning. Progressivism is completely antithetical to libertarianism in that they see government action in two different ways.

    5. Well Mr. Libertarian leaner.how many of those 62% whites are racists ? Have you ever though that they are reacting to natural human instincts also ? Probably not. huh ?

      How many of La Raza’a members are racist.? Do you know that La Raza means “The Race” ?

      Nation of Islam racists much ?

      If you can’t help be seeing Red States America as racists I can’t help be seeing you as a racist yourself.

      You don’t lean Libertarian. You’re full blown proggie.

      .

    6. Hey, Itchy Puss – I’m told that a vinegar douche is good for what ails you.

      1. I was gonna suggest Vagisil.

    7. “As a progressive-leaning libertarian, I can’t help be seeing the Red-States America as one great big Alabama.”

      This is why I read the comments here. Where else can one have intelligent or humorous comments interspersed with NYC dwelling bigots ignorantly denigrating entire sections of the country and groups of people while simultaneously displaying massive ignorance about political affiliations?

  14. In a separate indident, however, Trump’s anti-immigration rhetoric was channeled into violence: In Boston last week, two brothers were arrested last week for urinating on and beating a homeless Mexican immigrant. According to the police report, one brother said that not only that they had targeted their victim because he was an illegal immigrant, but that “Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported.”

    How is this argument different from blaming Obama and his race-bating supporters for yesterday’s killing?

    1. “Are you trying to say that yesterday’s murder’s are not Obama’s fault?”

      signed typical red-state white guy.

      1. Then I’m sure you have a substantive explanation of why grrizzly is wrong. The substance of his argument was fairly clear – if you blame one politician for the acts of his supporters, it’s perfectly reasonable to apply that standard to others. Why is this premise wrong?

        1. The part that’s wrong is the part where that’s not what’s happening. The guys in Boston explicitly attributed their acts to Trump-related inspiration. The equivalent would be blaming the VT shooter for yesterday’s murders.

          1. That is some thin gruel there Nikki

            One might even say the worst.

      2. Hello, new terrible troll that misrepresents what people are saying. I’m Irish. What’s your name?

        1. “Buttplug”

          1. “Hey, Weigel”

    2. “How is this argument different”

      It made it through Suddreman’s finely tuned SJW filter while the racist murdering gay black journalist got caught up in it.

      1. Wait a minute, trump, who is white, kicked out an activist, who was mexican. The VT shooter was black and shot a white. I wonder it this guy was a trump supporter and just acted out on trumps hatred of reporters who are a different color. Interesting, maybe reason could do an article on that.

  15. “Nativism is at the core of Donald Trump’s campaign; it is one of the keys to his appeal. And amongst his supporters and admirers, that aggressive nativism often shades into outright racism.”

    Same with Obama.

    Or do you contend that yesterdays shooter, who supported Obama and called for a race war, is not a nativist or a racist?

    1. What a stupid equivalence to try and draw.

      1. I know, right?

        Suderman really should not be writing such stupid articles.

        1. Nonsense, he’s exactly the man for the job.

    2. Well definitely a racist anyway.

  16. “You probably think we’re prejudiced, but my whole life we had niggers work for us in the field. And they were niggers. My daddy called them niggers. I’m not ignorant. That’s just the way I was raised. There’s black people and there’s niggers. You live around here, you know the difference.”

    I DON’ TOL’ YA MY DADDY RAISED ME RIGHT. I CAIN’T TELL THE DIFERNC BETWIN A PROSTITUTE AND MY COUSIN MARY LOU, BUT I SURES KNOWS THE DIFERNC BETWEEN BLACKS AND NIGGERS, I TELS YA WHAT

    1. +1 Robert Byrd

    2. Such a perfect example of the line “You may think I’m X, but…” where they then proceed to show exactly why they are X.

    3. Anyone else think Ratfucker Weigle just made this quote up?

      Honestly it would be a kindness if he did. To seek out the most disgusting of supporter, ignoring all the rest, to use as THE example to frame your enemy is the epitome of a sewer-rat fuck fest….

      Oh wait one might say that about Suderman

      Gee sorry about that Suderman. I mean your article is the pinnacle of rigor and editorial restraint and totally does not read like it came from Salon.

    4. you mean yo cuzin and yo waaff.

  17. Personally, I’m getting a little worn out on the identity politics narratives polluting everything.

    You know, just like its stupid for a minority to chalk up every single bad thing that ever happens to them to racism, because bad things happen to everybody for a lot of reasons,

    its equally stupid to chalk up every single bad thing claimed by people who oppose open borders to racism, because sometimes immigrants do, indeed, do bad things.

    So, this statement:

    “There is no more California,” Burns said. “It’s now international, lawless territory. Everything is up for grabs. Illegal aliens are murdering people there. People are being raped. Trump isn’t lying about anything ? the rest of the country just hasn’t found out yet.”

    is absolutely not a “a strictly, literally racist sentiment.” Its not literally racist because nobody’s race is ever mentioned. Its not a racist statement at all, as far as I can tell. She may be wrong, but being wrong isn’t racist, even if you’re white. Just how wrong she is, is a subject for discussion. But calling her a racist should be out of bounds, on current evidence.

    I also am less than happy at the casual application of “race” to groups that are not. Its not racist to say means things about Mexicans, or Muslims, because these are a nationality or a religion, not a race.

    1. You do a great job of leveraging willful obtuseness and hair-splitting into some kind of argument.

      1. Go back to CBC

      2. I’d rather leverage willful obtuseness and hair-splitting than throw around casual accusations of racism.

        See, I like words to mean things, and l like for those meanings to be reasonably stable over time.

        You obviously differ. As is your privilege.

    2. Its not racist to say means things about Mexicans, or Muslims

      I think it’s obvious that it’s racist to say mean things about Mexicans if you’re just engaged in stereotyping. It’s not racist to say mean things about Muslims, but even I, who think Islam is horrible, also think you shouldn’t assume bad things about random individual Muslims since many of them don’t buy into a lot of the bullshit that makes Islam so awful generally.

      1. No, it is not racist to say mean things about Mexicans – even if one is just engaged in stereotyping. Where is the racial angle?

        You have a tendency to conflate bigotry against folks from a particular nation state with racism. You also have a tendency to conflate religious bigotry with racism.

        Mexicans are not composed of one race.

    3. Except for the fact that all of those claims are wrong–

      If these idiots were ever informed about how illegal immigrants are relatively more law-abiding and use less of the welfare state than citizens, do you think they’d change their minds? Do you think they’re remotely interested in learning such things?

      1. “…illegal immigrants…use less of the welfare state than citizens

        That’s a nonsense statement. National Review Online estimates one out of three US citizens are on welfare with up to 10% being on multitude programs. The US population in 2014 was 318.9 mil. One third is over 100 mil. According to DHS, the number of illegals in this country as of 2012 was 11.5 mil, so lets round up the number to 15 mil to help you out. If every illegal was on welfare then it would be only 15% illegals to legals on welfare. So in that regard you are right, however, your premise is wrong. You are only right by default. Besides, I bet the majority of illegal children are going through the public school system, that is a form of welfare.

        I don’t blame people for wanting to come here for a better life, I welcome them. But don’t believe you have a right to or that you can just come without any regard to the law. My wife is an immigrant, she obeyed the law to come here.

        1. I’m right by default? I’ll take it. The point is that illegal immigrants are younger than the American population on average, and so take fewer services, while still paying taxes. They actually buttress the welfare state. This argument is one that cannot be legitimately made. It is a lie.

          If your concern is spending public money on people, why then not focus on the citizens? Tell them to stop reproducing. Better yet, to die young. Something that actually addresses the issue you claim to care about.

      2. Except for the fact that all of those claims are wrong

        She may be wrong, but being wrong isn’t racist, even if you’re white.

        1. Hence my question. Do you think she’d change her mind if she were apprised of the facts?

  18. While Trump’s campaign might be attracting some fringe racist elements that were sucessfully sought out by Weigel, I don’t think it would be any harder to find extreme communists at a Sanders ralley or jihadist femminists at a Clinton confab. It would require the desire and effort to do so though.

    Crusing for clicks by implying rampant Republican racism sends out delicious social signals that get better coctail party invites than the others though.

    I’ve noticed that the Tony troll also considers anyone who opposes unfettered illegal immigration to do so entirely due to racism as well. I suppose he thinks that they would welcome 20 to 30 million non English speaking Caucasian Russians dropped on their doorstep.

    There is a story floating around the web today that the Chicago school system is struggling to educate 66,000 non English speaking students. I wonder how many of their parents contribute to the tax burden required by that and the negative effects it has on the quality of the taxpayers kids education ?

    Anyway, I guess anyone who considers things like that is just a racist.

    1. I don’t think it would be any harder to find extreme communists at a Sanders ralley or jihadist femminists at a Clinton confab.

      What if I think Trump, Clinton and Sanders all suck?

      1. I would shake your hand?

      2. What if I think your comment has no relevance to my post ?

      3. I think all three are in cahoots with one another.

    2. To be fair, the Chicago school system can;t educate English speakers either. It’s not like Spanish speaking immigrants just started coming here in the last 10 years or so and we don’t have enough Spanish-speaking educators yet.

      The Chicago school system is equal-opportunity incompetent.

  19. so the farmer giving the robert byrd speech is named byrd. what a coincidence. and weigel is writing about the same stuff other writers are. what a coincidence. do you have the memory of a small mouth bass Peter?

  20. Frankly, that Weigel supplied quote above smells awful truthy to me. I don’t suppose he has this person on video or there is any corroboration of it, is there?

    1. Is there some controversy in your mind that Trump has a strong racist following?

      1. In your mind everyone who disagrees with you is a racist.

      2. And Tony demonstrates perfectly what I was saying:

        Its a quote that fills out the narrative so well, it must be true.

  21. I was just informed that I could no longer laugh at the whole Tumpocolyps stuff. This is serious shit.

    I larfed.

  22. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.online-jobs9.com

  23. It’s definitely getting into “Spinal Tap” territory.

    1. This article is definitely getting into journolist territory as well.

  24. Someone was heard yelling white power at a Trump rally? Maybe it was a plant trying to make the other attendees look bad. That does happen, you know.

  25. you can find nutjobs supporters of every candidate. In the Bernie Sanders campaign, the candidate is one of the nutjobs. Hillary’s a criminal. Go find people willing to overlook that.

    Look at all the wackos who voted for Obama! One of them killed two people on live TV yesterday in a bit of racist rage. What does that tell you about his campaigns and what type of person it attracted? Or is Trump the only candidate responsible for the words and deeds of his supporters?

    1. Trump hatred gets clicks. That’s the only standard being applied here.

      1. But this is reason.

        A site for libertarians.

        There are no clicks to be had here. No one reads the damn thing. What this article is is Suderman employing click-bait gawker style journalism for no effect. In fact a negative effect. Every one of these artilces make’s me never want to donate to reason ever again.

        I honestly do not understand it.

        Maybe Suderman is trawling for a job at Buzzfeed. Who knows.

  26. So Donald Trump is responsible for the racism of his obviously-racist supporters. Might as well add David Duke to the ticket and go all in, amirite?

    1. I’m Latino, and I support Trump. Who am I racist against, again?

      1. David….it would seem to me most legal immigrants would support Trump. The people most being hurt by illegal immigration are legal immigrants. How many legal immigrants are being treated like illegals all of a sudden? Probably a lot. Drive 50 miles up the highway from TJ and there is a highway immigration stop. I get waved through (old white guy), but my guess is a legal Hispanic gets stopped over and over, and has to prove he is who he says he is.

      2. Something something… false consciousness… mumble mumble… self hating jew latino.

      3. I’m Latino, and I support Trump. Who am I racist against, again?

        Mexicans. Which are a race. Apparently.

      4. Self-hating Latino.

        You aren’t Jewish, are you?

  27. So, opposing illegal aliens coming across our borders is racist, is it? This is crude even for “Reason”. :-/

  28. I support Trump, and I’m Latino. Who am I supposed to be racist against, again? Can someone remind me? I’m fuzzy on that detail.

    1. You are allowed your 2-minute Hate against residents of the Malvinas.

      1. But those are Latinos too lol

      2. Those Falklanders’ are British ? they’re just tan!

        /The lady’s not for turning

  29. Ooow…..Nasty Racists……I saw one with a Nazi arm-band!
    (faints straight away)

  30. To the author of this article: To expect people who want to immigrate here to follow our laws and take care of themselves when they get here is absolutely NOT racist and from what little I’ve personally heard from Trump is he also wants immigrants to come here legally and obey our laws. He nor I am against legal immigrants! In my view, obeying our laws is not too much to ask of any immigrant.

    This author’s pointing fingers and deliberately misinterpreting a person’s words to make them seem racist sounds suspiciously intolerant.

    Just who sounds like a racist again?

  31. If we’re going to play guilt-by-association games, then I’d like to point out that the Communist Party of the United States of America hasn’t bothered to field its own candidate for president since 1984, but in every election since then has endorsed the Democratic ticket, and that unless the Dems nominate Jim Webb, the CPUSA will probably endorse the Democratic nominee in 2016 as well.

    1. Birds of a feather…..

  32. You know else appealed to racists?

    1. *…who else…*

      #GodwinFail

  33. The most extreme in society are going to support someone. Hillary will get a bunch of black racists voting for her, and they will advocate killing white policemen, or some such thing. It is unfair to link Trump, with his reasonable position on immigration, because it is reasonable, with a racist. If Canadians were running the border, 11 million of us, he would be against that too, I suspect.

    I don’t necessarily agree with Trump, but he has a point. You can’t allow 11 million people, if there is any truth to that number, to cross the border illegally. It is stupid to do this.

    I have some very left friends in Southern California, Dems all the way, who say the emergency wards are filled with Mexicans who are not citizens. Often they hop across the border from TJ, go to a hospital, demand and get treatment, and never pay a dime. The Californians are incensed about it. And, they are Dems. It is an issue. He has the right to bring it up.

    I don’t agree with his stance, by the way. But, these sorts of hatchet jobs Reason is doing on Trump just makes me disrespect Reason.

    1. I wouldn’t call his position on immigration reasonable, although most Americans are probably open to the anchor babies debate. It was meant to protect children, but it leads to some unintended consequences – like wealthy pregnant Chinese women staying at American hotels to give birth.

      1. Who gives a shit. The spawn of a wealthy Chinese woman will contribute more to this country and planet than a thousand buck-toothed morons born to citizens.

    2. Who cares what californians believe, they dug their own socialist graves.

    3. Hatchet job? Look the conservative/libertarian blogasphere is clogged with Trumpbots who verbally attack anyone who challenges Trump on his sometimes dopey assertions and rants. He is not a serious candidate and I am convinced he will pull out once he has successfully destroyed the republicans chance at a victory in 2016. He is a self aggrandizing jerk who has no real convictions other than he is great and everyone else is a loser. He is the kind of guy who believes Vets are chumps who are either too stupid or poor to get out of serving. Only smart guys like him got out the draft. Yet he comes on and tells us how much he admires the Vets. Ask him how much he has given to support Veteran causes. Nada …zero. What is his charities? How much has he given back?

    4. Hatchet job? Look the conservative/libertarian blogasphere is clogged with Trumpbots who verbally attack anyone who challenges Trump on his sometimes dopey assertions and rants. He is not a serious candidate and I am convinced he will pull out once he has successfully destroyed the republicans chance at a victory in 2016. He is a self aggrandizing jerk who has no real convictions other than he is great and everyone else is a loser. He is the kind of guy who believes Vets are chumps who are either too stupid or poor to get out of serving. Only smart guys like him got out the draft. Yet he comes on and tells us how much he admires the Vets. Ask him how much he has given to support Veteran causes. Nada …zero. What is his charities? How much has he given back?

  34. I clicked on Reason.com and ended up on Talking Points Memo…how’d that happen?

    1. Curious, what was Reason.com’s excuse about all those racist writings in the Ron Paul newsletters about us blacks?

        1. Yeah, us people need to defend you people by policing other people’s speech.

          But nobody better start trying to police the progressive list serve inquisition.

    2. “I clicked on Reason.com and ended up on Talking Points Memo…how’d that happen?”

      I LOL’d. Thanks, I needed a laugh.

  35. So it looks as if Reason is now joining the ranks of the Politically Correct. All you have to do is call someone a “racist” and thereby dismiss their opinions as well astheir rational self-interests. No need to debate, just call someone a name, presto, consign them to political Siberia.

    1. They could help themselves by not pontificating on the difference between black people and niggers.

      1. “They could help themselves by not pontificating on the difference between black people and niggers.”

        Maybe you could explain that to comedian Chris Rock, who pontificates on that difference at some length:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3PJF0YE-x4

        1. Black people are allowed to say those things and not be called white supremacists. I’ll let you figure out why, and I hope the process isn’t too painful for your brain.

  36. Editors,

    The closer a GOP candidate is to the GOP leadership the less support they have. That is why Trump is top of the polling and Doctor Ben Carson is second. Not because of racism.

  37. Anecdotes are enough, Peter? That funny. When anecdotes were used to suggest the Tea Party was racist, Reason rallied to their defense. Just s tad bit selective about the validity of anecdotes, aren’t we?

    1. Oh, and I might add that Trump is getting more support from the Tea Party than even Cruz. Hmmm.

      1. Given the way the GOP establishment shat on the TEA parties that is hardly surprising.

        This isn’t just dissatisfied cons, it is also people who would have never supported any other Republican candidate.

    2. Here is Reason saying allegations of racism in the Tea Party based on anecdotal evidence is misguided

      “Ekins’s conclusion is not that the racially charged messages are unimportant but that media coverage of tea party rallies over the past year have focused so heavily on the more controversial signs that it has contributed to the perception that such content dominates the tea party movement more than it actually does.”

      Anecdotes. Good when they support you, not so good when they don’t.

    3. Joe you left right before the who Obamacare thing was happening.

      Suderman was a huge critic of Obamacare just like the Tea Party.

      I think it is OK if you just come right out and call Peter a huge racist…and a sexist…and a gaybasher.

      I mean all the anecdotal evidence is right there for you.

      1. Corning, I hate to say this, but are you an ignoramus? Can you read? Charges of racism bother you? It’s what Peter did! I didn’t say anyone is a racist, he did. I pointed out that Reason in the past said anecdotal evidence proves nothing, and yet Peter uses it admittedly. But I’ll say it again, if it’s OK for Reason today to use it on Trump supporters, and the Tea Party supports Trump, using Peters reasoning….hmmm?

      2. Let me put it this way. Reason is so petrified that Trump is going to get the nomination of their party of choice…GOP…that they can’t “reason” consistently. They can’t keep their arguments straight.

        1. OK I may have jump to some conclusions about what you were saying.

          But i really don;t think the GOP is the party of choice for Reason or even Suderman or for Scott (who called Trump a sexist).

          The institutional motives of Reason as an entity would probably lean somewhere between the big “L” Libertarain party and not voting with some ratfucking going on among some individuals (Suderman, Scott, Jesse, ENB, Robby) who lean culturally progressive and probably more then one are secret “Weigels” playing at some JournoList 3.0 cut and paste narrative.

        2. Perhaps you might entertain us with an anecdote on Venezuela your Utopian example of progressive politics in action.

  38. This board is even more soul-sucking than I imagined.

    1. This board is even more soul-sucking than I imagined.

      Good, then fuck off.

    2. Nothing in existence could be more soul-sucking than a socialist shitheel like you, Tony.

  39. Racist my ass. The fact that I don’t want my hard earned money going to support people from third world countries that are ruining the quality of life in many places in America does not make me a racist. I call bullshit.

  40. “What is xenophobic (racist) about being opposed to illegal immigration? Sovereignty is based on a defined population within defined borders. When borders dissipate, and foreigners decide who becomes part of the population, there is no sovereignty.”

    The odd one here is the supposedly educated, Reason writers, a group that seems to misunderstand the core concepts of what makes and defines a country.

    It’s disingenious to keep using the term “immigrants” for illegals.

    Sent from my iPad

    1. Because “illegal” being a noun and a type of person is such a long-standing convention in the English language…

  41. Man this article presents a real problem: should I spend my time reading the above piece or should I reread a piece on Democratic Underground claiming Sarah Palin’s bullseye map incited the Gabrielle Giffords shooting. Such a tough choice.

  42. Seriously, does this piece surprise anyone? Reason has been implying, or outright stating, for years that anyone opposed to open borders is a xenophobe who can ONLY be motivated by racism. Reason’s writers have been hurling the accusation for as long as I can remember; they aren’t interested in a debate on this issue, hence they skip straight to calling those who disagree with them bigots.

    PS Suderman’s description of Ramos’s antics is hilarious for the sheer untruth of it.

    1. Implying?

      Yes.

      But this article delves into depths unseen outside of Salon.

      So yeah I am a little surprised.

    2. It’s tactical folly over the long term for both libertarians and the Left to adopt this level of baseless ad hominem. Tactical folly because even if one makes the arguments a thousand times solely on the basis of budgetary impacts and basic fairness to those who cannot so easily traverse the southern border, after being called a racist each of those thousand times, they may begin to finally just say fuck it and fall into such uncouth thoughts for time number 1,001.

      This is why white nationalism and white identity politics is growing right now in response to decades of being called a racist for the simple fact of not being a part of the perceived victim classes.

      1. Is anything ever not the left’s fault? Why is that anytime the right says or does something stupid there’s always people blaming the left for “making them do it.”

        Contrary to what some people here seem to think of me, I have never argued that everyone or almost everyone who opposes illegal immigration and/or supports immigration restrictions is racist or xenophobic. But pretending like those have not been significant components of opposition to immigration, not just recently but throughout our country’s history, is simply inaccurate historical ignorance. Particularly if we’re talking about the people most fervently opposed to it. Even if 80% (I’m just making up a random number btw) of conservatives don’t oppose immigration for racist or xenophobic reasons, that doesn’t mean that ratio is the same for the conservatives who care most about the issue, go to rallies, post on message boards, and base their support of candidates on it. Go to virtually any conservative message board on the Internet that talks about immigration, and the comments are almost always filled with blatant racism and xenophobia, stereotypes, and paranoia, and it’s been like that for as long as the Internet has been around. They might not be the majority, but they’re not some fringe minority that constitutes 1% of the party.

        1. Go to virtually any conservative message board on the Internet that talks about immigration, and the comments are almost always filled with blatant racism and xenophobia, stereotypes, and paranoia, and it’s been like that for as long as the Internet has been around.

          And my response to that would be, so the fuck what? Hell, all I have to do is look at the school district I graduated from. Back then, it was a truly diverse student body–roughly equal numbers of whites, blacks, Asians, and Hispanics–and had issues, but overall was still a decent place to send your kids. About 15 years ago, the district started to flood with the children of illegal immigrants, and its now completely dysfunctional. These kids are barely literate in their own language, much less English, and having to cater to them means spending ever-greater resources to try and meet the state’s moronic standardized testing schedules and requirements. So now the city has its own version of white flight as the families move to the southern parts of town where the school districts are better quality and aren’t dumping resources into trying to get the kids of illegal immigrants up to the most basic educational standards.

          1. Or better yet, I can go to the neighborhood where my dad’s family–who is Hispanic, BTW–lives, and see a community that revels in its general ignorance, thugishness and racial grievance-mongering, with minimal interest in even doing basic shit like keeping their front yards maintained, much less cultivating a high-trust community. Or my mom’s old neighborhood, where she spent several years being harassed by Mexican and Guatemalan gang members before being lucky enough to sell the place last year.

            So yeah, there’s a lot of blatant racism and xenophobia and stereotypes going on, but it’s hardly paranoia because people saw their quality of life deteriorate and made the rational decision to move where they wouldn’t have to put up with the general dysfunction that comes with living in a majority-immigrant community. And I can hardly blame them for being bitter about it–hell, if I was Native American, I would have felt the same thing in the 18th-19th centuries.

      2. White identity politics are nothing new, it’s existed as long as the country has, long before modern minority group identity politics ever did. Racism didn’t vanish in 1965 only to reappear 50 years later after liberals kept calling people racist. Blaming liberals for making conservatives racist by calling them racist is laughable nonsense. People on the right have been criticizing the left for years for calling a significant portion of them racist (among other things) and when Trump shows that to be true, the conclusion to draw isn’t that liberals may have, to some extent, had a point (even if it is often exaggerated or not true in many instances), but that it only became true because liberals spent all those years saying it? Come on, Sudden, that’s bullshit and you know it.

        1. Cali, one thing to think about:

          Liberals, SJWs, and their fellow travelers have spent decades legitimizing identity politics and grievance-mongering.

          Seems to me that provides a nice friendly environment for white power types, who traffic in the very thing that liberals etc. have been working very hard to legitimize.

          1. What do you see being shat all over this thread and countless rightwing white supremacist cesspools elsewhere other than fucking grievance?

            The only difference is the ridiculousness of the dominant demographic doing the whining. And they whine a lot louder and piss their pants at much greater volume.

          2. R C,

            As I said in my comment, that is absolutely nothing new. White identity politics and grievance mongering has a history as old as this country (or older, really). Leftist minority advocate groups didn’t invent even if they may have been the loudest and most explicit in recent years. If you’re gonna go down the “blame X group for doing Y thing that caused Z group to A” then you’d have to blame the people responsible for creating an environment where leftist identity politics could come to exist in the first place (such as the very racist history of this country).

            The sort of sentiment Trump is tapping into has existed for centuries, and isn’t just some new result of annoyance with SJWs. And even if we assumed that it was, becoming an outright racist because you’re tired of liberals and SJWs calling you racist isn’t much of a defense.

            1. That’s like saying “You hit me back first!”

              What happened even 20 years ago matters little if any. Progressives have been in power since 2008 and they are reaping what they sowed. Progressives claimed they were sowing a post-racial society but all they’ve sown is the seeds of identity politics. They had the power to sow something else, and indeed won by convincing voters that they would sow different seeds.

              But I see your point. Bush must have made them sow more seeds of identity politics.

              1. “That’s like saying ‘You hit me back first!'”

                As opposed to the inaccurate “You did it first!” line from conservatives?

                “What happened even 20 years ago matters little if any.”

                How? Is the past irrelevant to the present? It certainly isn’t in this case, because it disproves the notion that this is some new phenomena that only emerged because of what leftists said in recent years. I think the best-case argument you can make is that these people are more comfortable openly espousing these views than they were in the past, as a result of the left being in power and promoting their brand of identity politics. The notion that the left created this out of thin air, however, is laughable and just not historically accurate.

            2. I hear ya, Cali. I think we’re differing more on nuance and timescale than substance.

              I wonder if there has ever been a movement in this country with the cultural and institutional reach of our modern day left, which is built on grievance mongering and identity politics. Maybe so, but I find it striking how much more blatant and applauded it is now, compared to 30 or 40 years ago. The left’s long march through the institutions has been a pretty big success for them, after all.

              1. R C,

                The entire anti-abolition and later anti-civil rights movement is the answer to your question.

                1. Maybe so. But not in living memory, and I seriously wonder if any political/intellectual movement has ever seized so much cultural high ground as the left has in the past few decades.

                  1. “But not in living memory”

                    The Civil Rights Movement isn’t within living memory? The KKK’s dominance in the 1920s isn’t within living memory?

                    “I seriously wonder if any political/intellectual movement has ever seized so much cultural high ground as the left has in the past few decades.”

                    I don’t think you can talk about the left’s increasing dominance in cultural aspects of society without acknowledging the widespread dominance of the things they’re (in many ways only nominally) fighting against. Stuff like racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. were well-established cultural norms that were much more accepted for centuries than any of the really odious stuff the left currently peddles is today.

            3. Perhaps I was unclear. My point wasn’t that white nationalism and white identity politics has not existed over the previous half century. Rather my point is that those who’ve long resisted racializing their policy preferences and have made the arguments on strictly race-neutral policy grounds but are still called a racist/xenophobe/hate-monger/etc. may at some point decide that there is no point in trying to address the substantive aspects of policy with such people and instead adopt the us vs. them mentality and join the white bloc/white nationalist side of the spectrum.

              I think it’s safe to say that such voices have been at the margin over the past 3 to 4 decades, even if the sentiment was more widespread but only existed under a thin veneer of social decorum. But at some point if no matter what race/nationality neutral arguments you make for a policy you are still called a racist, then the tendency to empathize with the actual racists grows, culminating in joining their ranks and the ugliness that follows. And as RC noted above, the SJW/New Left has spent the past 3 decades legitimizing identity politics, so at some point whites writ large begin to think “well if they’re all organized in advancing the narrow interests/agendas of their racial/gender/orientation brethren, maybe we should do the same.” And so it becomes the (anti)-intellectual equivalent of an arm’s race.

              1. “Rather my point is that those who’ve long resisted racializing their policy preferences and have made the arguments on strictly race-neutral policy grounds but are still called a racist/xenophobe/hate-monger/etc. may at some point decide that there is no point in trying to address the substantive aspects of policy with such people and instead adopt the us vs. them mentality and join the white bloc/white nationalist side of the spectrum.”

                Perhaps, but to be honest, I don’t think those are for the most part the people Trump is resonating with. Furthermore, even though the people you’re talking about may have consistently made race-neutral arguments, they also consistently ignored or downplayed the large contingent on their side that wasn’t, while Trump is proving that they aren’t nearly as insignificant as many on the right have been claiming for years. At the end of the day, as I said elsewhere, if your (and I’m using a general you here, not talking about you specifically) response to being called a racist is to embrace racism then I don’t blaming it on the people who accused you of it is a valid excuse. They might have actually had a point and you (again, not you specificially) were just in denial about it. And it’s not as if whites generally are embracing Trump – it’s one large, but minority faction of the Republican party, which even as a whole represents a minority of white people in terms of membership, and only about 60% in terms of general election popular vote.

                1. It’s also worth noting that the laws of derp physics apply here as well.

                  For every idiotically racist Trump supporter I’ve seen on social media, I’ve seen at least as many Hispanic posters openly fantasizing about El Chapo hunting down and killing the Trump.

                  So tell me who the fascists are again?

                  1. I never said that was ok, it obviously isn’t. I’ve seen a few people post stuff like that myself, but most who I know personally were just saying it satirically – which is still stupid, and I also saw a lot of people call them out on it both for the brutality of it and for trivializing who El Chapo is by using him to make a sarcastic joke about killing someone. But a tasteless joke (and I do acknowledge that for a few it probably isn’t a joke) isn’t the same as actual, serious racism. And at the end of the day, El Chapo isn’t running for president getting 30% of the vote in a major party’s polls, and if you polled Mexican-Americans I don’t think his favorability ratings would be anywhere near 50% as they are for Trump with regards to Republicans (granted, Trump obviously isn’t as bad as El Chapo, I’m just pointing out the differences between the two situations you’re comparing).

                    1. Mayhaps the El Chapo thing is overblown and snarky. I’m not as generous as you in that perception (seriously, search #elchapo in instagram and tell me it’s just snark). We can walk into any number of merchants in the greater East L.A. area and find shirts fellating the guy. He’s a folk hero in many areas, Pancho Villa style, and that only serves to reinforce the stereotype ginned up by Trump. Or we can get a Trump pinata walking distance from my place. Because nothing says “it is racist to suggest our community includes a lot of criminals and thugs” quite like beating an effigy of someone you disagree with.

                      I’d bet good money that I’d get attacked walking around large swaths of L.A. wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat. People can call Trump a fascist all they want, but the real fascism and how the brownshirts rose to power was precisely such belief that political disagreements warranted violent responses.

                      Most of them, I assume*, are good people

                      *I don’t assume, I know. I worked fast food jobs in L.A. County for years as a teenager and have the greatest respect for the work ethic of the mostly Guatemalans I worked alongside. I also worked alongside some guys that were mixed up in gangs or on parole (and even they could be very respectful people).

                    2. I didn’t say it all was, just that most of the people I’d seen saying it didn’t appear to actually be seriously rooting for the guy to kill Trump. And while I’m sure he has his supporters, his escape is one big reason among many why most of Mexico fucking hates Pena Nieto right now. I don’t think the pinata thing is nearly as big a deal as you seem to think it is. It’s a pinata, if it wasn’t a common item in Mexican culture I’d see where you’re coming from, but given how common it is I don’t think it’s really that serious.

                      Perhaps, but as of now I’m unaware of anyone being beaten anywhere for supporting Trump, while there’s at least one instance of Trump supporters being a guy for being Hispanic. I’m not trying to say that everyone who opposes Trump is by any means an angel, but he’s the only candidate expressing the sort of views we’re talking about and in a position to be a serious presidential contender as a result.

                    3. *beating

      3. This is why white nationalism and white identity politics is growing right now in response to decades of being called a racist for the simple fact of not being a part of the perceived victim classes.

        Well, that and the very fact that identity politics have become “a thing” in American politics to such a degree. And the left is responsible for that, without question.

        1. Identity politics have been a huge thing in American politics for centuries. The modern left by no means invented it or even brought it to unprecedented heights.

          1. So the people who came to power preaching against such divisions cannot be faulted for continuing to employ those same divisions?

            Just not their fault, is it? Poor little victims…

  43. I guess if you can say Trump’s campaign promotes racism then you can say open borders promote murder by illegal aliens.

    Meanwhile, a video from Trump’s Alabama rally appears?it is somewhat difficult to hear?to capture one of the attendees screaming “White power!”

    I’m guessing there are none who promotes “confederate pride” at tea party rallies and wave the confederate flag are racist.

    http://www.teaparty.org/hundre…..ag-104974/

  44. I see Reason‘s panicking now that their boy Jeb! is at 7% and dropping.

    1. It’s worse. Their real homeboy is Rand, and he is at 3%. And falling.

      1. Rand doesn’t support comprehensive immigration reform and the Trans-Pacific Partnership. As I’ve pointed out before the only reason staffer to criticize the TPP was let go.

  45. First off – Trump ‘wants to deport and then EXPEDITE THE RETURN’ OF ILLEGALS!! get it right!!!!!!!!

    and stop with the decade old lie of only 11 million…..

    Univision boasts 50 million
    Retired INS M. Cutler talks 40-50 million
    Debbie Schlussel writes of 40 million
    CAPS Study 2007 talks of 38 million…

    1. “Univision boasts 50 million”

      Where?

      Those are absolutely laughable numbers, and some of them from very questionable sources.

  46. A lot of people here are completely missing the point. A few of Trump’s supporters saying racist things doesn’t mean he or his campaign are racist. But the fact is that his appeal and surge in the polls is overwhelmingly because of his over-the-top racist and xenophobic fearmongering on immigration. He characterized Mexican immigrants (not even just illegal immigrants either) as a bunch of criminal drug-dealing rapists and you all think it’s unfair attack him for that? Or his retweeting of someone saying something along the lines of “who cares that Jeb Bush speaks Mexican, this is America, speak English!” Or him saying he doesn’t think millions of Americans are actually citizens and plans on deporting them?

    1. I find the whining about “You all are just PC!” to be hilarious quite frankly. One of the central things (if not the biggest) people hate about political correctness is that you’re supposedly not allowed to be honest and tell it like it is, and you always have to water down your criticism with phony respect to your opponents and various groups. Isn’t that a huge part of the defense of Trump? That he supposedly “tells it like it is?” Why is it then, that all of these people can’t take it when other people refuse to criticize Trump and his supporters with inoffensive mealy-mouthed critiques and instead “tell it like it is” and call a spade and spade, and call his supporters out for being the idiotic morons largely motivated by racism and xenophobia that they actually are? The fact that leftists often make false or unfounded accusations of racism doesn’t mean that every accusation of racism is unfounded. Some things being politically incorrect without good reason doesn’t mean that some things aren’t politically incorrect for a good reason. If Trump was saying “politically incorrect” stuff about other groups, such as Jews for example, I highly doubt many of the people defending him would continue to do so. Politically incorrect bullshit is still bullshit. One’s inability to understand that isn’t the fault of people who refuse to censor their criticism of Trump and his followers with watered-down inoffensive BS.

      1. So I’ll mark you as a “maybe” re: supporting Trump….

        🙂

        1. You know it baby 😉

          Some men just want to watch the world burn

    2. My goodness, Cali.

      I merely took a look at one of the accusations of racism above, and argued that it was pretty much bullshit, based on what we know about the woman (almost nothing). You’d have to be a mindreader to get from what she said, to “she is a racist”.

      Sure, Trump says a lot of stupid shit. Hell, he may even be a racist (although I’m far from convinced that opposing illegal immigration and open borders is inherently racist). But to tag all of his supporters as racists means you must have truly galactic powers of mind-reading.

      And what I especially don’t like is the casual accusation of racism to shut down a conversation. I’m getting more than a whiff of that from the open borders crowd, and it makes me less open to the rest of what they say.

      1. First off, what made you think my comment was specifically aimed at you?

        “You’d have to be a mindreader to get from what she said, to “she is a racist”.”

        It really isn’t that much of a stretch when she makes such an insane, hyperbolic statement like that. At the very least, it is very bigoted against illegal immigrants. Even if you don’t think they have a right to be in the country, characterizing them as a bunch of violent rapists is bigoted. And you and I both know that illegal aliens aren’t viewed as being a racially diverse group in this country. They are overwhelmingly thought of as, and often conflated with, Mexicans and Latinos.

        “Trump says a lot of stupid shit. Hell, he may even be a racist (although I’m far from convinced that opposing illegal immigration and open borders is inherently racist).”

        Do you think that is why Trump has been called racist? Most if not all Republican candidates oppose illegal immigration and none of them support open borders, and yet none of them have received a fraction of the accusations of racism that Trump has. That’s because those accusations are based on a lot more than him simply opposing illegal immigration. I gave a few examples in my comment above.

        “But to tag all of his supporters as racists means you must have truly galactic powers of mind-reading.”

        I never said that all his supporters are racist. I said that the racism and xenophobia of his campaign has been a primary part of his appeal as a candidate …

        1. I never said that all his supporters are racist.

          Uh-huh.

          call his supporters out for being the idiotic morons largely motivated by racism and xenophobia that they actually are

          This wasn’t a statement about his campaign. This was a statement about his supporters. An I may be obtuse and prone to hair-splitting, but I’m struggling to split the hair between
          “you’re a racist” and “you’re primarily motivated by racism.”

          1. By “largely motivated by racism and xenophobia” I’m saying that most of his support is coming from that, not that all of it is. If a group of people are supporting a candidate running a campaign as blatantly racist as Trump has, especially when he had little support prior to running such a campaign, my statement isn’t unfair. People on this site make far more unfair, less nuanced statements about the supporters of Democratic candidates all the time. I’d get less push back for saying “Democrats are all a bunch of fascist terrorist-loving anti-American anti-white anti-Christian commies” than for the much more nuanced, much more grounded in reality statement I did make.

        2. ” Most if not all Republican candidates oppose illegal immigration and none of them support open borders…”

          Homey please.

          The GOP is facing the rise of Trump precisely because they’ve been paying lip service to the base, all while playing failure-theater over actually doing anything about illegal immigration.

          So while your specific formulation regarding ‘open borders’ may be technically accurate, it also misses the real target by a wide margin.

      2. … Virtually nobody gave a shit about him or considered him a serious candidate until he started saying the shit he did about Mexican immigrants. And the more stupid shit he says about them, the better he does. That, combined with the high presence of open racism from his supporters (have you read any comment section with a large contingent of Trump supporters? Even articles on this site have been overrun recently with random new accounts promoting Trump and spouting racist garbage) is why I, and many others, have said that such things are a very significant motivating factor among his supporters generally speaking.

        “And what I especially don’t like is the casual accusation of racism to shut down a conversation. I’m getting more than a whiff of that from the open borders crowd, and it makes me less open to the rest of what they say.”

        But this isn’t a “casual accusation of racism to shut down a conversation.” It’s calling a spade a spade. I agree that people shouldn’t loosely toss the term around without justification. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t times where its use is justified, and there’s no reason people should have to censor themselves lest they offend people by calling racists racist. This is one of those times. If people calling Trump racists make you less open to what they say, but the racism coming from Trump and supporters doesn’t (or does to a lesser extent) then you may want to reevaluate your priorities.

        1. Well, Cali, maybe I’m just more optimistic than you are.

          I think there are actual racists that support Trump, but likely very few. And, given our experience, I suspect some of the high-media-profile Trump racist supporters are false flags.

          I think the increase in his popularity as he gets more outrageous about immigration has mostly to do with the outrageous bit, and the extra-added anti-PC/SJW flair he gives it, which a lot of people chuckle at because it pisses off the right people.

          Neither of us knows, of course. But I think its not so much pro-racism, as anti-elite/PC/SJW.

          1. Yes, perhaps this article exaggerates the percentage of Trump supporters that are outright racists.

            That doesn’t really change the fact that it’s pretty clear that the bulk of his support comes from anti-immigrant, anti-trade, nativists. Maybe not all nativists are outright racists is all.

            They’re still stupid and wrong though.

            1. “nativists”

              Why oh why isn’t that word ever used when the left are anti-trade anti-immigrant?

              In fact doesn’t Reason come out with an article like once a month telling us how horrible Obama is on free trade and immigration?

              Funny how it is only Trump who gets the “That’s racist” hit piece about it.

              1. Oh, I definitely agree that the left is full of anti-trade, anti-immigrant nativists. In fact, my theory is that a large percentage of Trump supporters are Northeastern/Midwestern Old Labor. They are working class whites, largely union men, who have witnessed the decline of US manufacturing along with their own wages, and attribute that decline to immigration and trade. They have also gradually shifted away from the Democratic party as the Democratic party has shifted towards free trade and immigration reform. Bill Clinton had these voters, but Hillary just isn’t enough of a politician. Biden is probably entering the race precisely to get them back.

                Trump is appealing to them because, as a real-estate tycoon, he’s built a lot of buildings, which is something that working class labor (i.e. the construction unions) respects. He’s also not against government spending money subsidizing US industry or building infrastructure, again something Old Labor can get behind. “Make America Great Again” translates to them as “rebuild the US manufacturing base”, which means jobs for them.

                So basically, Trump is stealing the left’s nativist shitheads and bringing them into the Republican Party. And in the process making the Republican party less libertarian and more nativist.

              2. Have you read any of the articles Reason’s had lately on the Democratic party’s rhetoric in recent years, including under Bill Clinton? Or the articles attacking Sanders positions on trade and immigration? Trump gets it worse cause he’s leading the polls and expressing those sentiments in a much more offensive way than anyone else in either party. False equivalences don’t make that go away.

              3. Remember guerrillas? That Spanish word was reserved for communist revolutionaries. Anyone attempting to subvert a looter regime were depicted pretty much like the Mussolini-hammedans are today.

          2. “I think there are actual racists that support Trump, but likely very few.”

            I simply disagree with that. Not being a full-blown neo-Nazi white nationalist doesn’t mean you’re not racist. Most actual Trump supporters aren’t saying “Well Donald might not be totally right about Mexicans, but I like his attitude anyways!” they’re for the most part explicitly agreeing with it and many of them primarily motivated to support him because of that.

            “I think the increase in his popularity as he gets more outrageous about immigration has mostly to do with the outrageous bit, and the extra-added anti-PC/SJW flair he gives it, which a lot of people chuckle at because it pisses off the right people.

            Neither of us knows, of course. But I think its not so much pro-racism, as anti-elite/PC/SJW.”

            If you express your opposition to political correctness by embracing racism, I don’t think it’s unfair for people to think you’re actually racist. Some things are politically incorrect for a good reason, and a lot of the stuff Trump is saying falls in that category. If there was a candidate saying a bunch of outrageous politically incorrect stuff about Jews, would you be unfair to think a lot of his supporters were anti-Semitic?

  47. What a shitstorm. Nice job, SuderMAN.

  48. Mexicans (and hispanics for that matter) are not a race. They are a culture and nation.

    They come from this place called Spain, which is in Europe, where people are white. Yes, they are somewhat darker than people from Nordic countries, or Germany, but they are still white and have always been regarded as white, just like Italians and French.

    Is Mexico racist because they don’t like immigrants coming in from other countries? I recently read a book about a American Indian lady traveling through Mexico collecting UFO stories. She was stopped at military checkpoints (looking for illegal aliens into Mexico) 17 times.

    1. Mexicans are dark because of the Native DNA. They have more of a claim to this landmass than you do.

      1. Mexicans are dark because their forefathers, the Conquistadors, raped the Indians before they killed them, whereas the Pilgrims simply killed them.

        Which method is worse, of course, is a matter of opinion, but I don’t think Mexicans (or “Hispanics” or “Latinos”) have any more claim to this landmass than us gringo-type US citizens.

      2. Tony-sock gives the progressive one drop principle of race.

        1. And he adds to his “one-drop” racism yet another noxious idea, namely, that the blood of your ancestors is the root of your claim to land and society.

          Ein Volk, Ein Reich, eh, Tony?

          1. If the jackboot fits…

      3. Mexicans are dark because of the Native DNA.

        So racist. Seriously. Mexicans come in fairly broad palette of colors. Very few blacks, but what we see in the US is somewhat darker than average, because Mexico still has a caste system, and the more indio blood you have, the lower in the caste system you are, the more likely you are to be unskilled labor, etc.

        Take a look at Mexican President Nieto and his wife, and tell me again about how dark Mexicans are.

      4. Then fuck off back to Europe, Chony.

    2. “They come from this place called Spain, which is in Europe, where people are white. Yes, they are somewhat darker than people from Nordic countries, or Germany, but they are still white and have always been regarded as white, just like Italians and French.”

      You’re leaving out a pretty big portion of Mexico’s history and ancestry JR. Go to Spain and tell me that the average Spaniard looks just like the average Mexican.

      As for your last paragraph, you know that’s a logical fallacy, right? Who exactly is holding up Mexico’s immigration policies as some sort of model?

      1. It’s also noteworthy that the bulk of Latin immigration at present is from the more Mayan diaspora. I do wonder if people would be so aghast at immigration trends if it were D.F. telenovela babes instead of obese squat Oaxacanos.

        1. I think you need to expand Mayan a bit, they only really live in the Yucatan and a couple neighboring states (I don’t even think they have a significant presence in Oaxaca). Most Mexican-Americans are mestizo and a lot of them are from the north as well as the south. Most Mexicans don’t look like telenovela actors (hell, most Americans don’t look like our actors). I think genetic studies show there isn’t much a difference between the ancestry breakdown of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans.

          1. Duly noted. Either way, the remark was tongue in cheek but does hit on both the more heavily mestizo/indio ethnic background of current Latin migrants and the caste realities raised above that explains why those of that ethnic composition make the (entirely anecdotal on my part) lion’s share of current migrants.

  49. I’m having a hard time figuring out why this article is on Reason.com. Wouldn’t it be more at home on, say, Daily Kos or MSNBC.com?

    WTF, Reason? Et tu?

  50. Can we stop pretending that that the issue is illegal immigration?
    If someone proposed a law that doubled the quotas for legal immigrants and relaxed immigration restrictions does anyone think Trumps supporters would be for it? Bullshit.
    They don’t want immigration period. They either don’t know or con’t that legal immigration is effectively impossible for most of those immigrating illegally, and aren’t interested in learning. They focus on illegal immigration just so they don’t have to publicly say that they hate the legal kind too.

    And they hate free trade too. Go look up Trump’s comments on the TPP deal. These people are nativist old school America Firsters. They don’t want foreigners selling their products, they don’t want immigrants coming here to work. If you could get them to stop talking about immigrants long enough the next topic they would bitch about is NAFTA, and how the damn Mexicans took all the factory work over the border.

    1. And they hate free trade too. Go look up Trump’s comments on the TPP deal.

      Based on the very little we know about TPP, I don’t think it has a damn thing to do with free trade.

      Globalized governance and cronyism, sure. Free trade? Not from what I’ve heard.

      1. Regardless, that’s beside the point. Trump has been very anti-free trade and pro-protectionism, not just anti-TPP.

      2. He’s not complaining that the trade deal is cronyist, he’s complaining that it will cost American jobs and saying that other countries will “dupe” us. Because trade is competitive, right? It’s classic protectionist bullshit, RC.
        Don’t sit there and pretend that he’s making some sort of nuanced libertarian argument that the TPP is going to unfairly favor certain corporations.

        1. Believe it or not, I don’t spend any time parsing what Trump actually says.

          Its the ensuing shitstorm where the real interest is, for me.

          1. Well, maybe you should start, so you’ll have at least a slight clue as to what sort of people you’re defending.

            1. “Well, maybe you should start, so you’ll have at least a slight clue as to what sort of people you’re defending.”

              Jesus fucking Christ. Would you take a min and listen to yourself.

            2. I’m not defending Trump, or even his supporters.

              I’m mostly doing what I mostly do here: point out the fallacies and weaknesses of people’s arguments and positions.

              The anti-Trump frothing seems to have some fallacies and weaknesses, is all.

              1. As if any of the other republican bozos running who actually have a chance are small gov’t, pro free trade, pro open borders.

        2. I would like to point out the most interesting thing RC said here was “Globalized governance and cronyism, sure. Free trade? Not from what I’ve heard.”

          But yeah sure lets jump on the “Trump is a racist whom we must focus all attention on cuz feelz and stuff” band wagon instead.

          1. Some people just can’t process the fact that a free trade deal came out of the Obama administration.

            Next thing you know Dean’s going to join the anti-globalization movement, and decide that the WTO is an evil plot by the UN to impose a world government.

            1. TPP is a free trade deal, based on what, Hazel?

              1. What makes you think it isn’t? The fact that the Obama administration negotiated it?

              2. I believe the general belief is as follows:

                free trade is better than managed trade is better than no trade

                The issue is that managed trade is generally the best we can get, especially because of the parties to those trade agreements.

    2. “They don’t want immigration period. ”

      No, they want a US immigration policy that benefits US citizens.

      1. Which US citizens? How about the ones who are perfectly happy to employ and rent to immigrants? Are they entitled to benefit from this immigration policy too?

    3. Can we stop pretending that that the issue is illegal immigration?

      Does the Democrat party really need help propagating this mind-reading nonsense?

    4. We can stop “pretending” that the issue is illegal immigration when the penalties for hiring illegals make it an economically untenable option.

    5. Can we stop pretending Thump is a candidate? The guy is chaff sprayed by the GOP and their media to divert attention from LP alternatives. Ross Perot was the same thing. London bookies have him down at nearly 7:1 and Ronnie (the token counterfeit libertarian) at 33:1, but Jeb Clampitt Bush at 4 to 1 odds on winning the election. Hillary is a shoo-in at 2:1 odds.
      The Nixon government passed a law the day before the LP filed its party papers. The law basically bribes the media to ignore the LP. Here’s the link to the law itself:
      http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/S…..-Pg497.pdf
      See p. 562, Public Financing of Election Campaigns, and how they defined “new party” upstarts.
      But as the Smothers Brothers said… “We’re still here.”

  51. Here’s Trump on NAFTA:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/do…..der-nafta/

    Republican contender Donald Trump promised that if he is elected President, “one of the early things” he would do is impose punitive tariffs on Ford Motor Company to force the Dearborn-based automaker to drop a multi-billion dollar expansion plan in Mexico which Trump says will cause job losses.

    In announcing his decision to run for President on Tuesday, Trump said he would call “the head of Ford, who I know” and tell him: “Let me give you the bad news: every car, every truck and every part manufactured in this plant that comes across the border, we’re going to charge you a $35 tax?OK??and that tax is going to be paid simultaneously with the transaction.”

  52. I read a story about a person who committed a murder that police believe was “a result of the practice of witchcraft gone wrong”. The police spokesman went on to say, “Of course, we don’t mean to suggest that all people involved in witchcraft are bad, or criminals.”

    That is why Trump is popular. He calls out nonsense, even if he is not an acceptable alternative to it.

    There are a few people who actually endorse what Trump is saying. Most just hope the discussion space will be stretched enough so that it includes objective truth. We cannot solve problems if we consider the “witchcraft culture” (or just any culture) to be equal to our own, deserving of consideration, and compatible with our society. They are not.

  53. I’d expect better from Reason: get it right. Trump is not opposed to IMMIGRATION, he is opposed t ILLEGAL INVASIONS specifically in the form of undocumented aliens flooding our nation. THAT is what’s hot him riled.. and I’m right there wiht him on that.

    Second, the Scontitition does not REQUIRE citizenship to be conferred upon those born here to parents not legally residents. READ that clear and simple 14th again.. this time don’t stop at the words. “all persons born in the United States”.. keep reading the REST OF THE SENTENCE. It continues (presenting the main exception) saying this: “and SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF are citizens”. Visitors, border crashers, river swimmers, visa overstayers, sneaks, undocumented aliens, guests, non-residents, are NOT “subject to the jurisdictioin thereof” any more than I, a US Citizen, am subject to the jurisdiction of the Queen of England.(never been there, no relatives for a few centuries have either).

    1. Exhibit A

    2. “Trump is not opposed to IMMIGRATION, he is opposed t ILLEGAL INVASIONS specifically in the form of undocumented aliens flooding our nation.”

      I don’t think he is *just* opposed to *illegal* immigration, he is also opposed to *legal* immigration that does not “improve jobs, wages and security for all Americans.”

      Basically, he wants a US Immigration that benefits US citizens. You know, like most other developed countries try to do.

    3. I do not think Trump particularly riled by illegal immigration.

      I think Trump has recognized there is much hay to be made capitalizing on those who are riled by illegal immigration.

      Put simply, he’s got an audience and he knows what schtick will work on it.

  54. So… what are you enlightened types gonna do the day people stop groveling whenever you call them “raaaaacist!” and start looking you in the eye and saying, “Yeah? What about it?”.

    I’m guessing we’re gonna find out in pretty short order.

    1. Way to undercut the argument of every person in this thread who’s gotten up in arms about calling Trump supporters racist.

      Exhibit B.

      1. I haven’t made any argument about whether or not Trump’s supporter are racists. I haven’t bothered to ask. Nor do I give a rat’s ass one way or the other. If they are, good for them! Suck on that for a while!

  55. “His platform and his policies, to the extent that they can be determined, have had the effect of rallying racists around his candidacy, and serve as an appeal to the racist mind.”

    Some racists are flocking to Trump. And some racists are not.

    There are many racists, and many racist minds. Not all of them are fans of The Donald.

    But since the Proggy Parade has come to Reason, just shriek Racism! Racism! Racism!, because that’s what the cool kids do.

    1. I bet there’s a greater number of racists at a tea party event than a trump event.

      1. Greater number of racists at a La Raza event than a Trump event.

        1. I can name one racist Obama supporter who just shot 3 people killing two of them yesterday.

      2. When was the last time you attended either?

    2. Seeing the anti-PC crowd embrace a central component of political correctness (the inability to be honest about people and their motivations lest you offend someone) is hilarious.

  56. There’s that race card being played again. How many race cards are there in a deck? Trump must be doing or saying something right or there would be little reason to play the race card. While I would not vote for him in the primaries, and hope that some of the other candidates might pick up on what it is that’s getting peoples attention about how our government should be working, and if not the Democrats may keep the Presidency in 2016 as a RINO President only perpetuates the slow death of our Nation and the people would be better served by allowing it to quickly die and have to be rebuilt from scratch while there remains something to build with.

    1. Trump was the one who played the race card by characterizing Mexican immigrants (and not even specifically referring to the illegal ones) as criminal drug-dealing rapists. Reason’s attack on him is fair game after all that and everything else he’s said. There’s no right, legal, moral, or otherwise, to say whatever the fuck you want without being accurately called out on it. The left often making inaccurate or exaggerated claims of racism doesn’t mean all such claims are invalid or wrong.

  57. “…Racist Supporters”

    Fuck you, Suderman. What part of “illegal” don’t you understand, or are you just an Obama cock-sucking tool?

    1. Because you’re out there campaigning to make legal immigration easier, right?

      1. Could you repeat that Hazel? I couldn’t understand you with Obama’s dick in your mouth.

        1. No, he’s right. The only way we stop the crime of murder is by making it legal.

          Genius really.

    2. Why not say what you really feel? No, actually the dishonest guilt by association deserves vehement response. It is intellectually dishonest and so thoroughly illogical that the editors of a publication going by the title “Reason” had a duty to tell Suderman, “wtf dude, the candidate — whether it’s Trump or Ron Paul, who was similarly slimed — doesn’t control who supports him.”

  58. The race vote’s got to go somewhere, doesn’t it? No matter what candidates do, people holding any kind of -ism are going to decide some candidate is closest to them. What are you going to do, run away from everyone?

    Meanwhile, the most vehement Trump supporter among people I know is Ed Ramirez.

  59. What kills me is the Donald paid the expensive visa costs for his Russian bride yet he is mad a the poor hardworking guys that struggle across the border and do the work Americans won’t do. And the point missed here is that most illegals don’t go anywhere near govt. offices and don’t qualify for welfare yet they pay taxes

    1. Shhh. Trump supporters don’t want to know that illegal immigrants can’t get welfare benefits. Fucks with the narrative.

      1. You are either a liar or an idiot.
        Net costs to the American taxpayer in all forms is 15 Billion per year.

        1. Actually, Hazel is an Obama cocksucker.

  60. I don’t really come to Reason to read the same “your political opinions differ from mine, therefore you are RACISS” bullshit that I can find in droves on Twitter and Tumblr. Nor do I expect such incredible mental gymnastics in order to make such an opinion seem Reason-able. Pretty lame.

    1. I come here because I like the way woodNfish boils everything down to: either you suck Obama’s dick, or you don’t.
      It may seem like a childish, none-too-bright, schoolyard taunt at first, but you begin to imagine there’s an incisive intellect behind these decisions. Much as a court case boils down to a simple “guilty”, or “not guilty” – but only after a great deal of legal opinion has been sifted through and considered, and all the facts, and the relevant laws, have been examined in detail – woodNfish decides whether you suck Obama’s dick, or not.
      Then again, he could be one these barely literate, pasty-faced, juvenile trolls, lashing out in fear and impotence, living in a paranoid world where race is sexually charged and foreigners steal your job, responding in the only way they’re capable of. That is to say, voting Republican and anonymously typing insults on the internet. But, I’m sure that’s not the case.

  61. Just wondering how many African/Iraqi/Syrian refugees the US has allowed to migrate into the Land of the Free this summer? We are bombing the shit out of them in our undeclared war. So, don’t be yelling “racist” at Donald’s gang when Obama is such a self-righteous prick.

  62. I thought better of Reason. I can tell you that I am not a racist. And I still support Trump. To be more precise, I don’t agree with Trump on several things, but support him because he is not a liar.

    That is the basis of most of his support. Many are fed up to here with politicians who lie to get elected and lie after they get elected.

    For you to imply that his appeal is due to racism is just not so. I have lost respect for you for spinning this as do so many in dishonest hidden agenda politically motivated hacks in the media.

  63. My first day here.

    It is hilarious that this article’s headline says something to the effect Trump is AGAINST immigration.

    Why do you lie like this? If I wanted untruths, I’d stick with the NY Times and Washpo.

    Trump wants to solve ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

    You do yourself a grave, long-lasting disservice to misrepresent the truth like you have here.

    Being arrogant and uber-confident is not excuse for specious interpretations of facts.

    1. Reason has jumped the shark here.

  64. If Trump’s support numbers don’t go down, Rand Paul and/or other GOP candidates should form a third party.

    Hillary Clinton is a damaged candidate. Sanders and Biden are old white men. The Democratic party is in an ideological dead end.

    There are plenty of voters up for grabs in the center if someone puts together a coalition; socially liberal, fiscally conservative, positive, optimistic, forward-looking, bringing people together, individual liberty, limited government, free enterprise, equal opportunity under rule of law, etc.

  65. Spanish is not a race.
    Breaking and entering into this country is a crime.
    There is no right to come to this country, it is a privileged that is granted, conditional that you will not be, or likely to become, a burden upon the State.
    The conservative estimated net cost to the American taxpayer of ILLEGALS into this country is 15 Billion per year and rising.
    If you can’t follow our most basic laws, your presence here is unwanted, unasked for and unacceptable.

    If that makes me a racist by your pretzel logic, so be it.
    As a legal, voting citizen, my rights trump that of any illegal, any day. (pun intended.)

    1. There is no right to come to this country, it is a privileged that is granted, conditional that you will not be, or likely to become, a burden upon the State.

      I trust you signed your pledge not to be a burden when you were randomly shat into this country?

      1. Yeah, DAAAAAAAD!!

  66. What in the world? I expect more from Reason. So if you want LEGAL immigration you are a racist? What is racist about wanting the people who live in the United States to be here legally, pay taxes and become American? Certainly there is no other place we can go illegally and just squat. Why should it be different here? Yes, many immigrants have come to America and added to its fabric — but that’s just it they became part of the fabric. They did not become an embellishment. If we just keep gluing on embellishments soon there will be no fabric left…

    1. Why the religious fascination with forcing people to pay taxes? What’s wrong with repealing the personal income tax, erosive of individual rights, and letting the collectivist corporations continue as taxpayers until they too develop an appreciation for rights?

  67. Donald Trump, no different from every other presidential candidate, suffers from a severe case of “Dictator Syndrome” , as does anybody who actually votes for _any_ of these criminal clowns:

    “If You Were King (The Dictator Syndrome)”:
    http://savingcommunities.org/d…..eking.html

    Which means that , in the real world, because government doesn’t work, at least not in the way the vast majority [including Trump] naively assume it does, that_none_ of the proposals to “make America great again”, regardless of who makes them, or who actually becomes the new temp mafia boss, will work or produce the [naively] imagined consequences [for example, reduced illegal immigration].

    All that their “solutions” will accomplish is to make the overall US economic situation even worse than it already is.

    Which is why the individual needs a fully diversified long-term savings plan; that will go a long way to protect the individuals savings from the dire economic consequences of the actions of any of these new, wannabe Hitleresque scam artists:

    http://onebornfreesfinancialsa…..pdate.html

    Regards,onebornfree
    Financial Health & Safety + Personal Freedom consulting
    onebornfreeatyahoodotcom

  68. The candidate’s aggressive opposition to immigration

    unauthorized immigrants

    I’m no Trump fan…but I’m even less of a fan of transparently dishonest word-play bullshit like the above.

  69. Is Reason trying to be the new Salon?

    1. It’s the Return of the Liberaltarians.

  70. This is true. Since everyone is racist, he is rallying close to 100% of the people. And if you think you aren’t racist, you are a bigger LIAR than Hillary.

  71. In 2012 anti-Ron Paul “reporters” described in gory detail the ugly side of what some supporters had to say. Because no candidate can control what kind of following his/her campaign picks up along the way, this type of attack is underhanded. I am surprised Reason stoops to this.

  72. I expected more from REASON. Suderman, as has become typical in such hit pieces, conflates illegal immigration with legal immigration. No one, in their wildest imaginings, could think that Trump is opposed to legal immigration or legal immigrants. While there is much to dislike about Trump, I can’t help but take his side against Suderman and anyone else who deliberately manipulates the discussion away from reality.

    As to racists, how are they an indictment of Trump? If Suderman and a racist both enjoy watching basketball games, does that make Suderman a racist? At some time or another, Suderman has surely sat down to eat a restaurant that was also serving a racist. Clearly, then, Suderman is a racist.

    The only question that matters here is whether Trump is a racist. If he is, you wouldn’t know it from anything Suderman says. He never attempts to explore Trump’s reasoning, never attempts to refute any of Trump’s statements. In such cases, I default to the presumption that the writer is either too lazy to do his homework or has some hidden agenda.

  73. Trump is worse than a racist. He’s a collectivist. He favored government-run single-payer health care. He pushes for protectionist trade barriers.

    And you know who else wanted car companies to put the interest of the Volk over profits?

    He’s not even an honest collectivist like Bernie Sanders. Sanders’ economic policy would be disastrous for the country, but at least he believe what he’s saying.

    Trump gets rich through eminent domain and crony capitalism, and then hires illegal immigrants to build his skyscrapers, while also blaming them for all the nation’s problems.

  74. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.online-jobs9.com

  75. The Republicans have been the party of racism since the sixties, when they recognized the opportunity provided by Democratic support for the Civil Rights Act. That is not new.
    What the racists love about Trump is that he’s being more open about it, either not possessing enough subtlety, or simply not caring, to use the quieter dog whistle of Republican politics. And, I have to admit, it’s refreshing to see a Republican almost say what he really thinks, out loud.

  76. Reason subscription mass cancellation in 5…4…3…2…

  77. Trump may be under federal pressure to run as a fake “non-libertarian third” candidate from an old bust at a casino he used to own. According to the Congressional Record of Aug-Sep 1998: “Federal banking regulators nailed the Trump Taj Mahal Casino resort with a $477,000 fine for money-laundering ? the biggest such fine ever, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported recently. Authorities said that drug traffickers, counterfeiters and others are known to use casinos as places to launder money. They do this by finding people to buy chips and denominations just under $10,000, gamble a little bit of it, then cash in the chips for “clean” money.” This use of tax laws to enforce prohibition snared a bunch of bigshots. The GOP desperately needs news cameras trained on non-libertarian candidates as idiotic fake alternatives as required by legislation passed just before Nixon was ousted.

  78. So it looks as if Reason is now joining the ranks of the Politically Correct.

    No, that’s been happening over the past few years. Reason’s coverage of immigration and education are garbage, suitable for consumption by SJWs everywhere.

    Yes, one would probably think that the speaker of this quote is prejudiced.

    Chris Rock is a naughty white man!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.