MovieChat Forums > Politics > I hate how diversity is always brought u...

I hate how diversity is always brought up with no negatives.


I'm from Canada where there is a lot of diversity, especially where I reside. I'm familiar with immigrants because of it. But I hate how it's always more diversity, more diversity, more diversity. Why is that automatically a good thing? Some countries are able to accommodate immigrants better than others. If crime raises because of immigrants, you're automatically considered racist for even mentioning it.

And why does a country have to be diverse? If it is, that's great. If it isn't, that's great too. Why are you forcing it on a country? Can you imagine if I walk up to the Smith family and say "hey, add some Johnson's to your family. Let's make your family the Smith-Johnson's. And if you don't like that, you're ignorant."

The entire thing is head-scratching.

reply

Globalists, Big Business and politicians have decided to impose "diversity" and "multiculturalism" on the Western World whether people like it or not. Globalists because they are deluded morons who don't realize they are sawing off the branch they're sitting on. Big Business so that they can employ workers at the lowest wage they can get away with and pay as little tax as possible. And politicians because they have been bought by Big Business.

We get the constant slogan that "diversity is good" because everyone likes pizza right ! But diversity also equals division and the more diverse a society is the more divided it is. As for multiculturalism it is an oxymoron. You can have a culture or you can have multiculturalism which destroys the native culture of the country by diluting and undermining it.

And of course it's only the Western nations that have to throw open the gates to all and sundry. You won't catch China or Japan doing this, they have too much sense.

I come from Australia and it's pretty well all over for the Anglo-Celtic population here already with its low birth rate. Meanwhile the Chinese and the Indians are flooding into the country in large numbers every year.


reply

Australia is actually a good example of this. I often hear how racist Australia is because there are no black people there. It's always black people they bring up, never any other race. Anyway, it's not like Australia is actively saying "we don't want immigrants here". People just look at the overwhelmingly white population and think they're racist and it makes no sense. As you said, China and Japan never get accused of this because doing so would make them feel like they're racist themselves.

reply

[deleted]

From that perspective, yes, but that's a generalization. I mean just because a country is overwhelmingly white, that doesn't make them racist.

I'm not Australian, but where I'm from, almost no immigrants can speak a word of any indigenous language. Obviously people who were born and raised here who aren't native can't either, but it's not like they're getting a pass on it like immigrants are. Immigrants can be a problem for natives just as much as non-natives who were born and raised in the country.

reply

Ask an Aboriginal if they think white Australian's aren't racist.


Everyone is racist. It's in the genes.

reply

Jeans! :)

reply

Aboriginals are the best victim players in the world. White Aboriginals play the race card the most as well. They get so many privileges and yet still scream for more.

reply

[deleted]

You have swallowed the Aboriginal Victim Industry's propaganda hook, line and sinker haven't you. You should familiarize yourself with the work of Keith Windschuttle on what he found when he actually went back to source documents to check the extravagant claims being made about how "diabolically" white people were supposed to have treated Aboriginals.

He found that the endlessly repeated mantra of "stolen generations" was grossly exaggerated and largely a myth. The claim that there was a "genocide" against Aboriginals is ludicrous. And there is no evidence to support claims of alleged massacres of large numbers of Aboriginals. The number of deaths on these reprisal raids have been either hugely inflated or in some instances were simply made up.


reply

[deleted]

Well if you know one person who was removed from her family and that's what you base your entire argument on well then I'm sorry but you simply don't know how to think logically. Your mind is ruled by emotion not facts. In other words what you say can't be taken seriously.

reply

[deleted]

The "Bringing Them Home" report... Well I suppose at least they clearly stated their bias right from the start so at least you know where they were coming from. No surprises though considering it was headed up by a libtard judge and a long time Aboriginal activist.

And this is what you cite to back up your argument, just more Aboriginal victim propaganda. By the way that "right wing hack" Keith Windschuttle actually went back to source documents to check the facts. That's how you do research. You don't just listen to all the made up sob stories and believe them because it gives you a glow of self righteous indignation.

reply

[deleted]

Yes the bleeding heart libtards and those who had carved out a nice little niche for themselves in academia with their cushy positions resting on fabricated work screamed blue bloody murder. Because like little emperors Windschuttle revealed that they were wearing no clothes.

His critics said that his research was "selective". That he didn't show proper regard for Aboriginal people's feelings. And of course there were enough racist cards played against him to stretch across the continent.

Educate yourself. Listen to his arguments. Don't just keep your head in the politically correct sand.


reply

[deleted]

I just believe in not being a cunt.


There's such a gap between what you believe and what you are though.

reply

[deleted]

Exactly what I was thinking, Quasi. Basing an argument on one single example of a thing is pretty damn foolish. It's emotional thinking at best, and absurd at worst.

reply

They were here for 200,000 years and never even discovered the wheel. Realistically someone was going to come along that was far more advanced than themselves. Many civilizations/races have been conquered over the centuries. Welcome to the world.

reply

[deleted]

But in the almost 60 years later, times have changed. Anyone is freely able to go there.

reply

[deleted]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying. My point is that often when people look at a country that is overwhelmingly white, people think it's racist. Some countries are just like that and they don't have to be diverse. I'm sure if we dig up history to every country, we can find all kinds of racism. I mean, all races at some point in time have been a victim of slavery.

reply

Hey Seymour, you say that white people are a suspicious lot, and in the same breath you tell us that you notice all the "sly racist comments" that everybody makes, everywhere you go...

Well, going by that, I'd say there's a "deep undercurrent" of anti-white misanthropy in the Seymour culture.

Either that, or paranoia.

reply

[deleted]

Oddly enough it was the Labor party (the Left wing party by today's standards) who introduced the White Australia policy to keep jobs safe.

That said Australia took in millions of migrants, not all were white either.

reply

I think you'd get some surprised looks from Australia's ~500,000 Aborigines/Torres Strait Islanders if you said that in public, Joe... :)

reply

I said: "it's not like Australia is actively saying they don't want immigrants here".

Aboriginals aren't immigrants.

reply

No, I was referring to the part, "how racist Australia is because there are no black people there." I agree with everything you're saying in the discussion.

reply

You're right, the "diversity is our strength" mantra collapses under even basic logical and empirical scrutiny, at least as it's typically used. Which is why one has to look past platitudes to the real motives behind it. Some honestly believe it but are shallowly repeating what they've been fed over the years without ever having thought it through. Some are just cowards going with the flow of the mob. But those driving it have a strategic agenda of breaking Western societies up by flooding them with immigrants while simultaneously sabotaging the assimilation process. Balkanizing countries and permanently entrenching racial/ethnic divisions lets leftists solidify their power by playing identity politics games forever. And a key part of radical leftism from the French Revolution to Marxism to the New Left has always been about destroying a culture's traditional status quo, whatever it is, by almost any means available (from the French so called "Cult of Reason" to Mao's Cultural Revolution to the US 1960s/70s counterculture movement), so they can have a blank slate on which to impose their totalitarian rule, free of obstacles.

The modern left loves bashing whites/men/Christians/etc. because doing so sucks up the oxygen in the room and diverts from real issues (like how visible socialism's spectacular failure is from a post Cold War perspective). Focusing on "diversity" gives them something proactive to put their rhetorical energy into, and with no limiting principle or light at the end of the tunnel it lets them self righteously preach on the issue and control discourse indefinitely as they subtly marry those themes to classic leftist agenda items (as they have on environmentalism).

Unless enough people call them out on their bullshit.

reply

People enjoy bashing white people and calling them evil only because of slavery but they seem to forget about the Barbary slave trade, Osama Bin Laden, Boko Haram and Pol Pot. To even suggest that all races are capable of evil will get you accused of racism.

They're going to get their wish, however. Eventually every country will be mixed of all races that the races themselves will begin to look different. No one will be one race, we'll all be mixed.

reply

In fact while slavery was pervasive around the world for most of human history, "white people" are the ones who ended it, not only at home but around the planet. Of course what's relevant in that isn't skin color but Christian morality combined with Western principles.

reply

"white people" are the ones who ended it


Except for the white people who fought tooth and nail to preserve it, many if not most of who I'm guessing also believed themselves to possess "Christian morality."

reply

True, but again pro slavery sentiment was the norm around the world among all races. What's noteworthy are differences, in this case many in Western Christendom (or "white people", as leftists think of them) opposing slavery and actually ending it. Everywhere. Parts of the Muslim world stubbornly held out well into the 20th Century, following Muhammad's example, until pressure from "white" powers like the US and Britain pushed them into banning it.

reply

IF WE ALL SPENT HALF THE TIME WE SPEND COMING UP FOR LOGICAL REASONS AGAINST DIVERSITY ACTUALLY TRYING TO ACCEPT THE WAY OF THE MODERN WORLD,THINGS WOULD BE A LOT BETTER.TECHNOLOGY HAS ERASED THE BORDERS AND DIVIDING LINES..WERE ALL JUST PEOPLE NOW..ITS ALL MOOT ANYWAY.THE OLD GUARD WILL BE DEAD SOON AND THE NEW WILL NOW REMEMBER THE OLD'S HANGUPS.

reply

But what if globalization and multiculturalism are a terrible mistake ? Do you think it's an accident that historically people tend to organize themselves into specific regions according to their ethnicity ? What if there is a genetic basis for that behaviour ? Because if there is then globalization and multiculturalism are going against human nature.

reply

Yeah, the caps help.....

reply

SMALL MINDS ALWAYS FOCUS ON THE CAPS.

reply

Okay, Copernicus. Why the caps then?

reply

I LIKE THEM.I USE THEM,AND I HAVE USED THEM FOR 20 SOME YEARS.

reply

What, since you turned 50?

Maybe time to get along to your optometrist.

reply

IM 37.CAPPING SINCE MY FIRST NET LOG ON.

reply

Um.... why?

reply

To annoy people with the false assumption that it will make the message somehow, more relevant.

reply

I LIKE THEM.SIMPLE AS THAT.WHY SO INTENT ON KNOCKING ME DOWN WITH YOUR ANALYSIS?.YOURE PRETTY RUDE.

reply

Typing in all caps like that is overwhelmingly considered rude. Wake up.

reply

CONSIDERED BY WHO?...SO SILLY.YOU HEARD CAPS WERE YELLING AND HAVENT BEEN ABLE TO SHAKE THE NOTION.ITS NOT TRUE..THERE ARE abcs AND ABCS. BIG AND LITTLE...NOTHING MORE..YOU SEEM TO LIKE TO ARGUE OVER TRIVIAL ISSUES THAT DONT REALLY APPLY TO YOU.ITS COOL.SO......ARE YOU SINGLE?

reply

I'm sure I'm not the first to complain but yet you continue for no reason (maybe attention?). Ask around. People will tell you it's rude, annoying and universally disliked. If that's how you like to be perceived, go you.

reply

IVE BEEN CHATTING FOR 2O YEARS WITH CAPS...IM AWARE OF THE WHINY BABIES WHO INSIST IT MEANS SOMETHING/ANYTHING...WHO CARES...I DONT LIVE MY LIFE BASED ON RANDOM STRANGERS COMPLAINTS.YOU SHOULDNT EITHER.YOU MIGHT WANT TO ADDRESS THIS OBSESSION YOU HAVE WITH ME...ITS UNHEALTHY..ALSO YOU NEVER ANSWERED...ARE YOU SINGLE?

reply

No. I am not. Are you? By the way, I have no obsession with you. I was simply stating the obvious. If you want to be irritating, like I said, go you.

reply

NO..WANNA BUMP KNOBS ANYWAY?

reply

NaW. mY DoOr Do3sN't SwInG tHaT wAy, BuT tHaNkS fOr AsKiNg.

reply

Yep, there it is. The desperate need for attention.

Never fails. Every time one of these jerks gets pulled up for some dumb behaviour, out come the old, "Are you obsessed with me" rubbish. Jesus, it's boring!

reply

YOU ARE AWARE I WASNT SOAPBOXING MYSELF...THE CHILDREN CHOSE TO PLAY 20 QUESTIONS WITH ME.

reply

You sound much older than 37. And you come across like an old queen, too.

reply

You say that like it's a bad thing corny. Making statements like that makes you come across as something altogether more unpleasant. It's not hard to be civil.

reply

Well, now I know all about Seymour...

reply

Anything you want to know about me, just ask mate. All else is pure speculation.

reply

LOL!! Speculation!! Like what you've been doing in nearly every post you've made in this thread! oh, man...

Anyway, I'm going to absent myself from this chat from here on, Theemour. No value in it. But please note, no parting shots will be read by me. So they'd better be entertaining for your chum...

reply

YOU CONTINUE TO LEAN THE INTO THE PUTDOWNS...IM CURIOUS,HOW IT IS YOUVE COME TO BELIEVE YOUR OPINION IS WORTH ANY MORE THAN MINE OR ANYONE ELSES.

reply

Hey, as well as never finding the Caps Lock key in 20 years, how have you managed without punctuation? Sometimes a comma or brackets or an exclamation mark or a semi-colon or (dare I say it), a colon makes a big difference to the meaning of what you're writing, (although in your case probably not much).

reply

YOU DID NOTICE MY LAST COMMENT HAD TWO PERIODS AND A COMMA,RIGHT?...NOPE.JUST MORE PUTDOWNS...YET,SOMEHOW IM THE PROBLEM HERE.YOURE PRICELESS.

reply

You forgot the double "the"s, bud.

But anyway, you're getting boring.. and I'm not usually easily bored. So, if it's all the same to you, KOWALSKI!!!!!!!, I'll sign off.

reply

IM BORING,WHILST REPLYING TO YOUR NONSENSE.SO IN ESSENCE...YOU BREED BOREDOM.

reply

WELL, YOU'RE GOOD FOR SOMETHING, kowalski. YOU'RE THE FIRST ONE I'VE EVER PUT ON IGNORE, HERE. Bye bye....................................................

reply

JUST FOR CLARITY...YOU INSULTED,DENEGRATED AND ATTEMPTED TO BULLY ME.I CALMLY REPLIED TO YOUR STREAM OF NONSENSE..YOU IGNORED ME...WAY TO GO CHAMP.

reply

Diversity comes along with freedom. To oppose it is to oppose a large piece of what makes us free.

reply

I'm not against it, I'm against forcing people to do it and calling them racist if they don't. I'm a white Canadian dude and I wouldn't dream of telling Japan to let more white guys like me in because they're not diverse enough.

reply

Canada isn't going to other countries looking for people of color to add to their own. The diversity is already there. What you're being "forced" to do is not blockade against the multiple races already in Canada. If you're going to put up barriers against people of color in your own country under the guise of "I will not be forced to do it," then of course some will call you racist. I prefer not to use that term since tribalism and xenophobia are more accurate, but it should be easy to see the red flag you are putting up.

I probably wouldn't tell that to Japan either, but it wouldn't hurt. Keep in mind that Japan is isolationist because of their failure in WW2. By rejecting their military regime, they became isolated, and became a culture of not interfering with outside territories. But here in the US and Canada, we've embraced diversity. You don't have to tell the leadership in our countries to allow it. Its already here.

reply

Not just Japan though. Nigeria isn't diverse. China, South Korea, Egypt, Ghana, Chad, Uganda, are also not diverse just to name a few. Why don't we look at those countries as racist? Canada, USA, England are all diverse, yet we often hear about how they're not doing enough. In 2018, Canada took in 30% of the entire World's refugees and all I kept hearing was that we need to bring in more. Why? Why not the other 200+ countries? Why are you singling out Canada? Why can't Nigeria or China accept some refugees? Why is Canada getting accused of racism just because we haven't taken 50% of the refugees?

reply

"Nigeria isn't diverse."

There's your answer. Nigeria and those other countries are not diverse. Canada is. What you are hearing is for Canadians to be more accepting of the diversity that already exists in Canada.

"In 2018, Canada took in 30% of the entire World's refugees and all I kept hearing was that we need to bring in more."

Asking Canada to take in more refugees is a waaaay different conversation than asking Canada to be more diverse. Canada is being asked to bring in more because it is believed Canada has the resources and infrastructure to handle it. Japan and China may have the resources (questionable), but they don't have the infrastructure. Nigeria doesn't have either, not even close.

reply

But the question is: what made Canada diverse 150 years ago that we continue to do today that China can't do now? After all, let's remember that Canada wasn't always diverse. It was a land of Native tribes and that was it.

reply

Canada and the US had a level of freedom that China did not have. With that freedom came capitalism, causing the entire globe to want to compete for the American dream which started with the Gold Rush and spread to Canada.

reply

Diversity comes along with freedom. To oppose it is to oppose a large piece of what makes us free.


Well so long as your definition of being free includes compulsory diversity. But if it's compulsory then it's the opposite of freedom isn't it ? What about the freedom of the English being able to claim and hold onto their own country as the homeland of English people and by that I mean people of Anglo-Saxon and Celtic descent ?

reply

I would argue freedom is the foundation. The driving force of diversity is capitalism, which typically comes from freedom. Capitalism pushes diversity in many ways. One way is it prompts foreigners to come here and compete for a piece of the pie (this is the biggest problem nationalists have with diversity). Another way capitalism pushes diversity is that the capitalists at the top understand that more cultural markets in the US equals more profits. And for the capitalists at the extreme top who have already gone global, supporting diversity is what grants them access to markets all over the world. Its why big corporations will not only fall in line with boycotts on social media, but those corporations will find themselves amplifying the boycotts. It increases domestic profits as well as foreign. Its also why Fox News anchors who say something racially insensitive often find themselves on "vacation."

reply

You're not arguing anything. You're just announcing that you're right because capitalism equals freedom and therefore globalization is good because capitalism wants it while totally ignoring what I said.

reply

Being criticized for pushing back against status quo diversity does not equal compulsory diversity. Diversity in the sense of adding different races to a country has never been compulsory. It was those races choosing to come here to compete for the American dream that made diversity the standard. Again... capitalism, with freedom as its foundation.

Also I never said capitalist globalism is good. Capitalism at high levels runs into the same problem globally that it runs into locally, which is that resources are finite.

reply

Ultraviolet, that's a very obvious example of the logic fallacy, "Begging The Question". There's also a bit of the "Loaded Question" trick there.

(1) Many things "come along" with freedom, but not necessarily diversity. Freedom may make diversity more possible, but it doesn't make it obligatory. A free society which doesn't choose to be diverse, for whatever reason, is still nonetheless free.

reply

I've already explained in my replies how our variety of capitalistic freedom lead to the gold rush which is where most of our diversity came from. You can argue that my first statement did not elaborate enough for you to make the connection on its own, but my replies are there for your reading pleasure.

Also, diversity for the sake of diversity has never been proven by anyone to be obligatory. It sounds more like a logical fallacy.

reply

What do you call the deliberate, sustained and long term program of mass immigration into the West of people from a diverse range of countries that was never voted for by the local population but obligatory diversity ?

reply

I call immigration immigration. I call mass immigration mass immigration. If you actually had proof that it was obligatory, you would've described how it was obligatory instead of asking a question.

Just like when the Irish and the Italians came here, it wasn't obligatory. Now when we first arrived and pushed the natives away, I guess I would agree that was obligatory since we siezed the actual land they were living on.

To determine whether or not it was actually obligatory, you have to ask yourself how you were obliged to change your life due to the mass immigration. If there was no change to your life, your obligation was effectively zero.

reply

UV, you're not understanding what the term "obligatory" means.

reply

Diversity instituted by law or some other rule would be obligatory. There's no law that any country must become more diverse.

Overall the problem you are having is the same problem nationalists have that immigration is the status quo. Wouldn't all immigration count as obligatory? If so then it makes no sense to focus on diversity. Being unable to prevent immigration is your problem. But it certainly raises the question, why the heck are you complaining about a country allowing in immigrants when thats how its been before you were born and how your family got there.

reply

Also keep in mind I said diversity for the sake of diversity. The mass immigration of refugees isn't diversity for the sake of diversity. Its diversity for the sake of giving people a place to live.

reply

Well, that's what we're being urged to believe, UV. And people like you believe it unreservedly because it sounds nice and warm and cosy and makes you feel like you're a "good person".

reply

Two sentences of what you believe to be true doesn't make it true. But it does reveal the heart of the matter. You don't like it because you believe you are being forced to do something. What is it that you are being forced to do? In what way are you forced to change your life? This was the question I asked above but received no answer.

reply

Come on now, UV, be honest. It does make you feel like you're a "good person", doesn't it. And you like that warm and cosy feeling that you get from being that person. You know that's true and so do I. It's the common weakness of western societies, and it's being exploited to achieve the assimilation of uninvited foreigners.

And you mean to say you don't understand how we're all being forced to change?? Really?

You really actually don't understand how "giving people a place to live" involves a change of circumstances for the people already living in that place? And that when you're giving people of a radically different culture and background "a place to live", it's a radical change of circumstances for the existing people?

Come on, you can't be that ignorant.

Or are you one of the privileged few who won't be forced to change your life in some way? Well, lucky you.

reply

It always amuses me the way you big-hearted humanitarians act so "compassionate" and "caring" towards anyone from a different culture who says they're disadvantaged, yet when one of your own society expresses a concern that he/she might become disadvantaged, you don't want to know. It's tough titty.

Is it possibly because there's no emotional payoff for showing compassion to your own, but there's a huge emotional payoff for proclaiming your compassion for total strangers? And is that payoff intensified by the fact that you can get on your righteous soapbox and admonish your friends and neighbours with dogmatic sermonising about how bigoted and racist they are? Make you feel "powerful", does it?

A member of a society who does anything that is inimical to that society's best interests, would benefit from some close personal self-scrutiny. Particularly of their perception of their own place in that society, and how confident they are of it.

reply

Change of circumstances is complete BS. I'm as white as a person can get. My life hasn't changed because of diversity or immigration just like yours hasn't.

You want people to think you are a victim, but you always run into a wall when asked how white people are suffering due to diversity. You don't want to just come out and say you don't like the idea of people of color mixing with white people. So you answer the question with another question around some obscure "change of circumstances" that you can't even define. lol. Its pathetic.

Also, it doesn't need to make me feel like a good person to support immigration. Immigration has been the status quo for this country for well over a hundred years. Its up to YOU to explain why immigration needs to change.

reply

Diversity is a good thing. The USA is a nation of imigrants from all over the world. As Rodney King said a long time ago "Can't we all just get along?"

reply

My post is how no bring brings up the negatives behind it because it comes off as racist if you do. Also, I don't understand why a country has to be diverse.

reply

Diversity is our strength, bro.

reply

Yeah but they all had a common background, values. They all assimilated, you start having problems when you get little parallel cultures and societies especially when they want to take down the host culture.

reply

Slim, I always smile and shake my head whenever I hear that old chestnut.

It reminds me that I can never decide if "naive" is written with two "i"s or one...

reply

"Diversity is our strength" that is what we are told ad nauseam down here. They never explain why though they just say it and if you ask why or disagree you are branded the "R" word.

Recently the Indians I work with were complaining because all of the stores in the city are Asian now or most of them anyway. I found that amusing. "Diversity" seems to be the end of diversity to me.

reply

"Diversity" seems to be the end of diversity to me.


Bingo! Globalization and "multiculturalism" end up destroying diversity in the end by blending everything together until it's the same lowest common denominator mash up. True diversity takes lots of time and a good degree of isolation to develop in its own unique way. Can anyone say that there is more genuine diversity in the world now than there was 150 years ago ?

People who are in favour of globalization and multiculturalism are so blinded by either their starry eyed and unfounded optimism ( in the case of white libtards ) or their own base self interest ( immigrants and would be immigrants to the West ) to actually look at the matter beyond barely scratching the surface and parroting a string of banal slogans.


reply

Should also be noted that the "Diverse" ones aren't diverse themselves. Same colour hair, eyes, same religions, same beliefs. The race they are desperately trying to kill off is the most diverse looking race on the planet.

On the bright side if the West ever falls the Libtard's could be in for a real shock when it comes to how their "values" are handled by the new masters.

reply

No shit! Their utopian paradise they think they want, doesn't and never will exist.

reply

What the followers of this insanity don't understand is that the people pulling the strings want it to fail, they know it will fail. It is all to disrupt and destroy society. When it fails, it succeeds.

reply

Yes, they are the classic "useful idiots".

Divide and Rule. Out of Chaos Order.




reply

Well said, Quasi.

reply

There is nothing wrong with diversity, its just when its forced down our throats and the best candidate for a position or job isn't hired bc a company or organization is forced to higher a lessor minority candidate to meet quota.

reply

Exactly.

reply

If you support President Trump in wanting legal immigration, or anything else, all the left know to do is label
you with the very same labels they have been using for decades. Not only are they hypocritical, they are also
unimaginative.

reply

I hate Trump but I don't see how anyone could be in favour of illegal immigration. It just doesn't make sense to me. Some people say the process can take decades, but the country doesn't owe you anything. If you go to the country, you follow the rules. Sneaking into a country and hiding and then complaining when you get caught just seems like excuses to me.

reply

I like him. He is something so different, not the same old same old we always get, Presidents that are
afraid to stand up for this country. I loved his rally in New Mexico last night. I am not racist, I'm not
Hitler, or facist. I believe in legal immigration, I even agree with liberals about certain types of guns
not being needed by the general public, but the left has gone bonkers, IMO, on too many issues. I have
always been Independent, in voting, but a conservative.

reply

I'm neither liberal nor conservative because I find the political spectrum arbitrary. Who decides what goes on the left and right? Both sides make strong and weak points.

reply

Trump absolutely terrifies a giant cross-section of modern political society because he calls into question the failed policies of both the left and right.

reply