Quote:

 

I could post this to anyone else here on the forum and they wouldn't take it negatively or even remotely condescending. That wasn't my intention and if you see it as such the problem is between the chair and computer. This is the second time I've had such a fluff argument here with you. You're still wrong on the rhetorical question thing though lol, since as you quoted you can present something in a persuasive and literary manner for it to be a rhetorical question. By posing the link as a rhetorical question, I'm saying whatever is in the link should make it obvious that he's racist.

Quote:

 

Good to know we're getting somewhere.

Quote:

 

It didn't before, but that kind of thing can now force you to make multi billion dollar decisions (a link)

Quote:

 

His rhetoric is still bad, so I'd say he's making a business decision and not a moral one. Hillary changed and her rhetoric changed. She doesn't support homophobia at all now. To say that Trump is no longer a racist because he's no longer as bad as he used to be is a weak argument imo.

Quote:

 

I'll reiterate: "If it is a rhetorical question, then it was a poorly written one and done in bad taste. Let's just drop it."

Quote:

 

Have you stopped to wonder if perhaps it's the way you present yourself? My initial post was calm, collected, and a good contribution. You were the one who responded in a condescending manner. And yes, I did see it as condescending considering it was the complete rejection of my own post and opinion. It was an "I'm right, you're wrong" statement, and I didn't like that. A list of outdated articles doesn't make you correct.

Quote:

 

Condescending.

Quote:

 

You're misunderstanding my argument. I never said that he isn't a racist because he's no longer as bad as he used to be. I'm saying that he isn't a racist because there is no hatred or intentional discrimination present in his speech. Are the things he says ignorant? Yes. Are they politically incorrect? Yes. Are they racist? No. Racism is quite different from political incorrectness, just as not all rhetorical questions adequately project their intended meaning.

I suppose at the end of the day it comes down to our own interpretation of terms, and clearly we differ there, so if your argument is going in that direction it's best to leave things here.

And just to clarify, I really don't have anything against you. I just have this thing called pride that seems to inflate when I feel dumb (i.e. not being able to distinguish links from text).

Quote:

 

It might have come across as sharp because you didn't realize that my argument was completely different from what you initially assumed it was (and that would mainly be your fault).

Quote:

 

The point we're arguing is: Is Trump racist? I think we both agree he's been a racist in the past. My question to you is: what has he done that would prompt you to think he no longer is racist? What evidence do we have that he isn't anymore? If someone has been racist, then no longer have extreme racism in their speeches doesn't qualify them as no longer being racist. His speech still a ton of racist undertone, so the evidence is on the side that he's still a racist.