Truth of 2016 president election

Truth of 2016 president election

The core is to help Trump to grab the president power.
The mastermind is the FBI.
Russian is only a scapegoat hired to get the thing done.

Clinton is victim but has been targetted by the FBI

Hillary's email was hacked. She is a victim. Russian (or the FBI) is the thief. But in this election the FBI attacked Clinton all the way to help their candidate Trump to steal the president seat.

Also the extreme left have become annoying with their social justice rhetorics and attack on white privilege. Do you know how annoying it is to call a blue collar white guy who works a 70 hour week job that is shitty and dangerous by some snot nosed collage kid who hasn't worked, priveldged because he's white.

Krumple wrote:

Also the extreme left have become annoying with their social justice rhetorics and attack on white privilege. Do you know how annoying it is to call a blue collar white guy who works a 70 hour week job that is shitty and dangerous by some snot nosed collage kid who hasn't worked, priveldged because he's white.

All this tells me is that you don't understand what the term 'white privilege' actually means (and neither, I suppose, does much of white America).

I'm saying this as a middle aged white guy who works 66 hours a week.

maporsche wrote:

Krumple wrote:

Also the extreme left have become annoying with their social justice rhetorics and attack on white privilege. Do you know how annoying it is to call a blue collar white guy who works a 70 hour week job that is shitty and dangerous by some snot nosed collage kid who hasn't worked, priveldged because he's white.

All this tells me is that you don't understand what the term 'white privilege' actually means (and neither, I suppose, does much of white America).

I'm saying this as a middle aged white guy who works 66 hours a week.

The point isn't how you demand it be understood but instead on how those people percieve the comment. Even if they are misunderstanding the meaning behind white priveldge its about how they interpret it in their own life. Thats why they are annoyed by the statement.

Krumple wrote:

maporsche wrote:

Krumple wrote:

Also the extreme left have become annoying with their social justice rhetorics and attack on white privilege. Do you know how annoying it is to call a blue collar white guy who works a 70 hour week job that is shitty and dangerous by some snot nosed collage kid who hasn't worked, priveldged because he's white.

All this tells me is that you don't understand what the term 'white privilege' actually means (and neither, I suppose, does much of white America).

I'm saying this as a middle aged white guy who works 66 hours a week.

The point isn't how you demand it be understood but instead on how those people percieve the comment. Even if they are misunderstanding the meaning behind white priveldge its about how they interpret it in their own life. Thats why they are annoyed by the statement.

"How I demand it?" haha...ok. First, I'm not demanding anything.

Words have actual meanings. Just because you or others don't understand the meanings (likely because they don't want to) doesn't change the meaning of the phrase.

I agree with you that misunderstandings are indeed an issue around the term. I get that ignorance of the meaning can cause annoyance (on both sides, trust me).

I wonder, do you understand the meaning behind the phrase? Could you explain it in a brief fashion? Do you agree that it exists to some degree? To what degree do you think, I wonder?

Essentially the statement suggests that whites are treated better because they are white.

maporsche wrote:

Krumple wrote:

maporsche wrote:

Krumple wrote:

Also the extreme left have become annoying with their social justice rhetorics and attack on white privilege. Do you know how annoying it is to call a blue collar white guy who works a 70 hour week job that is shitty and dangerous by some snot nosed collage kid who hasn't worked, priveldged because he's white.

All this tells me is that you don't understand what the term 'white privilege' actually means (and neither, I suppose, does much of white America).

I'm saying this as a middle aged white guy who works 66 hours a week.

The point isn't how you demand it be understood but instead on how those people percieve the comment. Even if they are misunderstanding the meaning behind white priveldge its about how they interpret it in their own life. Thats why they are annoyed by the statement.

"How I demand it?" haha...ok. First, I'm not demanding anything.

Words have actual meanings. Just because you or others don't understand the meanings (likely because they don't want to) doesn't change the meaning of the phrase.

I agree with you that misunderstandings are indeed an issue around the term. I get that ignorance of the meaning can cause annoyance (on both sides, trust me).

I wonder, do you understand the meaning behind the phrase? Could you explain it in a brief fashion? Do you agree that it exists to some degree? To what degree do you think, I wonder?

Essentially the statement suggests that whites are treated better because they are white. If you were to place two people in the same scenario, one being white and the other not, the situation result would favor the white over the non-white.

So any case, police stops, job interviews, bank loans, housing, etc. Any situation favors whites over non- white.

Its a generalization, its not 100% true. Therefore it's racist to say there is white priveldge.

All it is, is an attack on whites. When there is a problem you blame the ethnic race for your problems. Rather than admitting that people are not equal and never will be. Some people will always need to work harder, try more and get turned down more often than someone else. They just want to say this is because the white man said no, why I can't be a billionaire.

'significant percentage of whites who didn't accept desegregation . . ."

Where in god's name do you get this kind of information?

For a "significant percentage" of people - including minorities - it was an ECONOMIC issue.

You could be nibbling around a couple of points with your statement. It's definitely relevant to the discussion, but not sure exactly what you intend.

Trump won because the Dems were arrogantly positive they would win. Even Bill Clinton scolded Hillary for not campaigning in states he felt she could have won if she had treated them seriously.

The hacking story is pushed by the left because they don't want to admit to the truth. They are overly arrogant, childish, out of touch with the common hard working American, and corrupt.