Trump. 14th Amendment. Why is it okay?

If Trump is running on any kind of platform it's that he wants to get rid of and/or change the 14th Amendment so that the children of undocumented immigrants are no longer granted citizenship if they are born here. For anyone following the news you'll know that Trump is specifically targeting Mexico and Mexican immigrants with his comments regarding the 14th Amendment.

People are free to believe and support whoever they like, but my question is why news organizations continue to treat this as normal policy proposals from a presidential candidate and not hate speech?

EDIT: I forgot to include this part in the original comment so I'm putting it in now with a video aid.

With the 14th Amendment it isn't only an issue of preventing immigration into this country. It's also an issue of rounding up AMERICAN CITIZENS and deporting them to Mexico. Trump made it very clear that he doesn't believe that the children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants are US citizens so he envisions a system where they are removed as well.

Trump explained his views in an interview with Bill O'Reilly. Skip to 1:10 in the video.

>why news organizations continue to treat this as normal policy proposals from a presidential candidate and not hate speech?

Because it sells and that's all that matters to News outlets.

Because he's a legitimate candidate, God help us, the bullshit he says has to be taken with some degree of credibility and discussed as reasonably as possible, even if it is xenophobic.

If he becomes president I'm fucking moving out of this country.

Because the news, especially the 24 hour networks do not report on news.

When I was in the military, we had briefings on how to handle media and the one thing I remember is when one of the older guys, a Colonel told me about a briefing given to him by IIRC Burt Reinhardt, one of the founding guys at CNN. He said that "It is important to remember that 24 hour news networks do not report on the news, they are entertainment programs designed for ratings."

A couple of months ago, a friend of mine that works as a radio anchor explained to me in regards to trump, it's a smart move for the networks to keep covering trump and making him seem like a wild card contender without driving away too many people from him. He provides a constant stream of soundbytes and "news" to deliver on this 24 hour news-cycle. People like to hear about it because he's such a weird character. Turning him from weird to evil would be bad for business.

Besides, he's not a real, legitimate national level candidate. The people that are really sweating over trump are the Republicans since ihe distracts attention from much more viable presidential contenders.

Go ahead and change the 14th amendment all you want, but you better keep that 2nd amendment exactly as it is or else.

There are a lot of Americans whose priorities are so fucking out of whack that it is sometimes really difficult to stay rational-minded about it. People will say stuff like "get the foreigners out" or "everyone should own guns" and you don't even know where to start with trying to understand why people feel this way or how you can change their mind about these things.

There are much more important things that need to be addressed and fixed before most things that people spend so much time and energy talking about. Climate change, college debt, health care, making sure social security stays strong and viable, the growing wealth gap in this country...

It's just frustrating.

The vast majority of what Trump says is either disingenuous nonsense or intolerant invective. It's being humored because, to many outlets, they aren't there to judge. They've fallen into a realm of false objectivity, whereby prejudice and irrationality are treated as potentially as valid as anything else. It's why a CNN anchor can ask a panel of science experts whether a missing airplane was sucked into a wormhole and not bat an eyelash. Absurdity is as valid as it is popular.

Major news outlets see that he is up in the polls, and in modern "objective" news, popularity is validity. They feel an obligation to not question it and just offer "an alternative viewpoint" on any ridiculous thing. So, Trump will continue to talk like a young dictator with pure demagoguery and major news outlets will continue to try to give it the same billing it would give any other thing that is perceived as popular.

As long as false objectivity reigns in news, hate speech and absurdity will be considered as worthy of consideration as anything else.

To call it hate speech would, as one poster said, ruin their sense of 'objectivity'.

From what I hear, he also says that undocumented Mexican immigrants are likely to be rapists. So it's quite logical, really!

I get that you are discussing the media treatment of his proposal, but just so that we're all on the same page, there is a zero percent chance that the the Constitution is amended in such a way. You need a joint resolution supported by 2/3 of BOTH the House and the Senate to amend the Constitution. You couldn't get 2/3 of both Houses of Congress to agree that the sky is blue nowadays.

If we're asking about constitutional amendments why not throw Hillary under the bus for her plans to prevent 501(c)s from donating to campaigns? At least when Trump says some garbage its what he actually believes.

Whether anyone here wants to admit it or not, Trump is actually saying things that ring true with a lot of Americans.

Can anyone truly say we don't have an issue with illegal immigration in America?
No other country tolerates it, why should we?

It's not prejudice, or xenophobic to say that you need to come to America the proper way, and if you're here illegally (not just Mexicans) you need to be sent back to your own country.

@betterley: At issue here is Trump's effect on the attitudes of certain American voters. One need only look at his treatment of Jorge Ramos and the subsequent cries of "GO BACK TO YOUR OWN COUNTRY" from people outside of the interview room. He's stirring the pot of xenophobia whether he wants to or not, and people are loving every minute of it. That's the fucked up part: that so many people harbor such resentment towards their fellow human beings that they would talk to them so callously. America is a powder keg these days, with issues of race being particularly on everyone's mind. Everyone is choosing sides now, and fracturing in a frankly scary way. One day, it will erupt violently and people like Trump will be too far away to be blamed even though they started the fires.

I still think he's running just to embarase the republican party. I mean, look at his track record. He has been a democrat for so long, what's all of a sudden changed. He has to know he's not electable by the majority of the country. What a dog and pony show!

@getz:

I think you're exaggerating a bit.
I don't think it's fair to blame one person for someone else's actions either.
We make our own choices. Just because a few people show a hateful attitude, doesn't mean everyone does.

Me too. I said that jokingly in 2012 when Romney ran. But I'm dead serious about it this time. There's no way I'll be willing to live in this country if he becomes president. He's an absolute joke of a human being.

I live in Australia, so I could be talking completely out of my ass here, but here's my perspective on more radical candidates like Trump, and why they are getting their voices heard.

First of all, there's the whole media thing. That's already been covered in the thread.

Secondly, and I think this is major, is that America has only voluntary voting. This, in my mind, means that candidates actually have two issues they have to address; get people to vote, and get those people to vote for you. If Trump is tapping into the fervour of a group that has felt misaligned in the past, he may be getting those that haven't voted for years to vote for him this coming election, and that's a big deal. I would attribute a sizable portion of Obama's success to getting the youth of America to vote for him when otherwise they would not have voted at all.

Again, I am Australian, so if I have seriously misunderstood the issue, feel free to let me know.

@betterley is right saying there is a sizable group of American voters that agree with Trump, however the rest of us feel about it. He isn't creating the feeling in them, he is just speaking to them and perhaps leveraging them or maybe he really 100% believes it. Either way it's a real group of people that agree with him. Lets keep in mind people have been able to mobilize volunteers to police the borders in America very recently (and that may even still be going on?). Some people view this is a giant issue and they agree with Trump.

In my opinion Trump is hardly any worse than anyone else running for president right now, unfortunately. In fact at least he is probably more honest and outside the political system some so he might get more respect from me even if I totally disagree with his positions. That speaks to how little I think of the government right now but I think it's very justified.

@adequatelyprepared I think you have a pretty good read on things. Just getting voters to turn out in America is a major battle.

... because it's not hate speech? Because there'sno such thing as hate speech? Hate speech is a term that is meant to stifle and silence anyone who commits the terrible act of wrongthink.

Cynically, it's because Trump is a lightning rod and he attracts viewers/readers. Even the people who hate him still keep tabs on what he's saying. Dude brings in eyeballs, and eyeballs are what's most important to American news outlets. It doesn't hurt that he's tapping into a growing population of resentful Americans. Resentful because the law doesn't apply to illegals, resentful because they lost their house in 2008, resentful because they did the right thing by going to college and taking on hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loan debt only to realize that they'll never have a good job that'll help them pay it off. Resentful Americans who are understanding that unlike their parents, they'll never be able to afford a house, a car, or anywhere close to the same standard of living they enjoyed when the country was in more prosperous times.

There's a lot of resentment out there. A lot of anger. All you really need to become a leader in any political party is a voice that's expressing everything the resentful and angry feel. You show them you're on their side, and they'll walk through fire for you. The fact that it's Donald Trump that's saying all of this is hilarious, but anyone who has even a cursory understanding of what's going on in the United States will see quite clearly, and quite easily, how he's gaining so much ground.

Just gotta step outside your bubble and look at the world you live in, dawg.

It's a bit disappointing that anyone is following him, simply because 'he speaks his mind' and acts fed up with Government BS, but that's not necessarily the only thing that one needs to be president; so much of his talk is derogatory. So far, the entire campaign has been a joke to me unfortunately, and I don't think it helps that other candidates are even reacting to Trump's crap as much as they are, as if anyone should matter what that (what I consider) ignorant guy has to say about running the country. I just don't feel like Trump would know how to run a country properly, and with the way he would go, it isn't the way many would be happy with. So far, I haven't really liked any of the candidates attitudes toward things...

Trump is making my life miserable. Most of my coworkers and large parts of my family have been drinking his Kool-Aid since '08.

I can't stand him.

I don't like Trump at all and wouldn't vote for him if you paid me, but it's ridiculous to not treat him as a legitimate presidential candidate making sincere proposals, despite the fact that they're almost universally awful. He's a leading Presidential candidate whether you like it or not.

If you want to get rid of him then you need to tackle that head-on as opposed to complaining that mainstream news isn't become more of an opinion-pushing battle of the echo chambers. He thrives on that shit and so do his supporters.

I'm not sure I follow what you are saying. "Hate speech" does not exist? I wont get into the part of the comment where you say the law doesn't apply to "illegals", but maybe you can clarify how what you define as "hate speech" doesn't exist. Maybe we are talking about two different things, because the thing I'm talking about definitely exists and has very real consequences in society.

I agree. It's never made sense to me that, after people come here illegally, they bang out a few kids, and that somehow gives them the right to stay. That would be like if I broke into your house, had sex with my wife on your bed, she had a kid, then I demanded to be officially part of your family.

Just to be clear, I have no problem with people that go through the proper channels and come here legally. Also, he should just talk about illegal immigrants in general, not just Mexicans, even though they are probably the majority of them. Talking just about Mexicans does make him sound dumb, not that he's the pinnacle of intelligence to begin with.

@golguin said:

Sure thing.

Hate Speech laws are discrimination laws passed off as protection for marginalized groups. That's how people feel good about them and let them pass. The truth of the matter is that hate speech laws (where applicable in the world such as where I live; Canada) are instead wielded like a cudgel to silence and discriminate against anyone who does not share the orthodox opinion with regards to whatever issue you like. For instance, in the last few months a man on twitter disagreed with academic feminists and in return they successfully got him charged with harassment. He's facing a very real jail sentence because responding to a public tweet in Canada counts as harassment now. Yeah, that's right, in Canada, if you say something to a protected group on Twitter and they don't like it you can go to jail.

Here's a link to a pretty good overview of the events.

As far as the illegals comment, keep in mind I'm talking from the perspective of somebody who would support Donald Trump. They see illegal immigration happening all around them and see that virtually nothing is done to stop it, curb it, or penalize it. They're of the opinion that protective laws for illegal immigrants and their children are salt in the wound. The idea that the American government doesn't care about legal citizens and would rather spend time and resources protecting a diesenfranchised group that, legally, shouldn't be there. Now someone with a more nuanced view of illegal immigration in the US and why it's happening would understand that in a nation of 300+ million people, with an unprotected southern border full of holes, it's going to be pretty damn hard to keep track of people who don't technically exist. To someone who supports Donald Trump, removing the 14th amendment is one step in a long road to fixing the broken immigration system in the US. And compared to most of the western world, yeah, the US immigration system is pretty broken.

Anywho. That's where I was coming from. Hopefully I've painted a clearer picture of why this happening. If it wasn't Donald Trump and instead a politician, they'd be seeing the same groundswell of support from Americans who feel lied to, manipulated, and abused. Whether this is true or not is irrelevant; the important part is that Trump was the one who successfully tapped into American resentment and is now reaping the benefits, politically.

This is a comment that many people from south america say, and it makes absolutely no sense.

Hate speech targets someone for who they ARE. Something is not hate speech when it targets what someone DOES.

You, and many people who hold your argument, are making the illogical connection that because someone disagrees with a person's actions, they must disagree or harbor "hate" for who that person is. Again, that makes absolutely no sense.

Illegal immigrants, ("undocumented immigrants") are those who choose to cross over the border without going through the proper channels. That's it. Full stop. There is no more information that is required to discuss the issue. The COLOR of those people is entirely irrelevant. The plight of those people is entirely irrelevant.

Why is it not relevant? Because COMMON SENSE says that a country needs to manage itself in regard to it's population. That is a HUGE issue. It's not trivial. There isn't "enough America for everybody". There CAN be, but it takes planning and regulation. Illegal immigrants don't CARE about America. They don't care about there being enough for everybody. They only care about, and this is not unique to them, themselves.

I live in Texas. I see the problems of illegal border crossing first hand, all the time. This isn't a purely philosophical debate. It is a reality for many, many, many Americans.

@bananasfoster: What exactly is the problem? Too many brown people speaking Spanish?

Why do they talk about mass-shooters for a month after every incident? It's about views.

Bullshit. That's the classic defense of a racist system. The reason they come in illegally is because white assholes in the US won't let them come in otherwise. People who think the great state of texas will turn a nasty shade of tan and fry up just because too many mexicans come in at once. That's absurd and wrong.

If they were white men in cowboy hats crossing over no one would give a shit and you know it. If a senator wanted a bill put in place that said "Let's raise the quota on Canadians who can come in" no one would be upset about it. Allow more green cards for spanish speakers from the south? Well let's raise an entire presidential candidate around preventing that.

The COLOR and RACE is all that matters. This is a country of immigrants but also a country of people hating those immigrants because 90% of them weren't lilly white English WASPs. The irish were hated on for decades and people said they drank too much and caused crime and all sorts of problems for coming into this country, legally or otherwise. And now they're generally accepted, it's Spanish-speaker's turn to be put through the racist american wringer.

Fine, there is an issue of immigration, you're totally right. IT'S TOO FUCKING HARD TO GET INTO THIS COUNTRY. Young south and central american immigrants are the only thing that will inject life into the US, they have work ethic, enthusiasm and pride in becoming American, what they don't have is white skin.

We need them more than they need us I'd say. To say that Americans are grown-up enough to ignore race in an argument about immigration is to completely ignore your history.

@mikemcn: Now this is the kind of discussion I can get around. Please tell me why you hold these views? I'm genuinely curious.

Because every time a white person has encountered a new population of non-whites, the first reaction is mistrust/hate.

Like every time.

Ever.

How is this any different? I mean, they're not technically "new" but immigrants over the southern border have increased in the last few decades I believe, while immigrants from Europe have decreased. Add in that the US has been in an economic slump for years, so that people without jobs beg for any reason they can get, and you get people wanting a large and growing population of hispanics to stop "messing everything up."

or are you asking why I think we don't let enough people in legally?

those white people, always acting the same way, am I right?

In this instance? Yes...you are right.

I'm becoming increasingly concerned that there is a dearth of understanding of push/pull for historic immigration that's being replaced with just being angry about white people.

Really there's no lack of understanding.

In the US Race and Immigration are hand in hand,.and white politicians often hold the keys to immigration. There is no push or pull for historic immigration (What does that even mean?) because the conversation isn't "Should we have immigrants?" The conversation is "Should we have these (Read: Hispanic) immigrants?"

Which is not to say that Trump would ban spanish-speaking immigrants, that's far too obviously racist and even the media couldn't ignore that. No! He'll just make sure that southern border crossers are kept to a very small (But Legal!) trickle, and only if they have X amount of money/know important people.

You have a very loose interpretation of what hate speech is. Granting citizenship to a person who is born here is problematic and is abused. The United States has started to target companies that help enable wealthy Chinese women to come over and have babies here for the sole purpose to get US citizenship. Is that hate too? Or is it not because they are wealthy and Chinese?

Besides, what are you proposing? Should he be arrested?

People talk about going through the "proper channels" to come here legally as if it's as simple as a trip to the DMV. It's a long, long process that can take years.

citation needed

like, across the board.

this is embarrassing for all involved.

http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/why-don%E2%80%99t-they-just-get-line

Here, read this. Educate yourself.

Weird it's like undocumented immigration has fallen off and yet white people are still super upset about it. It must just be the immigration part, surely.

Bro. Nice try but that guy stalked them and continued to harass them after being blocked, it wasn't "Because they disagreed with him"

Gregory Alan Elliott was charged with three counts of criminal harassment and one count of breaching a peace bond after repeatedly sending Twitter messages to three women that allegedly made them fear for their safety.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/01/07/when_does_tweeting_become_criminal_harassment.html

so the problem is not white people trying to keep out the mexicans, but an outdated immigration system that doesn't account for the number of immigrants, the immigrants that attempt to subvert that system, and the inability of anybody to have a discussion about what can be done to solve it because they're too busy flinging shit at each other.

wow, it's like I'm actually listening to a political debate.

My wife did it. I know people who have spent thousands and took years to do it. What's your point.

Read what you are writing. Again, you are conflating the idea that race and illegal actions have something to do with one another. THEY. DO. NOT.

You cannot have an intelligent conversation on the idea of illegal immigration if you continue to make the argument that people dislike illegal immigrants coming into he united states because they don't like brown people. That is the same as a child saying their teacher gave them detention because "she hates me" as opposed to because they kicked a girl in the back of the head. It's childish, it's illogical and it's immature

You asked a question in your original post. This is the answer: The reason why nobody considers discussion of illegal immigration to be hate speech is because it's not. It simply isn't. If you can't wrap your head around it, you need to do more reading and understanding of the issues. It is not everyone else who needs to see the situation the way YOU see it.

Uh...it shouldn't take years? My point was pretty obvious.

I work with a man named Jose, he just became an American this week. I have a good friend named Fernando from Angola. He just became an American.

The idea that becoming an american is hard or takes a long time is irrelevant. The point is that a system exists and that system is in place for reasons. You can even argue that the system needs to be changed. That's totally fine. I don't think it should be prohibitively expensive to become an American. But to say that the answer is to just come on over is childish.

Maybe not years, but it shouldn't be easy either; especially since we as tax paying American citizens will need to shoulder the financial burden.

Lol at "Hate speech doesn't exist"

Cool tirade from oldirtybearon about how resentful people are about how hard they have it. Never mind the part where it was not illegal immigrants who are to blame for that. Just squeeze your anger and rage into a bitter little ball and direct it at the nearest scapegoat. It feels great!

Also, for those of you talking about deporting "anchor babies", fun fact, those are not illegal immigrants. But sure, it's totally not racist to want to enact stuff like this since immigrants can be all sorts of colors. There's a great law that seems like it solves this problem called the grandfather clause. Let's bring that back but in a totally not racist way!

It's a shame this site doesn't have a block function, this would be a nice thread to use to populate it.

@mikemcn said:

I'm asking both. For the sake of continuing this conversation however, in this post I'll continue with your first point.

From everything I've read with regards to immigration in the United States, it seems that this country in particular has a long history with, for lack of a better term, "hazing" new arrivals from new cultures. The worst of this seems to come at times of economic despair, where there is a rather substantial population of poor people. Whether it's Italian immigrants, Irish immigrants, or any other flavour it seems like cultural segregation and discrimination hits at these economic downswings. I don't think, even with wide open borders, you're going to reconcile resentment among the less fortunate with new arrivals. How would you go about combating that considering the US has been in an economic slump for so long? Do you think it's worse because of the slump? Do you think illegal immigration would be less of an issue if these were more prosperous times?

On the outside looking in, it doesn't seem like a race thing but a class thing.

No. I realize now that I forgot to include a key part in my opening comment. I was reading the comments right now wondering why no one was talking about the big sticking point only to see I didn't include it so that is my fault. With the 14th Amendment it isn't only an issue of preventing immigration into this country. It's also an issue of rounding up AMERICAN CITIZENS and deporting them to Mexico. Trump made it very clear that he doesn't believe that the children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants are US citizens so he envisions a system where they are removed as well.

Trump explained his views in an interview with Bill O'Reilly. Skip to 1:10 in the video.

@golguin said:

That re-contextualizes the entire discussion. Wow.