I don't believe he is a white supremacist, and I don't believe most people are saying he is. The discussion here is interesting but also a non-issue. The guy is and has always been an opportunist and like many users, he bites the hand that actually feeds him and prioritizes those who are a fan of him. And when I say, who feeds him, I mean, the House, Congress, legislators, Republicans. Too prideful to take blame so he tosses it around. At times, he has some (very small) point but completely dismisses his culpability and that as a leader, you take responsibility up to a point. He won't denounce the violence in a sensible way or talk in a clear, decisive way because his base includes white supremacists. Someone said that at the end of the day he hates people who hate him and likes people who like him. It's called pride. Which is also why he won't say he is wrong even as everyone in his administration and out of it denounces what happened and ultimately his response whether they address it directly or not.

Josh said everything as succinctly as necessary and I would agree. To be called racist does not have to mean it is your ideology when your actions propagate or support it. And why should it? In my opinion, racism is not about power in a direct sense as some seem to think. It is instead the offspring of classicism which is about power. Racism often exists within classes or more accurately among the lower classes. People looking for someone to blame for something they don't have are directed by the powerful to look at someone who is different. And why wouldn't they? If they looked at the powerful as if they were different, then they would also have to abandon the delusion that they are out of luck millionaires. They vote in the favor of wealthy, protecting the wealth they hope to have one day and turn to their peer to accuse him of standing in the way. The opportunists take advantage of this. It has always been my OPINION that Trump's aim has always been to monetize government to line his own pockets and while people are asking if he truly is a white supremacist (of course, he is not. He's not of their class), he is trying to rob people blind. I can try to point to a ton of things and people will still ask for proof as if I am under his dining room table with a mic. Can we instead, stop being optimistic about a PERSON and instead look to God to be doing a work and ask him what it is? I can tell you, it is not about intellectual discussions about what someone who lies (let's be frank) is thinking or how he defines himself or how we can learn to trust him. It is about how we can serve, spread Jesus, show who Jesus is, love, point people to Him and we can only do that when we also stop defending what has no defense in Christ. And yes, God is a just God and I believe we will see that in the years to come. Trump will go down in history as he really is and there will still be Christians defending him.

I hear what you are saying—he has not made an outright statement that proves he is a white supremacist. I would disagree about your assertion that he has not made xenophobic or racist comments.

To me, cozying up to white supremacists and refusing to denounce their words, actions, and overt support of him is sufficient to demonstrate to me, at best, his tacit support of them. In fact, in my experience, this is how oppression most often operates—through benign neglect that refuses to acknowledge the ways that systems, words, actions, and inaction reinforce marginalization.

Mill Gregitello, agreed. I don't see a smoking gun. I also agree that he's never been perceived as moral, at least not by anyone that I know of. It wasn't his morality, as far as I know, that got him into office. He's never been particularly truthful, either. (Next to Hillary they were two peas in a depraved pod as far as that was concerned.) And he certainly has no filter between brain and mouth, to the detriment of us all. I mean, I like a guy who shoots from the hip and tells it like it is, but there still has to be things like truthfulness, integrity, and wisdom that are clearly lacking.

Ultimately my thought is that we do not have a smoking gun pointing to Trump being a literal supremacist. But from what I have seen of his character, I do not see him as a leader I want to follow. He's not particularly moral, no one I know of believes he's truthful, he has no filter between his brain and mouth and appears to be unable to accept being wrong in the past.

He did not have my vote before, and he has done nothing to win me over since.

Neera, it's indubitable and unarguable that he has had plenty of time, advice, and feedback about his words and their effect. It's also obvious that he seems to specialize in marginalizing people with whom he disagrees or upon which he looks down. "Certainly if he did not intend this he has had ample opportunity to inform us otherwise." Agreed. How can it possibly be otherwise, because he has had both time and occasion, and if he didn't have an occasion, he could easily create one. He is, after all, Le Presidente. You're also right that, despite some people hoping that he would become more "presidential" with time in office, to guard his words more carefully, and to speak with more reasoned and seasoned thought, that has most assuredly not happened. Where I falter, then, is at your "face value." At face value, he has never spoken words of white supremacism, racism, or xenophobia. It is only in trying to guess at the attitude behind the words and to look at the effect that his irresponsible expressions have cause that people conclude, "Well, then, he must be..." But that's not face value. That's interpolation and interpretation. His inaction, though, is inexcusable. He has had SO many chances to make it right, and he just DOESN'T.

Thanks for your comments.

I often wonder if (hope?) DT is tragically neglectful, because this would alleviate my strong fear that he is at core a hateful man with hateful intentions. Wouldn't it be nice to learn that he's just a bad communicator? The problem here is that he has a full staff of the "best people" (his words) standing by him to advise and craft messages. Surely he has had plenty of time, advice, and feedback to help him understand the affect his words (and silence) has had to embolden hate and to make marginalized people feel unsafe and further marginalized. How can we possibly give him, the most powerful person in the world, the benefit of the doubt that he didn't intend this outcome? Certainly if he did not intend this he has had ample opportunity to inform us otherwise. Instead what I have observed is continued speech that serves to foment chaos, distrust, anger, and violence. At what point do we finally take his words, actions, and inaction at face value?

I guess I am just less convinced than you are that the distinction between tragically and irresponsibly thoughtless and bigoted is meaningful. If he isn't a racist or supremacist, he certainly doesn't seem to care that he empowers them, and doesn't hate their despicable agenda enough to attack it (we have seen what it looks like when he encounters agendas with which he strongly disagrees). In my mind (and I think in the mind of many of his detractors), this response is just as bad. And whether he is most accurately labeled as a bigot, an enabler, or an irresponsible big-mouth is an entirely academic exercise based on differing definitions and criteria. In my opinion, the evils espoused by Neo-Nazis, KKK, and similar hate groups cannot be confronted with apathy, and I am supremely disappointed that our president does not seem to share this position.

Yeah, I hear you, Nicholas Incorvaia. I get it. I just wonder if he's really a racist and white supremacist (which I'm still not sure of), or if he's just too irresponsible to even clear up the mess coming from his irresponsible speech. You know what I mean? Is he a bigot, or tragically thoughtless?

I completely agree. And a year in, my response is to simply believe that he is what he represents. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, do we then debate the definition of a duck?

BINGO!! You've hit the nail on the HEAD, Josh. I have so many times wished he would just go to the podium, and in straight, clear, and forceful language clarify what he said before (that was also in forceful language, but not so straight or clear). But he never seems to do that. He leaves others to try to spin, clarify, and explain, but he could just do it himself if (1) he wouldn't be so careless in the first place, and (2) if he sensed the great trauma over his words and made them clear for us all. Instead, all this violence dredges up, and he walks away and does another reckless speech.

I also strongly agree that his words are being used to empower all the proponents of anti-ideals you mentioned (racism, xenophobia, supremacism, etc.), and yet he still doesn't step up to the plate to speak passionately and vehemently against them.

Everybody needs to read what Josh W said above this that I am responding to.