Your thoughts about trump winning the presidency

@Daggerfell I already said that incident was a lie. You can't point at one incident and say that reflects thousands of others. It is poor logic.

Hillary's comment was bad, but it doesn't come out almost every time she opens her mouth. If you don't get how being labeled as one of them people in the city war zones killing each other is dehumanizing, then there is nothing that will open your eyes. Trump had many opportunities to deflect the racist subtext of his campaign. He knows what people are thinking. He never said "We're going to deport illegal immigrants, BUT if you are a citizen you have nothing to worry about because you are one of us and will be respected as such." He just shrugged off the KKK so much so that even people in the KKK think he's cool with them. He insulted all Muslims with "Maybe she wasn't allowed to have anything to say." There are Muslim women who are doctors, scientists, politicians, and judges and they say plenty. He just wanted his voters to have a picture in their heads of a certain subset of Muslims. And, really, calling an American a Mexican when he was born in Indiana isn't racist? Come on. It's hard to get a hold of what Trump himself actually thinks, but he's been okay with typecasting people by their race, religion, and ethnicity for the benefit of his campaign. @Daggerfell That's not what that says. That says that one incident was false. No where have you shown any proof that most are being proven false.

I dont understand why people default to believing rather than default to skepticism that is neither believing nor disbelieving. you hear some report so you believe it. and it has to be "proven false" before you'll even entertain the idea that it might be false. that seems screwy to me. we know for certain that several hate crimes have been faked in recent years. we know for a fact that at least one was faked from within the past several days. we do NOT have any evidence of legit hate crimes within the past several days. And evidence of legit hate crimes from the past several years are few and far between. so any rational person's scales of doubt would be tipped at least slightly in favor of "they might be fake" given the evidence we have at present given that we don't know 100% one way or the other.

I do entertain the idea that it could be false. I even said so earlier that some are probably false. I said it multiple times. But just as you say that people should not default to believing or disbelieving you are demanding evidence of these incidents being true in order to believe them. And yes, there is evidence supporting some of these claims. But I'm not going to just sit here and list things that are true or false.

Ummm... of course I need evidence to believe them. as i said believing without evidence seems incredibly screwy to me. And I never cease to be baffled by those who disagree with that basic concept.

You also said that people shouldn't default to believing OR disbelieving. If you actually believe what you said, instead of saying these are mostly false you would be saying "I don't know, they might be true but I don't have the evidence to decide that."

I said based on the evidence we have the chances are most are false. there is very little reason to believe in the legitimacy of these "hate crime" claims unless you have a vested interest in these stories being true.

Except there is NO evidence that most of these are false. None. There are some reports of individual cases being false and reports of individual cases being true. There's nothing you or Daggerfell have said that is evidence that most are false except your own biased perceptions.

there is evidence that some of them are false. there is PROOF that one of them is false. and even if there was NO evidence of falsity that would still NOT be evidence of legitimacy.