I recently saw somebody share this Ben Shapiro video on Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=4335446729826056&id=203805062990264

It's a response to Trump's failure to explicitly denounce white supremacists in the recent presidential debate, showing clips of when he has done so in the past. Let's talk about it (1/x)

Before I begin, I want to clarify a few things: Trump has absolutely disavowed the KKK and white supremacists in the past, and to claim otherwise would be irresponsible. Biden was wrong when he said that Trump has never done this. (2/x)

Secondly, I'm going to introduce an analogy later on that I acknowledge is not a perfect 1-to-1 comparison of the situation. However, it is analogous enough to be thought provoking and worth discussion, which is why I'm going to use it. So here we go. (3/x)

In the recent debate, Trump failed to explicitly condemn white supremacy and groups like the Proud Boys. At most, he said "sure," that he'd be willing to, but he never actually made a statement. That's important to remember for the analogy I'm going to use later on. (4/x)

The Ben Shapiro video shows that he has done so in the past, implying what I can only surmise is an argument that he doesn't need to do so again in late 2020. This is in line with arguments I've heard from others. I have a few issues with the video. (5/x)

The first, most glaring issue, is that the most recent clip where Trump outright condemns white supremacy is from over a year ago. He's been campaigning and holding rallies for a while now, but the most recent clip they could find is more than a year old. (6/x)

The other main issue I have with the video is how purposefully deceptive it is. This is a more subtle issue, but the video is edited and spliced together to try to make it seem like the first issue I stated above is untrue or unimportant. (7/x)

Clips from 2020 are spliced together with clips often from 2016 or 2017, making it seem as though some of Trump's explicit condemnations are specifically in response to questions he received about the topic in 2020. This is untrue and deceptive. (8/x)

So now the analogy. As an aside, if you want to see the origin of this analogy I'm going to use and expand upon, here's a clip from Michael Che's standup special. The main parts I'm referencing happen in the first 30 seconds or so. (9/x)

He brings up an interesting point. Imagine if you asked your partner, "Hey babe, do you love me?" There are multiple answers your partner could give, and each one evokes different levels of confidence in your relationship. (10/x)

Imagine that your partner responded, "Come on, I love all people!" That response comes off as avoidance and implies that there's a reason they aren't being specific and aren't willing to explicitly say they love you. (11/x)

What if you asked your partner, "Are you willing to say that you love me?" and they respond with, "Sure," without actually saying they love you, or they answer, "Well I've been saying that for years, do you need to keep asking me and do I need to keep saying it?" (12/x)

Again, these answers might come off as suspicious and would definitely make you reevaluate your relationship and try to figure out why it seems your partner is avoiding telling you that they love you. If they do love you, it's a simple answer. (13/x)

Trump's responses to being questioned about condemning white supremacy are analogous enough to these situations I've presented to be worth thinking about. If he really condemns them, it should be one of the easiest questions to answer. It's a softball question. (14/x)

All he has to say is, "Yes, I condemn white supremacy. Next question." Why can't he do that? How should we feel about it? Think about how you'd feel or what questions you'd have if your partner couldn't explicitly say, "Yes, I love you," especially if they have in the past (15/x)

The problem here is that people can change their minds. Stances and opinions can grow and evolve, for better or worse. Nobody is the same person today as they were 4 years ago, let alone 1 year ago. (16/x)

Some are inclined to ignore this idea, labelling others as hypocrites when their words or actions are at odds with who've they've been in the past. In some cases this is true. But in other cases, while the actions themselves may be hypocritical, the person is growing. (17/x)

It is not inherently bad to change and grow, but because people go through this process, it can be important to regularly check in and see where someone stands as they make their journey. This is what is being asked of Trump. This is what is being asked of your partner. (18/x)

Can you partner, as they've grown, changed, and developed through life, continue to explicitly and openly state that they love you? If not, why? What has changed? What needs to be reevaluated? This information is important to know for your relationship to continue. (19/x)

Can Trump, as his character has grown, changed, and adapted through his office term, continue to explicitly and openly condemn white supremacy? If not, why? What has changed? This information is important for citizens to know about their leader who they may vote for again. (20/x)

This shouldn't be a controversial opinion, and it's not a partisan issue: white supremacy is evil, and so are groups like the KKK and neo-Nazis. (21/x)

Our leadership must inspire confidence in the general population that they agree with this statement, and it's an important enough stance that we should check in with our leaders about it regularly. (22/x)

If our leaders cannot quickly, explicitly, and unequivocally say that white supremacy is evil and the groups adhering to those ideals deserve condemnation, we need to ask ourselves, "Why?" and, "What has changed?" It's not a hard question. (23/23)