The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

• You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

Enforcement procedures: Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. The contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topics sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

Section sizes Section size for Racial views of Donald Trump (88 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 15,541 15,541 Pre-presidency 20 26,205 Housing discrimination cases 7,365 7,365 Central Park jogger case 9,887 9,887 Black professionals 2,269 2,269 Native American casino industry 4,205 4,205 The Apprentice 2,459 2,459 2016 campaign 19 28,092 Mexican immigrants 719 719 Proposed Muslim immigration ban 142 142 Hispanic judge 4,850 4,850 Hate crime 1,695 1,695 New Jersey Arabs 2,461 2,461 Somali refugees 2,499 2,499 Racial accusations on Twitter and in debates 9,516 9,516 Minority outreach during 2016 campaign 6,191 6,191 First presidency 59 197,846 Immigration policy 4,228 4,228 Judicial appointments 1,105 1,105 Black Caucus 3,947 3,947 Derogatory statements towards Haiti and Nigeria 1,230 1,230 Hurricane Maria 1,851 1,851 Pardon of Joe Arpaio 6,683 6,683 NFL national anthem protests 9,768 9,768 Charlottesville rally 14,008 14,008 Elizabeth Warren 4,104 4,104 "Pretty Korean lady" 2,568 2,568 "Shithole countries" 16,296 30,359 Response from Republicans 4,374 4,374 Response from Democrats 4,366 4,366 International response 5,323 5,323 "The Snake" song and story 2,710 2,710 Alice Marie Johnson 2,298 2,298 Affirmative action in schools 953 953 Immigrants in Europe 1,666 1,666 White farmers in South Africa 3,709 3,709 "I am a nationalist" 1,457 1,457 Trump-backed ad removed 1,073 1,073 'Only in the Panhandle' 2,487 2,487 Harriet Tubman on the twenty-dollar bill 2,410 2,410 Democratic congresswomen should "go back" to their countries 32,520 32,520 "Rat and rodent infested mess" 15,581 15,581 Mass shooting in Texas 2,665 2,665 Jewish voters who support Democrats "disloyal" 6,030 6,030 Support of Stephen Miller 1,448 1,448 Support of Rush Limbaugh 1,901 1,901 "Chinese Virus" and "Kung Flu" 6,601 6,601 "When the looting starts, the shooting starts" 2,722 2,722 Moving date of Tulsa rally 1,316 1,316 Lincoln's end result "questionable" 697 697 Videos of black men attacking white people 1,311 1,311 "Bad hombres" and rapists 2,888 2,888 "White Power" retweet 4,211 4,211 Criticism of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing program 1,059 1,059 Independence Day speech 3,968 3,968 Support for Confederate symbols 5,016 5,016 Reversal of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule 1,818 1,818 Opposition to diversity training 2,112 2,112 Claims of racism by his former attorney 802 802 Interview with Bob Woodward 798 798 Rolling back civil rights protections 923 923 1776 Commission 1,768 1,768 Funding for the Community Relations Service 1,018 1,018 2020 campaign 19 12,111 Nazi symbol in Facebook ads 1,260 1,260 Kamala Harris citizenship conspiracy theories 4,958 4,958 "Good genes" 1,636 1,636 First 2020 presidential debate 4,238 4,238 Inter-presidency 24 16,288 Truth Social posts 3,332 3,332 Meeting with Nick Fuentes and Kanye West 2,438 2,438 Poisoning of blood comment 1,780 1,780 Indictments and mug shot comments 1,522 1,522 Dehumanizing rhetoric about undocumented immigrants 3,452 3,452 Claim that Jewish Democrats hate Israel and their religion 3,740 3,740 2024 campaign 4,147 4,147 Impact 6,624 14,099 Effects on students 3,331 3,331 Effects on children 1,269 1,269 Reactions by the Congressional Black Caucus 2,875 2,875 Defenses of Donald Trump 7,744 7,744 Support from white nationalists and white supremacists 10,409 10,409 Analysis 13 13,108 Journalists and pundits 8,160 8,160 Academics 4,935 4,935 Opinion polling 4,823 4,823 References 30 30 External links 519 519 Total 350,962 350,962

This article was nominated for deletion on 15 January 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

It has been proven that the claim that Trump called Neo-Nazis “fine people” is a full fledged lie. The video of the interview proves it. Exact quote is "I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis or the White Nationalists because they should be condemned totally. I'm talking about people other than the Nazis or Nationalists who were treated badly by the press. Each group had fine people but also had bad people” Dreadpirate43 (talk) 17:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

someone planted a glitch in the wiki page summarizing Trump’s extensive history of racism. The page resets every time the subsections are clicked. This is likely a deliberate cover-up. Please fix it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/key/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump 72.88.209.10 (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ValarianB, JacktheBrown and Mandruss for the input. I'll reframe: Racial views of Donald Trump should be renamed, as the article is not about his views, but rather his comments and actions as seen in the lede sentence. Unless there is consensus that there are not issues with the current title, I will be putting this to a requested move.

This post is an effort to establish what options will be put forward at the requested move. Some prior suggestions include Donald Trump and race, Donald Trump and racism, Donald Trump and racial issues and Accusations of racism against Donald Trump. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you may be missing the point of the page. We can't read his mind, obviously, so we'll never have perfect proof of any of his views. But we do have evidence of his views in the form of his words and actions. Which is what this article is about. Loki (talk) 04:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou Loki for making this comment; it's certainly worth making and discussing. I did consider this and rejected it as conduct can be (characterized as) racist without us being able to extrapolate views. Does he have prejudice towards this race, or is he being Machiavellian? The latter is frequently asserted as why he lies; that's what makes them lies rather than delusions. Reliable sources on the left of the American political spectrum [1][2][3] explicitly discuss his racism as a strategy.

Taking sources describing conduct as racist without them relating it to views and adding their conduct here is original research. Moreover, as evidence that the page is not about views but actions and words characterized as racist: the lede doesn't mention the word/concept. A useful comparison here is Racial views of Winston Churchill § Views of Churchill towards race. You may take this as an argument to cut the 90% of the article which fails verifiability rather than renaming.

I may have this upside down and am extremely open to being wrong, please assume good faith of me, I will certainly be doing so of you. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 06:57, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: I missed an important reason why sources may not link actions to views apart from strategy: they may not want to try to "read his mind". Given such a source, we should not be more willing to try. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 07:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What to? Slatersteven (talk) 11:51, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slatersteven This post is an effort to establish what options will be put forward at the requested move. Some prior suggestions include Donald Trump and race, Donald Trump and racism, Donald Trump and racial issues and Accusations of racism against Donald Trump. This is an effort to brainstorm options and decide which to include in a requested move (unless consensus is against a requested move). Do you have any suggestions apart from the ones listed above? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 12:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NO, as I am unsure a title change is needed, and I do not sign blank cheques. Slatersteven (talk) 12:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slatersteven (last ping) No blank checks needed; if editors including yourself at an RM reject alternatives no changes occur to the title. An RM also won't go ahead if there's a consensus that there aren't issues with the title, so if you think there aren't issues with WP:PRECISE, this is the place to speak your mind. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 12:32, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think 'Accusations of racism against Donald Trump' is most appropriate. By its framing, the article cannot be an impartial exploration of Trump's views. Riposte97 (talk) 21:52, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think 'Accusations of racism against Donald Trump' is most appropriate. By its framing, the article cannot be an impartial exploration of Trump's views. Riposte97 (talk) 21:52, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rollinginhisgrave: please propose the new title; to do this, initiate a move request. If it convinces me, I will vote in favour. JacktheBrown (talk) 14:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has been proposed in this section that Racial views of Donald Trump be renamed and moved to Accusations of racism against Donald Trump. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

Racial views of Donald Trump → Accusations of racism against Donald Trump – given that no one else has proposed a title and the discussion has been going on for days without a result, I take the advice of Riposte97 as good; since I'm the OP, I'm in favor of changing the title. JacktheBrown (talk) 23:15, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, as stated above. The current name is a perfectly fine description of the page. Expecting a page about views to be about mind-reading is an unreasonable expectation. Such a page must necessarily be about the words and actions of its subject because that's how we know what his views are. Furthermore, I think that renaming the page to this specific suggestion is a violation of WP:CLAIM as it suggests that there have merely been "accusations" of racism against Donald Trump. Loki (talk) 23:29, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @LokiTheLiar: in my opinion, there were both certainly not nice phrases said by Donald Trump (to be kind), and real accusations of racism against him; I think the truth lies perfectly in the middle. JacktheBrown (talk) 23:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • LokiTheLiar Can you respond to the response above, namely that as most sources don't extrapolate his views from his actions, we shouldn't be willing to go further than they are, and that by extrapolating his views from his actions, despite some reliable sources arguing against this practice, we are performing original research? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 23:39, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    When a source quotes Donald Trump directly, we do not need the source to explicitly state "and Donald Trump believes what he said" for that conclusion to not be original research.

    Similarly, when a source mentions something racist Trump did, it's usually very obviously relevant to this article. So for instance, the fact that Trump was found by a court to be discriminating against black people is clearly relevant to this article whether or not the source explicitly connects it to his views. Loki (talk) 03:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks Loki for the response. The points are in, over to the jury to deliberate. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 05:38, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Editors should read the discussion above for the justification for a name change: the page does not claim to be about his views but rather "actions and speech" characterised as racist. These are two different concepts. Editors are also invited to comment on alternative names proposed, including Donald Trump and racism, Donald Trump and race and Donald Trump and racial issues. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 23:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support change to Donald Trump and racism or Donald Trump and racial issues as better fits the scope of the article as it stands and the reliable sources it covers, weakly support change to Accusations of racism against Donald Trump: I sympathize with Loki that this runs up against WP:CLAIM, but the idea that it suggests that accusations are the extent of the scope matches the article's actual content, which uses attribution rather than wikivoice: viewed by scholars and the public as racist or sympathetic to White supremacy rather than are racist. Oppose Donald Trump and race, broader scope than article covers. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 05:38, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose No one makes him say or do stuff, and yes, it is analyzed. We reflect what RS say. Slatersteven (talk) 12:03, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Slatersteven, could you clarify if "we reflect what RS say" is contra Loki's point that we can extrapolate his views from his actions and it not be original research? Is it a refutation of my claim that the majority of sources are not relating his actions to his interiority? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 12:43, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I do not care what their reasons are, I have stated mine, RS has commented on his actions and words, and deeds. Nor am I sure what you are talking about. I can find any number of sources (including court cases) where his Words, deeds, and actions have been found to be racist. Slatersteven (talk) 12:47, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • His words, "deeds" and actions (not sure how you're distinguishing the latter two) can be found to be racist, but this can be in intent, (reflecting internal views), effect, or both. Does this clear up my meaning? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 12:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • No, as none of this is internal, as he has openly expressed racists views (as stated by RS) and carried out racist actions (as stated by RS) and had been found to have done so by courts, so it is not internalized. Slatersteven (talk) 13:26, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • The majority of RS say he has said and done racist things rather than say he has "expressed racist views". A subset analyze this conduct as expressing his views, another subset analyze them as a strategy. Most don't try to analyze intent. If the majority of sources aren't commenting on intent, framing his conduct around it is giving undue weight. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 13:41, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]