The position as an at-large delegate for the Florida Republican Party will be the highest-profile political role thus far for Barron, former President Donald Trump’s youngest son.

It will soon be Barron Trump’s time to step into the political spotlight.

Trump, former President Donald Trump’s youngest child, who will graduate from high school next week and has largely been kept out of the political spotlight, was picked by the Republican Party of Florida on Wednesday night as one of the state’s at-large delegates to the Republican National Convention, according to a list of delegates obtained by NBC News.

In a family full of politically involved children, Barron Trump, who turned 18 in March, has retained much more of a private life than his older brothers, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., both of whom will also be Florida at-large RNC delegates, along with Trump’s daughter Tiffany.

  • Soulg
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Removed by mod

    • whoreticulture@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I mean, you wrote a lot of words about defending a slave owner??? Is that something that should be encouraged? You said a whole lotta words but that doesn’t mean you put a lot of thought into it. It sounds like your entire point is just “Thomas Jefferson was bad. But not that bad. But I get it he was bad. Just not that bad.” Woohoo orator of the year. You didn’t address that commenter’s points at all, you literally just went in on the slavery-apologist route.

      • jwiggler
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        My point was more that

        1. Jefferson actually wasn’t completely fine with slave owning.

        2. He didnt fuck a bunch of his slaves and have their kids grow up as slaves.

        Now, the original point of the OP is right. America was, for a large part, built by white men whose own interests (staying in power) went into the establishment of the country.

        “I’m-pretty-sures,” though, just de-legitimize that whole argument, and I happened to have just come off of reading Jefferson’s biography, so I chimed in. Guess maybe I shouldn’t do that next time? I’m not defending Jefferson for slave owning – he was a hypocrite, for sure – but what we know about him (and we know a lot, because he was a prolific letter writer, and many of his private letters have survived) doesn’t match up with the OPs words. It’s important to at least be accurate if you’re going to invoke historical subjects to argue your political point.

        • whoreticulture@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Your first point just strikes me as entirely untrue and why I don’t like your post. He owned slaves, and took advantage of that situation with at least one well documented slave. There were contemporaries out there who were publically denouncing slavery, so, no, he doesn’t really get any credit for writing in his diary that he feels bad about all the free labor he’s getting.

          • jwiggler
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            You could interpret it as him being two faced, that is true, and a totally valid opinion. I tend to think he felt conflicted, but went with the current attitudes of the time. Still awful, but not exactly completely fine with slave owning.

            I don’t know about your point about his contemporaries publicly denouncing slavery. I would guess that no one as prominent as him was that outspoken, but that’s just my guess. A credit to your point, though, Jefferson did say some awful shit in one letter about black people being inferior to whites. That idea was challenged by Benjamin Banneker, a free, educated black man, in a letter addressed to him several years later, and Jefferson was receptive, but didn’t take a hard stance, disappointingly.

            I’m still hesitant to completely vilify Jefferson, despite his glaring moral inadequacies, because I think that lends itself to oversimplifying history in general, and hurts us when we are trying to understand the actions of historical figures in their time and place. Not to mention, it gives right wingers ammo to try to label us as revisionist.

            • whoreticulture@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              We can understand Jefferson in his time and place by seeing that he was upholding and benefiting from the institution of slavery. Just because you personally haven’t heard of antislavery activism in the 1700s, doesn’t mean those ideas weren’t around. He chose not to take them up. Since when have antiracist activists been enabled to become presidents?? He was prominent because he was racist. You are being revisionist if you think that Jefferson was some hero. I assume you would also excuse horrible takes in politicians today.

              • jwiggler
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                I mean, all the things you’ve said are true, except that I excuse horrible takes from other politicians today. I never said he was a hero. Or that he wasnt racist. Or that he was even a good person. Antislavery ideas were around, but they weren’t mainstream viable political stances until later, which is probably one of the reasons, you can imagine, Jefferson didn’t push them during his career.

                My whole original point isn’t that Jefferson isn’t racist, or that he isn’t a rapist, it’s that he had conflicted feelings, according to his letters, about slavery. Evidently, not enough to stop him from owning slaves, which does in fact make him both racist and a hypocrite. But to assert that he was completely fine with slavery just isn’t true.

                • whoreticulture@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  If he was not doing anything to stop slavery from happening, and he had as much power as he did, he was fine with slavery.

                  • jwiggler
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    “I congratulate you, my dear friend, on the law of your state [South Carolina] for suspending the importation of slaves, and for the glory you have justly acquired by endeavoring to prevent it for ever. This abomination must have an end, and there is a superior bench reserved in heaven for those who hasten it.”

                    to Edward Rutledge, July 14,1787

                    Idk what else to say.

      • norbert@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        When children are talking about world politics do you get down on your knees and listen to their simple, half-understood analysis or do you say “thats nice, now go do your homework.”

        • prettybunnys
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          That depends on if you’re an asshole or not.

          The third option is you talk to children and listen to them and explain and teach.

          • norbert@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            That wasn’t one of the options you were given but nice try. That’s reserved for my own actual children, not jackasses who have the simplistic worldview of a child. Have you ever tried “explaining and teaching” online?