The Trumpies would say that by keeping blacks, hispanics, and other non-white minorities from moving into your suburb, they “saved” it.

Blatant racist electioneering.

I would like to hear what the actual supporters of 45 would say.it was a definitive statement. A lot of the neighborhoods I have lived in have been fairly diverse, the neighborhood I am in now is becoming more diverse every year, and property values are rising.
So what is the rationale behind such a statement?

I understand that you want to hear from supporters, but I believe they would agree that this was a reference to the BLM protests—saving the suburbs from rioting and lawlessness. I’m not saying that situation is accurate, but I think that’s what Trump would clarify that point to mean.

Just another dog whistle. A real estate dog whistle, probably his favorite.

Have you ever heard the expression “there goes the neighborhood?” For a long time it generally meant foreigners or Blacks move in and schools and property values start to go down and crime goes up. God forbid you might also have a lot of foreign languages being spoken around you too.

It’s just being racist. There was a time when this had some truth, because white people made it come true by moving out of communities and their own racism.

Part of what happens also is a natural cycle where older neighborhoods eventually become less desirable no matter who lives there, but that is when people with lower incomes start to move in and then they are being blamed for property values declining. Often in America cities minorities make up a significant portion of lower income families.

Edit: when I moved to the Memphis area I was warned the suburban city of Cordova was less desirable, because a lot of the Black people from the city had moved there. Racism is its own self fulfilling prophecy.

The only person who knows exactly what he was referring to is Trump himself.
Try including a link of whatever statement you’re referring to so people know exactly what you’re expecting them to defend.

^^^^^ @cheebdragon I am not sure that is really accurate, he rarely holds the same thought for more than three seconds and will deny at the end of a sentence what he said at the start of the sentence.

Add to that he is in the middle of Covid brain fog right now….

I personally feel you are taking it out of context but I could be wrong.

If he’s playing off fears of protestors in suburbia, it means nothing to me but perhaps it does to those in St Louis or other other areas that have had issues this year.

‘But in July, Ben Carson, the head of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, claimed the provision is too expensive, complicated and ineffective. By eliminating the rule, the president said suburban home values would go up and the dream lifestyle of many Americans would be preserved because there would no longer be a push to build low-income housing in more affluent areas.’

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/19/perspectives/trump-suburbs-black-homeowners/index.html

PS Media bias on CNN is ‘leans left’.

And here is the explanation of the laws and why they need changed from the Trump site:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-protecting-suburbs-preserving-american-dream-americans/

Oh, ffs, people, I suggested googling the reference so eight people wouldn’t object to whichever source I linked.
@JLeslie Yeah, I know how that works, I have owned three houses in three different states in the last four decades.
@cheebdragon, see my first sentence here.
@KNOWITALL I am not taking anything out of context, it was included in a plea that suburban like him, at a rally.

Take your pick from these: https://www.google.com/search?q=i+saved+your+damn+neighborhood&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari

It wasn’t that long ago in this country that it was a mainstream idea that the suburbs were a white paradise and that minorities moving into them would ruin them (“there goes the neighborhood”). So of course there’s going to be racist connotations for many. I think based on that quote Trump was referring to the suburbs being threatened by violence from protesters and potentially also an influx of troublesome low-income residents by building low-income housing in the suburbs (for example, here in the Bay Area there’s not much fear of minorities taking over or protesters threatening idyllic suburban life, but homeless RVs lining suburban streets have stoked fears of a degradation of the quality of life in suburbs and there’s been a huge backlash against any attempts to accommodate the homeless from suburbanites). Low-income housing isn’t just for the homeless, but nonetheless, the idea is that low-income housing will bring crime, drug use, and other “big city” problems to the suburbs.

At this point I think racist Karens screaming at non-white people are a bigger threat to the suburbs than either minorities, protesters, or low-income housing.

Wow—this is a ‘General” question and so far we hear a lot of racist, enflamed opinions by people that are only guessing.

Biden and Obama were wanting to remove the Single Family Residential zoning so that ANYTHING could be built in your neighborhood. Entire counties would also be under one municipal government, eliminating suburban cities and towns.

Several things were in the works to get this happining, which Trump and the Republicans overturned. The suburbs are typically 30% minority in most areas, btw, It wasn’t about race. It was about control.

It seems to be a common theme that Democrats want more populated areas to override the less populated ones, such as in the elimination of the electoral college, whence major cities would have say-so over rural counties. Since Democrats control the more populated areas, what they want would be thwarted upon rural and suburban areas.

But you can believe whatever you want about this—everyone else seems to, Just be glad you aren’t living next to twenty story low-rent apartments and nowhere else to go,

^Source on your Obama statement?

Good luck with that @chyna .^^

It was about Suburban zoning laws that were being eliminated.

Go back to your own sources and see what was being referred to.

@Yellowdog Yes, Democrats want sovereignty on population as Democrats control the most populated areas and Republicans want sovereignty on geography as Republicans control a greater portion of the nation’s land, without regard to population. Both want what’s best for their party.

There’s an awful lot on the internet about this topic—from all perspectives. Evidently I do stand corrected as it IS an effort to get more diversity in the suburbs for voting and legislation. Race and diversity are key factors—by eliminating single-family residential zoning.

My state enacted legislation about thirty years ago whereby one quarter of new housing in a municipality had to be low income housing. So far no more rape or pillaging has occurred as a result of the Mount Laurel decision as far as I know. It’s time for suburbs to not be so lily white and for towns to be more diverse. Trump is playing to fears in an effort to win over “suburban Moms” and from what I am reading, they ain’t buying it much.

@chyna There are many papers and articles on how each party hears the same thing differently, even though the verbiage is the same.

@SQUEEKY2 She’s American, why wouldn’t I discuss anything to do with American politics with her?

A lot of developers are trying to get every dime out of every inch of real estate—that is what will ruin your suburban community—not the race of the residents. It will also bring crime—the sheer numbers will.

It is a false dichotomy to link this to race or white privilege as many suburbs reflect regional demographics, But if you put a lot of my neighbors around you, your lifestyle is pulled down to my level.

@KNOWITALL WTF are you referring to?
The only post I did on this thread was to @chyna ,and all I said was good luck with that.

@SQUEEKY2 Oh it was @Yellowdog,‘s my bad.

I just googled it and found a lot of articles from right leaning sites, and this from NPR, which I think portrays both sides of the debate:

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/21/893471887/seeking-suburban-votes-trump-targets-rule-to-combat-racial-bias-in-housing

Interestingly, in Florida, the poorest areas are adjacent to the richest. I’m trying to think if that was the case in other places I lived. The wealthy send their children to private school, they probably employed some of the people in the poorer areas to clean their houses, mind their children, and manicure their lawns.

The suburbs are more insulated with various levels of income, but still all middle class.

I have a feeling that the statement means different things to different people. When I lived near Memphis, I lived in a small town that was an “arbor” city that didn’t allow people to have up lights to shine on their homes at night because they wanted the skies to be dark and starry.

At one point, a developer bought up some land and wanted to put in a plaza with restaurants and stores. He paid a lot of money to draw up very pretty plans to get approval. People in the town turned out to state their strong disapproval. They didn’t want the traffic and in that part of the country “malls“ are perceived as crime areas and negative to property values. They saw no value regarding the convenience of having a beautiful plaza with restaurants and shopping.

So maybe people in a town like that associate Democrats with mixed use type zoning and also, as people mentioned above, forcing developers to provide lower income housing. Probably Democrats are the ones who put in rules to make sure lower income have a place to live. There is theory that it’s best to have them living in the same communities and buildings as higher income, similar to desegregating and bussing for schools.

Other people interpret it as an extension of the immigration topic. Build a wall on the southern border, not much different than build a wall around your neighborhood.

My point is it’s vague enough people can twist it to suit their own fears.

When Trump says, “I saved your neighborhood,” o think he hasn’t done anything to do any such thing, but his groupies believe he has. They believe without him their life would be much worse.

@jca2 Thank you for posting that, now I can totally see how it appears to be fostering discrimination by this verbiage. In your bigger cities, this is probably a much bigger issue that I can’t identify with.

We had a rezoning request a few years ago for some apartments and the entire town threw a fit about the criminal element as well as those ‘horrible’ renters, and that was in a predominantly white town. I can’t imagine throwing racial issues into that mix. Sad.

@KNOWITALL That’s going on where I live now. The developer is putting in a lot of rental apartments and some people are throwing a tizzy.

@JLeslie Good luck. Our builders were treated so poorly by such a large percentage of the community, they decided not to build. So we literally have nothing available, ever. Any homes or duplexes or apartments in our suburb are snapped up immediately, even if they are crap.

It’s definately a sellers market in suburbia right now, here anyway.

When this started happening in my parents’ neighborhood, I got shot and am permanently disabled—ironically, now consigned to low rental districts due to being unable to work, on SS Disability. The people who shot me were black so I guess I am now a racist due to the race of those who shot me. I’ve volunteered for missions in the inner city with no problems, but Housing and Urban Devrelopment problems invite criminals to the suburbs.

You can be a crime victim anywhere, but lets not encourage projects that increase crime rates.

^ You know, it might make sense for you to be against poverty since you are a victim of it. But it appears that you prefer to just want to keep poverty in place, but keep it hidden – and systemic.

@KNOWITALL In my community (it’s really a city of over 120,000 people) the entire place is developed by one family. I wish they would do some condos instead of rentals, and then people could rent them out anyway. There is no restrictions on renting your house or condo where I live. Many places in Florida you have limits like you have to own it a year before renting it, or you can only rent it out once a year, etc.

My developer won’t care what people say I don’t think. They are great at listening to suggestions, but something like this I don’t think they will change their mind. We’ll see.

The original founder wanted to make an inexpensive community that had great amenities for retirees. If they don’t continue to provide some inexpensive options and even rental options, they will move very far from their grandfather’s first vision. It already has changed a lot, but the family is kind of the benevolent dictators of our bubble here and as much as they obviously focus on making money, they also focus on making fun and being welcoming.

@JLeslie Yes these were changed to nice duplexes with dog park. Still not good enough. Some even said the ‘poor kids’ would ruin the excellent schools for everyone. It was something very ugly, not racist, but elitist.

@KNOWITALL That talk happens all over the country regarding schools. Schools and crime. It’s elitist and racist probably. They get intertwined because minorities are more likely to be poor.

I’m not sure how to solve it. I think about it a lot. If all schools were more equal it would help. If poor neighborhoods were safe it would help. Actually, if there was less poverty it would really help. If mental illness was addressed it would help. If birth control was taught and available to all it would help. But, all plans to address these things can backfire in unexpected ways also.

It seems to me at higher income levels race disappears. Maybe that’s true at all income levels within the level. I think social class is the big divider to your point.

@JLeslie There’s a big difference in tolerance as opposed to acceptance.

Of course a large Black/Mexican/(ethnic of any kind)... family in formal regalia would still very much turn eyebrows here, regardless of the venue, but more so in the well-heeled crowd. I’ve very rarely seen anyone of color at local fundraisers or events.

And the same for a family like Honey Boo Boo’s, of course. They’d be more likely to escort out Honey Boo Boo, than a well-dressed ethnic family, because you can treat poor people like crap without many repercussions unless it’s physical or property damage, they can’t afford to sue anyone.

@KNOWITALL I guess I would ask how many minorities are in the upper middle and upper classes where you are? I don’t remember what city you are in.

I’ve lived several places and there are real differences regarding race, socio-economics, culture, etc. Many of us Northeasterns talked about it when I lived in Memphis. My husband and I really liked Memphis, we love our friends there and miss them, but the race situation was very different than Florida or growing up in Maryland. When you go from place to place you ask yourself, what is the difference? Why is it different?

Don’t get me wrong, sometimes there were just a few minorities in a “wealthy“ crowd, but sometimes there were many, like Latin Americans at a gala in Miami.

There is a difference between old money and new money though. I have to agree with you there. Old money is going to be very white, but over time it will continue to change. I think race, religion, country, all disappears when people feel they have things in common.

@JLeslie I actually gave up my council seat to a wonderful black man, he’s great. And our first person of color on council. We have our first female sargeant, and first openly gay man on Parks. I love it!

Maybe 10% are non-white? Seems harmonious but its rural, small town of less than 10k.