There's no indication that judge's race has influenced his decisions. Again, if the judge was white, black, asian, or cuban, would the rulings be any different? I think not, the judge's rulings (sending the case to a jury, unsealing documents of a significant public figure, delaying the trial until after the election, continuing a class action after one plaintiff leaves) are all reasonable legal decisions.
> Surely not even you think that Trump is an actual racist, as in: he thinks mexicans are worth less as human beings purely for being mexican.
He's never said anything like that so I don't think he's a frothing at the mouth racist. Based on his public statements I'd say he's a mild racist who holds some old-school prejudicial attitudes on race and gender. His attitudes were fairly normal fifty years ago.
By the same token judge Curiel has not said anything racist or prejudicial against white people in general, or against Trump in particular. He's a judge, and judges put aside their political views and apply the law fairly. They do this all the time. So it would be a stretch to say he has an anger boner against Trump.
> No, you just want to point out how he said things the "wrong" way. Well that incidentally is political correctness which is the very thing people are fed up with.
I agree that PC reactions to perceived racism/sexism/islamophobia can go overboard and obscure the truth. Such as the Sam Harris vs Ben Affleck incident.
The problem in this case Trump is basically saying "this guy hates me because he's mexican". There's no "right" way to say this. There's no deeper truth being unearthed. The judge made rulings against Trump, and Trump unloaded against the guy. This is Trump trying to save face and settle a personal score.