[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[Danoff]

https://bgr.com/2016/11/15/man-threatens-to-kill-trump-ceo-sniper/

"Progressive" individuals continue to demonstrate the behavior that the other side often gets accused of. Obama was supposedly going to be constantly bombarded with assassination attempts during his presidency because of the racist gun-nuts on the right.

 

[DDastardly00]

https://bgr.com/2016/11/15/man-threatens-to-kill-trump-ceo-sniper/

"Progressive" individuals continue to demonstrate the behavior that the other side often gets accused of. Obama was supposedly going to be constantly bombarded with assassination attempts during his presidency because of the racist gun-nuts on the right.

What I'm seeing today is both deplorable and sick.

 

[Danoff]

What I'm seeing today is both deplorable and sick.

Keep in mind, these are people who see themselves as morally superior to the right. It's ok to say "rape Melania" as long as we don't call her ugly or tell her to make a sandwich.

 

[Scaff]

https://bgr.com/2016/11/15/man-threatens-to-kill-trump-ceo-sniper/

"Progressive" individuals continue to demonstrate the behavior that the other side often gets accused of. Obama was supposedly going to be constantly bombarded with assassination attempts during his presidency because of the racist gun-nuts on the right.

To be fair that's a threat rather than an actual attempt, and Obama got plenty of those both before and during his terms as Prezz. I'm quite sure Trump will get the same attention from nutters and quite sure had in been Clinton as President Elect it would be no different.

Idiocy isn't the exclusive preserve of any one side, but nor does it represent the whole of any one side.

Keep in mind, these are people who see themselves as morally superior to the right. It's ok to say "rape Melania" as long as we don't call her ugly or tell her to make a sandwich.

I count myself as both left wing and a liberal, however I don't consider myself morally superior, nor do I think such comments are OK.

Please stop using collective terms to group everyone into an 'us' and 'them' situation, its neither accurate or constructive.

 

[Famine]

It's ok to say "rape Melania" as long as we don't call her ugly or tell her to make a sandwich.

That seems weirdly contrary. I mean, I'm usually more hungry after sex...


*There's going to be quite a few people trying to work out exactly what they should be offended at in that joke right there

 

[Danoff]

To be fair that's a threat rather than an actual attempt, and Obama got plenty of those both before and during his terms as Prezz. I'm quite sure Trump will get the same attention from nutters and quite sure had in been Clinton as President Elect it would be no different.

Ok, but from a CEO of a tech company? This is indicative of something deeper.

Idiocy isn't the exclusive preserve of any one side, but nor does it represent the whole of any one side.

Wholly agree. Though one side is demonstrating it far more thoroughly and violently than we've seen the other side do. And I'd argue that's true for the entire history of the republican party as we know it today - because they haven't really been around in their current form for all that long.

I count myself as both left wing and a liberal, however I don't consider myself morally superior, nor do I think such comments are OK.

Technically, I didn't imply that you did. I implied that the people rioting do.

Please stop using collective terms to group everyone into an 'us' and 'them' situation, its neither accurate or constructive.

I think I can tease some characteristics out of the group the rioters. Don't misunderstand me as implying that all people who call themselves progressive fit this description. "Progressive individuals are doing this" should not be interpreted as meaning "all progressive individuals are doing this".

 

[Sanji Himura]

I expect a bare minimum level of analytical thinking in looking at "evidence" ... which in this case amounts to nothing more than a video clip of busses parked on a Chicago street.

It's called circumstantial evidence. Soros is known to have funded far left wing causes in the past.

 

[Scaff]

Ok, but from a CEO of a tech company? This is indicative of something deeper.

Why? Are CEO's immune to making stupid comments on twitter?

Keep in mind that a certain company boss did suggest that the second amendment folks could sort HC out and did so rather publicly. Which does demonstrate that sometimes brain doesn't get engaged before mouth regardless of position within a company or business.

Wholly agree. Though one side is demonstrating it far more thoroughly and violently than we've seen the other side do. And I'd argue that's true for the entire history of the republican party as we know it today - because they haven't really been around in their current form for all that long.

I would argue that had the result been reversed that may well be a different story.

Technically, I didn't imply that you did. I implied that the people rioting do.

No rioting people were in the picture you quoted? One utter idiot was and the handwork of another idiot was.

I think I can tease some characteristics out of the group the rioters. Don't misunderstand me as implying that all people who call themselves progressive fit this description. "Progressive individuals are doing this" should not be interpreted as meaning "all progressive individuals are doing this".

A group of rioters I would agree with you on, but that wasn't what the photos showed.

It's called circumstantial evidence. Soros is known to have funded far left wing causes in the past.

Is that a crime? And which far left groups?

 

[Spurgy 777]

How far off from the 5% was Johnson anyway? I saw he did fairly ok in many counties and his only disappointment was his home state.

He got 3.3% of the vote according to this;

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...about-how-third-party-candidates-did-in-2016/

 

[Keef]

This is indicative of something deeper.

I think it's indicative of pervasive lack of education throughout the country. And I'm not talking college degrees, I'm talking just basic reasoning skills and knowledge of how our system operates. The government - and therefore the people - have been breeding this situation for many many decades now via an education system which teaches people what the power that be want them to know and not what they actually need to know, much less how to solve problems rationally.

It doesn't console people who are freaking out about impending fascism when you tell them that, actually, 95% of the nonsense Trump or any other president says can't happen, because the system is naturally resistant to change. Oh, but both houses are Rep controlled! True, but a surprisingly large portion of those Reps hate Trump because he threatens their way of doing things. The party doesn't like Trump. It's unlikely he'll get Rep-unanimous support or votes on most things.

Americans are angry so they voted for somebody angry. Maybe if they weren't so angry and pulled their heads out of their asses to solve problems in a logical manner, that wouldn't have happened. But people are dumb and reactionary because our education system has taught them to be that way.

Since our education system is useless, how do we go about instilling a passion for self-learning among the people? With the wide accessibility of information, how do we get these damn baby boomers and the asshole kids they trained to start caring about things other than paying their bills on time or getting a 4.2 GPA?

 

[Danoff]

Why? Are CEO's immune to making stupid comments on twitter?

Clearly not. But the hatred in this case is not limited to a fringe group of individuals that have been marginalized through their bigotry. This is more mainstream.

Keep in mind that a certain company boss did suggest that the second amendment folks could sort HC out and did so rather publicly. Which does demonstrate that sometimes brain doesn't get engaged before mouth regardless of position within a company or business.

You make it sound like he suggested that they do it.

I would argue that had the result been reversed that may well be a different story.

Possible, but the results were pretty much reversed in 2012. I got an earful of hate from relatives who were devastated and "white hot" angry (that was their term) at Obama's re-election.

No rioting people were in the picture you quoted? One utter idiot was and the handwork of another idiot was.

My last few posts have been on this theme. I suppose there is too much discussion between to make that clear. The comment I was making (and have been making) was a broad one about how a segment of our society is demonstrating a striking degree of hypocrisy. Trump is evil, the republicans are evil, now that he's elected let's do evil things to him so that the world knows that evil is not ok.

A group of rioters I would agree with you on, but that wasn't what the photos showed.

Ok, protesters.

(Here's the article for the "Kill Trump" photo btw: https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3317408...ffigy-hurl-molotov-cocktails-at-police/#page1)

Edit:

President Barack Obama issued a warning Tuesday against "crude nationalism" in the wake of Donald Trump's victory, saying during a news conference on his final overseas trip that the President-elect had tapped into a "troubling" strain of rhetoric playing on Americans' fears of globalization to win the presidency.

Yes. Let's call the campaign rhetoric troubling while we have riots and a stream of much more troubling rhetoric from a group at home. Nice leadership.

 

[Biggles]

It's called circumstantial evidence. Soros is known to have funded far left wing causes in the past.

Sanji, please ... it's busses parked on a street. How is that "circumstantial evidence" of anything? I guarantee there are busses parked on a street every day in Chicago. Taking video of a perfectly common place thing & ascribing dark implications to it is NOT "evidence". Please don't repeat & re-circulate "evidence" that has no basis in fact.

http://www.snopes.com/anti-trump-protesters-bused-into-austin/

And yes, I think we can all agree that the guy holding up that sign (if it is genuine) is an idiot. The words on it are disgusting to anyone of any political stripe.

 

[DDastardly00]

It's not even circumstantial evidence, it's a video of busses parked on a street with a claim that it was paid for by Soros. I was seeking clarification, which is exactly why I posted it as a question not a statement. Let's not mischaracterize my post please.

 

[ryzno]

I keep seeing people say, "the uneducated voted for Trump", seems like the pot's calling the kettle black.

 

[Milouse]

Interesting (i didn't saw that posted here, i hope i didn't miss a page):

I've checked, the 2012 tweet is real:


This could legitimize protesters, from a moral standpoint (only, and from their point of view).

 

[McLaren]

It says march, not riot. It even specifically says Washington to address the center of the "problem", not random cities across the US.

Just about everyone here had no problem with the people protesting and marching against Trump. It's the violence that keeps building with each story we're all against.

 

[Dennisch]

That seems weirdly contrary. I mean, I'm usually more hungry after sex...


*There's going to be quite a few people trying to work out exactly what they should be offended at in that joke right there

Insta-ban on tumblr.

 

[DDastardly00]

Trump flip-flopping from 4 years ago is not surprising when I've seen him flip-flop mid-sentence while campaigning, he's an impressive piece of work that one.

And people made fun of John Kerry (whom I voted for) when he flip flopped during his Presidential run, one, maybe two times when Trump clearly set a new high score. I find that incredibly ironic.

 

[Dennisch]

flip-flopping

He's a politician now. He does what he's supposed to do.

 

[Milouse]

It says march, not riot. It even specifically says Washington to address the center of the "problem", not random cities across the US.

No, when someone writes "march on Washington and stop this travesty", it doesn't mean just "march".
And when someone writes "protesters", he doesn't specifically target "riots".

 

[mister dog]

@Milouse, do you have blue hair?

 

[Danoff]

No, when someone writes "march on Washington and stop this travesty", it doesn't mean just "march".
And when someone writes "protesters", he doesn't specifically target "riots".

I see the contradiction, not sure where you're getting the moral legitimacy. Are you referring to a moral legitimacy for protesting? I'm not sure anyone in this thread would argue that it is immoral to protest. What you posted from Trump certainly doesn't legitimize violence (such as beating a man for being white and therefore presumably voting for trump, or hurling Molotov cocktails at police), or inciting violence, such as calling for rape or murder.

 

[DDastardly00]

I'm not sure how much of the violence is being caused by legitimate protesters when it has been reported that Anarchists have been hijacking some of the protests.

Every year in Seattle and Portland we have the Mayday protests and every year a fringe element of anarchists blends in with the peaceful protesters and causes damage to property by smashing store windows and usually a few police are injured. I've even seen pictures of them changing clothes in the middle of crowds to disguise themselves.

 

[Milouse]

My comment targeted protesters asking for Trump to step aside, they probably find some or more moral legitimacy to do so since Trump acted in a similar way when he was in the opposing position.

 

[BobK]

And that is why a third party shouldn't exist because there is no point anyway.

As long as you and enough others share that opinion, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. We do need a viable third party.

 

[Milouse]

Every year in Seattle and Portland we have the Mayday protests and every year a fringe element of anarchists blends in with the peaceful protesters

We had the same phenomena in Europe (anarchist even moving from country to country), which usually comes as a convenience for gouvernements and the welcomed TV cameras, since this is often enough to flip the opinion and kill the protest.

 

[Johnnypenso]

My comment targeted protesters asking for Trump to step aside, they probably find some or more moral legitimacy to do so since Trump acted in a similar way when he was in the opposing position.

Still missing the point. Protestors can tweet and facebook and protest to their heart's delight. Don't call for an assassination, don't be dragging Trump supporters out of their cars and beating them, don't wreck public or private property, put the lighters down, don't call for the FLOTUS elect to be raped...etc.

 

[Milouse]

@Milouse, do you have blue hair?

No, that's Milhouse, and I wish i had more hair
Playing Rocket League online, i've been asked three times if that was a reference to "Milhouse Manastorm" character from World of Warcraft - obviously some WoW players missed the reference.

 

[Milouse]

Still missing the point. Protestors can tweet and facebook and protest to their heart's delight. Don't call for an assassination, don't be dragging Trump supporters out of their cars and beating them, don't wreck public or private property, put the lighters down, don't call for the FLOTUS elect to be raped...etc.

Could you just consider the non violent protesters, just for a few minutes? Why should they be accountable for the stupid ones. I didn't read someone here defending the violent protesters (unless i missed an isolated message), so i don't see the point of bringing that to the table all the time. Now, if you still don't see the point in the sentence "they probably find some or more moral legitimacy to do so since Trump acted in a similar way when he was in the opposing position" you'll need to be more specific - unless you're trying to read between lines where there's nothing to read.

 

[Dotini]

George "Ernst Stavro Blofeld" Soros gathers the wounded for a new charge of the Light Brigade!
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/democrats-soros-trump-231313