Donald Trump

ikiT

Advocating PROTEST against oppression is not advocating violence.  HK.

Halifax2TheMax

HughFreakingDillon said:

so we fight incitement of violence with advocating for violence now?

great strategy! 

last I checked, the red hats at that rally weren't cracking any skulls or firing off any water hoses. the actions of the protesters at that rally are indefensible. 

Who’s advocating for violence? I just stated that the deplorables wearing MAGA hats illicit certain responses from certain people and I understand that, particularly when taking the high road has gotten more of Team Trump Treason’s shit rammed down our throats. People ain’t taking it no more and Team Trump Treason and his deplorable supporters and enablers haven’t shown a willingness, never mind acceptance, of compromise or inclusion. If you don’t see it as “us” versus “them and the other,” well, that’s on you.

ikiT

some may wild out.  3 years of nonstop nonsense will do that.

mrussel1

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so we fight incitement of violence with advocating for violence now?

great strategy! 

last I checked, the red hats at that rally weren't cracking any skulls or firing off any water hoses. the actions of the protesters at that rally are indefensible. 

Who’s advocating for violence? I just stated that the deplorables wearing MAGA hats illicit certain responses from certain people and I understand that, particularly when taking the high road has gotten more of Team Trump Treason’s shit rammed down our throats. People ain’t taking it no more and Team Trump Treason and his deplorable supporters and enablers haven’t shown a willingness, never mind acceptance, of compromise or inclusion. If you don’t see it as “us” versus “them and the other,” well, that’s on you.

the people that you need to convince to vote for your side don't see it as "us against them".  So the left needs to decide if it feels better to break shit or win elections.  

ikiT

The Left.

josevolution

Fuck the deplorable’s fuck’em now they wanna be treated with respect lol the Baffoon himself was inciting violence since day one of his campaign! 

Merkin Baller

If I didn't know better, I would think certain people are much more concerned with right wing talking points than they are with a president whose behavior is appearing more and more treasonous with every passing day.

But hey, to each his own.

OnWis97

Notice the shit that the right can pin on the left?  The people acting foolish last night are being talked about at length here in Minneapolis...sure the people harping on it most are die-hard Trumpies.  But all sorts of people are hearing about it and you never know what causes some people to vote how they do.  

I don't think what happened in Minneapolis is worse than Trump's nonsense.  But it also doesn't help.  It invites the reactions that it's getting. And it permeates the culture.  Will it cause even a few people to vote for Trump? Stay home? Vote 3rd?  Maybe.  Can't help; could hurt.

And in the long run?  I hope for a better world with (ugh) civility.  Shit like this doesn't help.

mrussel1

Merkin Baller said:

If I didn't know better, I would think certain people are much more concerned with right wing talking points than they are with a president whose behavior is appearing more and more treasonous with every passing day.

But hey, to each his own.

It's a good thing you know better then.  But the reality is that I live in a world that is not a bubble.  I see how moderates, indys and conservatives think and take in information.  I work in financial services which is fiscally conservative by nature, but socially moderate.  I read National Review, Reason, Amcon, and others.  I care about winning elections.  If you think destroying downtown San Jose helped the cause in 16, you're wrong.  If you think destroying Minneapolis advances the cause, you're wrong.  And if you're not advancing it, your're hurting it. 

There's a huge difference in standing up for a principle and resorting to wanton destruction.  Stand up for Kap.  Stand up to China and the NBA.  Stand up for what's right vs wrong.  But destroying property isn't right and if you think a riot is a positive thing, you've lost your damned mind. 

CM189191

ikiT said:

U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., blasted the hundreds of protesters outside President Trump's Minneapolis rally on Thursday night, accusing the raucous crowd of trying to intimidate everyday citizens.

Scott said those same protesters -- who were yelling at police and Trump supporters -- were the same people telling the president to "calm down."

"I've never seen such hypocrisy in all my life," he said, adding he had heard recently from a man who was reportedly accosted in New York for wearing a MAGA hat.

Civilians, he said, are "consistently being intimidated" and are being asked to "cower" to what he characterized as a "new, socialist regime."

"This approach toward anarchy continues to run amok. We cannot afford that in the greatest democracy on Earth."

I don't buy it.  Lies, Lies, and still more lies.

The greatest democracy on earth cannot afford one more day of a corruptAF authoritarian dictator.   #ITMFA

This guy calls himself a politician?

Socialism and anarchy are literally the opposite of each other.  How is the left gravitating towards both?  

What a fucking moron.  

PJPOWER

CM189191 said:

ikiT said:

U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., blasted the hundreds of protesters outside President Trump's Minneapolis rally on Thursday night, accusing the raucous crowd of trying to intimidate everyday citizens.

Scott said those same protesters -- who were yelling at police and Trump supporters -- were the same people telling the president to "calm down."

"I've never seen such hypocrisy in all my life," he said, adding he had heard recently from a man who was reportedly accosted in New York for wearing a MAGA hat.

Civilians, he said, are "consistently being intimidated" and are being asked to "cower" to what he characterized as a "new, socialist regime."

"This approach toward anarchy continues to run amok. We cannot afford that in the greatest democracy on Earth."

I don't buy it.  Lies, Lies, and still more lies.

The greatest democracy on earth cannot afford one more day of a corruptAF authoritarian dictator.   #ITMFA

This guy calls himself a politician?

Socialism and anarchy are literally the opposite of each other.  How is the left gravitating towards both?  

What a fucking moron.  

This maybe?:

Social anarchism is considered an umbrella term that includes—but it is not limited to—the post-capitalist economic models of anarcho-communism, collectivist anarchism and sometimes mutualism, or even non-state controlled federated guild socialist dual powerindustrial democracy and economic democracyor federated worker cooperatives in addition to workers' and consumers' councils, replacing much of the present state system yet still retaining basic rights as well as the trade unionapproach of anarcho-syndicalism, the social struggle strategies of platformism and specifism and the environmental philosophy of social ecology. The term social anarchism is often used interchangeably with libertarian socialism[9] or left-libertarianism[10] and emerged in the late 19th century as a distinction from individualist anarchism.[11]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_anarchism

dignin

mrussel1 said:

Merkin Baller said:

If I didn't know better, I would think certain people are much more concerned with right wing talking points than they are with a president whose behavior is appearing more and more treasonous with every passing day.

But hey, to each his own.

It's a good thing you know better then.  But the reality is that I live in a world that is not a bubble.  I see how moderates, indys and conservatives think and take in information.  I work in financial services which is fiscally conservative by nature, but socially moderate.  I read National Review, Reason, Amcon, and others.  I care about winning elections.  If you think destroying downtown San Jose helped the cause in 16, you're wrong.  If you think destroying Minneapolis advances the cause, you're wrong.  And if you're not advancing it, your're hurting it. 

There's a huge difference in standing up for a principle and resorting to wanton destruction.  Stand up for Kap.  Stand up to China and the NBA.  Stand up for what's right vs wrong.  But destroying property isn't right and if you think a riot is a positive thing, you've lost your damned mind. 

Destroying downtown San Jose and destroying Minneapolis?

I'll tell you what also doesn't help win elections, hyperbolie like that.

If a Trumper points out burning Maga hats it's pretty easy to counter with Walmart mass shootings.

CM189191

PJPOWER said:

CM189191 said:

ikiT said:

U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., blasted the hundreds of protesters outside President Trump's Minneapolis rally on Thursday night, accusing the raucous crowd of trying to intimidate everyday citizens.

Scott said those same protesters -- who were yelling at police and Trump supporters -- were the same people telling the president to "calm down."

"I've never seen such hypocrisy in all my life," he said, adding he had heard recently from a man who was reportedly accosted in New York for wearing a MAGA hat.

Civilians, he said, are "consistently being intimidated" and are being asked to "cower" to what he characterized as a "new, socialist regime."

"This approach toward anarchy continues to run amok. We cannot afford that in the greatest democracy on Earth."

I don't buy it.  Lies, Lies, and still more lies.

The greatest democracy on earth cannot afford one more day of a corruptAF authoritarian dictator.   #ITMFA

This guy calls himself a politician?

Socialism and anarchy are literally the opposite of each other.  How is the left gravitating towards both?  

What a fucking moron.  

This maybe?:

Social anarchism is considered an umbrella term that includes—but it is not limited to—the post-capitalist economic models of anarcho-communism, collectivist anarchism and sometimes mutualism, or even non-state controlled federated guild socialist dual powerindustrial democracy and economic democracyor federated worker cooperatives in addition to workers' and consumers' councils, replacing much of the present state system yet still retaining basic rights as well as the trade unionapproach of anarcho-syndicalism, the social struggle strategies of platformism and specifism and the environmental philosophy of social ecology. The term social anarchism is often used interchangeably with libertarian socialism[9] or left-libertarianism[10] and emerged in the late 19th century as a distinction from individualist anarchism.[11]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_anarchism

yeah...good luck getting a MAGAt to understand that

The Senator was just throwing out red meat to the red hats

HughFreakingDillon

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so we fight incitement of violence with advocating for violence now?

great strategy! 

last I checked, the red hats at that rally weren't cracking any skulls or firing off any water hoses. the actions of the protesters at that rally are indefensible. 

Who’s advocating for violence? I just stated that the deplorables wearing MAGA hats illicit certain responses from certain people and I understand that, particularly when taking the high road has gotten more of Team Trump Treason’s shit rammed down our throats. People ain’t taking it no more and Team Trump Treason and his deplorable supporters and enablers haven’t shown a willingness, never mind acceptance, of compromise or inclusion. If you don’t see it as “us” versus “them and the other,” well, that’s on you.

you are. we all read between the lines, and you think because you are on a liberal forum that it will just get a pass. you think you won't get called on it because your next line will be an accusation of me being ok with sexual assault (which you did already), or the slaughter of thousands of kurds, or the murder of a journalist, or i am a misogynist (you did that one already too) or other things that have nothing to do with the current topic.

"what did peaceful marches get the civil right movement?". that's encouraging or, at the very least, being apologetic towards, violence. a following comment about people in maga hats "should expect a reaction", which you just doubled down on above, is much of the same. 

just own it already. don't try to hide behind semantics and play innocent/stupid. you are ok with people stealing others' property and burning it, possibly assaulting that person in the process. come on.how often does stealing someone's hat in a group of politically charged groups not end in assault of some kind?. all because the ends justify the means to you, as you've stated ad nauseum, "both sides are not the same", insinuating that the gloves are off and because of charlotteseville anything democrats do is a-ok in your book and being nice hasn't done shit. 

get it through your head. IT'S NOT OK JUST BECAUSE IT'S THE ADVERSARY IS TRUMP. IT NEVER WILL BE. 

Halifax2TheMax

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so we fight incitement of violence with advocating for violence now?

great strategy! 

last I checked, the red hats at that rally weren't cracking any skulls or firing off any water hoses. the actions of the protesters at that rally are indefensible. 

Who’s advocating for violence? I just stated that the deplorables wearing MAGA hats illicit certain responses from certain people and I understand that, particularly when taking the high road has gotten more of Team Trump Treason’s shit rammed down our throats. People ain’t taking it no more and Team Trump Treason and his deplorable supporters and enablers haven’t shown a willingness, never mind acceptance, of compromise or inclusion. If you don’t see it as “us” versus “them and the other,” well, that’s on you.

you are. we all read between the lines, and you think because you are on a liberal forum that it will just get a pass. you think you won't get called on it because your next line will be an accusation of me being ok with sexual assault (which you did already), or the slaughter of thousands of kurds, or the murder of a journalist, or i am a misogynist (you did that one already too) or other things that have nothing to do with the current topic.

"what did peaceful marches get the civil right movement?". that's encouraging or, at the very least, being apologetic towards, violence. a following comment about people in maga hats "should expect a reaction", which you just doubled down on above, is much of the same. 

just own it already. don't try to hide behind semantics and play innocent/stupid. you are ok with people stealing others' property and burning it, possibly assaulting that person in the process. come on.how often does stealing someone's hat in a group of politically charged groups not end in assault of some kind?. all because the ends justify the means to you, as you've stated ad nauseum, "both sides are not the same", insinuating that the gloves are off and because of charlotteseville anything democrats do is a-ok in your book and being nice hasn't done shit. 

get it through your head. IT'S NOT OK JUST BECAUSE IT'S THE ADVERSARY IS TRUMP. IT NEVER WILL BE. 

Would it be okay if it were hitler? And no I’m not advocating violence, just pointing out that sometimes violence is necessary to enact the change you want to see, particularly when given lip service and constantly told to be patient, wait your turn, and take the high road.

You have posted some sexist views and pretty bs opinions. Don’t pretend you haven’t. Own it.

And both sides are not the same, not by a long shot. Yea, I play innocent and stupid, sure.

ikiT

5 court losses, a talking fired ambassador, and Rudy.

what a day for Trumpito. 

HughFreakingDillon

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so we fight incitement of violence with advocating for violence now?

great strategy! 

last I checked, the red hats at that rally weren't cracking any skulls or firing off any water hoses. the actions of the protesters at that rally are indefensible. 

Who’s advocating for violence? I just stated that the deplorables wearing MAGA hats illicit certain responses from certain people and I understand that, particularly when taking the high road has gotten more of Team Trump Treason’s shit rammed down our throats. People ain’t taking it no more and Team Trump Treason and his deplorable supporters and enablers haven’t shown a willingness, never mind acceptance, of compromise or inclusion. If you don’t see it as “us” versus “them and the other,” well, that’s on you.

you are. we all read between the lines, and you think because you are on a liberal forum that it will just get a pass. you think you won't get called on it because your next line will be an accusation of me being ok with sexual assault (which you did already), or the slaughter of thousands of kurds, or the murder of a journalist, or i am a misogynist (you did that one already too) or other things that have nothing to do with the current topic.

"what did peaceful marches get the civil right movement?". that's encouraging or, at the very least, being apologetic towards, violence. a following comment about people in maga hats "should expect a reaction", which you just doubled down on above, is much of the same. 

just own it already. don't try to hide behind semantics and play innocent/stupid. you are ok with people stealing others' property and burning it, possibly assaulting that person in the process. come on.how often does stealing someone's hat in a group of politically charged groups not end in assault of some kind?. all because the ends justify the means to you, as you've stated ad nauseum, "both sides are not the same", insinuating that the gloves are off and because of charlotteseville anything democrats do is a-ok in your book and being nice hasn't done shit. 

get it through your head. IT'S NOT OK JUST BECAUSE IT'S THE ADVERSARY IS TRUMP. IT NEVER WILL BE. 

Would it be okay if it were hitler? And no I’m not advocating violence, just pointing out that sometimes violence is necessary to enact the change you want to see, particularly when given lip service and constantly told to be patient, wait your turn, and take the high road.

You have posted some sexist views and pretty bs opinions. Don’t pretend you haven’t. Own it.

And both sides are not the same, not by a long shot. Yea, I play innocent and stupid, sure.

never once posted anything sexist. that's absolute bullshit and you know it. 

ikiT

Trump IS Hitler. 

Halifax2TheMax

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so we fight incitement of violence with advocating for violence now?

great strategy! 

last I checked, the red hats at that rally weren't cracking any skulls or firing off any water hoses. the actions of the protesters at that rally are indefensible. 

Who’s advocating for violence? I just stated that the deplorables wearing MAGA hats illicit certain responses from certain people and I understand that, particularly when taking the high road has gotten more of Team Trump Treason’s shit rammed down our throats. People ain’t taking it no more and Team Trump Treason and his deplorable supporters and enablers haven’t shown a willingness, never mind acceptance, of compromise or inclusion. If you don’t see it as “us” versus “them and the other,” well, that’s on you.

you are. we all read between the lines, and you think because you are on a liberal forum that it will just get a pass. you think you won't get called on it because your next line will be an accusation of me being ok with sexual assault (which you did already), or the slaughter of thousands of kurds, or the murder of a journalist, or i am a misogynist (you did that one already too) or other things that have nothing to do with the current topic.

"what did peaceful marches get the civil right movement?". that's encouraging or, at the very least, being apologetic towards, violence. a following comment about people in maga hats "should expect a reaction", which you just doubled down on above, is much of the same. 

just own it already. don't try to hide behind semantics and play innocent/stupid. you are ok with people stealing others' property and burning it, possibly assaulting that person in the process. come on.how often does stealing someone's hat in a group of politically charged groups not end in assault of some kind?. all because the ends justify the means to you, as you've stated ad nauseum, "both sides are not the same", insinuating that the gloves are off and because of charlotteseville anything democrats do is a-ok in your book and being nice hasn't done shit. 

get it through your head. IT'S NOT OK JUST BECAUSE IT'S THE ADVERSARY IS TRUMP. IT NEVER WILL BE. 

Would it be okay if it were hitler? And no I’m not advocating violence, just pointing out that sometimes violence is necessary to enact the change you want to see, particularly when given lip service and constantly told to be patient, wait your turn, and take the high road.

You have posted some sexist views and pretty bs opinions. Don’t pretend you haven’t. Own it.

And both sides are not the same, not by a long shot. Yea, I play innocent and stupid, sure.

never once posted anything sexist. that's absolute bullshit and you know it. 

Hmmmmm, no.

HughFreakingDillon

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so we fight incitement of violence with advocating for violence now?

great strategy! 

last I checked, the red hats at that rally weren't cracking any skulls or firing off any water hoses. the actions of the protesters at that rally are indefensible. 

Who’s advocating for violence? I just stated that the deplorables wearing MAGA hats illicit certain responses from certain people and I understand that, particularly when taking the high road has gotten more of Team Trump Treason’s shit rammed down our throats. People ain’t taking it no more and Team Trump Treason and his deplorable supporters and enablers haven’t shown a willingness, never mind acceptance, of compromise or inclusion. If you don’t see it as “us” versus “them and the other,” well, that’s on you.

you are. we all read between the lines, and you think because you are on a liberal forum that it will just get a pass. you think you won't get called on it because your next line will be an accusation of me being ok with sexual assault (which you did already), or the slaughter of thousands of kurds, or the murder of a journalist, or i am a misogynist (you did that one already too) or other things that have nothing to do with the current topic.

"what did peaceful marches get the civil right movement?". that's encouraging or, at the very least, being apologetic towards, violence. a following comment about people in maga hats "should expect a reaction", which you just doubled down on above, is much of the same. 

just own it already. don't try to hide behind semantics and play innocent/stupid. you are ok with people stealing others' property and burning it, possibly assaulting that person in the process. come on.how often does stealing someone's hat in a group of politically charged groups not end in assault of some kind?. all because the ends justify the means to you, as you've stated ad nauseum, "both sides are not the same", insinuating that the gloves are off and because of charlotteseville anything democrats do is a-ok in your book and being nice hasn't done shit. 

get it through your head. IT'S NOT OK JUST BECAUSE IT'S THE ADVERSARY IS TRUMP. IT NEVER WILL BE. 

Would it be okay if it were hitler? And no I’m not advocating violence, just pointing out that sometimes violence is necessary to enact the change you want to see, particularly when given lip service and constantly told to be patient, wait your turn, and take the high road.

You have posted some sexist views and pretty bs opinions. Don’t pretend you haven’t. Own it.

And both sides are not the same, not by a long shot. Yea, I play innocent and stupid, sure.

never once posted anything sexist. that's absolute bullshit and you know it. 

Hmmmmm, no.

yeah, i remember, i once critizied AOC and that made me sexist. i forgot, anyone with a vagina is above criticism in your book. calling me a sexist just shows how utterly clueless and blinded you are by your trump rage.