What's the objective of the rioters?

1…5681011

Comments

  • Posts: 12,885
    Why do Americans love protests so much after a milestone election?
    These current protests will do nothing.
    smh
  • Posts: 3,562
    edited November 2016
    PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

    Why do Americans love protests so much after a milestone election?
    These current protests will do nothing.
    smh

    You're such a joy... go stir shit in another forum for a change of pace, huh? :bee:

    It's called Freedom of speech just like you have that freedom to stir the shit.
    Post edited by Free on
  • Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,668
    There are few things I hate more than the criticism of passionate civil disobedience and protest.
    Thank goodness for all of those brave and passionate enough to do it when they see fit. All of our lives are better for it.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Posts: 12,885
    edited November 2016
    Free said:

    show previous quotes
    You're such a joy... go stir shit in another forum for a change of pace, huh? :bee:

    It's called Freedom of speech just like you have that freedom to stir the shit.
    The violent rioters that are protesting is excused because it's a freedom?
    That's weird man.
    Again, I say that these protests that those Neanderthals are doing will not get their objectives out.
  • Posts: 3,562
    Did I say violence is excused? No. where are the violence areas? One spot of many. *1*.
  • Posts: 12,885
    Free said:

    Did I say violence is excused? No. where are the violence areas? One spot of many. *1*.

    No.
    Your words implied that Freedom of Speech is a right of the violent Neanderthals destroying your country.
    I could be wrong though. Perhaps a filter is needed in freedom speakers sometimes.
  • Posts: 3,562
    You (and others) are lumping protesters in with rioters. Way to go.

    It just make you all look like angry folk, looking to blame and generalize a huge number of people doing what is completely their right.
  • Posts: 12,885
    Free said:

    You (and others) are lumping protesters in with rioters. Way to go.

    It just make you all look like angry folk, looking to blame and generalize a huge number of people doing what is completely their right.

    Peaceful protests generally stay that way until the protesters feel they are not being heard.
    Starting a protest w/ burning property, flags and just general mischief are merely oh once so calm loving protesters skipping the middle man and going for the top.
  • Winnipeg Posts: 39,473
    Go Beavers said:

    But when did trump become some peace loving hippy? The guys has no idea about international relations, wants to "bomb the shit out of isis", is aggressive interpersonally, doesn't repect veterans, wonders why no one has used nukes, and is surrounding himself with dimwits. But Clinton was apparently on some war rampage set to deploy thousands?

    I know. I am merely pointing out it isn't simply a black and white issue as you are painting it to be. If it were, the US likely wouldn't be in this situation. There is a ton of grey in there. Hillary's got history in politics, and to many on the right, it's not a good record. I can't say I can comment on this, but I kept reading about her war mongering. Sure, Trump says he wants to bomb the shit out of ISIS. They are considered the ultimate bad guy. I dont recall Hillary ever mentioning a plan to deal with that threat. That resonated with people. The fear component is massive at this point. They see Hillary's wars as all about money and power, not keeping the US safe. They are willing to let some racist rhetoric slide if their safety is at risk. And many don't even see it as racist, many see it as truth. And that's not the fault of just the right, that's the fault of the media as a whole.

    Funny, during the election, I didn't notice one thing on CNN about terrorism, which usually dominates national headlines in the US. Did terrorists hit the pause button during the election?

    Nope. Just the coverage.
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • Posts: 24,524
    Free said:

    You (and others) are lumping protesters in with rioters. Way to go.

    It just make you all look like angry folk, looking to blame and generalize a huge number of people doing what is completely their right.

    I thought the subject of this was about rioters. Not even sure if that term is accurate, but open for another (if even needed) for those who get off on burning shit, breaking shit, spray-painting shit, treating others like shit.

    I'm not generalizing, General!
  • Posts: 9,617
    hedonist said:

    show previous quotes
    I thought the subject of this was about rioters. Not even sure if that term is accurate, but open for another (if even needed) for those who get off on burning shit, breaking shit, spray-painting shit, treating others like shit.

    I'm not generalizing, General!
    Website that reports the violence at protests

    https://tolerantleft.com
  • Posts: 6,499
    JC29856 said:

    show previous quotes
    Website that reports the violence at protests

    https://tolerantleft.com
    Damn, that's quite a list of deplorable crybabies!
  • Posts: 9,617
    Of America's 320-million-odd residents, only about three-quarters are eligible to vote (mostly because they're over the age of 18). Of the group that could vote in the presidential election, the U.S. Election Project's Michael McDonald estimates that about 58.1 percent did — meaning that 41.9 percent of eligible Americans didn't vote last week.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/16/a-lot-of-non-voters-are-mad-at-the-election-results-if-only-there-was-something-they-could-have-done/

    I wonder if voters simply didn't vote because the media convinced them the election wouldn't be close?
    Polls, 539.com, NYT saying Hilliary had 93% chance of winning.
  • Winnipeg Posts: 39,473
    JC29856 said:

    Of America's 320-million-odd residents, only about three-quarters are eligible to vote (mostly because they're over the age of 18). Of the group that could vote in the presidential election, the U.S. Election Project's Michael McDonald estimates that about 58.1 percent did — meaning that 41.9 percent of eligible Americans didn't vote last week.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/16/a-lot-of-non-voters-are-mad-at-the-election-results-if-only-there-was-something-they-could-have-done/

    I wonder if voters simply didn't vote because the media convinced them the election wouldn't be close?
    Polls, 539.com, NYT saying Hilliary had 93% chance of winning.

    this is something I theorized yesterday. I stil think the turnout would have been low, but I think the media convinced so many people that trump had no chance, so that many more people didn't vote (on both sides, both sides thinking "what's the point if it's already foregone?")
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • Posts: 9,617
    HughFreakingDillon said:

    show previous quotes
    this is something I theorized yesterday. I stil think the turnout would have been low, but I think the media convinced so many people that trump had no chance, so that many more people didn't vote (on both sides, both sides thinking "what's the point if it's already foregone?")
    Take it a step further, did the media want low turnout to help trump win? He was a ratings cash cow from when he first announced and the media covered him almost exclusively until the conventions.
  • Winnipeg Posts: 39,473
    JC29856 said:

    show previous quotes
    Take it a step further, did the media want low turnout to help trump win? He was a ratings cash cow from when he first announced and the media covered him almost exclusively until the conventions.
    I highly doubt that. unless you factor in they might think their ratings would skyrocket for 4 years straight because of his potential buffoonery. But I just can't see democratic leaning news agencies trying to influence the election of a republican president.
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    If the rioters are being paid as rumored, wouldn't the person funding them be funding terrorism?
  • Posts: 9,617
    unsung said:

    If the rioters are being paid as rumored, wouldn't the person funding them be funding terrorism?

    I doubt all those craigslist ads are fake.
  • Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,668
    unsung said:

    If the rioters are being paid as rumored, wouldn't the person funding them be funding terrorism?

    What has happened that you see as terrorism? You do know the difference between protests, riots, civil disobedience, and terrorism, right?
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Posts: 9,552
    unsung said:

    If the rioters are being paid as rumored, wouldn't the person funding them be funding terrorism?

    To clarify: armed people occupy a government building and damage property in protest are freedom fighters worthy or your support. Protesters who occupy the street and damage property are terrorists?

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register

Quick Links

Categories