The Proud Boys, The New Republicans?

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

my2hands said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

my2hands said:

Oh, this is WAY too entertaining!!!!!

Please, stop, I cant breathe!!! 

I would love if you would explain. Because I'm finding it a little difficult to figure out where you stand overall, just because you're focusing on stuff like Hillary and GW, which makes little sense to me.

Here's my take on my2hands for what it is worth, based on observations over the years. M2H is a liberal. He is a progressive. He does not support Trump. He did not vote for Trump. He's also not necessarily a party guy, but certainly isn't a Repub, nor is he a conservative.
 What he is doing, although many see it as trolling (and it may very well be), is pushing back against the standard Dem or liberal response here on the AMT. He's challenging Dems to get past making fun of Trump and/or belittling Trump supporters, and be more introspective. Dems will not win a national election by ignoring the electorate. Dems will not win a national election by being scholarly and elitist. Dems need to be more grassroots (as Bernie demonstrated), and get their supporters engaged and excited. Dems need to listen to people who reside between the 2 coasts. Dems need to be inclusive, rather than alienating. As long as Dems continue the theme of the past couple of years, they will have trouble reaching critical mass in elections. 

M2H, if I'm misrepresenting, I'm sure you'll correct me. Maybe this is all me projecting. But I do believe that the Dems need to change the way they campaign and talk to voters if they have any hope of winning a national election. Trump demonstrated that you can be clueless on policy, can have a tenuous grasp on reality, and can be a racist, misogynistic boor, but still win the country if you say the right things to the right groups of voters. Had Hillary spent any time with her constituency in the middle of the country, had she displayed any sort of human emotion, had she merely set foot in certain key states, she would have been a shoe-in. Instead, because her campaign and the DNC didn't understand the importance of the populists in the rust belt, here we are. And if the Dems don't learn any lessons from 2016 they're doomed to repeat their failures in 2020.

pay the man

Me, a trump supporter, because I point out that blindly labeling 60 million people as racists, sexist, morons is not only wrong, but the exact reason they lost in the first fucking place... its blatant elitism, and is only getting worse... not just here, everywhere 

If you've got someone more progressive than me I'd like to sit down and talk to them... Brian Lux is likely... but not many others

My enemy, he looks just like me........

Why or where do you get the 60 million Team Trump Treason supporters/voters are racists (as so called by the elistist liberals)? Again, you're the only one saying that.

That's all I ever hear.  Racists biggots, assholes.  Take your pick...

I don’t think all 60 million Team Trump Treason voters are racists, bigots and misogynists but a surprising percentage are clearly that. I think that’s the 37% that make up his base. I also don’t hear much about dem candidates running around and campaigning on that or impeachment. They’re running on the issues and associating their opponents with Team Trump Treason’s draconian policies and treatment of people. There are a lot of Team Trump Treason voters with regrets, moderated repubs and butt hurt Bernie bros mostly. Listen to Kasich. Listen to former Bush Administration folks. And looming in the background is Team Mueller’s indictments.

Kasich should have won the Rep platform but the US wanted something different...

But again, all I read and hear is what a typical Trump supporter is.  You only have to read a few of these pages and it's there.

This was supposed to be about The Proud Boys and the new look Republicans, lol.  

Oh well, at least people are talking.

OnWis97 said:

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

my2hands said:

Oh, this is WAY too entertaining!!!!!

Please, stop, I cant breathe!!! 

I would love if you would explain. Because I'm finding it a little difficult to figure out where you stand overall, just because you're focusing on stuff like Hillary and GW, which makes little sense to me.

Here's my take on my2hands for what it is worth, based on observations over the years. M2H is a liberal. He is a progressive. He does not support Trump. He did not vote for Trump. He's also not necessarily a party guy, but certainly isn't a Repub, nor is he a conservative.
 What he is doing, although many see it as trolling (and it may very well be), is pushing back against the standard Dem or liberal response here on the AMT. He's challenging Dems to get past making fun of Trump and/or belittling Trump supporters, and be more introspective. Dems will not win a national election by ignoring the electorate. Dems will not win a national election by being scholarly and elitist. Dems need to be more grassroots (as Bernie demonstrated), and get their supporters engaged and excited. Dems need to listen to people who reside between the 2 coasts. Dems need to be inclusive, rather than alienating. As long as Dems continue the theme of the past couple of years, they will have trouble reaching critical mass in elections. 

M2H, if I'm misrepresenting, I'm sure you'll correct me. Maybe this is all me projecting. But I do believe that the Dems need to change the way they campaign and talk to voters if they have any hope of winning a national election. Trump demonstrated that you can be clueless on policy, can have a tenuous grasp on reality, and can be a racist, misogynistic boor, but still win the country if you say the right things to the right groups of voters. Had Hillary spent any time with her constituency in the middle of the country, had she displayed any sort of human emotion, had she merely set foot in certain key states, she would have been a shoe-in. Instead, because her campaign and the DNC didn't understand the importance of the populists in the rust belt, here we are. And if the Dems don't learn any lessons from 2016 they're doomed to repeat their failures in 2020.

That's a shame.  Because while I don't know who the nominee's going to be, I do know that that person will be labeled "elitist" and successfully accused of ignoring the real America.

It's true that they can't just get on a podium and say "Trump's a piece of shit" and win.  They can't even win by pointing out all the things we waste our time pointing out here.  America has proven that it's OK with these.  What they need most of all is their next Obama.  Someone without 25 years of being hated, someone with few skeletons in their closet, and someone with the personality to pull people off the couch on election day.  And I have NO idea who that is.  It's not Joe Biden.  As much as I'd enjoy seeing surly Joe run up the score against that clown in the debates, I think his personality rubs people the wrong way. Obama came across as positive, not cynical.  Maybe the Dems are further along than I think...because there's no value to hinting at it for a while.  Whoever it is will instantly become Public Enemy Number 1 for nearly half the country.  And might even get locked up after the election.  The Dems would be smart (quite a change) to not have a lot of time for that vilification to build up.

CM189191 said:

njnancy said:

CM189191 said:

LongestRoad said:

josevolution said:

Like they say “ once you let the Jeannie out of the bottle “ all these groups have been given the green light by the Orange Baffoon himself ..

Who gave Antifa the green light? They are the same. I wish the gangs and gang stalkers would  get a life. Do something positive and legal. That’ll keep you busy. 

But but but whatabout....

Antifa is not the same. They are not a hate group.  They are not a terrorist organization.

Antifa's only purpose is to show up and fight fascism wherever it exists.  No fascists, no antifa.

The problem with almost every 'gathering' whether it is meant to be peaceful or if there is perceived confrontation is that Anarchists show up and usually make the liberal/left side of the protest look bad. 

You can spot them easily - hoodie and face covered. They blend in and then out come the anarchy logo with its violence, destruction, looting, etc....  There have been some marches that have prevented them from infiltrating, usually big ones. But they reliably show up year after year, cause after cause, march after march...doesn't matter as long as they can act without care for law, property, safety, etc. They don't believe in government so latch onto any chance to wreak havoc. 

They are usually what is used as the 'violent' argument against a peaceful liberal/left march when they have nothing to do with the cause. They are as annoying AF and that makes them exuberant. 

I'm inclined to agree with most of what you said here...a few bad apples and whatnot.

But that certainly doesn't qualify them as a hate group or terrorist organisation.