Massive ongoing protest in Chicago makes Trump "postpone" his event

Status
Not open for further replies.

SI SE PUEDE!!

SI SE PUEDE!!

SI SE PUEDE!!

Cq2cRNr.jpg
 
Not that I agree with Trump but not allowing a Presidential Candidate to make his event isn't democratic and you fall to the same level as him. Protest with your vote and not with obstructing him, this will just fuel him and strengthen him.

Fuck No x1000. We don't give hate a platform. Let this monster go "unobstructed" and by the time we all realize the mistake it will be far too late to save the democracy.
 
I'm not downplaying it at all, but you seem to be overstating it considering nearly every post you make is about the protest being violent or having violent motivations in some way.

Did you see how many people were there? Why aren't you talking about the 99.99999999999% of uninjured, nonviolent protestors and their legal speech? Can you do some self-analysis here on your assumptions and framing?

The same (false imo) argument could be employed about Trump supporters attacking minorities -- it's only a handful here or there. The problem isn't the absolute numbers. Its whether that violence is encouraged, as many here are doing, and as Trump has been doing, or whether it is discouraged. One path leads to more violence, perhaps more violence than our political structure can maintain.
 
Fuck No x1000. We don't give hate a platform. Let this monster go "unobstructed" and by the time we all realize the mistake it will be far too late to save the democracy.

Agreed. Doing nothing can be worst than taking some action and trying to get dissenting voices heard.
 
Fuck No x1000. We don't give hate a platform. Let this monster go "unobstructed" and by the time we all realize the mistake it will be far too late to save the democracy.
The entire media is his platform, and he can't be protested out of office. He has to be out voted.
 
The same (false imo) argument could be employed about Trump supporters attacking minorities -- it's only a handful here or there. The problem isn't the absolute numbers. Its whether that violence is encouraged, as many here are doing, and as Trump has been doing, or whether it is discouraged. One path leads to more violence, perhaps more violence than our political structure can maintain.

Violence against minorities has been happening for centuries, m8. Odd that it's only a concern now.
 
The same (false imo) argument could be employed about Trump supporters attacking minorities -- it's only a handful here or there. The problem isn't the absolute numbers. Its whether that violence is encouraged, as many here are doing, and as Trump has been doing, or whether it is discouraged. One path leads to more violence, perhaps more violence than our political structure can maintain.
The diffirence is that Trump and his campaign promotes the use of violent rhetoric. Trump is guilty of not making efforts to distance himself from his violent supporters.
 
Out the window goes the off chance that liberals dont show in November to keep that lunatic Trump out of office for SURE now. The guy is sunk; the numbers are going to be ugly.

In the end, this will definitely work out.
 
Thank you for your post. Unfortunately, I still don't understand what you mean. The onus of what? The onus of the violence? The onus of being informed on the matter? Are you saying the protestors are to blame because, if they had googled and read a little, they would have realized the trump rally would likely result in violence? Or that the electorate in general have an onus of being informed so someone like Trump does not get elected?

Edit: wait nevermind, I think I understand. Its more of the latter -- you feel the onus of voters to understand tonights events is on them, they are to blame if tonights events make them vote for Trump. I understand and can somewhat agree, but I feel a lot of tonights impact is indirect. Trump supporters get rallied up and campaign or reach out to friends, who may never hear of tonights events directly.

Your edit is a lot closer to my point. The onus is on the moderate to do their homework to be informed. Everyone from both sides will reach out to friends but people should take it upon themselves to look at the facts objectively and stand behind a vote before blindly accepting spin as truth which Trump is skilled at doing.

In regards to violence, yes we all do not condone it but forgive me if I must say that it would be rather naive to watch all of these current events unfold and not expect a tussle between folks. We know that these skirmishes solve little if nothing at all but when people gather in mass, there will always be conflict of some nature. It's a basic truth.
 
Fuck No x1000. We don't give hate a platform. Let this monster go "unobstructed" and by the time we all realize the mistake it will be far too late to save the democracy.

By engaging in violence, it gives hate the only platform for tonight. A stable democracy (or representative democracy) is ultimately about using the political power imbued to change the system. Violence was probably justified to some degree when some individuals did not have any political power -- e.g. Boston tea party, or when slaves or women could not vote. And while there is some political inequality via economic inequality, I don't think that was the main issue tonight. I believe the way to fight this threat to democracy is peaceful awareness and to vote, not encouraging violence.
 
The diffirence is that Trump and his campaign promotes the use of violent rhetoric. Trump is guilty of not making efforts to distance himself from his violent supporters.

Also of egging them on in interviews about their actions. He wants these people riled up and excited since that means they're more likely to go out and vote for him. Unfortunately that also has a lot of downside, including increased violence against protesters. So far we're pretty lucky that his most violent supporter's actions have been fairly limited.

The fact is this is going to get worse as time passes and it's likely too far gone to get back in the bottle. The GOP really screwed the pooch on this one.
 
By engaging in violence, it gives hate the only platform for tonight. A stable democracy (or representative democracy) is ultimately about using the political power imbued to change the system. Violence was probably justified to some degree when some individuals did not have any political power -- e.g. Boston tea party, or when slaves or women could not vote. And while there is some political inequality via economic inequality, I don't think that was the main issue tonight. I believe the way to fight this threat to democracy is peaceful awareness and to vote, not encouraging violence.

:lol

Yeah, Trump's rally would have been completely ignored if not for this protest.

Where the fuck is this disingenuous "violence" narrative coming from? Peps ass?

Yes.
 
Your edit is a lot closer to my point. The onus is on the moderate to do their homework to be informed. Everyone from both sides will reach out to friends but people should take it upon themselves to look at the facts objectively and stand behind a vote before blindly accepting spin as truth which Trump is skilled at doing.

In regards to violence, yes we all do not condone it but forgive me if I must say that it would be rather naive to watch all of these current events unfold and not expect a tussle between folks. We know that these skirmishes solve little if nothing at all but when people gather in mass, there will always be conflict of some nature. It's a basic truth.

I agree about the expected tussle, which is why I feel the protest could be held in another location, or otherwise be more positive in nature (via campaigning for preferred canadite). It is how the conflict manifests itself that I am concerned with.
 
By engaging in violence, it gives hate the only platform for tonight. A stable democracy (or representative democracy) is ultimately about using the political power imbued to change the system. Violence was probably justified to some degree when some individuals did not have any political power -- e.g. Boston tea party, or when slaves or women could not vote. And while there is some political inequality via economic inequality, I don't think that was the main issue tonight. I believe the way to fight this threat to democracy is peaceful awareness and to vote, not encouraging violence.

You're equating protesting with violence. Not everyone protesting was violent.

Anyway, it's clear that you don't feel inciting people to violence with racist and xenophobic rhetoric should be challenged, so please at least admit as much and stop insulting everyone's intelligence.
 
He isn't wrong. Though the same can be said for conservatives.

No, he's very wrong. People should be able to say what they want without going to jail. That is what the first amendment protects. BUT people can also protest and not put up with bullshit that people say, that is also protected by the first amendment.

I don't think you understand the first amendment.
 
Violence against minorities has been happening for centuries, m8. Odd that it's only a concern now.

I think the black lives movement has been powerful in (mostly peacefully) raising awareness, before the presidential election even got underway. We are seeing more police body cams and some (probably not enough) accountability for police violence. I'm not sure why you feel it's only a recent concern.
 
I think the black lives movement has been powerful in (mostly peacefully) raising awareness, before the presidential election even got underway. We are seeing more police body cams and some (probably not enough) accountability for police violence. I'm not sure why you feel it's only a recent concern.
?!?!? BLM has been all about this exact same kind of protest, continuously.
 
I agree about the expected tussle, which is why I feel the protest could be held in another location, or otherwise be more positive in nature (via campaigning for preferred canadite). It is how the conflict manifests itself that I am concerned with.

Again I would pose to you the effectiveness of a protest without directly facing your opposition. That would be more in line with an echo chamber, would you not agree?

Likeminded individuals gain nothing when sentiments are shared. These opinions have to be heard by all, sympathizes, moderates, and dissenters alike. That is when protest is the most 100% effective.
 
Where the fuck is this disingenuous "violence" narrative coming from? Pepboys ass?

If it was only me, I would have stopped. But there are multiple pages of posters defending the idea of violent protest. Not what I expected either. But I've made my point and my peace so I will stop discussing it.
 
I agree about the expected tussle, which is why I feel the protest could be held in another location, or otherwise be more positive in nature (via campaigning for preferred canadite). It is how the conflict manifests itself that I am concerned with.

Translation: Out of sight and out of mind because I'm not affected.

Conflict means that things get dealt with.
 
I think the black lives movement has been powerful in (mostly peacefully) raising awareness, before the presidential election even got underway. We are seeing more police body cams and some (probably not enough) accountability for police violence. I'm not sure why you feel it's only a recent concern.

They are the exact same type of protest.
 
When you are beaten down by society and by Conservative Republicans, white purists, hate-mongering rhetoric that plays on invisible fears of scenarios that don't exist(having people chasing imaginary monsters), you can only "turn the other cheek" for so long. Liberals and Democrats pride themselves on being the "better man", but you can only take so much pain before you crack. You are worn ragged, tired of the abuse that nobody should take. Some times you gotta make a stand, regardless if it ends in violence or not. If not, you'll always be somebody's punching bag.

And when they do crack, they are scrutinized by, not only Republican/Conservatives that are quick to call out how quick they are to resort to violence(which is the pot calling the kettle "black"), and other liberals(no doubt liberals "well off", out of danger, from good neighborhoods, and perhaps White) also jump down on those who had enough of the bullshit and lash out in frustration. How sweet it must be to be so... safe. To know that you can walk outside and the world bends to you. That even though you may face SOME hardship in life, you will never suffer the worse of it, because there are others for that. Where you think one doesn't have to get themselves dirty, or literally fight for a better way of life. Such a wonderful, privileged world that exists for some, yet not all, and THAT is the problem. Do people think the underprivileged, minorities and such ask too much? All we want is what all anybody wants, that piece of the pie that is, as of right now, solely reserved for Whites and the wealthy. But, even in this day of enlightened minds, technological wonders and centuries of historical missteps we could've learn well from, such a dream is far off.

People have to nerve to say, "Wait your turn!". Until when? When our children have to tell their grandchildren that, maybe if they be good, continue to turn the other cheek, perhaps "they'll" see that we're "good enough". Who has that right to make such a judgement? We are all human beings, we are all good enough and should sit side by side rather than over and under each other.
 
If it was only me, I would have stopped. But there are multiple pages of posters defending the idea of violent protest. Not what I expected either. But I've made my point and my peace so I will stop discussing it.
You still keep calling a lot of people chanting "violent protest."

You should watch some actual video and look at actual photos of MLK protests.
 
Also of egging them on in interviews about their actions. He wants these people riled up and excited since that means they're more likely to go out and vote for him. Unfortunately that also has a lot of downside, including increased violence against protesters. So far we're pretty lucky that his most violent supporter's actions have been fairly limited.

The fact is this is going to get worse as time passes and it's likely too far gone to get back in the bottle. The GOP really screwed the pooch on this one.
And with luck the GOP will not recover untill they become a legitimate proggressive party after some soul searching. Because as they are right now they should never take the presidency.
 
"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."

Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."


Martin Luther King, Jr.
"Letter From The Birmingham Jail"
April 16, 1963
.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom