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

Status
Not open for further replies.
If the protest are not in support of Clinton,Sanders and Trump. Then what are they doing for?
Is there not a better way to support the democratic process than erupting others?
Anti-racism protest have a pretty wide appeal. Also, no one was erupted to my knowledge. That would actually be too far, I agree.
 
If the protest are not in support of Clinton,Sanders and Trump. Then what are they doing for?
Is there not a better way to support the democratic process than erupting others?

Americas protest have done more positive in the history of our country then people give credit for.
 
I will not bite and enter in your game.

Um, I am not trying to do that?

The way you were insisting that the protests would be violent just bothered me a little and I wanted to warn you that there were some dubious connotations to statements like that. My apologies if that genuinely isn't what you meant.

Regardless though, your apparent definition of what a protest can and cannot be is not correct, which was the bigger problem.
 
And Trump says he's got nothing to do with it. He's really digging that hole.

Holy crap, I'm starting to think the GE will be Goldwater or Mondale levels of defeat for Trump.
 
Ah, those leftist tactics...

pic.png


https://twitter.com/AmericanGlob/status/708594580934041600

Bullshit. Not even the same person but now someone's life is affected. This shit should be banned from GAF.
 
Bullshit. Not even the same person but now someone's life is affected. This shit should be banned from GAF.

I hope the poster was just bringing it our attention and didn't actually believe it was legit. It's good to have a view into the world of these fanatics and the lengths they are going to do try and make it seem like they are racist and bigoted pieces of shit.
 
Um, I am not trying to do that?

The way you were insisting that the protests would be violent just bothered me a little and I wanted to warn you that there were some dubious connotations to statements like that. My apologies if that genuinely isn't what you meant.

Regardless though, your apparent definition of what a protest can and cannot be is not correct, which was the bigger problem.


It should also be noted that that the protest had the backing of a lot of UIC's more activist faculty members. As in, professors who have protested before and know the history of protesting in America.

Veronica Arreola on Facebook said:
Someone asked how we canceled the Trump rally. UIC is one of the most diverse campuses is this country. 90+% of our students are from the Chicago area - Trump came into our home with his hate. Many of our faculty are activist scholars & they had students' back. As soon as the rally was announced our campus got into gear. It's in our nature to respond. We're not perfect, but we know how to organize.
 
If the protest are not in support of Clinton,Sanders and Trump. Then what are they doing for?
Is there not a better way to support the democratic process than erupting others?

The "democratic process" has never meant anything more than hundreds of people yelling at each other until they reach a consensus.

Echo chambers don't do anyone any favors.

Why do people protest? Because they believe in a cause and they believe that cause is being ignored or downplayed. Take net neutrality, for example. Until Google, Reddit, and a few other companies encouraged the masses to basically spam the fuck out of the FCC (and did their part by basically shutting down the internet for short bursts), legislators were ready to bend over on SOPA.

Protests are inherently disruptive. Even the ones you read about in children's books - The Boston Tea Party, an act of vandalism by the Sons of Liberty, or the Montgomery bus boycotts, throwing a cog in daily commuting revenue because the law of the land was legalized segregation - are riddled with violent reprisals by the holders of the status quo. Something we see mirrored today in Ferguson, MO. Or at Trump Rallies.

Hillary and Bernie chose to respond to the protests differently. Whether it was because they genuinely care about the issue, or because they saw it as an opportunity for political soothsaying, they addressed the issue. So the protests worked. Far more effectively than making a FB group, a GAF thread, or writing a sternly worded letter.
 
Trump calling last night's protesters thugs. Yet he called the man who sucker punched and threatened to kill a protester "passionate". What more do you really need to know about Donald J Trump?
 
It should also be noted that that the protest had the backing of a lot of UIC's more activist faculty members. As in, professors who have protested before and know the history of protesting in America.

You beat me to posting this. Also read something kind of odd.

ABC Chicago said:
The crowd of protesters outside the area swelled to at least 1,000 people. Some attendees said they had signed up for tickets, but those tickets were never collected so anyone could have gotten into the event. Protesters surrounded the Pavilion, heckling attendees as they left.

Protesters outside the Pavilion were loud, but peaceful. Inside the Pavilion, there appeared to be thousands of protesters in attendance, mostly young people and UIC students. At the announcement, undercover protesters who had entered the Pavilion as Trump supporters broke into wild celebration, shouting "We stopped Trump! We stopped Trump!"

Another..

ABC News said:
Chicago Police Department spokesman Anthony Guglielmi told The Associated Press the department never told the Trump campaign there was a security threat at the University of Illinois at Chicago venue.

Why would they just let anyone in? This really does seem like something he knew full well was going to happen, and he let it play out. I mean, who didn't know? Why would he lie about the police like that? Because he was a scared bully, for sure. But will people actually call him out on this, or shit talk the police because they contradict their saviour?

Trump calling last night's protesters thugs. Yet he called the man who sucker punched and threatened to kill a protester "passionate". What more do you really need to know about Donald J Trump?
Not much, bud..says it all.
 
I hope the poster was just bringing it our attention and didn't actually believe it was legit. It's good to have a view into the world of these fanatics and the lengths they are going to do try and make it seem like they are racist and bigoted pieces of shit.

That retweet tells another story.

Also, that Twitter account needs to be reported by as many folks as possible. Portia Boulger is likely going to be inundated by some threats from some very nasty folks in the days to come because that Twitter bloke is either a moron or a liar or both.

Done. I doubt it'll make a difference, but it was easy enough.
 
I don't understand how people are still making the argument that the protesters stepped on Trumps First Amendment rights. Ignoring the fact that the first amendment is protection from the government, not everyday people, the protesters have the same first amendment right as Trump. They have the same right to have their voices heard and to give their message out, Trump doesn't have more of a right just because he is a presidential candidate.
 
I don't understand how people are still making the argument that the protesters stepped on Trumps First Amendment rights. Ignoring the fact that the first amendment is protection from the government, not everyday people, the protesters have the same first amendment right as Trump. They have the same right to have their voices heard and to give their message out, Trump doesn't have more of a right just because he is a presidential candidate.

Yes that's completely ridiculous, Trump spent the following hours calling in to all the major cable news networks.
 
I don't understand how people are still making the argument that the protesters stepped on Trumps First Amendment rights. Ignoring the fact that the first amendment is protection from the government, not everyday people, the protesters have the same first amendment right as Trump. They have the same right to have their voices heard and to give their message out, Trump doesn't have more of a right just because he is a presidential candidate.

I don't know about the first amendment, but as I said before in this thread: It is in bad taste to drown Trump's right to free speech in their free speech. Some said "nobody sabotaged Trump, he decided to cancel his event on his own". But he did so to prevent violent outbreaks. Had he not canceled his event and there were hundreds of hurt people, you'd hold it against him, too.

The best way to deal with bad people is to let them talk and then reply to them, have discussions with them and call them out on their bs. Unfortunately, something similar is currently happening in Germany. Instead of cool-headedly revealing the AfD's bs, even high-ranking politicians call them and their supporters "Nazi", which only strengthens them (AfD = new rightwing party)
 
I don't know about the first amendment, but as I said before in this thread: It is in bad taste to drown Trump's right to free speech in their free speech. Some said "nobody sabotaged Trump, he decided to cancel his event on his own". But he did so to prevent violent outbreaks. Had he not canceled his event and there were hundreds of hurt people, you'd hold it against him, too.

The best way to deal with bad people is to let them talk and then reply to them, have discussions with them and call them out on their bs. Unfortunately, something similar is currently happening in Germany. Instead of cool-headedly revealing the AfD's bs, even high-ranking politicians call them and their supporters "Nazi", which only strengthens them (AfD = new rightwing party)

Where do people get this shit? You think Civil Rights happened because people hear out bullshit and then simply talk about it? You really don't know your history. (and w've already heard everything Trump has to say, and people have been discussing his bullshit for months)
 
A lot of the people that complain about their 1st amendment rights are white people that are losing the white privilege of saying whatever they want without consequence and can't handle it. They confused white privilege with their rights a long time ago.
 
The best way to deal with bad people is to let them talk and then reply to them, have discussions with them and call them out on their bs. Unfortunately, something similar is currently happening in Germany. Instead of cool-headedly revealing the AfD's bs, even high-ranking politicians call them and their supporters "Nazi", which only strengthens them (AfD = new rightwing party)

Trump talked and talked and talked until now. Now people responded to him. Seems pretty fair.

Oh, you think AfD has a point that needs to be heard? Ok, then.
 
Cruz went on TV to comment on the protest. That's what their comments are about.

https://youtu.be/9EqREyxuX-Y

Ah I see.

I'm amazed at the number of posters who take umbrage with the idea that the protests were "organized" (and yes, they use quotes). Well, no shit. An effective demonstration requires a bit of thought and planning. It's not cheating to use your brain in politics.

I don't know about the first amendment, but as I said before in this thread: It is in bad taste to drown Trump's right to free speech in their free speech. Some said "nobody sabotaged Trump, he decided to cancel his event on his own". But he did so to prevent violent outbreaks. Had he not canceled his event and there were hundreds of hurt people, you'd hold it against him, too.

The best way to deal with bad people is to let them talk and then reply to them, have discussions with them and call them out on their bs. Unfortunately, something similar is currently happening in Germany. Instead of cool-headedly revealing the AfD's bs, even high-ranking politicians call them and their supporters "Nazi", which only strengthens them (AfD = new rightwing party)

Trump had several avenues to address the crowd. He could tell his followers not to engage in violence (he's frequently done the opposite) and to turn the other cheek. He could have security legally remove disruptive or unwanted persons from his private rally once it began. Or he could address some of their grievances, for good or for ill.

Had actual violence been initiated by the protesters he would have been well within his rights to have all of them arrested.

A protest at a political rally is a reply, of sorts. The crowds that gathered are telling the rally attendees that they disagree with their politics. Loudly. The first amendment was made to protect this kind of speech.

And the great political upheavals of Western society have all been surrounded by protest, most of it far more action packed than what we saw in Chicago. I'd really like to see an example of sweeping political reform brought about exclusively through fireside chats.

MLK (who the right love to invoke for some reason) was one of the harshest critics of the advocates of false peace; people who would rather things stay fucked up as long as it's quiet, rather than suffer through loud, painful change. When people are actively marching against you by the thousands, it's far, far too late to ask them to sit down for a friendly dialogue, as at that point you've been ignoring or paying lip services to their grievances for years.
 
This only makes Trump stronger, by using these tactics and shutting down a rally. Free speech, sure. It's just overriding someone else's free speech.
 
Where do people get this shit? You think Civil Rights happened because people hear out bullshit and then simply talk about it? You really don't know your history. (and w've already heard everything Trump has to say, and people have been discussing his bullshit for months)

You're right, I don't know your history that much; however, this is about free speech. It either exists or it does not. You either let him speak or you give up the right to free speech. Let him speak, then call him out for his bs (which really is not difficult).

Trump talked and talked and talked until now. Now people responded to him. Seems pretty fair.

No, they forced him to cancel his speech.

Oh, you think AfD has a point that needs to be heard? Ok, then.

Where do you get that? I'm saying let the AfD talk and then pick apart their non-existing ethics and plans. Will get us further than insulting them But I guess you will realize that after tomorrow's Landtagswahlen, when they get 15% or more in some states.
 
This only makes Trump stronger, by using these tactics and shutting down a rally. Free speech, sure. It's just overriding someone else's free speech.

No, it makes him more radical. When he needs to get less radical for GE.

Anyhow, that's besides the point. Protesting against racism, xenophobia and hate speech makes the democracy and civilization stronger.
 
This only makes Trump stronger, by using these tactics and shutting down a rally. Free speech, sure. It's just overriding someone else's free speech.

Fuck this 'It only makes Trump stronger.' Bullshit now. Guy has basically sealed the nomination outside of fuckery. Doesn't mean he is going to do shit in the general.

And Free Speech isn't some blanket statement to protect whatever dumbass things you say. Words have consequences and always had. People still act shocked when they do. You aren't going to jail for it but it reflects highly on your character and how others interact with you.
 
You're right, I don't know your history that much; however, this is about free speech. It either exists or it does not. You either let him speak or you give up the right to free speech. Let him speak, then call him out for his bs (which really is not difficult).

So they should give up their first amendment right and should allow Trump to have his? That makes no sense.
 
Alright so based on the last year, I wanna make sure I know how NOT to protest, especially involving black people:

1) Don't express a generation of community rage via riot - Alright, fair enough

2) Don't block highways to make your voice heard - I mean, it's not that bad

3) Don't Interrupt a speaking engagement by a presidential candidate - Now you're getting ridiculous

4) Don't organize a peaceful community protest around and outside of a huge presidential rally - WTF CAN YOU DO?

Seriously if it was in any question before now, forget it, these people... the people who try to tell you how to protest as if they give a shit about you, nothing will ever be good enough for them. If you did everything exactly as they said you should there would still be a problem.

Anyway, great job Chicago.
 
Fuck this 'It only makes Trump stronger.' Bullshit now. Guy has basically sealed the nomination outside of fuckery. Doesn't mean he is going to do shit in the general.

And Free Speech isn't some blanket statement to protect whatever dumbass things you say. Words have consequences and always had. People still act shocked when they do. You aren't going to jail for it but it reflects highly on your character and how others interact with you.

I think things like this will help him in the general. More Americans dislike the censoring of free speech by bullying than you would think.
 
You're right, I don't know your history that much; however, this is about free speech. It either exists or it does not. You either let him speak or you give up the right to free speech. Let him speak, then call him out for his bs (which really is not difficult).



No, they forced him to cancel his speech.
Sounds like you have no idea what's going on here in America.
 
This only makes Trump stronger, by using these tactics and shutting down a rally. Free speech, sure. It's just overriding someone else's free speech.

You're right, I don't know your history that much; however, this is about free speech. It either exists or it does not. You either let him speak or you give up the right to free speech. Let him speak, then call him out for his bs (which really is not difficult).

Can we stop saying free speech, this has nothing to do with free speech.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom