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

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

Funny that as soon as others confront them with free speech they shrink into a corner and say their free speech is censored when it wasn't it was just overridden by louder voices they could never hope to match.
 
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.

free_speech.png
 
So they should give up their first amendment right and should allow Trump to have his? That makes no sense.

I'm sure there's more than one location to hold speeches.
Again, answer me this: If Trump supporters stormed Clinton rallies, making it impossible for Hillary to talk, would you be okay with that?

Just to make sure: I'm no Trump supporter (Bernie would get my vote, if I was an US-citizen), but I hold the right to free speech very dear. Let everybody speak, so everybody can hear it, then pick it apart if that's reasonable.
 
Your constitutional right to free speech allows you to say what you want; provided you do it in a way that doesn't break any laws, no government authority can suppress you.

You do not have a constitutional right to a venue, crowd, microphone, lights, and cameras.

Trump could have shown up on the floor and shouted whatever he wanted to exercise his First Amendment rights; at no point was he constrained from doing so.
 
I'm sure there's more than one location to hold speeches.
Again, answer me this: If Trump supporters stormed Clinton rallies, making it impossible for Hillary to talk, would you be okay with that?

Just to make sure: I'm no Trump supporter (Bernie would get my vote, if I was an US-citizen), but I hold the right to free speech very dear. Let everybody speak, so everybody can hear it, then pick it apart if that's reasonable.

You don't understand "the right to free speech".
 
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.

Do you even realize the irony of this post?

I think you don't. So let me simplify this for you:

"People dislike bullies so they will vote for the most aggressive bully of them all"
 
No, they forced him to cancel his speech.

They didn't force him to do anything. No one held a gun to Trump's head and made him cancel his event. The president didn't send in a gestapo to hold back Trump. It also must be very nice to think that this only stops at matters of free speech. That you're in the wrong only because you managed to speak louder in this particular instance.

This isn't only about who's free to speak louder or not. This is about people's lives and livelyhoods. Trump is free to speak of hatred and xenophobia and people who have to deal with the brunt of the attitude that that hateful rhetoric breeds are free to respond with their distaste for it. Going "Well they shut him down so they're the bad guy specifically and solely because of matters of free speech" is to wildly misunderstand everything about this situation and comes off as nothing more than disingenuous and unempathetic.
 
I'm sure there's more than one location to hold speeches.
Again, answer me this: If Drumpf supporters stormed Clinton rallies, making it impossible for Hillary to talk, would you be okay with that?

Just to make sure: I'm no Drumpf supporter (Bernie would get my vote, if I was an US-citizen), but I hold the right to free speech very dear. Let everybody speak, so everybody can hear it, then pick it apart if that's reasonable.
The government didn't stop Trump's rally. He still has his freedom of speech. Trump cancelled his own rally, so no but Trump prevented Trump from speaking.
Since you are not from the US, you should probably look up free speech in this country before commenting on it.
 
I'm sure there's more than one location to hold speeches.
Again, answer me this: If Trump supporters stormed Clinton rallies, making it impossible for Hillary to talk, would you be okay with that?

Just to make sure: I'm no Trump supporter (Bernie would get my vote, if I was an US-citizen), but I hold the right to free speech very dear. Let everybody speak, so everybody can hear it, then pick it apart if that's reasonable.

You keep saying those words, I really don't think you know what they mean.
 
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.

A lot of people do not know what the 1st amendment actually entails. They just hear "FREE SPEECH" and think it's a universal get out of criticism free card. There's clearly something wrong with the way we educate our students about the constitution.
 
No, they forced him to cancel his speech.

No they didn't. Trump even bragged about not cancelling another rally in St. Louis earlier that day for the same reason (protesters showing up)

"And I heard that this was going to happen. And they said "Mr. Trump, would you like to cancel?", I said absolutely not."

But a few hours later he suddenly changed his mind?
 
"Free speech" has a legal and philosophical meaning in the United States. That people conflate the two isn't some travesty.
 
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.
Because they're just dumb. They obviously don't know anything about history.

It's interesting how the same people who don't understand what a protest is or that it's valid and legal are just as misinformed about the first amendment. I want to know where they get all of this misinformation.
 
I'm sure there's more than one location to hold speeches.
Again, answer me this: If Trump supporters stormed Clinton rallies, making it impossible for Hillary to talk, would you be okay with that?

Just to make sure: I'm no Trump supporter (Bernie would get my vote, if I was an US-citizen), but I hold the right to free speech very dear. Let everybody speak, so everybody can hear it, then pick it apart if that's reasonable.

I'm not sure that the right to free speech also gives everyone the right to a 10,000 capacity arena, a microphone and a public address system.

Not that that was even taken away from him, he just didn't want to deal with the constant booing that the rest of his miserable existence deserves.
 
Can't believe I see some people on this thread shitting on the protesting. How do you think there has ever been any change? You think people are supposed to quietly sit by?

Hell this country was founded on actual violent protesting.
 
The government didn't stop Trump's rally. He still has his freedom of speech. Trump cancelled his own rally, so no but Trump prevented Trump from speaking..

Had Trump not cancelled his rally and his supporters and the masses of protesters had hurt each other to the hundreds, would you have criticized Trump for that? That's what I'm trying to point out: Trump had 2 options and I feel like you would have criticized him for either.


Then I admit I do not understand the American concept of free speech. If everybody talks over each other, free speech is worthless.
 
Someone make a goddamn PSA thread(and sticky it) educating people on what free speech in the US is, good fucking god.

It wouldn't help.

Also, this thread is a cyclical hell. We have had this same exact arguement several times about poor Trump's free speech bullshit. There is no escape!
 
Funny that as soon as others confront them with free speech they shrink into a corner and say their free speech is censored when it wasn't it was just overridden by louder voices they could never hope to match.

and violence, your forgetting that one. If it was just people yelling at each other, than so be it. Not when thousands of protesters show up, while quite a few of them are ready to fistfight.
 
Can't believe I see some people on this thread shitting on the protesting. How do you think there has ever been any change? You think people are supposed to quietly sit by?

Hell this country was founded on actual violent protesting.

It's like they don't understand it took a damn war to end Slavery. It's been literal blood, sweat and tears for many in our history to finally have their voices heard, and for real change to happen.

and violence, your forgetting that one. If it was just people yelling at each other, than so be it. Not when thousands of protesters show up, while quite a few of them are ready to fistfight.

5 people were arrested last night, out of thousands. So much violence.
 
Had Trump not cancelled his rally and his supporters and the masses of protesters had hurt each other to the hundreds, would you have criticized Trump for that? That's what I'm trying to point out: Trump had 2 options and I feel like you would have criticized him for either.

Umm, yes. I wouldn't have criticized him for having the rally, I would have criticized him because that is the environment and actions he has encouraged in the past.
 
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.
And then you're told to wait until after he's elected to voice concern, since I guess everyone's got the right to run for president to completion without pushback for some reason?
 
Had Drumpf not cancelled his rally and his supporters and the masses of protesters had hurt each other to the hundreds, would you have criticized Drumpf for that? That's what I'm trying to point out: Drumpf had 2 options and I feel like you would have criticized him for either.



Then I admit I do not understand the American concept of free speech. If everybody talks over each other, free speech is worthless.

There have been numerous rallies with protesters that Trump has not cancelled, this should not have been any different.

Once again, his freedom of speech was not violated. Read what freedom of speech is in the US and then you can comment on it. You clearly don't know what it is.
 
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.

This has nothing to do with the first amendment. It takes a fundamental misunderstanding of the amendment to cite it so. The first amendment protects you from government reprisal for your speech. That's it. People can reply nearly any way they wish to nearly anything you say. Your words and theirs have consequences that the government cannot protect you from or prosecute you for.

You'd think that Trump's followers, they of the "political correctness is ruining everything", would appreciate why we allow the country to be an open forum. You're allowed to say nasty, hateful things. People are allowed to tell you that you're being nasty and hateful.

No one's rights are violated in that exchange.
 
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)

Silly. Trump is on a permanent stage and everything he says reaches millions. Protesters don't have that luxury. In order to be heard you have pick and choose your moments to get your word heard. We already heard Trump exercise his freedom and he called them thugs. So...
 
Had Trump not cancelled his rally and his supporters and the masses of protesters had hurt each other to the hundreds, would you have criticized Trump for that? That's what I'm trying to point out: Trump had 2 options and I feel like you would have criticized him for either.

Trump's the one that decided to set the two halves of the country against each other in such a way. This is all a direct consequence of him enacting his right to freedom of speech in the first place. The people have the right to turn up and call him out on that.
 
Then I admit I do not understand the American concept of free speech. If everybody talks over each other, free speech is worthless.

Well if people agree with your message then they will get behind you and help make your message louder. The group with more people on their side tend to win out.
 
Had Trump not cancelled his rally and his supporters and the masses of protesters had hurt each other to the hundreds, would you have criticized Trump for that? That's what I'm trying to point out: Trump had 2 options and I feel like you would have criticized him for either.
It's Trump's fault that the protest happened in the first place, he deserves to be criticized regardless. If Trump wasn't a walking piece of garbage in a suit he wouldn't have masses of people protesting him.


Then I admit I do not understand the American concept of free speech. If everybody talks over each other, free speech is worthless.

The first amendment means he can say what he wants with out the government censoring him, it does not guarantee him a stage and an audience and the government had nothing to do with him canceling. When it comes to social justice just politely talking gets you nowhere, and you seem to not understand that at all.
 
and violence, your forgetting that one. If it was just people yelling at each other, than so be it. Not when thousands of protesters show up, while quite a few of them are ready to fistfight.

You act like it is a riot and promptly ignore the violence to protestors at Trump events. Both should not be tolerated but should not distract from the greater point.
5 people were arrested last night, out of thousands. So much violence.
This as well.
 
Can't believe I see some people on this thread shitting on the protesting. How do you think there has ever been any change? You think people are supposed to quietly sit by?

Hell this country was founded on actual violent protesting.

Unfortunately violent protesting only breeds more hate. There is no better way to have a message ignored, if there was any message to be heard.
 
"Free speech" has a legal and philosophical meaning in the United States. That people conflate the two isn't some travesty.

What is the "philosophical" meaning of free speech?

Unfortunately violent protesting only breeds more hate. There is no better way to have a message ignored, if there was any message to be heard.

This was violent protest now?

And I'd disagree in principle anyway. I don't enjoy the thought of riots, but they are by definition the only form of protest that is completely impossible to ignore. You can choose to disagree with the message after, but you can't pretend you didn't hear it.
 
Once again, his freedom of speech was not violated. Read what freedom of speech is in the US and then you can comment on it. You clearly don't know what it is.

Yes, apparently. I guess I'm looking at it from a German point of view. When right wing idiots are having a rally, counter-rallies happen by the people protesting. But these counter-rallies happen in other locations and have to be registered beforehand, so that the police can ensure everybody's safety. Everybody gets to express his right to free speech, nothing is drowned in both sides shouting over each other. I think that's a more reasonable way to get your word out in the world.
 
Unfortunately violent protesting only breeds more hate. There is no better way to have a message ignored, if there was any message to be heard.
WHAT VIOLENT PROTEST. You can count the amount of people arrested on your hands.

Regarding having the message ignored, literally every major message in history was through protest. Protest either started or ended just about every single moment in our history books. Read up.
 
Had Trump not cancelled his rally and his supporters and the masses of protesters had hurt each other to the hundreds, would you have criticized Trump for that?
Yes. HE caused this shit. He's encouraging it. He says fight harder. I'd find quotes, but you'll ignore them..again. Your point is to defend Trump..again. Just like in the thread with the man that got elbowed by a Trump supporter.
 
Yes, apparently. I guess I'm looking at it from a German point of view. When right wing idiots are having a rally, counter-rallies happen by the people protesting. But these counter-rallies happen in other locations and have to be registered beforehand, so that the police can ensure everybody's safety. Everybody gets to express his right to free speech, nothing is drowned in both sides shouting over each other. I think that's a more reasonable way to get your word out in the world.

Germany has no free speech. What are you talking about?
 
Unfortunately violent protesting only breeds more hate. There is no better way to have a message ignored, if there was any message to be heard.

You already had your mind made up, will ignore our history and the history of protests, and will call a group of thousands that ended up with 5 people arrested(dunno if they were all protesters by the way) as violent.

Stop acting like you would even give it a second thought otherwise.
 
Yes, apparently. I guess I'm looking at it from a German point of view. When right wing idiots are having a rally, counter-rallies happen by the people protesting. But these counter-rallies happen in other locations and have to be registered beforehand, so that the police can ensure everybody's safety. Everybody gets to express his right to free speech, nothing is drowned in both sides shouting over each other. I think that's a more reasonable way to get your word out in the world.

That's Germany's way, but it's not our culture.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom