Support NeoGAF

[Cipherr]

They won't stay at home. They'll be out throwing rocks at cars. Will they be voting though?

Oh yeah definitely, during the polling hours they will take all this pent up energy and...


throw rocks at cars even though there's no trump rally in their city that day instead of voting so they can watch him slink into the shadows defeated.


Honestly... Like, I don't understand these views. I cannot wait until the fall.

 

[Captin Quacker]

Am I missing something here?

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?p=192670560#post192670560

Beware the hypotheticals

 

[activatethesmile]

Well I'm sure the protesters throwing rocks at motorists and do all sorts of vandalism things would endear their image in front of the general public.

 

[OuterLimits]

Unfortunately for California, he may be there a bunch in the next month. California has 172 delegates, and he will likely need half of them to get 1237. It depends on what happens in the next few states and whether Cruz and Kasich stay in. Polls show Trump leading California and Oregon.

How many Trump supporters showed up?

 

[King Tubby]

I just don't even know what the point is.

Are you going to stop Trump from holding rallies or campaigning? No, because he doesn't care, he doesn't have an employer. You just give him more ammunition.

Are you going to stop people from supporting Trump? No, you're kind of galvanizing them more and playing into the rhetoric.

Are you showing that there's a large group of people who don't like Trump or his antics? That seems pretty well established.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I just don't even know what the point is.

Are you going to stop Trump from holding rallies or campaigning? No, because he doesn't care, he doesn't have an employer. You just give him more ammunition.

Are you going to stop people from supporting Trump? No, you're kind of galvanizing them more and playing into the rhetoric.

Are you showing that there's a large group of people who don't like Trump or his antics? That seems pretty well established.

Trump is literally a threat to their human rights.

 

[daniels]

Trump is literally a threat to their human rights.

Stop excusing violence and destruction of property against police and random citizens.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Stop excusing violence and destruction of property against police and random citizens.

What?

I'm defending protesting not the violence.

He didn't say why the violence he said why protest.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Oh yeah definitely, during the polling hours they will take all this pent up energy and...


throw rocks at cars even though there's no trump rally in their city that day instead of voting so they can watch him slink into the shadows defeated.


Honestly... Like, I don't understand these views. I cannot wait until the fall.

Yeah, no shit. I was being facetious because the person I was quoting seemed to think that there was some link between people throwing rocks as passing cars and liberals going out to vote.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

Wow, that's some loaded imagery.

At the same time this is one of the occasions in which there are two sides of things.

Easy to misconstrue this as further police-state actions, but we don't know anything about it.



And I hardly think those people instigating violence are going to vote. They "refuse the system".

 

[knkng]

Trump is literally a threat to their human rights.

Right, but he's not in power yet.

What does rioting and breaking stuff do at this point? In a popularity contest you have to woo people to your side, not reinforce your opponent's position. There's a pretty big difference between protesting against Trump, and antagonizing the general public who are going to be casting the votes.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Right, but he's not in power yet.

What does rioting and breaking stuff do at this point? In a popularity contest you have to woo people to your side, not reinforce your opponent's position. There's a pretty big difference between protesting against Trump, and antagonizing the general public who are going to be casting the votes.

Again not defending violence but fuck yes there should be protests at every rally he holds.

 

[knkng]

Again not defending violence but fuck yes there should be protests at every rally he holds.

Yeah, I see your other post now. My bad, I misunderstood where you were coming from. I totally agree that everywhere Trump goes there should be protests.

 

[timetokill]

Trump is literally a threat to their human rights.

He can't write laws.

 

[Nightbird]

related (and funny).

Woah

 

[SapientWolf]

At the same time this is one of the occasions in which there are two sides of things.

Easy to misconstrue this as further police-state actions, but we don't know anything about it.



And I hardly think those people instigating violence are going to vote. They "refuse the system".

If that's the case then what a colossal waste of time.

 

[Wuthering_Heights]

It's really sad that some people can't figure out how to get their message across without resorting to violence and destroying the property of others.

 

[Syriel]

It's really sad that some people can't figure out how to get their message across without resorting to violence and destroying the property of others.

What's worse is that the violence and chaos plays right into Trump's anti-immigrant message.

Trump couldn't have asked for a better outcome as far as his messaging is concerned.

He can take photos and videos from the night, showing people running around, proudly displaying the Mexican flag, why decrying American politics and destroying property and then display those as "proof" that his stance is correct.

Trump's media director is probably giddy tonight. Those rioters did Trump's team a massive solid.

 

[King Tubby]

Trump is literally a threat to their human rights.

And protesting stops him how? There is no way for them to apply any sort of pressure against him in any meaningful way.

 

[Condom]

And protesting stops him how? There is no way for them to apply any sort of pressure against him in any meaningful way.

Yeah what's the point of protest, it isn't like it ever helped ever in the history of humanity or something.


Schools should really invest more time into teaching about protest movements and how they play their part in politics because people are clueless.

 

[King Tubby]

Yeah what's the point of protest, it isn't like it ever helped ever in the history of humanity or something.


Schools should really invest more time into teaching about protest movements and how they play their part in politics because people are clueless.

I am not saying all protests are pointless. I'm saying these particular ones against this particular target are more likely to backfire than accomplish anything meaningful.

Protests tend to work by applying pressure to local authorities or calling attention to some injustice. What authority is going to stop Trump that isn't already trying to? What attention are they going to call to him that he isn't already seeking?

 

[Malfunky]

What's worse is that the violence and chaos plays right into Trump's anti-immigrant message.

Trump couldn't have asked for a better outcome as far as his messaging is concerned.

He can take photos and videos from the night, showing people running around, proudly displaying the Mexican flag, why decrying American politics and destroying property and then display those as "proof" that his stance is correct.

Trump's media director is probably giddy tonight. Those rioters did Trump's team a massive solid.

Bullshit. Regardless of any action taken by his opposition, Trump will say what he wants and have his supporters no matter what.

Let's just get this straight. There is no such thing as violence against property. If you believe there is, you're the one playing into the hands of criminal elements of society: the nobility who put rhetoric over reality. The fact of the matter is that Trump advocates violence against people, most notably women and people of color, and if you aren't going to do anything to challenge that rhetoric, you probably shouldn't criticize the only social movements with the balls to do anything about it. Riot is a legitimate form of protest for the disenfranchised and the powerless and sometimes property destruction is a symptom of this. And these ain't sports hooligans. This is a life or death situation for some people. Can you blame folks for acting out?

I was there. I saw people taking charge of their city. Tagging the fairgrounds sign with anti-Trump slogans. Climbing traffic lights and tagging those. Taking the streets. Blocking the intersections. Trying to take the freeway. Black folks, white folks, latin@s, muslims, feminists, the queer community, anarchists, communists, and progressives were all out actually trying to send a message to these scumbags. There was a unity there. And it was amazing.

 

[Malfunky]

I am not saying all protests are pointless. I'm saying these particular ones against this particular target are more likely to backfire than accomplish anything meaningful.

Protests tend to work by applying pressure to local authorities or calling attention to some injustice. What authority is going to stop Trump that isn't already trying to? What attention are they going to call to him that he isn't already seeking?

What's the alternative? What do you want people to do? Sit by and let a racist scumbag feel welcome in one of the most diverse parts of the country? No, there needs to be push back. It doesn't need to have an objective. Because there is nothing people can do outside of protest to have their voices heard. And this was the people trying to have their voices heard. Many of them were chanting for Bernie, but we all know their votes are going to be thrown away come the California primary, so what do you want them to do? Vote hopelessly over and over again?

Protest is the only option when it comes to this.

 

[Templar Wizard]

What's worse is that the violence and chaos plays right into Trump's anti-immigrant message.

Trump couldn't have asked for a better outcome as far as his messaging is concerned.

He can take photos and videos from the night, showing people running around, proudly displaying the Mexican flag, why decrying American politics and destroying property and then display those as "proof" that his stance is correct.

Trump's media director is probably giddy tonight. Those rioters did Trump's team a massive solid.

Yes, nothing says more than 'im a pro American citizen' by local damage and Mexican flags.

 

[E92 M3]

Bullshit. Regardless of any action taken by his opposition, Trump will say what he wants and have his supporters no matter what.

Let's just get this straight. There is no such thing as violence against property. If you believe there is, you're the one playing into the hands of criminal elements of society: the nobility who put rhetoric over reality. The fact of the matter is that Trump advocates violence against people, most notably women and people of color, and if you aren't going to do anything to challenge that rhetoric, you probably shouldn't criticize the only social movements with the balls to do anything about it. Riot is a legitimate form of protest for the disenfranchised and the powerless and sometimes property destruction is a symptom of this. And these ain't sports hooligans. This is a life or death situation for some people. Can you blame folks for acting out?

I was there. I saw people taking charge of their city. Tagging the fairgrounds sign with anti-Trump slogans. Climbing traffic lights and tagging those. Taking the streets. Blocking the intersections. Trying to take the freeway. Black folks, white folks, latin@s, muslims, feminists, the queer community, anarchists, communists, and progressives were all out actually trying to send a message to these scumbags. There was a unity there. And it was amazing.

You're living in a fantasy world. Tell this to the innocent people getting their property destroyed.

Violent protest is not the answer in a modern society.

 

[Calvero]

It's a win/win for him. Bolster the support of the over 30K people who tried to attend tonight's rally (the venue only holds 8K) and make his enemies look bad by causing shit like this.




also a bunch of extremely racist signs like "kill whitey". I'm glad I got out of there early.

Fuuuuck

 

[ItIsOkBro]

related (and funny).

Accurate

 

[Skellig Gra]

Fuck all these violent protestors. You are just as bad as what you are protesting. This is never the answer.

 

[Phased]

I strongly disagree with damaging property during protests/riots.

With that said I think he's going to lose Florida really bad in the General and that will probably be the ball game right there.

 

[Malfunky]

You're living in a fantasy world. Tell this to the innocent people getting their property destroyed.

Violent protest is not the answer in a modern society.

Violent protest. Like police assaulting and imprisoning unarmed protestors. Like the KKK stabbing protestors in Anaheim just weeks prior. But a few kids busting some cop car windows and tagging a few walls is what we need to get angry about. Keep enabling the powers of white supremacy and neoliberalism, my friend. Believe whatever fantasy makes you comfortable.

 

[knkng]

Bullshit. Regardless of any action taken by his opposition, Trump will say what he wants and have his supporters no matter what.

Let's just get this straight. There is no such thing as violence against property. If you believe there is, you're the one playing into the hands of criminal elements of society: the nobility who put rhetoric over reality. The fact of the matter is that Trump advocates violence against people, most notably women and people of color, and if you aren't going to do anything to challenge that rhetoric, you probably shouldn't criticize the only social movements with the balls to do anything about it. Riot is a legitimate form of protest for the disenfranchised and the powerless and sometimes property destruction is a symptom of this. And these ain't sports hooligans. This is a life or death situation for some people. Can you blame folks for acting out?

I was there. I saw people taking charge of their city. Tagging the fairgrounds sign with anti-Trump slogans. Climbing traffic lights and tagging those. Taking the streets. Blocking the intersections. Trying to take the freeway. Black folks, white folks, latin@s, muslims, feminists, the queer community, anarchists, communists, and progressives were all out actually trying to send a message to these scumbags. There was a unity there. And it was amazing.

Hey genius, Trump isn't the president. The "nobility" you're attacking on the freeway is actually the electorate. Are you even aware of the platform Trump is running on? Do you not see the fucking issue here?

 

[dapperbandit]

lol at these posts conflating criticism of these protests with a rejection of all political protest, what a lousy defence. Like, what is it with contemporary left wing protests and blindly lashing out at people and their stuff regardless of their involvement?

 

[E92 M3]

Violent protest. Like police assaulting and imprisoning unarmed protestors. Like the KKK stabbing protestors in Anaheim just weeks prior. But a few kids busting some cop car windows and tagging a few walls is what we need to get angry about. Keep enabling the powers of white supremacy and neoliberalism, my friend. Believe whatever fantasy makes you comfortable.

No, I get angry over everything. Violence is wrong.

 

[Voyevoda]

Protests getting militant isn't surprising for the OC. Lots of racial tension there and a history of protests turning violent.

Trump spoke last September in the LA harbor and while there were protests, it didn't turn violent.

Don't call it that.

 

[Malfunky]

Hey genius, Trump isn't the president. The "nobility" you're attacking on the freeway is actually the electorate. Are you even aware of the platform Trump is running on? Do you not see the fucking issue here?

See, none of you even understand what you are talking about. You weren't there. And I bet you are the same people up in arms about the riots in Ferguson.

Nobody was being attacked. There were a few scuffles here and there, but there's bound to be overzealous people in any charged environment. But nobody advocates attacking people except for the police [advocate violence EDTTED FOR CLARITY], who have the monopoly on violence. Because it wasn't about that. It was about disrupting the event. It was about people taking charge of their city.

EDIT: Let me explain it again: you're following the rhetoric of the nobility by accepting the notion that disruptive protest is violence. You're accepting the framework set forth by the media without any critical examination. You're enabling the reactionary movements in our society to mobilize and take further control by getting angry at protestors, the VICTIMS, rather than the criminals who put us in this position: the statesmen, the rich, the 1%, what have you. You're letting them delegitimize the ONLY opposition to their hegemony outside of a system designed and maintained to keep the rest of us powerless.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

I am not saying all protests are pointless. I'm saying these particular ones against this particular target are more likely to backfire than accomplish anything meaningful.

Protests tend to work by applying pressure to local authorities or calling attention to some injustice. What authority is going to stop Trump that isn't already trying to? What attention are they going to call to him that he isn't already seeking?

Trump rallies cause attention. In those rallies, people are organizing to be reminded to vote for Trump.

Counter-rallies and protests are largely the same thing. It brings awareness to Trump, his positions, statements, etc. By and large, it's a reminder to not vote for him or vote for one of his competitors.

 

[Kezen]

Some of those protesters should be ashamed. This is not how you properly demonstrate your discontentment.
Express your frustration towards Trump in a civilized manner.

 

[King Tubby]

What's the alternative? What do you want people to do? Sit by and let a racist scumbag feel welcome in one of the most diverse parts of the country? No, there needs to be push back. It doesn't need to have an objective. Because there is nothing people can do outside of protest to have their voices heard. And this was the people trying to have their voices heard. Many of them were chanting for Bernie, but we all know their votes are going to be thrown away come the California primary, so what do you want them to do? Vote hopelessly over and over again?

Protest is the only option when it comes to this.

These people have been heard and continue to be heard. Your point about Bernie is a complete non sequitur. What is the revelation these protests brought to light, that Mexicans don't like Trump? How illuminating.

Protests absolutely should have an objective. If they don't and they degenerate into violence then people affected have a right to be upset. What's more, violence has no place in democratic politics. It's a dark ugly road and I have no interest in entertaining any justification for it.

The only way Trump is going to be defeated is at the ballot box in the general election this November. I'd rather the people lining up to break shit would channel their efforts into mobilizing the vote against him.

Trump rallies cause attention. In those rallies, people are organizing to be reminded to vote for Trump.

Counter-rallies and protests are largely the same thing. It brings awareness to Trump, his positions, statements, etc. By and large, it's a reminder to not vote for him or vote for one of his competitors.

Don't you think Trump likes having these counter-protests and rallies? News headlines like this play directly into his hands. He's goading people and it's working to his benefit.

 

[Alligatorjandro]

They need to be respectful like Trump is.

 

[Majine]

This is the greatest sign since "CNN smells like farts"

Lmao.

 

[TheJollyCorner]

Bullshit. Regardless of any action taken by his opposition, Trump will say what he wants and have his supporters no matter what.

Let's just get this straight. There is no such thing as violence against property. If you believe there is, you're the one playing into the hands of criminal elements of society: the nobility who put rhetoric over reality. The fact of the matter is that Trump advocates violence against people, most notably women and people of color, and if you aren't going to do anything to challenge that rhetoric, you probably shouldn't criticize the only social movements with the balls to do anything about it. Riot is a legitimate form of protest for the disenfranchised and the powerless and sometimes property destruction is a symptom of this. And these ain't sports hooligans. This is a life or death situation for some people. Can you blame folks for acting out?

I was there. I saw people taking charge of their city. Tagging the fairgrounds sign with anti-Trump slogans. Climbing traffic lights and tagging those. Taking the streets. Blocking the intersections. Trying to take the freeway. Black folks, white folks, latin@s, muslims, feminists, the queer community, anarchists, communists, and progressives were all out actually trying to send a message to these scumbags. There was a unity there. And it was amazing.

This line of thinking is... concerning. :/

Edit: initially quoted the wrong thing.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

Don't you think Trump likes having these counter-protests and rallies? News headlines like this play directly into his hands. He's goading people and it's working to his benefit.

No not really. He moans and complains that Bernie supporters are disruptive. He even had to cancel a rally a month or so ago because of the protests.
The guy has a huge ego and doesn't like to be mocked.

He can spin the angle that "The mainstream politically correct media is out to get him", but that's that a winning strategy. That'll work for the hardcore base.

As of right now, his unfavorability ratings are so high because the movement to stop Trump is working. He can win the primary. But he's hated by so many people.
And while it's important people go and vote for Hillary to defeat Trump, it's also a semi-viable strategy to deter potential voters away from voting for Trump.

 

[BigBeauford]

This line of thinking is... concerning. :/

Terrorizing people with threats and breaking their belongings in order to dissuade someone from voting for a candidate is insanely anti-democratic. But they are heroes and stuff.

 

[grimmiq]

related (and funny).

"Is shit broken?" seems out of place to me as the first step, as someone not from America it seems like that answer should always be "YES".

 

[Malfunky]

These people have been heard and continue to be heard. Your point about Bernie is a complete non sequitur. What is the revelation these protests brought to light, that Mexicans don't like Trump? How illuminating.

Protests absolutely should have an objective. If they don't and they degenerate into violence then people affected have a right to be upset. What's more, violence has no place in democratic politics. It's a dark ugly road and I have no interest in entertaining any justification for it.

The only way Trump is going to be defeated is at the ballot box in the general election this November. I'd rather the people lining up to break shit would channel their efforts into mobilizing the vote against him.

Have you ever been involved in a protest? Have you ever felt like the people you are protesting are actually listening to you? Moreover: what should the objective of protest be and how is it fulfilled?

We don't want Donald Trump in our county. We organized to let this be known. We acted in such a manner that our voices were heard. Is that objective enough for you? Or are you going to dismiss it because the window of a police car got shattered?

My point about Bernie couldn't be non-sequitur, because you're using my conclusion as basis for your argument. Like I said, most of the people in the protest were supporting Bernie. They're going to vote for him in the primary. When that time comes, their votes will have meant nothing when Hillary wins. So one of their very limited examples of political autonomy will have been for nothing.

Protest remains as the only option. The only chance people have for their voices to be heard, even if the result is a whisper in the greater conversation. And you're trying to tell all these oppressed people how, where, and why to speak. It's all very presumptuous. And quite narcissistic. But that's the liberal mindset, I suppose.

 

[Slayven]

Yeah this will strengthen support to his supporters, too bad his supporters aren't anywhere near enough to win the election.

 

[King Tubby]

As of right now, his unfavorability ratings are so high because the movement to stop Trump is working. He can win the primary. But he's hated by so many people.
And while it's important people go and vote for Hillary to defeat Trump, it's also a semi-viable strategy to deter potential voters away from voting for Trump.

You and I disagree on the causal relationship between the movement to stop Trump and his unfavorability. His unfavorability is high to begin with because of his behavior, stemming back to the Birther garbage, and it's only persisted with his primary campaign.

While the strategy of deterring potential voters away from voting for Trump is one I'd find logical against other candidates, I feel like it plays into a general strategy Trump has of inflaming discourse and inviting outrage and attention. I don't see any voters being deterred by counter-protests that wouldn't already be deterred by the things the man has said on the campaign trail that are exposed nightly by the media already.

Have you ever been involved in a protest? Have you ever felt like the people you are protesting are actually listening to you? Moreover: what should the objective of protest be and how is it fulfilled?

Here's an example. Protesting the police shooting an unarmed black man in your town or city. You put pressure on the local authorities, like the mayor and police commissioner, you draw media attention and make sure that a story that would otherwise slip through the cracks does not. Not sure what a counter-Trump rally accomplishes in either regard.

We don't want Donald Trump in our county. We organized to let this be known. We acted in such a manner that our voices were heard. Is that objective enough for you? Or are you going to dismiss it because the window of a police car got shattered?

I'm going to dismiss it because of the likely outcomes of such a protest, few are likely to be productive towards your goals.

My point about Bernie couldn't be non-sequitur, because you're using my conclusion as basis for your argument. Like I said, most of the people in the protest were supporting Bernie. They're going to vote for him in the primary. When that time comes, their votes will have meant nothing when Hillary wins. So one of their very limited examples of political autonomy will have been for nothing.

Yes, this is a non-sequitur, because backing a losing candidate in one election is not the same as having no political autonomy. By this standard the only people who shouldn't protest are the ones who always back a winning candidate. This is absurd. It's more absurd for the fact that failing to push Bernie over the top has nothing to do with the ability to stop Trump from winning the general.

Protest remains as the only option. The only chance people have for their voices to be heard, even if the result is a whisper in the greater conversation. And you're trying to tell all these oppressed people how, where, and why to speak. It's all very presumptuous. And quite narcissistic. But that's the liberal mindset, I suppose.

My parents are immigrants. These aren't just "oppressed people", they're speaking for me, and frankly I don't appreciate how they went about it. And I honestly find it rather presumptuous of you to assume that this is the "only option" when that is clearly not true.

 

[Christopher]

What's worse is that the violence and chaos plays right into Trump's anti-immigrant message.

Trump couldn't have asked for a better outcome as far as his messaging is concerned.

He can take photos and videos from the night, showing people running around, proudly displaying the Mexican flag, why decrying American politics and destroying property and then display those as "proof" that his stance is correct.

Trump's media director is probably giddy tonight. Those rioters did Trump's team a massive solid.

Pretty much right on point.

 

[knkng]

See, none of you even understand what you are talking about. You weren't there. And I bet you are the same people up in arms about the riots in Ferguson.

Nobody was being attacked. There were a few scuffles here and there, but that there's bound to be overzealous people in any charged environment. But nobody advocates attacking people except for the police, who have the monopoly on violence. It wasn't about that. It was about disrupting the event. It was about people taking charge of their city

EDIT: Let me explain it again: you're following the rhetoric of the nobility by accepting the notion that disruptive protest is violence.

First off, why should I trust your reporting over what is being reported by multiple media sources? Am I to believe that you saw every single thing that happened? (But hey, perhaps you did, after all you seem to know the race, religion, sexual and political affiliation of everybody there according to your earlier post).

Second, no, I don't have a problem with the Ferguson riots because they were against a clear establishment (the police). However, I remember people were upset and disappointed at one point when a liquor store was broken into because it was opportunistic and counter-productive to what they were protesting.

Lastly, you're just all over the place with what you're saying. "Nobody was attacked, except for the few scuffles here and there." Um, what? In one post you condone violence, but then you say it's bad, but then it's ok against the police, but also against the public to "take charge of the city." How does any of this disrupt the event, or spread your message to the people watching around the country?

To the bolded: You are the one who condoned violence by changing the parameters to meet your justification. "There is no such thing as violence against property." Well, yeah, you can't assault property, but you can still destroy it, and in this case it is completely counter-productive to the protest. And again with the nobility stuff; Trump is not in power, we have to work to ensure that it does not happen, not play into his politics. You keep talking like you're overthrowing a government, when what we're trying to do here is preventative.

 

[Malfunky]

This line of thinking is... concerning. :/

Edit: initially quoted the wrong thing.

Please, elaborate.

Like I said, I was there. The protestors were friendly. It was a multitude of different types of people sharing a community bonding over a single cause. We made sure people weren't harmed. If someone needed help, we offered it. If someone bumped into you, they apologized. It was chaotic. And yet we communicated.. We made sure children were out of the way. We held each other back when things got dangerous.

People got overzealous. They broke cop car windows. This happens a lot. Even after sports matches, like I mentioned. Why does it negate the rest of the protest?