Support NeoGAF

[Sioen]

In what world is this acceptable? This behavior is almost as disgusting as the hatred and violence that trump supporters spew. This will only strengthen him and his supporters and not damage them in the way these morons hope it will.

"True liberals"

 

[cackhyena]

Trying to storm private property in an attempt to stop him from speaking doesn't really seem like a great idea to me. If this was Obama speaking at some hotel for a dem fundraiser and a bunch of tea party activists or other right group tried to do pull off this stunt I'd be equally dismayed.

Yep

 

[Mr. X]

You do realize that Trump supporters are a minority not only in this country but in the Republican electorate as well, right? The only reason Trump even got as far as he has is because the GOP is weak and fractured and his supporters simply have the plurality of votes. Most Republicans still hate Trump and many are planning to either forego voting entirely or even vote for Clinton. A lot of them are already mad because they know how much damage Trump simply winning the nomination is going to do to their party.

Alright, he's still comfortable enough to spread hate and fear even if you believe he has a snowball's chance to win.

 

[cwmartin]

God damn, some really fucking out of touch and scary posts in here from "anarchists." No, it's not okay to attack and injure people for your ideals.

The United States government attacks and injures humans all over the world in the name of American ideals.

Who should we be holding to these standards of conduct? Does it come down to a matter of aggression? A matter of "who struck first?"

 

[Calamari41]

Trying to storm private property in an attempt to stop him from speaking doesn't really seem like a great idea to me. If this was Obama speaking at some hotel for a dem fundraiser and a bunch of tea party activists or other right group tried to do pull off this stunt I'd be equally dismayed.

Thank you.

The United States government attacks and injures humans all over the world in the name of American ideals.

Who should we be holding to these standards of conduct? Does it come down to a matter of aggression? A matter of "who struck first?"

So the people leaving Newport Hoag Hospital and trying to get on the freeway "struck first" then?

 

[kame-sennin]

Violence is simply wrong.

You mean violence that isn't condoned by the state, right? Do you say that every time the U.S. takes military action? Or every time a cop arrests a drug user on the corner? Those are violent acts as well, but they're done under the authority of the state.

So when you say you're against violence, what you really mean is that you're against violence committed by people who don't have the backing of the most powerful government on Earth.

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

He's heavily favored to win the state and the nomination.

Maybe OC, but CA as a whole? No way.

 

[cackhyena]

The United States government attacks and injures humans all over the world in the name of American ideals.

Who should we be holding to these standards of conduct? Does it come down to a matter of aggression? A matter of "who struck first?"

Wow

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Maybe OC, but CA as a whole? No way.

He's talking about the GOP primary, not the GE.

 

[E92 M3]

You mean violence that isn't condoned by the state, right? Do you say that every time the U.S. takes military action? Or every time a cop arrests a drug user on the corner? Those are violent acts as well, but they're done under the authority of the state.

So when you say you're against violence, what you really mean is that you're against violence committed by people who don't have the backing of the most powerful government on Earth.

Common sense would dictate that I am talking about violence exhibited by the protesters.

 

[kame-sennin]

He's not just running for President. Have you noticed that Trump has emboldened hate groups? Racists have a publicly acceptable and popular figure to rally their cause around, and they are.

Let him, he will lose hard. Like Lose big. He will go down in the history books as the biggest loser in a General Election

Translation: 'I don't care what happens to minorities so long as my party wins the election.'

Common sense would dictate that I am talking about violence exhibited by the protesters.

Right, which is hypocritical. You condemn the violence of the weak, but don't bat an eye at the violence of the powerful.

The United States government attacks and injures humans all over the world in the name of American ideals.

No, but it's different...

 

[NullPointer]

Counterproductive idiots.

That's about as nice as I can put it.

 

[rjinaz]

Trying to storm private property in an attempt to stop him from speaking doesn't really seem like a great idea to me. If this was Obama speaking at some hotel for a dem fundraiser and a bunch of tea party activists or other right group tried to do pull off this stunt I'd be equally dismayed.

I don't necessarily disagree and that would be their prerogative. It doesn't change the fact that Trump has not been silenced despite the protests.

 

[Aaronology]

Translation: 'I don't care what happens to minorities so long as my party wins the election.'

Please explain how you decided this was an accurate translation, Kame.

Right, which is hypocritical. You condemn the violence of the weak, but don't bat an eye at the violence of the powerful.

If you want to discuss the validity of military action by countries such as the United States maybe you should start a thread on the topic.

 

[Calamari41]

I don't necessarily disagree and that would be their prerogative. It doesn't change the fact that Trump has not been silenced despite the protests.

That guy walking around with his face covered in blood was sure as heck silenced

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

He's talking about the GOP primary, not the GE.

Ah right. Whoops.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

You mean violence that isn't condoned by the state, right? Do you say that every time the U.S. takes military action? Or every time a cop arrests a drug user on the corner? Those are violent acts as well, but they're done under the authority of the state.

So when you say you're against violence, what you really mean is that you're against violence committed by people who don't have the backing of the most powerful government on Earth.

Can't you be against both?

 

[SapientWolf]

"True liberals"

What's that mean? True liberals wreck shit?

Conversely, how many Hiliary riots would it take to get dems to vote for Trump?

 

[Jeffolation]

Maybe OC, but CA as a whole? No way.

I'm not up on the latest polling but surely Trump is going to carry CA. Cruz or Kasich can't be doing that well there really?

 

[cwmartin]

Wow

Oh, I guess I blindly accept acts of civilian violence?

Dismissing anything that occurs without context of why groups of people, or other people have violent tendencies really only succeeds in suppressing actual discussion.

Not a single person with a solid moral compass will condone violence commited upon civilians, ESPECIALLY in the context of political protest. To simply dismiss all discussion of violence as morally reprehensible serves no purpose in a discussion about the major concerns, imo.

 

[LUFTRAUSER]

You mean violence that isn't condoned by the state, right? Do you say that every time the U.S. takes military action? Or every time a cop arrests a drug user on the corner? Those are violent acts as well, but they're done under the authority of the state.

So when you say you're against violence, what you really mean is that you're against violence committed by people who don't have the backing of the most powerful government on Earth.

Why would you even compare "violence committed by the state" with this? It is completely different. And are you honestly suggesting that Trump has the backing of the government of the United States? He doesn't even have the backing of the Republican Party!

Oh, I guess I blindly accept acts of civilian violence?

Dismissing anything that occurs without context of why groups of people, or other people have violent tendencies really only succeeds in suppressing actual discussion.

Not a single person with a solid moral compass will condone violence commited upon civilians, ESPECIALLY in the context of political protest. To simply dismiss all discussion of violence as morally reprehensible serves no purpose in a discussion about the major concerns, imo.

The people the American government is targeting are terrorists. People who explicitly and deliberately commit violence on civilians. It is in no way comparable to the political violence that we are talking about here.

 

[rjinaz]

That guy walking around with his face covered in blood was sure as heck silenced

Ok. One person decided to take things too far, as has happened on both sides. Unless you are proposing that violence against people is the real motivation of these protests.

 

[SimpleDesign]

Right, which is hypocritical. You condemn the violence of the weak, but don't bat an eye at the violence of the powerful.

God it must feel amazing up on that pedestal you've built for yourself.

 

[Calamari41]

Ok. One person decided to take things too far, as has happened on both sides. Unless you are proposing that violence against people is the real motivation of these protests.

"One person?" I suggest researching some footage from last night.

As for their motivation, I can't say what's in their hearts. Throwing debris at cars on a major road away from the venue doesn't suggest that they're not interested in violence for its own sake, though.

 

[Chie Satonaka]

Please explain how you decided this was an accurate translation, Kame.

If you want to discuss the validity of military action by countries such as the United States maybe you should start a thread on the topic.

Given the context in which it was brought up, this should be fair game.

 

[USC-fan]

Who sets up these protests?

I would not be shocked it was trump team themselves.

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

I'm not up on the latest polling but surely Trump is going to carry CA. Cruz or Kasich can't be doing that well there really?

I thought they meant he'd take CA when up against Hillary/Bernie.

 

[Stinkles]

I don't care what energizes one side or the other, or if one side thinks they're more right than the other. You should be able to go to a legally permitted political rally without the fear of having the shit beaten out of you. You should be able to drive down a major road in a highly populated area without having "debris" "heaved" at your car. And on the other side you should be able to peacefully protest a political rally without having to worry about being sucker punched.

The anti-Trump protesters are "right," ok. But to use my specific experience, my wife should be able to walk by to see what's going on without having to think "I wonder if I'm going to have my face caved in by the protesters, who are 'right,' just because I'm in this location."

I DO care what energizes them and I care that naked racism is allowed in mainstream politics. But I also agree people should be physically safe at protests.

 

[kame-sennin]

Everyone seems to be missing the point. Trump losing the GE means nothing.

Trump losing in the GE won't change the fact that cops are still arresting the peaceful protestors instead of the rally supporters attacking them. Injustice has been exposed at these rallies. This type of injustice won't go away simply because Trump doesn't get elected.

If people want to fix that, all they have to do is vote against police in the primaries.

Hey everyone, riots are totally unnecessary. Peaceful protests are the only way to protest as time has shown us before. If you cause no harm or annoyance and just yell loud enough and long enough then everybody will see your point.

Being destructive will only cause the racists voting for a racist to become more racist and then your point is defeated but being peaceful will cause the racists at a racists rally to see the error of their ways and vote for Hillary?

Basically, just protest in a way that we can all ignore it without a problem.

And above all, remain inside the free speech zone.

Let's be clear here: You are advocating injuring and potentially killing people, innocent or otherwise, to further a political cause and catalyze change. You know there are words for people who do that...

U.S. President?

 

[Calamari41]

I DO care what energizes them and I care that naked racism is allowed in mainstream politics. But I also agree people should be physically safe at protests.

To clarify, I'm only saying I don't care about motivation in the context of using it to excuse violence, so we are in agreement.

 

[studyguy]

Who sets up these protests?

I would not be shocked it was trump team themselves.

California also has one of the largest Latino populations in the country. Even if it's a small organized protest against Trump from the jump, I can see it snowballing into mammoth proportions basically anywhere around the state just from word of mouth.

 

[NullPointer]

Who sets up these protests?

I would not be shocked it was trump team themselves.

You don't need to set them up to rig them to go sideways. You just need some agent provocateurs to push things over the edge.

Its always something to be wary of in these kinds of stories, but there is plenty enough real anger towards Trump, towards the economy, and some people just show up to these things to have an excuse to cause some damage.

 

[BlackSalad]

This image is amazing

 

[rjinaz]

"One person?" I suggest researching some footage from last night.

As for their motivation, I can't say what's in their hearts. Throwing debris at cars on a major road away from the venue doesn't suggest that they're not interested in violence for its own sake, though.

How many instances of blood on their face were there which is what you said.

Yeah some really shitty people were there at that rally. So are we just going to ignore all the peaceful rallies that happened up to this point that went off pretty much without a hinge implying that everybody that protests peacefully must be the same as the hooligans.

 

[Calamari41]

How many instances of blood on their face were there which is what you said.

Yeah some really shitty people were there at that rally. So are we just going to ignore all the peaceful rallies that happened up to this point that went off pretty much without a hinge implying that everybody that protests peacefully must be the same as the hooligans.

I'm not saying any of that. This thread is about violence at this rally. I am personally invested in the topic because it happened in my back yard and my wife was almost caught up in it for the crime of working near that location.

I used the example of the guy with blood on his face as *an example* of someone having their speech denied, or whatever your wording was. You were acting as though there were no consequences to people from this protest, which itself is weird because this whole thread is full of pro-protest people saying that it's the whole point of the protest.

If you want to start a thread to discuss peaceful rallies, go for it.

 

[studyguy]

Wouldn't advocate violence, but all the same Trump's rhetoric isn't happening in a vacuum. Civil disobedience generally happens if citizens feel threatened enough to act beyond the boundaries of the law but the question is simply the scale of reaction. When set against the backdrop of booting millions of Hispanics (specifically Latinos) in the country it's not hard to surmise why the reaction was so aggressive either. Especially given the fact that we're in California where the highest population of Latinos in the country reside.

Shit's not a good look either way you cut it though, November needs to come soon.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

Wow. Stay classy, regressive left.

 

[rjinaz]

I'm not saying any of that. This thread is about violence at this rally. I am personally invested in the topic because it happened in my back yard and my wife was almost caught up in it for the crime of working near that location.

I used the example of the guy with blood on his face as *an example* of someone having their speech denied, or whatever your wording was. You were acting as though there were no consequences to people from this protest, which itself is weird because this whole thread is full of pro-protest people saying that it's the whole point of the protest.

If you want to start a thread to discuss peaceful rallies, go for it.

You were questioning the motives of all the protestors there, grouping people together. I was giving examples of Trump protestors that are peaceful and there were plenty of those at this event as well as one person that was there already attested to in this thread.

Of course there are consequences. I was originally responding to somebody saying that the left was deciding who should get a platform and I replied by saying Trump has his platform and you decided to take my words in implying that I meant nobody was being impeded on which is not what I said. I feel we're just going to go in circles here speaking for each other.

Wow. Stay classy, regressive left.

and here is another example. grouping everybody together. The people that were violent were in the wrong and should be arrested. Most trump protestors are perfectly civil people as are most of the "regressive left". And guess what. As are most people on the right even if I disagree with many of them.

 

[TestMonkey]

To be fair this is California.

California isn't as liberal as many believe. We did pass a gay marriage ban and disenfranchise immigrants proposition in my lifetime.

 

[USC-fan]

How many instances of blood on their face were there which is what you said.

Yeah some really shitty people were there at that rally. So are we just going to ignore all the peaceful rallies that happened up to this point that went off pretty much without a hinge implying that everybody that protests peacefully must be the same as the hooligans.

Yes they get ignored. Media doesnt cover them. Might as well not happen. trump get more covage the worst he get protested.

Protesting trump does nothing but gain him more media coverage and more voters. Look how this all played out THIS WHOLE TIME.

If you want to stop trump. You do that by volunteer for whatever campaign you support. getting people to get out and vote.

It's upsetting seeing people play right into his hands.

You don't need to set them up to rig them to go sideways. You just need some agent provocateurs to push things over the edge.

Its always something to be wary of in these kinds of stories, but there is plenty enough real anger towards Trump, towards the economy, and some people just show up to these things to have an excuse to cause some damage.

Yep hire a couple guys to start it and off we go.... Destroying police cars, attacking people on the highway, ugh.....

 

[studyguy]

California isn't as liberal as many believe. We did pass a gay marriage ban and disenfranchise immigrants proposition in my lifetime.

It's also not 2008 any longer and population shifts have been pretty wild.
The climate in CA has changed dramatically since then as polling has shown.

Stutzman, the GOP strategist, is candid about how California has changed since 2008. "Four years later I don't believe [Prop. 8] would pass again," he acknowledged.

Shifts in opinion literally a year later were wildly different, it's pretty interesting to look at.

 

[Calamari41]

You were questioning the motives of all the protestors there, grouping people together. I was giving examples of Trump protestors that are peaceful and there were plenty of those at this event as well as one person that was there already attested to in this thread.

Of course there are consequences. I was originally responding to somebody saying that the left was deciding who should get a platform and I replied by saying Trump has his platform and you decided to take my words in implying that I meant nobody was being impeded on which is not what I said. I feel we're just going to go in circles here speaking for each other.

I think we're probably just misunderstanding each other, no biggie. I wasn't trying to question the motives of every protester, just the ones using violence.

 

[NullPointer]

I can understand violence when there is no outlet for competing speech or ideas, or when issues are systematically ignored and suppressed by those in power.

That is not the case with this election and with Trump's campaign. The entire world is speaking about how backwards he is, and how damaging and ignorant his platform is. His words, and endless reactions to them from all quarters are everywhere you look. People are voting and making their voices heard in doing so.

The violence and property damage here is so pointless and only reflects horribly on elements of his opposition. Taking things beyond peaceful protest deserves to be called out, regardless of the political views of those involved.

 

[E92 M3]

Translation: 'I don't care what happens to minorities so long as my party wins the election.'



Right, which is hypocritical. You condemn the violence of the weak, but don't bat an eye at the violence of the powerful.



No, but it's different...

And that has nothing to do with this thread.

--

Either way, all supporters of violent protests are hypocrites. Lets see how happy you get when your hometown gets trashed instead of being a bigshot over the internet.

 

[rjinaz]

I think we're probably just misunderstanding each other, no biggie. I wasn't trying to question the motives of every protester, just the ones using violence.

For sure. And I've been arguing against them in this thread, just not against protesting in general. Those people that harmed others or their property over a Trump rally should face conseqeunces.

 

[excelsiorlef]

California isn't as liberal as many believe. We did pass a gay marriage ban and disenfranchise immigrants proposition in my lifetime.

Absolutely true but it's still a hella Blue State, with a strong left.

I was merely cautioning against extrapolating turnout to this protest as a sign of an inspired youth that is definitely going to show up nation wide in huge numbers on election day.

 

[Nibiru]

Haha guys in crab suits advertising for crab rolls at the protest!

 

[LiquidSword]

Anyone considering the police caused the escalation? Orange County reporter on NPR who was covering the protest said it was mostly peaceful with a few scuffles until the police formed two lines and started moving in and condensing the anti Trump protestors. Also 20 arrests and a broken window is a riot now? I can't find anywhere that lists further damage than that.

 

[Jay Seven]

The United States government attacks and injures humans all over the world in the name of American ideals.

Who should we be holding to these standards of conduct? Does it come down to a matter of aggression? A matter of "who struck first?"

Hopefully this awful post of yours is the nadir of stupidity for this thread.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Anyone considering the police caused the escalation? Orange County reporter on NPR who was covering the protest said it was mostly peaceful with a few scuffles until the police formed two lines and started moving in and condensing the anti Trump protestors. Also 20 arrests and a broken window is a riot now? I can't find anywhere that lists further damage than that.

I'd be so shocked if that turned out to be true.


/s