Donald Trump suggests 2nd Amendment Folks do something about Hillary

Status
Not open for further replies.
SporeCrawler said:
What I love about the statement is, is that there is no other way to interpret it. He meant kill clinton
Click to expand...

Whoa, whoa, I'm sorry SporeCrawler, Trump did not mean that at all. This was just a funny little joke that the lamestream media is blowing up into a huge deal so they can avoid having to deal with the real issues. The real issues being the countless American lives we've lost due to Hillary's wars, like the Vietnam War, the Korean War, the Clone Wars, and, and..

Oh god I have to do this for 90 more days? Oh fuck me, FUCK ME! What the hell happened to my life?! I used to have dignity and self respect!
 
theecakee said:
Wow another crazy Trump remark, how will he top this?

See you all here next week to see what he says next!
Click to expand...

week?

nah he's gonna double down and say something even stupider to cover for this tomorrow

Tranqueris said:
Whoa, whoa, I'm sorry SporeCrawler, Trump did not mean that at all. This was just a funny little joke that the lamestream media is blowing up into a huge deal so they can avoid having to deal with the real issues. The real issues being the countless American lives we've lost due to Hillary's wars, like the Vietnam War, the Korean War, the Clone Wars, and, and..

Oh god I have to do this for 90 more days? Oh fuck me, FUCK ME! What the hell happened to my life?! I used to have dignity and self respect!
Click to expand...

Webcomic_xkcd_-_Wikipedian_protester.png
 
King Tubby said:
The problem is that the right wing has, in a typically partisan fashion, lowered the bar for what is considered tyrannical to such an extent that it's basically lost all meaning at this point.
Click to expand...

Indeed. We're talking about the party that has repeatedly peddled the notion that expanding healthcare insurance coverage is tantamount to a "tyrannical government".
 
Assuming that Hillary keeps her shit together and comes out on top this November, who among the republican base will be the biggest casualties? Will it be the Tea Party faction or the more traditional fiscal types? The NRA will probably remain a fixture, but I wonder about the evangelicals. The Evangelical Right and Trump couldn't be farther apart, and yet they've forged this unholy alliance of convenience with the sole purpose of defeating Hillary, Their political stances on gay rights, abortion, climate change, and creationism places them on the fringes of society and yet they've managed to hold a prominent place within the GOP. Since they've hitched themselves to Trump during this election cycle, what are the chances that they could be significantly defanged, or at least neutered enough that will allow their progressive counterparts to mount a more earnest opposition going forward -- either legislatively or through activist means?
 
theecakee said:
Wow another crazy Trump remark, how will he top this?

See you all here next week to see what he says next!
Click to expand...

Remarks about using nukes on american soil would top this (I mean who needs california and new york anyways they will never vote republican right?)

Bet republicans will still defend him (yeah but then all sleeper terrorists die too)
 
Brawly Likes to Brawl said:
How many news outlets are pointing how this was said in the context of Hillary having already won the election?
Click to expand...

The Trump surrogate/campaign spin is so bad that they've all been forcing most of the news outlets (that I've seen today) to acknowledge that he meant after the election.

Trump surrogate: "Well he meant that people should vote!"

News person: "Actually he said after the election."

Captin Quacker said:
Webcomic_xkcd_-_Wikipedian_protester.png
Click to expand...

Yeah, you got a point.
 
The "He meant voting!" spin seems to have taken full effect on my Facebook. With also calls that the media is biased for posting unedited videos of him saying this.
 
Frustrated_Grunt said:
The "He meant voting!" spin seems to have taken full effect on my Facebook. With also calls that the media is biased for posting unedited videos of him saying this.
Click to expand...

This spin doesn't even make sense. He's talking about what to do AFTER she's been elected and is in the process of electing SCOTUS picks. Is he saying the "2nd amendment people" can at that moment go out and vote? Vote for what?
 
crackhead_bob said:
Assuming that Hillary keeps her shit together and comes out on top this November, who among the republican base will be the biggest casualties? Will it be the Tea Party faction or the more traditional fiscal types? The NRA will probably remain a fixture, but I wonder about the evangelicals. The Evangelical Right and Trump couldn't be farther apart, and yet they've forged this unholy alliance of convenience with the sole purpose of defeating Hillary, Their political stances on gay rights, abortion, climate change, and creationism places them on the fringes of society and yet they've managed to hold a prominent place within the GOP. Since they've hitched themselves to Trump during this election cycle, what are the chances that they could be significantly defanged, or at least neutered enough that will allow their progressive counterparts to mount a more earnest opposition going forward -- either legislatively or through activist means?
Click to expand...
Tea Party lunatics will repeat their spiel about the Republicans losing the election because the GOP didn't appoint a REAL right wing republican (just like they did '08 and '12), just a semi-liberal celebrity from NY who didn't stand for the extremely conservative Christian values REAL Americans want to vote for.

The Tea Party in opposition will only lose power if the partisanship that divides US politics is tempered and voters have no reason to be angry and resentful at the Washington establishment anymore. So, not anytime soon, because you know that Republicans will spend the Hillary presidency obstructing and stoking the fire just as they have done over the last 8 years and hoping the resentment, anger and despair they cause against the government will be enough to get an (R) elected next time.
 
EatinOlives said:
This spin doesn't even make sense. He's talking about what to do AFTER she's been elected and is in the process of electing SCOTUS picks. Is he saying the "2nd amendment people" can at that moment go out and vote? Vote for what?
Click to expand...
The supreme court picks. Duhhh!
/s though that should be obvious.
 
In any case, America is headed for Civil War.
Modern society and democracy are based on the idea that even if you oppose him, your political adversary is legitimate.

Trump and the Tea Party destroyed that idea.
Whoever wins in November, it will be impossible for the other half to accept the "rule" of the winner. During the last decades, it's the very principle of bipartisanship that has been destroyed.

Or as a great Republican said : " A house divided cannot stand"
 
Bloody_Five said:
In any case, America is headed for Civil War.
Modern society and democracy are based on the idea that even if you oppose him, your political adversary is legitimate.

Trump and the Tea Party destroyed that idea.
Whoever wins in November, it will be impossible for the other half to accept the "rule" of the winner. During the last decades, it's the very principle of bipartisanship that has been destroyed.

Or as a great Republican said : " A house divided cannot stand"
Click to expand...

Don't be ridiculous. Even if bipartisanship is basically non-existent there's not gonna be any kind of war. The worst you'll see is isolated cases of domestic terrorism.
 
Tea Party lunatics will repeat their spiel about the Republicans losing the election because the GOP didn't appoint a REAL right wing republican (just like they did '08 and '12), just a semi-liberal celebrity from NY who didn't stand for the extremely conservative Christian values REAL Americans want to vote for.

The Tea Party in opposition will only lose power if the partisanship that divides US politics is tempered and voters have no reason to be angry and resentful at the Washington establishment anymore. So, not anytime soon, because you know that Republicans will spend the Hillary presidency obstructing and stoking the fire just as they have done over the last 8 years and hoping the resentment, anger and despair they cause against the government will be enough to get an (R) elected next time.
Click to expand...

Okay, but that goes to my second question I asked: will there be the sizable demographics to counter them in the next election cycles? I remember Pat Buchanan's speech at the 1992 GOP convention, when he was considered the outlier. And when the GOP had their landslide in 1994, it seemed as though there were no progressive apparatuses in place to counter the Gingrich Revolution. Trump and the Tea Party represent the successors to the Gingrich Revolution, but it's so fucking brazen today that they don't even bother to mask their racism and bigotry and sometimes I feel that the democrats either lack the infrastructure to challenge them or don't have the courage to take them on unless it's them who are backed up against the wall.

Church state separation is an issue I've always held dear since I was able to vote, and something well before I even knew of the proper term. I wish that in this day and age, progressive lawmakers had the courage to even say the words "church state separation," but I digress. It's just been a downward race to crazy for the republicans.
 
Brawly Likes to Brawl said:
How many news outlets are pointing how this was said in the context of Hillary having already won the election?
Click to expand...

I really don't think that's as important, since people can still spin it as "he meant that we should vote so that she doesn't get elected in the first place!"

What is impossible to argue against, is that he said that "you can't do anything about it - aside from maybe the 2nd amendment people". The only situation in which that isn't a call for assassination/violence is if people who like the 2nd amendment have more voting power than others. Which they don't.
 
I really don't think that's as important, since people can still spin it as "he meant that we should vote so that she doesn't get elected in the first place!"

What is impossible to argue against, is that he said that "you can't do anything about it - aside from maybe the 2nd amendment people". The only situation in which that isn't a call for assassination/violence is if people who like the 2nd amendment have more voting power than others. Which they don't.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that this will be yet another instance in which Trump's gaffe will be buried, just like his encouragement to Russia to hack the DNC emails:-/
 
He's already asked the Russians to hack (encouraged foreign espionage), what's a request for assassination? Dude aint going to jail or be removed from the party.
 
crackhead_bob said:
So what you're saying is that this will be yet another instance in which Trump's gaffe will be buried, just like his encouragement to Russia to hack the DNC emails:-/
Click to expand...

Oh, it will be, even though it's a despicable thing to do/say. But his fanbase is all about not changing and not liking when people dissect your words, so they never have a problem with what he says. All they hear is the other side saying "trump needs to apologize, trump said a horrible thing" and they double down.

What I find interesting is that I don't know of many people that are trump supporters who will admit he has faults. I know many people who are voting for Hillary who are critical of her, but any trump supporters? They're all in. They support and back up 100% of what he does, which is ridiculous. If you truly care about something or support it, you will be critical when it falls short.
 
Poltergust said:
Don't be ridiculous. Even if bipartisanship is basically non-existent there's not gonna be any kind of war. The worst you'll see is isolated cases of domestic terrorism.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Like I don't want to undersell this. This offers legitimate encouragement to the sort of people might carry out lone wolf attacks, and that's awful and dangerous, but we're not on the road to civil war. Really, given where Trump supporters live, I doubt we even see much in the way of rioting, since any place dense enough to sustain a riot is majority Democratic anyway. Maybe you see some increased militia activity out west, but that's been an on-and-off problem for decades now.
 
Lo_Fi said:
I really don't think that's as important, since people can still spin it as "he meant that we should vote so that she doesn't get elected in the first place!"

What is impossible to argue against, is that he said that "you can't do anything about it - aside from maybe the 2nd amendment people". The only situation in which that isn't a call for assassination/violence is if people who like the 2nd amendment have more voting power than others. Which they don't.
Click to expand...

I think the other line is "there is the NRA which has the most lobbying power of anyone else! They won't let anything pass!"
 
Jesus Christ.

After the murder of Jo Cox, this shit has to be taken seriously. We've already seen one assassination attempt this election (ironically against Trump), I don't want to see another.
 
There's a crucial factor that everyone has been overlooking that explains why Trump was talking about the Second Amendment People™ voting after Hillary had already been elected and was in the process of choosing liberal Supreme Court justices!

Trump was not talking about the Second Amendment People™ voting in the 2016 election to do something about Hillary... but rather he was talking about the 2020 election!

I mean, he's already whining about the election being rigged in August whilst not making any moves to investigate the supposed rigging even though the election is three months away - that sounds like something only a predestined loser would say. Clearly, Trump has already realized and ceded defeat, but this is all a part of his plan.

The Republican obstructionists will simply delay the Supreme Court nominee hearings until after the 2020 election, because Hillary Clinton's election doesn't count as a mandate because she isn't a man and therefore can't have a mandate, now can she?

Now you may ask "but Sianos, if Hillary wins in a landslide the Democrats will control the Senate! How could the Republicans still obstruct the Supreme Court nominee hearings?"

It's simple: this is where the Second Amendment People™ come into play. They'll shoot those pesky liberal senators, of course! Then the Republicans will have the majority and will be able to obstruct as much as they please. Then they'll vote for President Trump in 2020 and therefore save the guns through voting. Flawless victory!

kunk-rum.gif
 
soxxx said:
Trump said for the 2nd amendment supporters to do something about it, well what can they do about it?

Well they can all vote against her and prevent her from putting in a liberal supreme court justice in. Based on what he said you cannot conclude that Trump suggested an assassination.
Click to expand...

Except Trump was super clear that he was discussing a hypothetical scenario in which Hillary already took power and nominated judges.
 
BlastProcessing said:
Tell me more about this "tyrannical government".
Click to expand...
It refers to an oppressive regime, which is relative to the amount one agrees or disagrees with your government. I can only assume Trump and his followers arereading the scenario as such.

King Tubby said:
The problem is that the right wing has, in a typically partisan fashion, lowered the bar for what is considered tyrannical to such an extent that it's basically lost all meaning at this point.
Click to expand...
Agreed, that has been the problem with the entire concept from day one. We've had eight years of people yapping on about how Kenyan, secret muslim Marxist Obama is ruling the the US like a monarch that goes against the will of the people. While a white lady in the oval office may face similar types of resistance and scrutiny as a black man would, I figured if any radicalised 2nd amendment goons would start an armed revolt, it would have been during Obama's time. Since nothing happened in spite of all the near-incessant noise, perhaps people realise that standing up against their government with weapons may not be so easy to rationalise after all. Not that it makes Trump's quips any less tasteless or disrespectful.
 
Is The Donald Reddit page for real? That they want Hillary killed and the 2 amendment is going to be axed of by her so she can be a tyrannical leader
 
davepoobond said:
I think the other line is "there is the NRA which has the most lobbying power of anyone else! They won't let anything pass!"
Click to expand...

Which still doesn't make sense because he was referring to the SC, which doesn't actually "pass" anything.
 
iRAWRasaurus said:
Off topic but strangely enough, I don't get adds. There is just a massive black box where the adds should be for me on my iPhone.
Click to expand...
Depends where you're from in the world. You might sometimes get ads for things based on Adsense from Google but those Trump ones are targeted to the USA. I got them all the time when I was working in the states for a few weeks. Seems to have bombarded adsales everywhere :/
 
Mr Swine said:
Is The Donald Reddit page for real? That they want Hillary killed and the 2 amendment is going to be axed of by her so she can be a tyrannical leader
Click to expand...

How stupid are these people? Like, that they think that the second amendment is something that prevents the government from exerting a tyrannical authoritarian dictatorship on them? Like, do they truly think that government tyranny will be preceded by the removal of the second amendment, as if the guns will just poof into thin air once it's gone? You can talk about politicians being stupid all you want, but they know what they're doing - if they were going to create a tyranny, you wouldn't know you were being subjected to it.
 
So is this the first time ever a presidential candidate of a modern country suggested an assassination of his rival candidate?

Lol, damn. Shit's crazy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Should Bethesda or Microsoft do something about NateTheHate ?
27
435
MMaRsu replied
  • Locked
what do you think of the new banger 'Trump Gaza'?
39
2K
EviLore replied
Something odd happened today, want your take on if it's something or nothing
2
50
532
YCoCg replied
Berserk fans...what do you think about this question?
20
1K
EviLore replied
THE SURFER | Official Trailer | Nicolas Cage | In theaters May 2nd
23
1K
DKehoe replied
Top Bottom