Anti-Trump Protests

[Lutherf]

I'm just now looking at a Breitbart piece -Anti-Trump Groups Threaten 'Largest Civil Disobedience Action of the Century' - Breitbart- and can't for the life of me figure out what these people think they're accomplishing.

Has it not yet occurred to these idiots that the bigger their protest the more it HELPS Trump? The guy is already getting 40 hours of TV coverage a week and all these protests do is get him MORE coverage. Seriously, what's the sense in going out with the intention of being arrested "for the cause" if the end result is that the guy you're protesting just keeps racking up more votes?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I'm just now looking at a Breitbart piece -Anti-Trump Groups Threaten 'Largest Civil Disobedience Action of the Century' - Breitbart- and can't for the life of me figure out what these people think they're accomplishing.

Has it not yet occurred to these idiots that the bigger their protest the more it HELPS Trump? The guy is already getting 40 hours of TV coverage a week and all these protests do is get him MORE coverage. Seriously, what's the sense in going out with the intention of being arrested "for the cause" if the end result is that the guy you're protesting just keeps racking up more votes?

What is noteworthy is those who preach tolerance, seem to be the ones not willing to show it to opposing ideas.... The other thing is, "let's disrupt ****, then when there is blowback lets pretend to be victims" mentality....

 

[Lutherf]

What is noteworthy is those who preach tolerance, seem to be the ones not willing to show it to opposing ideas.... The other thing is, "let's disrupt ****, then when there is blowback lets pretend to be victims" mentality....

That's nothing new. The left wing has always pictured themselves as the sole custodians of what's best for everyone else and they've always been hellbent to force it down our throats no matter what the consequence.

 

[OrphanSlug]

I'm just now looking at a Breitbart piece -Anti-Trump Groups Threaten 'Largest Civil Disobedience Action of the Century' - Breitbart- and can't for the life of me figure out what these people think they're accomplishing.

Has it not yet occurred to these idiots that the bigger their protest the more it HELPS Trump? The guy is already getting 40 hours of TV coverage a week and all these protests do is get him MORE coverage. Seriously, what's the sense in going out with the intention of being arrested "for the cause" if the end result is that the guy you're protesting just keeps racking up more votes?

You (and to an extent Breitbart) are missing the point.

What matters at this point is the assumption that Trump wins the GOP nomination, meaning "the cause" is all about bringing as much attention to Trump's rhetoric as possible. Not in an effort to help him, but in an effort to give as much to the media as possible as a play on Moderates and Independents in a general election against Hillary.

For a while there we all assumed that Trump vs. Hillary might be a very low voter turn out, with various demographics staying home. Now the strategy is to get as much negative message out there about Trump to get some of those Moderates and Independents to vote for Hillary out of pure concern over Trump being President.

Literally frightening the population into voting for Hillary as the lesser of two evils. And it just might work, that is yet to be seen.

 

[joG]

What is noteworthy is those who preach tolerance, seem to be the ones not willing to show it to opposing ideas.... The other thing is, "let's disrupt ****, then when there is blowback lets pretend to be victims" mentality....

At least Trump doesn't preach tolerance. That is also noteworthy.

 

[cpwill]

I'm just now looking at a Breitbart piece -Anti-Trump Groups Threaten 'Largest Civil Disobedience Action of the Century' - Breitbart- and can't for the life of me figure out what these people think they're accomplishing.

Has it not yet occurred to these idiots that the bigger their protest the more it HELPS Trump? The guy is already getting 40 hours of TV coverage a week and all these protests do is get him MORE coverage. Seriously, what's the sense in going out with the intention of being arrested "for the cause" if the end result is that the guy you're protesting just keeps racking up more votes?

1. It's Breitbart. I would check the primary sourcing.
2. Probably not. Radicals tend to have very skewed views of how people actually make decisions.

 

[NeverTrump]

I'm just now looking at a Breitbart piece -Anti-Trump Groups Threaten 'Largest Civil Disobedience Action of the Century' - Breitbart- and can't for the life of me figure out what these people think they're accomplishing.

Has it not yet occurred to these idiots that the bigger their protest the more it HELPS Trump? The guy is already getting 40 hours of TV coverage a week and all these protests do is get him MORE coverage. Seriously, what's the sense in going out with the intention of being arrested "for the cause" if the end result is that the guy you're protesting just keeps racking up more votes?

This is where the OWS crowd ended up. Simple as that. Protesters don't really care about the law because they care about changing it, even if it makes no logical sense that they can

 

[Chomsky]

You (and to an extent Breitbart) are missing the point.

What matters at this point is the assumption that Trump wins the GOP nomination, meaning "the cause" is all about bringing as much attention to Trump's rhetoric as possible. Not in an effort to help him, but in an effort to give as much to the media as possible as a play on Moderates and Independents in a general election against Hillary.

For a while there we all assumed that Trump vs. Hillary might be a very low voter turn out, with various demographics staying home. Now the strategy is to get as much negative message out there about Trump to get some of those Moderates and Independents to vote for Hillary out of pure concern over Trump being President.

Literally frightening the population into voting for Hillary as the lesser of two evils. And it just might work, that is yet to be seen.

I think this is accurate, and Breitbart took it hook, line, and sinker! But in reality, Breitbart is only in turn trying to fire-up their (Trump) base as well! And the Trump base is driven by fear & anger.

Trump's problem is he gives his opposition way too much fodder for opposition ads!

And of course HRC brings her own baggage to the frey, both legit and politically manufactured.

It's going to be ugly! Really ugly!

 

[OrphanSlug]

I think this is accurate, and IMO Breitbart took it hook, line, and sinker! But in reality, Breitbart is only in turn trying to fire-up their base as well!

Trump's problem is he gives his opposition way too much fodder for opposition ads!

And of course HRC brings her own baggage to the frey, both legit and politically manufactured.

It's going to be ugly! Really ugly!

BreitBart is speaking to those who lean right and may or may not be supporting Trump anyway.

Our issue is what these various groups either supporting Hillary or supporting Sanders are up to. Now we all know good and well that no one from the BLM or MoveOn.org groups are going to change the mind of someone leaning right supporting one of the Republican candidates. But, they might speak to those pesky Independents who both Republicans and Democrats alike need to win in a General Election.

The right, and right leaning media/commentary sources, can complain all day long about these fired up anti-Trump groups but it changes little.

The question before us is the same as it was before. Do various groups stay home on election day, or are they prompted to come out and ensure Trump *does not* win. I used to think the former suggesting this might very well be the lowest voter turn out of our generation. Now I am convinced the plan is the latter, and the media opposite right leaning sources may just make it happen.

Everyone is lining up talking about Trump in negative ways. The general left leaning media, all the stories on his past and various business dealings, all the left leaning commentary groups, BLM, MoveOn.org, large Unions, the Sanders camp, the Hillary camp, the DNC, even various world leaders are all talking about Trump. Very little, if any of it, positive.

The irony here is Hillary who is Wall Street, who is DC insider, who is aristocratic, who does not give a single **** about minorities or anyone in the lower income quintiles will win. Not because they really like her or think her ideas will fly... but because they will end up terrified of Trump.

The bigger irony, right leaning news and commentary groups (like BreitBart) will miss all of this, probably on purpose, and might end up helping Trump lose by a large margin to Hillary.

 

[Chomsky]

BreitBart is speaking to those who lean right and may or may not be supporting Trump anyway.

Our issue is what these various groups either supporting Hillary or supporting Sanders are up to. Now we all know good and well that no one from the BLM or MoveOn.org groups are going to change the mind of someone leaning right supporting one of the Republican candidates. But, they might speak to those pesky Independents who both Republicans and Democrats alike need to win in a General Election.

The right, and right leaning media/commentary sources, can complain all day long about these fired up anti-Trump groups but it changes little.

The question before us is the same as it was before. Do various groups stay home on election day, or are they prompted to come out and ensure Trump *does not* win. I used to think the former suggesting this might very well be the lowest voter turn out of our generation. Now I am convinced the plan is the latter, and the media opposite right leaning sources may just make it happen.

Everyone is lining up talking about Trump in negative ways. The general left leaning media, all the stories on his past and various business dealings, all the left leaning commentary groups, BLM, MoveOn.org, large Unions, the Sanders camp, the Hillary camp, the DNC, even various world leaders are all talking about Trump. Very little, if any of it, positive.

The irony here is Hillary who is Wall Street, who is DC insider, who is aristocratic, who does not give a single **** about minorities or anyone in the lower income quintiles will win. Not because they really like her or think her ideas will fly... but because they will end up terrified of Trump.

The bigger irony, right leaning news and commentary groups (like BreitBart) will miss all of this, probably on purpose, and might end up helping Trump lose by a large margin to Hillary.

So it would seem the 'establishment' still wins, and once again the voting citizenry get hoodwinked! :roll:

Great post, BTW.

 

[Lutherf]

You (and to an extent Breitbart) are missing the point.

What matters at this point is the assumption that Trump wins the GOP nomination, meaning "the cause" is all about bringing as much attention to Trump's rhetoric as possible. Not in an effort to help him, but in an effort to give as much to the media as possible as a play on Moderates and Independents in a general election against Hillary.

For a while there we all assumed that Trump vs. Hillary might be a very low voter turn out, with various demographics staying home. Now the strategy is to get as much negative message out there about Trump to get some of those Moderates and Independents to vote for Hillary out of pure concern over Trump being President.

Literally frightening the population into voting for Hillary as the lesser of two evils. And it just might work, that is yet to be seen.

I can see how that may be the point if it was working but it's obviously not working and, in fact, is increasing Trump's turnout.

 

[Redress]

I'm just now looking at a Breitbart piece -Anti-Trump Groups Threaten 'Largest Civil Disobedience Action of the Century' - Breitbart- and can't for the life of me figure out what these people think they're accomplishing.

Has it not yet occurred to these idiots that the bigger their protest the more it HELPS Trump? The guy is already getting 40 hours of TV coverage a week and all these protests do is get him MORE coverage. Seriously, what's the sense in going out with the intention of being arrested "for the cause" if the end result is that the guy you're protesting just keeps racking up more votes?

Holy ****ing dishonest ****ing spin. The protest it mentions has exactly nothing to do with Trump. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Let's look at a primary source: Democracy Spring. Hey look, it is about money in politics, it is about "voter suppression". It is about what it sees as "big money" determining who can and can't run for office. It is not anti-Trump any more than it is anti-Cruz, or anti-Clinton, or anti-any politician that gets alot of money. It is about the system, not individual people.

Now, it is the kind of mindless, silly, no real solutions mentioned populist crap I hate(oddly, it is mindless populism much like what Trump peddles), but I am against this kind of thing based on at least knowing what the **** it actually is, not based on what it is dishonestly spun to be. It takes little actual effort to educate yourself before passing this **** off on people, and it is worth that effort.

 

[Redress]

What is noteworthy is those who preach tolerance, seem to be the ones not willing to show it to opposing ideas.... The other thing is, "let's disrupt ****, then when there is blowback lets pretend to be victims" mentality....

So your opposition is based on really stupid anti-logic and dishonest spin of what people believe. Well done.

 

[OrphanSlug]

I can see how that may be the point if it was working but it's obviously not working and, in fact, is increasing Trump's turnout.

Among those who would support Trump, among Indepenents and Moderates we have no solid indication how they will vote in the General Election. How things are going in the Primaries notwithstanding.

 

[What if...?]

:mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:

I'm just now looking at a Breitbart piece -Anti-Trump Groups Threaten 'Largest Civil Disobedience Action of the Century' - Breitbart- and can't for the life of me figure out what these people think they're accomplishing.

Has it not yet occurred to these idiots that the bigger their protest the more it HELPS Trump? The guy is already getting 40 hours of TV coverage a week and all these protests do is get him MORE coverage. Seriously, what's the sense in going out with the intention of being arrested "for the cause" if the end result is that the guy you're protesting just keeps racking up more votes?

I'm beginning to suspect he's secretly working with Hillary.

He is supposed to divide the republican vote and scare liberals away from Bernie and back to her.

I bet there's a conspiracy about this somewhere.

 

[Lutherf]

:mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:

I'm beginning to suspect he's secretly working with Hillary.

He is supposed to divide the republican vote and scare liberals away from Bernie and back to her.

I bet there's a conspiracy about this somewhere.

There is a conspiracy. Breitbart is on it's knees for Trump so it promotes this stuff.

Since I posted this I did some more looking around and near as I can tell these yahoos will be lucky to get 50 people for their march. First they want to march from Philly to DC and then they plan on getting arrested. Are there people out there stupid enough to sign up for that agenda? Sure, but not too many.

 

[Thrilla]

I'm just now looking at a Breitbart piece -Anti-Trump Groups Threaten 'Largest Civil Disobedience Action of the Century' - Breitbart- and can't for the life of me figure out what these people think they're accomplishing.

Has it not yet occurred to these idiots that the bigger their protest the more it HELPS Trump? The guy is already getting 40 hours of TV coverage a week and all these protests do is get him MORE coverage. Seriously, what's the sense in going out with the intention of being arrested "for the cause" if the end result is that the guy you're protesting just keeps racking up more votes?

free speech for me... none for thee.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

So your opposition is based on really stupid anti-logic and dishonest spin of what people believe. Well done.

No idea what you are on about.


The point I was making is as you can see from the chicago protests is, a planned disruption of a rally, leads to violence perpetrated by protesters, then claims of victimhood....

valdosta, dress in all black as all the BLM protesters that have protested republican and democrat candidate rallies have done, admit you were wearing said to make a statement, then play the victim when you get thrown out of a private event. (not to mention the yelling and cursing that numerous witnesses including the police chief heard).....

The idea that these folks think free speech means you have the right to disrupt a private event to the point where the guy holding the private event can't speak is "tolerance" is bat **** crazy.



I am sure you have a snotty retort with not much intellectual meat. I await..... :lol:

 

[PakPuk]

Yet again backed by pro Clinton oligarch George Soros.

 

[d0gbreath]

That's nothing new. The left wing has always pictured themselves as the sole custodians of what's best for everyone else and they've always been hellbent to force it down our throats no matter what the consequence.

Historically, the left has always been the sole custodians of violent protest. Tea Party rallys pale in comparison.