• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Moveon.Org raising funds from Trump protests, warns more disruptions to come

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
31,009
Reaction score
9,029
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Moveon.Org is conducting fundraising activities from the Chicago protests against Donald Trump that prompted the Republican presidential front-runner to cancel a rally there Friday, and promises that more disruptions are on the way.

“Last night, without consulting local police, Donald Trump abruptly cancelled a rally in Chicago in the face of massive and overwhelmingly peaceful student-led protests,” MoveOn.org wrote in an email Saturday to members. “We’re being flooded with aggressive emails and social media posts from Trump supporters. Some of them are threatening. We refuse to be intimidated by Donald Trump, Fox News, or anyone else.”

The email asked members to donate $3 to help the effort. The progressive group is funded by billionaire George Soros, and has endorsed Democratic candidate Vermont Sen. Bernard Sanders for president.

Moveon.Org raising funds from Trump protests, warns more disruptions to come - Washington Times


Guess that clears up much of the questions.

Also;

John Kasich took $202,700 from George Soros - Conservative Outfitters
 
I thought the Left hated old billionaire White dudes?
 
Something about this stinks to High Heaven. Moveon is behind this? Who stands to benefit from these protests at this time?
 
I think anti-Trumpers hoping to swing delegates their way at a brokered GOP convention stand to benefit the most.

Possibly. We know that Trump is being attacked from all corners.

Although the chances of an 'inserted' candidate winning the general are very slim.
 
Possibly. We know that Trump is being attacked from all corners.

Although the chances of an 'inserted' candidate winning the general are very slim.

I agree with you on this, my thoughts were more oriented towards will the GOP ever be able to call moveon a hostile organization ever again.
 
Moveon.Org is conducting fundraising activities from the Chicago protests against Donald Trump that prompted the Republican presidential front-runner to cancel a rally there Friday, and promises that more disruptions are on the way.

“Last night, without consulting local police, Donald Trump abruptly cancelled a rally in Chicago in the face of massive and overwhelmingly peaceful student-led protests,” MoveOn.org wrote in an email Saturday to members. “We’re being flooded with aggressive emails and social media posts from Trump supporters. Some of them are threatening. We refuse to be intimidated by Donald Trump, Fox News, or anyone else.”

The email asked members to donate $3 to help the effort. The progressive group is funded by billionaire George Soros, and has endorsed Democratic candidate Vermont Sen. Bernard Sanders for president.

Moveon.Org raising funds from Trump protests, warns more disruptions to come - Washington Times


Guess that clears up much of the questions.

Yup.


Obama's divisive rhetoric and governance is responsible for much of the anger and hate of the Trump phenomenon. Trump, in turn, is riling up anger and hate among his supporters, while inspiring it in the left. Both men are demagogues who care not what happens to the people caught in the middle of the strife they create.

This is going to go back and forth, now, with each side feeling the need to one-up the other.


Civilization is based on us foregoing revenge-cycles in favor of rule of law, obeying the better angels of our nature, and punishing those who violate norms. Trump's folks, like Trump no longer think they have to obey those norms. The Left has a long weakness for being willing to ignore them. That's a recipe for chaos and bloodshed.
 
I think anti-Trumpers hoping to swing delegates their way at a brokered GOP convention stand to benefit the most.

There isn't anyone who can "broker" a convention anymore. It will come down to the delegates in a contested convention. They'll have the power, if no one gets to 1,237.
 
There isn't anyone who can "broker" a convention anymore. It will come down to the delegates in a contested convention. They'll have the power, if no one gets to 1,237.

You think they won't be politicked in any way? The whole point of a brokered convention is to influence delegates who are no longer bound to vote a certain way.
 
I agree with you on this, my thoughts were more oriented towards will the GOP ever be able to call moveon a hostile organization ever again.

The Establishment on both sides are funded by big money...not a surprise.
 
You think they won't be politicked in any way? The whole point of a brokered convention is to influence delegates who are no longer bound to vote a certain way.

Of course it will be politicked. It's politics. It's a political decision. Politics is inherent to it.

The point is, there is no one who can control the outcome of a contested convention, except the delegates. If no one has 1,237, then the Delegates are effectively in charge of who the nominee is. Technically, that's the way it always is, but because there is usually a winner, it's been pro forma since Reagan tried a contested convention in 1976.
 
Of course it will be politicked. It's politics. It's a political decision. Politics is inherent to it.

The point is, there is no one who can control the outcome of a contested convention, except the delegates. If no one has 1,237, then the Delegates are effectively in charge of who the nominee is. Technically, that's the way it always is, but because there is usually a winner, it's been pro forma since Reagan tried a contested convention in 1976.

Of course the delegates matter, that's why they'll be politicked. I'm no longer sure I understand your point. I'm saying that once the delegates are no longer obligated a certain way the anti-Trump people are going to go to them and say that Trump has to be stopped because of the violence on the streets. That's the hook.
 
Of course the delegates matter, that's why they'll be politicked. I'm no longer sure I understand your point. I'm saying that once the delegates are no longer obligated a certain way the anti-Trump people are going to go to them and say that Trump has to be stopped because of the violence on the streets. That's the hook.

If by that you mean that's part of their message, well, probably it will be. Both sides will be trying to influence everyone. It's politics. That's how it works. If you mean there will be some kind of shadowy cabal secretly running things and making decisions in smoke-filled rooms... those days are a century or so gone.
 
If by that you mean that's part of their message, well, probably it will be. Both sides will be trying to influence everyone. It's politics. That's how it works. If you mean there will be some kind of shadowy cabal secretly running things and making decisions in smoke-filled rooms... those days are a century or so gone.

What I'm saying is that before violence in the streets happened the only argument against Trump was that he wasn't one of the established players. Would that swing a lot of delegates away from Trump? It's a purely political position to take. Now if the threat of violence is real the position against Trump is no longer purely political.
 
What I'm saying is that before violence in the streets happened the only argument against Trump was that he wasn't one of the established players.

...no. There were lots of arguments against Trump prior to Chicago, nor were they limited to the ugliness and violence of his rallies.

Would that swing a lot of delegates away from Trump? It's a purely political position to take. Now if the threat of violence is real the position against Trump is no longer purely political.

I don't know if that will sway them or not. I know that Trump and his supporters have been gleefully celebrating their breaking of the rules up until this point, and I will have nothing but peals of laughter for them if they complain that someone did it to them.
 
...no. There were lots of arguments against Trump prior to Chicago, nor were they limited to the ugliness and violence of his rallies.



I don't know if that will sway them or not. I know that Trump and his supporters have been gleefully celebrating their breaking of the rules up until this point, and I will have nothing but peals of laughter for them if they complain that someone did it to them.

OK. I see where you're coming from so fair enough.
 
Back
Top Bottom