Conservatives forget history in discrediting Trump protesters

[jc456]

you have not provided any link that validated your OP not one.

Not my problem if you don't like the link.

sure it is, it's your integrity, BTW, I just deleted my post on the ambulance story because I couldn't find a reliable news source to validate it. I have integrity. I didn't do my due diligence and apologize.

But you made a statement and it is not validated. without that, it's not real.

Ok, that's reasonable.

The claim I made in the OP was (copied from the blog I linked to):

Trump’s supporters also perceive these protests as “unfair” because they claim there were no riots following Obama’s election.

According to conservatives on social media, “Republicans have jobs and responsibilities” and therefore couldn’t engage in civil disobedience to voice their discontent with the 2008 and 2012 elections. With this perception of the Obama elections and subsequent claims of “ Republican acceptance,” Trump supporters are now demanding the same “fairness” for Donald J. Trump’s presidency, “We sat through do nothing politics for 8 years, the least they can do is go shut up and sit in the corner for 8 themselves,” one Trump supporter explained.

However, these perceptions do not reflect what actually followed the election of our country’s first black president, much less the difference between why people are protesting Donald J. Trump’s presidency as compared to Barack Obama’s presidency.

Obama’s election in 2008 was preceded and followed by violent attacks and property destruction targeted against minorities.
​

So here are some links:
Anti-Obama Protest at University of Mississippi Turns Unruly
Guilty plea in Springfield church fire
Idaho students chant Obama threat on school bus
Obama election spurs race threats, crimes

Now, I'm going to say this about 2008 and the ways in which it differs from now:
In 2008 and 2012, the unrest was not as wide spread, was more in invidual acts around the country, but individual acts that added up to some pretty ugly stuff including a church burning and assaults but no large scale demonstrations, so I'll agree I was wrong to go with that comparison. Mea Culpa

There are some other differences though - between then and now - that ought to be part of the conversation.

McCain made a deliberate effort to calm flames from his supporters when the rhetoric started to go over the top throughout the campaign. Trump pumped it up and I think part of that is a reason why these protests are so charged, if you fan the flames like that right up to and through the election, how are you going to control them after the election - when someone HAS to lose? Do you honestly think Trump supporters would have quietly accepted it it after months of rhetoric about rigging and cheating? You had people threatening revolution, shooting, etc. At this point, it's all rhetoric and speculation and we'll never know.

Add to that, as soon as the protests started, what does Trump do? Tweets that they had a "fair and transparent" (because he won) and the Dems were bussing in paid protestors (again, a charge without evidence). That is not calming the flames, it's fanning them. Some of that might be the problem with Twitter - a medium not designed to convey nuance or much else either. He first lashed out at out at the protestors accusing them of being paid operatives then, the next day praising them for their passion and calling for unity.

Another point to consider - the question of has Hillary and Obama said and done enough to calm the protests? When I've looked over the articles, I've seen multiple moments, on various trips and talks, where Obama AND his supporters, such as Oprah Winfrey and Dave Chappelle, have called for unity, and for people to work with Mr. Trump and give him a chance. He has emphasized to his followers that a Trump Administration doesn't automatically mean a rejection of everything they've worked for. Obama has refused to criticize or talk about Trump's potential appointments or any aspects of the transition. Though not related to the protests, has met with foreign dignataries to assure them that their will be continuity with the Trump Administration. All this, together - is an effort to calm the flames and to try to reassure the people who supported him: unity not violence. I think that is sufficient unless things get really out of hand. So far, this is not the riots of the civil rights era, nor Rodney King nor even Fergeson. The protests are still by and large peaceful.

I'm not really sure how to respond to this post. it seems you are now pulling in the bullshit from the campaign. And friend, that's over and water under the dam and I don't care. You're right no conservative rallies or protests occurred after either victory for obummer. So again, the OP is not accurate. Just isn't. Take your lump and call it what you stated here, you took it at face value and it isn't true.

And again, I'm not sure what you think Trump can do with people shouting fk trump you're not my president while rioting and causing damage to other people's property and interfering with traffic and other peoples time.

it isn't his supporters, it is up to Hitlery and obummer to quiet the fools on the crybaby left. For you to impose that expectation on Trump is truly stupid.

You really can't seperate out the campaign from the post-election. Both sides have a responsibility here. And, let me point out - Trump has yet to denounce the outbreak in hate crime violence that has also occurred. Calling for unity from both sides is good, imo, and both sides HAVE done that.

look, this is getting old, he told any/all of his supporters to stop on 60 minutes sunday night. I haven't heard jack from your side. And for during the campaign, I'd ask you who was causing violence where? Can you name where the violence was and how it was started? Please, can you be fking honest? have some integrity.

 

[jc456]

Most of the imbecilic leftards arrested in Oregon couldnt even be bothered to vote. This hypocrisy though, is typical of the left.

That appears to be yet another of the claims that has been debunked as "unproven": Most Trump Protesters Didn't Vote?

Why do you insist on spreading unproven or debunked claims such as this?

coyote, please, you're wrong again. reread your own link here let me pull out the piece for you:

"WHAT'S TRUE: An Oregon-based news outlet claimed it checked voter activity against a list of arrests and determined that a majority did not vote at all in the 2016 general election.

WHAT'S FALSE: The data omitted important variables; the information only included 112 people arrested in Portland and not all protesters in all anti-Trump demonstrations."
which means many of the arrested folks in Portland didn't vote. What's inaccurate?

She didn't say "Portland". She said Oregon.

Edited to add:

What she said was: "Most of the imbecilic leftards arrested in Oregon couldnt even be bothered to vote."

So here is another source: At least third of arrested anti-Trump protesters didn't vote

Even with that - 1/3 didn't vote that they know of.

isn't portland in oregon?

 

[jc456]

you have not provided any link that validated your OP not one.

Not my problem if you don't like the link.

sure it is, it's your integrity, BTW, I just deleted my post on the ambulance story because I couldn't find a reliable news source to validate it. I have integrity. I didn't do my due diligence and apologize.

But you made a statement and it is not validated. without that, it's not real.

Ok, that's reasonable.

The claim I made in the OP was (copied from the blog I linked to):

Trump’s supporters also perceive these protests as “unfair” because they claim there were no riots following Obama’s election.

According to conservatives on social media, “Republicans have jobs and responsibilities” and therefore couldn’t engage in civil disobedience to voice their discontent with the 2008 and 2012 elections. With this perception of the Obama elections and subsequent claims of “ Republican acceptance,” Trump supporters are now demanding the same “fairness” for Donald J. Trump’s presidency, “We sat through do nothing politics for 8 years, the least they can do is go shut up and sit in the corner for 8 themselves,” one Trump supporter explained.

However, these perceptions do not reflect what actually followed the election of our country’s first black president, much less the difference between why people are protesting Donald J. Trump’s presidency as compared to Barack Obama’s presidency.

Obama’s election in 2008 was preceded and followed by violent attacks and property destruction targeted against minorities.
​

So here are some links:
Anti-Obama Protest at University of Mississippi Turns Unruly
Guilty plea in Springfield church fire
Idaho students chant Obama threat on school bus
Obama election spurs race threats, crimes

Now, I'm going to say this about 2008 and the ways in which it differs from now:
In 2008 and 2012, the unrest was not as wide spread, was more in invidual acts around the country, but individual acts that added up to some pretty ugly stuff including a church burning and assaults but no large scale demonstrations, so I'll agree I was wrong to go with that comparison. Mea Culpa

There are some other differences though - between then and now - that ought to be part of the conversation.

McCain made a deliberate effort to calm flames from his supporters when the rhetoric started to go over the top throughout the campaign. Trump pumped it up and I think part of that is a reason why these protests are so charged, if you fan the flames like that right up to and through the election, how are you going to control them after the election - when someone HAS to lose? Do you honestly think Trump supporters would have quietly accepted it it after months of rhetoric about rigging and cheating? You had people threatening revolution, shooting, etc. At this point, it's all rhetoric and speculation and we'll never know.

Add to that, as soon as the protests started, what does Trump do? Tweets that they had a "fair and transparent" (because he won) and the Dems were bussing in paid protestors (again, a charge without evidence). That is not calming the flames, it's fanning them. Some of that might be the problem with Twitter - a medium not designed to convey nuance or much else either. He first lashed out at out at the protestors accusing them of being paid operatives then, the next day praising them for their passion and calling for unity.

Another point to consider - the question of has Hillary and Obama said and done enough to calm the protests? When I've looked over the articles, I've seen multiple moments, on various trips and talks, where Obama AND his supporters, such as Oprah Winfrey and Dave Chappelle, have called for unity, and for people to work with Mr. Trump and give him a chance. He has emphasized to his followers that a Trump Administration doesn't automatically mean a rejection of everything they've worked for. Obama has refused to criticize or talk about Trump's potential appointments or any aspects of the transition. Though not related to the protests, has met with foreign dignataries to assure them that their will be continuity with the Trump Administration. All this, together - is an effort to calm the flames and to try to reassure the people who supported him: unity not violence. I think that is sufficient unless things get really out of hand. So far, this is not the riots of the civil rights era, nor Rodney King nor even Fergeson. The protests are still by and large peaceful.

I'm not really sure how to respond to this post. it seems you are now pulling in the bullshit from the campaign. And friend, that's over and water under the dam and I don't care. You're right no conservative rallies or protests occurred after either victory for obummer. So again, the OP is not accurate. Just isn't. Take your lump and call it what you stated here, you took it at face value and it isn't true.

And again, I'm not sure what you think Trump can do with people shouting fk trump you're not my president while rioting and causing damage to other people's property and interfering with traffic and other peoples time.

it isn't his supporters, it is up to Hitlery and obummer to quiet the fools on the crybaby left. For you to impose that expectation on Trump is truly stupid.

You really can't seperate out the campaign from the post-election. Both sides have a responsibility here. And, let me point out - Trump has yet to denounce the outbreak in hate crime violence that has also occurred. Calling for unity from both sides is good, imo, and both sides HAVE done that.

BTW, the campaign is over so yes I don't see the need to go pull all of that violence. there is enough violence from your side after the election cycle ended that you should be ashamed and denounce them. you still haven't done that.

 

[Coyote]

mmm

Obama’s election in 2008 was preceded and followed by violent attacks and property destruction targeted against minorities.

I believe what you are referring to were isolated incidents by individuals, not an organized protest like a million woman march, right?

Yes, most were: Orcinus: When Obama Was Elected: An Outpouring of Hate in 2008

No massive organized protests.

Ok, so you believe this is different?

Yes

"I suspect that there’s not a president in our history that hasn’t been subject to these protests," he answered. "So, I would not advise people who feel strongly or who are concerned about some of the issues that have been raised during the course of the campaign, I wouldn’t advise them to be silent." BHO

Trump supporter, 15, beaten during Rockville protest

"...A march of students in Rockville, Maryland, protesting the election of Donald Trump to the presidency turned violent on Wednesday morning as a teenager wearing one of the Trump campaigns "Make American Great Again" hats was beaten..."

"The group surrounded the teen, punching him repeatedly, then threw him to the ground and kicked him repeatedly in the ribs. It is not yet clear what led up to the incident, but Maj. Michael English with Rockville police said the victim was not the aggressor.

“They jumped him and beat him up pretty bad,” Max Stucky, a bystander who witnessed the attack, told WTOP. The group surrounded the teen, punching him repeatedly, then threw him to the ground and kicked him repeatedly in the ribs. It is not yet clear what led up to the incident, but Maj. Michael English with Rockville police said the victim was not the aggressor."

Supporting the right to demonstrate - free speech is not the same as supporting assault. Is that what you trying to claim here?

 

[Coyote]

Most of the imbecilic leftards arrested in Oregon couldnt even be bothered to vote. This hypocrisy though, is typical of the left.

That appears to be yet another of the claims that has been debunked as "unproven": Most Trump Protesters Didn't Vote?

Why do you insist on spreading unproven or debunked claims such as this?

coyote, please, you're wrong again. reread your own link here let me pull out the piece for you:

"WHAT'S TRUE: An Oregon-based news outlet claimed it checked voter activity against a list of arrests and determined that a majority did not vote at all in the 2016 general election.

WHAT'S FALSE: The data omitted important variables; the information only included 112 people arrested in Portland and not all protesters in all anti-Trump demonstrations."
which means many of the arrested folks in Portland didn't vote. What's inaccurate?

She didn't say "Portland". She said Oregon.

Edited to add:

What she said was: "Most of the imbecilic leftards arrested in Oregon couldnt even be bothered to vote."

So here is another source: At least third of arrested anti-Trump protesters didn't vote

Even with that - 1/3 didn't vote that they know of.

isn't portland in oregon?

Portland is one city, in a state.

 

[jc456]

mmm

I believe what you are referring to were isolated incidents by individuals, not an organized protest like a million woman march, right?

Yes, most were: Orcinus: When Obama Was Elected: An Outpouring of Hate in 2008

No massive organized protests.

Ok, so you believe this is different?

Yes

"I suspect that there’s not a president in our history that hasn’t been subject to these protests," he answered. "So, I would not advise people who feel strongly or who are concerned about some of the issues that have been raised during the course of the campaign, I wouldn’t advise them to be silent." BHO

Trump supporter, 15, beaten during Rockville protest

"...A march of students in Rockville, Maryland, protesting the election of Donald Trump to the presidency turned violent on Wednesday morning as a teenager wearing one of the Trump campaigns "Make American Great Again" hats was beaten..."

"The group surrounded the teen, punching him repeatedly, then threw him to the ground and kicked him repeatedly in the ribs. It is not yet clear what led up to the incident, but Maj. Michael English with Rockville police said the victim was not the aggressor.

“They jumped him and beat him up pretty bad,” Max Stucky, a bystander who witnessed the attack, told WTOP. The group surrounded the teen, punching him repeatedly, then threw him to the ground and kicked him repeatedly in the ribs. It is not yet clear what led up to the incident, but Maj. Michael English with Rockville police said the victim was not the aggressor."

Supporting the right to demonstrate - free speech is not the same as supporting assault. Is that what you trying to claim here?

dudette, you can protest all fking year for all I care. Just don't impose your protest onto others. why is that so difficult for you libturds?

 

[Coyote]

Not my problem if you don't like the link.

sure it is, it's your integrity, BTW, I just deleted my post on the ambulance story because I couldn't find a reliable news source to validate it. I have integrity. I didn't do my due diligence and apologize.

But you made a statement and it is not validated. without that, it's not real.

Ok, that's reasonable.

The claim I made in the OP was (copied from the blog I linked to):

Trump’s supporters also perceive these protests as “unfair” because they claim there were no riots following Obama’s election.

According to conservatives on social media, “Republicans have jobs and responsibilities” and therefore couldn’t engage in civil disobedience to voice their discontent with the 2008 and 2012 elections. With this perception of the Obama elections and subsequent claims of “ Republican acceptance,” Trump supporters are now demanding the same “fairness” for Donald J. Trump’s presidency, “We sat through do nothing politics for 8 years, the least they can do is go shut up and sit in the corner for 8 themselves,” one Trump supporter explained.

However, these perceptions do not reflect what actually followed the election of our country’s first black president, much less the difference between why people are protesting Donald J. Trump’s presidency as compared to Barack Obama’s presidency.

Obama’s election in 2008 was preceded and followed by violent attacks and property destruction targeted against minorities.
​

So here are some links:
Anti-Obama Protest at University of Mississippi Turns Unruly
Guilty plea in Springfield church fire
Idaho students chant Obama threat on school bus
Obama election spurs race threats, crimes

Now, I'm going to say this about 2008 and the ways in which it differs from now:
In 2008 and 2012, the unrest was not as wide spread, was more in invidual acts around the country, but individual acts that added up to some pretty ugly stuff including a church burning and assaults but no large scale demonstrations, so I'll agree I was wrong to go with that comparison. Mea Culpa

There are some other differences though - between then and now - that ought to be part of the conversation.

McCain made a deliberate effort to calm flames from his supporters when the rhetoric started to go over the top throughout the campaign. Trump pumped it up and I think part of that is a reason why these protests are so charged, if you fan the flames like that right up to and through the election, how are you going to control them after the election - when someone HAS to lose? Do you honestly think Trump supporters would have quietly accepted it it after months of rhetoric about rigging and cheating? You had people threatening revolution, shooting, etc. At this point, it's all rhetoric and speculation and we'll never know.

Add to that, as soon as the protests started, what does Trump do? Tweets that they had a "fair and transparent" (because he won) and the Dems were bussing in paid protestors (again, a charge without evidence). That is not calming the flames, it's fanning them. Some of that might be the problem with Twitter - a medium not designed to convey nuance or much else either. He first lashed out at out at the protestors accusing them of being paid operatives then, the next day praising them for their passion and calling for unity.

Another point to consider - the question of has Hillary and Obama said and done enough to calm the protests? When I've looked over the articles, I've seen multiple moments, on various trips and talks, where Obama AND his supporters, such as Oprah Winfrey and Dave Chappelle, have called for unity, and for people to work with Mr. Trump and give him a chance. He has emphasized to his followers that a Trump Administration doesn't automatically mean a rejection of everything they've worked for. Obama has refused to criticize or talk about Trump's potential appointments or any aspects of the transition. Though not related to the protests, has met with foreign dignataries to assure them that their will be continuity with the Trump Administration. All this, together - is an effort to calm the flames and to try to reassure the people who supported him: unity not violence. I think that is sufficient unless things get really out of hand. So far, this is not the riots of the civil rights era, nor Rodney King nor even Fergeson. The protests are still by and large peaceful.

I'm not really sure how to respond to this post. it seems you are now pulling in the bullshit from the campaign. And friend, that's over and water under the dam and I don't care. You're right no conservative rallies or protests occurred after either victory for obummer. So again, the OP is not accurate. Just isn't. Take your lump and call it what you stated here, you took it at face value and it isn't true.

And again, I'm not sure what you think Trump can do with people shouting fk trump you're not my president while rioting and causing damage to other people's property and interfering with traffic and other peoples time.

it isn't his supporters, it is up to Hitlery and obummer to quiet the fools on the crybaby left. For you to impose that expectation on Trump is truly stupid.

You really can't seperate out the campaign from the post-election. Both sides have a responsibility here. And, let me point out - Trump has yet to denounce the outbreak in hate crime violence that has also occurred. Calling for unity from both sides is good, imo, and both sides HAVE done that.

BTW, the campaign is over so yes I don't see the need to go pull all of that violence. there is enough violence from your side after the election cycle ended that you should be ashamed and denounce them. you still haven't done that.

You're wrong. I've denounced it multiple times on threads regarding these protests.

Have you denounced the violence from YOUR side? Maybe you should be ashamed as well.

 

[jc456]

Most of the imbecilic leftards arrested in Oregon couldnt even be bothered to vote. This hypocrisy though, is typical of the left.

That appears to be yet another of the claims that has been debunked as "unproven": Most Trump Protesters Didn't Vote?

Why do you insist on spreading unproven or debunked claims such as this?

coyote, please, you're wrong again. reread your own link here let me pull out the piece for you:

"WHAT'S TRUE: An Oregon-based news outlet claimed it checked voter activity against a list of arrests and determined that a majority did not vote at all in the 2016 general election.

WHAT'S FALSE: The data omitted important variables; the information only included 112 people arrested in Portland and not all protesters in all anti-Trump demonstrations."
which means many of the arrested folks in Portland didn't vote. What's inaccurate?

She didn't say "Portland". She said Oregon.

Edited to add:

What she said was: "Most of the imbecilic leftards arrested in Oregon couldnt even be bothered to vote."

So here is another source: At least third of arrested anti-Trump protesters didn't vote

Even with that - 1/3 didn't vote that they know of.

isn't portland in oregon?

Portland is one city, in a state.

and they didn't vote, they weren't even residents and didn't vote. still not sure how that makes it wrong.

 

[Coyote]

mmm

Yes, most were: Orcinus: When Obama Was Elected: An Outpouring of Hate in 2008

No massive organized protests.

Ok, so you believe this is different?

Yes

"I suspect that there’s not a president in our history that hasn’t been subject to these protests," he answered. "So, I would not advise people who feel strongly or who are concerned about some of the issues that have been raised during the course of the campaign, I wouldn’t advise them to be silent." BHO

Trump supporter, 15, beaten during Rockville protest

"...A march of students in Rockville, Maryland, protesting the election of Donald Trump to the presidency turned violent on Wednesday morning as a teenager wearing one of the Trump campaigns "Make American Great Again" hats was beaten..."

"The group surrounded the teen, punching him repeatedly, then threw him to the ground and kicked him repeatedly in the ribs. It is not yet clear what led up to the incident, but Maj. Michael English with Rockville police said the victim was not the aggressor.

“They jumped him and beat him up pretty bad,” Max Stucky, a bystander who witnessed the attack, told WTOP. The group surrounded the teen, punching him repeatedly, then threw him to the ground and kicked him repeatedly in the ribs. It is not yet clear what led up to the incident, but Maj. Michael English with Rockville police said the victim was not the aggressor."

Supporting the right to demonstrate - free speech is not the same as supporting assault. Is that what you trying to claim here?

dudette, you can protest all fking year for all I care. Just don't impose your protest onto others. why is that so difficult for you libturds?

Oh, so if you don't agree with the protest's message it's "imposing" it onto others? Hey, they can protest all they want as long as it doesn't cross the legal line. Most presidents have had to suffer through that.

 

[Coyote]

That appears to be yet another of the claims that has been debunked as "unproven": Most Trump Protesters Didn't Vote?

Why do you insist on spreading unproven or debunked claims such as this?

coyote, please, you're wrong again. reread your own link here let me pull out the piece for you:

"WHAT'S TRUE: An Oregon-based news outlet claimed it checked voter activity against a list of arrests and determined that a majority did not vote at all in the 2016 general election.

WHAT'S FALSE: The data omitted important variables; the information only included 112 people arrested in Portland and not all protesters in all anti-Trump demonstrations."
which means many of the arrested folks in Portland didn't vote. What's inaccurate?

She didn't say "Portland". She said Oregon.

Edited to add:

What she said was: "Most of the imbecilic leftards arrested in Oregon couldnt even be bothered to vote."

So here is another source: At least third of arrested anti-Trump protesters didn't vote

Even with that - 1/3 didn't vote that they know of.

isn't portland in oregon?

Portland is one city, in a state.

and they didn't vote, they weren't even residents and didn't vote. still not sure how that makes it wrong.

1/3 is not "most".

 

[boedicca]

It is a complete sophistry to compare the random and few incidents of violence that occurred (most likely as part of some False Flag Operation) when Obama was elected to the wholesale Epic Whinge of the Participation Trophy Losers.

 

[Kosh]

what is that? It isn't a news story, it's some magazine. I said a news story, you know from a media source. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSBC, Fox, any fking main stream outlet. BTW, I laughed at that magazine piece. funny stuff, never said anything about rioting or people in the streets.

Nope no people in the street there.

You are scaring me. You have never seen an article in a magazine cover news? Jesus. How old ARE you?
We were talking about PROTESTS. I think everyone here has agreed the riots are wrong. And they were limited and appear to be over. I would call everything in that article a protest, even if they weren't in the streets..

Why haven't Obama and Hillary denounced the violence?
Answer: They are fascists who love violence.

Links have been provided earlier. I'm not repeating.

you have not provided any link that validated your OP not one.

Not my problem if you don't like the link.

Yes it is your problem when you provide a link that does not validate your far left religious comments!

Being a mod you should know better!

 

[peach174]

Obama’s election in 2008 was preceded and followed by violent attacks and property destruction targeted against minorities.

And months before the election, and years before it, there were thousands of such violent attacks, fights, property destruction against blacks, and even hundreds of murders. Usually committed against minorities by other minorities.

And since Obama's election, there have been hundreds and thousands more. The trend seems to have gradually increased for eight years.

And now the same people are rioting on college campuses and city streets, smashing windows, overturning cars, throwing firebombs at police, and all the rest.

The few dozen committed by Republican supporters pales by comparison.

Poor little liberals. Crying and squalling after receiving the biggest electoral defeat in living memory.

Why should anyone pay attention to you? Normal people know you'll just keep complaining and whining no matter what we say. Since you're no longer in a position to do harm to the country, there's no point in paying attention to you. You're just not worth the trouble.

This is not just the only reason out of many things on this subject, but I think the kids in college today doing this right now, are the same kids that were in elementray school being taught that rewards were for all so the losers could feel good about themselves.
The other and maybe the biggest at the root is Parents are no longer being Parents.
How many times have we heard this from our school teachers.
This is at the heart of many seats that were lost for the Dems since 2010.
They stopped listening to the people and only wanted their agendas.

 

[ding]

I believe what you are referring to were isolated incidents by individuals, not an organized protest like a million woman march, right?

Yes, most were: Orcinus: When Obama Was Elected: An Outpouring of Hate in 2008

No massive organized protests.

Ok, so you believe this is different?

Yes

Can you tell me how you believe it is different?

The difference is on two levels. On is in the reaction after the election - mass protests in a larger scale then we've seen for a while. The level of violence from these demonstrations as well, though it falls far short of what is being spread about it in social media - it's greater than prior recent elections.

The other is less tangible - the ugliness and the vitriole of the campaign itself, the deliberate fanning of flames and division, the incredible amount of false information/disinformation/fake news dumped into the campaign, the effect of Wikileaks, of Russian hacking, of Comey's last minute injection of the emails. You also have the Trump campaign's claims through out the campaign of "rigging" and "cheating" and "stealing". All together that sets the stage for a really toxic environment. I think people really believe that Trump won unfairly and, I strongly suspect if Clinton had won, Trump supporters would be feeling the same.

There is something I'm coming to realize. There is a lot of anger that has been generated and encouraged in this election cycle - it's not going to disappear overnight, when the election is over. It needs someplace to go. I think because of this you can't simply denounce the protests - they are a legitimate expression. As long as you don't go over into violence and property destruction. My initial reaction to it was - they need to grow up, accept the results and move on to 2018. But maybe that's not exactly realistic. People need to blow off steam - if they win they need to celebrate if they lose, likewise, the right to express their anger. Leadership recognizes that they need to allow this because if they just repress it - it may break out in a worse way later on. The caveate being it needs to stay within the law. I see this on these boards as moderator.

I don't ever remember an election cycle like this - never.

I believe we are past the point of no return. The only thing that will heal the war between the people is a major war with another country. Winter is coming.

 

[jc456]

sure it is, it's your integrity, BTW, I just deleted my post on the ambulance story because I couldn't find a reliable news source to validate it. I have integrity. I didn't do my due diligence and apologize.

But you made a statement and it is not validated. without that, it's not real.

Ok, that's reasonable.

The claim I made in the OP was (copied from the blog I linked to):

Trump’s supporters also perceive these protests as “unfair” because they claim there were no riots following Obama’s election.

According to conservatives on social media, “Republicans have jobs and responsibilities” and therefore couldn’t engage in civil disobedience to voice their discontent with the 2008 and 2012 elections. With this perception of the Obama elections and subsequent claims of “ Republican acceptance,” Trump supporters are now demanding the same “fairness” for Donald J. Trump’s presidency, “We sat through do nothing politics for 8 years, the least they can do is go shut up and sit in the corner for 8 themselves,” one Trump supporter explained.

However, these perceptions do not reflect what actually followed the election of our country’s first black president, much less the difference between why people are protesting Donald J. Trump’s presidency as compared to Barack Obama’s presidency.

Obama’s election in 2008 was preceded and followed by violent attacks and property destruction targeted against minorities.
​

So here are some links:
Anti-Obama Protest at University of Mississippi Turns Unruly
Guilty plea in Springfield church fire
Idaho students chant Obama threat on school bus
Obama election spurs race threats, crimes

Now, I'm going to say this about 2008 and the ways in which it differs from now:
In 2008 and 2012, the unrest was not as wide spread, was more in invidual acts around the country, but individual acts that added up to some pretty ugly stuff including a church burning and assaults but no large scale demonstrations, so I'll agree I was wrong to go with that comparison. Mea Culpa

There are some other differences though - between then and now - that ought to be part of the conversation.

McCain made a deliberate effort to calm flames from his supporters when the rhetoric started to go over the top throughout the campaign. Trump pumped it up and I think part of that is a reason why these protests are so charged, if you fan the flames like that right up to and through the election, how are you going to control them after the election - when someone HAS to lose? Do you honestly think Trump supporters would have quietly accepted it it after months of rhetoric about rigging and cheating? You had people threatening revolution, shooting, etc. At this point, it's all rhetoric and speculation and we'll never know.

Add to that, as soon as the protests started, what does Trump do? Tweets that they had a "fair and transparent" (because he won) and the Dems were bussing in paid protestors (again, a charge without evidence). That is not calming the flames, it's fanning them. Some of that might be the problem with Twitter - a medium not designed to convey nuance or much else either. He first lashed out at out at the protestors accusing them of being paid operatives then, the next day praising them for their passion and calling for unity.

Another point to consider - the question of has Hillary and Obama said and done enough to calm the protests? When I've looked over the articles, I've seen multiple moments, on various trips and talks, where Obama AND his supporters, such as Oprah Winfrey and Dave Chappelle, have called for unity, and for people to work with Mr. Trump and give him a chance. He has emphasized to his followers that a Trump Administration doesn't automatically mean a rejection of everything they've worked for. Obama has refused to criticize or talk about Trump's potential appointments or any aspects of the transition. Though not related to the protests, has met with foreign dignataries to assure them that their will be continuity with the Trump Administration. All this, together - is an effort to calm the flames and to try to reassure the people who supported him: unity not violence. I think that is sufficient unless things get really out of hand. So far, this is not the riots of the civil rights era, nor Rodney King nor even Fergeson. The protests are still by and large peaceful.

I'm not really sure how to respond to this post. it seems you are now pulling in the bullshit from the campaign. And friend, that's over and water under the dam and I don't care. You're right no conservative rallies or protests occurred after either victory for obummer. So again, the OP is not accurate. Just isn't. Take your lump and call it what you stated here, you took it at face value and it isn't true.

And again, I'm not sure what you think Trump can do with people shouting fk trump you're not my president while rioting and causing damage to other people's property and interfering with traffic and other peoples time.

it isn't his supporters, it is up to Hitlery and obummer to quiet the fools on the crybaby left. For you to impose that expectation on Trump is truly stupid.

You really can't seperate out the campaign from the post-election. Both sides have a responsibility here. And, let me point out - Trump has yet to denounce the outbreak in hate crime violence that has also occurred. Calling for unity from both sides is good, imo, and both sides HAVE done that.

BTW, the campaign is over so yes I don't see the need to go pull all of that violence. there is enough violence from your side after the election cycle ended that you should be ashamed and denounce them. you still haven't done that.

You're wrong. I've denounced it multiple times on threads regarding these protests.

Have you denounced the violence from YOUR side? Maybe you should be ashamed as well.

I don't condone any violence, any. Right now it's all the libturd crybabies. shame on their violence. I spit at them

 

[jc456]

mmm

Ok, so you believe this is different?

Yes

"I suspect that there’s not a president in our history that hasn’t been subject to these protests," he answered. "So, I would not advise people who feel strongly or who are concerned about some of the issues that have been raised during the course of the campaign, I wouldn’t advise them to be silent." BHO

Trump supporter, 15, beaten during Rockville protest

"...A march of students in Rockville, Maryland, protesting the election of Donald Trump to the presidency turned violent on Wednesday morning as a teenager wearing one of the Trump campaigns "Make American Great Again" hats was beaten..."

"The group surrounded the teen, punching him repeatedly, then threw him to the ground and kicked him repeatedly in the ribs. It is not yet clear what led up to the incident, but Maj. Michael English with Rockville police said the victim was not the aggressor.

“They jumped him and beat him up pretty bad,” Max Stucky, a bystander who witnessed the attack, told WTOP. The group surrounded the teen, punching him repeatedly, then threw him to the ground and kicked him repeatedly in the ribs. It is not yet clear what led up to the incident, but Maj. Michael English with Rockville police said the victim was not the aggressor."

Supporting the right to demonstrate - free speech is not the same as supporting assault. Is that what you trying to claim here?

dudette, you can protest all fking year for all I care. Just don't impose your protest onto others. why is that so difficult for you libturds?

Oh, so if you don't agree with the protest's message it's "imposing" it onto others? Hey, they can protest all they want as long as it doesn't cross the legal line. Most presidents have had to suffer through that.

do you know what the word impose means. It means walking down the fking middle of the street and disrupting traffic. unacceptable. breaking windows, unacceptable, so far the protests have been unacceptable. go to a park and shout obscenities until the cows go home I give two shits. interfere with traffic and business crosses the line.

 

[jc456]

coyote, please, you're wrong again. reread your own link here let me pull out the piece for you:

"WHAT'S TRUE: An Oregon-based news outlet claimed it checked voter activity against a list of arrests and determined that a majority did not vote at all in the 2016 general election.

WHAT'S FALSE: The data omitted important variables; the information only included 112 people arrested in Portland and not all protesters in all anti-Trump demonstrations."
which means many of the arrested folks in Portland didn't vote. What's inaccurate?

She didn't say "Portland". She said Oregon.

Edited to add:

What she said was: "Most of the imbecilic leftards arrested in Oregon couldnt even be bothered to vote."

So here is another source: At least third of arrested anti-Trump protesters didn't vote

Even with that - 1/3 didn't vote that they know of.

isn't portland in oregon?

Portland is one city, in a state.

and they didn't vote, they weren't even residents and didn't vote. still not sure how that makes it wrong.

1/3 is not "most".

semantics, come on, it was a fking a point. you're calling blogs news outlets. and you continued to fight that one. you're acting like a hypocrite.

 

[Grizz]

 

[peach174]

I believe what you are referring to were isolated incidents by individuals, not an organized protest like a million woman march, right?

Yes, most were: Orcinus: When Obama Was Elected: An Outpouring of Hate in 2008

No massive organized protests.

Ok, so you believe this is different?

Yes

Can you tell me how you believe it is different?

The difference is on two levels. On is in the reaction after the election - mass protests in a larger scale then we've seen for a while. The level of violence from these demonstrations as well, though it falls far short of what is being spread about it in social media - it's greater than prior recent elections.

The other is less tangible - the ugliness and the vitriole of the campaign itself, the deliberate fanning of flames and division, the incredible amount of false information/disinformation/fake news dumped into the campaign, the effect of Wikileaks, of Russian hacking, of Comey's last minute injection of the emails. You also have the Trump campaign's claims through out the campaign of "rigging" and "cheating" and "stealing". All together that sets the stage for a really toxic environment. I think people really believe that Trump won unfairly and, I strongly suspect if Clinton had won, Trump supporters would be feeling the same.

There is something I'm coming to realize. There is a lot of anger that has been generated and encouraged in this election cycle - it's not going to disappear overnight, when the election is over. It needs someplace to go. I think because of this you can't simply denounce the protests - they are a legitimate expression. As long as you don't go over into violence and property destruction. My initial reaction to it was - they need to grow up, accept the results and move on to 2018. But maybe that's not exactly realistic. People need to blow off steam - if they win they need to celebrate if they lose, likewise, the right to express their anger. Leadership recognizes that they need to allow this because if they just repress it - it may break out in a worse way later on. The caveate being it needs to stay within the law. I see this on these boards as moderator.

I don't ever remember an election cycle like this - never.

It has been building on boths sides now for twenty years and neither side listened.
So now this is the result.
Let's see how Trump and the repubs do, if not then maybe we will need another Revolution.
I think if we get back to stable long term solutions it will help to stablize the country.
They have been lawless for to long up there in D.C.

 

[ding]

Yes, most were: Orcinus: When Obama Was Elected: An Outpouring of Hate in 2008

No massive organized protests.

Ok, so you believe this is different?

Yes

Can you tell me how you believe it is different?

The difference is on two levels. On is in the reaction after the election - mass protests in a larger scale then we've seen for a while. The level of violence from these demonstrations as well, though it falls far short of what is being spread about it in social media - it's greater than prior recent elections.

The other is less tangible - the ugliness and the vitriole of the campaign itself, the deliberate fanning of flames and division, the incredible amount of false information/disinformation/fake news dumped into the campaign, the effect of Wikileaks, of Russian hacking, of Comey's last minute injection of the emails. You also have the Trump campaign's claims through out the campaign of "rigging" and "cheating" and "stealing". All together that sets the stage for a really toxic environment. I think people really believe that Trump won unfairly and, I strongly suspect if Clinton had won, Trump supporters would be feeling the same.

There is something I'm coming to realize. There is a lot of anger that has been generated and encouraged in this election cycle - it's not going to disappear overnight, when the election is over. It needs someplace to go. I think because of this you can't simply denounce the protests - they are a legitimate expression. As long as you don't go over into violence and property destruction. My initial reaction to it was - they need to grow up, accept the results and move on to 2018. But maybe that's not exactly realistic. People need to blow off steam - if they win they need to celebrate if they lose, likewise, the right to express their anger. Leadership recognizes that they need to allow this because if they just repress it - it may break out in a worse way later on. The caveate being it needs to stay within the law. I see this on these boards as moderator.

I don't ever remember an election cycle like this - never.

It has been building on boths sides now for twenty years and neither side listened.
So now this is the result.
Let's see how Trump and the repubs do, if not then maybe we will need another Revolution.
I think if we get back to stable long term solutions it will help to stablize the country.
They have been lawless for to long up there in D.C.

Yep. Our society has adopted the behaviors of our so-called leaders. I won't be holding my breath that anything short of civil or world war will change it.