Donald Trump

[Gameface]

I'd take an unqualified "empty suit" over Donald without hesitation.

As for Cruz vs Trump? Well, that's harder. I'd live with Cruz, but I wouldn't like it. Crazy to think I'd want a Christian conservative over anyone, ever. The marriage of religion and political ideology is pretty deplorable to me, and threatening to me. But Nothing is worse than what Trump is selling.

 

[Jamezz]

I tire of the false equivalence. It's like everytime I talk to my Tea Bagger brother about what's happening with the Republicans, and how it is being controlled by its more radical elements, he always responds with something like, "Well, yeah, the left is just as bad. What about George Soros? What about Al Sharpton? What about Black Lives Matter? Etc." The fact that NONE of these individuals or movements have remotely near the power over the Democratic party, its policies, or its candidates as the Tea Party, Evangelicals, and now proto - authoritarians who support Trump, is of no consequence. Rather than acknowledge the obvious problem of the radical tail wagging the Republican dog, to him Al Sharpton is equivalent to Donald Trump. Un, f'n believable.

Whenever somebody on the right raises Al Sharpton as a point in comparison, implying that Al Sharpton has some mystical control over the Left, that is a clear sign that there is absolutely nothing to be gained by talking with this person. It reminds me of trying to debate people from other Christian sects on my mission when they quoted "Revelation 22: 18-19 about not adding to the Bible, it was a clear sign to me that talking to this person would be absolutely fruitless. It is that sort of unthinking, and uncritical use of a standard and dumb talking point that clearly signals that you are dealing with someone who's not serious about trying to understanding anything.

I read "You're worse people than us!"

I'm so tired of the polarized childish arguments. Follow the money son.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I read "You're worse people than us!"

I'm so tired of the polarized childish arguments. Follow the money son.

Well, that's certainly a sub-text.

Yep, things ARE polarized, and one side bears the overwhelming responsibility for it. It's hardly childish to point out, and express concern, about the unqualified and dangerous proto - authoritarians and religious zealots the Republicans have put forward for the highest office in the land. Were the Republicans putting forward candidates of substance, interested in the messy process of governing, then things would be different. But they haven't so it isn't.

I believe strongly in the value of the two-party system, assuming both sides make a good faith effort to govern. No side has all the answers (up until only recently I've voted Republican almost as much as Democrat), but the scales have become unbalanced. To bring things back to balance, either the Republicans need to break free of the dominance their unhinged base has on the party, or it needs to blow the thing up and start again. The status guo is not sustainable; it will break eventually under the weight of the ideological inflexibility of the doctrinaire right. In my view, the sooner the better before more damage is done than later, when there is even greater potential for lasting damage.

 

[Stoked]

Well, that's certainly a sub-text.

Yep, things ARE polarized, and one side bears the overwhelming responsibility for it. It's hardly childish to point out, and express concern, about the unqualified and dangerous proto - authoritarians and religious zealots the Republicans have put forward for the highest office in the land. Were the Republicans putting forward candidates of substance, interested in the messy process of governing, then things would be different. But they haven't so it isn't.

I believe strongly in the value of the two-party system, assuming both sides make a good faith effort to govern. No side has all the answers (up until only recently I've voted Republican almost as much as Democrat), but the scales have become unbalanced. To bring things back to balance, either the Republicans need to break free of the dominance their unhinged base has on the party, or it needs to blow the thing up and start again. The status guo is not sustainable; it will break eventually under the weight of the ideological inflexibility of the doctrinaire right. In my view, the sooner the better before more damage is done than later, when there is even greater potential for lasting damage.

I disagree. It has been going on long enough that trying to place majority blame is simply wasted effort IMO. They both deserve mountains of blame. Enough to make pointing fingers pointless.

I agree that the status quo is not sustainable. I am hoping that a Trump and Clinton primary wins lead to mass revolt to the two party system. There are to many complex issues to fit everyone onto two groups.

The Rs are not capable of fixing this alone because they are not the sole cause of the problem.

I know we won't agree and not really interested in a debate. Just throwing out my .02

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I disagree. It has been going on long enough that trying to place majority blame is simply wasted effort IMO. They both deserve mountains of blame. Enough to make pointing fingers pointless.

I agree that the status quo is not sustainable. I am hoping that a Trump and Clinton primary wins lead to mass revolt to the two party system. There are to many complex issues to fit everyone onto two groups.

The Rs are not capable of fixing this alone because they are not the sole cause of the problem.

I know we won't agree and not really interested in a debate. Just throwing out my .02

Well my friend, your .02 is always appreciated.

 

[Stoked]

Well my friend, your .02 is always appreciated.

As is yours. I enjoy reading your takes.

 

[fishonjazz]

I'd take an unqualified "empty suit" over Donald without hesitation.

As for Cruz vs Trump? Well, that's harder. I'd live with Cruz, but I wouldn't like it. Crazy to think I'd want a Christian conservative over anyone, ever. The marriage of religion and political ideology is pretty deplorable to me, and threatening to me. But Nothing is worse than what Trump is selling.

Yep
Anyone but trump

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I read "You're worse people than us!"

I'm so tired of the polarized childish arguments. Follow the money son.

Well said.

 

[Deleted member 848]

I disagree. It has been going on long enough that trying to place majority blame is simply wasted effort IMO. They both deserve mountains of blame. Enough to make pointing fingers pointless.

I agree that the status quo is not sustainable. I am hoping that a Trump and Clinton primary wins lead to mass revolt to the two party system. There are to many complex issues to fit everyone onto two groups.

The Rs are not capable of fixing this alone because they are not the sole cause of the problem.

I know we won't agree and not really interested in a debate. Just throwing out my .02

the proof is in the pudding. The GOP is on the verge of collapse, while the Democrats show no signs of weakening. 2 party system is flawed-- but to consider the recent actions of those affiliated with the GOP as equal to those with the Dems doesn't really hold any water I'm afraid.

America is about to go 12 years without any Republican rule, I'm afraid.

 

[Deleted member 848]

with that said, go Bernie!

 

[Gameface]

the proof is in the pudding. The GOP is on the verge of collapse, while the Democrats show no signs of weakening.

Enjoy that swing of the pendulum. Ten years ago the Republicans had their **** together and the Democrats were infighting and seemed like a lost cause.

 

[Stoked]

the proof is in the pudding. The GOP is on the verge of collapse, while the Democrats show no signs of weakening. 2 party system is flawed-- but to consider the recent actions of those affiliated with the GOP as equal to those with the Dems doesn't really hold any water I'm afraid.

America is about to go 12 years without any Republican rule, I'm afraid.

Enjoy that swing of the pendulum. Ten years ago the Republicans had their **** together and the Democrats were infighting and seemed like a lost cause.

And there it is.

Edit: For the record Dala, I am not defending the Rs. Their behavior is shameful, damaging and disgraceful. Shame on them. But the dissatisfaction with the political parties and their games goes far past "recently".

 

[Red]

I am anti Trump and I think his rhetoric should disqualify him from being president, but the fact you are purporting above does not seem at all inescapable to me. I am aware of an old man who threw a punch. I saw some confrontations inside the arena after the cancellation of the Chicago event but it was unclear to me who was initiating the violence and who was defending themselves in those situations. Please show me the evidence that his supporters keep beating people up at his rallies.

These are from the links I mentioned in the previous post.

This is the first incident I remember. Although I saw the video at the time, last November, it has been removed from this link, although you may be able to find it elsewhere:

https://www.vox.com/2015/11/22/9778330/trump-protester-rally-violent

And this incident involving a Latino protester. The original video is longer, but this copy cuts short before you see the guy getting kicked after being dragged across the floor:

https://mobile.twitter.com/TUSK81/status/657957146529673216?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

More complete clip at bottom of this page. Crowd erupts in cheers for the guy who dragged and kicked the protester:

https://www.rawstory.com/2015/10/wa...-latino-protester-while-others-chant-usa-usa/

This one involves a black woman being shoved by several white men, and the vet pushing her out said afterwards that he was ashamed of himself. Interesting to listen to Trump as this is happening:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FXq_WBV3_YI

Guy in the baseball cap in the video above is a member of a white supremacist group:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9LpolkCBVO8

And another incident:

https://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/12/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protestor-light-on-fire

I think these provide a view of the atmosphere at least. You talk to your supporters like it's wrestlemania, and maybe no surprise.

I found that first video. And I was mistaken. He was not beaten. This was the incident after which Trump said "maybe he deserved to be roughed up". It is the second video at this link:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/trump-violence

I understand the argument exists that goes like "How about just avoid attending these rallies"? Come this summer, if Trump is the nominee, best to keep people well apart, for everyone's safety. As was mentioned earlier, the most dangerous political act of 2016 is protesting at a Trump rally. The problem is anger. Anger from Trump supporters toward the issues Trump focuses on, and anger toward the establishment, and toward protesters that are defined the way Trump chooses to define them. It's his call to talk as he does, he owns his words.

But anger is the issue with the protesters as well. Anger if they feel Trump is marginalizing them, anger at the specter of a fascist tending candidate. They hear his words on TV, and their anger takes them to his rallies.

And for his supporters, this anger will not go away if Trump loses. But maybe it has to be. And maybe we'll just get through it. For sure the divisiveness of recent years seems to be coming to a head. Hope we have a cooler then normal summer.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OJLpxJ9ucCM

And Joe, I have not provided you with the evidence you asked for. Most of these incidents are at best "assaults" at Trump rallies, not "beatings". An attack on a homeless illegal was attributed to two guys who claimed inspiration from Trump words, but not at a rally, and another protester was sucker punched by security outside a Trump property.

 

[Jamezz]

I'm gonna throw something here, chew on this for a moment. The establishment is scared of Trump and scared of Sanders. Now imagine a Trump-Sanders ticket, that would be their worst nightmare. With Trump aiming for ending international free trade by heavily taxing imported products and Sanders openly declaring an economic war against "the 1%". Both these nationalist and anti-banking cartel views are not well received by what we call the establishment I bet.

Which better way of crushing both sides than confronting them. Something stinks and it's not one of MeloJazzKiller's threads. Thoughts please.

 

[Gameface]

I fondly remember McCain taking the microphone away from a woman who said they can't trust Obama because he's a Muslim. McCain said that wasn't true and that Obama was a good man.

Didn't seem exceptional at the time.

 

[Miggs]

Yep, let's send all the illegals back to Mexico. Because millions of whities will just run to line up to take their jobs they've been doing that this country depends on.

 

[The Midnight]

Rubio finally drops out... can't say I didn't see it coming....

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I'm gonna throw something here, chew on this for a moment. The establishment is scared of Trump and scared of Sanders. Now imagine a Trump-Sanders ticket, that would be their worst nightmare. With Trump aiming for ending international free trade by heavily taxing imported products and Sanders openly declaring an economic war against "the 1%". Both these nationalist and anti-banking cartel views are not well received by what we call the establishment I bet.

Which better way of crushing both sides than confronting them. Something stinks and it's not one of MeloJazzKiller's threads. Thoughts please.

Both of candidates represent an electorate that is extremely angry with the status quo, but their solutions are not even slightly compatible with one another. What I wish they would do, though, is stand side by side in front of the American people and declare that the violence must end and that we need to work together. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

These are from the links I mentioned in the previous post.

This is the first incident I remember. Although I saw the video at the time, last November, it has been removed from this link, although you may be able to find it elsewhere:

https://www.vox.com/2015/11/22/9778330/trump-protester-rally-violent

And this incident involving a Latino protester. The original video is longer, but this copy cuts short before you see the guy getting kicked after being dragged across the floor:

https://mobile.twitter.com/TUSK81/status/657957146529673216?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

More complete clip at bottom of this page. Crowd erupts in cheers for the guy who dragged and kicked the protester:

https://www.rawstory.com/2015/10/wa...-latino-protester-while-others-chant-usa-usa/

This one involves a black woman being shoved by several white men, and the vet pushing her out said afterwards that he was ashamed of himself. Interesting to listen to Trump as this is happening:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FXq_WBV3_YI

Guy in the baseball cap in the video above is a member of a white supremacist group:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9LpolkCBVO8

And another incident:

https://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/12/donald-trump-black-lives-matter-protestor-light-on-fire

I think these provide a view of the atmosphere at least. You talk to your supporters like it's wrestlemania, and maybe no surprise.

I found that first video. And I was mistaken. He was not beaten. This was the incident after which Trump said "maybe he deserved to be roughed up". It is the second video at this link:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/trump-violence

I understand the argument exists that goes like "How about just avoid attending these rallies"? Come this summer, if Trump is the nominee, best to keep people well apart, for everyone's safety. As was mentioned earlier, the most dangerous political act of 2016 is protesting at a Trump rally. The problem is anger. Anger from Trump supporters toward the issues Trump focuses on, and anger toward the establishment, and toward protesters that are defined the way Trump chooses to define them. It's his call to talk as he does, he owns his words.

But anger is the issue with the protesters as well. Anger if they feel Trump is marginalizing them, anger at the specter of a fascist tending candidate. They hear his words on TV, and their anger takes them to his rallies.

And for his supporters, this anger will not go away if Trump loses. But maybe it has to be. And maybe we'll just get through it. For sure the divisiveness of recent years seems to be coming to a head. Hope we have a cooler then normal summer.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OJLpxJ9ucCM

And Joe, I have not provided you with the evidence you asked for. Most of these incidents are at best "assaults" at Trump rallies, not "beatings". An attack on a homeless illegal was attributed to two guys who claimed inspiration from Trump words, but not at a rally, and another protester was sucker punched by security outside a Trump property.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of all of these. No doubt that Trump's rhetoric deserves a lot of the blame. It still seems to me that the Trump protestors also deserve a lot of blame. If protesters were behaving in a similar manner at Democratic events I don't think it would go over well at all.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

the proof is in the pudding. The GOP is on the verge of collapse, while the Democrats show no signs of weakening. 2 party system is flawed-- but to consider the recent actions of those affiliated with the GOP as equal to those with the Dems doesn't really hold any water I'm afraid.

America is about to go 12 years without any Republican rule, I'm afraid.

Yep, I agree (multi-party systems have their flaws as well, and I'm by no means convinced they're better than a two-party system, e.g., the latter has historically tended to push national parties toward the center, while the former doesn't necessarily reward centrism). As for those arguing that we should avoid the blame game, my response is why? The problem cannot be fixed unless we, first, acknowledge the problem exists and, second, figure out what caused the problem. The Democrats didn't cause this problem, the Republicans did. It does absolutely no good for anyone wishing to restore balance, sanity, and a commitment to governing to our two party system to engage in, what essentially boils down to, "I'm know I'm bad but so are you," particularly when, as measured by degrees, the one is very much worse than the other at the present time. (Yes, Democrats and the Left has its share of unhinged dogmatists, but they are not controlling the party, as are the unhinged dogmatists among the Republicans and the Right.)

The suggestion that we should just avoid being open about where the blame lies here strikes me as a similar type of argument that, although racism exists and remains a significant social problem, we should just move on and avoid talking about it. Neither approach will lead to a true introspective reckoning or change.