ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at low-info Boomers like my religions aunts. I have two questions:
a) Is anyone here who supports Trump bothered by lies like this?
b) Does anyone know what he's even talking about here? Like is there some grain of truth that he's embellishing on bigly?
I wouldn't consider the riots we're speaking of to have happened because of policy disagreements, and I don't know how it would be considered "political violence".
I also can't imagine that many happening in a short period of time again.
There likely would have been only a few isolated incidences as in past years were it not for the Covid related lockdowns. It had been several months of large groups of young people with no school to attend,
uh? it was rioting to defund the police and all that crap
The thing that appeared to have set off most of the rioting was the killing of black men by police officers. They weren't protesting the fact that police existed and they didn't have any particular political goal. Really they could have blown up about anything.
As I said, I think the only reason the were more than a few isolated incidents was because of the Covid lockdowns. I haven't heard that discussed much, but I would imagine that anyone who thought about it would agree. I wish there had been protests earlier against the lockdowns themselves, as I think they were mostly unconstitutional.
The thing that appeared to have set off most of the rioting was the killing of black men by police officers. They weren't protesting the fact that police existed and they didn't have any particular political goal. Really they could have blown up about anything.
As I said, I think the only reason the were more than a few isolated incidents was because of the Covid lockdowns. I haven't heard that discussed much, but I would imagine that anyo
and? that's the trigger then there are policy proposals and a national debate on the topic and they contribute to the debate by rioting to make their point. That's political violence 101.
They burned police stations and police cars
and? that's the trigger then there are policy proposals and a national debate on the topic and they contribute to the debate by rioting to make their point. That's political violence 101.
They burned police stations and police cars
The riots were before the "defund the police" idea, and I don't believe the rioters had any specific goal. It was a bunch of young people looking for an excuse to go crazy after lockdowns.
Again, I agree that the riots were absolutely wrong and should have been punished more severely. They were criminal. But they weren't treasonous.
The riots were before the "defund the police" idea, and I don't believe the rioters had any specific goal. It was a bunch of young people looking for an excuse to go crazy after lockdowns.
Again, I agree that the riots were absolutely wrong and should have been punished more severely. They were criminal. But they weren't treasonous.
FALSE
In the days after the killing of George Floyd, an extraordinary wave of mass protests erupted across the US, with demonstrators setting fire to police buildings and cars, shutting down freeways and bridges and storming city halls and neighborhoods.
Amid familiar chants of Black Lives Matter, a new slogan emerged: “Defund the police.”
FALSE
In the days after the killing of George Floyd, an extraordinary wave of mass protests erupted across the US, with demonstrators setting fire to police buildings and cars, shutting down freeways and bridges and storming city halls and neighborhoods.
Amid familiar chants of Black Lives Matter, a new slogan emerged: “Defund the police.”
Yes, this is just like I said. The riots were first, all that bad stuff happened, then the calls to "defund the police" emerged.
The political violence and the eversive riots went on for months during which the policy requests became louder and louder.
It was political violence , and it was directed by the democratic party.
This is America. We riot. If you don’t like it then you need to appease the population
We don’t have room here for fascist non protesting ideas like you have.
How do you feel about antifa?
The political violence and the eversive riots went on for months during which the policy requests became louder and louder.
It was political violence , and it was directed by the democratic party.
This is just silly. Where did you get your information that it was "directed by the democratic party"?
I experienced the protests and riots, in the city where they went on the longest, some in my neighborhood.
The people rioting here in Portland were not democrats. If anything they were anarchists.
I heard way more calls of "F... Ted Wheeler" (the democratic mayor) than of "Defund The Police".
Very few people in the Democratic party supported defunding the police, and none in the mainstream party leadership. You have mentioned VP Harris supporting a bail fund. Do you really think she supported defunding the police? She was known as a hard line prosecutor who put lots of people in jail. The left wing protest types hate her.
This is America. We riot. If you don’t like it then you need to appease the population
We don’t have room here for fascist non protesting ideas like you have.
How do you feel about antifa?
Aren't there way more riots in Europe than in the US? Paris seems to get shut down by protests nearly every year.
Just saw a video of farmers launching **** at govt offices from their tractors. We would shoot them for that here
Yes
0%. It’s just not going to happen. I think you all are grossly underestimating the will of the American people.
Maybe if Trump was persona non grata in the Republican Party after Jan 6 maybe. But given the party has deteriorated so much he genuinely had a shot. Like I don’t think we can expect republican senators, judges, governors and election officials were just 100% going to do the right thing when they all still support a guy who tried to overturn an election.
And it’s not the will of the people. Historically a minority of amoral conservatives can drag the country to battles of slavery, segregation abortion etc when most Americans have the common sense correct view on the subject.
This is just silly. Where did you get your information that it was "directed by the democratic party"?
I experienced the protests and riots, in the city where they went on the longest, some in my neighborhood.
The people rioting here in Portland were not democrats. If anything they were anarchists.
I heard way more calls of "F... Ted Wheeler" (the democratic mayor) than of "Defund The Police".
Very few people in the Democratic party support
What Luciom is doing here--treating the most extreme views expressed by a group member as indicative of the views of the group as a whole--is typical of modern political debate.
Republicans do this with Democrats all the time. In fairness, Democrats use the same tactic, but it reads a little differently because one of the main extremists on the Republican side is the former POTUS, and most of the party has bent the knee to him.
What Luciom is doing here--treating the most extreme views expressed by a group member as indicative of the views of the group as a whole--is typical of modern political debate.
Republicans do this with Democrats all the time. In fairness, Democrats use the same tactic, but it reads a little differently because one of the main extremists on the Republican side is the former POTUS, and most of the party has bent the knee to him.
The VP candidate at the time (Harris) raised money for bail for the rioters.
If you honestly believe that the odds of the protestors/rioters eventually succeeding in overthrowing the most powerful country in the history of the world either through your steps or any other sequence of events you need to stop drinking the kool-aid. The chance of this working was exactly 0% and anyone who says otherwise is in a fantasyland or was talked into believing it by someone who did so for political reasons.
Don’t believe e
Try reading this and understanding it. Their goal was not to directly overthrow the government. It was to delay certification of the election.
THEY SUCCEEDED.
That was their part in the coup attempt. The only thing that kept the whole plan from moving forward was that congress reconvened later that night to carry forward instead of waiting longer.
Saying they had no chance of doing something they weren't trying to do is stupid and irrelevant. They had a different goal than you the simpleton right wing talking heads imagine they did.
AND IT WORKED. Yes they had a chance to succeed BECAUSE THEY DID.
I think that people setting cars and buildings, including federal buildings, on fire and rioting for days in 50+ cities is A LOT worse than the jan 6 vegan shaman crowd (which as i said should all have been executed anyway).
I think no one should even think it is possible to riot and live to tell it.
It’s because u compare the incomparable.
It’s one event on January 6 with couple thousand people vs many millions of peoples throughout thousand of events over months duration ….
Just do a ratio of what 1k people actions on both cases and u would see how insanely serious January 6 compare to a measly couple thousands others during those protested u speak of .
Hell u can cut it by a million and it wouldn’t change much of the narrative …
How do you think that rioters in Portland or people holding signs and yelling outside the house of a SC justice, with the intention of just grabbing attention, are in any way comparable with people who broke into the seat of the federal government with the intention of preventing the transfer of the presidency?
I think having a group stand outside of a judges house to pressure him to change law is worse than what some of the 1/6ers did and less bad that what some of the other 1/6ers did.
I think riots should be handled with more force than they generally are in the US, but those rioters had no intention to prevent constitutional processes or do anything else that I would consider treasonous. People do the same thing in big cities when their team wins a sports championship.
If you want to say they were worse because there were more people involved or more destruction occurred then that's fine, but they were completely diffe
What city won a championship that resulted in fans trying to burn down government and police buildings, people getting severely hurt, people dying, businesses going under because the owner couldn't sell anything because his store was surrounded by violence for a year and the business and personal property damaged and destroyed was in the billions of dollars?
The riots and 1/6th are completely different beasts and I wasn't trying to say they were the same thing. While both had a 0% chance to overthrow the gov't the big difference was the scale of the riots vs 1/6. 1/6 had either 0 or 1 politician support it (depending on who you ask), had millions in damages, relatively few injuries and minimal property damage - where the riots led to quite a few deaths, too many injuries too count, billions in damages and fairly widespread support by one major political party.
