How Trump Incites Followers To Violence

[the_mother_thing]

Sorry, but being in someone's face does not allow for abusive behavior.

If your wife is yelling in your face, is it OK to hit her?

If the protestors at an abortion clinic are yellingnin your face, can I hit them? (This would be one of those "non liberal" protests you're talking about)

Sorry. No.

Mind you, I'm not condoning domestic violence in any way, but there is a HUGE difference between having a fight with your S/O (who you at least know) and a complete stranger approaching you suddenly in a tense environment, and yelling in your face when you're strolling into the venue minding your own business, trying to learn about a candidate; it's NOT a reasonable expectation ... well, it WASN'T a reasonable expectation until these nutty protestors started going off the rails making it the new norm.

A stranger who (in this case) wants to prevent your first amendment rights by suddenly & aggressively forcing his first amendment right on you is easily perceived as a threat if they approach you in a confrontational manner. 15 years ago, I had someone who I THOUGHT was innocently checking his mail in our community mail box stroll on up beside my car (which I was in and was parked by the mailbox at the time), but instead of seeing if he won Publishers Clearinghouse, he leveled a shotgun in my face to carjack me. So, is it reasonable for me to feel threatened by someone who approaches/engages me rather aggressively? Why yes, yes I do think that is reasonable.

I use good judgment and common sense, and don't usually go places where there is a high crime rate or likely occurrence of violence or fights, etc. And now, thanks to these whackadoo protestors, seems I can also cross off hearing a candidate speak (in person) on his positions since they - by THEIR own actions (the whackadoos) - have created yet another unsafe environment. So, they've now successfully further stifled the very rights they claim put them on the street to protest in the first place. Bunch of hypocritical troublemakers ... who NEED to be popped in the mouth!

 

[the_mother_thing]

What some of these protestors are doing is NOT respectful nor peaceful.

Frankly, the views espoused by Trump and his supporters are not deserving of respect. This goes beyond politics. This is not about taxes, or social programs, or a difference of opinion on religion. This is flat out bigotry, misogyny, and fascism, and EVERYONE should be screaming WE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS IN OUR COUNTRY.

To say Trump and/or his supporters don't deserve respect because you don't agree with them is wrong. I don't agree with Hillary or Bernie or Obama - and I really disrespect their positions - but I have enough respect for them as people and for those who may agree with them to NOT act like an ******* and disrupt their event.

Let the people going in to hear Trump speak decide for themselves; they're adults, they can make decisions, have a right to vote and have the RIGHT to hear a candidate speak just as much as protestors do to stand on the sidewalk and picket the event. Just because you don't like or agree with the candidate does NOT give you (not 'you' Lia) the right to shut that event down and prevent others from participating in it if they are not breaking the law somehow, which ... I'm not seeing how they/Trump was. And it CERTAINLY doesn't give you the right to break the law by disturbing the peace and acting aggressively toward people who are there for a legal & peaceful purpose.

Again, I don't like Trump (he disgusts me, to be honest), so I'm looking at it from a neutral vs "policy" stance.

 

[liaerfbv]

I respect lots of people with differing views than mine. I am clearly extremely liberal - yet I have respect for people who support Rubio, Kasich, Cruz, etc. even though I do not agree with them.

I think most reasonable people would agree there are beliefs that no matter who holds them or for what reason, they are wrong and dangerous. I do not respect white supremacists. I do not respect misogynists. I do not respect anti-Semites (et al). Once you align yourself with those beliefs, you have lost the right to demand respect, and I feel like it's our responsibility as American citizens to stand up and say - No, those beliefs are not okay. You do not have the right to disenfranchise other citizens with your hate.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I think most reasonable people would agree there are beliefs that no matter who holds them or for what reason, they are wrong and dangerous. I do not respect white supremacists. I do not respect misogynists. I do not respect anti-Semites (et al). Once you align yourself with those beliefs, you have lost the right to demand respect, and I feel like it's our responsibility as American citizens to stand up and say - No, those beliefs are not okay. You do not have the right to disenfranchise other citizens with your hate.

I don't respect those beliefs you noted either, but what I perceive to be "wrong & dangerous" may also differ from yours and/or the next person's. And people CAN object to those things if they feel that's what he represents ... peacefully ... outside the event on the sidewalk. Chant "dump Trump", wave signs, put stickers all over their (own) cars if they want. BUT disagreeing with someone who is NOT breaking the law does not give anyone the right to shut down someone else's right to gather and speak/be heard by others ... just like they don't have the right to shut down YOUR right to peacefully protest their "beliefs".

If the rally attendees don't like what they hear, if they agree with you that he's a misogynistic hateful ass who just wants to destroy America, that's their conclusion to draw. But it is their right to draw that conclusion; not have anyone else force their views on them and prevent them from forming their own conclusions about the candidate. You also do not have the right to disenfranchise other citizens from whatever it is they believe if they are NOT breaking the law.

 

[liaerfbv]

I think most reasonable people would agree there are beliefs that no matter who holds them or for what reason, they are wrong and dangerous. I do not respect white supremacists. I do not respect misogynists. I do not respect anti-Semites (et al). Once you align yourself with those beliefs, you have lost the right to demand respect, and I feel like it's our responsibility as American citizens to stand up and say - No, those beliefs are not okay. You do not have the right to disenfranchise other citizens with your hate.

I don't respect those beliefs you noted either, but what I perceive to be "wrong & dangerous" may also differ from yours and/or the next person's. And people CAN object to those things if they feel that's what he represents ... peacefully ... outside the event on the sidewalk. Chant "dump Trump", wave signs, put stickers all over their (own) cars if they want. BUT disagreeing with someone who is NOT breaking the law does not give anyone the right to shut down someone else's right to gather and speak/be heard by others ... just like they don't have the right to shut down YOUR right to peacefully protest their "beliefs".

If the rally attendees don't like what they hear, if they agree with you that he's a misogynistic hateful a$$ who just wants to destroy America, that's their conclusion to draw. But it is their right to draw that conclusion; not have anyone else force their views on them and prevent them from forming their own conclusions about the candidate. You also do not have the right to disenfranchise other citizens from whatever it is they believe if they are NOT breaking the law.

I am really struggling to respond to this because I see the points you are making, and in other contexts I would probably agree with you - but in this instance I cannot agree. What I consider wrong and dangerous in this situation is not based on what I believe but on the ideals on which the US was founded and Trump is clearly undermining. His campaign is not peaceful, his views are not peaceful, legal, or anything worth protecting - and that's not in my opinion, that's based on the laws of our country.

ETA to clarify, I think what crosses the line is when you try to use your hateful ideas to try and create legislation that would restrict the rights of others. Once you attempt to do that, you lose the right to complain about your rights being infringed upon.

 

[momhappy]

Sorry, but being in someone's face does not allow for abusive behavior.

If your wife is yelling in your face, is it OK to hit her?

If the protestors at an abortion clinic are yellingnin your face, can I hit them? (This would be one of those "non liberal" protests you're talking about)

Sorry. No.

Yes, I agree - I agreed with the bolded part of the previous post, but not the part about violence. I do not condone violence. Having said that, I do not agree with the actions of those "protesting" the Trump rallies.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I am really struggling to respond to this because I see the points you are making, and in other contexts I would probably agree with you - but in this instance I cannot agree. What I consider wrong and dangerous in this situation is not based on what I believe but on the ideals on which the US was founded and Trump is clearly undermining. His campaign is not peaceful, his views are not peaceful, legal, or anything worth protecting - and that's not in my opinion, that's based on the laws of our country.

I know when things are wrong in my gut or when my moral compass spins out of control, and I agree that there are LOTS of behaviors such as those you noted that fall into that category. Unfortunately, we don't all share the same values and ability to judge right from wrong. And people have been legislated to death already that it's sad we might almost need yet another law to dictate what common sense should inspire in some naturally. I'm failing to know though what Chump's spouting that is against the law. I don't listen to his nonsense or download podcasts of his musings, and if I have to hear him reference any "poll" one more time I will offer to pop HIM in the mouth too, but if he is spewing something that is - in fact - illegal, why is he not being charged with something?

Annnd my inner 'brat' would just like to point out that the right to own firearms for self-defense/protection - which I think you know I support - is also an ideal on which this country was founded, and it IS the law by virtue of its presence and location in the constitution. (ducking and running for cover )

 

[liaerfbv]

I know when things are wrong in my gut or when my moral compass spins out of control, and I agree that there are LOTS of behaviors such as those you noted that fall into that category. Unfortunately, we don't all share the same values and ability to judge right from wrong. And people have been legislated to death already that it's sad we might almost need yet another law to dictate what common sense should inspire in some naturally. I'm failing to know though what Chump's spouting that is against the law. I don't listen to his nonsense or download podcasts of his musings, and if I have to hear him reference any "poll" one more time I will offer to pop HIM in the mouth too, but if he is spewing something that is - in fact - illegal, why is he not being charged with something?

Annnd my inner 'brat' would just like to point out that the right to own firearms for self-defense/protection - which I think you know I support - is also an ideal on which this country was founded, and it IS the law by virtue of its presence and location in the constitution. (ducking and running for cover )

What he's saying isn't illegal, but many of the things he's saying he wants to do are illegal. He claims he will order soldiers to kill terrorist's families (even though that is illegal and a war crime). He claims he wants to go "above and beyond" waterboarding as and interrogation tactic, even though Congress barred those actions last year. First he said he would revoke the citizenship of natural-born children to non-citizens, then backpedaled when he realized how illegal that was. Just in general, he has no concept of the legality of any of his talking points and wants to create laws that restrict the rights of citizens based on his own prejudices. There's more, but those are the highlights off the top of my head.

And for the record, I do support the right to own guns... my objection is to the type, amount, and what kind of background check you have to go through to get them!

 

[the_mother_thing]

And for the record, I do support the right to own guns... my objection is to the type, amount, and what kind of background check you have to go through to get them!

I object to all the crazy background checks too! See, we CAN agree!

 

[liaerfbv]

And for the record, I do support the right to own guns... my objection is to the type, amount, and what kind of background check you have to go through to get them!

I object to all the crazy background checks too! See, we CAN agree!

It was bound to happen sooner or later!! That will teach me to post from my phone without proofreading.

 

[kenny]

I support fixing the Constitution and removing ALL guns from every American, except for the military and law enforcement.

Other countries have pulled their heads out of their @sses.
We can too.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I support fixing the Constitution and removing ALL guns from every American, except for the military and law enforcement.

Other countries have pulled their heads out of their @sses.
We can too.

Figure out how to keep the criminals from getting them first, then get back to me.

Personal protection from criminals & tyranny aside, guns serve a significant form of protection & purpose for people that cannot be replaced. People use them to fend off bears. Fisherman and hunters also use them to help put food on your table. There are programs where farmers are allowed to kill deer and other animals that decimate their crops which would either drive farmers out of business or drive up the costs of that produce. And in a lot of cases, those crop damage kills go to food banks to feed the hungry.

Sorry Kenny, guns aren't going anywhere in this country; not in our lifetime anyway.

 

[momhappy]

I support fixing the Constitution and removing ALL guns from every American, except for the military and law enforcement.

Other countries have pulled their heads out of their @sses.
We can too.

We are not "other countries" so making the comparison is apples to oranges.

 

[packrat]

Seal them borders first. Big moat or something. And make it worth taking notice "If I do X I'm going to be handed my ass on a silver platter" not "If I do X I'll get a pass so why should I care". I don't notice a whole mess of victim mentality going on in all those other countries either, and that's really something we have taught and learned to complete and utter perfection.

All things we've discussed until the weasel has popped.

 

[AGBF]

I know when things are wrong in my gut or when my moral compass spins out of control, and I agree that there are LOTS of behaviors such as those you noted that fall into that category. Unfortunately, we don't all share the same values and ability to judge right from wrong. And people have been legislated to death already that it's sad we might almost need yet another law to dictate what common sense should inspire in some naturally. I'm failing to know though what Chump's spouting that is against the law.

What he's saying isn't illegal, but many of the things he's saying he wants to do are illegal.

All the arguing back and forth between liaerfby and JCJ at this point in the thread seems to be about whether the content of what Mr. Trump says in his speeches is acceptable.

My answer is ts that clearly it is not. The man is a pig and he spews poison. (Mixed metaphor. Sorry.) Many things he espouses are ugly and illegal, some are war crimes. Many things he espouses are racist and misogynistic. I take a typical, liberal, ACLU attitude toward this, however. (The same one I do towards protesters at Trump rallies.)

That attitude can be summed up as:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,"

I believe that Mr. Trump has a First Amendmend right to speak, even if he says vile things with his right.

AGBF

 

[missy]

First amendment right doesn't apply carte blanche.
Hate speech, speech that is directed to inciting violence in others, etc is not protected.

For example, you cannot get up in the middle of a movie theater and yell fire. Also speech that advocates violence may be illegal as well. Defamatory speech also has its limits but I don't know the law on what applies and what does not apply but just wanting to say that no all speech is not protected under the constitution.

 

[Niel]

I support fixing the Constitution and removing ALL guns from every American, except for the military and law enforcement.

Other countries have pulled their heads out of their @sses.
We can too.

We are not "other countries" so making the comparison is apples to oranges.

Well, that's not really true.

It's comparing country to country.. So, comparing two like things.

 

[MarionC]

Did anyone read the article about the two young men who went to a Trump rally for fun [not Trump supporters] and were surprised that they were literally sickened by the thick atmosphere of hate?

Eckhart Tolle said that we all have a "pain body" that wants to be fed... The part of the mind that relishes the dark side, and Trump is feeding the dark side of people's hearts.
I would not want to be at one of those rallies and feel sad for those caught up in it.

 

[AGBF]

First amendment right doesn't apply carte blanche.
Hate speech, speech that is directed to inciting violence in others, etc is not protected.

For example, you cannot get up in the middle of a movie theater and yell fire. Also speech that advocates violence may be illegal as well. Defamatory speech also has its limits but I don't know the law on what applies and what does not apply but just wanting to say that no all speech is not protected under the constitution.

Perhaps I should have been more specific, but I thank you for pointing this out. I am referring to the kind of speech that advocates racism and misogyny in the general scheme of things, not the kind of speech that directs followers to take specific illegal action now. If Mr. Trump were to tell his followers to go outside and find some Muslims tonight and lynch them, that would be a direct call to perform an illegal act. It is akin to calling on supporters to murder doctors who perform abortions. I would not support that as a First Amendment right.

 

[missy]

First amendment right doesn't apply carte blanche.
Hate speech, speech that is directed to inciting violence in others, etc is not protected.

For example, you cannot get up in the middle of a movie theater and yell fire. Also speech that advocates violence may be illegal as well. Defamatory speech also has its limits but I don't know the law on what applies and what does not apply but just wanting to say that no all speech is not protected under the constitution.

Perhaps I should have been more specific, but I thank you for pointing this out. I am referring to the kind of speech that advocates racism and misogyny in the general scheme of things, not the kind of speech that directs followers to take specific illegal action now. If Mr. Trump were to tell his followers to go outside and find some Muslims tonight and lynch them, that would be a direct call to perform an illegal act. It is akin to calling on supporters to murder doctors who perform abortions. I would not support that as a First Amendment right.

Deb, I understood completely what you meant. Sorry, I wasn't directing my comments to anyone specifically. Just commenting generally. I don't agree with all protests however even when protected by the first amendment. For example I don't think it's ok for "pro-lifers" to get in the face of people going into abortion clinics. Not sure what is considered legal in that circumstance but sometimes I think those "rights" are protected a bit too much. IOW one has the freedom to spew hate and nastiness but yanno stay far away from me and where I need to go. Otherwise it feels very threatening/intimidating depending on the specifics.

 

[momhappy]

I support fixing the Constitution and removing ALL guns from every American, except for the military and law enforcement.

Other countries have pulled their heads out of their @sses.
We can too.

We are not "other countries" so making the comparison is apples to oranges.

Well, that's not really true.

It's comparing country to country.. So, comparing two like things.

No two countries are alike, so no, its not like comparing two like things (outside of the obvious, which is that they are both countries).

 

[momhappy]

I know when things are wrong in my gut or when my moral compass spins out of control, and I agree that there are LOTS of behaviors such as those you noted that fall into that category. Unfortunately, we don't all share the same values and ability to judge right from wrong. And people have been legislated to death already that it's sad we might almost need yet another law to dictate what common sense should inspire in some naturally. I'm failing to know though what Chump's spouting that is against the law.

What he's saying isn't illegal, but many of the things he's saying he wants to do are illegal.

All the arguing back and forth between liaerfby and JCJ at this point in the thread seems to be about whether the content of what Mr. Trump says in his speeches is acceptable.

My answer is ts that clearly it is not. The man is a pig and he spews poison. (Mixed metaphor. Sorry.) Many things he espouses are ugly and illegal, some are war crimes. Many things he espouses are racist and misogynistic. I take a typical, liberal, ACLU attitude toward this, however. (The same one I do towards protesters at Trump rallies.)

That attitude can be summed up as:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,"

I believe that Mr. Trump has a First Amendmend right to speak, even if he says vile things with his right.

AGBF

Unfortunately, I know a lot of folks who think Hillary is a pig who spews poison, so again, some of what this comes down to is the media. Is trump a pig? Absolutely, but the media has certainly helped to mold this election into what it has become.

 

[AGBF]

Unfortunately, I know a lot of folks who think Hillary is a pig who spews poison, so again, some of what this comes down to is the media. Is trump a pig? Absolutely, but the media has certainly helped to mold this election into what it has become.

If you have actually heard Trump call his followers to throw out protesters with a smirk and ask, "are we having fun?" as violence ensues and you think anything Hillary Clinton says from the platform is equivalent, I doubt you know one single person who thinks she is a pig of Trump's caliber. The media didn't make Mr. Trump a million times worse than Secretary Clinton. He did that. She sounds reasonable. He sounds like a ranting fascist. (As I said, I would protect his right to rant under the US Constitution, but I can speak out about it.)

Secretary Clinton was a Senator and a Secretary of State. Mr. Trump bankrupted casinos in Atlantic City.

 

[Niel]

I support fixing the Constitution and removing ALL guns from every American, except for the military and law enforcement.

Other countries have pulled their heads out of their @sses.
We can too.

We are not "other countries" so making the comparison is apples to oranges.

Well, that's not really true.

It's comparing country to country.. So, comparing two like things.

No two countries are alike, so no, its not like comparing two like things (outside of the obvious, which is that they are both countries).

yes america is a special flower

 

[liaerfbv]

Unfortunately, I know a lot of folks who think Hillary is a pig who spews poison, so again, some of what this comes down to is the media. Is trump a pig? Absolutely, but the media has certainly helped to mold this election into what it has become.

If you have actually heard Trump call his followers to throw out protesters with a smirk and ask, "are we having fun?" as violence ensues and you think anything Hillary Clinton says from the platform is equivalent, I doubt you know one single person who thinks she is a pig of Trump's caliber. The media didn't make Mr. Trump a million times worse than Secretary Clinton. He did that. She sounds reasonable. He sounds like a ranting fascist. (As I said, I would protect his right to rant under the US Constitution, but I can speak out about it.)

Secretary Clinton was a Senator and a Secretary of State. Mr. Trump bankrupted casinos in Atlantic City.

I agree with everything you have said here. However to me, there is a distinct difference between stating your opinion (his ranting, etc.) which should be protected speech, and campaigning on a platform of discrimination that incites violence towards and stripping rights of "others." How far does the 1st amendment go? We've never had a candidate who openly ran a campaign of hate before to my knowledge.

 

[ksinger]

Unfortunately, I know a lot of folks who think Hillary is a pig who spews poison, so again, some of what this comes down to is the media. Is trump a pig? Absolutely, but the media has certainly helped to mold this election into what it has become.

If you have actually heard Trump call his followers to throw out protesters with a smirk and ask, "are we having fun?" as violence ensues and you think anything Hillary Clinton says from the platform is equivalent, I doubt you know one single person who thinks she is a pig of Trump's caliber. The media didn't make Mr. Trump a million times worse than Secretary Clinton. He did that. She sounds reasonable. He sounds like a ranting fascist. (As I said, I would protect his right to rant under the US Constitution, but I can speak out about it.)

Secretary Clinton was a Senator and a Secretary of State. Mr. Trump bankrupted casinos in Atlantic City.

I agree with everything you have said here. However to me, there is a distinct difference between stating your opinion (his ranting, etc.) which should be protected speech, and campaigning on a platform of discrimination that incites violence towards and stripping rights of "others." How far does the 1st amendment go? We've never had a candidate who openly ran a campaign of hate before to my knowledge.

Not openly, no. But listen to this little gem from 1981. Just in case anyone ever thought that the GOP was unaware of what they were doing. They've been cynically stoking hate and channeling hate for for a long long time now. Trump is just the apotheosis of the GOP's methods. They've been creating him for a lot longer than the 24-hour news cycle OR the internet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_8E3ENrKrQ

 

[momhappy]

Unfortunately, I know a lot of folks who think Hillary is a pig who spews poison, so again, some of what this comes down to is the media. Is trump a pig? Absolutely, but the media has certainly helped to mold this election into what it has become.

If you have actually heard Trump call his followers to throw out protesters with a smirk and ask, "are we having fun?" as violence ensues and you think anything Hillary Clinton says from the platform is equivalent, I doubt you know one single person who thinks she is a pig of Trump's caliber. The media didn't make Mr. Trump a million times worse than Secretary Clinton. He did that. She sounds reasonable. He sounds like a ranting fascist. (As I said, I would protect his right to rant under the US Constitution, but I can speak out about it.)

Secretary Clinton was a Senator and a Secretary of State. Mr. Trump bankrupted casinos in Atlantic City.

I do know people who think Hillary is as bad as Trump - just in very different ways. I'm not comparing the two or saying that they are equivalent. I'm simply saying that I know many people who hate Hillary as much as they hate Trump. There are a lot of things that the media has not been forthcoming about when it comes to Hillary. I agree with you that she comes off as quite reasonable (whereas Trump does not), but I am certain that she is anything but reasonable.... I wouldn't trust either of them and I sure as heck wouldn't vote for them either and I know lots of people who feel that way.

 

[momhappy]

I support fixing the Constitution and removing ALL guns from every American, except for the military and law enforcement.

Other countries have pulled their heads out of their @sses.
We can too.

We are not "other countries" so making the comparison is apples to oranges.

Well, that's not really true.

It's comparing country to country.. So, comparing two like things.

No two countries are alike, so no, its not like comparing two like things (outside of the obvious, which is that they are both countries).

yes america is a special flower

Nope, not special, just different and when it comes to firearms, we have our own unique set of challenges.

 

[Niel]

I support fixing the Constitution and removing ALL guns from every American, except for the military and law enforcement.

Other countries have pulled their heads out of their @sses.
We can too.

We are not "other countries" so making the comparison is apples to oranges.

Well, that's not really true.

It's comparing country to country.. So, comparing two like things.

No two countries are alike, so no, its not like comparing two like things (outside of the obvious, which is that they are both countries).

yes america is a special flower

Nope, not special, just different and when it comes to firearms, we have our own unique set of challenges.

Right, different because we won't pass gun reform.

 

[monarch64]

Guys, don't worry. Anonymous has this Trump thing under control.

http://www.engadget.com/2016/03/14/anonymous-declares-total-war-on-donald-trump/