|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 14, 2017 23:16:22 GMT
Nope. The US political system does not allow one to vote against anybody. That's too bad, because I did it anyway. I cast my vote for the only practical candidate who could keep her from winning the office. |
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Aug 14, 2017 23:25:36 GMT
Might have sold better if it hadn't taken direct public pressure from multiple senators and reps, even from his own party, to make him do so. Or maybe if it didn't come after his original, watery take saw the leader of Stormfront crowing about is tacit acceptance of their actions. The man didn't spend months getting votes by telling his crowds how black protesters "are so bad for this country, folks" and "they used to get hurt for this" only to want to turn around and edge out the same voter block he courted. Took some pressure. Glad he caved, though. He can't win. Did Obama ever condemn Islamic Terrorists by name? How much pressure did it take for anyone to name it? Trumps initial statement was a condemnation of the violence. The press spun it like usual. He makes additional remarks. Still not good enough. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Aug 14, 2017 23:27:01 GMT
tpfkar To be fair, do you think unchecked and un policed Antifa violence has anything to do with this? We saw this in the UK when that tosser killed a Muslim by running him over. Everyone rushed to blame Tommy Robinson, Brexit, Katie Hopkins etc. Nobody looked at the three terrorist attacks in the previous months. "Everybody" should hold Robinson, Hopkins, et. al., whoever, to what they actually say and whatever sh!t they actually stir and who they actually stir it against. Drive cars into crowds, I suppose. Well done, America. Just bravo.
 You guys are pure mental.
Canada, North Americas Sweden |
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Aug 14, 2017 23:42:42 GMT
We both know that there are multiple videos and testimonies online of the police doing nothing in the face of violence. We both know there are stories of the police being told to stand down in the face of left wing violence. This has happened in Europe as well. We've seen the organisers of Antifa calling for violence. We've seen people attacked. You know the reach social and alternate media has. You see the clip of Cenk Uger saying white people would become a minority in the US and the audience cheering? One video on YouTube has 750,000 views. Did we expect the right wing to do nothing? I would expect enraged demonstrators to throw an elbow where they can - not exactly a new thing. I wouldn't expect either side to suddenly drive a 2 ton vehicle into a crowd over that factor. Nor would I expect anyone to cite those instances with a "Whaddaya expect?" There's punches and then there's attempted mass murderer. You're dancing close to apologist. (Also, let's not do the "right wing" the disservice of lumping them in with their radicalized, violent extreme end. The vast majority of "right wingers" don't really see a history of police looking the other way for either side as a good case for running people down. They "didn't expect" that.) Dancing close to apologism, eh? It's called realism. Violence doesn't generally go from name calling to terrorist style attacks without escalation. Again, European prospective here, cars running into civilians is shockingly common place here now, with two such attacks in France this week. Americans have the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Your SCOTUS has deemed "hate speech" has 1st Amendment protection. This protest was entirely legal. The Left has consistently attacked both those rights and played identity politics for years. Why is anyone surprise than some white people are feeling marginalised? Why was no action taken against this organisation after the Berkeley riots? Patreon and Twitter still encourage them. As a Briton looking on, I'm amazed that the US has not seen this before now. I'm frankly astounded you haven't yet seen a shooting war at one of these protest and I still think you will. Nigel Farage said a while back that when politics fails people will turn to violence. You are now seeing this. The utter intolerance of the left in hearing opinions is causing violence. Call that apologism if you will, but it's ultimately true. You think if Antifa hadn't been advocating for violence and protesting everything they didn't agree with with for years this would still have happened? Like in the UK, you think had we not seen multiple Islamist attacks a Welsh bloke would have rammed a car into a group of Muslims? Does that excuse anyone's actions? Of course it doesn't. Should we ignore the primary problem to focus on the secondary one? Of course not. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Aug 14, 2017 23:50:07 GMT
tpfkar Dancing close to apologism, eh? It's called realism. Violence doesn't generally go from name calling to terrorist style attacks without escalation. Again, European prospective here, cars running into civilians is shockingly common place here now, with two such attacks in France this week. Americans have the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Your SCOTUS has deemed "hate speech" has 1st Amendment protection. This protest was entirely legal. The Left has consistently attacked both those rights and played identity politics for years. Why is anyone surprise than some white people are feeling marginalised? Why was no action taken against this organisation after the Berkeley riots? Patreon and Twitter still encourage them. As a Briton looking on, I'm amazed that the US has not seen this before now. I'm frankly astounded you haven't yet seen a shooting war at one of these protest and I still think you will. Nigel Farage said a while back that when politics fails people will turn to violence. You are now seeing this. The utter intolerance of the left in hearing opinions is causing violence. Call that apologism if you will, but it's ultimately true. You think if Antifa hadn't been advocating for violence and protesting everything they didn't agree with with for years this would still have happened? Like in the UK, you think had we not seen multiple Islamist attacks a Welsh bloke would have rammed a car into a group of Muslims? Does that excuse anyone's actions? Of course it doesn't. Should we ignore the primary problem to focus on the secondary one? Of course not. Yeah, things were just great for the white man here up until we we started showing "increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery".
1979 |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Aug 15, 2017 0:00:52 GMT
tpfkar You know the reach social and alternate media has. You see the clip of Cenk Uger saying white people would become a minority in the US and the audience cheering? One video on YouTube has 750,000 views. Did we expect the right wing to do nothing? Why should you or anybody care what the average color makeup is? Just what "wing" are you?
People saying he cucked are shills and kikes. He did the opposite of cuck. He refused to even mention anything to do with us. When reporters were screaming at him about White Nationalism he just walked out of the room. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2017 1:10:42 GMT
Nope. The US political system does not allow one to vote against anybody. That's too bad, because I did it anyway. No you didn't. Indeed. You cast a vote FOR a candidate. Not against one. Because that's impossible. |
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Aug 15, 2017 1:22:32 GMT
Oh, I thought you were asking for *my* thoughts on it. Not yours. Huh. Just the fact that it only occurred due to public pressure.  |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 15, 2017 1:22:47 GMT
That's too bad, because I did it anyway. No you didn't. Indeed. You cast a vote FOR a candidate. Not against one. Because that's impossible. No, it was done. I did it. And so did the talk radio host Jim Bohannon. And I have a feeling we weren't the only ones. You see, it's very simple. Voting for Donald Trump was the only way to keep Hillary Clinton from winning. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein were running for the office too, along with a couple of hundred others, but they were running on third-party tickets which have almost no chance in my country, and voting for one of them would have had much the same effect as not voting at all. By voting for Trump I voted for the only candidate who had a chance of winning the race over the one whom I didn't want to win, and that is the reason why I voted for him. Hope that helps. |
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Aug 15, 2017 1:27:04 GMT
Might have sold better if it hadn't taken direct public pressure from multiple senators and reps, even from his own party, to make him do so. Or maybe if it didn't come after his original, watery take saw the leader of Stormfront crowing about is tacit acceptance of their actions. The man didn't spend months getting votes by telling his crowds how black protesters "are so bad for this country, folks" and "they used to get hurt for this" only to want to turn around and edge out the same voter block he courted. Took some pressure. Glad he caved, though. He can't win. Did Obama ever condemn Islamic Terrorists by name? Nope, and we had a whole shit-fest about it on the old IMDB. His response was weak, I've said it before. HOWEVER - his reasoning was the same reason I wouldn't want Trump to term this "White Terrorism" - it's not whites, it's radical supremacist whites. When it comes to placing the blame for literal acts of murder, distinctions are important. It's almost as if the guy presided over a country full of hundreds of thousands of generation-long peaceful Muslim Americans alongside hundreds of thousands of state militia types willing to go-to with a gun and didn't want to see them all lumped together. Like he knew the kettle was ready to boil over and didn't want to turn up the heat the way Trump did. I think it was weak but I get it. I don't get being unable to even label this act terrorism on Trump's part, much less put the blame on the party that committed it. But... that's his voter block. Took him ages to even disown David Duke's support. Yeah, dude, you're not really speaking to reality here. Punches have been thrown by "both sides". Not vehicles. Give it time, though. |
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Aug 15, 2017 1:28:49 GMT
That's too bad, because I did it anyway. No you didn't. That moment when the sitting POTUS is so cringe-worthy his own voters have to insist they didn't vote for him.  |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 15, 2017 1:30:21 GMT
The timing is neither here nor there.[/quote] Oh, I thought you were asking for *my* thoughts on it. Not yours. Huh. Just the fact that it only occurred due to public pressure. [/quote] That's a supposition on your part, and a most predictable one. I haven't been to the Politics board yet but I have no doubt there are about twenty "progressives" spouting the same thing you are. I'm on vacation until the 21st, but I had to go into town today, and the speech was announced on the Internet just before I left. As I was driving our old friend Hannity was playing it on the radio and I knew there and then what you guys would say; didn't go far enough, insincere, only did it because of public pressure, waited to long to do it, etc. No way I expected any of you to say it was okay and that you're satisfied now. That isn't going to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Aug 15, 2017 1:31:14 GMT
I would expect enraged demonstrators to throw an elbow where they can - not exactly a new thing. I wouldn't expect either side to suddenly drive a 2 ton vehicle into a crowd over that factor. Nor would I expect anyone to cite those instances with a "Whaddaya expect?" There's punches and then there's attempted mass murderer. You're dancing close to apologist. (Also, let's not do the "right wing" the disservice of lumping them in with their radicalized, violent extreme end. The vast majority of "right wingers" don't really see a history of police looking the other way for either side as a good case for running people down. They "didn't expect" that.) Dancing close to apologism, eh? It's called realism. Violence doesn't generally go from name calling to terrorist style attacks without escalation. [/quote]That's correct. There was certainly escalation in his campaign rhetoric. Bomb plots and cars are the result. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2017 1:32:12 GMT
No you didn't. Indeed. You cast a vote FOR a candidate. Not against one. Because that's impossible. No, it was done. I did it. You can say it as often as you like. It's still not true. Voting for Donald Trump is what you did. That is not voting against Hillary Clinton. Your motivation is not at issue. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 15, 2017 1:33:17 GMT
No, it was done. I did it. You can say it as often as you like. It's still not true. Voting for Donald Trump is what you did. That is not voting against Hillary Clinton. Your motivation is not at issue. Then we'll just have to agree to disagree like civilized men. |
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Aug 15, 2017 1:35:24 GMT
He already addressed Charlottesville. The direct address of the white supremacist terrorism literally only came after a heap of public pressure. Get off Yewtewb and follow current events for a bit, then come back to the topic with some knowledge. You're offering up some herculean effort at defending the missteps of the "guy you didn't vote for" that you voted for. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 15, 2017 1:39:39 GMT
That moment when the sitting POTUS is so cringe-worthy his own voters have to insist they didn't vote for him. Laughing boy, if you would care to remember (which is something you don't care to do, so you won't), I went on public record in the pre-election days that I was voting for Trump, not because I particularly liked him, but because I particularly disliked Hillary Clinton. I also went on record as saying that I fully expected Hillary to win, but voting for Trump was all I could do against her, so I was going to do it. And I did it, and you're not going to make me guilt-trip about it. Too bad you had to settle for only three dead. Imagine what you could have done if twenty or thirty people had got it. You could have gone hog wild with numbers like those. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2017 1:39:40 GMT
You can say it as often as you like. It's still not true. Voting for Donald Trump is what you did. That is not voting against Hillary Clinton. Your motivation is not at issue. Then we'll just have to agree to disagree like civilized men. I'm right and you are wrong. You can disagree all you like, but that is the fact. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 15, 2017 1:43:27 GMT
He already addressed Charlottesville. The direct address of the white supremacist terrorism literally only came after a heap of public pressure. Get off Yewtewb and follow current events for a bit, then come back to the topic with some knowledge. You're offering up some herculean effort at defending the missteps of the "guy you didn't vote for" that you voted for. No defense is necessary. I thought he handled it as well as any POTUS could have. If I thought otherwise I would say so. Now, those missiles he fired at Syria......that was something I sharply disagreed with, and I even said so at the time, laughing boy. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 15, 2017 1:46:20 GMT
Then we'll just have to agree to disagree like civilized men. I'm right and you are wrong. You can disagree all you like, but that is the fact. Childish as always you are. I expected it, but you forgot to add, "Nanny-nanny-boo-boo," to your post like a typical immature little kid. |
|
