Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Are trying to insinuate that none of these incidents would have occurred if we would have had a different president?
Read the information and draw your own conclusions. But I already know what your conclusions are. Anything anti-Trump is a falsehood. Anything pro-Trump is right-on.
Read the information and draw your own conclusions. But I already know what your conclusions are. Anything anti-Trump is a falsehood. Anything pro-Trump is right-on.
Why don't you just answer the question instead of trying to draw my conclusions for me.
Why don't you just answer the question instead of trying to draw my conclusions for me.
To answer your rather ridiculous question "Are (you) trying to insinuate that none of these incidents would have occurred if we would have had a different president?" No.
Most are missing my main point. Ellen made a post, an obvious political post, pointing out harassment of a Trump supporter by someone we all assume is NOT a Trump supporter. That is fine. Undoubtedly there have been many such instances in which Trump supporters have been harassed.
But why make the post? Obviously to incite a level of anger against those who harass Trump supporters. My post was simply to point out that I could make similar posts that point out violence by Trump supporters:
"Departing from the prepared remarks about his successes as president, Trump chided the press for refusing to “acknowledge what we’ve done and how well we’re doing it.” He continued: “I don’t think I’ve had a good story in years. I don’t get good press.” Citing Rasmussen polling purporting to show that a majority approve of his job performance, the president insisted that this feat was even more impressive because it was achieved amid consistent negative media coverage. A few minutes later, a man in a red MAGA hat screaming anti-media profanities attacked a BBC News cameraman. As the unruly attacker was detained by rally security, the crowd seemed to rally to his defense, chanting “CNN sucks” as he was ushered away."
There are a couple of truths that people who participate on this forum should understand. Those who support Trump will not be dissuaded from voting for Trump in 2020 based on any comments made on this forum. Likewise, those who do not support Trump will not be dissuaded from voting against Trump in 2020 based on any comments made on this forum. The die has already been cast.
It's fun discussing issues and supporting the candidate of our choice. Don't take it too seriously. Sometimes I regretfully do.
To answer your rather ridiculous question "Are (you) trying to insinuate that none of these incidents would have occurred if we would have had a different president?" No.
Most are missing my main point. Ellen made a post, an obvious political post, pointing out harassment of a Trump supporter by someone we all assume is NOT a Trump supporter. That is fine. Undoubtedly there have been many such instances in which Trump supporters have been harassed.
But why make the post? Obviously to incite a level of anger against those who harass Trump supporters. My post was simply to point out that I could make similar posts that point out violence by Trump supporters:
"Departing from the prepared remarks about his successes as president, Trump chided the press for refusing to “acknowledge what we’ve done and how well we’re doing it.” He continued: “I don’t think I’ve had a good story in years. I don’t get good press.” Citing Rasmussen polling purporting to show that a majority approve of his job performance, the president insisted that this feat was even more impressive because it was achieved amid consistent negative media coverage. A few minutes later, a man in a red MAGA hat screaming anti-media profanities attacked a BBC News cameraman. As the unruly attacker was detained by rally security, the crowd seemed to rally to his defense, chanting “CNN sucks” as he was ushered away."
There are a couple of truths that people who participate on this forum should understand. Those who support Trump will not be dissuaded from voting for Trump in 2020 based on any comments made on this forum. Likewise, those who do not support Trump will not be dissuaded from voting against Trump in 2020 based on any comments made on this forum. The die has already been cast.
It's fun discussing issues and supporting the candidate of our choice. Don't take it too seriously. Sometimes I regretfully do.
I don't think my question was ridiculous at all. If Donald Trump is the cause for people lashing out at one another it just proves how divided this country really is. It's not Trump's fault its the people's fault. This country was divided when Obama was president but it wasn't that obvious because the Left was content with Obama and the Right didn't go on character attacks against Obama supporters. Liberals are immature and they think their ideas are realistic any one or anything against their world view they attack with racism, Homophobic, Misogynist. People who think this way are basically crazy.
I don't think my question was ridiculous at all. If Donald Trump is the cause for people lashing out at one another it just proves how divided this country really is. It's not Trump's fault its the people's fault. This country was divided when Obama was president but it wasn't that obvious because the Left was content with Obama and the Right didn't go on character attacks against Obama supporters. Liberals are immature and they think their ideas are realistic any one or anything against their world view they attack with racism, Homophobic, Misogynist. People who think this way are basically crazy.
Ridiculous. Again you are ignoring attacks by Trump supporters on others. Are they immature? Again, my point is that there are acts of disrespect and violence by both sides. None of it should be tolerated.
I'm not going to argue with you as to whose fault the violence is because I'm sure our opinions will differ. No point in doing so.
Ridiculous. Again you are ignoring attacks by Trump supporters on others. Are they immature? Again, my point is that there are acts of disrespect and violence by both sides. None of it should be tolerated.
I'm not going to argue with you as to whose fault the violence is because I'm sure our opinions will differ. No point in doing so.
The fault of any violence is the perpetrator. If you think you have a chance of a valid argument against that then knock yourself out.
And usually the attitudes of the perpetrators are influenced by the words and actions of others.
Thats neither here nor there. So by your logic, every time a so called hate crime is perpetrated should the influencing party be arrested and charged equally to the perpetrator?
Thats neither here nor there. So by your logic, every time a so called hate crime is perpetrated should the influencing party be arrested and charged equally to the perpetrator?
No. But there is accountability. If someone advocates violence towards another group of people, and someone listens to that person and commits a hate crime, is not the person advocating violence in some way culpable?
If someone incites someone to commit a crime and they commit the crime would the person who did the inciting be charged with both crimes?
Short answer: Yes, they could be charged with both crimes.
Longer answer:
This depends on the crime and the degree of interaction leading up to the crime.
If one person requests another person to commit a crime, it’s solicitation.
If there is any level of planning between the two, it’s conspiracy to commit the crime.
If there is a cooperative dynamic established where in criminal acts are being guided by a figurehead, it is racketeering.
No. But there is accountability. If someone advocates violence towards another group of people, and someone listens to that person and commits a hate crime, is not the person advocating violence in some way culpable?
Why, yes. Yes they are...
In a related piece, now even so-called journalists are even getting in on the act...
No. But there is accountability. If someone advocates violence towards another group of people, and someone listens to that person and commits a hate crime, is not the person advocating violence in some way culpable?
If someone incites someone to commit a crime and they commit the crime would the person who did the inciting be charged with both crimes?
Short answer: Yes, they could be charged with both crimes.
Longer answer:
This depends on the crime and the degree of interaction leading up to the crime.
If one person requests another person to commit a crime, it’s solicitation.
If there is any level of planning between the two, it’s conspiracy to commit the crime.
If there is a cooperative dynamic established where in criminal acts are being guided by a figurehead, it is racketeering.
Yes, a person can be held criminally accountable for specific intent for others to commit violence. But I don't think this thread is about Donald Trump or his supporters conspiring to commit violence against others, and that is certainly not whats happening anyway.
No, he's just trying to distract with very unscientific studies and a nebulous definition of hate crimes. It's easy to cherry pick certain instances and pretend to draw conclusions.
The instance in the OP is the discussion, the rest is noise to distract.
So we all agree it's bad right? Not to be justified with other actions?
Oh dear! Looks like speedy is flailing again. Maybe I can help him out.
Speedy is trying to compare getting physically attacked for wearing a MAGA hat in public with trumpy's hateful, inciteful rhetoric.
Speedy is arguing there is a direct, empirically demonstrable 1:1 mathematical correlation between the rise in anti-semitic hate crimes over the past two years and trumpy's speeches. Here is a good example of the inflammatory words speedy is objecting to:
"And citizens of America, tonight, as we mark the conclusion of our celebration of black history month, we are reminded of our nation's path toward civil rights and the work that still remains to be done. Recent threats targeting Jewish community centers and vandalism of Jewish cemeteries, as well as last week's shooting in Kansas City, remind us that while we may be a nation divided on policies, we are a country that stands united in condemning hate and evil in all of its very ugly forms."
President Donald J. Trump, SOTU speech on February 28, 2017
Point well taken! I hope this will help the rest of you appreciate speedy's compelling argument.
Ridiculous. Again you are ignoring attacks by Trump supporters on others. Are they immature? Again, my point is that there are acts of disrespect and violence by both sides. None of it should be tolerated.
I'm not going to argue with you as to whose fault the violence is because I'm sure our opinions will differ. No point in doing so.
there are likely more fake reports than any actual trump supporters attacking anyone
most trump supporters involved in any fisticuffs are merely try to defend themselves
there are always nuts who attack people due to their own biases, has nothing to do with trump or his supporters
on the other hand, the record is replete with liberal haters attacking trump supporters merely for being trump supporters
which is a big difference- as racists attack people due to their own issues but liberals attack people merely for being trump supporters, a whole new category of oppressed people
there are no recorded instances of which I know, where people are attacked for being an Obama supporter or hellary supporter alone
