Police Officer talks about his experience at Trump's rally in Tucson: AWESOME!

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Antagonistic? Not at all. I made general comments, you attempted to constrain them to you and I personally, and I clearly stated that you have zero effect on me, personally.

Sorry if direct speech offends you.

Again, the general argument (which your argument echoes) is that the speech of Mr. Trump and his followers (Freedom to Listen?) is being shut down by anything antagonistic to that speech, ranging from holding up a sign at a Trump rally saying "Dump Trump" to flipping birds and sticking out tongues to stopping traffic ... and these things are equated with sucker-punches and groups of Trump supporters kicking someone being escorted out of the gathering.

As far as all of your statements being factual ... that is neither here nor there. The ludicrosity of implication that all those who speak out against Trump are part of a unified, homogenous "force" is ridiculous on it's own face.

You are free to reject any assertions of course. Just as I am free to state, clearly, that the actions that many are pursuing here, to wit, attacking other posters directly for their views on Trump and on these protests, take the exact same approach that the posts are attempting to cite others for.

I.e. there is much rampant hypocrisy afoot.

Please don't take my generic comments personally, even if language requires the use of the pronoun "you."

Is there an argument that anything antagonistic to a person is akin to shutting down free speech? I missed that.

I think you will find that the antagonism debate was related to the reactionary violence point.

Shutting down free speech is partaking in violence and intimidating to stop others , blocking their access to a venue, shouting over someone else and not letting them speak - all things that the progressive terrorists did in Chicago. They did it again in AZ, blocking people from actually making it to a venue.

I think you might be confusing or conflating two issues.

Ohhhh so then lets just allow the same old dumb dumbs who have been running America forever continue to run the Country further into hell because? They know what they're doing? hahaha

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Semicollegiate

No, the harangue about Trump being "shut down" is not about the fools blocking traffic.

It's a tactic being used to shut down counter speech.

If anyone disagrees with Trump, or with what Trump supporters are saying and doing, why they're all "leftist progressive shills working to instill Nazi terror techniques" ... which is, it goes without saying, an attempt to shut down the dissenting speech of others.

Physicians, heal thyselves.

Yesterday did cross a line. Those anti-Trumpies displayed the attitude of your time is my time, a socialistic I-know-better-than-thou attitude. The anti-Trumpies are socialists by means as well as by rhetoric.

That is genesis of the NAZI accusations.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth

The differentiation he has with the current political class is that he has not held office before. The winner is going to be someone who is perceived as an outsider. Whether he is or not is a debate in itself.

That's all it takes? To be considered an outsider?

It doesn't matter that he's a flip-flopping liar who's entire campaign is an insult to the intelligence?

His entire campaign has been reminiscent of something out of an SNL skit and yet people are getting on their knees to pay lip-service....because he is an outsider?

You seem very one sided like the democrats have done any better?? We have a presidential candidate that was shown by a reporter that she changed her position in an interview. She is currently under investigation which is likely to get her charged. We have people jumping up on stage trying to disrupt bernie. And we have democrats clearly trying to make sure Hillary wins. As a long time democrat I'm becomming based by my party being hi hacked by nothing short of extreme left. The republicans have the same problem with those t party fools.

Neither side has any room to cast dispersions at the other. Yet here on ATS we have people that actually support this stupid behavior based on nothing more then who they vote for. Sad when people sacrifice there integity and common sense and argue these people a liberals or racists etc. Eveidence isn't required just people with opinions and yours or someone elses is no more valid than the other.

a reply to: awareness10

The "hope and Change" crowd has become "Establishment" and "status quo".

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth

So he is not that different than the politicians after all.

I don't think he is that different. I didn't say he was. The only differences I can see are the perception of being an outsider and the focus on trade deals and immigration. Trump is quite right that immigration was not a major talking point before he lit the fire on it, yet the stats show an incredible increase in both immigration and illegal immigration since the 1965 act. Same with trade. NAFTA and now TPP have been pushed through the senate without much understanding of what they do for the people. Shining a light on that is a key point of difference.

As a person though, I am sure he will be the consummate politician.

originally posted by: awareness10
a reply to: introvert

I'd say he's a lot different than the Politicians 'running things' (Amok) that is. And i don't think we need to go over all that again.

I disagree. It's just more of the same with a little drama-soap opera entertainment tossed in.

It's "WWF-style" politics.

a reply to: dragonridr

You seem very one sided like the democrats have done any better??

The Dems are not the issue. It's Trump. Forgive me if I stay on topic.

Ignoratio elenchi

a reply to: UKTruth

On the contrary, what is being seen here is a mantra-like repetition, flung at anyone who posts in disagreement with Trump or his followers, that we are part of a cabal of leftist terrorists (or whatever specific language is used at the time.)

The protesters in Chicago were there to speak out against Trump, and the invitation to attend was freely given to the public.

They carried signs and wore clothing that indicated their position, and when they assembled in sufficient numbers, the Trump campaign cancelled the event. This angered both sides, and the agitation spilled over into different behaviors, many of which are socially unacceptable.

You're trying now to reduce my point to another argument, or to restate my point to your own liking: I reject your attempt.

Here it is again: If Mr. Trump and/or his supporters are having their "free speech" limited by the actions of others who display dissent, opposition and even antagonism to the Trump message, and these actions range from the mundane to the extreme, then it is fully appropriate to state, as a logical result, that the attempts here at ATS to display dissent, opposition and even antagonism to the anti-Trump message are also attempts to shut down "free speech."

They're the same thing. They're either both attempts to "shut down free speech" or they're not.

Again, I am not confused and further have no interest in your personal comments directed at me; please desist.

Focus on the statements and facts.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: awareness10

The "hope and Change" crowd has become "Establishment" and "status quo".

The revolutionaries always become the new policemen.

(This wouldn't stop with Obama, would it?)

I think this whole thing is hysterical.

We've got protesters blocking highways, assaulting police, slapping police horses and people say they're gentle little sweetums.

We've had two people at Trump rallies punch people. Out of hundreds of thousands, but Trump is the agitator.

Anyone watching and being honest knows where the problem is. It's with the Bernouts.

Even more hysterical is that a US political candidate is rustling foreigners jimmies so hard. Stay rustled, it's a positive for Trump. Every uppity Canadian and European telling Americans how to vote is giving Trump 10 more votes. Every protester is probably giving him thousands. Keep it up kids. It reminds me of the Bernouts telling black people they're stupid for not voting for Panders. Your tears are Trump fuel.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

On the contrary, what is being seen here is a mantra-like repetition, flung at anyone who posts in disagreement with Trump or his followers, that we are part of a cabal of leftist terrorists (or whatever specific language is used at the time.)

The protesters in Chicago were there to speak out against Trump, and the invitation to attend was freely given to the public.

They carried signs and wore clothing that indicated their position, and when they assembled in sufficient numbers, the Trump campaign cancelled the event. This angered both sides, and the agitation spilled over into different behaviors, many of which are socially unacceptable.

You're trying now to reduce my point to another argument, or to restate my point to your own liking: I reject your attempt.

Here it is again: If Mr. Trump and/or his supporters are having their "free speech" limited by the actions of others who display dissent, opposition and even antagonism to the Trump message, and these actions range from the mundane to the extreme, then it is fully appropriate to state, as a logical result, that the attempts here at ATS to display dissent, opposition and even antagonism to the anti-Trump message are also attempts to shut down "free speech."

They're the same thing. They're either both attempts to "shut down free speech" or they're not.

Again, I am not confused and further have no interest in your personal comments directed at me; please desist.

Focus on the statements and facts.

The evidence has already been provided that these protesters hid their allegiance at first. We have eye witness evidence of this. We also know that Trump supporters were blocked from getting into the venue.

Your attempts to suggest the physical and sometimes violent actions of progressive terrorists in Chicago is in some way the same as someone disagreeing with you on ATS is simply not going to land.

For the avoidance of doubt - I am calling the people who protested in a violent way and sought to intimidate and coerce , progressive terrorists. Unless you were one of those then I am not lumping you in with them. The finger is firmly pointed at them and those that organised and paid for the chaos.

a reply to: introvert


What is it you disagree with?

wwf style politics is nothing compared to war mongering and mass murder.

originally posted by: Domo1
I think this whole thing is hysterical.

We've got protesters blocking highways, assaulting police, slapping police horses and people say they're gentle little sweetums.

We've had two people at Trump rallies punch people. Out of hundreds of thousands, but Trump is the agitator.

Anyone watching and being honest knows where the problem is. It's with the Bernouts.

Even more hysterical is that a US political candidate is rustling foreigners jimmies so hard. Stay rustled, it's a positive for Trump. Every uppity Canadian and European telling Americans how to vote is giving Trump 10 more votes. Every protester is probably giving him thousands. Keep it up kids. It reminds me of the Bernouts telling black people they're stupid for not voting for Panders. Your tears are Trump fuel.

No one has said that activists are all "peace loving" or "gentle little sweetums." If so, quote it.

Your statement that "one or two people have been punched" at Trump events is absolutely incorrect.

The Federalist

Multiple violent encounters have occurred at Donald Trump’s campaign events. Here are a few of the most recent times people got attacked at one of the businessman’s campaign events.

Slate Magazine

Washingon Post

Vanity Fair

The ISSUE here is that People are Tired, they want a break from the corruption going on using Tax Payer $

That is why people are looking elsewhere.

a reply to: Gryphon66

OK here, read this.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: reldra

Anyone who is a fan of Coulter is seriously brain damaged. She is one of the biggest trash talking propagandist out there. At this point I honestly think she just says the most offensive thing possible so people will fight with her about it because she wants the attention. She's afraid of being irrelevant and uses that as her gimmick.

Are you sure this guy is a fan though and not just saving those Coulter vids because he doesn't like what she's saying??? I haven't looked at his page yet so I'm just asking.

Trump/Coulter 2016

"Make lib brains explode"

a reply to: Teikiatsu

This is how we MAGA!

Piss off the bottom feeders so they move to Canada (they won't go to Mexico) and BOOM! Prosperity!

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Gin
a reply to: MysticPearl

That's what the left always does, divide people apart and pit people against one another, instead of putting people together and discussing and debating issues to fix common problems all Americans have.

No, that is not the case.

'That causes me to question your perception of reality on it's own.'

a reply to: UKTruth

Which protesters "hid their allegiance"? You had one video from one Trump supporter.

Trump supporters were blocked? I guess there are fire codes about maximum capacity.

You are again desperately trying to reframe my argument: I am not talking about the violence on both sides as being equal to the attempts to personally attack and therefore dissuade folks from posting in these threads in dissent to Trump and his supporters. That is a direct misrepresentation of the facts.

Neither am I talking about "disagreeing" with someone on ATS! Please stop this blatant misrepresenation of the facts!

If by whatever action from mundane to extreme, the actions of anyone who expresses dissent and disagreement with Trump and his message at his rallies are terroristic attempts to shut down free speech, then conversely, whatever action from mundane to extreme on the part of Trump supporters to do the same thing is EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

If the claims of "shutting down free speech" are valid for one side, it's valid for the other.

To be clear as well, I am addressing the arguments, not the people, and not you personally UKTruth.