Do you support these protests against Trump?

[Jazz and Utes]

I support any peaceful protest, it's the burning of the flag that pisses me off.

But can these be considered peaceful protests when highways are being shut down?

 

[Siro]

I support any peaceful protest, it's the burning of the flag that pisses me off.

Good. So you're paying attention, and nobody got hurt.

 

[♪alt13]

1. How does the electoral college solve this? It is the same situation in both, except with the electoral system the problem is multiplied by the number of swing states. With a national vote system, that could only arise when the vote is very close nationally. With the current system, the problem can arise with every competitive swing state. In both cases an error can hand the opponent the election. I see how, logistically, a national vote recount would be a bigger headache, but that is such a trivial consideration when the alternative is an undemocratic arbitrary system where a chunk of each state's voters are automatically disenfranchised. What was the point of me voting for HRC this election? Nothing. I am robbed of meaningful participation in the most important civic event in a supposed democracy. So recount logistics be damned.

2. I don't really understand this. Currently, third part spoilers is a more significant "problem". A 1% third part candidate defection can cause one major party candidate to lose ALL the votes from a state. How is this better?

3. I think it's actually the opposite. Vote rigging is much more meaningful in the electoral college system, since changing a tiny number of votes can have a huge impact on the national tally. Additionally, you can still run the elections locally, as you do now. Hell, you can even award electors based on proportion of vote cast for each candidate. I don't see how that's an issue.

First let me say that I did acknowledge the problem with states awarding all of their electors to a single candidate. Also I am not in favor of less than 20% of the population electing a temporary king no matter how you do it. I would do away with the whole thing if it were up to me.

1)Yes it is a logistics issue. I don't know the error rate of American elections but the 0.2% that separated the candidates this year has got to be close to that figure if not well within it.

2)This is only relevant if you assume apportionment of electors instead of winner take all(as I qualified my first post).

3)The few states that are swing states are monitored heavily by all interested parties. Even if you were to keep control of elections local I think that if we went by national popular vote there would be rampant rigging. The incentive to do so would exist in every county in the country. Again I acknowledged that winner take all states are a problem and a bigger one imv.

 

[♪alt13]

I support any peaceful protest, it's the burning of the flag that pisses me off.

But can these be considered peaceful protests when highways are being shut down?

They are illegal protests. As have been most of the major protests in world history.

 

[babe]

Get over it? Like you and your ilk did? Apparently protests are only bad when democrats do it.

View attachment 5006

Ghandi is probably the all-time master of the protest method. His method included extreme personal commitment and precise logic and all the personal morality he could project.

JazzFanz posters are nitwit moralists with vast ambitions to regulate others while ignoring their own problems. Hence, it's OK with this set of "thinkers" to be hypocrites in the extreme.

Ghandi faced real entrenched fascism in the form of British occupation. British moralists are not always nitwits, as shown by Runnymead. The royals are the nitwits. Those who flesh out the ideals of humans rights without actually ending the monarchy must use their wits.

Today's progressives..... using that term in the self-deceiving terms of those who presume they are "progressives" today..... the Siros, the Alts, the Kickys and such..... are nitwit moralists in the extreme. I don't believe they have the wherewithal to assess a complex situation and figure out who is manipulating who politically.

Without firebrands to run the torches through the dry grass, there is today little in real life America that supports "racism" as a public issue. The firebrands have to bring their own grass or look pretty hard to find a useful patch, except in California which is all dry grass, lol.

Trump got more black and other minority support than any precedent Republican candidate since JFK, with perhaps an exception in Reagan, Before LBJ around 1967, it was the Democrates in the South who were the racists, politically, seeking to exclude the blacks. It was the Democrats in the South that seceded in 1861 to keep Lincoln from imposing federal measures to end slavery.

whatever race you are today, if you are polite you can have friends of your choice. You can work where you want, for anyone, if you will convince your employer you will do the job. Trump employs lots of minorities, and gets good reviews from people like Jesse Jackson... oh... wait.... who knows the price he pays for that. But on the completion in the nineties of his NY project, Jackson showed up and Trump exorbitantly honored the largely black unionized workfore that erected his tower.

agitators who want to push a charge will do so whether there is substantial truth behind it or not. In an age of collegiate theorists on correct politics and correct terminology for everything, I'm pretty sure SirKickyass could be made out to be a crude, abusives jerk. I mean, why doesn't JazzFanz impose some kind of standard on the handles we use when someone chooses an objectively offensive and abusive persona?

Who's asses does Kicky think he's gonna kick anyway. Old white dudes with no sensitivity to physical abuse degrade other humans, and probably abuse minorities more because they are the vulnerable ones who don't have the money to buy the lawyers to defend them. I could see some policemen, white of course, having that abusive attitude, but I'm sure ignoramuses come in all shades of color, and I believe it is a universal human trait to dislike and abuse people who are different somehow, like how most of JazzFanz' regular cohort of nitwit moralists will do when I crank out an opinion that isn't exactly a rollover and please do your will invitation.

So until the alts and reds and Games and Siros go after "SirKickyass", just go pound sand. Or admit your own fascist delusions and political proposals to disenfranchise Americans who don't vote your way.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Ghandi is probably the all-time master of the protest method. His method included extreme personal commitment and precise logic and all the personal morality he could project.

He was a great man. One of the only time he comprised his moral values is when he decided to use medicine to save his life from the same disease that killed his wife that he kept his moral values for and refused treatment. No ones perfect.

Today's progressives..... using that term in the self-deceiving terms of those who presume they are "progressives" today..... the Siros, the Alts, the Kickys and such..... are nitwit moralists in the extreme. I don't believe they have the wherewithal to assess a complex situation and figure out who is manipulating who politically.

So grateful we have you and your ever wise wisdom on this board to teach us. What we do without having someone like you regurgitate patriot radio ideas?

Trump got more black and other minority support than any precedent Republican candidate since JFK, with perhaps an exception in Reagan, Before LBJ around 1967, it was the Democrates in the South who were the racists, politically, seeking to exclude the blacks. It was the Democrats in the South that seceded in 1861 to keep Lincoln from imposing federal measures to end slavery.

Lets get some sources for this. Trump got 8% of the black vote. That is better than Romney or McCain. However you would have to go back to 1964 to see a lower amount than those three. Bush did better in his second election and about the same in his first as Trump. Trump beat Romeny in the Latino and Asian vote but worse than Romney in races that are categorized as other. Going back further many many Republican candidates have beaten Trump at the Latino, Asian and all other race groups. So this is simply false information. Unless you are looking at just numbers not percentage. If that is the case those numbers are useless and I have not looked at them but there are more people in this country every election and minority groups are growing. But as far as the meaningful numbers which are percentage of the vote this is not true. Facts are hard, its easier just to here something on the radio and repeat it adding a caveat that people who view it different or fact check are less smart than you.

https://blackdemographics.com/wp-co...Black-Party-Affiliation-and-Vote-Patterns.jpg


Its fine if you want to deny racism is not happening but its simply ignorant. Take any study done on race equal treatment and it will show there is a bias that hurts black people and other races in this country. Of course people can succeed and "have friends" as you put it but that does not mean people are being treated equal.

But stick to calling everyone facists and nitwits that does not have your same opinion I am sure that will change their minds.

 

[LogGrad98]

Well the left is calling everyone racists so...

 

[fgcamel]

Well the left is calling everyone racists so...

The discrimination against trump supporters is disgusting, let me tell ya folks. They are the new muslims.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Well the left is calling everyone racists so...

Edited because that was more rude than intended.

That is a blanket statement that is untrue. Maybe if you said the left is calling a lot more people racist and I disagree that they are racists it might be a better statement.

I do think we have a lot of racial problems and that we have racists people. I think calling someone racist will not solve the problem and make it worse.

Most of the racists things being done are unintentional and I dont think a lot of stuff is done by racist people with ill intentions.

The real racists people are a small minority but are still a problem and making a lot of noise right now.

 

[LogGrad98]

Edited because that was more rude than intended.

That is a blanket statement that is untrue. Maybe if you said the left is calling a lot more people racist and I disagree that they are racists it might be a better statement.

I do think we have a lot of racial problems and that we have racists people. I think calling someone racist will not solve the problem and make it worse.

Most of the racists things being done are unintentional and I dont think a lot of stuff is done by racist people with ill intentions.

The real racists people are a small minority but are still a problem and making a lot of noise right now.

Wow you really are either out of touch or in denial. We have had posters here on JF call every Trump supporter racists. There are whole chunks of threads devoted to the discussion of whether they are all racists or if they are just ok with racists. It amounts to the same. That is the main talking point of nearly every person interviewed during the current protests, that all people who supported Trump are racists. I get having and following an ideology, but being that blind is sad.

But my post was more in response to this one...

But stick to calling everyone facists and nitwits that does not have your same opinion I am sure that will change their minds.

Hyprocisy runs thick here, when that is EXACTLY what the left is doing right now, all over the country, and even in our little JF microcosm.

 

[Gameface]

Wow you really are either out of touch or in denial. We have had posters here on JF call every Trump supporter racists. There are whole chunks of threads devoted to the discussion of whether they are all racists or if they are just ok with racists. It amounts to the same. That is the main talking point of nearly every person interviewed during the current protests, that all people who supported Trump are racists. I get having and following an ideology, but being that blind is sad.

When a candidate says racist things and his supporters don't seem to be bothered by it I think it's a valid question.

When a candidate has the overwhelming support of racist organizations and the rest of that candidates supporters don't seem to be bothered by it I think it's a valid question.

For people to act like the concerns over racism are ridiculous, well I don't get it. You all are just so tired and bored of the issue that you don't care one way or the other anymore? So what about racism?

 

[LogGrad98]

When a candidate says racist things and his supporters don't seem to be bothered by it I think it's a valid question.

When a candidate has the overwhelming support of racist organizations and the rest of that candidates supporters don't seem to be bothered by it I think it's a valid question.

For people to act like the concerns over racism are ridiculous, well I don't get it. You all are just so tired and bored of the issue that you don't care one way or the other anymore? So what about racism?

I think a lot of his supporters have said they are bothered by that, reference the essay by the female muslim who voted for Trump. I know plenty of Trump supporters who told me they felt like they were picking the lesser evil, and I wouldn't consider a single one of them racist. I personally found and still find Trump deplorable, and I don't even think the racism part to be his worst quality, but I found Hilary deplorable too which is why I voted for a 3rd party candidate. I just find hypocrisy equally deplorable, and Hilary's supporters are having no problem spewing the same crap at Trump supporters that they feel Trump's supporters are guilty of. Hilary's supporters have no problem glossing over the very real crap she is guilty of, but they protest against Trump and his own brand of crap when all he has done is SAID things, but Hilary is guilty of things she has actually DONE. But of course everyone is tired of hearing about it so it is a non-issue, even though it doesn't make it any less real or wrong.

I think that shows very weak character.

For you obviously the single most important issue is Trump's racist talking points, more important than American lives thrown away for nothing with no consequences and elected and appointed officials scoffing at the rule of law. That is fine, that is your choice, but you are not the moral police (and neither am I for that matter). Others are allowed to have their own priorities without being labeled as you are choosing to label them. You think supporters of Trump are racists, or at least tolerant of racism, I think Hilary supporters are hypocrites, or at least tolerant of hypocrisy. I guess we can agree to disagree.

 

[Jonah]

I don’t think the vast majority of Trump’s supporters are racist. Most are regular Americans disillusioned and disaffected with government and with opportunistic establishment politicians like Clinton.

I do think it’s not unreasonable, however, to suspect strong supporters of the alt-right movement and white nationalism of occasionally harboring racist thoughts and feelings. It’s a question of accurately identifying who those people are. Some proudly self-identify, others are more circumspect, but still work diligently to support the cause of white nationalism. One of the most successful supporters of the alt-right and white nationalism over the past few years has been Steve Bannon.

By complete happenstance and coincidence, Trump has just appointed Steve Bannon as his chief White House strategist. Bannon was most recently head of Trump’s presidential campaign, but prior to that he was the executive chairman of Breitbart News. Over the past two years Bannon turned Breitbart from a reasonably successful anti-establishment website into the most influential alt-right and white nationalist news organization in the country.

 

[JazzGal]

I had decided that I would give Trump a clean slate starting from the day of the election. He's had a couple of unpresidential tweets, but mostly has been okay - until today. Picking Steve Bannon as his right-hand man will only ramp up the fear for minorities. This is a really bad move for someone who needed to move away from a racist position.

Sent from my HTC6535LVW using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[fgcamel]

I had decided that I would give Trump a clean slate starting from the day of the election. He's had a couple of unpresidential tweets, but mostly has been okay - until today. Picking Steve Bannon as his right-hand man will only ramp up the fear for minorities. This is a really bad move for someone who needed to move away from a racist position.

Sent from my HTC6535LVW using JazzFanz mobile app

To be fair, this guy headed the campaign that got Donald Frickin Trump elected to be president of the United States. He's not just gonna get rid of him.

 

[JazzGal]

To be fair, this guy headed the campaign that got Donald Frickin Trump elected to be president of the United States. He's not just gonna get rid of him.

It's a lot to ask me to believe that both Trump and Bannon are different and better people than their past behavior indicates. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. I hope so. I'm not holding my breath.

Sent from my HTC6535LVW using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[Jonah]

To be fair, this guy headed the campaign that got Donald Frickin Trump elected to be president of the United States. He's not just gonna get rid of him.

To be fair? As in understandable and excusable? I don’t think so, however, it is a move that sets the tone for Trump’s administration from the get go.

Steve Bannon is one the country’s most powerful and influential white nationalists. The alt-right and white supremacists are celebrating his hire and the continued sway he will now have in the Trump administration.

No doubt Trump feels indebted to Bannon for taking control of a campaign in disarray and changing the trajectory of the election. Bannon is an extremely smart and charismatic manager whom subordinates have described as having a Svengali-like influence on those around him. Trump and Bannon have been simpatico for more than a year. He was a supporter and confidant well before he was officially hired in August to take over the Trump campaign. Now, as Trump’s leading advisor, he will be in the perfect position to help set policy and direction for the Trump administration.

 

[str8line]

To be fair? As in understandable and excusable? I don’t think so, however, it is a move that sets the tone for Trump’s administration from the get go.

Steve Bannon is one the country’s most powerful and influential white nationalists. The alt-right and white supremacists are celebrating his hire and the continued sway he will now have in the Trump administration.

No doubt Trump feels indebted to Bannon for taking control of a campaign in disarray and changing the trajectory of the election. Bannon is an extremely smart and charismatic manager whom subordinates have described as having a Svengali-like influence on those around him. Trump and Bannon have been simpatico for more than a year. He was a supporter and confidant well before he was officially hired in August to take over the Trump campaign. Now, as Trump’s leading advisor, he will be in the perfect position to help set policy and direction for the Trump administration.

I bet Trump has the most volatile cabinet in history. Will even one of them still hold their position in four years?

 

[Ron Mexico]

I bet Trump has the most volatile cabinet in history. Will even one of them still hold their position in four years?

Yeah but his reality show will be exciting as we get to see them fired and watch as he makes new candidates play fun games to win their jobs. The white house apprentice.

 

[JazzGal]

Yeah but his reality show will be exciting as we get to see them fired and watch as he makes new candidates play fun games to win their jobs. The white house apprentice.

Just like his campaign was, only more visible. Enjoy the show!

Sent from my HTC6535LVW using JazzFanz mobile app