Demonstrations against Trump

[segnosaur]

And so it begins...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/11/10/trump-tweet-professional-protesters-media/93624612/

Earlier Trump tweeted: Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters, incited by the media, are protesting. Very unfair!

So much wrong with that. So very much wrong.

First of all, its petty, vindictive and pointless. Why slam the media? You've already won the election, so there's no need to pander to the idiots in your voting base.

Secondly, its untrue... I have seen no evidence that the protests were "professional", and I doubt Trump has either.

Lastly, its completely hypocritical. After Obama was elected, Trump was calling for widespread protests. During this past campaign, he railed endlessly about the "rigged system", and dropped hints that he wouldn't accept the results. But now that he's won, he is complaining about people protesting him?

The proper thing to do would be to release a statement... something like "It was a rough campaign. I understand people might be upset. Its America and people do have the right to protest. Please let your protests be peaceful. Hopefully I'll do a good enough job to earn your trust". It would make him look like an actual statesman. And if he couldn't do that, then just stay silent and let the protests die down. (He did send out a second tweet later, reversing his position and actually praising the protesters, but by that time the damage was done. In fact, now it even looks worse, because it looks like his handlers had to get involved again to stop him messing up on Twitter.)

Instead, he comes across as a thin skinned, petty, vindictive, and a hypocrite. Many were protesting because they don't think Trump is qualified to be president. He's helping to show that they may be right.

 

[msj]

2 minutes ago, segnosaur said:

 

The proper thing to do would be to release a statement... something like "It was a rough campaign. I understand people might be upset. Its America and people do have the right to protest. Please let your protests be peaceful. Hopefully I'll do a good enough job to earn your trust". It would make him look like an actual statesman.

 

Agreed.  However, I'm going to assume by your name you are too busy preparing for a meteorite strike and have not heard the news: Trump is no statesman. 

[Boges]

Quote

Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have passion for our great country. We will all come together and be proud!

His followup Tweet kind of echoed the sentiment that they have the right to protest. 

[kimmy]

I love Trump's response on Twitter to the protests:

Quote

Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have passion for our great country. We will all come together and be proud!

Nice!

Meanwhile the Breitbarters and similar media outlets are laughing their asses off at these protests, and I can't blame them.

7 minutes ago, segnosaur said:

Well, you're assuming the protesters were the ones who stayed home on election day. Its quite possible that all of them (or the vast majority) did vote on election day, and/or actively campaigned to get Hillary elected. And many of them may have a right to feel a little miffed that the rules allowed their candidate to win the popular vote yet still lose the election.

(Not that I agree with the protests... the rules of the election were clearly spelled out before hand, and there may be more productive ways to channel their energy.)

 

Well, I think the major protests are actually in places that Hillary won by a landslide anyway. New York City, Portland, Los Angeles, Bay Area, Seattle...  so whether the protestors actually went to vote or not probably doesn't actually make any difference.

7 minutes ago, segnosaur said:

I also find it hard to feel sorry for supporters of the Green Party. They wanted to protect the environment and thought "I don't like Hillary", and now they've gotten someone in office that thinks global warming is a hoax. Hope you like it warm!

And the Bernie-Or-Bust people. "I'll never reward Hillary and the DNC for how they treated Bernie!"   ...well, I guess you showed her, guys!

 -k

 

[Boges]

Sure blame those that stayed home if they want. Many republicans stayed home too, Trump got less than Romney but I suspect he got a different type of voter this time around. 

But the DNC nominated someone that seemed incredibly unlikable. You had the likes of Bill Maher and Michael Moore pleading with people to suck it up and vote for her. It's kind of unsettling that people would demand that voters vote for a person they may not like just because they're the "less or two evils".

It's like here in Canada when the Liberals tell NDPers that the only way to stop Harper is to vote for them. 

Edited November 11, 2016 by Boges

[segnosaur]

17 hours ago, Bonam said:

The whole democratic narrative that a bunch of hillbilly racists took over the country by electing Trump is shown to be a lie though. The Republican nominee got pretty much exactly as many votes as the Republican nominee always gets. But Democrats stayed home, thus losing themselves the election. 

No, its not really a lie.

It is true... fewer people came out to vote for the Democrats than in past elections, and for that they should feel shame. But, there was no reason Republicans had to vote for Trump. They could have looked at Trump, and said "I'm republican/conservative, but I don't think I can vote for an incompetent businessman and a bigot". The fact that they got as many votes as before despite their candidate being more racist than before speaks volumes about them.

There were principled republicans. Romney made statements criticizing Trump. Neither of the former Bush presidents campaigned for him (and there were rumors that some were actually going to vote for Hillary).  But for everyone else that walked into that voting booth and marked their ballot for Trump (just the same as they did for previous presidents) deserve all the shame for voting for a lying bigot and an incompetent businessman.

Quote

In some sense, as much as I find a president Trump distasteful... it's kind of fun watching all the liberals be shocked and dismayed as their bubble burst around them. So much melodrama, "woe is me", the "world is ending" posts everywhere.

Keep in mind that not everyone who is criticizing Trump is a "liberal". Some of the posters here are Canadians who actually voted for Harper. Some of the criticism against Trump came from Republicans.

As for the "world is ending", no... but things are not going to be good either.

Edited November 11, 2016 by segnosaur

[segnosaur]

8 minutes ago, Boges said:

His followup Tweet kind of echoed the sentiment that they have the right to protest. 

Yes it did. (As I acknowledged in my earlier post.) But by then, the damage was already done. He's shown himself to be a petty person, and now we're wondering if his handlers had to get involved, and whether this will be a constant theme throughout his administration... make a huge blunder, then spend a bunch of time in damage control.

Had he started with that tweet, it would have been something to respect. As a followup tweet... not so much.

[Argus]

22 hours ago, BC_chick said:

Yeah well, like I said, I think the polls gave the Democrats a false sense of security.  Why wait in line for hours to vote if it's such a sure bet anyway.

Why do Americans have such long lines? Voter turnout is much higher in Canada and I've never had to wait in line more than a couple of minutes. Are American elections that disorganized?

[Argus]

28 minutes ago, Boges said:

His followup Tweet kind of echoed the sentiment that they have the right to protest. 

I'm thinking the first was from him and the second from someone in his campaign who is a lot smarter than him.

[segnosaur]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

Why do Americans have such long lines? Voter turnout is much higher in Canada and I've never had to wait in line more than a couple of minutes. Are American elections that disorganized?

They don't always have long lines.

One of the problems with the American system is that the elections are largely controlled by the states, who decide on voting hours, number of polls, etc. So what you see happening is that states controlled by the republicans will have more polls open in upper/middle class areas and fewer in the inner cities (or, perhaps if voting electronically, fewer machines will be available in each polling place in poorer areas.)

So the long lineups you see will often be in areas that often support democratic candidates. You tend to see shorter lines in areas that support republicans.

Its voter supression. Trump claimed that the "election was rigged". Well, in a way he was right, just not in the way he or his supporters believed.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/07/those_insanely_long_early_voting_lines_were_a_result_of_republican_voter.html

[kimmy]

24 minutes ago, Boges said:

Sure blame those that stayed home if they want. Many republicans stayed home too, Trump got less than Romney but I suspect he got a different type of voter this time around. 

But the DNC dominated someone that seemed incredibly unlikable. You had the likes of Bill Maher and Michael Moore pleading with people to suck it up and vote for her. It's kind of unsettling that people would demand that voters vote for a person they may not like just because they're the "less or two evils".

It's like here in Canada when the Liberals tell NDPers that the only way to stop Harper is to vote for them. 

Well, guess what. Everybody knew on the morning of Nov 8 that by the next day, either Hillary or Trump would be the President Elect.

People certainly had the right to vote for Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, place write-in votes for Bernie Sanders or Harambe the Gorilla, or spoil their ballots, or stay home and not vote at all. Vast numbers opted for one of these options, particularly the last. That's certainly their right. But they knew beforehand that either Hillary or Trump was going to be President Elect, and whining about how unhappy they are with the "lesser of two evils" mentality doesn't change the fact that one of them was going to win.

Ultimately, they cast their ballots or abstained knowing full well that regardless of their preferred form of protest vote, and for them to now say "w-w-w-wait, I actually hate everything Trump stands for! I'm extremely upset that he won!" is, to quote the President Elect, "SAD and PATHETIC!"

 -k

[kimmy]

By the way, I'm completely in favor of the idea of protestors organizing to say to Trump "don't attack gay rights!" or "don't attack women's healthcare!" or "don't destroy the environment!"   Maybe showing people that they have strong feelings about these issues would make congressmen or senators take not of their constituents.

But that's not the message these protestors are presenting. The message they're presenting is "#NotMyPresident!" and that's stupid, because like it or not he IS your President, effective January 20. #DealWithIt.

 -k

[Boges]

3 minutes ago, kimmy said:

By the way, I'm completely in favor of the idea of protestors organizing to say to Trump "don't attack gay rights!" or "don't attack women's healthcare!" or "don't destroy the environment!"   Maybe showing people that they have strong feelings about these issues would make congressmen or senators take not of their constituents.

But that's not the message these protestors are presenting. The message they're presenting is "#NotMyPresident!" and that's stupid, because like it or not he IS your President, effective January 20. #DealWithIt.

 -k

For sure, by all means protest when/if Prez Trump repeals Obamacare. Or actually tries to build a wall to Mexico. Or even protest if it seemed that the election results were tainted by fraud and cheating (like in 2000). 

But to protest the results because you don't like the result or because Hillary won the popular vote is petulant and worth derision. 

[DogOnPorch]

Protest repealing Obama Care? Hah. More like back to business as usual.

There already is a wall along the Mexican border...just needs fixing.

[segnosaur]

11 minutes ago, kimmy said:

But that's not the message these protestors are presenting. The message they're presenting is "#NotMyPresident!" and that's stupid, because like it or not he IS your President, effective January 20. #DealWithIt.

 -k

To loosely quote John Oliver...

You will remember that day. Because it will be the day that time travelers from the future return to stop trump on the the day everything started to go horribly wrong.

[bush_cheney2004]

7 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Protest repealing Obama Care? Hah. More like back to business as usual.

There already is a wall along the Mexican border...just needs fixing.

 

Agreed....plus land mines !

[Bonam]

47 minutes ago, kimmy said:

But that's not the message these protestors are presenting. The message they're presenting is "#NotMyPresident!" and that's stupid, because like it or not he IS your President, effective January 20. #DealWithIt.

 -k

Indeed. I mean they're free to protest of course with whatever message they want, but the message they've chosen is just dumb. 

[taxme]

On 11/9/2016 at 11:50 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

This is what democracy looks like.    When the democratic nominee loses the election, we get protests, riots, marches, etc.    Happened when Bush won too.

The Global Research website has already said that the losers would favor a warmonger, perjurer, racketeer, fraudster, and a money launderer as President. Sure, Trump is no angel but at least he said to the American people that the system is crooked and rigged, and the people apparently know this, and that is why he is President today. A man who  tells it like it is a man that should be listened too. And where did we ever hear that from Hillary or any other presidential nominee? The fix was in using the media to try and get rid of Trump but it back fired. And now the globalist elite are in a panic, and are going to try anything to get Trump out of there. I fear that there will be many attempts on his life. Trump better start wearing a suit of armor to try and stave off elimination by the scum that run and rule the world. Their days are numbered and they know it. Bye-bye losers. 

[taxme]

3 hours ago, segnosaur said:

To loosely quote John Oliver...

You will remember that day. Because it will be the day that time travelers from the future return to stop trump on the the day everything started to go horribly wrong.

Ya, as if all has been in good shape up to now in America for decades, eh? Thanks Mr. Trump for the mess you put America and the rest of the world in. Chuckle-chuckle. And I suppose that Trump has been responsible for all the wars America got itself into, eh? Naughty you, Mr. Trump. Chuckle-chuckle. 

Maybe those time travelers have already been here, and have helped give Trump the presidency. They maybe from a time where peace is promoted, not war. I guess that the globalist elite are now going to have a rough time trying to get a WW3 started now. We will only be thanking Trump one day for not trying to start any more wars by America. 

Cool, eh?  

 

[taxme]

On 11/10/2016 at 8:03 AM, Altai said:

I smell a military coup against Triumph 

News for you. The military establishment was on his side. The military does not want to have anything anymore to do with the elite globalist warmongering cabal, and puppet Hillary who could not wait for her to get elected, and look for a WW3 to start up. Rumor has it Russia and China were the elites next targets. Trump being elected just saved the world from maybe getting nuked.   

[taxme]

On 11/10/2016 at 11:38 AM, BC_chick said:

I wonder how much of that had to do with the polls giving Clinton virtually no chance of losing.  I was worried about the complacency that is probably going to result from such over confidence.

Trump's supporters on the other hand were very motivated to get out and vote.

Thank gawd for those Trump supporters who got out there and voted and kept the lying and crooked Hillary out of the presidency's chair. The establishment elite are in a panic.

Yahoo. 

[-TSS-]

Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. These people have had a president to their liking for the past eight years and maybe they will have another in four years time. In the meantime they have to put up with somebody they don't like.

Soros is instigating all this and these people who are there protesting don't realise that they are being used as pawns in a very cynical game.

 

[WestCoastRunner]

4 hours ago, Bonam said:

Indeed. I mean they're free to protest of course with whatever message they want, but the message they've chosen is just dumb. 

It's dumb to you because you and many others have missed the point and don't understand what these protestors are so passionate about. I'll spell it out for you. 

They repudiate his values and policies. 

He does not represent them  

He will be fought when he tries to implement  policies that removes the rights of minorities  

It is their right to protest and if Trump were a true leader he would listen and not rant about another media conspiracy     

 

 

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, WestCoastRunner said:

It's dumb to you because you and many others have missed the point and don't understand what these protestors are so passionate about. I'll spell it out for you. 

They repudiate his values and policies.

 

Why do they reject the outcome of a democratic election when it does not go their way ?

Do the rules only apply when their candidates win ?

Pundits worried about the reactions of Trump supporters if he lost, but never realized what Clinton's whiners would do.

Edited November 11, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest]

It's everyone's right to protest.  It's no-one's right to break windows or set fire to dumpsters.