Will Trump Supporters Listen To The Warnings?

Good question. Looks like this has been the reaction thus far



Good ol' Carl the Cuck

 

6

Well I’m glad you are enjoying yourself but I’m not sure what you are laughing at? I mean what ‘trap’ do you think I fell into?

To think that the right don’t and have never harass progressive, anti-racist or left leaning rallies, groups or individuals is the thing that really seems laughable to anyone that has read any history.

Such people have been harasses by established interests and conservative vested interests for literally generations and it goes on to this day. To give an example just google the many attacks by skinheads on gay pride marches around the world.

Anyway I can suggest some books if you want?

But I will give you some stories

A friend of mine got beaten up by skin heads after been at a Rock against Racism concert it seems gangs of these right wingers had been hunting the area and attacking when the saw individuals or couples (they kept way from crowds).

Another friend born and lived in US was kicked, shunned and spat on at her school because someone found her reading the Communist Manifesto she wasn’t a communist she’d got it to find out about communism for herself rather than just accept without question that it was ‘evil’.

When I lived in France someone I knew got beaten up by La Pen supporters (the father at that time) because he was wearing an antifacist badge, he wasn’t some extremist just a school kid.

BUT and it is a big but is that to you the March for Science and the Women's march are left wing rallies

Thing is that I know many right wingers that accept that global warming is happening and is manmade.

So the idea that been for the science must mean you are left wing is really silly.

Again I know many right wingers that aren’t against abortion you seem to be saying that ALL right wingers have to be against, again that seems silly.

Yes it is always tricky who goes on a march but seeing as one of the themes of the march was women’s rights to choose about abortion so having a group against that would be problematic, it’s like having one of those groups that believe homosexuality is ‘curable’ wanting to be part of a Pride March.

Fuck Framing

Look the first couple of times you made the false comparison I thought it was just because you were naive, couldn’t write very well and so were not that good at expressing your ideas, but them you kept doing it even though it had been pointed out to you, and I realized that you knew exactly what you were doing in pushing that particular con trick so…

Fuck framing, I'm happy on the evidence to shout it out that I think you are a dishonest debater

 

I and others warned that Trumps admin would be about tax cuts for the already wealthy while been detrimental to the majority of people.

We warned that he was lying about not wanting to cut programmers that actually helped his voters.


Can any of his supporters look at the proposed budget and say we were wrong?

 

I read about what he was cutting in the newspaper yesterday....and I knew it. I am waiting here and waiting here to hear anything good Donald trump has done or will be doing from his voters other than the usual rhetoric..."He is not the Clintons..."

Anything else, anyone?

 

Trump once said he could murder someone in the street and his supporters wouldn't care. I think that could be true. Impeachment is fundamentally a political process. The constitution requires "Treason, bribery or other high crimes or misdemeanors." What "misdemeanors" means is an open question. Gerald Ford said it was whatever you could get a majority behind in the House, which is the body that does impeachment (bringing the charge). Nixon, under fire over Watergate, said it required an indictable offense, and Clinton said it had to be one which related directly to the functions of the office, instead of extracurricular activities. So far, the main offense people have in mind is obstruction of justice, and the evidence so far is probably insufficient but mounting almost daily. Trump's insensitivity to financial conflicts of interest also lays the foundation for a possible emoluments clause violation. However, the House that brings the charge and the Senate that tries it are controlled by Republicans (unlike the Nixon and Grant cases where the opposing party controlled both parties. The only way I can see Trump being impeached and removed is if things get so bad in this country that even the Republican's constituents are screaming to get rid of him, and Republican legislators start losing their seats because of it. Right now, the prospects for screwing the poor and enriching the rich with all those tax cuts is paramount in their minds, so they don't care who in the Trump Administration might be a Russian agent. If after 2018 there is a Democrat majority in the House, then I think there's a good chance he'll be impeached, but not convicted unless the Senate goes too. And then, of course, who would we have? The succession goes: Pence, Ryan, Hatch, Tillerson, Mnuchin. (ugh). (And they complained that Hillary was paid to speak at Goldman-Sachs!) But in the long run this won't work out well for Trump supporters or the country, because the man is an ignorant, corruot, sociopathic, immature, incompetent, unreliable, narcissistic, pussy-grabbing boob whom we can only hope will not destroy us all. We can take small comfort in being able to say:"We told you so."

 

Exactly right, unless BOTH sides come together on the issue of Trump, nothing will change. But I have to say I seriously doubt you'll ever see such a merging of purpose from Washington. They're all part of the same country club crowd, but they're still ideologically dissimilar to the extreme. I doubt a nuke from NK dropped on San Francisco could unite the current congressional gaggle. Americans have no friends in the US government.

 

where are Trump voters supposed to go, what are the alternatives?

 

Well let's see he's already done a lot worse then getting his dick sucked. That was enough for Clinton. That was lying and inappropriate for a president at the time. Even though it had zero to do with policy it was still unacceptable because it showed a lack of character. How can we trust this man? We can not so he must go.

Are you really so delusional and blindly aligned to a party you will not admit he has lied numerous times?

 

I already said I don't deny the rightwing-on-leftwing violence that has happened in the past. But you can't deny the sudden rise of fringe-left-on-everybody violence and rioting that's going on today.

You claim to read lots of books, but you seem to take all my metaphors and comparisons literally.

Did you happen to catch any pro-Trump, pro-tea party, pro-republican signs at either of those marches? Me neither.

You are framing again. Framing that I'm saying people who are pro-science and pro-womens' rights are strictly left wing.

The march for science conveniently took place on Earth Day. What narrative could they possibly be protesting? Yes you're probably gonna tell me they were protecting science from those crazy christian and muslim creationists. Gimme a break. The whole narrative was global warming. This can all be seen in the cardboard protest signs that were made, and the speeches that were delivered.

The litter left behind shows it wasn't truly about environmentalism. Nothing more than a political feel-good festival.

And it wasn't problematic to have most of the event led by islamists like Linda (take their vaginas away) Sarsour? Advocating sharia law and domestication of women under religious authority? Where the fuck are your priorities dude?

 

6

So you oppose the March for Science because the people on it accept the overwhelming scientific evidence supporting climate change?

Are you saying you don’t believe climate change is happening?

To me part of the marches raison d'être is to highlight science such as climate change science and to combat scientific ignorance.

I mean you mention creationists – there is overwhelming scientific evidence to support the geological record and evolutionary development how is a creationist’s rejection of that different from rejecting global warming or believing it is a conspiracy invented by the Chinese to attack America?

Well there are some Republicans that understand climate change is happening and that it has a human dimension but many of the tea baggers and Trump supporters I’ve talked to seem to deny that and some seem to prefer conspiracy theories to reality.

The thing is if the attack on science is mainly coming from people on the right (for example in rejecting climate change evidence) and those from that section of the right define themselves in that way (as anti-science) then anyone that does accept science based evidence suddenly become a ‘leftie’ to that type of right winger.

 

6

According a recent report, A Dark and Constant Rage, from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), rightwing extremists have been responsible for planning at least 150 acts of terror in the United States over the past 25 years. They’ve killed 255 people in these attacks and injured 600 more. White supremacists and anti-government extremists are the biggest subset of rightwing extremists (which also includes groups such as anti-abortionists and anti-immigrant extremists) and are responsible for 85% of these incidents.

However, as the ADL points out, while “rightwing extremists have been one of the largest and most consistent sources of domestic terror incidents in the United States for many years”, this fact “has not gotten the attention it deserves.” What’s more, “it has garnered far less notice than … Islamic terrorism”.
Guardian

 

6

OK so you say you know that political violence has and does take place from both left and right AND that doesn’t mean ALL people of the left or right are violent BUT you would just like to really highlight the - fringe-left-on-everybody violence and rioting that's going on

And why are you – a right winger - wanting to shine a big spot light on left wing extremism – I mean you’ve already said it’s not a reflection on the vast majority of left wingers –but you know you just really want to highlight left wing violence, there is no agenda it’s just….

HEAY everyone look at this one person here - Linda Sarsour - don’t look at all those other women JUST LOOK AT HER and although I’m not saying all those other women are wrong LOOK AT LINDA she’s a MUSLIM and you now ALL MUSLIMS HATE WOMEN and while that is not a reflection on all those other people on the women’s march it’s just that, you know, you’d like to point of this out, there is no agenda it’s just….

LOL, come on man it’s the same fucking MO

 

Part one - the civil replay

But ‘governments’ are made up from our fellow citizens – ‘government’ covers every civil servant, police officer, everyone in the military and everyone elected and they are not all seven foot tall lizards from Alpha Centauri whatever the conspiracy theorist might say.

The US has an ‘elected government’ so isn’t any flaws in it down to those that elected people into government? It seems to me that some sneer and blame ‘government’ for being ‘bad’ when the true problem is a dysfunctional political system that allows ‘bad’ representatives into power, it would seem then to me that the solution would be to try and fix the political system so elections get ‘good’ or at least better representatives into power. People that have decent ideas that stand up to scrutiny and wish to improve the system.

 

Part two - the uncivil fucking can’t believe the crap said these days reply.

Americans have no friends in the US government.

And a hell of a lot of American’s are to blame for that.

They voted into power people with crap ideas and policies then stood back and seemed fucking amazed that those politicians enacted those polices and made things shittier for all but the few.

BUT YOU KNOW THE FUCK WHAT

They then fucking voted for the same crap ideas all over again and once again seemed so fucking amazed that things got shittier for all but the few.

Then they all go boo hoo and say ‘we can’t do nothing’ or some such crap

Well they could start by fucking listening to those people that were fucking warning them about what could happen, there were many.

STOP bloody moaning and START fucking listening and for fuck sake STOP voting for crappy ideas that can't be defended from criticism.

 

Of course I don't believe carbon dioxide is causing the ice caps to melt. If any of Gore's predictions from 10 years ago came true, Holland would be underwater. However, I do accept that humans can alter the climate with cloud seeding chemicals to manipulate rain patterns. Deforestation without proper care can cause desertification; resulting in microclimate change. Leveling ecosystems to build massive structures of asphalt and concrete has been proven to raise temperatures in that microclimate as well. I guarantee where you live, London, has higher average temperatures than the local countryside a few kilometers out. When towns and villages grow at an exponential rate, it has been known that the local average temperature rises with it.

The climategate scandal that exposed these scientists were manipulating the data for their agenda is all the proof I need.

The same ADL who says cartoon frogs are a symbol of white supremacy?

(I'll address more of this later)

While I can't and won't say that Antifa and BAMN represent the motive of the entire left. The vast majority of left wingers still seem to support Black Lives Matter. Even after the Dallas sniper incident.

If you took a deep look at how advocates for Sharia Law treat women, homosexuals, and atheists. You'd find that you have more in common with those churchy republicans you hate so much than you do with people like Linda Sarsour.

Let me remind you that under sharia law:
-a husband can beat his wife
-a husband can divorce his wife, but not vice versa
-you can get your hand cut off for stealing
-a woman's testimony is worth half that of a man's
-homosexuals are thrown from buildings
-etc

There's a paradoxical alliance between liberalism and islam. True liberalism doesn't stand for any of those things from that list. Linda Sarsour advocates and defends sharia law, yet she complains about the patriarchy. The left is very critical on Christianity for being anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion. So why is the left standing in solidarity with an even more strict abrahamic religion?

Ironically, Sarsour translated to Arabic means bug

 

Yeah, we can only believe Fox, Breibart, Alex Jones and Russia Today. Trump in Wonderland! De nial ain't just that long river in Africa. Power corrupts? Trump is outdoing the Grant Administration in that regard. Your chickens are coming home to roost. Face it. The guy is a walking hot air balloon.

 

Have you taken a poll? How would you even define "a majority of left wingers?" And did Black Lives Matter sponsor the Dallas sniper incident? You're outdoing yourself with your guilt by association propaganda MO.

 

During the dnc primary debates, all candidates were asked, "Do black lives matter, or do all lives matter?" All answered Black Lives Matter (of course). Yet prior to that, Martin O'Malley was under fire from his voting base when he said "AllLives Matter" during one of his campaign speeches; then he had to retract that statement and pander to BLM. So yes, discrediting black lives matter is a very unpopular thing to do if you are a leftist.

Who needs to conduct a poll when you can just look at the Tweets after the incident.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/07/08/black-lives-matter-supporters-celebrate-police-deaths-twitter/amp/
https://www.infowars.com/sick-black-lives-matter-supporters-celebrate-murder-of-dallas-cops/

The internet never forgets.

 

They used to say that about the Bourbon monarchs: "They learn nothing and they forget nothing."( It wasn't a complement ). Seriously, the comments of some random tweeters courtesy of Breitbart and Infowars isn't much of a data base for making global generaliations. As we know, the Internet is infested with trolls and morons. The statement by Martin O'Malley was made at a time when the nation had experienced a rather large number of police shootings of blacks, leading to a suspicion on the part of some that it was open season on blacks. Hence the name and the movement. When a white politician said "All lives matter" (which would be hard to argue with as a general proposition) it was taken as a slap at the resentment many people had that blacks (not all people) had become the special targets of these shootings. It sounded insensitive and out of touch. Hence the audience reaction. The statement was interpreted as "blacks have no special problem", and was, therefore, regarded as insensitive. I like and sympathize with O'Malley. He means well. But he's such a dweeb.