bannination wrote:
The medical field is horrible for IT, they won't spend a dime. I have to try to support clients that are still running Windows XP with IE8 or less.....
We paid our head IT guy $150K plus bennies and had Windows 7 when I retired.
For the people praising the guy who went after Trump on stage, heres another shot of him for ya'll,
just so you know exactly what youre supporting.
WHO is supporting him?
Hint: Having a mountain of reasons not to like Trump and laughing at his reaction, is not the same as praising the guy who rushed the stage or his tactics.
bannination wrote:
The medical field is horrible for IT, they won't spend a dime. I have to try to support clients that are still running Windows XP with IE8 or less.....
We paid our head IT guy $150K plus bennies and had Windows 7 when I retired.
My work email (Outlook) has gone down without warning, this after a central portion of the entire system went down last week.
For the people praising the guy who went after Trump on stage, heres another shot of him for ya'll,
just so you know exactly what youre supporting.
WHO is supporting him?
Hint: Having a mountain of reasons not to like Trump and laughing at his reaction, is not the same as praising the guy who rushed the stage or his tactics.
Starting to look like seth is a trumpett, but won't admit it.
In all fairness, I can't imagine why any of them would admit it
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
billy.pilgrim wrote:Starting to look like seth is a trumpett, but won't admit it.
Nah. He's been pretty consistently anti-Trump.
But it's just like how he keeps insisting that more than one person disagreeing with him means that they're conspiring. He truly believes that ANYONE who criticizes a Republican candidate has the exact same set of beliefs. There's no spectrum of left vs. right, libertarian vs statist or conservative vs. progressive. You're a leftie liberal, and you all have the exact same beliefs. Some anarchist dipshit standing on the flag means that EVERYONE who disagrees with Trump supports standing on the flag.
The problem is that his own anti-Trump criticism puts him in this group. He'll have to reconcile this, or he'll snap. It doesn't help that he can no longer deny that Trump is the clear choice of Republicans. By now he probably has a severe nervous twitch....
Devil's Advocate - I don't support the violent protests (the vast majority have been nonviolent or self defense), would never be part of a planned violent protest (probably do 1st aid if unplanned and I happened to be there) and think they're usually counter-productive. However, what should people do when they are marginalized and oppressed and see the real possibility of a neofascist POTUS - a real fascist, not the wingnutty version ascribed to Obama or "Hitlary" - who is energizing millions of flat out racists with neofascist tendencies? In hindsight, would we have objected to any tactics used to try and stop Naziism early? And, from the relative security of our white middle class (or richer) positions, do we have any standing to criticize tactics if we aren't doing everything we can to nonviolently prevent a Trump (or arguably Cruz) presidency?
Also, re "usually counter-productive" - Few are really supporting the violent protesters, but Cruz, Rubio and many others are saying that Trump bears a significant portion of the blame, even to the extent that the Fayetteville, NC PD considered and decided against charging Trump with inciting a riot. So, have they been counter-productive or not?
I don't have answers, just laying out an alternate perspective. Discuss.
Vrede too wrote:Devil's Advocate - I don't support the violent protests (the vast majority have been nonviolent or self defense), would never be part of a planned violent protest (probably do 1st aid if unplanned and I happened to be there) and think they're usually counter-productive. However, what should people do when they are marginalized and oppressed and see the real possibility of a neofascist POTUS - a real fascist, not the wingnutty version ascribed to Obama or "Hitlary" - who is energizing millions of flat out racists with neofascist tendencies? In hindsight, would we have objected to any tactics used to try and stop Naziism early? And, from the relative security of our white middle class (or richer) positions, do we have any standing to criticize tactics if we aren't doing everything we can to nonviolently prevent a Trump (or arguably Cruz) presidency?
Also, re "usually counter-productive" - Few are really supporting the violent protesters, but Cruz, Rubio and many others are saying that Trump bears a significant portion of the blame, even to the extent that the Fayetteville, NC PD considered and decided against charging Trump with inciting a riot. So, have they been counter-productive or not?
I don't have answers, just laying out an alternate perspective. Discuss.
For the people praising the guy who went after Trump on stage, heres another shot of him for ya'll, just so you know exactly what youre supporting.
WHO is supporting him?
billy.pilgrim wrote:Starting to look like seth is a trumpett, but won't admit it. In all fairness, I can't imagine why any of them would admit it
rstrong wrote: Nah. He's been pretty consistently anti-Trump. Correct. Definitely not a show of support; it was posted for show; the Trump followers believe the anti-Trumpers are anti-American, ISIS supporting, wingnuts. I will admit that in the beginning, I was slightly leaning towards Trump, but as his looniness and sheer stupidity began to surface, I ran in the other direction.
By now he probably has a severe nervous twitch.... The nervous twitching I get is when I see that the other contenders are only one to two notches below Trump, and rapidly gaining ground, but I'll be damned if I'll move to Canada.
Don't take life too seriously; No one gets out alive
Here's a different take on the situation. Trump's ties to "professional" wrestling are well known. What if he has chosen a path of outrageous boisterous language akin to the style of wrasslers to engender a cult like following when it is really all an act, and if elected, he reverts back to common sense?
Wneglia wrote:Here's a different take on the situation. Trump's ties to "professional" wrestling are well known. What if he has chosen a path of outrageous boisterous language akin to the style of wrasslers to engender a cult like following when it is really all an act, and if elected, he reverts back to common sense?
Yeah, this is almost certainly what's going on. He's seeing its working and is rolling with it.
You aren't doing it wrong if no one knows what you are doing.
They might, but the author doesn't really make the case that protesters helped Nixon in 1968 or that the situations are comparable since most of the protests were against the Dems, not Nixon. There was a lot going on in 1968 and people had good reason to be anti-Dem besides the fact that people were protesting. Now, Trump can be seen as being as much a cause of any perceived break down in "law and order" as a solution to it. Whether that's what voters will conclude, I don't know. It's gonna be a wild ride if he's the nominee, people will be active in thousands of ways.
Last edited by Vrede too on Tue Mar 15, 2016 9:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Wneglia wrote:Here's a different take on the situation. Trump's ties to "professional" wrestling are well known. What if he has chosen a path of outrageous boisterous language akin to the style of wrasslers to engender a cult like following when it is really all an act, and if elected, he reverts back to common sense?
Could be. It's a poser, do we react to what Trump and his followers are or what we hope he and they will be? For example, how does Trump back down on his promise to deport more Latinos than Obama's unprecedented high numbers or his promise to exclude all Muslims that wish to enter the US for any reason, and would he want to?
He is credibly credited with being actuated by lofty, unselfish patriotism. He probably does not know himself just what he wants to accomplish. The keynote of his propaganda in speaking and writing is violent anti-Semitism. His followers are nicknamed the "Hakenkreuzler." So violent are Hitler's fulminations against the Jews that a number of prominent Jewish citizens are reported to have sought safe asylums in the Bavarian highlands, easily reached by fast motor cars, whence they could hurry their women and children when forewarned of an anti-Semitic St. Bartholomew's night.
But several reliable, well-informed sources confirmed the idea that Hitler's anti-Semitism was not so genuine or violent as it sounded, and that he was merely using anti-Semitic propaganda as a bait to catch masses of followers and keep them aroused, enthusiastic, and in line for the time when his organization is perfected and sufficiently powerful to be employed effectively for political purposes.
A sophisticated politician credited Hitler with peculiar political cleverness for laying emphasis and over-emphasis on anti-Semitism, saying: "You can't expect the masses to understand or appreciate your finer real aims. You must feed the masses with cruder morsels and ideas like anti-Semitism. It would be politically all wrong to tell them the truth about where you really are leading them."
Now, Brown's sources in all likelihood did tell him that Hitler's anti-Semitism was for show. That was a popular opinion during Nazism's early days. But that speaks to how unprepared polite German society was for a movement as sincerely, radically violent as Hitler's to take power.
One other thing: if "violent anti-Semitism" was such a winning issue for Hitler, what does that tell us about the state of public opinion in Bavaria in 1922?
Or, the state of public opinion in America in 2016, some of its leaders and media reporting on them?
In order to insult a rival, Donald Trump slighted a supporter Monday during a rally in Columbus, Ohio.
On the eve of the Ohio Republican primary, Trump was joined in the state by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who has attended several of the Republican frontrunner's events since announcing his endorsement last month. Since he was in John Kasich's home state, Trump decided to get a dig in, Politico reports, telling the crowd: "Your governor is absentee. He goes to New Hampshire, he's living in New Hampshire. Living! Where's Chris, is Chris around? Even more than Chris Christie. He was there, right? Even more."
Christie was there, standing right next to Trump. Trump tried to soften the blow somewhat, saying, "I hated to do that, but I had to make my point." Christie has been blasted by critics for not only hitting the road for his own failed presidential run, but also for missing the funeral Monday of a state trooper killed last week so he could stump for Trump.
In order to insult a rival, Donald Trump slighted a supporter Monday during a rally in Columbus, Ohio.
On the eve of the Ohio Republican primary, Trump was joined in the state by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who has attended several of the Republican frontrunner's events since announcing his endorsement last month. Since he was in John Kasich's home state, Trump decided to get a dig in, Politico reports, telling the crowd: "Your governor is absentee. He goes to New Hampshire, he's living in New Hampshire. Living! Where's Chris, is Chris around? Even more than Chris Christie. He was there, right? Even more."
Christie was there, standing right next to Trump. Trump tried to soften the blow somewhat, saying, "I hated to do that, but I had to make my point." Christie has been blasted by critics for not only hitting the road for his own failed presidential run, but also for missing the funeral Monday of a state trooper killed last week so he could stump for Trump.
Shit do you think Chris Christie is really being held captive? Donny T and his crew might be holding his family hostage or something.
Somebody needs to start a "Free Chris Christie" movement.
You aren't doing it wrong if no one knows what you are doing.
Vrede too wrote:Devil's Advocate - I don't support the violent protests (the vast majority have been nonviolent or self defense),
There's a difference in a "violent protest" and in a protest that turns violent. Trump (and lately his political ho Sarah) have been trying to characterize the protesters as violent thugs - even when they're just standing there with a sign or wearing an anti-Trump shirt. I wouldn't be surprised to see Trump pay some guys to cause a violent disruption, though. As I read recently, "Get 'em outta here!" is the new "You're fired!"
Different story, same character - So Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi now endorses Trump, right before the primary. OKfine. But it turns out that in 2013, she was about to take action against Trump University. Then got a $25,000 contribution from Trump Foundation. Then decided she didn't have to file suit because somebody in New York already had. Coincidence, I'm sure.