Trump Raises Specter Of Supporters Turning Violent If They Don’t Get Their Way

[ArgoEagle 1,792]

On 3/16/2019 at 8:15 PM, SaltyTiger said:

Big Harley dealership on Highway 98 ala Back Beach Road at PCB. 

According to them no mention or rumor of an upcoming rumble..............all media again

Idea brother Salty. Can we make 1 humongous thread called 1000 reasons why homer hates Trump so that he can stop making so many new and meaningless threads blaming Trump for everything that doesn't suit his cause. I haven't seen a man so obsessed with another man since Finkle was obsessed with Dan Marino on Ace Ventura.

[SaltyTiger 7,825]

1 hour ago, ArgoEagle said:

Idea brother Salty. Can we make 1 humongous thread called 1000 reasons why homer hates Trump so that he can stop making so many new and meaningless threads blaming Trump for everything that doesn't suit his cause. I haven't seen a man so obsessed with another man since Finkle was obsessed with Dan Marino on Ace Ventura.

No Argo. Brother Homer has good intentions. 

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

On 3/18/2019 at 8:59 AM, homersapien said:

Just though it odd that you picked out antifa in particular, as if they are a salient problem.

I choose Antifa to get questioning comments and down votes from Antifa fanboi's around here. Then I read them and go to the gym. Saves money on pre-workout.

I find it odd that as the groundbreaking, gold standard, psychological profiler of the 21st century you ask these questions.

[ArgoEagle 1,792]

12 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

No Argo. Brother Homer has good intentions. 

You must be wearing your homer colored glasses.

[AUDub 11,158]

Holy s*** this is a good piece. 

https://thebulwark.com/its-time-to-stop-talking-about-a-national-divorce/

Quote

It’s Time To Stop Talking About a “National Divorce”

It shouldn’t be difficult for the party of Lincoln to purge itself of civil war agitators.

by CHRISTIAN VANDERBROUK 

 

MARCH 21, 2019 4:05 AM

 

 

Loose talk about breaking up the United States has become increasingly common. While quixotic secession campaigns for California or Texas are more amusing than threatening, there seems to be something different about the right-wing movement for a “peaceful separation” or “national divorce.” If you look closely, there’s an undercurrent carrying the threat of political violence. Or even full-scale civil war.

“It’s Time For The United States To Divorce Before Things Get Dangerous,” the Federalist’s Jesse Kelly argues. Citing deep cultural divides on religion, gun rights, and immigration, Kelly warns that “sooner or later, the left-wing rage mob will start coming for the careers (and lives) of any normal American who sees things differently.”

Trump supporters face genocide or ruin, he writes in “America Is Over, But I Won’t See It Go Without An Epic Fight.” In that essay, Kelly asks readers to imagine themselves as native Lakota tribesmen who must choose between life on a reservation—“in the liberal utopian nightmare of 57 genders and government control over everything”—or glorious, doomed resistance: as the Lakota who fights back and holds his enemy’s scalp in his hands.

You killed him, won the day, carved off the top of his skull, and now you’re standing over him victorious on the now-quiet field of battle, with a quiet breeze blowing through your hair. Your adrenaline is still pumping with that primal feeling of victory and the elation of having survived when others didn’t.

“Be the Lakota,” Kelly concludes.

This is just a bit from an aspiring TV pundit, right? Merely a winking step-across-the-line for clicks and attention?

Over the weekend, Iowa Rep. Steve King (last seen losing his committee assignments over white nationalist-friendly comments) shared a meme joking that the right would win the next civil war because his supporters are stockpiling ammunition while the other side obsesses about gender and bathrooms.

Such discussions aren’t limited to fringe outlets or marginalized congressmen. National Review’s Victor Davis Hanson takes the likelihood of violent conflict almost as a given. “How, when, and why has the United States now arrived at the brink of a veritable civil war?” he asks. “We are now nearing a point comparable to 1860, and perhaps past 1968.”

Maybe Hanson is just being hyperbolic and we should take him seriously, and not literally, when he says that the divisions of 2018 are comparable to the divisions of 1860? After all, Hanson’s list of grievances—displacement from a globalized economy, cultural and campus radicalism, immigration, and the legacy of Barack Obama—is familiar enough, and reasonable arguments can be had about all of them. And one of his solutions—“we need to develop a new racial sense that we are so intermarried and assimilated that cardboard racial cutouts are irrelevant”—seems much less arduous than any of the pathways out of the antebellum years. Hanson’s view, while it gives a frisson of danger, would probably disappoint the white nationalists who see civil strife as both necessary and desirable.

The president, of course, has long indicated his support for political violence, threatening protesters with beatings at his rallies and approving the assault of a journalist by a congressional candidate. But last week, Trump took that openness to violence in a new direction, suggesting he could unleash the police, military, and “Bikers for Trump” on “the left.”

cont. at the link

 

[homersapien 11,396]

On 3/18/2019 at 8:34 PM, AUFAN78 said:

You sure? Could be he said it as "I hope they remain peaceful." Do you really know his intent or are you simply applying Homey logic? 

There's that common sense thing.

But you are free to grasp that interpretation if it works for you.

[homersapien 11,396]

16 hours ago, ArgoEagle said:

Idea brother Salty. Can we make 1 humongous thread called 1000 reasons why homer hates Trump so that he can stop making so many new and meaningless threads blaming Trump for everything that doesn't suit his cause. I haven't seen a man so obsessed with another man since Finkle was obsessed with Dan Marino on Ace Ventura.

So,

(1) do you reject the fact Trump said what he said or,

(2) do you ascribe to Salty's theory he was maybe expressing the hope they would "all remain peaceful"?

It sounds like you would rather avoid the question all together and just talk about me.  Are you "obsessed" with me?

[homersapien 11,396]

1 hour ago, AUDub said:

Holy s*** this is a good piece. 

https://thebulwark.com/its-time-to-stop-talking-about-a-national-divorce/

 

Wow.

Talk about pointing out the obvious: "If conservatism is to survive the challenge of white identity politics and nationalist populism, it must return to its classically liberal roots and stop harboring extremists."

Considering the current condition of the Republican party, I really question if this is still possible. Can the Republican party reclaim itself and divorce itself from the radical crazies described in this piece?

Have the crazies totally appropriated the term "conservative"?  What will take it's place to represent the "conservatism based on classically liberal roots"?

It's obvious Trump is pushing in the wrong direction. He clearly sees these folks as political allies.

 

[AUDub 11,158]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Wow.

Talk about pointing out the obvious: "If conservatism is to survive the challenge of white identity politics and nationalist populism, it must return to its classically liberal roots and stop harboring extremists."

Considering the current condition of the Republican party, I really question if this is still possible. Can the Republican party reclaim itself and divorce itself from the radical crazies described in this piece?

Have the crazies totally appropriated the term "conservative"?  What will take it's place to represent the "conservatism based on classically liberal roots"?

It's obvious Trump is pushing in the wrong direction. He clearly sees these folks as political allies.

 

Should be noted that Vanderbrouk is himself conservative and that site belongs to Bill Kristol and Charlie Sykes.

 

[homersapien 11,396]

16 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Should be noted that Vanderbrouk is himself conservative and that site belongs to Bill Kristol and Charlie Sykes.

 

Actually, I assumed he was.  There is a fairly large contingent of Republicans who recognize the problem.

This is the new site that was intended to replace the "Weekly Standard" I suppose. Looks like some pretty good stuff:

https://thebulwark.com/bulwark-originals/

Thanks for posting. I hadn't seen it.

[AUDub 11,158]

10 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Actually, I assumed he was.  There is a fairly large contingent of Republicans who recognize the problem.

This is the new site that was intended to replace the "Weekly Standard" I suppose. Looks like some pretty good stuff:

https://thebulwark.com/bulwark-originals/

Thanks for posting. I hadn't seen it.

I would very much recommend reading his other articles. He’s an insightful writer that has been incisively calling out idiots on the right for their crap for years now. I’ve been a follower of his on Twitter since he was a lowly anonymous Twitter conservative going by the nom de plume Brandt, after the character from the Big Lebowski. He blew up when he called Selena Zito on her bull****, then outed himself publicly a month ago when he started writing for the Bulwark. 

https://thebulwark.com/author/christianvanderbrouk/

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Run for the hills. Conservatives are rioting in the street just like the libs

Good move by Trump today:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-signs-executive-order-to-promote-free-speech-on-college-campuses

But it is getting the expected results by some who speak with forked tongues.

[AUFAN78 3,916]

7 hours ago, homersapien said:

It's obvious Trump is pushing in the wrong direction. He clearly sees these folks as political allies.

I'll tell you what is obvious. Even when Trump succinctly calls these groups out you choose to repeat the media lies. You are not alone and thanks to a despicable media one can somewhat understand. Not everyone seeks truth, but rather relies on their preferred source(s) for the truth, even when it isn't. 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/03/21/trump_didnt_call_neo-nazis_fine_people_heres_proof_139815.html

[AUDub 11,158]

31 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

I'll tell you what is obvious. Even when Trump succinctly calls these groups out you choose to repeat the media lies. You are not alone and thanks to a despicable media one can somewhat understand. Not everyone seeks truth, but rather relies on their preferred source(s) for the truth, even when it isn't. 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/03/21/trump_didnt_call_neo-nazis_fine_people_heres_proof_139815.html

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

[SaltyTiger 7,825]

9 hours ago, homersapien said:

 

(2) do you ascribe to Salty's theory he was maybe expressing the hope they would "all remain peaceful"?

That was 78. I went to the Harley place.... they are going to remain peaceful. No "hope" in my words.

Bulwark? you and Ben sound like two old southern ladies talking about a new evangelical. 

[homersapien 11,396]

15 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

I'll tell you what is obvious. Even when Trump succinctly calls these groups out you choose to repeat the media lies. You are not alone and thanks to a despicable media one can somewhat understand. Not everyone seeks truth, but rather relies on their preferred source(s) for the truth, even when it isn't. 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/03/21/trump_didnt_call_neo-nazis_fine_people_heres_proof_139815.html

We are talking about what Trump said.  It's quoted in the thread above.

[AUFAN78 3,916]

7 hours ago, homersapien said:

We are talking about what Trump said.  It's quoted in the thread above.

No. We are talking about your interpretation of Trumps statements.  

[AUDub 11,158]

10 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

No. We are talking about your interpretation of Trumps statements.  

And if you think that RCP article makes any sense at all, man, you are stupid. 

[AUFAN78 3,916]

35 minutes ago, AUDub said:

And if you think that RCP article makes any sense at all, man, you are stupid. 

So it doesn't fit the narrative of butthurt liberals wearing blinders. Of course those pawns would consider it stupid.

I can't imagine the pain that comes when collusion, racism, antisemitism and misogyny are debunked in short order.

The reality is those that deny this and continue to believe lies perpetrated by a corrupt media are stupid.   

I have no pity for that kind of ignorance. Simpletons do not amuse me.

[AUDub 11,158]

11 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

So it doesn't fit the narrative of butthurt liberals wearing blinders. Of course those pawns would consider it stupid.

I can't imagine the pain that comes when collusion, racism, antisemitism and misogyny are debunked in short order.

The reality is those that deny this and continue to believe lies perpetrated by a corrupt media are stupid.   

I have no pity for that kind of ignorance. Simpletons do not amuse me.

It doesn’t fit the narrative because it’s revisionism. A rewrite on history. When he said "very fine people," he was specifically talking about "the night before" August 12. The night before was the guys with torches screaming "Jews will not replace us” and “blood and soil.”

[AUDub 11,158]

5 minutes ago, AUDub said:

It doesn’t fit the narrative because it’s revisionism. A rewrite on history. When he said "very fine people," he was specifically talking about "the night before" August 12. The night before was the guys with torches screaming "Jews will not replace us” and “blood and soil.”

Laugh away. 

http://tracinskiletter.com/2017/08/16/donald-trump-need-not-to-be-president-yesterday/

[AUFAN78 3,916]

16 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Laugh away. 

http://tracinskiletter.com/2017/08/16/donald-trump-need-not-to-be-president-yesterday/

No worries, I will. I think you should read. 

The Tracinski LetterNews and Analysis from an Individualist Perspective

Can't make this stuff up. LOL

[AUDub 11,158]

6 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

No worries, I will. I think you should read. 

The Tracinski LetterNews and Analysis from an Individualist Perspective

Can't make this stuff up. LOL

That’s not a rebuttal and you know it. 

[AUDub 11,158]

Trump is even quoted directly in that piece. 

Quote

There were people in that rally. I looked the night before. If you look, they were people protesting very quietly the taking down the statue of Robert E. Lee. I am sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day, it looked like they had some rough, bad people, neo-Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call them. But you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest and very legally protest.

 

[AUFAN78 3,916]

Just now, AUDub said:

That’s not a rebuttal and you know it. 

Nor was that ridiculous crap you posted and you know it. I care only about the truth not some goofy Tracinski opinion. Post a fact and we can discuss.