The next stage: Will anti-Trump marches become a movement?

[Shawn0000]

Just now, Usernames said:

 

Go ahead. It's revelatory. 

 

I already did, thanks.  Do you like the 1st amendment?

[crackhouseparty]

Just now, Shawn0000 said:

 

What relevance would their past employment have and particularly whether or not it was gainful employment?

 

 

More their current employment, i.e. not past employment.  You know, have they too much time on their hands?  And is the taxpayer supplementing this excess?

[crackhouseparty]

Just now, Shawn0000 said:

 

I already did, thanks.  Do you like the 1st amendment?

 

You're not accepting of the democratic vote then, Shawn?

[Shawn0000]

Just now, crackhouseparty said:

 

You're not accepting of the democratic vote then, Shawn?

 

What?  Where did you get that nonsense from?

[Usernames]

9 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

I didn't add anything, that has been there for quite a while already.

 

Not judging people by their appearance but rather by their heart, is nonsense to you, really?

 

As these are mug shots, their "hearts" appear to be one with rioting, smashing car windows, throwing rocks at police, bashing in electrical boxes, and using baseball bats to smash windows. 

[crackhouseparty]

Just now, Shawn0000 said:

 

What?  Where did you get that nonsense from?

 

Good.  Then you are accepting of the democratic vote and Trump is the next POTUS.

 

Bless you.

[crackhouseparty]

1 minute ago, Usernames said:

 

As these are mug shots, their "hearts" appear to be one with rioting, smashing car windows, throwing rocks at police, bashing in electrical boxes, and using baseball bats to smash windows. 

 

Shawn is all over the place.  Reading between the lines, he appears to be condoning spotty teenagers rampaging all over the place.  I hope he doesn't mind his taxes being used to clear up the mess.

 

And these little urchins still don't have a job.

[Shawn0000]

1 minute ago, Usernames said:

 

As these are mug shots, their "hearts" appear to be one with rioting, smashing car windows, throwing rocks at police, bashing in electrical boxes, and using baseball bats to smash windows. 

 

No mug shots show nothing of where someones heart is, that is just your judgmental mind making silly assumptions again, all we know is these people have been arrested.

[crackhouseparty]

1 minute ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

No mug shots show nothing of where someones heart is, that is just your judgmental mind making silly assumptions again, all we know is these people have been arrested.

 

They are criminals, Shawn.  End of.

[Shawn0000]

2 minutes ago, crackhouseparty said:

 

Shawn is all over the place.  Reading between the lines, he appears to be condoning spotty teenagers rampaging all over the place.  I hope he doesn't mind his taxes being used to clear up the mess.

 

And these little urchins still don't have a job.

 

I am doing nothing of the sort, I am just not taking anyone seriously who says that you can tell from someones picture if they should be taken seriously or not.

[Shawn0000]

2 minutes ago, crackhouseparty said:

 

They are criminals, Shawn.  End of.

 

No judge, no jury, just an arrest, but crackhouseparty has spoken, end of.

[crackhouseparty]

2 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

I am doing nothing of the sort, I am just not taking anyone seriously who says that you can tell from someones picture if they should be taken seriously or not.

 

They've all been charged with riotous behaviour.  Glad you haven't been a victim, though.

Edited November 15, 2016 by crackhouseparty

[Shawn0000]

7 minutes ago, crackhouseparty said:

 

They've all been charged with riotous behaviour.  Glad you haven't been a victim, though.

 

Riotous behavior falls under breach of the peace in US law and includes "rowdiness", it may sound serious but it isn't necessarily serious at all, and it's all to easy to blame those arrested for the crimes seen to be committed, personally I would prefer a judge to do the judging.  And anyway, the original comment was regarding how they look not how their charges affect our ability to take them seriously, thanks.

[crackhouseparty]

3 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Riotous behavior falls under breach of the peace in US law and includes "rowdiness", it may sound serious but it isn't necessarily serious at all, and it's all to easy to blame those arrested for the crimes seen to be committed, personally I would prefer a judge to do the judging.  And anyway, the original comment was regarding how they look not how their charges affect our ability to take them seriously, thanks.

 

They'll be convicted.  Don't worry about that.

[pgrahmm]

^^^^^^Pretty much freestyle with gusts of condemnation, entitlement, guffaws, & Walter Mitty-esqe self proclaimed name calling "authority" figures, along with a sprinkling of sociopaths and whack jobs.....Kind of like having a cocktail party at the Molokav's place.....

 

Jump on in & be amused.......

 

If you sift through long enough you'll find some substance....

[nottocus]

1 hour ago, DriveByTrucker said:

 

Its funny that nobody seems to understand what liberals actually are......because it were "the inadequate and pathetic liberals views" as you call them which  made Trump win the electoral votes (not for instance the endorsement by the KKK). The majority of the Trump voters are not racist, but are the working class people who are without a job, have their homes foreclosed, and cant afford healthcare for their kids, and voted for Trump because of his liberal policies to solve this (ie creating jobs, killing trade deals, improve infrastructure, etc. you know, the real socialist ideals). With that in mind, I am sure you understand how foolish it is to think that liberals hate white straight guys (hell I can guarantee you that I dont hate myself for that matter), but you might need some time to think it over.

For some incomprehensible reason people seem to think Clinton is liberal, or even funnier, that she is left. These people are complete idiots.

CLueless

[metisdead]

A post containing content copy and pasted from another site has been removed as it was in violation of fair use policy.  

 

A post replying to a now removed post has been removed. 

[Jingthing]

Hardly representative. My favorite protest poster says ... I'm really not happy about this!

trumpists won the government but they would be best off accepting that a huge portion of Americans are never going to trust trump for many reasons including irrefutable evidence that he is a con man that ran the most hateful, divisive, and big lie riddled campaign in U.S. history.

So that's over right? No. He has just picked the key architect of that style of campaign as his top adviser.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Morch, I am not a leader of this opposition movement. I am assuming strong and credible leaders will emerge that offer a way for the many millions of Americans that are totally horrified that trump (and Breitbart) are taking power and feel a strong need for a way to channel that energy into a hopefully productive opposition tactic and strategy. I don't know what that will be yet or who the leader(s) will be. Possibly Elizabeth Warren will be a big part of it. 

As far as winning people back, we've talked about this before. trump has already broken his promises bigly. I think that a large  portion of the trump voters will need less persuading than you do when the reality of the big lies really hits the fan. 

 

As of now, there is no "opposition movement". For it to be a movement, there need to be evidence of continuity and persistence. Better see how it pans out before jumping the gun with titles (if the elections campaign was not enough of a lesson).

 

What I'm talking about go zilch to do with leadership. Leaders may be the public face of a movement or a party, and indeed, many people perceive a such organizations by the image its leaders project. Pretty much what we're seeing in most election campaigns. The thing is, the vast majority of people do not get to actually meet leadership, but are more likely to come in contact with ordinary people rooting for the cause. Relating to people without labeling, hyperbole, and bombastic terminology might do more with regard to their hearts and minds. People rarely change their minds when called names, or through being engaged in a confrontational manner. Again, seems like some of the immediate free lessons of the recent elections are rejected.

 

Same goes for relying on Trump's probable future mistakes to be enough. It may, or may not be enough to drive them away from Trump (and I think another obvious lesson rejected is underestimating his salesmanship), but it may not necessarily be enough to have those voters come back. One of the main themes in these elections, and the vote for Trump, was a desire for change in the political system. Not sure voters will simply flock to the same old, even post-Trump. 

 

This brings us back to leadership, or rather, future leadership. Way I see it, going for well established mainstream politicians with DC credits to their name is one set of electoral appeal problems, while going for more extreme left candidates, even those "pure of heart" ones, poses other disadvantages. No easy answers on this one. Could be wrong, but I get the impression that globally, political parties losing the elections after a long time in power, aren't that great at reforming themselves. The more common phenomenon is petty squabbling and post elections backstabbing.

[Jingthing]

You're projecting a lot of stuff on me that doesn't apply but I don't matter. An ultimately successful repudiation of trumpist power does. You're right nobody knows for sure where the opposition call it a movement or not goes but I think it continues long term in yet to be determined forms. You don't. So what?

[gemini81]

Might get bigger if Soros is paying them enough.

[Morch]

59 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

You're projecting a lot of stuff on me that doesn't apply but I don't matter. An ultimately successful repudiation of trumpist power does. You're right nobody knows for sure where the opposition call it a movement or not goes but I think it continues long term in yet to be determined forms. You don't. So what?

 

How am I projecting and how doesn't it apply? You post quite a bit, to put it mildly, expressing your feelings and thoughts on the elections, the candidates and the electorate. For the most part, what I refer to goes directly to the things you post and posted, both pre and post elections.

 

There seems to be a tendency to jump the gun on many things related to the elections. Posters celebrating Trump's actions before he did anything, posters saying its doomsday before he did anything. Same goes for crowning presidents before they won and same goes for making protests into an ongoing long term resistance after only a few days passed.

[Jingthing]

Lots of things. I get the feeling that you think I think all trump supporters are racist yet I never said that. I get the feeling you think I don't think the democratic party doesn't have a problem with being labelled only for coastal elites by the heartland and I don't think that needs to be addressed. The problem is real and it does need to be addressed.

One thing that I think we are far apart on is your tone comes off like this was just another election and things are normalized now. I don't buy it. I'm with the camp that sees this election as cataclysmic. A historical shock on par with 911. It's ok if we disagree right?

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Lots of things. I get the feeling that you think I think all trump supporters are racist yet I never said that. I get the feeling you think I don't think the democratic party doesn't have a problem with being labelled only for coastal elites by the heartland and I don't think that needs to be addressed. The problem is real and it does need to be addressed.

One thing that I think we are far apart on is your tone comes off like this was just another election and things are normalized now. I don't buy it. I'm with the camp that sees this election as cataclysmic. A historical shock on par with 911. It's ok if we disagree right?

 

 

There's just so much bile and scorn that can be poured on a side's political views before they stop listening. Cuts both ways, guess you know where I stand on that in general. I think a lot of it doesn't have to do with content but with how things are perceived. And accept it or not, your posts seem to leave very little room for maneuvering when it comes to Republican voters. I say Republican, as a reference to the sizeable part of the electorate who did not necessarily see Trump as a good candidate - but as the lesser of two evils. I'm guessing here, but throwing a fit over the election results probably makes these people more confident in their choice.

 

This relates to tone. I think we agree that these protests will not bring about Trump's demise or change the elections results. If their aim is more long term, then both the violence in the streets  and the tone on the internet do not play favorably for your cause. While I do think that Trump's presidency could be trouble on many levels, I do not believe all the doomsday scenarios will indeed come about. But even if I did, and to the extent that I  do - I'd still hold that keeping a level head is a better choice. Granted, I'm probably less emotionally involved with regard to some of the issues you often raise.

 

Just my opinion - and it is perfectly alright if we disagree.

[Jingthing]

Emotionally involved? 
Yes, I plead guilty. 

I still think you don't get it about what this election shock means.

Totally virgin territory in the American experience.

The opposite of a normal election is not going to result in anything like a normal presidency for the shock winner.

 

http://www.advocate.com/politics/2016/11/15/north-carolina-kkk-group-announces-celebratory-march
 

Edited November 15, 2016 by Jingthing

[Publicus]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

As of now, there is no "opposition movement". For it to be a movement, there need to be evidence of continuity and persistence. Better see how it pans out before jumping the gun with titles (if the elections campaign was not enough of a lesson).

 

What I'm talking about go zilch to do with leadership. Leaders may be the public face of a movement or a party, and indeed, many people perceive a such organizations by the image its leaders project. Pretty much what we're seeing in most election campaigns. The thing is, the vast majority of people do not get to actually meet leadership, but are more likely to come in contact with ordinary people rooting for the cause. Relating to people without labeling, hyperbole, and bombastic terminology might do more with regard to their hearts and minds. People rarely change their minds when called names, or through being engaged in a confrontational manner. Again, seems like some of the immediate free lessons of the recent elections are rejected.

 

Same goes for relying on Trump's probable future mistakes to be enough. It may, or may not be enough to drive them away from Trump (and I think another obvious lesson rejected is underestimating his salesmanship), but it may not necessarily be enough to have those voters come back. One of the main themes in these elections, and the vote for Trump, was a desire for change in the political system. Not sure voters will simply flock to the same old, even post-Trump. 

 

This brings us back to leadership, or rather, future leadership. Way I see it, going for well established mainstream politicians with DC credits to their name is one set of electoral appeal problems, while going for more extreme left candidates, even those "pure of heart" ones, poses other disadvantages. No easy answers on this one. Could be wrong, but I get the impression that globally, political parties losing the elections after a long time in power, aren't that great at reforming themselves. The more common phenomenon is petty squabbling and post elections backstabbing.

 

People are not much committed to street movements during recent times, so we'll have to see empirically what might become of the present actions in the streets.

 

With IT and mediums such as social media and internet, cell phones and the like people can organise not only well but quickly. Conversely, when people can communicate as we communicate here, they're less likely to take to the streets en masse. Occupy for instance was an extended event rather than a long term movement that attracted a quantitative participation by a driving demographic, such as the Boomers against the Vietnam War, or a powerful engine socio-economic grouping.

 

The present demonstrations are directed and targeted to the world at large (which is why the right is lost in trying to characterise them in the parochial and absurd, mindlessly silly terms of trying to change the election result and rejecting the process that produced it). The protest demonstrators are trying to show the world that USA is not Donald Trump. I've done my own posting here in the same respect, i.e., presenting the data that show Ma and Pa Kettle made the difference in the election, not possibly you, and certainly not myself or other progressives here.

 

There's talk of a million woman march on Washington which likely will occur in some form and extent, but women have been marching on Washington for 150 years so that is unlikely to be the catalyst or core of a 'movement' that would sustain itself in broader and more encompassing terms, impact, efficacy.

 

Given that writing one's elected member of the U.S. House, or the Senate, or to Potus HimSelf is now more useless than it normally is, there will be some street actions going forward. The inauguration will be interesting and we'd have to see what if anything might manifest in the streets of Amerika subsequently or consequently.

 

The New Left Movement of roughly 1965 - 75 was strong and effective which is why and how it lasted a decade in the streets and in arduous meeting halls. It had its proliferation of literature in books and manuscripts popularly circulated that gave it the substance a Movement must have to continue and to thrive.

 

It was routine to meet and to politically kibbutz with our national leaders right in our own haunts because they were always rotating through in an impressive application of democratic principles and practice. By the informal talk they wanted to know about us and what we knew and were doing, and they related to us their learned experience and that of others across our great nation.

 

We of the Movement sat in MIT large lecture caverns many evenings where Chomsky railed to us face to face against the war...also Howard Zinn at Boston University and a slew of academics during our own time after classes or work.  We didn't have IT and its social media convenience so we had to meet face to face and go literally into the streets, hit the bookstores, sit on the floor to do community read-ins then discuss all input through and through of each and every development and literally to strategise. That's not the case in the present time or circumstance.

 

Some protesters will hound Trump everywhere he goes. There well might be a few big event demonstrations similar to a million woman march that is greater than being a gender identity and interest march (crossing all gender too and of course). But I just don't see many millennials for instance massing in the street pumping their fist and chanting. It's sort of a very yesterday kind of thingy in a multiplicity of ways.

 

So a Movement is unlikely but a few biggie events on an ongoing basis several months apart that shake and bake the other side and skewer 'em are what may be likely.

[kevkev1888]

6 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Emotionally involved? 
Yes, I plead guilty. 

I still think you don't get it about what this election shock means.

Totally virgin territory in the American experience.

The opposite of a normal election is not going to result in anything like a normal presidency for the shock winner.

 

http://www.advocate.com/politics/2016/11/15/north-carolina-kkk-group-announces-celebratory-march
 

 

Yeah unlike a normal presidency, Trump may actually get some positive things done. 

Could be an 8 year run. Dow Jones is hitting all-time highs, just on the possibility of a Trump Expansion. 

Edited November 15, 2016 by kevkev1888

[jimmyyy]

a bowel movement perhaps, that is about it

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, kevkev1888 said:

 

Yeah unlike a normal presidency, Trump may actually get some positive things done. 

Could be an 8 year run. Dow Jones is hitting all-time highs, just on the possibility of a Trump Expansion. 

Funny, the market GOT very close to  those highs under Obama. Correction ... all under Obama. He's still president.

 

 

trump put on the big lie show that he cares so much about the working class little guy. Don't they care more about MAIN street than WALL street? 

Edited November 15, 2016 by Jingthing

[kevkev1888]

45 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Funny, the market GOT very close to  those highs under Obama. Correction ... all under Obama. He's still president.

 

 

trump put on the big lie show that he cares so much about the working class little guy. Don't they care more about MAIN street than WALL street? 

 

The show has not started yet!