Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, nottocus said:

CLueless

 

Wonder what makes you think I am clueless?

 

  • The fact that I think that the majority of the Trump voters are not racist? Is it that you think that the majority of the Trump supporters are racist?
  • That bringing back jobs from abroad, killing international trade deals/oppose globalization, invest in infrastructure, build schools and hospitals, aren't socialist ideals? Or do you think that these are capitalist ideals?
  • That Clinton is not a liberal and that anyone who think she is left is a complete moron?

 

Edited by DriveByTrucker
  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
30 minutes ago, nottocus said:

You just sound that way.

 

LoL I am clueless because I sound this way.

 

So here you go again, this is what to you sounds as clueless:

  • The fact that I think that the majority of the Trump voters are not racist? Is it that you think that the majority of the Trump supporters are racist?
  • That bringing back jobs from abroad, killing international trade deals/oppose globalization, invest in infrastructure, build schools and hospitals, aren't socialist ideals? Or do you think that these are capitalist ideals?
  • That Clinton is not a liberal and that anyone who think she is left is a complete moron?
Posted
12 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
 

 

You keep saying the elections were not "normal". At the same time you say that you accept the results. This is a mixed message that's both confusing and leaves your position open to interpretation.

 

Without fanfare - what about the elections wasn't normal? Or wasn't an extension of ongoing processes in the US and things seen on previous elections? There were extreme groups supporting candidates in the past. Same goes for demagogue candidates, outright lies, dishonest propaganda, and unsavory ideas and policies suggested. The main difference is that this time the "villain" (from your point of view) won. It wasn't supposed to end like this.

 

There are many posts on this forum, not all by hardcore Trump fans, that express one thing clearly - a lot of voters were not interested in "normal" any longer. The "normal" didn't seem to work out for them. Hence, they opted for "change". Whatever change, it seems. The "normal", or the "status quo", did work for some or did seem a better option over the uncertainty of "change". I was, and still am, one of those. But I get it not everyone sees it this way.

Posted
8 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

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.

 

I think the recent elections are a good indication of where these protests are heading, and what they will morph to in the future. Some bouts of action, and a whole lot of words. If anything, IT serves to shorten people's attention span and makes information easier to spin.

 

Associations with past instances of resistance, particularly the 60's and 70's era are all very fine. Just that circumstances and people are different. Doubt this generation of potential protestors is as committed, persistent, and resilient.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Morch said:

Doubt this generation of potential protestors is as committed, persistent, and resilient.

Understatement of the week.

Posted
6 hours 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. 

 

On at least a couple of the other online (more economy/investment inclined) pastures I frequent, there were predictions of a very short slump, followed by correction and possibly markets going up. At least until inauguration and bit post that. From then onward, differing views as actual policies remain to be seen (with the uncertainty eventually taking its toll, unless dispelled).

Posted
4 hours ago, DriveByTrucker said:

 

Wonder what makes you think I am clueless?

 

  • The fact that I think that the majority of the Trump voters are not racist? Is it that you think that the majority of the Trump supporters are racist?
  • That bringing back jobs from abroad, killing international trade deals/oppose globalization, invest in infrastructure, build schools and hospitals, aren't socialist ideals? Or do you think that these are capitalist ideals?
  • That Clinton is not a liberal and that anyone who think she is left is a complete moron?

 

 

1 hour ago, DriveByTrucker said:

 

LoL I am clueless because I sound this way.

 

So here you go again, this is what to you sounds as clueless:

  • The fact that I think that the majority of the Trump voters are not racist? Is it that you think that the majority of the Trump supporters are racist?
  • That bringing back jobs from abroad, killing international trade deals/oppose globalization, invest in infrastructure, build schools and hospitals, aren't socialist ideals? Or do you think that these are capitalist ideals?
  • That Clinton is not a liberal and that anyone who think she is left is a complete moron?

 

43258642.jpg

Posted
3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

On at least a couple of the other online (more economy/investment inclined) pastures I frequent, there were predictions of a very short slump, followed by correction and possibly markets going up. At least until inauguration and bit post that. From then onward, differing views as actual policies remain to be seen (with the uncertainty eventually taking its toll, unless dispelled).

 

It is the Bond market people should be watching.

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Morch said:

 

You keep saying the elections were not "normal". At the same time you say that you accept the results. This is a mixed message that's both confusing and leaves your position open to interpretation.

 

Without fanfare - what about the elections wasn't normal? Or wasn't an extension of ongoing processes in the US and things seen on previous elections? There were extreme groups supporting candidates in the past. Same goes for demagogue candidates, outright lies, dishonest propaganda, and unsavory ideas and policies suggested. The main difference is that this time the "villain" (from your point of view) won. It wasn't supposed to end like this.

 

There are many posts on this forum, not all by hardcore Trump fans, that express one thing clearly - a lot of voters were not interested in "normal" any longer. The "normal" didn't seem to work out for them. Hence, they opted for "change". Whatever change, it seems. The "normal", or the "status quo", did work for some or did seem a better option over the uncertainty of "change". I was, and still am, one of those. But I get it not everyone sees it this way.

I have a hard time understanding how you could be watching what happened in the election and not understand that the assertion that anti-trumpists shouldn't accept the trump presidency as NORMAL has become mainstream and WHY. It's obvious the "not my president" and not accepting he was elected and will take office was a denial phase for many, but this ABNORMAL thing in my opinion will have legs.

 

Maybe this will help you. Of course you don't have to agree. The people that say "give him a chance" and don't start opposing him early proactively are certainly not agreeing.

 

Quote

 

“While some are arguing that Trump may not have meant all those things, that leaves us with two devastating options,” he said. “Either we just elected a president who didn’t mean a single word he said or we elected one who did.”

Though Oliver is all for accepting the results of the election, he maintains that people should beware the normalization of the things that Trump has said and done. 

 

 

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-john-oliver-donald-trump-abnormal-20161114-story.html

 

 

 

Edited by metisdead
Oversize font reset to normal.
Posted
12 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I have a hard time understanding how you could be watching what happened in the election and not understand that the assertion that anti-trumpists shouldn't accept the trump presidency as NORMAL has become mainstream and WHY. It's obvious the "not my president" and not accepting he was elected and will take office was a denial phase for many, but this ABNORMAL thing in my opinion will have legs.

 

Maybe this will help you. Of course you don't have to agree. The people that say "give him a chance" and don't start opposing him early proactively are certainly not agreeing.

 

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-john-oliver-donald-trump-abnormal-20161114-story.html

 

 

 

 

Was Trump the first politician on a campaign trail to lie? Hardly. Even his opponent engaged in this. So not sure if you're saying the issue with Trump's lying is qualitative or quantitative. Lies are pretty synonymous with politicians.

 

When did the "assertion that anti-trumpists shouldn't accept the trump presidency as NORMAL has become mainstream"? Was there a memo? Did I miss a meeting? IMO, that's an arbitrary claim. If anything, it again reflects some of the disconnect exhibited by the HRC camp during the elections. I'd ask if there's a poll. but eh...

 

I like John Oliver's show, but I do not take it as a political guidebook. As posted previously, losing an election does not imply ditching one's view and beliefs. It doesn't mean you actually have to love Big Brother. There's not even an obligation to give Trump a chance. All I'm saying is that, IMO, the some of the current reactions (online and on the street) are out of proportion. Trump ain't going anywhere (well, yeah, that could be interpreted in a few ways) - save it for when it's effective. Right now, these protests and mighty talking is less useful than doing some house cleaning and figuring out what can be done to oppose Trump. Run in circles, scream and shout just ain't it.

 

The fun bit (if it wasn't sad) is that had things gone the other way, we'd probably have posters airing exactly opposite positions.

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Was Trump the first politician on a campaign trail to lie? Hardly. Even his opponent engaged in this. So not sure if you're saying the issue with Trump's lying is qualitative or quantitative. Lies are pretty synonymous with politicians.

 

When did the "assertion that anti-trumpists shouldn't accept the trump presidency as NORMAL has become mainstream"? Was there a memo? Did I miss a meeting? IMO, that's an arbitrary claim. If anything, it again reflects some of the disconnect exhibited by the HRC camp during the elections. I'd ask if there's a poll. but eh...

 

I like John Oliver's show, but I do not take it as a political guidebook. As posted previously, losing an election does not imply ditching one's view and beliefs. It doesn't mean you actually have to love Big Brother. There's not even an obligation to give Trump a chance. All I'm saying is that, IMO, the some of the current reactions (online and on the street) are out of proportion. Trump ain't going anywhere (well, yeah, that could be interpreted in a few ways) - save it for when it's effective. Right now, these protests and mighty talking is less useful than doing some house cleaning and figuring out what can be done to oppose Trump. Run in circles, scream and shout just ain't it.

 

The fun bit (if it wasn't sad) is that had things gone the other way, we'd probably have posters airing exactly opposite positions.

I really don't see this question, normalize the trump presidency or not, as productive area of debate. Either it's something that resonates with you or not. For me and I believe many millions of Americans it does and based on early days trump president elect it will continue to do so. For you, not, you can rationalize this situation as a variation of normal. We won't agree. Only time will tell if my strongly felt perception that this perception of the abnormality of a President trump will grow and persist, or not, happens.

 

To add, I didn't get the idea from Oliver, I had the perception organically as I believe many millions of Americans also did, just as many millions of Americans also perceived this election represents a cataclysmic shock comparable to 911. For you, it's just  more politics to spin. We're not on the same page about this and never will be. 

 

QUOTE FROM LINK:
"Clinton’s speech, Gessen writes, rests on the presumption that Trump will immediately “repudiate almost everything he has stood for during the campaign. In short, it is treating him as a ‘normal’ politician”—which he certainly is not. “More dangerously,” Gessen notes, both “Clinton’s and Obama’s very civil passages … seemed to close off alternative responses to his minority victory” and omitted any “call to action.”

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/11/11/masha_gessen_explains_why_clinton_s_concession_speech_was_so_dangerous.html

Edited by metisdead
Edited as per fair use policy, oversize font reset to normal.
Posted
2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I really don't see this question, normalize the trump presidency or not, as productive area of debate. Either it's something that resonates with you or not. For me and I believe many millions of Americans it does and based on early days trump president elect it will continue to do so. For you, not, you can rationalize this situation as a variation of normal. We won't agree. Only time will tell if my strongly felt perception that this perception of the abnormality of a President trump will grow and persist, or not, happens.

 

I honestly don't even know is meant by "normalize", from a practical-realistic perspective. Many millions sympathize for sure - same goes for quite a few extreme view you're against. That doesn't make them ideas mainstream, same goes for the protests. Mainstream is a word  and a concept that got mutilated by out of context use.

 

Posted

I mean of course mainstream among people that have a strong negative reaction to the reality of the authoritarian know nothing no experience mentally bizarre demagogue trump being elected. That is a LOT of people. 

Posted
15 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Was Trump the first politician on a campaign trail to lie? Hardly. Even his opponent engaged in this. So not sure if you're saying the issue with Trump's lying is qualitative or quantitative. Lies are pretty synonymous with politicians.

 

When did the "assertion that anti-trumpists shouldn't accept the trump presidency as NORMAL has become mainstream"? Was there a memo? Did I miss a meeting? IMO, that's an arbitrary claim. If anything, it again reflects some of the disconnect exhibited by the HRC camp during the elections. I'd ask if there's a poll. but eh...

 

I like John Oliver's show, but I do not take it as a political guidebook. As posted previously, losing an election does not imply ditching one's view and beliefs. It doesn't mean you actually have to love Big Brother. There's not even an obligation to give Trump a chance. All I'm saying is that, IMO, the some of the current reactions (online and on the street) are out of proportion. Trump ain't going anywhere (well, yeah, that could be interpreted in a few ways) - save it for when it's effective. Right now, these protests and mighty talking is less useful than doing some house cleaning and figuring out what can be done to oppose Trump. Run in circles, scream and shout just ain't it.

 

The fun bit (if it wasn't sad) is that had things gone the other way, we'd probably have posters airing exactly opposite positions.

 

The extreme right is on the move globally and it is happening now, and to an unprecedented extent, so this is the memo you'd admitted to apparently having missed. (If you'd like to receive notices of anti-fascist meetings leave your phone number for text alerts.)

 

Kindly save the lecturing and banal statements that are by definition unoriginal for the very few people who might not already know all politicians lie. For instance, Jimmy Carter didn't invent lying by politicians, but when he said during his campaign in 1976 that, "I will never lie to you," that was in fact his First One.

 

That the global right are on the move globally tends strongly to make anti-fascist stir to take action and to do it on a sustained basis. Whether that will be in the streets of Amerika remains an open question.

 

Given the polarising times we are in, we do need people with a balanced point of view. So it is unfortunate there aren't any left, but that's the way it has become. Your lecturing and presumptuous posts to JT do of course get the fully expected more than capable and savvy responses -- very civil ones besides-- however, one can press too hard in language calculatedly presented as soft and fair minded.

 

Focusing on one side only in the left-right contest to prevail, and doing it under the pretense of being neither and fair, is also and indeed a self-expose' of which side constitutes the burr under your saddle. The rise of Donald Trump and the global right has made clear this is a serious business which removes the usual game playing from the normal discourse. Donald Trump has established that the normal discourse is gone, and that it has been supplanted almost exclusively by the right with the politics and language of the gutter.

 

Do try to keep up plse thx.

Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

The extreme right is on the move globally and it is happening now, and to an unprecedented extent, so this is the memo you'd admitted to apparently having missed. (If you'd like to receive notices of anti-fascist meetings leave your phone number for text alerts.)

 

Kindly save the lecturing and banal statements that are by definition unoriginal for the very few people who might not already know all politicians lie. For instance, Jimmy Carter didn't invent lying by politicians, but when he said during his campaign in 1976 that, "I will never lie to you," that was in fact his First One.

 

That the global right are on the move globally tends strongly to make anti-fascist stir to take action and to do it on a sustained basis. Whether that will be in the streets of Amerika remains an open question.

 

Given the polarising times we are in, we do need people with a balanced point of view. So it is unfortunate there aren't any left, but that's the way it has become. Your lecturing and presumptuous posts to JT do of course get the fully expected more than capable and savvy responses -- very civil ones besides-- however, one can press too hard in language calculatedly presented as soft and fair minded.

 

Focusing on one side only in the left-right contest to prevail, and doing it under the pretense of being neither and fair, is also and indeed a self-expose' of which side constitutes the burr under your saddle. The rise of Donald Trump and the global right has made clear this is a serious business which removes the usual game playing from the normal discourse. Donald Trump has established that the normal discourse is gone, and that it has been supplanted almost exclusively by the right with the politics and language of the gutter.

 

Do try to keep up plse thx.

 

Well, that didn't too long. Let the purges begin....

 

The expected emergence of post-defeat with us or against us mentality, complete with the inability (or more charitably, unwillingness) to accept plurality of approaches and views, even when these are not in direct opposition to one's own.

 

Not being of a religious bent, an ideological true believer, or one to take causes and leaders at face value, I am rather used to my views, positions or motivations being misrepresented by purists of whatever persuasion. Nothing new or original, then, with the rant above. The fact free nature of the personal references in such diatribes is usually pretty obvious. Not different in this case.


Issue relating to right wing views getting more traction globally were addressed in my posts, and by PM with certain posters, over a period of few years now. And of course, "memo" was used in an altogether different context - namely, assertions that the protests are representative of mainstream views.

 

Full credit for comedy gold on haranguing others with regard to "lecturing" and "presumptuous" . Don't think I need to expand or dwell much on this point.

 

My posts, on pretty much any political topics, display a consistent line of thinking when it comes to discourse. Posters holding extreme views often find these anathema to their own convictions and style. Responses often incorporate the claims that with regard to pet subject on sale - all bets are off and vehemence is the order of the day. Similarly, issues related to divisions fragmenting societies, and the need to address them are a common theme. Understood that this too does not hold much appeal for those hooked on conflict. The no-one-to-talk-to is a run of the mill accompanying bogus claim.

    

Binary, black and white takes are not my thing. Too narrow, too limited, and almost never conforming to actual experience. What you read is what you get. When previously opining that HRC was the lesser of two evils, that's exactly what I meant. None of my posts indicates buying wholesale into campaign trail drivel, so not sure why the faux outrage is about. Seems like much of the electorate felt similarly.

 

Not too long ago, in response to an interesting post you made about the upcoming disintegration of the GOP, I wondered how things would pan out for the Democrats if they lost the elections. IMO, the protests and the post above reflect on the unfavorably on the answer. Run in circles, Scream and Shout.

 

To sum, have fun on your crusade, and save your long-winded, pompous nonsense for numpties impressed or intimidated by it. If it doesn't work for you, always welcome to opt for our previous understanding.

Edited by Morch
Posted
16 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

The extreme right is on the move globally and it is happening now, and to an unprecedented extent, so this is the memo you'd admitted to apparently having missed. (If you'd like to receive notices of anti-fascist meetings leave your phone number for text alerts.)

 

Kindly save the lecturing and banal statements that are by definition unoriginal for the very few people who might not already know all politicians lie. For instance, Jimmy Carter didn't invent lying by politicians, but when he said during his campaign in 1976 that, "I will never lie to you," that was in fact his First One.

 

That the global right are on the move globally tends strongly to make anti-fascist stir to take action and to do it on a sustained basis. Whether that will be in the streets of Amerika remains an open question.

 

Given the polarising times we are in, we do need people with a balanced point of view. So it is unfortunate there aren't any left, but that's the way it has become. Your lecturing and presumptuous posts to JT do of course get the fully expected more than capable and savvy responses -- very civil ones besides-- however, one can press too hard in language calculatedly presented as soft and fair minded.

 

Focusing on one side only in the left-right contest to prevail, and doing it under the pretense of being neither and fair, is also and indeed a self-expose' of which side constitutes the burr under your saddle. The rise of Donald Trump and the global right has made clear this is a serious business which removes the usual game playing from the normal discourse. Donald Trump has established that the normal discourse is gone, and that it has been supplanted almost exclusively by the right with the politics and language of the gutter.

 

Do try to keep up plse thx.

 

You talk about fascists but the establishment candidate was just as vulnerable from the Left and had there been no orchestrated conspiracy of the center left establishment to undermine the Progressive candidate the Progressive candidate would be president elect today. This election was not about the rise of fascism, it was about the establishment getting its comeuppance. 

Posted

They are attempting to.

I just recieved a spam today from the colalition asking for a minimum $5 contribution to finance the anti-trump organization effort.

I would, but i am a Social security pensioner, and even $5 a month is an expense I don't need.

Anyhow, in my personal opinion Trump i such a fool he will talk himself out of the job.

No need for me to help the fool, just let him get enough rope and he will soon hang himself anyhow.

 

Posted
18 hours ago, Jingthing said:

I mean of course mainstream among people that have a strong negative reaction to the reality of the authoritarian know nothing no experience mentally bizarre demagogue trump being elected. That is a LOT of people. 

 

It sure does include a lot of people. Still doesn't make it mainstream. I think you're clutching at straws with regard to this definition.

 

Posted
 
It sure does include a lot of people. Still doesn't make it mainstream. I think you're clutching at straws with regard to this definition.
 

Fine. Just semantics.
The opposition to trumpism will be YUGE and BIG LEAGUE. The threat he poses is just too serious for the people not to become involved in a struggle to actively protest the worst of it.
Posted
3 hours ago, Jingthing said:


Fine. Just semantics.
The opposition to trumpism will be YUGE and BIG LEAGUE. The threat he poses is just too serious for the people not to become involved in a struggle to actively protest the worst of it.

Where is this Yuge opposition to Trump going to come from?

Street people?

Get serious JT...:post-4641-1156694083:

Posted

As I expected there is a healthy debate going on about how to best organize the OPPOSITION to trumpism. Early days now and tumultuous times ahead.


 

Quote

 

The Democrats Are Screwing Up the Resistance to Donald Trump

This isn’t a pedantic complaint. It matters that Warren and Sanders (and, it seems, the likely chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison) have made a choice to obscure the fundamental tribalism of Trump’s appeal. It matters that they’ve cast the bigotry of Trump’s movement as an element to oppose if it comes, and not an essential part of the whole. To take that step is to sanction white nationalism as a legitimate political appeal, thus rewarding the fight against liberal pluralist democracy.

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/11/the_democrats_are_already_screwing_up_the_trump_resistance.html

Posted
9 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Where is this Yuge opposition to Trump going to come from?

Street people?

Get serious JT...:post-4641-1156694083:

 

That would depend on how things progress with regard to his feelings toward NATO, China etc.  Mess with the wrong things and the opposition will be bigger than you or I.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

As I expected there is a healthy debate going on about how to best organize the OPPOSITION to trumpism. Early days now and tumultuous times ahead.


 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/11/the_democrats_are_already_screwing_up_the_trump_resistance.html

 

As said earlier: let the purges begin....

 

I get why he favors Reid's statement over Warren's and Sanders's. Fair enough. But seriously doubt this guy will actually accept it even if Reid's "conditions" were to be fulfilled.

 

Here's another article by the same author:

 

There’s No Such Thing as a Good Trump Voter

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/11/there_is_no_such_thing_as_a_good_trump_voter.html

 

Kinda hard to see this going anywhere.

Posted
33 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Where is this Yuge opposition to Trump going to come from?

Street people?

Get serious JT...:post-4641-1156694083:

Doubt any of them could organize much they are too busy picking new anti POTUS avatars.

 

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Yup

Way too much butthurt still afflicting the losers...

 

While winners seem to have forgotten what an olive branch looks like.

Posted
25 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

That would depend on how things progress with regard to his feelings toward NATO, China etc.  Mess with the wrong things and the opposition will be bigger than you or I.

Very true, most of these basket cases probably have no clue what NATO is or what the issue is with China past the Chinese restaurant that donates to their local food bank - they'll go back to sleep soon enough.

 

The wrong things are all minor and not a big deal. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...