President Trump

@Robert Gentel,

You are right in a sense. All he said was that he needed to wait and see before conceded. I know that ticked a lot of people off, but it wasn't such an unreasonable thing to say. Assuming he really was concerned the election would be rigged, you don't have to agree with that concern to acknowledge that a wait and see approach wasn't heinous.

If after he lost and there was nothing to suggest a rigged election, it would have been atrocious if he didn't concede, but obviously that didn't happen so it's moot.

On the other hand, there were people taking to the streets and chanting expletives about the guy who won fair and square. Pardon me if I don't see their action as deserving of being called a protest. What the heck was there to protest against? That the election didn't turn out the way they wanted? It was temper tantrum from a segment of the population who think it is not only perfectly acceptable loudly stomp their feet and shake there fists at anything they don't like, but that it is somehow heroic and, of course, cool.

FB is filled with "Oh woe is me, you don't understand how much this hurts" posts. I bet it does hurt, but no more than it hurt conservatives when Obama won....twice!

This is far too typical of progressives for whom "feelings" are as or more important than fact based reason.

It is hypocritical too because we all know that if the roles were reversed, they would be sneering and saying "Typical of Trump and his supporters. If things don't go his way they whine and claim he was cheated."

Now of course a progressive argument will be that the disappointment that conservatives felt when Obama was elected was based on their racist fear and loathing of a black man in the White House, while the progressive's is based on a genuine fear of a racist in the White House.

There is no point in discussing anything with people who think like that.

As long as the street tantrums remain peaceful, they may be obnoxious but they are fine for babies who can't deal with their disappointment like adults. If the children throwing the tantrums aren't embarrassed by the crude language they are using...well, that's just a sad sign of the times.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

I said he wouldn't accept the results which has nothing to do with concession. Isn't that exactly what the protesters are doing? Not accepting the results of the election?

Kinda, in a rhetorical way. But it's a false equivalence to the degree of criticism you should expect of a presidential candidate.

So in short, asking people to denounce every protester because a man running for president was criticized on somewhat similar terms is a very simplistic way of making a false equivalence.

You should expect the, now, president to face more criticism than some dumbass on the street. Furthermore their protesting is not at all the same thing as a candidate refusing to concede an election. It's only the same with some word play (in that yes some of them might not have emotionally accepted it).

Protesting does not equal a candidate not conceding that a process was legal. For all we know they might all think it's legal but want to yell and scream about it.

Protesters do not equal presidents.

The game of false equivalence is inordinately simplistic.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Now of course a progressive argument will be that the disappointment that conservatives felt when Obama was elected was based on their racist fear and loathing of a black man in the White House, while the progressive's is based on a genuine fear of a racist in the White House.

Izzy already played that game when I said I didn't say anything negative about Obama for the first 2 years. He said that was because after 2 years he was still black.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

You are right in a sense. All he said was that he needed to wait and see before conceded. I know that ticked a lot of people off, but it wasn't such an unreasonable thing to say. Assuming he really was concerned the election would be rigged, you don't have to agree with that concern to acknowledge that a wait and see approach wasn't heinous.

If after he lost and there was nothing to suggest a rigged election, it would have been atrocious if he didn't concede, but obviously that didn't happen so it's moot.

On the other hand, there were people taking to the streets and chanting expletives about the guy who won fair and square. Pardon me if I don't see their action as deserving of being called a protest. What the heck was there to protest against? That the election didn't turn out the way they wanted? It was temper tantrum from a segment of the population who think it is not only perfectly acceptable loudly stomp their feet and shake there fists at anything they don't like, but that it is somehow heroic and, of course, cool.

FB is filled with "Oh woe is me, you don't understand how much this hurts" posts. I bet it does hurt, but no more than it hurt conservatives when Obama won....twice!

This is far too typical of progressives for whom "feelings" are as or more important than fact based reason.

It is hypocritical too because we all know that if the roles were reversed, they would be sneering and saying "Typical of Trump and his supporters. If things don't go his way they whine and claim he was cheated."

Now of course a progressive argument will be that the disappointment that conservatives felt when Obama was elected was based on their racist fear and loathing of a black man in the White House, while the progressive's is based on a genuine fear of a racist in the White House.

There is no point in discussing anything with people who think like that.

As long as the street tantrums remain peaceful, they may be obnoxious but they are fine for babies who can't deal with their disappointment like adults. If the children throwing the tantrums aren't embarrassed by the crude language they are using...well, that's just a sad sign of the times.

There were protests in LA lastnight. I thought it was funny. What are they expecting? What do they expect to result from it? We already know cali voted dem but thats not the only state. They want a second vote? I dont even like Trump but there is no way I can identify with this inability to accept the choice that was made legally. Its not like Trump stormed the compound and held leaders at gun point. Even Hitler was democratically voted in. Im not on the right, nor a republican but I cant stand the left these days.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

I'm sure he did, but I ignore him so I'll take your word on it.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

That was a lot of periods.

So much for accepting election results: Protesters burn flags, block traffic … the usual

Maybe that will help you with your period issues. If not, perhaps you can explain why they are protesting? Is it because it was cold and they thought some fires would help warm it up?

3 Replies

@Krumple,

I don't think they expected anything to come of their temper tantrums, although I've no doubt that some fools among them thought they were participating in the birth of "The Revolution"

They were disappointed and angry and rather than dealing with the results like adults they reacted like the children they are.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

And this of course is the problem

Peaceful tantrums may be obnoxious but they aren't dangerous.

But we all know that among the children throwing these tantrums there are both really snotty brats, and professional agitators who will inevitably introduce violence and property destruction into the mix.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

They do not emotionally accept the election, that is not the same as a candidate not accepting the legal legitimacy (if not the personal desirability) of an outcome.

They are worthy of criticism when their right to express themselves impinges on the rights of others to peacefully coexist but it is not fundamentally the same thing we are talking about except in the wordplay that both are "not accepting" the result. One procedurally in a very important legal process and the other in mere ability to moderate their extremes when expressing their emotions.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

They were protesting to express their displeasure in the president-elect. No one was chanting to overthrow the government or to stop democracy.

I was there. I saw it first hand in Chicago. You can post whatever blogger you want, it doesn't change the facts. I've got about 30 minutes of high definitation 4k video if you'd like to see what was really happening in the streets.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

They were disappointed and angry and rather than dealing with the results like adults they reacted like the children they are.

I'm a 36 year old man, mid-six figure income, employed since I was 14 years old. Lived on my own since I was 16.

I, personally, was on the streets last night. Many people, just like me, were there too. Your caricature of what you want to be true, does not make it true.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

To me it was a small part of a grander point I tried to make that has ended up being examined instead of the grander point I apparently failed to make. It's no big deal.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Again, what candidate didn't accept the legitimacy of the election?

You are arguing against something that didn't happen.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Surely you realize that age has nothing to do with whether or not someone acts like an adult or a child.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Surely you realize that age has nothing to do with whether or not someone acts like an adult or a child.

Surely you realize that participating in a protest does equate to acting like a child.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

It wasn't a protest.

What were you protesting?

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

It wasn't a protest.

What were you protesting?

Seriously?

pro·test
noun
ˈprōˌtest/
1.
a statement or action expressing disapproval of or objection to something.

an organized public demonstration expressing strong objection to a policy or course of action adopted by those in authority.
"a protest march"
synonyms: demonstration, (protest) march, rally, counterdemonstration; More

2 Replies

@maporsche,

Yes seriously.

Irrespective of the dictionary definition, common understanding of the word as used in our society is that a "protest" is directed against a perceived injustice, and not just an outcome with which you are not happy.

2 Replies

@maporsche,

If you want to use that definition, who is the authority you are protesting against? The American people?

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

I never claimed any candidate refused to accept the legitimacy of the election. McG is making a false equivalence between the criticism Trump received for not being clear about it and the protesters and my argument is not that Trump failed to accept the legitimacy of the election but that this comparison is a false equivalency.

2 Replies

President Trump

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know