American Politics

[xi0]

The problem wasn't that she was thrown out, it's how the crowd reacted to it.

 

[M3J]

How? the rules were set and she broke them. She knew what she was getting into when she decided to silent protest, it was what was deserved for a rule breaker. Not to mention other protestors who were vocal earlier in the week and tossed out. I don't see you getting mad and agitated when Mr Obama throws out a LGBTQ protestors at his own functions. At least Mr Triumph was polite about it and handled it with class and style. Either be consistent or don't point it out at all.

All the lady did was protest silently, she didn't heckle Obama like that one protester did. She did nothing wrong and was peaceful about it. Would she have gotten thrown out if she wasn't a Muslim? And the way his supporters reacted proves Trump supporters are truly trash. This is after they beat up a black person and a Hispanic person at two different rallies, and Trump actually condoned it. There's no class or style to how he handled it.

Bernie actually talked to the BLM supporters and hired one to work with him. That's class and style, and bein polite. Trump threatened to beat up BLM supporters who interfered with his rallies and excused his supporters beating up a black and Hispanic. And while Obama throwing out a protester is wrong, the protester kept heckling him.

Very hypocritical coming from you, considering you point out anything bad democrats do but completely ignore the very same, if not worse, acts that republicans do. You should learn consistency as well. I've seen how biased you are.

 

[SharkBait]

All the lady did was protest silently, she didn't heckle Obama like that one protester did. She did nothing wrong and was peaceful about it. Would she have gotten thrown out if she wasn't a Muslim? And the way his supporters reacted proves Trump supporters are truly trash. This is after they beat up a black person and a Hispanic person at two different rallies, and Trump actually condoned it. There's no class or style to how he handled it.

Bernie actually talked to the BLM supporters and hired one to work with him. That's class and style, and bein polite. Trump threatened to beat up BLM supporters who interfered with his rallies and excused his supporters beating up a black and Hispanic. And while Obama throwing out a protester is wrong, the protester kept heckling him.

Very hypocritical coming from you, considering you point out anything bad democrats do but completely ignore the very same, if not worse, acts that republicans do. You should learn consistency as well. I've seen how biased you are.

I dont follow every Trump rally so I didn't know if he did acts like that, but I would have to say that rules are in place and people ought not break them. It was mentioned that people acted strange when the muslim lady was escorted off the premises from Trumphs rally however the cnn article and video suggests that the people around her were polite and understanding, calling her one of the good ones. I think it shows again that muslim people must do more in America to help people who may not have ever encountered people who were muslims or were from countries leaning towards Islamic beliefs to help Americans understand their ideals and culture. I don't think it is an Americans job to be trained or knowledgeable of other cultures if those cultures themselves arent willing to introduce themselves to America as a whole.

I don't mean to be hypocritical or biased. I try to remain open minded about things. Ive just not seen these wrongs. I dont think the leader can be held accountable for what the people do at the rally or the opinions they hold. I also dont mean to speak of those rallies but only this rally and the act of throwing the protestor out.

Im not a Trump supporter, by the way, and I dont see these beat up protesters at Rubio rallies for example.

 

[M3J]

I dont follow every Trump rally so I didn't know if he did acts like that, but I would have to say that rules are in place and people ought not break them. It was mentioned that people acted strange when the muslim lady was escorted off the premises from Trumphs rally however the cnn article and video suggests that the people around her were polite and understanding, calling her one of the good ones. I think it shows again that muslim people must do more in America to help people who may not have ever encountered people who were muslims or were from countries leaning towards Islamic beliefs to help Americans understand their ideals and culture. I don't think it is an Americans job to be trained or knowledgeable of other cultures if those cultures themselves arent willing to introduce themselves to America as a whole.

I don't mean to be hypocritical or biased. I try to remain open minded about things. Ive just not seen these wrongs. I dont think the leader can be held accountable for what the people do at the rally or the opinions they hold. I also dont mean to speak of those rallies but only this rally and the act of throwing the protestor out.

Im not a Trump supporter, by the way, and I dont see these beat up protesters at Rubio rallies for example.

As they were escorted out, Trump supporters roared -- booing the pair and shouting at them to "get out." One person shouted, "You have a bomb, you have a bomb," according to Hamid.

The article itself suggests people were quite rude, and the video of her being escorted out doesn't have any sound, so I don't see how one can determine that people around her were polite and understanding. The lady was not causing any disturbance either, all she did was stand up in silent protest. I'm willing to bet she was thrown out because she was a Muslim who didn't agree with Trump's views, not because she was "breaking" rules.

Well, there is so much Muslims can do against Islamophobia when Americans are actively against them, from attacking the people to their places of worship. Pointing fingers at Muslims is quite a delusion because the Americans are just as guilty, if not even more guilty. Hell, a lot of Americans do understand Islamic culture enough to go out of the way to insult or desecrate Muslims, like throwing a pig's head in a mosque.

I'm pretty sure you selectively don't see or pay attention to the wrongs committed by republicans or Americans whose views you support, given your posts here. I also don't see you being that open minded, given you think terrorists come from or come back from visiting areas with Islamic extremists' views, especially when even media itself has pointed out a lot of the wannabe terrorists were born and grown in US.

Also, did you ever point out how the republicans lied about US's vetting process? How Cruz lied about Net Neutrality? Trump vs. Bush like you did Clinton vs. Bernie? If not, that's very biased.

The leader can be held accountable because they're the ones who inspire people to take action. If it weren't for the shit Trump spouts, I highly doubt his supporters would have attacked minorities. Not to mention, Trump himself was okay with his supporters' behaviors and said he liked seeing the enthusiasm.


I've never heard of protesters being attacked at Rubio's rallies either, but then Rubio isn't as much of a piece of shit as Trump is, and his supporters probably aren't that extreme either. But, even more reasons why Bernie deserves support over Trump.

 

[SharkBait]

The article itself suggests people were quite rude, and the video of her being escorted out doesn't have any sound, so I don't see how one can determine that people around her were polite and understanding. The lady was not causing any disturbance either, all she did was stand up in silent protest. I'm willing to bet she was thrown out because she was a Muslim who didn't agree with Trump's views, not because she was "breaking" rules.

Well, there is so much Muslims can do against Islamophobia when Americans are actively against them, from attacking the people to their places of worship. Pointing fingers at Muslims is quite a delusion because the Americans are just as guilty, if not even more guilty. Hell, a lot of Americans do understand Islamic culture enough to go out of the way to insult or desecrate Muslims, like throwing a pig's head in a mosque.

I'm pretty sure you selectively don't see or pay attention to the wrongs committed by republicans or Americans whose views you support, given your posts here. I also don't see you being that open minded, given you think terrorists come from or come back from visiting areas with Islamic extremists' views, especially when even media itself has pointed out a lot of the wannabe terrorists were born and grown in US.

Also, did you ever point out how the republicans lied about US's vetting process? How Cruz lied about Net Neutrality? Trump vs. Bush like you did Clinton vs. Bernie? If not, that's very biased.

The leader can be held accountable because they're the ones who inspire people to take action. If it weren't for the shit Trump spouts, I highly doubt his supporters would have attacked minorities. Not to mention, Trump himself was okay with his supporters' behaviors and said he liked seeing the enthusiasm.


I've never heard of protesters being attacked at Rubio's rallies either, but then Rubio isn't as much of a piece of shit as Trump is, and his supporters probably aren't that extreme either. But, even more reasons why Bernie deserves support over Trump.

Thats because net neutrality is not an issue on my radar or one I see as important. How will net neutrality aid the US economy, create jobs, or ensure I get a well paying job, or ensure our border and homeland is secure? It wouldnt. I think I did encounter one article where it made it seem as if Rubio misunderstood net neutrality, but since its an issue I dont care about Im not really voting for anyone based on that.

CNN interviewed the lady and she was like the people are her were supporting and apologized for her, so its not like every Republican harbors those views.

 

[xi0]

The leader can be held accountable because they're the ones who inspire people to take action. If it weren't for the shit Trump spouts, I highly doubt his supporters would have attacked minorities.

You know I don't support Trump, but saying that he's at fault for what people supposedly said to her when she was removed is a bit much. She herself mentioned that the people around her that were Trump supporters treated her well. For whatever reason people were instructed to chant his name if protesters were seen.

Thats because net neutrality is not an issue on my radar or one I see as important. How will net neutrality aid the US economy, create jobs, or ensure I get a well paying job, or ensure our border and homeland is secure? It wouldnt. I think I did encounter one article where it made it seem as if Rubio misunderstood net neutrality, but since its an issue I dont care about Im not really voting for anyone based on that.

Well if you think all data on the internet should be treated the same, and that there should be no discrimination or difference in cost for any reason and that the Internet should be treated as a public utility.... then it'd probably be important to you. Gigantic communication companies weren't really prevented from surreptitiously screwing with peoples service, prior to it.

 

[SharkBait]

You know I don't support Trump, but saying that he's at fault for what people supposedly said to her when she was removed is a bit much. She herself mentioned that the people around her that were Trump supporters treated her well. For whatever reason people were instructed to chant his name if protesters were seen.


Well if you think all data on the internet should be treated the same, and that there should be no discrimination or difference in cost for any reason and that the Internet should be treated as a public utility.... then it'd probably be important to you. Gigantic communication companies weren't really prevented from surreptitiously screwing with peoples service, prior to it.

I havent had any telecom company do anything to my service so I dont really have any opinion on this. Perhaps the ones affected by it ought to be the ones to vote for it.

 

[xi0]

I havent had any telecom company do anything to my service so I dont really have any opinion on this. Perhaps the ones affected by it ought to be the ones to vote for it.

Then you were just lucky, honestly. The point is Republicans like Ted Cruz came out against it, despite there being no legit reason to be that way...unless you were in the pocket of telecom companies, which Cruz is.


If the FCC hadn't rejected the telecom companies' pleas and enacted it, then the internet would have almost certainly gone to shit eventually. So it sort of makes you wonder what kind of person would have rather sided with big telecom instead of the average netizen. It's clear Cruz didn't even understand the issue in the first place, and said whatever the people that paid him wanted him to say/write. If that doesn't say enough about him as a person, never mind a candidate for POTUS, I don't know what would.

 

[kkck]

I havent had any telecom company do anything to my service so I dont really have any opinion on this. Perhaps the ones affected by it ought to be the ones to vote for it.

So..... do you even know what net neutrality is? If we argue about net neutrality as a right its not even a voting issue. A right should in principle be inherent to the person, it's not something that should be decided by a vote. You either have a right or you don't.

 

[M3J]

Thats because net neutrality is not an issue on my radar or one I see as important. How will net neutrality aid the US economy, create jobs, or ensure I get a well paying job, or ensure our border and homeland is secure? It wouldnt. I think I did encounter one article where it made it seem as if Rubio misunderstood net neutrality, but since its an issue I dont care about Im not really voting for anyone based on that.

CNN interviewed the lady and she was like the people are her were supporting and apologized for her, so its not like every Republican harbors those views.

I really don't understand how you don't see freedom of internet usage as important. If there is no net neutrality, then your internet provider can throttle your connection speed, which means it could take you longer to apply for jobs. If you work in an office environment, unless your company somehow gets consistently good to excellent speed, your company will be slower because it takes them longer to access and browse the internet. It seems you are in favor of US's freedom being taken away, especially by republicans. No same sex marriage, no Planned Parenthood, no Affordable Care Act, and now no equal internet for everyone. Many republicans I know are against government interference, but they have no problem with the government banning same sex marriage and women's right to health care while wanting prayers in schools back.

I can also safely bet that if Trump comes into office, our border and homeland security will be even worse, and from my understanding of republicans, you're far less likely to get a good paying job, and if you do, you probably would have to hide your sexual orientation.

According to the article you linked, the lady said there were people who booed her and asked if she had a bomb with her. I know not every republican harbors the same racist views as Trump or his supporters, but they seem to be in the minorities.

You know I don't support Trump, but saying that he's at fault for what people supposedly said to her when she was removed is a bit much. She herself mentioned that the people around her that were Trump supporters treated her well. For whatever reason people were instructed to chant his name if protesters were seen.

Just going by with what the article said. And I find it easier to blame Trump as he's the leader who inspires action in people. If Bernie's supporters got mad at BLM supporters and attacked them for interrupting, I'd blame Bernie if he did nothing to stop them. If he espoused racist views that inspired people, then I would blame him as well. Same for Hilary and her so-called "feminist" supporters.

 

[kkck]

Also worth noting, deciding against net neutrality can and will be detrimental to the US economy. People against net neutrality want communications companies to pay for the speed at which their customers can browse websites. Setting aside that customers are already paying for their internet speed, it is specifically detrimental to everyone involved and not involved. Companies with websites would have an additional cost. Smaller companies that cannot afford this would have take a severe hit due to their websites suddenly being inherently and unforgivably worst than the bigger companies they compete against. Assuming they can afford it or have to pay for this anyways, the blow to smaller companies would be much higher than against the giants around. Overall, deciding against net neutrality is something that literally hurts everyone who uses the internet except the very limited few who would potentially receive money from this. It's a very close real life scenario to cartoonish levels of villainy. Right beneath blowing up the moon with a giant laser....

 

[SharkBait]

Wow Clinton needs to spend her time with Mr Sanders instead of the republicans or else she may never get a chance to face off against them.

 

[M3J]

Sanders > Clinton > Republicans, though if it came down to Clinton vs. Trump or Cruz... I dunno.


Thankfully I don't see Jebby mentioned as much. The fact that he actually claimed George Jr. protected the country is laughable, especially when there are claims that he/his administration knew about 9/11 well ahead before it happened.

 

[Franckie]

Well, but aren't their entire campaigns almost completely built on scare tactics?

That's politics as usual. Scare tactics are great at turning out the base, especially the Republican base. Also, a very lucrative career choice for the politically connected.

I'm glad there are at least some republicans in the government with enough sense to know Cruz's stance on Net Neutrality is dumb.

"Reasonable Republicans" are as mythic as unicorns and trolls. Nowadays they're called "Democrats".

 

[kkck]

That's politics as usual. Scare tactics are great at turning out the base, especially the Republican base. Also, a very lucrative career choice for the politically connected.



"Reasonable Republicans" are as mythic as unicorns and trolls. Nowadays they're called "Democrats".

Well, to be fair both sides use the scare tactic "Pick me or else suffer what the other guys are offering". Of course, it is the republicans who think science is an opinion (given their postures on evolution and climate change), lack a basic understanding of the internet (evidenced by their opinions on net neutrality being the equivalent to thinking dolphins are fish or that the earth is hollow) and their stance on drug policy and crime is not only prehistoric but it has been amply documented as a pointless waste of human lives and money. Seriously, republican stances on climate change or evolution are so insane and ridiculous that every time I have brought it up over here (I am not at the US) to people who would normally associate with that party they think I am either insane or just a moron arbitrarily pulling stuff from his ass. The mildest reaction I have ever had to pointing out republican postures on those specific issues is "It's simply not possible that an entire party believes something like that". In other countries if someone even suggests the sort of thing that appears to be standard to republicans on issues such as climate change, evolution and a few other things they'd think of that person the same way they think about someone who believes the earth is hollow or some other equally insane conspiracy theory.

 

[Franckie]

Please, there is no need to bring up "fairness" here. Yeah, both Republicans and Democrats engage in scare tactics, but as you point out, only one party is nutty. Republicans engage in scare tactics that are reminiscent of an apocalyptic cult. Democrats, on the other hand, engage in scare tactics that are reminiscent of security guards preventing insane inmates from taking over the joint. Democrats have their problems (e.g. their forgotten support for outsourcing) but are nowhere near as rotten as the lunacy that is today's Republican Party.

I also cannot speak for other countries (since I am *ahem* a native-born US citizen), but I am aware of the political concerns that other countries have regarding the US, specifically the Republican Party. Many of our allies are not particularly enthusiastic with the prospect of having Republicans dictating foreign policy as they did during the Bush years, save a few exceptions (cough*Israel*cough).

 

[xi0]

Please, there is no need to bring up "fairness" here. Yeah, both Republicans and Democrats engage in scare tactics, but as you point out, only one party is nutty.

There are plenty of nutty liberals in the Democratic party. But they don't necessarily make up the bulk of the party's base and aren't as loud and bombastic.

 

[M3J]

Let's just agree both sides are fucked up, but republicans far more so. Same people who think giving more guns will mean more safety, or lie to people and ignore facts.

 

[Franckie]

There are plenty of nutty liberals in the Democratic party. But they don't necessarily make up the bulk of the party's base and aren't as loud and bombastic.

The “both sides make their claims, who are we to judge?” reflex is very powerful in politics, even if one viewpoint is objectively true and the rest are not. Expanding upon your observation, consider how 10% of Democrats are birthers. The percentage of Republicans, however? 53%. Yes, nutty Democrats do exist, but as far as the Democratic base and Democratic establishment are concerned, they're practically nonexistent; Democratic birthers and the like have steadily abandoned their party and vote Republican nowadays (e.g. West Virginia). This is the very different from the Republican field where the nutjobs compose both the base and the party.

 

[SharkBait]

Mr Sanders continues to show he would drive America even more in the hole by hiding his unrealistic plan for health care. Hopefully he isnt selected as hes pretty untrustworthy and already breaking promises.