• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Startling threats and violence against GOP voters: Part of a pattern?

3leftsdoo said:
I'm sure the parents of the gay reporter beaten by liberal thugs were reassured to know that cement wasn't a part of the assault.

But liberals are stepping up their game, so it sounds like it won't be long before cement is used.

:donkeyfla

Liberal logic:

Imaginary Nazis = Conservatives are a MASSIVE threat!!! :2mad:

Actual hate crimes by liberals = :yawn:
Click to expand...

That dude is a provocateur and a liar. Stands to reason you were duped. The imagination is all on your part.

All US extremist killings in 2018 had links to right-wing extremism: report - Business Insider

It's sad but not unexpected that you are here spreading lies.
 
I don't condone violence against other people unless self defense is required. Intimidation, on the other hand can be very useful. For instance: There are no MAGAt hats in the whole state of Texas. Sure, plenty of people own one, they just don't wear them in public.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
It's posted because there seems to be a pattern of people who support the president being attacked because of their support for the president.
The one liner as you call it is the headline from the article... not my words. Do you think it's OK to physically attack a person for their
politics?
Click to expand...

From time to time, but then I'm closer than most to Atilla the Hun on the political spectrum.
However, that wasn't what I was talking about. If I want to present a societal conundrum with overt political content, there are several ways of doing it, depending on my target audience.

- I can focus on telling the other side that they are bad people. This will change nothing whatsoever in today's partisan environment.
- I can focus on how bad the people they associate with are. This will provoke nods of agreement from people who agree with me and opposition from those who dont. (The "Your-side-does-it-too-DP-special".)
- I can focus on waving a bloody shirt. This will engender feeling of victimization in people who identify with the victims, and move them closer to my side.
- I can focus on the unreasonableness of the acts themselves, without drawing arrows (obvious or not) pointing at various entities. This will move reasonable people closer to me.

So who is you focus group for this thread? Do you want to preach to people who already agree with you, or do you want to tamper with the balance? Do you want to dig the trenches deeper, or to start filling them up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom