• 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!

Is violence against MAGA/Trump supporting clothing appropriate?

Is violence against MAGA/Trump supporting clothing appropriate?

  • Yes, Trump is the leader of an evil movement and his supporters need to be stopped

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No, Violence is not the answer

    Votes: 60 92.3%

  • Verbal confrontation is preferable to physical

    Votes: 1 1.5%

  • Other - Answer below

    Votes: 4 6.2%
  • Total voters
    65
Atomic Kid said:
No less stupid in that respect than your silly MAGA meme attempt that suggested that anyone opposed to Trump is an asshole or liking a post suggesting gun violence. In the end it was your choice to become associated with a racist who happens to be the senior figure of the party of your affiliation and has since melded into the Party of the baby snatchers and I sure as heck don't see where you are disavowing that or Rand Paul. So as far as I'm concern that if you walk like a duck and talk like a duck. You're the duck I think you are.
Click to expand...

you again demonstrated a lack of understanding.

when I joked MAGA stood for Making assholes Get Angry by definition it was limited to those who are assholes and got angry. Nothing like your silly blanket attack on the entire GOP

and my opening post was in response to someone's idiocy comparing Trump supporters to the KKK
 
TurtleDude said:
you again demonstrated a lack of understanding.

when I joked MAGA stood for Making assholes Get Angry by definition it was limited to those who are assholes and got angry. Nothing like your silly blanket attack on the entire GOP

and my opening post was in response to someone's idiocy comparing Trump supporters to the KKK
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm sure that's what you meant. :roll: Still don't see you this avowing Rand or the policy of separating children and there is little doubt that Trump clearly espouses and embraces white identity politics and that is what attracts a large part of base to him. And as for the GOP. Go ahead and explain those Quinnipiac poll numbers for me then.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Yeah I'm sure that's what you meant. :roll: Still don't see you this avowing Rand or the policy of separating children and there is little doubt that Trump clearly espouses and embraces white identity politics and that is what attracts a large part of base to him. And as for the GOP. Go ahead and explain those Quinnipiac poll numbers for me then.
Click to expand...

I don't need to disavow stuff that bothers lefties. I don't need to base my opinions on polls. I don't need to deal with your idiotic claims of racism when there is JUST as much racism on the left as there is on the right
 
Atomic Kid said:
Yeah I'm sure that's what you meant. :roll: Still don't see you this avowing Rand or the policy of separating children and there is little doubt that Trump clearly espouses and embraces white identity politics and that is what attracts a large part of base to him. And as for the GOP. Go ahead and explain those Quinnipiac poll numbers for me then.
Click to expand...

Hey guess what? *whispers* Children are separated from their parents when they're sent to jail.
 
Howard the Duck said:
1. I was not offered the true option of Democrat.

2. It is my call. I wasn't looking for your approval.

3. The right wing chanted, "lock him up," about Jesus, too.
Click to expand...

1. Were you not given the option to vote Bernie or Hillary in the primary?

2. I never said anything about it not being your call or that you needed my approval, I was merely curious about your position.

3. Completely irrelevant to our discussion.
 
Nap said:
1. Were you not given the option to vote Bernie or Hillary in the primary?

2. I never said anything about it not being your call or that you needed my approval, I was merely curious about your position.

3. Completely irrelevant to our discussion.
Click to expand...

I was not given the opportunity to list myself as a Democrat, here, at debate politics.

And point 3 was totally relevant.
 
Howard the Duck said:
I was not given the opportunity to list myself as a Democrat, here, at debate politics.

And point 3 was totally relevant.
Click to expand...

Except that there was no Left/Right in that period, the terms weren't commonly used until the French revolution. Even if we were to extend the practice of dividing people in left and right to that age, there is no relevance to left and right in America. The divide is different among populations and only relevant to particular populations. Until recently, the Left in America would have largely been considered Right wing in Europe.
 
Nap said:
Except that there was no Left/Right in that period, the terms weren't commonly used until the French revolution. Even if we were to extend the practice of dividing people in left and right to that age, there is no relevance to left and right in America. The divide is different among populations and only relevant to particular populations. Until recently, the Left in America would have largely been considered Right wing in Europe.
Click to expand...

Wtf? Are you sure you are in the tight thread?
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't need to disavow stuff that bothers lefties. I don't need to base my opinions on polls. I don't need to deal with your idiotic claims of racism when there is JUST as much racism on the left as there is on the right
Click to expand...

Ahh so your true colors have come shining through. You don't disavow because you tolerate it. Carry on with your quacking then.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Ahh so your true colors have come shining through. You don't disavow because you tolerate it. Carry on with your quacking then.
Click to expand...

I pick and choose what to bash. the creeping crud of collectivism and other encroachments on freedom bother me far more than things that I might mildly disagree with-especially if they send the loony left into orbit
 
TurtleDude said:
I pick and choose what to bash. the creeping crud of collectivism and other encroachments on freedom bother me far more than things that I might mildly disagree with-especially if they send the loony left into orbit
Click to expand...

Quack Quack.
 
Renae said:
In light of the recent incident here in my hometown where a minor was attacked by a grown man for wearing a MAGA hat, some posters seem to approve of this behavior and even wish he had taken further steps.

I personally find this frightening that anyone would advocate such, but perhaps I am in error.'
Click to expand...
The offender/criminal got himself fired, he should have been brought up on charges of theft, intimidation, and assault, how does he get off with being fired?

I saw a young woman the other day at my doctors office, she wore a shirt that read, "Black women rule the world". I laughed to myself, ignored her obvious shortcomings and went about my business. If you see something that offends ones ideas or principles you ignore it, if you can't then remove yourself from the situation.
 
lefty louie said:
The offender/criminal got himself fired, he should have been brought up on charges of theft, intimidation, and assault, how does he get off with being fired?

I saw a young woman the other day at my doctors office, she wore a shirt that read, "Black women rule the world". I laughed to myself, ignored her obvious shortcomings and went about my business. If you see something that offends ones ideas or principles you ignore it, if you can't then remove yourself from the situation.
Click to expand...

He was arrested and charged.
 
The thread seems odd in that it poses a question that a vast majority of ANY political party or coalition would answer with a firm no. A person with emotional problems may use whatever political platform they've bonded with to justify bad behaviour. It's important for reasonable people to see through the surface reasons for someone acting badly, and understand that most people, regardless of political affiliation, want a safe and peaceful life, satisfying work, loving relationships, good schools for their kids, etc. I've met quite a few people on the Left, and all other points on the political spectrum, and only on the far Right did I encounter serious talk about violent action...and even that struck me as just talk, I. E. venting.

So, IMO, the spectre of the Left-wing boogeyman is just another diversion for those who are stymied at the more daunting task of cleaning up their own party or how to deal with the large-scale violence, often state sponsored, playing out all around the world. I would also advise sifting through DOJ stats on hate crimes, just to get some kind of factual awareness of how much Leftist ideology is really a factor. Though not a Left-wing person myself, I can't help but notice that many Leftist leaders were strong voices against violence, even when their followers were subject to extreme brutality from both onlookers at demonstrations and the police. Those on the Left who feel they can become zealots and attack people, have sadly forgotten their ideological forebears like King, Gandhi, the Berrigans, et al.
 
ajn678 said:
See how it changes when its anonymous.
Click to expand...

You know I considered that option, but I wanted to see if anyone was brave enough to to yes in a poll open to the public.
 
Renae said:
In light of the recent incident here in my hometown where a minor was attacked by a grown man for wearing a MAGA hat, some posters seem to approve of this behavior and even wish he had taken further steps.

I personally find this frightening that anyone would advocate such, but perhaps I am in error.'
Click to expand...

From what I have seen over the last 10 or so years violence and threats against those wearing political appeal along with bumper stickers has been growing. I added the bumper stickers because this last election you hardly ever seen one.

You seen a ton of bumper stickers in the 2008 campaign for both sides. Then the news reported some keying of cars along with spray painting of those that had McCain bumper stickers in downtown Atlanta and some which had Obama bumper stickers in the northern suburbs. 2012, those types of incidents really multiplied. So much so that in 2016 political bumper stickers seem like a thing of the past. I seen a lot more Obama bumper stickers left over from 2012 than Clinton one's and even a couple of Ron Paul bumper stickers, but no Trump ones.

Has anyone else noticed the lack of bumper stickers for the 2016 election? Has it come down to no political bumper stickers on cars these days out of fear of keying or spray painting of the car due to a differing choice of candidates?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom