Why do you think most protesters and rioters are Democrats?

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

Why are people showing up in huge numbers at town hall meetings across the country and at protest marches? Do you think that these people protesting believe they are in the minority but want their voices to be heard? I don't. I think these people believe they are represent the majority of Americans. And they want the voices of the majority to be heard loud and clear.

It's understandable that Trump fans want to believe the above is fake news. Rejection is a tough cookie to digest.

Again, the popular vote only seems to be an unnecessary excuse for the protests. Have any protests actually been called a protest to of the electoral college and move to a popular vote? Not that I've seen.

In a population of 300+ million, a few million isn't a big percentage to claim speaking for a majority.

[JustRalph]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/li...rticle/2595028

Selma envy

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

Bingo. For example, that's why it's mandatory that the GOP talk about is cutting taxes whenever they gather. Who cares who has health insurance and who doesn't if you already have good health insurance? Who cares about giving out food stamps if one does not need food stamps?

I could go on but why bother. The GOP represents people who are concerned with one issue - themselves and their family. The welfare of society as a whole is not their problem - financially at least. They may contribute to society if they feel like it but if they don't - tough s_ _ t for those in need.

I don't feel the need to share that philosophy. It's 2017 - not 1884 for crying out loud.

Wrong. Assuming more conservatives are religious, then the data shows that conservatives are more charitable than liberals. Liberals want to give away OTHER people's money.

Also, conservatives believe in the concepts of tough love and necessity being the mother of invention. Liberals believe they are being kind by enabling (again, with other people's money).

All who are of able body and mind should be required to work for government subsidies whether it's taking low wage or part time paying jobs or volunteer at non-profits. That helps push them along into the work force and work frame of mind. Zero should be received by those who are healthy and choose to not work.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

This is a serious question and I am interested in honest answers and a polite discussion. My liberal girlfriend gave me her reasoning which I thought was rather unique. I will be curious if someone matches her thoughts. I blame the current chaos on just getting over having the "great divider" as president for 8 years and the liberal media fanning the flames. I didn't see millions of protesters in the streets when Obama was re-elected and I know plenty of people like me were as disgusted with him as Democrats are with Trump. What does everyone else think?

Here is a list of the ten most significant protest movements in the United States as compiled by Time magazine.
1. Boston Tea Party
2. Civil Rights
3. Women's suffrage
4. Anti war
5. Gay rights
6. Labor Movement
7. Black power
8. Anti globalization
9. Tea Party
10. Occupy Wall Street.

And here is a similar list internationally as compiled by Live Science magazine.
1. Protestant Reformation.
2. Storming the Bastile
3. Ghandi's Salt March
4. Boston Tea Party
5. South Africa's National Day of Protest.
6. March on Washington.
7. Tiananmen Square.
8. Berlin Wall Protests.
9. Iraq War Protests
10. The Orange Revolution. (Kiev)

What all of these protests have in common is that the protesters felt marginalized and not in control of their own destiny. And that is why it is the Democrats who are most evident at these protests. Democrats/Liberals have always been at the forefront of social change. Democrats/Liberals have always carried about the downtrodden.

Of course you won't see any Democrats at present day Tea Party rallies. Those are an anomaly. Just a bunch of angry old white men who want to go back to the bad old days when blacks knew their place, gays stayed in the closet and
women were barefoot and pregnant.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Ocala Mike

Simple - Republicans/Conservatives feel themselves to be creatures of privilege, either economically, socially, or whatever. As such, they tend to be happy with the status quo, and don't want to rock the boat (rise of the Tea Party an outlier event).

Dems/Libs are denizens of the world of "lack of privilege," whether real or imagined. As such, they feel obligated to protest everything to achieve what they call "a level playing field" (no such thing, of course).

A good and very true analysis.

[Ocala Mike]

But don't you know, I'm "disconnected."

Still say it has something to do with the tinkering going on with this site!

LOL

Actually, I do think Inner Dirt's g/f is pretty much spot on.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by mostpost

What all of these protests have in common is that the protesters felt marginalized and not in control of their own destiny. And that is why it is the Democrats who are most evident at these protests. Democrats/Liberals have always been at the forefront of social change. Democrats/Liberals have always carried about the downtrodden.

It's funny that these protestors show up NOW, but yet not one new law has been written or passed, not one law has been repealed, nothing. So, what has CHANGED in this country in the last month that causes these misguided individuals to take to the streets?.....Fake passion, fake outrage, fake protests...

[Ocala Mike]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

So, what has CHANGED in this country in the last month that causes these misguided individuals to take to the streets?

http://search.aol.com/aol/image?q=im...yword_rollover

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Ocala Mike

http://search.aol.com/aol/image?q=im...yword_rollover

And yet, NOTHING has changed, has it?....I'll keep waiting..

[no breathalyzer]

ignorance due to poor education and willingness to learn.. lazy misinformed individuals with no guidance that want the easy way out... should i go on?

[no breathalyzer]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Here is a list of the ten most significant protest movements in the United States as compiled by Time magazine.
1. Boston Tea Party
2. Civil Rights
3. Women's suffrage
4. Anti war
5. Gay rights
6. Labor Movement
7. Black power
8. Anti globalization
9. Tea Party
10. Occupy Wall Street.

And here is a similar list internationally as compiled by Live Science magazine.
1. Protestant Reformation.
2. Storming the Bastile
3. Ghandi's Salt March
4. Boston Tea Party
5. South Africa's National Day of Protest.
6. March on Washington.
7. Tiananmen Square.
8. Berlin Wall Protests.
9. Iraq War Protests
10. The Orange Revolution. (Kiev)

What all of these protests have in common is that the protesters felt marginalized and not in control of their own destiny. And that is why it is the Democrats who are most evident at these protests. Democrats/Liberals have always been at the forefront of social change. Democrats/Liberals have always carried about the downtrodden.

Of course you won't see any Democrats at present day Tea Party rallies. Those are an anomaly. Just a bunch of angry old white men who want to go back to the bad old days when blacks knew their place, gays stayed in the closet and
women were barefoot and pregnant.

really ? c'mon man

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by DSB

Alinsky believed in implementing Marxism through legal and non-violent means, such as through the ballot box.

Where the heck do you get that from? Is it from this passage from "Rules for Radicals?" A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists.....(and ends with) the political paradise of capitalism. But immediately following that Alinsky says, "The Christians begin with their prime truth: the divinity of Christ and the tripartite nature of God." Does this mean Alinsky was a Christian? Pretty sure he was Jewish.

On Page four of "Rules for Radicals" Alinsky writes. "Dogma is the enemy of freedom. Dogma must be watched for and Apprehended at every turn and twist of the revolutionary movement."

Is there anything more dogmatic than communism; unless it is Christianity-or any religion?

On page nine of "Rules for Radicals" Alinsky writes, "We have permitted a suicidal situation to unfold wherein revolution and communism have become one. These pages are committed to splitting this political atom, separating this exclusive identification of communism with revolution."

Hardly the words of a Marxist.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Tom

And you question my intelligence?
You want to point out the mobs of Trump people rioting in the streets?
Never mind, I forgot, you already put together a paragraph tonight.
You don't want to risk PESD.

Maybe Teach will make you some cocco.

We do not question your intelligence. We are completely aware of your lack thereof. And, it is COCOA.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by davew

1) half of democrats are/were Bernie Sanders supporters and became disenfranchised after they saw the way the DNC screwed him. Many of those did not vote.

2) biased polls continually showed Hillary winning in a landslide. This kept some voters from voting and Hillary from an aggressive campaign during the last month.

3) major media was extremely biased in their views, the way they interviewed candidates, and questions during the debates. This kept many voters upset with the reporting. An example is George Stephanopolous -

4) Hillary kept talking out of both sides of her mouth. She was the most untrustworthy candidate in recent history.

I'd add one more. There were a lot of mainstream Republicans who didn't like Trump, but voted for him because of the Supreme Court vacancy.

I'd agree that Hillary didn't bring out the vote the way Obama did. But I think there were also Republican voters who stayed at home because they weren't Trump fans. I think that aspect may have cancelled each other out.

I don't think number three was a cause for Trump's victory or Hillary's loss. The people who were solidly Trump saw it your way, the people who were solidly Hillary thought the media was hitting the nail on the head. All the "biased" media did was reinforce the views of both sides. I don't think they changed many minds one way or the other.

Your number 4 is what I said when I called her extremely flawed. But, again, the Trump supporters were rabid in their hate of Hillary, while the Hillary supporters were not nearly as convinced of her prevarication. At the very best, Hillary would have been a continuation of the status quo, and with a Republican congress, no more effective than Obama was. She was the candidate of no real change.

Trump did a masterful job of sucking up all the available air during the campaign. He was on the news constantly. He was the un-candidate. He was the right person in the right place at the right time.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

She said it was due to the political demographics of how the population is dispersed. Densely populated areas in the inner cities are strongly Democrat while Republicans populate rural areas. She claims Republicans are too spread out to easily assemble in masses. I honestly am amazed at how she spins things to never paint a liberal cause or action in a negative light. Of course no one in here came close to her explanation.
I would not have thought of that as a compelling reason. While a lot of the less populated states are strongly Republican, there are certainly enough well populated Republican areas to support protests.

Personally I think as a whole liberals love to make excuses for poor behavior. I see many of them going as far as condoning and explaining away the law breaking and violence that these protests lead to.
I really hate the way you ignore the vast majority of peaceful protesters and concentrate on the miniscule number of violent incidents. Then again, that supports your agenda.

On the other hand the most despised extreme right wing organization in the USA, namely the KKK does not condone breaking the law in any manner. Let that sink in.

First of all, thank you for admitting that the KKK is a right wing organization.
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/..._Cat=Extremism
The above documents at least six instances of law breaking by KKK Members in the late 90s and early 2000s.

KKK is flat out lying when it says it does not condone breaking the law. Nobody believes that.