117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Jan 23, 2017 14:28:46 GMT
To give him his due, after that tweet he does say peaceful protests are a sign of democracy and people have the right to do it. When do the protesters stop protesting and accept the outcome of a democratic process?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 14:37:23 GMT
Where has this idea come from that there is a point at which protesters need to stop? It's one of the more ridiculous and cowardly ideas that has been floating around since the election. People protested against the injustices they saw for the entirety of the Obama presidency, there is no reason they should stop now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 14:41:16 GMT
Likewise I'm puzzled by the notion that people should stop protesting. People protest a range of issues and events. So in fact you could argue that they have no accepted Trump is in charge and are now protesting the actions he is taking.
Plus the women's march is a historic event, that offered a useful sounding board for current issues.
So I think the short answer to "When will people stop protesting" is "Never"
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Jan 23, 2017 14:48:34 GMT
Where has this idea come from that there is a point at which protesters need to stop? It's one of the more ridiculous and cowardly ideas that has been floating around since the election. People protested against the injustices they saw for the entirety of the Obama presidency, there is no reason they should stop now. People have every right to protest at any decision made by the Trump administration during his reign as President... My problem is with people protesting about Trump being elected (he won, its called democracy, get over it) or will continue to protest because of idiotic things he once said...
|
|
1,013 posts
|
Post by talkstageytome on Jan 23, 2017 14:48:42 GMT
Two of the most worrying things I keep seeing and hearing are 'we won, you lost' and 'Trump is your president now. Deal with it'. Since when did people have to blindly agree with what their country's leader says, regardless of whether they feel the same way or not? Very concerning that people seem to think that their country's leader should be allowed to do and say whatever he wants and not ever be challenged.
|
|
1,013 posts
|
Post by talkstageytome on Jan 23, 2017 14:51:32 GMT
Where has this idea come from that there is a point at which protesters need to stop? It's one of the more ridiculous and cowardly ideas that has been floating around since the election. People protested against the injustices they saw for the entirety of the Obama presidency, there is no reason they should stop now. People have every right to protest at any decision made by the Trump administration during his reign as President... My problem is with people protesting about Trump being elected (he won, its called democracy, get over it) or will continue to protest because of idiotic things he once said...
People protest the things he says because now that he is in the ultimate position of power the terrible demeaning things he's said and not apologise for will be out there for impressionable people to hear and emulate. He should be setting an example for all of his people, and trying to mend fences, not divide the left and the right / men and women / different races and nationalities even further. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 14:52:05 GMT
Where has this idea come from that there is a point at which protesters need to stop? It's one of the more ridiculous and cowardly ideas that has been floating around since the election. People protested against the injustices they saw for the entirety of the Obama presidency, there is no reason they should stop now. People have every right to protest at any decision made by the Trump administration during his reign as President... My problem is with people protesting about Trump being elected (he won, its called democracy, get over it) or will continue to protest because of idiotic things he once said... When the "idiotic things he once said" become a thing of the past rather than a constant daily reality, and when his worrying views don't look like they'll have a direct affect on policy, maybe people will stop. If you don't think women's rights or LGBTQIA rights or freedom of religion or freedom of the press need protecting, then by all means stay at home and don't go to any protests. In the meantime, we will march as we see fit, knowing that at THE VERY LEAST we will be able to look back and know that we were on the right side of history. |
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Jan 23, 2017 14:55:18 GMT
Two of the most worrying things I keep seeing and hearing are 'we won, you lost' and 'Trump is your president now. Deal with it'. Since when did people have to blindly agree with what their country's leader says, regardless of whether they feel the same way or not? Very concerning that people seem to think that their country's leader should be allowed to do and say whatever he wants and not ever be challenged.
Of course no leader should be able to say or do whatever they want. Only an idiot would be happy to accept such a situation.
However, there should be a moment when bitter people stop protesting simply because the person they voted for lost. We're getting it in Britain with the ridiculous inability of some to accept the EU referendum outcome and, even as someone who voted remain, it is embarrassing.
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Jan 23, 2017 15:16:46 GMT
People have every right to protest at any decision made by the Trump administration during his reign as President... My problem is with people protesting about Trump being elected (he won, its called democracy, get over it) or will continue to protest because of idiotic things he once said... When the "idiotic things he once said" become a thing of the past rather than a constant daily reality, and when his worrying views don't look like they'll have a direct affect on policy, maybe people will stop. If you don't think women's rights or LGBTQIA rights or freedom of religion or freedom of the press need protecting, then by all means stay at home and don't go to any protests. In the meantime, we will march as we see fit, knowing that at THE VERY LEAST we will be able to look back and know that we were on the right side of history.
History won't remember anything about you, sorry that's the truth.
He won an election because he is in touch with the realities of life for a significant amount of Americans. I totally agree that we should watch his administration carefully, as we should every government in the World, but millions of Americans voted for Trump and when policies and laws are passed with these in mind which do not break any international laws, they will be on the side of history. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 15:20:04 GMT
"Oh yes Mr Hitler we're quite happy for you to exterminate all the Jews because you won an election."
Some would disagree.
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Jan 23, 2017 15:22:43 GMT
"Oh yes Mr Hitler we're quite happy for you to exterminate all the Jews because you won an election." Some would disagree.Godwin's Law!!!
Please don't embarrass yourself or my intelligence comparing Trump to Hitler...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 17:46:18 GMT
Where has this idea come from that there is a point at which protesters need to stop? It's one of the more ridiculous and cowardly ideas that has been floating around since the election. People protested against the injustices they saw for the entirety of the Obama presidency, there is no reason they should stop now. People have every right to protest at any decision made by the Trump administration during his reign as President... My problem is with people protesting about Trump being elected (he won, its called democracy, get over it) or will continue to protest because of idiotic things he once said...
Clearly you misunderstand why a lot of people were marching at the weekend. To label it as an anti-Trump march is misleading - of course some people were there as a protest against Trump (and a protest against the man and his actions is a different thing to a protest against an election result in any event), but much more than that the organisers of the march were focused on highlighting issues including women's rights, disability rights, LGBT rights, the need to ensure equality of opportunity and eliminate racism. The reason so many people focused on Trump was that it is Trump's actions, his bigotry, hatred and ignorance, that are threatening the progress that has been made on all those issues, and the rights of marginalised people. He is taking up arguably the most powerful political position on the planet, so of course his actions will be scrutinised, counter-argued and protested where people think it necessary to protect and preserve the human rights that he is threatening to destroy for many people. The very heart of democracy is being able to express one's opinions and feelings about all of that and more, and no-one should, or has the right to, tell anyone to stop doing so. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 18:31:48 GMT
Maybe the marchers will not be remembered in history as individuals. But you better believe that every history book that mentions Trump 50 years from now will mention the fact that he was so unpopular that he caused the biggest protest in US history to happen the day after his inauguration. The photos contrasting the crowds from the protests and the crowd at his inauguration will be placed side by side for decades to come.
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Jan 23, 2017 19:24:52 GMT
Maybe the marchers will not be remembered in history as individuals. But you better believe that every history book that mentions Trump 50 years from now will mention the fact that he was so unpopular that he caused the biggest protest in US history to happen the day after his inauguration. The photos contrasting the crowds from the protests and the crowd at his inauguration will be placed side by side for decades to come. No one cares about the attendance at the inauguration beyond. Not really. Those pictures do not prove anything as Trump won an election with millions voting for him in the process and he is clearly talking rubbish about how well it was attended. But no one really cares in the real World. What real people want is to be proved correct that they were right to vote for Trump and he fixes some very tough problems with America or, on the other hand, to be proven wrong with their fears about what a Trump presidency will be like (If anyone says that they want him to fail then they really are undeserving of the vote. We should never want our leaders to fail at great cost to the nation). No one real, however, does or should care about attendance at a ceremony held when most people are at work. The protesters will not only fade into insignificance individually but collectively too. History books will concentrate on his successes or failures as President and neither will be the result of those protesters. Also, I wish people would stop saying he is the most unpopular President since blah blah blah as if it is true and not just some silly mantra. He WON an election with millions of votes. Read that again and let it sink in... He WON an election with millions of votes. Thatcher is apparently the most hated Prime Minister in our history but someone always forgets to point out her two landslide victories... Not bad for someone hated... Trump is President, get used to it. Watch his actions and hold him to account when he has to be but he's not unpopular and he's going nowhere. *off on a tangent * Why can't the left accept defeat? There would be no protests if Clinton had won and none, for example, if Remain had won the referendum but we were guaranteed protests when the reverse happened. It reeks of childishness and Generation Snowflake. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 19:29:13 GMT
Thatcher is apparently the most hated Prime Minister in our history but someone always forgets to point out her two landslide victories... Not bad for someone hated... Yes, she is the most detested, followed by Tony Blair who was also electorally successful. These are FACTS. Not alternative facts. Just FACTS. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 19:30:37 GMT
And of course Clinton beat Trump in the popular vote but lost in the electoral college vote.
FACT.
Not alternative fact.
Just FACT.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 19:36:30 GMT
unless every single member of the population is polled they aren't facts.
There are plenty of people who also like both of them.
Both Blair and Thatcher are probably the two most high profile prime ministers since Churchill and possibly had the biggest impact on British history by their actions so they will naturally create strong opinions in people
|
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Jan 23, 2017 19:48:16 GMT
Why can't the left accept defeat? There would be no protests if Clinton had won and none, for example, if Remain had won the referendum but we were guaranteed protests when the reverse happened. You lose a lot of credibility when you start name-calling, so I didn't quote that bit, however I will respond to the above. You can say all that but you or I will never know if that is true. I heard some Trump supporters talking about civil war if Hillary Clinton won. When Nigel Farage believed that Remain had won, he said something along the lines of 'we have lost the battle, but we haven't lost the war.' There may not have been protests on this scale or we may have seen worse, you or I cannot definitively say otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by perfectspy on Jan 23, 2017 19:53:15 GMT
Maybe the marchers will not be remembered in history as individuals. But you better believe that every history book that mentions Trump 50 years from now will mention the fact that he was so unpopular that he caused the biggest protest in US history to happen the day after his inauguration. The photos contrasting the crowds from the protests and the crowd at his inauguration will be placed side by side for decades to come. I believe there was something similar happened when Reagan began his Presidency. The protesters that day included a Whoopi Goldberg. As Reagan is considered to have done a job well done, those protesters are no more than footnotes. It was also ironic that the current Women's march was organised by a woman who supports Sharia Law and has expressed hatred for the Jewish people. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 20:00:22 GMT
Why can't the left accept defeat? There would be no protests if Clinton had won Are you kidding? All through the Obama presidency there were right-wingers trying to claim that he wasn't American and therefore wasn't a legal president, and anyone who said otherwise was part of the "liberal conspiracy". When it comes to politics I've never known any group of people be more in denial about what is real. The US left-wing may not be happy with Trump as a president but they're not living in some delusional fantasy where he isn't American. |
|
950 posts
|
Post by vdcni on Jan 23, 2017 20:01:41 GMT
Maybe the marchers will not be remembered in history as individuals. But you better believe that every history book that mentions Trump 50 years from now will mention the fact that he was so unpopular that he caused the biggest protest in US history to happen the day after his inauguration. The photos contrasting the crowds from the protests and the crowd at his inauguration will be placed side by side for decades to come. Why can't the left accept defeat? There would be no protests if Clinton had won and none, for example, if Remain had won the referendum but we were guaranteed protests when the reverse happened. It reeks of childishness and Generation Snowflake. What utter rubbish. The Republicans have spent the last 8 years obstructing Obama's every move. They were so determined to refuse to accept his legitimacy they invented a whole theory that he wasn't born in America or that he was a Muslim. Way before the election they said they'd refuse to accept Hillary Clinton's supreme court picks and many times Trump implied the election would be stolen and there would be a need to take to the streets to stop it. Against that a peaceful protest in support of equal rights for women is nothing. And if people do remember the inauguration crowd in the future, Trump will have himself to blame by being such a child about it. |
|
|
|
Post by perfectspy on Jan 23, 2017 20:24:46 GMT
And of course Clinton beat Trump in the popular vote but lost in the electoral college vote. FACT. Not alternative fact. Just FACT. Its a Fact. But a redundant fact as the election isn't judged on what New York and California vote for. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 21:26:37 GMT
Maybe the marchers will not be remembered in history as individuals. But you better believe that every history book that mentions Trump 50 years from now will mention the fact that he was so unpopular that he caused the biggest protest in US history to happen the day after his inauguration. The photos contrasting the crowds from the protests and the crowd at his inauguration will be placed side by side for decades to come. I believe there was something similar happened when Reagan began his Presidency. The protesters that day included a Whoopi Goldberg. As Reagan is considered to have done a job well done, those protesters are no more than footnotes. It was also ironic that the current Women's march was organised by a woman who supports Sharia Law and has expressed hatred for the Jewish people. An alternative fact propagated by far right websites, it would appear. www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/news/a42375/womens-march-organizer-linda-sarsour-is-under-attack/Just a couple of minutes of googling means that I now could believe that she is either a rabid pro zionist or an anti zionist. Without proof and personally checking such claims people are making the fake news problem ten times worse. |
|
|
|
Post by perfectspy on Jan 23, 2017 21:48:46 GMT
I believe there was something similar happened when Reagan began his Presidency. The protesters that day included a Whoopi Goldberg. As Reagan is considered to have done a job well done, those protesters are no more than footnotes. It was also ironic that the current Women's march was organised by a woman who supports Sharia Law and has expressed hatred for the Jewish people. An alternative fact propagated by far right websites, it would appear. www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/news/a42375/womens-march-organizer-linda-sarsour-is-under-attack/Just a couple of minutes of googling means that I now could believe that she is either a rabid pro zionist or an anti zionist. Without proof and personally checking such claims people are making the fake news problem ten times worse. Yes I admit it's a problem with both left and right wing media creating fake stories or bending a narrative to such a way it looks like a Uri Geller spoon. Though I have heard of this name before and will post this link. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 21:58:28 GMT
Presumably sharia law may be applied in NYC in certain categories of case if the defendant agrees to its application.
Surely there's almost universal support for that? What reasons does anyone have against this?
|
|
