A military coup, no. Trump has no friends among the military. But riots? Militia uprisings? In the era of Cliven Bundy, do you really think it's so unlikely?
Is there a point to this statement?American history is an armed insurrection circa 1776. With help from France, the insurrection won.
A reply to "Great, the Cinnamon Hitler just called for an armed insurrection/coup." upthread.
Riots and uprisings are not unique to Trumpkins. Riots at worst. A bona-fide militia uprising ... maaaaybe. I dunno if such would garner any significant initiative. Nothing that I'm aware of in the way of 'social unrest' by Trumpkins has attained any significant steam.
So-and-so is grarr'ing mah gun rights! has been political football for an awfully long time. *shrugs*
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
He's suggested "Second Amendment People" could stop her from picking undesirable Supreme Court Justices.This does not translate into assassination. People could do something about it without going anywhere close to such things. Remember the earlier post upthread about how few people call their Congresscritters' offices? :)
You can't be serious here.
He began the remark with "if she gets the pick" — which presumes she's already won the Presidency — then says, "although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is."
His intent is crystal clear.
I don't think that there has been a state within the last 120 years whose electors actually went off the reservation.
There has been a move by Republicans to move Electoral college results by congressional district instead of states as a whole. This would give them a tremendous advantage over urban voters. They want to break up California for simmilar advantage.
Good god. They literally hate democracy. Gerrymandering our districts wasn't enough?
Maine actually has a push right now for ranked-choice balloting. This year is probably the best advertisement for that kind of system you're ever going to get.
It's the reason that districts are being gerrymandered in the first place.
They don't hate democracy... they simply just want it to apply to what they consider "Real Americans".
Sadly, the motive is the retention of political power. Both majority parties have been doing this for a few decades (perhaps longer?) now. ;)
The guy is weak on monstrous races' rights, and I worry he's going to overprioritize Chelaxian issues.K-Cleaver,
God I hope milita uprising don't happen. Cause if they do, I'm starting my own based on King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.
I'm in favor of electing James Jacobs as our King. :p :)
Don't worry I plan on instituting The Code and the Measure as a backup.
Nothing else, we might get Hellknights as our new overseas enforcers. :)
He's suggested "Second Amendment People" could stop her from picking undesirable Supreme Court Justices.This does not translate into assassination. People could do something about it without going anywhere close to such things. Remember the earlier post upthread about how few people call their Congresscritters' offices? :)You can't be serious here.
He began the remark with "if she gets the pick" — which presumes she's already won the Presidency — then says, "although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is."
His intent is crystal clear.
Or maybe the Republican Congress will simply block supreme court justices for the next 4-8 years or until the Democrats knuckle under.
A barbell could slip and break his neck, perhaps.
Yeah...no. Not at all what I was suggesting. Kinda the opposite, actually. But I suspect you know that?
He's suggested "Second Amendment People" could stop her from picking undesirable Supreme Court Justices.This does not translate into assassination. People could do something about it without going anywhere close to such things. Remember the earlier post upthread about how few people call their Congresscritters' offices? :)You can't be serious here.
He began the remark with "if she gets the pick" — which presumes she's already won the Presidency — then says, "although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is."
His intent is crystal clear.
At no point in his speech that I've seen quoted does he advocate violence, let alone assassination.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A reply to "Great, the Cinnamon Hitler just called for an armed insurrection/coup." upthread.
I can't claim credit for the Cinnamon Hitler. That was totally Trevor Noah.
At no point in his speech that I've seen quoted does he advocate violence, let alone assassination.He's suggested "Second Amendment People" could stop her from picking undesirable Supreme Court Justices.This does not translate into assassination. People could do something about it without going anywhere close to such things. Remember the earlier post upthread about how few people call their Congresscritters' offices? :)You can't be serious here.
He began the remark with "if she gets the pick" — which presumes she's already won the Presidency — then says, "although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is."
His intent is crystal clear.
What exactly would "Second Amendment" refer to then, since it's about nothing other than guns, (although one might stretch to argue for the right to put a tactical nuclear missle on one's property)?
Drah,
*raises his hand* Uhm I have some. ;)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
He's suggested "Second Amendment People" could stop her from picking undesirable Supreme Court Justices.This does not translate into assassination. People could do something about it without going anywhere close to such things. Remember the earlier post upthread about how few people call their Congresscritters' offices? :)You can't be serious here.
He began the remark with "if she gets the pick" — which presumes she's already won the Presidency — then says, "although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is."
His intent is crystal clear.
Next thing, he'll probably say "lone wolf" a few times. Y'know, just coincidentally.
Look, I've said it before and I'll say it again, right here on these very message boards: I'm a gun owner who's completely fine with the idea of regulating gun ownership. Trump can try to appeal to me with whatever soundbyte he chooses, that dude just bums me out no matter what.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A barbell could slip and break his neck, perhaps.Yeah...no. Not at all what I was suggesting. Kinda the opposite, actually. But I suspect you know that?
I know that's what happened to a guy that was supposed to testify against Hillary, but only Anti Trump people should worry, amirite?
I know that's what happened to a guy that was supposed to testify against Hillary, but only Anti Trump people should worry, amirite?A barbell could slip and break his neck, perhaps.Yeah...no. Not at all what I was suggesting. Kinda the opposite, actually. But I suspect you know that?
I am so embarassed for you.
maybe it's poe'slaw? please be poe'slaw.
Sure, why not?
Is that like cole'slaw?
Sure, why not?
Is that like cole'slaw?
Poe's law is when the subject of parody is sufficiently ridiculous that you can't tell the difference between the parody or the real thing.
I wish it was parody...
Are you serious? You have to be aware of how much bs that list is.
A bona-fide militia uprising ... maaaaybe.Then there's this
LinkifiedI doubt there's enough organization to actually mount a real revolution, but I'd definitely expect more of this kind of thing and more of the linked Bundy style militias. The more Clinton is painted as illegitimate, the more emboldened they'll be.
His base IIRC trends older. My thinking is that most retirees/near retirees are not going to be so motivated to do more than complain.
Of course his younger base might try something. I don't think the next few years are going to be pretty...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My thinking is that most retirees/near retirees are not going to be so motivated to do more than complain.
Well, the Colorado abortion clinic shooter was 57. Although, that might actually qualify him for Trump's "younger base"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish it was parody...Just to be clear: You wish it was parody because it's crazy that some people believe this, not you wish it was parody because you think the Clintons really are murdering people right and left? Right?
I know you're smarter than that, Kryzbyn. Jeez, even the blogspeak drivel on Huffington Post at least links to pseudo-sources.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to disapprove of Hillary Clinton without resorting to fictions, conspiracy theories, and half-truths.
I don't think that's actually the case.
Do I believe they are capable of it? Yes, I do, as far as they are white, rich and very politically connected. Cynicism, I suppose.
As I often say, public perception is what matters. If more people believe Hillary is capable of these things than Trump, then all of the sky falling about "Cinnamon Hitler" won't matter.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to disapprove of Hillary Clinton without resorting to fictions, conspiracy theories, and half-truths.
Yes but all of those reasons go triple for trump, so they need to make up stuff.
That sure does look like a trustworthy and accurate source of information, right there.
What does?
Also no love for my link? :p ;)
Yes but all of those reasons go triple for trump, so they need to make up stuff.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to disapprove of Hillary Clinton without resorting to fictions, conspiracy theories, and half-truths.
Not to provoke anyone into a flame war, but what are those legitimate reasons, exactly? A 35 year long smear campaign by conservative talk radio mouth pieces does not equal factual evidence.
Not to provoke anyone into a flame war, but what are those legitimate reasons, exactly? A 35 year long smear campaign by conservative talk radio mouth pieces does not equal factual evidence.Yes but all of those reasons go triple for trump, so they need to make up stuff.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to disapprove of Hillary Clinton without resorting to fictions, conspiracy theories, and half-truths.
She's a shill of big business, it's all about her, she's just going to make the rich richer, she doesn't care about the voters, it's all about getting her name on legislation...
That's all vague bullshit, you got anything that you know for sure.
Please, be as specific as possible.
Knowing BNW, he was speaking (posting, I guess, in this case?) ironically. /wink
Yeah all that is questioning intentions, and on a forum with debates about RAW and RAI we should all understand the pitfalls of trying to ascribe intentions to someone else.
*ascribe the intention for when he dies to join the active roster of Avengers*
Knowing BNW, he was speaking (posting, I guess, in this case?) ironically. /wink
nah, I'm being serious this time. Captain yesterday: vague is fine. Bullshit it is not.
She's for the transpacific trade partnership which.. how on earth is this supposed to help american workers? We don't put tarrifs on them, and they break their promises to pay their workers and not pollute
She voted for the war in iraq, which is the most blatant piece of corporate welfare and influence since we invaded south america on behalf of dole fruit.
She voted for the patriot act (twice)
She voted for the wallstreet bailout.
is it really too much to ask for a Fiscal policy left of Reagan?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Links? Or more b$%%!*!@.
I've never heard of that website.
The whole article sounds like sour grapes to me.
I've never heard of that website.
The whole article sounds like sour grapes to me.
*hands captain a bottle of wine*
I don't drink.
I do, I'll take two bottles of that thar wine!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't drink.
Okay here's a cookie instead.
*hands the bottle of wine to Hitdice*