Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

All this talk about violence from supporters...I repeat again...Which candidate supported and encouraged violence and which ones opposed it?

It no longer matters now. The "Mob" is getting a life of its own.

Edit

Anyone hear mention of a US Flags being burnt at the last one? I saw the news piece but never saw any flag burning just the little stick Mexican flags being waved. Just NPR this morning mention flag burning.

 skyth wrote:
All this talk about violence from supporters...I repeat again...Which candidate supported and encouraged violence and which ones opposed it?

Which ones burned a US flag while waiving foreign flags and attacked people outside the event? Thats three events this has occurred so far.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:
It no longer matters now. The "Mob" is getting a life of its own.

Edit

Anyone hear mention of a US Flags being burnt at the last one? I saw the news piece but never saw any flag burning just the little stick Mexican flags being waved. Just NPR this morning mention flag burning.

A US flag was burned.

 Frazzled wrote:

 skyth wrote:
All this talk about violence from supporters...I repeat again...Which candidate supported and encouraged violence and which ones opposed it?

Which ones burned a US flag while waiving foreign flags and attacked people outside the event? Thats three events this has occurred so far.

Really irrelevant. I think it's more important to see which candidate encouraged violence rather than who's 'supporters' did whatever. For all we know, these were actually Trump supporters trying to cause trouble and make the other side look bad.

Irrelevant to you. Not irrelevant to others.

 skyth wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 skyth wrote:
All this talk about violence from supporters...I repeat again...Which candidate supported and encouraged violence and which ones opposed it?

Which ones burned a US flag while waiving foreign flags and attacked people outside the event? Thats three events this has occurred so far.

Really irrelevant. I think it's more important to see which candidate encouraged violence rather than who's 'supporters' did whatever. For all we know, these were actually Trump supporters trying to cause trouble and make the other side look bad.

Doesn't matter. The US Flag getting burnt stands out more to a good chunk of US Civilians then which side the "protestors" are actual on. Has protestors against Hillary/Bernie been burning US Flags?

Edit

Hold that thought. Word it wrong
The US Flag burning going to be associated towards Bernie and Hillary. I'm not saying a huge chunk of people are going to sway their votes towards Trump because of that but some voters who are on the fence might go ahead and vote for Trump due to that.

well right after the incident in San Jose Sanders condemned that attacks that took place there and furthermore stated he does not need Supporters like that so even he might think people who support him were involved, while also doing a classic CYA before something nasty happens, as it goes wonder if Trump will be doing a rally in Idaho? and if so will protesters be there? if so it will get ugly real quick there with all the militias around there.

as to flag burning there was flag burning in San Jose along with hat burning and sign burning and weed burning, which parties supporters did it, unknown or even if they support a party, but people are seeing flags being burned by people who are waving a foreign nations flag and waving signs of California belongs to Mexico, these are not seen at other candidates rallys, just Trumps, so American citizens see these things and think Trump may be the way to go.

also the California belongs to Mexico is so flawed its a joke, before them Spain owned it until the revolution took it from them, before that the Indians owned it before the Spanish took it from them and before that another culture owned it before the Indians took it from them.

So in other words the truth doesn't really matter at all to poeople who would possibly support Trump. Looks like Trump has them pegged and has been doing it right all along.

Trump is not a politician so I doubt he would condemned the violence during protests. Since the perception of the protestors are Dem supporters it works in his favor. If you think about it. I have not seen any ads promoting Trump for POTUS yet.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
So in other words the truth doesn't really matter at all to poeople who would possibly support Trump. Looks like Trump has them pegged and has been doing it right all along.

the truth is a foreign nations people are burning the American flag while waving their foreign nations flag and waving signs saying California belongs to Mexico, trump is the only one who says he will try to stop them, not Hillary, not Bernie, they will accept them with open arms.

sorry but I'm all for repelling boarders not inviting them on to take the ship. you want to hand over your land with a smile and a wave go for it. but not me.

also the California belongs to Mexico is so flawed its a joke, before them Spain owned it until the revolution took it from them, before that the Indians owned it before the Spanish took it from them and before that another culture owned it before the Indians took it from them.

exactly. Mexico's ownership of California could best be described as...temporary.

 Jihadin wrote:
Trump is not a politician so I doubt he would condemned the violence during protests. Since the perception of the protestors are Dem supporters it works in his favor. If you think about it. I have not seen any ads promoting Trump for POTUS yet.

That's right. Trump has endorsed violence at his rallies.

 Frazzled wrote:

also the California belongs to Mexico is so flawed its a joke, before them Spain owned it until the revolution took it from them, before that the Indians owned it before the Spanish took it from them and before that another culture owned it before the Indians took it from them.

exactly. Mexico's ownership of California could best be described as...temporary.

all ownership of land in the grand scheme of things could be termed temporary at best, just like governments rise and fall and while the US is still standing does not mean it will always stand and the founding fathers knew and encouraged this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Trump is not a politician so I doubt he would condemned the violence during protests. Since the perception of the protestors are Dem supporters it works in his favor. If you think about it. I have not seen any ads promoting Trump for POTUS yet.

That's right. Trump has endorsed violence at his rallies.

he has endorsed Supporters to defend themselves.

This is getting rather off the topic.

Asterios wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Trump is not a politician so I doubt he would condemned the violence during protests. Since the perception of the protestors are Dem supporters it works in his favor. If you think about it. I have not seen any ads promoting Trump for POTUS yet.

That's right. Trump has endorsed violence at his rallies.

he has endorsed Supporters to defend themselves.

No, he endorsed any of his supporters beating up any protesters in his rallies, whether they were violent or not.

That's right. He even said he would pay their legal costs.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Trump is not a politician so I doubt he would condemned the violence during protests. Since the perception of the protestors are Dem supporters it works in his favor. If you think about it. I have not seen any ads promoting Trump for POTUS yet.

That's right. Trump has endorsed violence at his rallies.

he has endorsed Supporters to defend themselves.

No, he endorsed any of his supporters beating up any protesters in his rallies, whether they were violent or not.

really where does he say that?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
That's right. He even said he would pay their legal costs.

he would pay the legal fees of those defending themselves.

In the links posted earlier in the thread to confirm this point which you seem to have ignore but are still there for you to refer to.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
In the links posted earlier in the thread to confirm this point which you seem to have ignore but are still there for you to refer to.

then do point them out, and looking for actual video of him saying it or unbiased articles saying he said that, please enlighten me and show me these things.

Why waste anyone's time pretending that you would read them instead of ignoring them?

Asterios wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
In the links posted earlier in the thread to confirm this point which you seem to have ignore but are still there for you to refer to.

then do point them out, and looking for actual video of him saying it or unbiased articles saying he said that, please enlighten me and show me these things.

If you flip through the past few pages you will find them posted by me. I'm not going to waste my time doing your work for you.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
In the links posted earlier in the thread to confirm this point which you seem to have ignore but are still there for you to refer to.

then do point them out, and looking for actual video of him saying it or unbiased articles saying he said that, please enlighten me and show me these things.

If you flip through the past few pages you will find them posted by me. I'm not going to waste my time doing your work for you.

but you expect me to waste my time to amuse you, you state Trump said this and that and yet the evidence shows otherwise, it is not articles, and videos and images we see of Trump supporters attacking protesters of late, but of protesters attacking Trump supporters so if he said what you said he did and you claim his supporters are mindless drones who will follow him in all things, then why are they not attacking them willy nilly? even in San Jose protesters got in the rally and Trump told people to leave them alone and let them be, that sounds contrary to what you just said.

http://www.mercurynews.com/politics-government/ci_29971491/san-jose-supporters-line-up-hear-donald-trump

in fact when I pointed that out you called it Spam and threatened me to stop doing that, so you used your position as a moderator to push your own political agenda and squelch my voice, which makes you a poor moderator.

Asterios wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Trump is not a politician so I doubt he would condemned the violence during protests. Since the perception of the protestors are Dem supporters it works in his favor. If you think about it. I have not seen any ads promoting Trump for POTUS yet.

That's right. Trump has endorsed violence at his rallies.

he has endorsed Supporters to defend themselves.

No, he endorsed any of his supporters beating up any protesters in his rallies, whether they were violent or not.

really where does he say that?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
That's right. He even said he would pay their legal costs.

he would pay the legal fees of those defending themselves.

Right here.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-campaign-protests-20160313-story.html

 jreilly89 wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Trump is not a politician so I doubt he would condemned the violence during protests. Since the perception of the protestors are Dem supporters it works in his favor. If you think about it. I have not seen any ads promoting Trump for POTUS yet.

That's right. Trump has endorsed violence at his rallies.

he has endorsed Supporters to defend themselves.

No, he endorsed any of his supporters beating up any protesters in his rallies, whether they were violent or not.

really where does he say that?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
That's right. He even said he would pay their legal costs.

he would pay the legal fees of those defending themselves.

Right here.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-campaign-protests-20160313-story.html

Here is another, with video of him saying it for easy convenience.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/10/trump-once-said-he-would-pay-legal-fees-for-people-who-beat-up-protesters-now-that-its-happened-can-he/


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And for the record, that took literally 5 seconds, googling the following: "trump says he will pay legal fees".

I remember an age old adage in regards to making this reply: You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

 jreilly89 wrote:

Asterios wrote:


really where does he say that?

Right here.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-campaign-protests-20160313-story.html

did you read this article? it is all based on him saying he might pay the legal fees, furthermore his statement of attack is if you see someone going to throw a tomato at you, so i repeat did you read the article?

IronWarLeg wrote:
Here is another, with video of him saying it for easy convenience.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/10/trump-once-said-he-would-pay-legal-fees-for-people-who-beat-up-protesters-now-that-its-happened-can-he/


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And for the record, that took literally 5 seconds, googling the following: "trump says he will pay legal fees".

I remember an age old adage in regards to making this reply: You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

this goes back to the other link, so this is your whole arguments for how Trump said to attack protesters? your evidence fu is weak, and love how you made that last added statement since you obviously realized your evidence was weak.

I go by facts, did trump supporters attack Protesters in San Jose? no, did those protesters attack Supporters just trying to get in and out of the rally? yes.

Asterios wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

Asterios wrote:


really where does he say that?

Right here.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-campaign-protests-20160313-story.html

did you read this article? it is all based on him saying he might pay the legal fees, furthermore his statement of attack is if you see someone going to throw a tomato at you, so i repeat did you read the article?

He also said '"I’d like to punch him in the face,” he told the Las Vegas crowd when one protester was ejected.' Also, tomatoes are not really the same as a rock or a brick, so I think stomping the gak out of someone is a bit much.

Care to move the goal posts?

Asterios wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

Asterios wrote:


really where does he say that?

Right here.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-campaign-protests-20160313-story.html

did you read this article? it is all based on him saying he might pay the legal fees, furthermore his statement of attack is if you see someone going to throw a tomato at you, so i repeat did you read the article?

IronWarLeg wrote:
Here is another, with video of him saying it for easy convenience.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/10/trump-once-said-he-would-pay-legal-fees-for-people-who-beat-up-protesters-now-that-its-happened-can-he/


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And for the record, that took literally 5 seconds, googling the following: "trump says he will pay legal fees".

I remember an age old adage in regards to making this reply: You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

this goes back to the other link, so this is your whole arguments for how Trump said to attack protesters? your evidence fu is weak, and love how you made that last added statement since you obviously realized your evidence was weak.

I go by facts, did trump supporters attack Protesters in San Jose? no, did those protesters attack Supporters just trying to get in and out of the rally? yes.

From the article:

"At a rally on the day of the Iowa caucuses this year, Donald Trump told the audience that he'd been warned about protesters with tomatoes in the audience.

"So if you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of 'em, would you? Seriously. Okay? Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise. I promise.""

I didn't realize that the goal post was to be moved to only be in regards to the protesters in San Jose. This isn't weak evidence, this is a direct quote from the Donald's mouth inciting violence against any possible trouble makers in his audience, and in the same breath offering to cover any legal fees. The following quote: " I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise. I promise" doesn't sound like might to me, but what do I know?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
That's right. He even said he would pay their legal costs.

I thought this was getting off topic. Pick a team Killkrazy!



He has made "interesting statements" in that regard, where neither Bernie nor Hillary said anything at all like that. This however is counterbalanced by the violence that is now occurring.
Here's an idea. peaceful protests = good. Physically attacking the opposition = bad.

Funny; I don't recall Trump supporters rioting and attacking people at Sanders' rallies.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
This is getting rather off the topic.

It's off topic as soon as someone disagrees with you? Sad state of moderation on this forum.