Donald Trump

New Poll: Left-Wing Protesters Drive People into Arms of Donald Trump

Trump canceling Chicago event made Republicans more likely to vote for him.

|

Trump
Todd Kranin

Donald Trump's supporters aren't fazed by his decision to cancel an appearance at a Chicago rally over the weekend—in fact, they are more likely to vote for him to be the Republican nominee because of it. 

That's according to a new poll of likely Republican voters conducted by Monmouth University. It confirms something I've long suspected (and have argued in previous articles): the antics of left-wing agitators are driving ordinary people into the arms of Trump. 

The poll noted that pro-Trump and anti-Trump forces clashed in Chicago last Friday, which prompted Trump to cancel the event. It then asked respondents whether this fact made them more or less likely to support Trump. Just 11 percent said they were less likely to support Trump because of this decision. Another 22 percent said they were actually more likely to back Trump, and 66 percent said their views were unchanged. 

Leftist protesters who vehemently oppose Trump would do well to remember that in a free society, even contemptible speakers are permitted to be heard. As New York Magazine's Jonathan Chait wrote in a recent piece: 

But the whole premise of democracy is that rules need to be applied in every case without regard to the merit of the underlying cause to which it is attached. If you defend the morality of a tactic against Trump, then you should be prepared to defend its morality against any candidate. Now imagine that right-wing protesters had set out to disrupt Barack Obama's speeches in 2008. If you're not okay with that scenario, you should not be okay with protesters doing it to Trump. 

Indeed. But the Monmouth poll is good evidence that letting Trump speak is not merely the morally correct, philosophically consistent course of action: It's the tactically sound one as well. When the left stops Trump from speaking, Trump wins. He gets to tell his people that the forces of far-left activism and political correctness are trying to silence him. Implicitly, he is suggesting to his followers that when he becomes president, the tides will turn: see his promise to make it easier to sue newspapers for criticizing him. Trump supporters adore this shtick. Stop giving them ammunition.

Related: The Main Casualty of Canceled Trump Rally is the Idea of Free Speech

Advertisement

NEXT: When You Picture President Trump, Think of Biff Tannen Crossed with Richard Nixon

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I hope Trump follows through with his threat to send his goons to Sanders’ rallies. BernieBros vs. Trumpshirts will be hilarious.

    1. I imagine they’ll be shocked by how much they have in common.

      1. People like that are never shocked by how much they have in common with their enemies – they are confounded by the audacity of Evil in its drive to resemble Good.

      2. Degenerating into one LITERAL giant cluster-fuck.

        1. BACK TO THE PILE!

      3. I just realized this was written in 2002. I wonder what the gun crime rate is now. Any government that tells you that you have no right to self defense is not looking after your best interest. Self defense is the most basic right anyone has. No government or police can protect you. I can’t believe you all allow this to continue. I keep a gun at home for self defense and have a license to carry it concealed any where I go. And I do. If I am attacked then at least I have a chance to stay alive. By the time the police arrive they can either arrange for my body to be picked up or take a statement from me. I choose the later. Britons let a right be taken from them and now it will be much harder to get it back. But you should try.
        ???? ????? ??????
        ???? ????? ??????

    2. Rotfront!

    3. Cripplefight! The deranged, 78-year old cowboy versus the gender studies sophomore!

      1. So what are the current odds for a septuagenarian not being POTUS in 2017?

        1. Hillary’s not quite 70, so it’s probably 50/50.

          1. She looks older than Trump, but not older than Bernie. Holy shit, that old bag will look 100 2 years into office defending all her old scandals and new scandals.

          2. Yeah, she won’t turn 70 until 10 months in office.

            1. She’ll be only 10 months younger than Reagan when he took office, but somehow I don’t think we’ll see all the doddering old fool jokes pouring out of the left like in the 80s.

              1. Well, that would be sexist.

                1. Vote Vagina 2016!

        2. According to betting markets, we’re now down to a 7% chance that it is anyone other than Trump, Clinton or Sanders.

          If Clinton (will be 69 and a quarter at her coronation) doesn’t count, then it’s over 70%.

          1. Any betting market that gives favorable odds to Bernie cannot be taken seriously.

            1. Take the bet then, it’s a lock brah!

              1. It’s illegal for American’s to bet and BettingFair won’t take American credit cards or money orders from America. I’d probably have some bets on it, if it wasn’t illegal (and a major a hassle).

                Some of the odds were really off 6 weeks ago. And even today it still almost certainly overweights the Democratic chance of winning the election. (70%+)

            2. Is there one doing that? From what Glide says, the favorable odds are for Trump, Clinton or Sanders. Which seems like a fairly safe bet.

    4. I’m picturing this.

    5. He won’t follow through with that. There may be some idiots who end up acting on that comment, but Trump is just using negotiation tactics. He’s throwing that out there to intimidate, just like the 45% tariff on China comment, which was designed to get them worried so they’ll offer up something better than the status quo.

    6. After I been earnin $8768 this-past/five weeks and-a little over, $10k lass-month. it’s realy my favourite work I have ever had. I actually started 7-months ago and pretty much straight away was earning at least $87… p/h. I follow
      this website,
      =============== http://www.PathCash30.com

    7. After I been earnin $8768 this-past/five weeks and-a little over, $10k lass-month. it’s realy my favourite work I have ever had. I actually started 7-months ago and pretty much straight away was earning at least $87… p/h. I follow
      this website,
      =============== http://www.PathCash30.com

    8. After I been earnin $8768 this-past/five weeks and-a little over, $10k lass-month. it’s realy my favourite work I have ever had. I actually started 7-months ago and pretty much straight away was earning at least $87… p/h. I follow
      this website,
      =============== http://www.PathCash30.com

    9. After I been earnin $8768 this-past/five weeks and-a little over, $10k lass-month. it’s realy my favourite work I have ever had. I actually started 7-months ago and pretty much straight away was earning at least $87… p/h. I follow
      this website,
      =============== http://www.PathCash30.com

  2. You Know Who else got more popular thanks to disturbances at rallies?

    1. The Sex Pistols?

    2. Homer Stokes?

    3. Anyone who exploited the banned-in-Boston effect?

    4. Pelagius?

      Socrates?

    5. The 2002 California Angels?

      1. +1 Los Angeles Angels of Califonia de Anaheim via Long Beach and Malibu

    6. The Rolling Stones?

    7. Hedge funds?

    8. The Grachii brothers?

    9. Rage Against the Machine?

    10. Ferguson Police Department?

    11. Lenny Bruce?

    12. Darth Maul?

  3. Evil begets evil.

    Or something witty like that.

    1. No, it’s: Evil feeds upon itself.

  4. Have the conspiracy theories already gotten started, i.e. that Trump himself engineered the protests knowing that it would help him?

    1. Since Trump is only in the race to guarantee victory for Hillary, I’m not sure he’d do that.

      1. Holy shit, I got flamed to a crisp months ago for saying that. Way back before the Donald was even taken seriously by anyone.

        1. You probably got flamed because that is the most common conspiracy theory.

          1. Yeah, but apparently it’s a true story that Bill Clinton called up the Donald and encouraged him to run for president as a Republican. That being said, I hardly think it qualifies as conspiracy. I guess Bill didn’t take Donald’s yuuuuuge ego into account before the call.

            1. Could a Nixon/JFK situation. Apparently they were good buddies, until they ran against each other…

            2. I give The Donald credit for showing the pols that the voting public is not exactly what they thought.

              1. What, you mean they’re not as drunk and stupid as ever?

                1. The retards don’t want some high horse enlightened person leading them, they want a King Retard. The fact that he’s rich in addition to being a retard makes Trump a perfect fit.

                  1. they want a King Retard

                    Well geez, they’ve been proving it for 16 years now.

                  2. “The retards don’t want some high horse enlightened person leading them.”

                    Yeah that’s it. Name one “enlightened” person who has kept us from moving further into the cesspool of European style socialism. Even Rand Paul would get into office and let it happen.

                    Now, only time will tell if Trump will do that. But, I’d hardly call an average Trump voter a retard for voting for a bombastic question mark over a guaranteed squish who cares little for anything but going along to get along to perpetuate his or her cocktail party lifestyle in DC.

                2. Apparently, fat, drunk and stupid is a way to go through life?

            3. In fairness, few predicted the degree of fury at the establishment Republicans’ refusal to stop Obama’s abuses of power in any meaningful way. I share that disgust, but had no idea there were so many out there who feel the same.

    2. Yes, people have absolutely noticed that he scheduled his first rally in a major northern urban center the day after a GOP debate, which is typically an event he tries to control the news cycle after, and that he cancelled it before violence happened, while lying about the police telling him to cancel it, which then set off the crowd.

      1. Given that people were saying their primary goal was to shut down the Trump rally before it had even started, I think it’s pretty obvious the protesters wanted this outcome too.

        The worst you can say is that Trump and the thug leftists feed off each other, but the situation in Chicago wasn’t Trump’s fault.

        1. Yes, of course the protesters wanted it. And Trump wanted them to want it, which is why he didn’t have a rally in Rolling Meadows like Ted Cruz.

          1. So? Trump didn’t do anything violent. There were people getting punched in the head by the protesters as they left the Trump rally. The argument that Trump somehow bears responsibility for ‘goading them into it’ is nonsense for the same reason it’s nonsense to blame someone for getting shot at when they draw a ‘provocative’ Mohammad cartoon.

            1. I’m not talking about blame. I’m saying Trump knew it would be a shit show, and wanted one.

              1. Free publicity for him, while showing the world that leftists are violent. Trump’s strategy keeps working.

              2. If true, it certainly indicates Trump is smarter than most people ever gave him credit for being.

          2. So like Gandhi. Provoking people into reacting to your presence with violence and hostility to take the moral high ground.

            Trump’s a lot more clever than people are willing to admit.

          3. “And Trump wanted them to want it.”

            Are you one of those folks who accused Fox News of spending too much air time on the Black Panthers threatening voters in 2008? There are a lot of people who yawned about that crime and Obama’s/Holder’s flat refusal to prosecute, but are carrying pitchforks for Trump’s supposed failure to exercise absolute mind and body control over thousands of people.

            Of course there are a few violent idiots. But at least it’s only a few. The left has a lot more violence in its character.

      2. Excellent observation. I’ll buy that.

    3. Have the conspiracy theories already gotten started, i.e. that Trump himself engineered the protests knowing that it would help him?

      Google ” Trump engineered riots in Chicago “

      1. I Googled that and found some interesting information

        “Emergency Alerts: Race War To End America Looming”

        “We also listen below to a newly released video report from Alex Jones called “Emergency Alert: Race War To End America” which he created after receiving a phone call from a former Bill and Hillary Clinton insider. In this linked story from Infowars, we also learn that Hillary Clinton is largely responsible for the recent protests against Trump as according to political insider Roger Stone, Hillary both funded and directed the latest attempts to bring down Trump. ”

        Sounds legit

      2. The other side are saying that Rahm engineered the riots. So which is it? Who knows, maybe it’s both. The more divided the political elite class has the people, the more power they will have. Anyone believe that both sides don’t want this?

        1. What’s the other side? Trumpers? Anti-Trump conservatives? Or Progs? It’s not clear anymore since all three of those groups have reasons to hate Rahm and blame him for things. Things are too confusing these days.

    4. Lots of conservatives immediately began saying that. I agree that he is using it to his advantage (cancelling the Cincy event and crying everywhere that “dhey won’t wet me tawlk”) but it’s hard to debate the circumstances of the original Chicago event.

    5. This isn’t unusual. Donald Trump is foremost an entertainer and knows how to play a crowd.

      What else did he expect to happen scheduling a rally at a university with a nearly 60% minority student body? He was setting up a camp in enemy territory and he knew it.

      The idiotic protestors played perfectly into his hands. Nobody is going to notice that Trump lied about the police recommendation; they’ll remember the scenes of Trump loyalists getting into arguments with the protestors.

      1. What else did he expect to happen scheduling a rally at a university with a nearly 60% minority student body? He was setting up a camp in enemy territory and he knew it.

        So? Objectively, we have a problem with progressives being violently opposed to other political views. You seem to be saying that people should simply acquiesce in the face of such violent threats.

        1. “So? Objectively, we have a problem with progressives being violently opposed to other political views. You seem to be saying that people should simply acquiesce in the face of such violent threats.”

          Amen. Bassjoe’s suggestion is akin to free speech jones on campuses. I guess Trump should limit all speeches to fields in the middle of Nebraska so he doesn’t force the college cupcakes to hear anything dat makes dem feew bad.

          1. Yeah, the funny thing is the MSM acting like this is some extraordinary event.

            Visit any college campus when a non-progressive speaker is scheduled and you’ll see the exact same antics. This is their standard playbook, and has been for years.

  5. Come on Reason, at least one more Donald story today!

  6. I was all-in for the spectacle of it all, but the reality of all this is just too depressing to derive any more entertainment from it.

    We truly are doomed.

    1. Well at least the BernieBots and the Trumpistas will kill each other off and libertarians will fill the vacuum, right?

      1. No, we’ll still be 5-15% of the population at best. The other 85-95% will be filled by Hillary supporters.

        1. Well at least Hillary Clinton is a liar so she is a secret libertarian like Bill and Obama…

          1. Rest assured anything that Obama or Slick Willy does that could be considered libertarian will be a 100% pure accident.

        2. Where are the 60-70% of Republicans who still hate Trump?

          1. Crying into their pillows I assume.

          2. “Where are the 60-70% of Republicans who still hate Trump?”

            My guess is they never existed?

          3. Fighting over Rubio, Cruz, and Kasich.

            None of this would be happening if Rubio and Kasich had dropped out when Carson did. Cruz could have very easily beaten Trump fair and square in the remaining primaries, amassed the required delegates and put this whole thing out of it’s misery.

            But nope. Rubio needed to save face, and Kasich wants to be a spoiler so he can play kingmaker at the convention. Ego all around.

            Trump supporters would mostly accept a loss to Cruz through the primary process, but will go fucking thermonuclear if he’s denied the nomination through parliamentary process at the convention.

            Well done everyone. Very well done.

      2. “We’ll use the Nazis to get rid of the Communists, and then we can control them.”

        1. Fun fact: one of the major reasons (drink!) that Hitler was able to outmaneuver his allies was due to a riot in Altona: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altona_Bloody_Sunday

          Von Papen used that as an excuse to oust the Prussian state government by decree and gain control of the Prussian Police, the largest police force in Germany. So went Hitler came to power he had Goering appointed Prussian Interior Minister and he used his control over the police to ensure they did the Nazis bidding.

        2. Yes, Prelate Kaas, your ingenious plan cannot fail!

  7. When all outcomes are terrrible vote schadenfreude?

  8. But the Monmouth poll is good evidence that letting Trump speak is not merely the morally correct, philosophically consistent course of action: it’s the tactically sound one, as well.

    Let us know when someone finds a “tactically sound” way of opposing Trump. Apparently ignoring him, arguing against him, belittling him, and heckling him are all the incorrect options.

    1. Sounds like you need a smack in the mouth, little lady.

      1. I usually have to pay extra for that

    2. There may be more incorrect options than others. I would argue that making Trump look like a victim is the worst option.

      I see The Donald’s poll numbers a bit like this:

      Criticizing trump as a racist: +~2%
      Comparing Trump to Hitler: +2.5%
      Attacking his policies: +~.5%
      Shutting down his rallies: +~4%
      Attacking his past business deals: *no significant effect*
      Ignoring him: *no significant effect*

      1. Pretty accurate I would guess.

      2. I don’t know why someone afraid to speak in front of a crowd with more than 5 hostile listeners looks like a victim instead of a pussy.

        1. Oh wait, I do: because all three cable news networks let him call in and spend hours on live TV while playing the footage of the skirmishes that resulted from his cancellation.

      3. Ignoring him is probably the only way his popularity would start to decline, over time.
        Either the press is too stupid to realize their hysterics are only helping him, or they’re so desperate for clicks that it takes precedence over everything.

        1. You should tell the Reason writers that, they apparently don’t believe you.

          1. How many clicks has it generated today? I’m pretty sure they believe.

        2. I’m going with desperate for clicks/eyeballs/etc. That’s their job, to sell ads. Why anyone is surprised by this, I just don’t know.

      4. He… has policies?

    3. Trumpettes don’t like him for any rational reason and therefore they cannot be soured on him for any rational reason. And they have been mocked for so long about their dim-to-mediocre intelligence that they lack anything resembling shame.

      1. A confirmation:

        Trump!

        For the LULZ

        1. And I remember some of these same people calling voting for a 3rd party candidate out of principle “an act of political nihilism.”

        2. For the LULZ

          What difference, at this point, does it make?

    4. ignoring him

      Umm…when has anyone tried this?

      1. Most of the candidates who are now no longer running for president tried it throughout much of last year.

        1. Did they? I have no clue what any of them said at all, as Trump received about 15 times more media coverage than all other candidates put together, and the bulk of the remaining time went to either JEB! or Hillary.

        2. If I recall– and correct me if I’m not (though I know you will)– THEY ignored him but the media did not.

          As someone who almost reflexively tunes out political news coverage, I always was aware the Trump was running, and often couldn’t even name a good 1/3 of the other Republicans running.

          Hell, I was shocked when Jeb Bush dropped out, not even realizing the horse was still pulling him along by his ankle.

          One of my reliable Democrat friends was still convinced Jeb was going to sneak into the lead and Trump was going to go 3rd party. The day before Jeb dropped out.

          1. If I recall– and correct me if I’m not (though I know you will)– THEY ignored him but the media did not

            To answer both you and Derp, yes, exactly this.

            The media is happy to scold people for their responses to Trump. But only in between live, unedited feeds of his rallies.

      2. IT was the only sensible course of action but Trump used his well-honed evil attention seeking powers and all the best people fell into his “call-me-Hitler” trap.

      3. IT was the only sensible course of action but Trump used his well-honed evil attention seeking powers and all the best people fell into his “call-me-Hitler” trap.

    5. Trump supporters have twisted themselves into a self-reinforcing pretzel, and that’s why there is no “tactically sound” way of opposing Trump. Because it’s not about him. It’s about what his supporters see in him, or those who oppose him, or others who support him, or anything. Ignoring him makes them angry because they feel like *they* are being ignored. Arguing against him makes them feel like they’re getting attention. Belittling him makes them feel like they’re being persecuted. Heckling him makes them feel like they’re being silenced. Anything anyone does just reinforces their dedication to being whatever the fuck it is they think they are.

      None of this is actually about Trump. It’s about the pathetic fucks who think he’s somehow “speaking truth to power” and opposing the people they hate. It’s all in their heads, and he’s a good enough con man to let them do all the work for him.

      1. Trump supporters also work themselves into a lather any time The Donald is criticized, so it’s impossible to get them to see him for who he is because they’re so emotionally invested.

        In order for a Trump supporter to abandon him, they’d have to admit they just wasted months of their lives adoring a total scumbag.

        1. Like all the TEAM BLUE retards did with Obama in 2008, Trump lets his mongoloid supporters project themselves onto him. *That’s* why they get upset when he gets insulted…because *they’re* being insulted, because he is them. This is way beyond admitting that they wasted months adoring a total scumbag, because the scumbag they adore is…themselves. This is a mass admission by a lot of people–plenty of them here at H&R–that they admire and aspire to be scumbags. That they *are* scumbags, but were too pussy to admit it until a mob and a strongman gave them courage.

          And people are admitting this freely. That’s pretty astounding.

          1. Agreed. He’s a blank slate on which they project their political frustrations.

            1. It’s mass malignant narcissism combined with projection and wishful thinking. His supporters think that by liking/supporting him, they gain his “qualities” (as if they were Sylar or something) and become the tuff gai un-PC take-no-shit-from-SJWs people they think he is and wish they were but apparently never bothered to have the cogliones to be until their strongman came along to inspire them to mob courage.

              It’s unbelievably pathetic, and its very patheticness causes them to dig in even harder because they know it’s retarded, but it makes them feel SO GOOD. Because *they’re* retarded, and the last thing in the world they want to do is admit that. That’s partially how mobs work.

              1. A proof of this is that when he isn’t outright contradicting himself, he is vague to the point of taking no actual position at all.

              2. Better analysis than anything a paid Reason writer has barfed up on Trump. Well done, Epi.

        2. Trump!

          Because you KNOW he is lying

          ===========

          From what I gather the most important thing for Trump supporters are his enemies. The MSM. The Left. The Republican elite (eRepublicans).

          1. I think this is the best explanation of Trump’s popularity. People are utterly fed up with the PC nannies, and Trump is a big “fuck you” to those nannies.

            Trump is simply a reaction to the incessant insults to “Joe six pack”. There is a racist aspect to Trump’s popularity, but it is certainly not as racist as the words and actions of progressives. It is conventional wisdom on the left that white people, particularly men, are evil, corrupt and unaccomplished. I can’t count the lefty websites that have run editorials that explain white privilege, and why only black lives matter, etc. Lefties have no shame in making such broad, and absurd claims and that lack of shame demonstrates the depth of contempt and group acceptance toward whites in the Democratic party. They don’t try to hide it in the least.

            Racial harmony has gone down the tubes in the last decade.

            Thanks, Obama!

      2. You forgot the big one. The people who hate Trump are his best advertisement.

        1. Exactly, every time I see one I move closer to voting for Trump, the lol over his presidency may just be worth it. Hell, the explosion on my FB page from all my proggie friends would warm me through whatever apocalyptic winter Trump creates.

      3. So Trump is a purely emotional “anti-establishment” crusade, like Obama and Turdeau Jr. and countless other politicians, including You-Know-Who…

        1. Ron Paul?

          1. Wasn’t there some stuff a while back showing that a lot of his supporters went to either Trump or Sanders?

      4. Supporters twisting themselves into self-reinforcing pretzels is the heart of modern politics.

      5. None of this is actually about Trump. It’s about the pathetic fucks who think he’s somehow “speaking truth to power” and opposing the people they hate.

        You can’t right a democracy when 51% of the voters are morons.

          1. Frank is being awfully optimistic. He must’ve come into some money recently.

          2. The other 49% are voting for Hillary and the socialist.

            Different morons.

            1. Then who’s voting for Trump?

              *rimshot, dances off stage*

      6. But the problem, again, is the bureaucracy is going to punish the pro-Trump elements whether he wins or loses. If people think the President is some all powerful being, they’re not paying attention. Even if Trump wins, the people who elected him will be punished heavily. The “process being the punishment” will get dialed up to eleven, and those behind Trump will be alienated even more, and they’ll search for even more toxic solution.

        With Nixon-in-a-dress we’ll have some form stability (at least the marching on of the Statist policies which are about to go tits up at some point). With either Sanders or Trump, the instability will fostered at a much faster pace (will go tits up faster).

        In short, the massive idiocy of a century is coming to an end, the instabilities we’ve been dealing with for the better part of a decade which is leading up to a culmination of corrections. Hillary is most “catholic” of the candidates and fits in with the vile plans that exist. The two outsiders who represent respective alienation from the establishment will only speed along events.

        1. “With Nixon-in-a-dress we’ll have some form stability …”

          I think that’s the most accurate nickname I’ve heard applied to Hillary Clinton. Kudos.

      7. None of this is actually about Trump. It’s about the pathetic fucks who think he’s somehow “speaking truth to power” and opposing the people they hate.

        To a large degree yes. But the same is true of the Trump haters. The entire thing is pathetic.

      8. Spot on Epi.

    6. Let us know when someone finds a “tactically sound” way of opposing Trump.

      I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.

    7. The strategy should be to accuse him of being a socialist who’s in bed with big business and NYC political elite. Calling him a racist or refuting his policies is pointless. The GOP should have (may be too late now) come at him from the opposite direction. Associating him with ‘big government’ and ‘corrupt big business’ and things like eminent domain would do some things (who says libertarianism doesn’t have its uses?), but they also could have exploited regional tensions: Trump is an elite New Yorker who’s never killed his own food; if they wanted to appeal to the GOP base, Rubio and Cruz should have worn denim everywhere they went and talked with thick hillbilly accents while throwing hunting references into every sentence. There’s no bigger recipe for failure than demonstrating one’s intellectual superiority when trying to win GOP primary voters.

  9. I can’t keep up with the Trump. Too many articles… my brain can’t handle it…

    1. Haha. You got schlonged.

      1. You’ll get your post deleted at WaPo for using that word. I kid not.

        1. I guess it’s now another forbidden word of the white patriarchy, or something.

          1. It’s culturally appropriated from the Yiddish.

            1. Well, progs hate Jews even though Jews always vote Democrat. Or something like that, I’m obviously confused.

        2. You’ll get your post deleted at WaPo for using that word. I kid not.

          Penises are evil!

  10. Having the convention in Cleveland might be a the smartest move they’ve made.

    1. It’s not like they can make Cleveland any worse of a place to be.

        1. They both seem pretty dismal: http://places.findthehome.com/…..eveland-OH

  11. Wow there is a lot of nonsense here. First of all, Trump supporters will always claim that everything makes them more likely to vote for him. Secondly, Trump only has a right to be protected from the government. Not Sanderista goons protesting peacefully. He should be shouted down, and if only people had done this against Hitler he wouldn’t have risen to power. The whole idea that protesting bad stuff will only make your opponent stronger is a big part of the problem in the first place. Of course you can – and should – protest bad stuff. Regardless of the consequences. (But it must be NON-VIOLENT.)

    1. If only people had done this to Hitler?? I take it you’re not aware that there were frequently all-out brawls at early Nazi rallies between Nazis and Communists, and they sometimes resulted in fatalities?

      1. Exactly – they were VIOLENT. Do you not understand the difference between VIOLENT and NON-VIOLENT?

        1. Do you have some sort of proof that some of the protesters in Chicago were not behaving in a violent way and/or trying to intimidate Trump supporters?

          I’m asking because I’m hearing conflicting reports about this all over the intertoobz.

          1. Do you have some sort of proof that you should not speak out against Nazis because then they will tell you that you ‘have no proof’ that it is effective?

            1. When did I mention Nazis? I was asking a clear question. Were any of the protesters at the Trump rally behaving in a violent or intimidating way? Do you understand that now, or not? It’s the 3rd time I’ve written it in clear terms. What does it take, or am I wasting my time?

              1. Thank you for demonstrating how the Trump Nazi bullies will gang up on the dissenter and demand answers to all their questions and accuse the protester of refusing a director order. Please, proceed:

            2. It’s a n00b. Possibly a driveby troll. And it’s claiming the ability to predict the future below. Ignore would be my option.

              1. Yes, for god’s sake – please ignore.

                1. I don’t know why I’ve seen dajjal accused of trolling here more than once.

                  1. Because Trump is going to criminalize ‘trolling’ under Christie’s cyber bullying legislation. However there will be a minimum requirement that it must be seen and attested to by at least 3 bullies. So you are the third, congrats!

                    1. I’m once again writing to the Koch brothers and asking them to ban all comments from this site because of the amount of bullying that takes place.

              2. It’s a n00b. Possibly a driveby troll.

                I’m leaning towards another Tulpa sock, myself.

                1. Yes, some of us called it last night.

        2. Do you not understand that the leftist fringe at least frequently skirts the edges of violence? MLK they ain’t.

          1. Do you not understand that Trump Nazis will hit protesters and then accuse them of violence and that this is a time old tradition of Nazis? And then online they will accuse their detractors of ‘trolling’ and ‘cyber bullying’ and this will be criminalized under the ‘hate speech’ legislation developed by Christie in NJ and nationalized by Trump even though he says one day he’d never do such a thing?

          2. “I stand in the middle of two opposing forces in the Negro community. One is a force of complacency… The other force is one of bitterness and hatred, and it comes perilously close to advocating violence.”

            He seemed to be at the edge himself there.

          3. Nazis, Chipwooder, Nazis. Don’t you see? Nothing else matters, Nazis! Do you like raspberry pie? Nazis!

            1. As I was saying, he should and must be shut down. Because he’s a very dangerous person. And to all the people who say that is a violation of his free speech rights, I say, Tell me more:

              1. dajjal. The fact that you want to “shut down” someone else’s free speech, and the Donald wants to shut down someone else’s free speech, is a testament to how far as a society we have fallen.
                You are no better than he is.

                1. Wow. Thank you for showing how people will defend Trump’s racism and Nazism by accusing his critics of being ‘no better than him’ because they are trying to shut down free speech just like he plans to do once in power. That’s a new one for me. Now, let’s see if you can come up with another, you ‘kin do it:

                  1. I call stupid when I see stupid.
                    If it is your intention to win me over to your argument, you are doing a terrible job at it.
                    If you are just trolling, you are also doing a terrible job at it.
                    -3

                    1. JPyrate, I have no intention of winning you over by argument. I know that you are too invested in your secret Trumpism to admit that he is dangerous like Hitler. All I can do is expose the stupidity of your argument that pointing out the stupidity of your argument somehow impinges on Trump’s free speech. OK now go ahead and explain where I’m going wrong:

                    2. “JPyrate, I have no intention of winning you over by argument.”

                      Okay you are just trolling and screwing the pooch at it.

                      “. I know that you are too invested in your secret Trumpism to admit that he is dangerous like Hitler”

                      False accusation with just a hint of Godwin.

                      “. All I can do is expose the stupidity of your argument that pointing out the stupidity of your argument somehow impinges on Trump’s free speech.”

                      Playing the victim, making an ad hom, and misrepresenting your opponents argument.

                      “OK now go ahead and explain where I’m going wrong:”

                      Asking your opponent to repeat his/her argument.

                      Overall you are what would happen if PB, and Hinh had a mentally defective love child.

                    3. All you are doing is calling Trump and his supporters Nazis and racists. You’re not providing any rational arguments, just name calling.

                  2. It would be much better for everyone if Trump kept his racism secret. Now about the Jews.

                    My name is Donald Trump and I’m a BIG fan of Israel

                    1. His targets are not Jews, but immigrants, blacks and mostly Muslims.

        3. The point being, people did ‘shout down’ Hitler. And his supporters shouted them down, even louder. If a mob of truncheon wielding communists doesn’t stop a fascist, a few with megaphones sure as hell won’t.

    2. I have heard that all the protesters in Chicago were not acting peacefully. I guess it comes down to either having been there, knowing someone first hand, or believing what the media says, all of whom lie like dogs when their agenda is at stake.

      1. Every single one of the protesters was not acting peacefully? Are you sure you heard that correctly?

        1. I’m saying I have heard that not ALL of them were acting peacefully. Is that true or not true?

          1. And I’m saying that Trump Nazis will defend their dear leader with any nonsense they can muster to try to convince people not to protest him.

            1. Can you write a paragraph without using the word Nazi? You didn’t answer the question, again. I see you are incapable, forget it.

              1. I have willfully refused a direct order from the Commisarriat. What will become of me?

                1. You will get plenty to eat. It will ALL be GMO.

                2. Actually you don’t have any coherent arguments so you resort to name calling.

      2. FWIW, there were more arrests at the St. Patrick’s Day mayhem in Chicago’s armpit (otherwise known as Wrigleyville).

        http://www.cwbchicago.com/2016…..rings.html

        1. I take it that you have never lived there. It is quite a bit of fun.

          The Armpit of Chicago is the South Side. You know. Sox Park.

    3. “He should be shouted down, and if only people had done this against Hitler he wouldn’t have risen to power.”

      How’d you figure that one out?

      1. Hah, so you are another stealth Trump supporter who says we should just ignore him and he’ll go away. OK let us know how that works out for you.

        1. “Hah, so you are another stealth Trump supporter who says we should just ignore him and he’ll go away. OK let us know how that works out for you.”

          Didn’t see that coming so quickly.

          1. This guy is either a huge troll or a complete moron.

            Or Tulpa. Or Mary.

            1. At this point I have to say, all 4.

            2. OR Tulpa or Mary? They fit those categories nicely.

            3. Look at the meaning of its chosen handle – false messiah. Remember that commenter Tulpa named himself after this.

              1. Nicely done, Tonio.

            4. I was genuinely interested in his theory about Hitler’s rise, maybe he didn’t put as much thought into it as I’d hoped. My fault.

              1. Hitler wrote on his meeting bills: “No Jews Allowed.” And if any protesters showed up he would use violence against them. So my theory is that if the protesters are non-violent, then they can easily shut down his rallies. If this had been successful against Hitler, then Hitler probably wouldn’t have risen to power, or at least, his power would have been severely curtailed and not so many people would have been killed. Now I realize you are going to bloviate about Hitler and Weimar Germany, but keep in mind that we are talking about Trump and USA, where the rules and norms and Constitutional protections are very different.

                1. “Hitler wrote on his meeting bills: “No Jews Allowed.” And if any protesters showed up he would use violence against them. So my theory is that if the protesters are non-violent, then they can easily shut down his rallies. If this had been successful against Hitler, then Hitler probably wouldn’t have risen to power, or at least, his power would have been severely curtailed and not so many people would have been killed.”

                  Do you have any reason to think that would have been successful against Hitler?

                  “Now I realize you are going to bloviate about Hitler and Weimar Germany, but keep in mind that we are talking about Trump and USA, where the rules and norms and Constitutional protections are very different.”

                  I’m not. Hitler and Weimar Germany are far more interesting.

                  1. “Do you have any reason to think that would have been successful against Hitler?”

                    So what you’re saying is, since I have no proof that protests would have been successful against Hitler (even though he insisted they would have been) then there is no point to protest Trump’s rallies. Got it, thanks.

                    1. “So what you’re saying is, since I have no proof that protests would have been successful against Hitler (even though he insisted they would have been)”

                      He did? Link some sources please.

                      “then there is no point to protest Trump’s rallies. Got it, thanks.”

                      You’ve got Trump Fever, pal. As I’m not talking about Trump at all here. Protest him, peacefully, violently, or both, all you’d like.

                    2. “I was genuinely interested in his theory about Hitler’s rise, maybe he didn’t put as much thought into it as I’d hoped. My fault.”

                    3. “I was genuinely interested in his theory about Hitler’s rise, maybe he didn’t put as much thought into it as I’d hoped. My fault.”

                      Couldn’t say it better myself.

                2. If this had been successful against Hitler, then Hitler probably wouldn’t have risen to power, or at least, his power would have been severely curtailed and not so many people would have been killed.

                  Bullshit. Hitler became chancellor and dictator not because of the people (he had a strong party but no absolute majority) but by acts of parliament.

                  Furthermore, Hitler’s political program was far closer to Sanders than to Trump: he wanted to stick it to the bankers/capitalists, and promised full employment and growth through government spending, free education, free health care, and government retirement plans for everybody.

    4. If the French and Brits had marched against Hitlers takeover of the Rhineland in ’36 his government would have collapsed. Or so said Hitler. From that Hitler got the idea “they are worms”.

      Well at least there was no war. The NAP did win the day.

      1. Their future-predicting crystal ball was broke that day. Also, if they had done that there would have been no holocaust and that military action might have gone down as an example of overreaction.

      2. I donno, I’d consider breaking the terms of a truce or peace treaty violation of NAP that justifies the use of force. So yeah, if idiot Tories backed French up (French government was willing to go in, all they asked for was British support, and Brits said “no, we’d no more support your aggression against Germany than German aggression against you”), Hitler gets slapped down, Wehrmacht is exposed as weak and…who knows what happens after? War in 1937 as Germans demand their honor be restored? Military coup removes Hitler? War in 1942 or so, as German General Staff planned for?

      3. Interestingly, Hitler himself believed (not entirely unreasonably) that if the British et al. had gone to war with him in 1938 after invading Czechoslovakia. He was apparently surprised, even disappointed, that Britain chose peace, and later (in one of his recorded meetings with his advisers) argued that the allies were biding their time to continue their rearmament. Germany, he thought, was more ready for war in 1938 than the European allies were, and would have fared better if the war had started then.

    5. First of all, Trump supporters will always claim that everything makes them more likely to vote for him.

      Oh no! If Jeb(!) endorses him, he’ll take a major hit.

    6. “But it must be NONVIOLENT”

      The only good violence is the violence we choose to do together. With government.

      Or something.

    7. Secondly, Trump only has a right to be protected from the government. Not Sanderista goons protesting peacefully.

      He can exclude whoever he wants to at private venues.

      if only people had done this against Hitler he wouldn’t have risen to power

      Nice fiction. In fact, Hitler was made chancellor by von Hindenburg, and became dictator by an act of parliament, primarily on the support of Prelate Kaas and his party.

      1. Thank you.

        Additionally, I seem to recall it was the brownshirts and the early Nazi party that went around silencing, shutting down, and not infrequently attacking meetings and gatherings of their opponents.

  12. I could have told you that. I did.

    Chicago ’68.

  13. “The poll noted that pro-Trump and anti-Trump forces clashed in Chicago last Friday, which prompted Trump to cancel the event. It then asked respondents whether this fact made them more or less likely to support Trump. Just 11 percent said they were less likely to support Trump because of this decision. Another 22 percent said they were actually more likely to back Trump, and 66 percent said their views were unchanged. ”

    Completely unsurprising for the same reason riots tend to make people feel better about police and are therefore a totally counterproductive response to police brutality.

    People tend not to feel good about the person behaving violently.

    1. If that drives people into his arms then I’m glad for it. I would rather know who my enemies are.

  14. Left-Wing Protesters Drive People into Arms of Donald Trump

    Trump canceling Chicago event made Republicans more likely to vote for him.

    As expected by pretty much everyone other than the protestors themselves.

    1. Over the weekend some people here insisted that this turn of events would harm Trump by exposing his supporters as cowards — they didn’t violently confront the anti-Trump protesters. That was a ridiculous position to have on Saturday, it sounds even more stupid now after the poll.

      1. Over the weekend some people here insisted that this turn of events would harm Trump by exposing his supporters as cowards

        “Some people”? You mean Stormfront?

  15. Daddy was a cop on the east side of Chicago
    Back in the USA, back in the bad, old days

    1. Did Chicago ever have good old days?

      1. They had two: the day after the Chicago Bears won the 1985 Super Bowl, and the day before Nikki moved there.

        1. Jim McMahon the perfect Libertarian. He didn’t follow orders. And he won!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        2. What about the day after the fire?

          1. What’s the day during the fire, chopped liver?

            1. That would be fried liver.

    2. +1 One-hit Wonder Paper Lace

  16. Stop giving them ammunition.

    Good thing you waited until the last word of your piece to send left-wing activists diving for their safe space.

  17. The one nice thing about Trumpism is that I’ve gotten to see John go completely mad and start calling me a progressive, social-signaling fascist.

    So that’s been fun.

    1. You are definitely a social signaler but I never called you a fascist. Meanwhile, you are convinced I endorsed political violence despite my saying I didn’t about ten different ways.

      1. Oh right, you said I support fascist leftists against Trump, even though I’d already said the protesters were scum. Sorry, I forgot you were just saying I support fascists, not that I actually am one.

        “You are definitely a social signaler”

        I don’t think you know what this means, since your definition of ‘social signaler’ is ‘anyone to the left of John on any issue.’

        1. I said you engaged in moral equivocation, which you did. I am sorry but an old guy throwing a punch at one rally is not the same as what happened in Chicago. And even in your post, you couldn’t bring yourself to call out the Bernie people for what they were. They were just dumb, not fascist assholes.

          You adopt the exact “pox on both houses” posture I figured you would. If you have now walked back from that, good for you. You should.

          1. “I said you engaged in moral equivocation, which you did. I am sorry but an old guy throwing a punch at one rally is not the same as what happened in Chicago”

            And I never said there was an equivalence between those actions. I drew an equivalence between the Trump supporters saying violence was okay and the leftists saying violence was okay.

            The actual equivalence I drew was not false since it was about both groups justifying violence against people they don’t like.

          2. The idiots in Chicago don’t excuse the repeated incidents of violence by Trump supporters, with Trump encouraging it repeatedly.

            Trump and his defenders can’t play the “it was just one crazy guy who threw a punch” card when Trump has defended him and offered to pay his legal fees.

            1. That is true Cal. But you murdering me wouldn’t excuse my punching. The two acts would still not be equivalent. Saying one thing is worse than the other doesn’t excuse the lesser of the evils. And i have never said it does. Irish is just pretending I did because he wants to change the subject from my point.

              1. If we were just comparing Trump supporters to the Chicago protesters, it might be relevant to argue which is worse. But at this point we are talking about the stuff Trump has said and done to defend and condone atrocious behavior by his supporters. He can’t blame it on a few bad eggs when he’s actively encouraging and defending the bad eggs. Trump is a major presidential candidate, no one that was in the mob in Chicago is. You can also criticize Sanders’ reaction to it (from what I read, he tried to shift all blame away from his supporters), which I think is fair game.

                1. When has ‘pox on both their houses’ been a more sensible posture than today?

                  No wonder the GOP gets such horrible candidates these days; plenty of you will eat literally whatever they give you.

    2. My favorite is the people who accuse you of “virtue signalling.” Someone taught them a fancy way of saying, “I’m amoral.”

      1. I’m signaling vice.

        Trump!

        For the LULZ

      2. Virtue signaling? How the… I can’t even

      3. Social signaling and virtue signaling can be useful terms because there are times where people are clearly trying to puff up their egos by saying SEE! I’M CLEARLY BETTER THAN YOU!

        You see this a lot when progressives try to out prog each other by proving that they’re totally the least racist person ever in existence. You also see it when white progressives go out of their way to ‘check their privilege’ in situations where it makes no fucking sense.

        1. Or conservatives/libertarians try to out-non-prog each other by pointing out how proggy someone else sounds.

          By the way…

          1. Yes, that would also be an example of social signalling.

        2. David Thompson uses the term “moral preening”, which I really like.

        3. In my college town, I have a few times had strangers “socially signal” rather humorously. Someone who I just met and knew nothing about me, drop some hilariously racist remark, like “I loved how that movie (the Revenant) showed how evil white people are”, etc. (that one was by a white person, incidentally).

          What’s bizarre is that they assume, beyond doubt, that I, a white person (with no tattoos, and generally possessing a rather bourgeois demeanor) would agree with such an overtly despicable sentiment. No subtlety whatsoever. Not even signalling, more like shameless advertisement.

    3. I thought you were the house racist. No fair grabbing all the good roles.

      1. He’s a racist AND he’s a progressive, social-signaling fascist. Irish is a complicated man with many layers, like an onion.

        1. Also like an onion, his scent will make your eyes water.

          1. He is also delicious when he is surrounded by ground beef.

    4. I’ve gotten to see John go completely mad and start calling me a progressive, social-signaling fascist.

      Meh, that doesn’t take much.

      1. Do you know who else was a social-signaling fascist?

  18. The protesters are doing nothing but making Trump appear more reasonable and making his election more likely. Only a retard would not see that. But since these people make their careers about going full retard, they will continue to do this and Trump will continue to benefit from it.

    1. Didn’t the hippies and Nixon have a similar dynamic?

      1. Yes they did. The 68 convention pretty much put Nixon over the top. IT was still a close election. Take away the 68 convention and Humpheys wins I think.

        1. If Bernie doesn’t win the nom I’d expect a LOT of Ds to defect. If he does win I expect a LOT of Ds will stay home.

          1. Bernie and his supporters are a bigger problem for the Dems than Trump is for the GOP. If Trump wins the nomination a bunch of journalist and Washington douchebags will stay home but the vast majority of Republicans voters will suck it up and vote for him. I don’t think the same can be said for Hillary. I think Bernie’s supporters will stay home.

            1. “I don’t think the same can be said for Hillary. I think Bernie’s supporters will stay home.”

              Nope, the one’s that were actually going to vote will suck it up and Vote against Trump. And I still think Hillary will probably win.

              But it certainly feels like Trump has much better control of the media narrative than Hillary does.

      2. Yes. I lived through it. As a hippie. I still hate Nixon. And Nancy Reagan. And Hitler.

        1. Don’t worry, MSimon, they’ll be plenty more hatin to do, you can count on your ruling political class to deliver the most hateable humans in existence.

          1. I’m counting on it.

      3. Yippies weren’t hippies any more than anarchists are libertarians. Nixon’s Staat and the Weathermen deserved each other, but sane folks–including hippies with their own Tim Leary non-aggression principle not very different from Ayn’s–had no nonviolent options until Nolan founded the LP. Immediately the draft went out the window and the Court took abortion of the chessboard. Also, in 1968 there was as much difference between the Dem and the GOP as between Soviet Socialism and German National Socialism… about the same as now, in fact.

        1. The difference between the Dems and Repubs is akin to the difference between the Strasser Brothers and Hitler. No one is espousing direct ownership of the means of production and ending currency. Both are rabidly production side (with interference and cronyism) – the contrast is whether labor or equity holders are greased. Neither side gives a shit about the individual/consumer existing in a market free from coercion and Force. Up until about six decades ago, the Republicans were somewhat on the side of the individual/consumer, and they gave empty lip service for another four decades, but they gave up about two decades ago. Now there are two Statist parties fighting over the largesse as the whole rotten structures of interweaving Ponzi-schemes are about to crash. The disenfranchised, – as could be easily predicted – are flying further left and further right as they see the ground coming up fast as the plane runs out of fuel.

    2. Trump needs to appear more reasonable in order to shore up the inevitable Team Red voters that will come his way as the General approaches. Dude knows how to play you guys for sure.

      1. If today goes well for him, that’s a done deal. But he certainly needs to appear more reasonable in order to shore up the independent voters. Or potentially provoke the Left into more stupid public violence.

    3. How does being protested make one seem more reasonable? When David Duke gets protested, does it make him seem more reasonable?

      1. It’s a relative scale. If the protesters are obviously violent and want to shut down their opponents ability to speak, then the person getting protested starts looking like the lesser of two evils.

  19. I have a feeling it’s going to get ugly on the Dem side as well. After MI, the dem races in OH, IL, etc, are tightening up and Bernie could wind up winning some of those, which will give him more momentum, which could lead to more wins in big states like PA, NY, and CA. Bernie could wind up winning the popular vote but being far behind in the delegates due to the dems undemocratic delegate system. A lot of people would not be happy. Then the GOP could try to pull a brokered convention to get rid of Trump. It could get ugly even before the general.

    1. I think the Democrats are going to get ugly. The GOP may still screw Trump but it won’t get ugly. I don’t think there will be riots. It would just cause whatever loser the GOP put up to get hammered in November, which I honestly think what most of the GOP big donors and hack journalists prefer.

    2. Trump’s greatest feat has been distracting everybody from just how awful Hillary Clinton is. I think the rabid Trump fans will outnumber the anti-Trump reluctant Hillary voters in a general election between the two. Trump will carry almost every battleground state and could eke out an electoral college win yet lose the general due to blue states going 90% blue.

      1. I’ve been saying that Hillary supporters better be careful what they wish for. Hillary won’t win any southern states, the ones she’s been winning big against Bernie, and the Donald seems very solid in northern states. He’ll probably sclong Hillary. His supporters, no matter how dumb they are, are energized. Hillary doesn’t really excite anyone, and Bernie supporters, a lot of them, hate her more than GOP voters hate her. I can’t see her surviving the general and Trump will go for blood and get dirty, she’s not used to that.

        1. She’s never won an even slightly competetive political race in her life. Hillary’s flip-flopped on as many issues as Trump. Hers were over the course of 20 years instead of 20 minutes, but that won’t matter in the ads and in the debates. She was even for building a wall ten years. She can’t really use LGBT rights as a factor against him. The Dems are running a campaign for the demographics of 2030, and seem to be forgetting that illegal immigrants can’t vote. They are a decade too early to completely give up on the white working class, but that is what they have done. If they ignored them it might not matter, but they actively demonize them.

          1. Trump will kill her.

        2. Trump’s solidity in the North is the mirror images of Hillary’s in the South (for the primaries). Nothern Republicans tend to be more populist IMO than southern ones, not to mention Trump is one of them, unlike Rubio and Cruz. Much like Hillary, Trump will get demolished in a general election in many of the states he’s won so handily in the primary.

          And Hillary doesn’t have to be used to it, she doesn’t even have to respond to it. She knows it too; Trump attacking her will galvanize her among Democrats (famous for their victimhood complexes, remember?) every bit as much as Trump attacking everyone else has galvanized him among Republicans. And the lukewarm center will go for Hillary simply because she’s less volatile and offensive than Trump

          Trump’s antics and ‘charisma’ may well win him half the GOP. Beyond that, they’ll win him nothing more though. Water on rock. Making 2/3 of the country hate you to make 1/3 like you is a great way to win a primary, and a great way to lose a general. And then all Hillary needs to inspire is indifference in most voters to win, and she’s excelled at that.

        3. He’ll probably sclong Hillary.

          Really, that is something I don’t need to hear about.

      2. The presidential Roman Holiday is simply distracting everyone from Libertarian candidates for the congressional gerontocracy races. Congress writes the laws, spends your money, has no term limits, average age is 60, each with an 85% probability of reelection. The Prez only enforces their laws, fights their wars, takes their blame and has a pisspot full of jobs to distribute. This is what magicians call misdirection.

        1. Congress has spent the last 80 years steadily abdicating its authority to the President. The only way I can picture that that balance of power changing is for one party to achieve a veto proof majority while the other party has the Presidency, which will never happen.

          1. I could see a Senators’ revolt. Not because they’d get 60 people who give a shit elected, but just because “Fuck That Guy” syndrome. Neither Trump nor Cruz are beholden to anyone. Hillary has the personality to piss off everyone. I’d love to see the travel and training budgets of every department that gives a Senate committee the “no comment” treatment at zero and their cabinet level appointments embargoed. But that’s probably not gonna happen.

    3. The Democratic convention this summer is going to be a reprise of their 1968 convention in Chicago.

      1. I’m looking forward to it.

      2. Only with ultra-violence. Fuck the billy clubs, we’re tazing pwople to death this time.

  20. “…Now imagine that right-wing protesters had set out to disrupt Barack Obama’s speeches in 2008. If you’re not okay with that scenario, you should not be okay with protesters doing it to Trump.”

    It’s settled!

    No, seriously Chait cut to the chase and he’s, gulp, right.

    /looks around to see if world is ending.

  21. “New Poll: Left-Wing Protesters Drive People into Arms of Donald Trump”

    Not surprising considering that people tired of being demonized by progressives for being white, employed, middle class, heterosexual, patriotic, etc. is what’s driving a lot of the support for Trump anyway.

    If the social justice warriors hate Trump that much, they figure, then he must be doing something right!

    I wouldn’t vote for Trump because of his anti-free trade stance, amongst other things, but the way the social justice warriors and their minions in the media are making him and his supporters out to be a bunch of brownshirts, it’s making me wish I could support him, too.

    If there’s a pony in this pile of shit anywhere, maybe it’s that one way or the other, the PC wars are about to go into a lull. Democrats won’t push it like they used to if doing so helps the Republicans. And with fag marriage now a reality coast to coast, the progressives will have one less wedge issue in their arsenal.

    P.S. I don’t have to be PC in a post hoping for the death of PC fanaticism and the Marxist horse it road in on, do I?

    1. I hope you are right about that Ken but I am skeptical. The reason I am skeptical is the reaction by Trump’s critics on the right has been just as PC driven and irrational as the SJWs. Have you read anything Kevin Williamson at National Review has written? It is one PC SJW screed after another about the lazy evil, white trash who support Trump.

      One of the things that the reaction to Trump has revealed is how both sides benefit from the PC culture. The PC culture as much as anything makes certain subjects and opinions off limits for public debate. And the Republicans in Washington benefit from that just as much as the Democrats.

      1. Kevin D. Williamson: well-known PC SJW.

      2. “Have you read anything Kevin Williamson at National Review has written? It is one PC SJW screed after another about the lazy evil, white trash who support Trump.”

        LOL, Kevin Williamson is an SJW now!

        WTF, John!

        1. Have you read him? Go read his Buchanan Boys one from last month. IT is all about how anyone who votes for Trump is a “welfare queen”. Then read the one in the March 28th issue of National Review “Father Fuhrer” explaining how the white workign class is all drug addicts and deadbeat fathers and it is an immoral crime to pretend they have any legitimate objection to international trade.

          John Derbyshire was fired for saying less offensive things about blacks. Williamson has lost his mind over this.

          Sorry Irish but being smug isn’t an argument. Williamson’s pieces are offensive, fact free, and collectivist stupidity. And you know it.

          1. Did you get a chance to read that piece in the New York Toast? Man, makes KDW look like a motherfucking Pulitzer winner.

          2. Yet more social signalling from noted PC SJW Kevin Williamson:

            “That’s where identity politics has landed the Democrats: Sure, there may be some poor white folks out there, or millions and millions of them, but we have to prioritize here: Suffering picturesquely in the service of Democratic political careers is a black thing, first and foremost, and has been ever since Lyndon Johnson did that amazing 180-degree turn from opposing anti-lynching laws to posturing as the champion of a national civil-rights agenda that he’d stymied in the Senate for years. African Americans are the gold-medal champions when it comes to poverty pimps like Bernie Sanders and Hillary Rodham Clinton. The wise Latinas come in second, and the poor whites, if Democrats have to admit they exist at all, are third place at best, bronze medalists in the poverty Olympics. ”

            I also notice this paragraph contains some facts, which makes Williamson not exactly fact free. And if you’ve read his very good book The End Is Near and It’s Going to Be Awesome, you’d know that he frequently marshals a good amount of facts and evidence to back up his positions.

            1. The Father Fuhrer article is pretty damned ugly, Irish. It’s paywalled, so I haven’t read the entire thing, (but it looks like you can find it here.) but parts like,

              So the gypsum business in Garbutt ain’t what it used to be. There is more to life in the 21st century than wallboard and cheap sentimentality about how the Man closed the factories down.

              The truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities is that they deserve to die. Economically, they are negative assets. Morally, they are indefensible.

              Trump’s followers hear things like, ‘Gee, why won’t you people just die already?’ and pundits wonder why his followers could give a shit about what GOP intellectuals inside the Beltway have to say? That article is one of the most contemptuous things towards the blue collar American worker that I’ve read. If he were to have written it about Overtown, Sunnyside, Compton, or any other majority African-American enclave, he’d have been canned about as fast as Derbyshire.

              I liked Williamson’s writing a lot before this. I’m just chalking it up to a combo of contempt for the Flyover Lands and Trump Derangement Syndrome, and I hope his writing improves after November.

              1. Trump’s followers hear things like, ‘Gee, why won’t you people just die already?’

                Yes, we know they have a literacy problem.

                1. Nikki,

                  Do you realize that you come across as a hateful arrogant ass when you say shit like that? Do your political views serve any purpose beyond giving you an excuse to feel superior?

                2. Trump’s followers hear things like, ‘Gee, why won’t you people just die already?’

                  Yes, we know they have a literacy problem.

                  Are you sure it’s Trump’s followers with the literacy problem?

              2. I’ve heard the exact same sentiment about towns like this from many posters here.

          3. “Then read the one in the March 28th issue of National Review “Father Fuhrer” explaining how the white workign class is all drug addicts and deadbeat fathers and it is an immoral crime to pretend they have any legitimate objection to international trade.”

            It seems to me what Williamson was criticizing in that piece was people having children they can’t afford and doing massive amounts of drugs (which are both problems in poor white communities) rather than doing anything to improve their own lives.

            In other words, he’s saying the exact same thing to poor whites that Republicans have been saying to poor blacks for decades and suddenly Republicans decide it’s offensive.

            1. Also, sorry if this makes working class whites have a sad, but it’s not my goddamn problem if you don’t get educated and give yourself an opportunity to get a good job. Sorry you can’t work in the same job your great great grandfather worked in, but unfortunately economies change over time and if you’re unwilling to do anything to fit into the modern economy, that really is your fault.

              And if you decide to get strung out on heroin instead of doing anything to improve your lot in life, that’s on you. That’s all Williamson was saying, and he’s right.

              1. Democrats’ response to the disruptions caused by a changing economy: “Here’s some welfare. Now, kindly vote for us so it doesn’t go away.”

                Conservative / libertarian ideologues’ response: “Go figure out something else to do with your time. It won’t kill you to take a small step back while learning a new skill.”

                Trump’s response: “The economy should never change, ever. And it doesn’t have to if you just try these two weird tricks that the establishment doesn’t want you to know about!”

        2. Noted PC SJW Kevin Williamson on Bernie Sanders

          “Senator Sanders likes to pose as a man of great conviction, but he is basically a grifter who has used public office as a way to evade honest employment for most of his long life. (Yes, Herself is a grifter, too, having used public office to avoid prison for most of her long life. Nice choice Democrats have.) Herself is whooping his narrow white Yankee ass among black voters, who feel, for whatever reason, a particular affinity with the Clinton mob. Senator Sanders is the white man’s red, and that’s killing him in the nomination fight.

          So we are treated to the spectacle of a senator representing the second-whitest constituency in the Senate (Hello, Maine!) talking absolute nonsense in a sad, lame attempt to prove to black primary voters that he feels their pain, as some lowlife once put it. ”

          So PC! Much SJW!

          1. We are talking about what he said about Trump. What he says about Sanders has nothing to do with it. He doesn’t like Sanders? He is a right wing hack. I wouldn’t expect him to like Sanders. That doesn’t make his writing about Trump any less SJW PC bullshit.

            Try engaging the argument Irish.

            1. John, this was the operative comparison in the Buchanan Boys piece. I fail to see how this is SJW PC bullshit.

              “It is an odd line of thinking: If the government levies a tax on your neighbors in order to fund an earned-income tax credit for your family, then you’re a welfare queen; if the government levies a tax on businesses that is passed on to your neighbors in order to subsidize your earned income through higher prices, then that’s economic nationalism.”

              Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/…..t-buchanan

              1. “”It is an odd line of thinking: If the government levies a tax on your neighbors in order to fund an earned-income tax credit for your family, then you’re a welfare queen; ”

                That line is just stupid. And earned-income tax credit is earned. You can only get the earned income tax credit if you work. A welfare queen is someone who doesn’t work.

                That line is emotional rhetoric, not rational discourse.

            2. You’re incredible

              “That doesn’t make his writing about Trump any less SJW PC bullshit.”

              Shit-talking about Trump doesn’t make you an SJW, Jesus fucking Christ. It’s laughable that you’re trying to claim Williamson of all people is PC. This is a man who once joked about hanging any woman who gets an abortion! (And I’m not sure it was a joke).

              “He is a right wing hack”

              How can you be a right-wing hack and a PC SJW at the same time? They’re mutually exclusive.

              Moreover, Williamson consistently disagrees with Republican orthodoxy, so how on Earth is he a right-wing hack? Do other Republicans go out of their way to criticize their working class white base? No they don’t. Since Williamson does, that’s proof he’s not a right-wing hack.

              Your criticisms of him are ridiculous.

              1. There are few things more PC than engaging in collective hate against the white working class. Again, Derbyshire got fired for writing less ugly things about blacks. The entire point of both pieces is that these people are morally defective and have no legitimate political interests. Whether you call that SJW or not, it is appalling and Williamson should never be taken seriously about anything again.

                This is just another example of you either being unable or refusing to understand what I am saying. I can’t engage in a discussion with you when you continually misrepresent what I am saying.

                1. Poor whites (or blacks, or reds, or purples) who vote for more protectionism and socialism deserve to be marginalized, as they are attempting to steal from non-poor people. They picked the fight, not me, so fuck em.

      3. Kevin Williamson: Cuckleberry Finn.

      4. John, did you realize that KDW is fucking Ann Coulter?

        Go get ‘im!

        1. He is a bald nerd and she is a skelator. Old Man, I don’t think I am going to get that image out of my mind with bleach. Thanks a lot.

          1. If Skeletor was a giraffe he would be Ann Coulter, no doubt.

        2. That would be interesting to watch.

        3. You think Ann Coulter gets fucked? How quaint!

          Ann Coulter dominates men in bed like the libidinous sex goddess that she so obviously is.

            1. Their dirty talk is full of witty aphorisms.

          1. Williamson is a bottom if there ever was one. I would imagine his “fucking her” consists of her sticking his head in a toilet and standing on his neck in 6 inch heels.

            There would be a pretty epic testosterone imbalance in that relationship.

      5. I suspect a lot of them have been traumatized by the PC wars. They’ve always lost that war, and they’re sure the Republicans will lose to the extent that they’re seen as being anti-PC.

        What I don’t think they get is that plenty of Americans see the difference between being anti-PC and being racist or homophobic. I support “fag marriage”!

        People aren’t turned off by social conservatives because they use words like “fag”. They’re turned off by social conservatives becasue they wanted to use the government to discriminate against gay people.

        Take the issue away, and all the social justice warriors are complaining about is my use of language–and that’s a losing issue for social justice warriors. It’s more or less like that with all their other wedge issues, too.

        The establishment Republicans are used to getting clobbered for everything they say. Donald Trump is winning because the general public is way ahead of establishment Republicans on free speech, immigration, etc. I think Donald Trump may even be ahead of the establishment Democrats on immigration.

        If Donald Trump can beat two Latinos in Florida despite being smeared as a racist against Latinos, then why would the Democrats keep running with that?

        1. Because it is all they have Ken. And I think for some people, it is not about winning or losing. It is about the emotional satisfaction that comes with believing their opponents are racist. Even if they lose, they won’t stop doing it.

          1. It’s like in football.

            An offensive coordinator will keep running a play until it doesn’t work anymore.

            The Democrats are yet to lose for being PC.

            Once they do, all bets are off.

            If Donald Trump becomes President, that’ll be a big loss. They won’t run that play again for a while.

            1. That is the way it would work, if these people were rational. I am not sure that is a very good assumption anymore.

      6. Finding hatred of Mexicans to be deplorable is not PC SJWism or endorsing political violence, it’s just the correct position.

        Trump’s rise is doubtless largely an overreaction to progressive’s propagation of ‘reverse’ bigotries, but doing everything in one’s power to become the caricature that SJWs spend most of their time attacking is not the way to rebut them.

        1. *Finding hatred of Mexicans or endorsing political violence to be deplorable is not PC SJWism, it’s just the correct position.

          Misplaced preposition.

    2. Not surprising considering that people tired of being demonized by progressives for being white, employed, middle class, heterosexual, patriotic, etc. is what’s driving a lot of the support for Trump anyway.

      Wait, I thought we were demonizing them for being welfare queens?

      1. When everyone is a demon, only one angel stands alone.

        *Looks trustingly at SugarFree*

      2. We’re demonizing them for being welfare queens. Progressives hate that they’d rather not be.

        1. Progressives hate that they’d rather not be.

          How’s that, exactly? They seem to be demanding more.

          1. They’re just stuck in the unfortunate position where they can’t support their families without welfare. There was an article in the WSJ that hits on the problem:

            Research by the Hamilton Project and the Urban Institute show that when families with children making between $20,000 and $50,000 attempt to have a second earner go back to work, the effective tax rate on the extra earnings?including lost government benefits such as food stamps, the earned-income tax credit, and medical support payments?is between 50% and 80%. This phaseout of the ever increasing array of benefits has created a “working-class trap” instead of a “poverty trap” that is increasing inequality and keeping the income of these households lower than they might otherwise be.

            While the number of two-earner households declined during the first six years of the Obama presidency, the number of single-earner households rose by 2.6 million and the number of households with no earners rose by almost five million. In other words, two thirds of the increase in the number of families under Mr. Obama was accounted for by households with no one working. This is the reason the middle class has shrunk, and the reason inequality has increased. And unless we increase the number of people wanting to work and the number of jobs through economic growth, inequality will only increase.

            1. Your typical Trump supporter, according to other research I’ve seen, is quite unhappy with this reality. They don’t like welfare and want to get back to work, but they’re unwilling to give up their welfare until they do since it would not materially help their families.

              1. They don’t like welfare and want to get back to work

                And that’s why they’re advocating protectionism. Aka welfare.

                They just don’t want people to realize they’re welfare queens.

                1. I think they don’t realize that they’re asking to be welfare queens. And since protectionism has been mostly discarded over the course of their lifetimes, they have no practical frame of reference with which to compare, and it’s a bit counterintuitive if you’re uneducated in economics. That’s the challenge.

                  1. I have seen others make a similar argument?that Trumpets genuinely don’t want to be welfare queens, and if they realized that’s what this was, would be ashamed.

                    Perhaps. But I don’t see them turning down their refundable child tax credits either.

                    1. There’s no getting through to them this cycle for all the reasons noted throughout this thread. Our best hope is convincing them of their foolishness after their adrenaline recedes.

                2. Damn it, they took our jerbs!!!

      3. The progressives are demonizing white people for being welfare queens?

        Sometimes my sarcasm detector gets stuck. Sometimes I don’t get the joke.

        Sometimes, I just don’t get it.

        I demonize welfare queens for being welfare queens!

        . . . especially if they’re anti-immigration people arguing that American citizenship gives them the right to eat at the public trough–public schools, ERs, etc.–where illegal aliens shouldn’t be allowed. When I point out that it’s my future paychecks their native-born asses supposedly entitled to scarf on, I sometimes call them welfare queens.

        Because they are welfare queens.

        1. The progressives are demonizing white people for being welfare queens?

          No, people against Trump are demonizing Trumpets for being welfare queens.

          1. Wow.

            I guess we’ve been saying that the Democrat and Republican establishments are more alike than people realize. I guess that kinda proves it.

            1. Being elitist, I mean.

    3. the PC wars are about to go into a lull

      I guess that’s nice – too bad every single candidate wants to destroy the telecommunications industry along with any shred of a right to private communication.

      How can a person with a conscience vote for any one of them?

      1. I don’t think I can pinch my nose hard enough to vote for any of this bunch.

        Sometimes I think Cruz looks alright compared to Trump, Bernie, or Hillary, but that’s like dating the prettiest girl in the AIDS ward.

  22. I am amazed to see how many supposed “Libertarians” oppose the right to peacefully protest Trump’s blatant Nazism. Then again maybe I shouldn’t be. After all, this kind of thing has happened before many times. And then people wonder, “How the hell did that just happen? Again??”

      1. What ever happened to my right to free speech? You are a true Libertard.

        1. he didnt look to have the govt or reason censor you. he just told you to shut up.

          1. LOL, another True Libertard?.

    1. what is his blatant naziism?

      1. The dumb shit can’t say anything without mentioning the word Nazi. What a loser. I blocked the idiot.

        1. You’re using the Trump Insult Generator against me. Cheater!

          1. You know he had to walk that back before David Duke would endorse him, right?

            1. And his daughter is an Orthodox Jew. By choice. Did he walk that back?

              BTW got a link for your assertion?

        1. ok racists for trump? so what. not sure what that has to do with trump.

          i guess i dont understand how trump is racist. he just says over the top things that arent really true with respect to normal population regarding illegals. and thinks a religion is violent.

          have not seen him in any way denigrate blacks or talk about white supremacy.

          according to the progs arent hispanics which typically makes up illegals whites anyway?

          1. Trumpkinism is a far more violent religion than Islam.

            1. based on what?

              1. All the beheadings, dude.

            2. Um, compare the death tolls, buddy.

              1. Yes, but you have to factor in the ‘white privilege’. And his hair. That’s just violence squared.

      2. what is his blatant naziism?

        Raise your right hand and repeat after me….

    2. Trump is Hitler? Well that cements my vote tomorrow.

      For the LULZ

      =====================

      Clean up in aisles 1, 11, 13 and 23. There has been a mass of pants shitting.

    3. What is peaceful about screaming and disrupting the event? And what possible good does it do anyway? You are not going to convert anyone. If you want to get your Trump hate on, there are lots of avenues available and ones where you are likely to reach someone who will listen.

      So what is the purpose of protesting? it is not to change anyone’s mind. It is just to shut it down and ensure people you don’t like don’t have a chance to have public rallies. You are the one who hates free speech. Trump supporters are not showing up at Bernie rallies. And if they did, you would have a fucking stroke.

      1. LOL thanks for showing how Trump’s supporters will try to stifle dissent online by saying “No one cares what you have to say.” Well I’m sorry to hear that. Next time, maybe don’t respond and you might have a point.

        1. Who here is stifling you? And there seems to be no shortage of places where people criticize Trump quite freely.

    4. Threatening and using force to shut down speech – even shitty speech – is a hell of a lot closer to Nazism than anything that fuckwit Trump has done. Go polish your own jackboots.

      1. Oh yay the woodchippers are just secret Trump supporters. They show their true colors. Again.

        1. Your writing has rather a familiar ring to it.

          1. Stupid?

        2. Bag of dicks, dude. Gobble ’em up.

    5. I am amazed to see how many supposed “Libertarians” oppose the right to peacefully protest Trump’s blatant Nazism.

      I think Trump is chaotic and would be a lousy president, but his confused political program has almost nothing to do with the Nazis.

      Read the NSDAP’s 25 point program, then decide for yourself which candidate it is most similar to. Hint: it’s not Trump.

  23. the antics of left-wing agitators are driving ordinary people into the arms of Trump.

    driving ordinary people driving idiots

    So the DemoGOP alienated voters from its soft machine and they ran to Bernie, who then alienated them to The Don. So after that, the libertarian moment comes when The Don alienates them to us–once we have a platform and candidates?

    1. driving ordinary people driving idiots

      Sorry to say, but most voters are idiots. That’s why we have the so called ‘leaders’ that we have.

      1. Trump!

        Because you KNOW he is lying

        1. I haven’t taken one single thing he’s said seriously since the start. Guy is a gigantic blowhard. That’s the only thing that left can get right about him, and then they proceed to take everything he says seriously. Derp.

  24. arent bernie and trump the exact same on trade? thats my thoughts anyway

    1. They both seem to be anti-free trade. I don’t really know what’s up with that. The people who support that position clearly do not understand the dynamics of it. All of those manufacturing jobs are not coming back, it’s automation that is killing them, not the Chinese per say. Maybe it was that at first, but it’s not coming back. And that’s not a bad thing, I want cheaper and better things myself.

      1. plus i saw on sanders page he wants stuff sold in america to be made in america which isnt possible. as the united states doesnt have anywhere near the capacity to produce everything here.

        was reading an interesting article why it isnt possible for apple to produce goods here as it is impossible to meet demand.

        which is why sanders 200b a year infrastructure wont result in all these jobs…free stuff combined with lack of people that can be plugged into construction means 14 million jobs wont materialize like he says

        1. Yeah, I’m sure most sane Americans cannot wait to pay 3x the price for shitty televisions and automobiles made by overpaid union slugs. Not only no, but fuck no.

          1. not only that but consumer goods i think would go way down in turns of volume. the progs may like that of course.

            1. terms not turns

            2. This is in fact precisely what would happen if progs are remotely right about US industries being dominated by bud greedy monopolists (which they must argue in order to support raising minimum wage or imposeing other regulations).

              When a domestic monopolist sees tariffs imposed on foreign imports, said monopolist will often simply increase prices without increasing production at all, and sometimes cut production to save on labor costs, so tariffs can indeed cause a fall in domestic production.

              Btw, speaking of which, has anyone seen Paul Krugman’s recent blog posts? Basically, Krugman has gone full protectionist, 17th century style mercantilist. It’s official, the Paul Krugman who won the Nobel Prize for international trade theory is dead, and but a husk remains. Even Brad DeLong is criticizing him. Yeah, that bad.

        2. “plus i saw on sanders page he wants stuff sold in america to be made in america which isnt possible. as the united states doesnt have anywhere near the capacity to produce everything here.”

          That comment doesn’t help the free trade side, because it’s untrue in any but a narrow sense. The obvious rebuttal is that we’d need to create more capacity which would create even more jobs. So, you’ve really just made a point for the anti-trade side.

          Most trade studies indicate we’re better off by paying less for the goods by buying cheaper goods overseas and employing are people to make higher value products. That’s the positions to push.

    2. They’re frighteningly similar, yes.

    3. Fuck off to your local grocery selling Jew Coke, Tulpa

      1. what?

        1. Los Doyers is a well-known millennial troll.

          1. Pay the toll or I’m coming in there.

            1. Phrasing?

  25. Trump protester “Shut up !!!”

    Trump supporter “No you Shut up !!!”

    /fist fight ensues

    Business as usual. Playing the silly game.

    1. It’s so easy, when you know the rules, it’s so easy, all you have to do…

    2. Dammit, man, you haven’t lost your mind about this enough already!

    3. It’s not like progressives and grass roots Republicans were having reasoned debates before Trump.

      What was it Gandhi said? “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, and then you win”?

      That would put today’s progressives in Stage Four on the Gandhi Scale.

      I’m sure progressives are having a hard time. They’ve always operated under two delusions: 1) That the people are behind them. That Trump’s grass roots isn’t behind them is emotionally triggering for progressives. 2) That progressives will always be in power. They’re sort of like Islamist parties like the Muslim Brotherhood that way. Once they’re in power, they assume a legitimate changeover to their opponents is unpossible. The more possible the unpossible becomes, the more they shit their pants.

      1. “That would put today’s progressives in Stage Four [Three] on the Gandhi Scale.”

        You knew what I meant!

  26. also does anyone else think sanders is not friendly to immigration but cant come out and say it? i think back to his interview with vox about it being a koch conspiracy to make americans poor

    1. I thought he did say it.

      1. well yea he did but i havent seen him campaigning recently on that. he is trying to project a love of immigratiom recently

        1. I don’t think socialism can work with mass immigration. Oh, who am I kidding, socialism doesn’t work, period.

          1. Milton Friedman was a supporter of open boarders, but acknowledged that there are serious issues with having unfettered immigration into a welfare state

            1. i think that has to do with human nature being pretty consistent no matter where. why work when you can get all your free stuff for not working.

  27. We interrupt the current broadcast to bring you this important message:

    PM links has been preempted so that we may instead bring you the next important Trump article.

    /Reason

    1. It’s better than hearing about how the chess club at State U got sanctioned for pitting white pieces and black pieces against each other.

      1. Ken, we all know that State U would only sanction the chess club for putting the white pieces and the black pieces on an even board when, in historical reality, the white pieces have always stolen the high ground of the battlefield and lorded it over the black pieces for all eternity.

        1. This is why whitey moves first and has a distinct advantage, even in chess.

          1. +1 fire before smoke

        2. Except, of course, for the million-something white Europeans enslaved by Africans.

  28. It’s the Democrats fault Republican voters are idiots.

    1. who you voting for?

    2. They were asking to have their head cracked. You are such a good fascist Joe. You never change.

    3. Tell us more about the Democrats’ intelligence, what with the front runners being a felon and a layabout.

  29. Well, yes, and me, for one.

    On last Friday night and Saturday, every candidate, both parties, and most of the media, affirmatively endorsed mob action against political opponents. Except Trump.

    If the shoe were on the other foot, would Trump have done the same? I don’t know. But I do know what all the others did, and at least with Trump there is still room for doubt.

    And the mob organizers promise more such riots–why shouldn’t they? This one worked beyond their hopes. Not only did they shut down a rally, but the media and all the political class blame their victims. A huge win.

    So, expect a lot more of it, regardless of who the candidates are, because the crowd that organized this riot does not make any distinction between Trump or Cruz or Rubio or Kasich. Some of them would like to take sides in the Democratic primaries against Hillary, except some of their funders are for her, so that’s a long shot.

    What do you mean “actually”, like it’s a surprise that some people might not like to see mob rule?

    Unless this is stopped now, the poison on our campuses is about to enter the entire political process, and it is far from clear that anyone in the elites even cares.

    1. ^^^THIS^^^

  30. This is similar to how the black rioters of the 1960s gained votes for the candidates willing to stand up to them. It hsould be no surprise to anyone who isn’t an outright anarchist. Of course, many of those liberals are probably happy to help Trump, particularly during the primaries, thinking him an easier target later on.

  31. RE: New Poll: Left-Wing Protesters Drive People into Arms of Donald Trump

    Whereas right wing protesters drive people into the arms of Comrade Bernie and Hitlery…oh wait.
    There are no right wing protesters.
    Never mind.
    Hopefully Trump uses a lot of soap.

  32. So what did Trump say that has both sides so horribly offended?

    He said the southern border should be closed. Well gee, that is common sense that has been held in a dark cell under the guards of political correctness for the last thirty years. How dare we say that Mexicans from Mexico should not be allowed illegal entry? My question is why the great GOP hasn’t been stating the same thing all this time.

    He said our economy is on the brink of total breakdown. How offensive. How dare we state out loud a tidal wave is coming to our shore when we wish to sunbathe?

    He believes in our own energy production. God awful. It is way better to rely on the Middle East. Things are really peaceful there with our longtime allies.

    He’s not proponent of entitlement for those who can work. Terrible. Because it is completely logical that one half of the country works to support the other half.

    He has alluded that our tax system is broken. Whatever is he talking about? It makes total sense that if you earn more you should be punished by paying out more for those who don’t. That Marxist concept has been implemented before, remember? Russia was extremely prosperous after 1917. Cuba as well.

    Trump is a thorn in both parties’ side because he is trying to arrange a prison break for that long lost entity that we have forgotten. And that prisoner is America.

    Charles Hurst. Author of THE SECOND FALL. An offbeat novel of Armageddon. And creator of THE RUNNINGWOLF EZINE.

    1. Don’t worry Chuck, some day novel will make it to the discount bin at half price books.

  33. the antics of left-wing agitators are driving ordinary people into the arms of Trump.

    As are the anti Trump antics of the media. Including Reason.

  34. But the whole premise of democracy is that rules need to be applied in every case without regard to the merit of the underlying cause to which it is attached.

    That’s so cute! He thinks Leftists actually intend to follow rules!

    Here is the Leftist rule – power, by any means necessary. Part of that is duping their enemies into following rules that the Left has no intention to follow in a reciprocal fashion.

  35. I just realized this was written in 2002. I wonder what the gun crime rate is now. Any government that tells you that you have no right to self defense is not looking after your best interest. Self defense is the most basic right anyone has. No government or police can protect you. I can’t believe you all allow this to continue. I keep a gun at home for self defense and have a license to carry it concealed any where I go. And I do. If I am attacked then at least I have a chance to stay alive. By the time the police arrive they can either arrange for my body to be picked up or take a statement from me. I choose the later. Britons let a right be taken from them and now it will be much harder to get it back. But you should try.
    ???? ????? ??????
    ???? ????? ??????

  36. I just realized this was written in 2002. I wonder what the gun crime rate is now. Any government that tells you that you have no right to self defense is not looking after your best interest. Self defense is the most basic right anyone has. No government or police can protect you. I can’t believe you all allow this to continue. I keep a gun at home for self defense and have a license to carry it concealed any where I go. And I do. If I am attacked then at least I have a chance to stay alive. By the time the police arrive they can either arrange for my body to be picked up or take a statement from me. I choose the later. Britons let a right be taken from them and now it will be much harder to get it back. But you should try.
    ???? ????? ??????
    ???? ????? ??????

  37. I just realized this was written in 2002. I wonder what the gun crime rate is now. Any government that tells you that you have no right to self defense is not looking after your best interest. Self defense is the most basic right anyone has. No government or police can protect you. I can’t believe you all allow this to continue. I keep a gun at home for self defense and have a license to carry it concealed any where I go. And I do. If I am attacked then at least I have a chance to stay alive. By the time the police arrive they can either arrange for my body to be picked up or take a statement from me. I choose the later. Britons let a right be taken from them and now it will be much harder to get it back. But you should try.
    ???? ????? ??????
    ???? ????? ??????

  38. I just realized this was written in 2002. I wonder what the gun crime rate is now. Any government that tells you that you have no right to self defense is not looking after your best interest. Self defense is the most basic right anyone has. No government or police can protect you. I can’t believe you all allow this to continue. I keep a gun at home for self defense and have a license to carry it concealed any where I go. And I do. If I am attacked then at least I have a chance to stay alive. By the time the police arrive they can either arrange for my body to be picked up or take a statement from me. I choose the later. Britons let a right be taken from them and now it will be much harder to get it back. But you should try.
    ???? ????? ??????
    ???? ????? ??????

  39. I just realized this was written in 2002. I wonder what the gun crime rate is now. Any government that tells you that you have no right to self defense is not looking after your best interest. Self defense is the most basic right anyone has. No government or police can protect you. I can’t believe you all allow this to continue. I keep a gun at home for self defense and have a license to carry it concealed any where I go. And I do. If I am attacked then at least I have a chance to stay alive. By the time the police arrive they can either arrange for my body to be picked up or take a statement from me. I choose the later. Britons let a right be taken from them and now it will be much harder to get it back. But you should try.
    ???? ????? ??????
    ???? ????? ??????

  40. I just realized this was written in 2002. I wonder what the gun crime rate is now. Any government that tells you that you have no right to self defense is not looking after your best interest. Self defense is the most basic right anyone has. No government or police can protect you. I can’t believe you all allow this to continue. I keep a gun at home for self defense and have a license to carry it concealed any where I go. And I do. If I am attacked then at least I have a chance to stay alive. By the time the police arrive they can either arrange for my body to be picked up or take a statement from me. I choose the later. Britons let a right be taken from them and now it will be much harder to get it back. But you should try.
    ???? ????? ??????
    ???? ????? ??????

  41. I just realized this was written in 2002. I wonder what the gun crime rate is now. Any government that tells you that you have no right to self defense is not looking after your best interest. Self defense is the most basic right anyone has. No government or police can protect you. I can’t believe you all allow this to continue. I keep a gun at home for self defense and have a license to carry it concealed any where I go. And I do. If I am attacked then at least I have a chance to stay alive. By the time the police arrive they can either arrange for my body to be picked up or take a statement from me. I choose the later. Britons let a right be taken from them and now it will be much harder to get it back. But you should try.
    ???? ????? ??????
    ???? ????? ??????

  42. Who would win in a cage match Robby’s hair or Trumps hair? The universe must know.

  43. To these “ditch and switchers” also add the many many decent and aware young democrats, who, upon seeing or hearing the Wicked Witch Hillary coming, auto-reach for a wooden stake,
    just I do..

  44. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

  45. BS. I have always voted Republican and will not vote for The Donald because of his divisive bigoted talk. The more protests, the more I don’t want to vote for him. Also, I think he brought out the true face of the Republican party. I actually don’t know anyone who is voting for him. But then again I don’t hang out with any Duck Dynasty fans either.

  46. It’s an old tactic going back to Governor Reagan and Berkeley, Nixon and Agnew. Anybody who let’s themselves get taken in by Trump is a fool. That some of the ‘protesters’ couldn’t articulate what they don’t like about Trump is very suspicious; everybody knows what they don’t like about Trump. I’d lay odds that Trump made sure the would be confrontations by placing agents provacateurs among the demonstraters.

  47. “Leftist protesters who vehemently oppose Trump would do well to remember that in a free society, even contemptible speakers are permitted to be heard.”
    No bias there.

  48. Just 11 percent said they were less likely to support Trump because of this decision. John Derbyshire was fired for saying less offensive things about blacks. Williamson has lost his mind over this.

  49. He gets to tell his people that the forces of far-left activism and political correctness are trying to silence him

    What do you mean ‘gets to tell’? They ARE trying to–AND succeeding in–silencing him. It’s an objective fact.

  50. ” the antics of left-wing agitators are driving ordinary people into the arms of Trump. ”

    It’s a poll of Republican voters. Not ordinary people.

  51. How utterly consistent with Republicans and Libertarians. You maintain that you are the ideology of personal responsibility but no matter what the problem is it’s almost always the liberal’s fault. Blaming the few protesters with the rise of Trump is utterly ridiculous. Trump is the result of Republicans themselves. They have been fomenting extreme hate, fear and loathing. They primed that pump and now they can’t control the monster they helped create. Pathetic.

    1. You might like this. Or maybe not:

      Clinton is in deep trouble. Trump may get 25% Black support.

      http://classicalvalues.com/201…..-a-racist/

      But the biggest news is Trump is earning MAJOR support from segments of the population which almost exclusively vote for Democrats. SurveyUSA announced that Donald Trump would receive 25% among black registered voters. That is news that has Hillary Clinton terrified, and is shaking the political establishment to the core!

      Links at the link. Also some videos. And a link to a video.

  52. ??Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    +_

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.BuzzSelf90.com

    1. <html
      <body

      </body
      </html

  53. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??
    ? ? ? ? http://www.CashJoin60.com

  54. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??
    ? ? ? ? http://www.CashJoin60.com

  55. my roomate’s mother-in-law makes $70 /hr on the laptop . She has been out of a job for eight months but last month her check was $16850 just working on the laptop for a few hours. original site

    ? ? ? ? http://www.BuzzSelf20.com

  56. Before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??
    ? ? ? ? http://www.CashJoin60.com

  57. until I looked at the draft of $7079 , I didnt believe that…my… mother in law had been actualie bringing home money in there spare time at there labtop. . there sisters neighbour haz done this for under 4 months and resantly cleard the dept on their place and purchased a new Lotus Carlton .try here ..

    ?? W?W?W. A?l?p?h?a-C?a?r?e?e?r?s.C?O?M

  58. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

  59. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??
    ? ? ? ? http://www.CashJoin60.com

  60. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.SelfCash10.com

  61. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.