Election 2016

Riots in Portland on Third Night of Protests

Trump returns to Twitter to complain about "unfair" protests "incited" by media.

|

Alex Milan Tracy/Sipa USA/Newscom

There were more protests around the country against the election of Donald Trump last night, with police in Portland declaring the protest there a riot due to deteriorating conditions. Rioters there threw objects at cops, attacked newspaper stands, and smashed windows. Earlier, police said protesters were trying to stop "anarchist groups" from destroying property, and tweeted that it encouraged others to leave the area, before declaring the situation a riot and issuing orders to disperse the "unlawful assembly." Police say they made 26 arrests and dispersed the crowd using pepper spray, "rubber ball distraction devices" and rubber baton rounds.

Trump returned to Twitter for the first time since being elected on Tuesday night after spending the day in Washington, tweeting that "professional protesters, incited by the media, are protesting," calling it "very unfair!" NBC News described the tweet as "putting an end to a brief stretch of conciliatory behavior since Tuesday," although one salty tweet in a 72 hour period doesn't seem like enough data to come to that conclusion. Trump had "returned to pre-election form," as NBC News put it, also pointing out Trump himself had tweeted in favor of a march on Washington after Mitt Romney's 2012 loss, and suggested if he lost riots could ensue.

At least two other prominent Trump supporters, Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke and former Rep. Joe Walsh, had also tweeted supportively of protests and civil disobedience before the election but called for a tough response after. They did not expect Trump to win, so the calculus changed. Things are different now that he's president-elect—though not for Trump's tendency to make loose statements and the media's tendency to botch interpretations of those statements.

Trump's tweet was characterized as "unpresidential." I'm not sure what was expected at this point, particularly since such protests have, until now, worked in Trump's favor. The Trump campaign cancelled a rally in Chicago after massive protests there. Trump said the protests would "energize" his voters—he clinched the nomination in May. By June, I noted how attacks on Trump supporters by anti-Trump protesters were an apparent effort to help get Trump elected. In late September, when protests and riots erupted in Charlotte after a fatal police shooting there, I suggested the city was working hard to get North Carolina in the Trump column.

On Wednesday night, when there were protests and "vigils" around the country, I suggested this trend to could end up helping Trump by earning him political capital and helping drive never-Trump conservatives back into the fold. Protesters say they are demonstrating because Donald Trump has created a climate of fear for minorities. Riots also have that tendency. If the mostly white rioters in Portland last night provide police in the city to ramp up enforcement, that endangers marginalized people the most. Protests last month over a police contract the outgoing mayor pushed through before leaving office failed to stop the contract, and it's not unreasonable to fear tonight's riots will increase tensions in altogether different neighborhoods.

And for all the talk pre-election of "voter intimidation," what else could violent protests over the result of an election be other than voter intimidation? Hillary Clinton won Portland overwhelmingly, but that still leaves a minority of Trump voters watching their fellow citizens destroy property over the way they voted. And it leaves a slew of residents who didn't vote, but will probably eventually be blamed for Trump's win as well. Blame anyone but Clinton and the Democratic Party.

Some Anti-Trump protesters like to compare Trump to Hitler, yet it doesn't seem they understand their own comparison. Hitler used civil unrest—specifically the Reichstag fire—to greatly expand his powers after he had already been elected. At the Republican convention, Trump called America a "divided crime scene" and said "only" he could solve the country's problems. Anti-Trump protesters are setting the stage for him. It's hard to imagine what continued violent protests (the Portland group has organized as a Resistance) can accomplish other than creating a climate of fear Trump could exploit to make it easier to get what he wants, whatever that turns out to be.

A write-up of a mostly white riot in Portland would perhaps be incomplete with a note about the occupation of a remote outpost in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon in protest of federal prosecutors reneging on a plea deal with two ranchers who had set a fire on their property that spread onto federal land, appealing the sentences handed down in favor for longer ones. Those protesters were called "terrorists" by many left-wing commentators because they were armed. The hashtag #OregonUnderAttack went viral. No one has suggested Oregon, or Portland, have been under attack tonight, nor has anyone called the protesters or rioters terrorists. But as usual, one side has created a precedent when it was convenient rhetorically in the short term that can be used by the other side with as much, if not more, effect.

If anti-Trump protesters are concerned about the powers Trump will inherit, President Obama and the Congress have two and a half months to try to get something accomplished in terms of limiting executive power. The prospect is unlikely already. Directionless protests make the prospect less likely, and also place efforts at reducing government power after Trump is in office at a disadvantage. Although protesters may be more interesting in expressing their feelings, including by rioting, than reducing government power and constraining the office of the president.

Advertisement

NEXT: Sheriff Admits He Issued a False Alarm About THC-Tainted Halloween Treats

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. The media warned us that violent fascists would refuse to accept the election results, and they were right!

    What do these idiots actually expect to happen? “Oh, okay, since you’re having a tantrum we’ll just cancel the election and give the Presidency to Hillary!” Proof there is no such thing as peak derp.

    1. Right on cue the blackshirts “anarchists” arrive. Where Democrats ‘protest’ their violent fascist enforcers cannot be far behind.

      http://koin.com/2016/11/10/ant…..-11102016/

      It’s an often repeated script that only the media fails to notice as one. Nobody from the media ever thinks to ask the ‘organizers’ of these ‘peaceful protests’ why they continually tolerate the presence of the violent blackshirts.

      It’s a conundrum I tel you.

      1. #NotAllAnarchists

      2. I’m not really sure what peaceful protesters are supposed to do about the violent blackshirts, being peaceful and all.

        Pretty stupid and hypocritical, though. Only a few short weeks ago, Trump suggesting that he might challenge election results was the worst thing in the world.

    2. Can I at least hope other people see this, and realize that the people who are protesting cannot be allowed to win anything ever again? FFS, they aren’t even saying that the election was rigged or that Trump cheated, they’re just saying that he shouldn’t have won. If you won’t follow the rules when you lose, why the hell would I think you’ll follow them when you win?

      1. Probably not. At least half of the country is either at least partly sympathetic, or will forget about it all as soon as they run out of steam.

    3. Once again demonstrating that all the terrible things proggies say about their political opponents enemies (let’s stop kidding ourselves) is just projection.

  2. Take his damn phone away people.

    1. No way, why deprive us of all that entertainment value?

      1. I look forward to our twitter negotiated dearmament deals? #TakeMeNowJesus

        1. @RealDonaldJTroomp:

          “China thinks they can out-cheat us, out-Twatter us, out-Make’MuricaGreatAgin’ us. China, you got another thing coming when we grab all your Chins by the chins and stuff your smoggy cheap goods in your…wherevers. Your leaders even stole Crooked Shillary’s wardrobe! Haven’t we beaten her enough? SAD!

  3. “Rubber ball distraction device”, like, do rioters chase it?

    1. I use a laser pointer. They’re so cute when they try to catch it.

    2. cheaper than small, shiny objects.

      1. Safer too. Those small shiny objects are a choking hazard.

        1. I swallowed many rubber balls. Forgot the buckle in back.

          1. Those weren’t rubber, straff…

            1. Vas Defference das it make at dis point.

          2. Final proof you really do live in Japan.

            1. We actually had a meet up once. Both of us. Haven’t seen Tejicano around lately, though.

  4. Related…

    Best meme in my FB feed today:

    So you’re anti-gun but you’re screaming for revolution?

    What are you going to fight with, dildos and bongs?

      1. That seems to be the default playbook. That, and blocking interstates. Hearts and minds are being won over more and more as they pursue those strategies, but the scales aren’t tipping the way they expect

    1. I saw that one too, pretty funny.

    2. My cop dad has basically been having the same laugh. Anti-second amendment folks make the least scary out of power revolutionaries.

      1. They think they can weaponize cowardice and weakness. They can’t. Progs on my FB were pushing an article about how there have been two (2) transgender suicides since the election. Yeah, that’s it, kill yourselves, that’ll change the election.

      2. I got kicked off of Alternet for saying the right to keep and bear arms keeps the government at bay.

    3. In all honestly, we should probably thank our lucky stars these people ‘don’t believe in guns’ but I won’t kid myself and think that they’re going to be intellectually consistent on that matter. I would fully expect them to be against guns, but have no problem obtaining one illegally and doing something with it in the name of ‘justice’. It’s because we forced their hand, you understand…

    4. I sort of have this quiet little hope that the election will finally give liberals a healthy respect for limited government and gun rights. I mean, if LITERALLY HITLER wielding unlimited executive authority isn’t enough to teach you the importance of such things, what ever could?

      Spoiler alert…I know it won’t though.

  5. suggested if he lost riots could ensue

    It’s riots all the way down.

  6. You know who should be rioting and protesting? The countries and individuals who gave funneled millions of $$$ to the Clinton foundation or the Clintons directly in expectation of her win. I would love to hear from some of them if anyone wants to keep the shadenfruede train running on time.

    1. Hillary and Bill’s email accounts have been set to autoreply.

      We’re not here right now. Please forward all questions to Anthony Weiner’s snapchat account.

    2. The Clinton Crime Family Foundation has but two rules for donors:

      1) No Refunds;

      2) No Checks.

      It will be interesting to see how stridently donors wish to recoup their donations… Perhaps a rash of Robby Horse heads in her bed?

  7. Some Anti-Trump protesters like to compare Trump to Hitler, yet it doesn’t seem they understand their own comparison.

    As Voxday wrote, SJWs always lie, double down, then project.

  8. Protests are overwhelmingly occurring in places that Hillary won: Portland, Oakland, Chicago, D.C., Boston, Phily, N.Y. Seattle, and Virgina. That’s 8-1 for Hillary. Those protesters already have 100% of their electors assigned to her, but the irony of all the Trump voters being silenced in their states is lost on them. She received more votes than Trump overall, but the majority of Americans voted against Hillary. Get over it.

    1. One can only hope that the liberal owners of the businesses and homes they vandalize will be able to connect the dots.

    2. Greatest place to have protests for Trump. None of his voters who actually have their votes counted will get intimidated, and all the other get to laugh at the progs screwing over their neighbors in a hissy fit. Great way to feel good about your vote.

    3. They can only protest where hillary won because in the places she didn’t win (rural america) that shit wouldn’t be tolerated. You can’t loot businesses in small town conservative areas. You will get your ass shot.

      1. True dat x .357

        1. I’m not a business owner, but if I were, it would be true Dat x7.62×51. No need to be mucking around when rioters are trying to loot your livelihood.

      2. I kinda wish they would take a bus to someplace like Oklahoma and give it a try. Unfortunately they are too lazy.

        1. West Virginia comes to mind, some little coal town.

      3. Yup- Step in front of me on an Interstate? You are a speedbump…

  9. So glad Hillary has come forward to urge people to refrain from violence. What a leader.

    1. Silence from Hillary is a blessing. Don’t fuck this up.

  10. Maybe somebody should remind these people that elections have consequences.

      1. Only if they leave their liberal enclaves and try that shit out in the real world.

    1. “Elections have consequences, and I won.”
      – Barack Obama, January 2008

      1. “Elections have consequences, and I won.”
        – Barack Obama, January 2008

        Not in January 2008 he hadn’t. /pedant

  11. I do have one simple question for the protesters – what the hell is it you’re hoping to accomplish? The country just had a free and fair election. Are you proposing we overturn it because you don’t like the result? If so, then it’s not Donald Trump and his supporters who are the revealed fascists here. I didn’t vote for the guy. But, I’ll take him and respecting honest election results over the alternative any day of the week. By an order of magnitude.

    1. I presume that they’re either throwing a tantrum, or else trying to send a message to Dems – “don’t think of being conciliatory!”

      1. Tony would never risk himself by going out into public like that.

    1. “Free” republic? Why’d Clinton’s donors pay so much money if it’s there for free?

  12. Man, there’s gonna be another riot if we don’t get some lynx up in here.

    1. Dude, it’s not 9 o’clock yet! You can’t whine about lynx 14 minutes before they’re due!

      1. You can whine about anything, this is *&^%ing America!

      2. My clock must be fast.

  13. I’ve made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. Im 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. Heres what I do,

    ————– http://YoutubeJobs.Nypost55.com

    1. $64,000? Sounds like a pyramid scheme.

      1. ::slow clap::

        1. “…..a bathroom…..Depends….a pardon…..a maintenance dose of benzodiazepines….Huma….The Electorate….polls….”

          “Umm umm….THINGS HILLARY CLINTON CAN USE AND TAKES FOR GRANTED!”

      2. $64 grand won’t even get you in the door at the Clinton Foundation.

    2. Shouldn’t you be out rioting in the streets or cowering in a safe space crying?

  14. “At least two other prominent Trump supporters, Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke and former Rep. Joe Walsh, had also tweeted supportively of protests and civil disobedience before the election but called for a tough response after.”

    The exact situation that we have now with the Electoral College. Had Trump won popular vote and Clinton won Electoral, all the Dems would become insta-Constitutionalists, defending Electoral College to their death. No party which party, everything comes down to , “For me, not for thee”.

    1. I think the NE or Maine model of allocating electors would be an improvement, but it’s 8:00 now and time to switch links

    2. Saw Clarke on TV last night. He supports 1st A demonstrations, but not the violence.

  15. a slew of residents who didn’t vote, but will probably eventually be blamed for Trump’s win as well. Blame anyone but Clinton and the Democratic Party.

    Exactly. These people are unwilling to look critically at themselves. It’s always the messenger, or the idiots in flyover country, or the vast right wing conspiracy. No attempts at self criticism.

    The unexamined life is not worth living. is being played out live on the streets.

  16. “rubber ball distraction devices”

    Why do I picture the cops tossing rubber balls for the crowd to chase like dogs?

    “Go get it, boy! Go on! Go fetch!”

  17. A write-up of a mostly white riot in Portland would perhaps be incomplete with a note about the occupation of a remote outpost in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon in protest of federal prosecutors reneging on a plea deal with two ranchers who had set a fire on their property that spread onto federal land, appealing the sentences handed down in favor for longer ones. Those protesters were called “terrorists” by many left-wing commentators because they were armed. The hashtag #OregonUnderAttack went viral. No one has suggested Oregon, or Portland, have been under attack tonight, nor has anyone called the protesters or rioters terrorists. But as usual, one side has created a precedent when it was convenient rhetorically in the short term that can be used by the other side with as much, if not more, effect.

    Because….. the left is evil and the enemy of civilization. Pandering to leftist scum should be last thing libertarians should do. Someone tell Robby.

  18. Hillary Clinton did win the popular vote. Perhaps their objective is to eliminate the electoral college.

    1. She got less than 50% so the majority of voters voted for someone else.

    2. Of course it’s just moving the goalpost. Candidates and parties built their entire strategies and campaigns around this set of rules. If the votes were weighted differently everyone would have acted differently and the outcome would undoubtedly be quite different.

      And by the way democracy sucks. An angry mob that demands pure democracy by rioting is just trying to bully their way past a system that gives special rights to minorities, as in smaller states in this case.

      1. Yes, if the votes were weighted differently, this entire election would have been different. The two parties would not be what they are. When you think about how we got to this point, think about that.

        If the rioting was clearly about overthrowing the electoral college system, you could count me in.

        1. please explain why you think the electoral college is bad. you do realize that if you did away with it not one candidate would visit any small state or rural area. Should the entire country really be run on policies that only people in NYC, SF, and LA agree with?

    3. So she won time of possession and lost on points.

      Unless she was a complete moron, she was competing for electoral votes. She lost at the way this thing works. Full stop.

      1. It’s still a shitty system that has all sorts of perverse outcomes, not least of which is how it forces the system into an entrenched two-party dynamic.

        1. It’s also a system that ensures that, even if people in Alabama and Nebraska believe that every blue state Democratic city is stuffing the shit out of ballots left and right, they also can objectively say that it doesn’t materially affect them since that fixed number of EC votes was going blue regardless of the margin of victory. Take that away, and the number of people who think they lost the Most Important Election Ever because the other side cheated is going to skyrocket. Once people are convinced the game is rigged to the extent that it is unwinnable, elections will have no legitimacy, and that’s likely to at least end in civil unrest, if not civil war.

          On top that, well, there’s less incentive for fraud under the EC because there’s no benefit to additional votes once you’ve secured a plurality in your own state, but there is an ever-growing risk associated with getting caught. No EC, and every additional vote your city can pull out gets you closer to continent-wide power and influence, which changes the incentives dramatically. So, not only are people likely more likely to believe they can never peacefully acquire power, it’s also much more likely to be true.

    4. Michael Moore certainly is.

    5. Michael Moore certainly is.

  19. Meh. Second amendment remedies. The press is just blowing this out of proportion. What kind of radical libertarians are opposed to a little anarchist violence directed at the police and a lying and authoritarian deviant?

    Trump’s tweet is classic. Is this how he’s going to rule? Maybe he should sue Portland anarchists for defamation. #anarchistshurtTrumpfeelz

  20. Public property is being destroyed and the first thing one of my liberal friends sent me this morning is a tweet by Ann Coulter calling protesters fat.

  21. They aren’t protesters.

    They are rioters. Bring out the firehoses and rubber bullets to get the filth off the streets so citizens are free to go about their business.

    Free speech means standing on a soapbox trying to convince people of your position. It does not mean the freedom to break stuff and terrorize your neighbors.

    And if they are paid, which evidence points to in all of these incidents, then find the money and start arresting.

    1. This. It is one thing to yell “Fuck Trump” over and over….which I would support. But destroyng property is a crime.

  22. Can we stop, as a society, calling liberals who wanted hillary to be potus anarchists

    1. There’s a different between not wanting Trump to be POTUS, and wanting Hillary to be POTUS.

      I don’t think you’re going ot be seeing too many pictures of Hillary at any of these protests.

  23. Protesting is like sex. You can be as loud and as crazy as you like and it’s all good, but if something starts burning you really need to stop.

    1. You win

  24. T here is no good guy in this story.

  25. Wait, what? Oh, NOW that Obama is thankfully leaving he wants restraint to Presidential power? Imagine that. A man that envisioned himself an emperor above the separation of powers and performed exactly in that manner, was happy to help his self-appointed successor have the same powers, now suddenly discovered the constitution and wants to limit the power of the president that was elected to repudiate his communism. Normal hypocrite leftist.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.