POTUS Donald Trump

[DaveW]

In my opinion, there absolutely is a problem with this protest. And that is that there is no end game. I can't stand the guy, but he was elected to office. He's going to be president. Not a lot can be done about that. In fact, nothing can be done about that. So, making a big scene over his inauguration is nothing but a bunch of bitter, if not predictable noise.

It's not so much about him winning as it is about the PEOPLE letting him know that he better not screw things up too much, or set our country back.

[Craig Arko]

In my opinion, there absolutely is a problem with this protest. And that is that there is no end game. I can't stand the guy, but he was elected to office. He's going to be president. Not a lot can be done about that. In fact, nothing can be done about that. So, making a big scene over his inauguration is nothing but a bunch of bitter, if not predictable noise.

Then it's fortunate you're not required to participate.

[TheLeviathan]

Then it's fortunate you're not required to participate.

Congratulations on completely missing his point.

[drjim]

 

In my opinion, there absolutely is a problem with this protest. And that is that there is no end game. I can't stand the guy, but he was elected to office. He's going to be president. Not a lot can be done about that. In fact, nothing can be done about that. So, making a big scene over his inauguration is nothing but a bunch of bitter, if not predictable noise.

 

You have to start somewhere. Hopefully the opposition can take the energy, organize a little bit, and clean the Rs clock in 18 and Trump in 20. But you have to start somewhere.

[TheLeviathan]

 

You have to start somewhere. Hopefully the opposition can take the energy, organize a little bit, and clean the Rs clock in 18 and Trump in 20. But you have to start somewhere.

 

Does organizing a protest really lead to that though?  

 

Protests are more common and easier to organize because they don't require the kind of long-term buy-in that you want them to evolve into, so if the positive about a protest like this is that it will galvanize involvement in more meaningful ways I guess I have to ask...does it though?  And if not, then we go back to Dinger's original point.

[drjim]

There are going to be huge protest marches today. I'm related to some who are going and have never taken part in something like this in their life. I suspect there will be lots of exchanges of emails and other information there. That's where the grassroots starts.

 

While technically it doesn't do anything, it builds solidarity, allows people to realize they are far from alone, and sets the stage for future action. And in a very real way protest is speech.

[TheLeviathan]

 

There are going to be huge protest marches today. I'm related to some who are going and have never taken part in something like this in their life. I suspect there will be lots of exchanges of emails and other information there. That's where the grassroots starts.

 

While technically it doesn't do anything, it builds solidarity, allows people to realize they are far from alone, and sets the stage for future action. And in a very real way protest is speech.

 

Absolutely, but it doesn't substitute for action.  I feel that notion has been lost of late.

 

I'd also still maintain protesting has become over-used.

[drjim]

 

Absolutely, but it doesn't substitute for action.  I feel that notion has been lost of late.

 

By this standard not sure anything would be satisfactory.

 

I think marches, phone calls, volunteering are definitely a start.

[Brock Beauchamp]

While I condemn the actions of anyone who destroys private property or harms a police officer, is there a protest movement in history that didn't become unnecessarily violent at one point or another?

 

Get a group of angry people together and there will always be a few jackasses who go too far with it.

[Craig Arko]

Sometimes history speaks for itself.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvadoran_Civil_War

https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857

[Squirrel]

 

While I condemn the actions of anyone who destroys private property or harms a police officer, is there a protest movement in history that didn't become unnecessarily violent at one point or another?

 

Get a group of angry people together and there will always be a few jackasses who go too far with it.

Yup. And with that, I'm off to protest. Cheers!

[TheLeviathan]

I will give the Women's March credit, they seem to have organized a good, legit protest today.  Good for them.

 

Maybe it will inspire other movements to do a better job.

[TheLeviathan]

 

By this standard not sure anything would be satisfactory.

 

I think marches, phone calls, volunteering are definitely a start.

 

A start implies a continuation afterward. My question to you was....does this actually happen?  If not, then it wasn't much of a start to anything.  It was just a thing.  And then that thing ended.  Usually with a bunch of dumb violence, a little bit of coverage, and then it's over.

 

It's encouraging to me today that a real, valid protest that seems to want to be more than that is happening.  I hope today is just a start and not just a thing for people to feel good about themselves for a day.

[drjim]

Lots of middle class white women marching today. That absolutely moves the needle. Technically it's not *doing* anything, but it's the start of a lot of political pressure to blunt some of the more extreme aspects that could come out of the current government.

[Squirrel]

I will give the Women's March credit, they seem to have organized a good, legit protest today. Good for them.

 

Maybe it will inspire other movements to do a better job.

That's because it's not just a protest. It's a rally and an event, uniting different entities all striving for equality of rights across all demographic lines.

[Craig Arko]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeednews/womens-march

 

The live update from D.C.

[TheLeviathan]

 

That's because it's not just a protest. It's a rally and an event, uniting different entities all striving for equality of rights across all demographic lines.

 

Exactly!  You said what I've been getting at much better than I have.  It's not content to just be a protest and you can see that.  It wants to be a movement.  A protest without a movement to follow (or without the protest being so significant it moves the needle) amounts to little more than noise.

 

Today's march isn't noise, it's actually trying to be more than that.  It's refreshing to see.

[Squirrel]

Exactly! You said what I've been getting at much better than I have. It's not content to just be a protest and you can see that. It wants to be a movement. A protest without a movement to follow (or without the protest being so significant it moves the needle) amounts to little more than noise.

 

Today's march isn't noise, it's actually trying to be more than that. It's refreshing to see.

Um, it wants to be a movement? It IS a movement, one that has been around longer than I've been alive. And we are rallying today because the little progress that has been made is being threatened and new issues need to be heard. I find it quite disheartening, actually, that these we are still fighting for rights and equality in this country.

[drjim]

Anecdotal, but I live about a mile from the rally point in St Paul and I've seen about 100 people walking by and the streets are jammed with cars with people looking to park.

 

Goingto be yuge. Good.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Um, it wants to be a movement? It IS a movement, one that has been around longer than I've been alive. And we are rallying today because the little progress that has been made is being threatened and new issues need to be heard. I find it quite disheartening, actually, that these we are still fighting for rights and equality in this country.

 

Sorry, I think the terms are causing confusion.  I meant a movement that will have an impact future elections and policy more than they have in recent cycles.  It's an event meant to reinvigorate action going forward, not just be an event.  That distinction has been sorely lacking in many protests.

 

[Squirrel]

Anecdotal, but I live about a mile from the rally point in St Paul and I've seen about 100 people walking by and the streets are jammed with cars with people looking to park.

 

Goingto be yuge. Good.

They say the number in Chicago reached 250,000. I don't know what was going on where the crowd had nowhere to go but overflow to the streets away from the rally point with all the speakers were

[stringer bell]

If the shoe were on the other foot, what would Republicans be doing if the winner of the presidential election had almost three million fewer votes, there was evidence of foreign government(s) influencing the election and the victor was as ungracious as Donald Trump? I think there would be rioting in the streets for sure.

 

 

[Squirrel]

This is the report from Chicago. The rally swelled to more than 3 times what was expected. The official march part was cancelled and it just became a huge rally, but those unable to get close enough didn't know that and still took to the streets ... they really had no where else to go the crowd was that large. And the reports I've read so far, including this one, said it remained peaceful.

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/womens-march-chicago-411405495.html

[TheLeviathan]

 

If the shoe were on the other foot, what would Republicans be doing if the winner of the presidential election had almost three million fewer votes, there was evidence of foreign government(s) influencing the election and the victor was as ungracious as Donald Trump? I think there would be rioting in the streets for sure.

 

I highly doubt they would be rioting.  They'd do other horrible things, but they wouldn't riot.

 

Remember, we were well down the "Obama is an arab who hates America, wasn't born here, and is trying to destroy us" when he was re-elected.  There wasn't riots.  That's not really a right-wing thing and never has been.  They'd just do other horrible things.  

[Squirrel]

I highly doubt they would be rioting.  They'd do other horrible things, but they wouldn't riot.

 

Remember, we were well down the "Obama is an arab who hates America, wasn't born here, and is trying to destroy us" when he was re-elected.  There wasn't riots.  That's not really a right-wing thing and never has been.  They'd just do other horrible things.

 

That's really a different scenario than what stringer said. Obama didn't lose the popular vote by 3million. I think there'd be plenty of uproar and plenty involving guns and other weaponry.

[D. Hocking]

He just spoke to the CIA, standing in front of the memorial wall, and makes the speech all about him.  How great he is (been on the cover of Time more than Brady), ranting about the fake media (they misrepresented the crowds yesterday), saying the rain never came (although it did) because God was looking down on them. 

 

I am guessing the crowds today really bother him.  He does not always take what he views as criticism well.

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

That's really a different scenario than what stringer said. Obama didn't lose the popular vote by 3million. I think there'd be plenty of uproar and plenty involving guns and other weaponry.

 

Let's be real here, that doesn't have nearly as much to do with this as stinger or you is positing.  This is about Donald Trump.  Whether he had won by 3 million or lost by 3 million these things would be happening.  It's about the menace he represents, not the final vote tally.  

 

Uproar?  Sure, they were in 8 years of uproar trying all kinds of crazy ****.  But rioting? Nah, they only seem to do that for abortion clinics.  

[Squirrel]

Let's be real here, that doesn't have nearly as much to do with this as stinger or you is positing.  This is about Donald Trump.  Whether he had won by 3 million or lost by 3 million these things would be happening.  It's about the menace he represents, not the final vote tally.  

 

Uproar?  Sure, they were in 8 years of uproar trying all kinds of crazy ****.  But rioting? Nah, they only seem to do that for abortion clinics.

 

Let's be real here ... you were equating the reaction to Trump's election to Obama's. It's not the same scenario at all and that's all I was saying.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Let's be real here ... you were equating the reaction to Trump's election to Obama's. It's not the same scenario at all and that's all I was saying.

 

Well of course the situation isn't 100% identical, but there was absolutely rage and vitriol on the other side during both Obama wins.   Same during the Clinton years.  

 

But they don't fight back with protests and riots.  They fight back with birth certificates, impeachments, and other forms of attack.    So no, there is no way in hell they'd be protesting.  It's just not something the right wing does.

[Squirrel]

Well of course the situation isn't 100% identical, but there was absolutely rage and vitriol on the other side during both Obama wins. Same during the Clinton years.

 

But they don't fight back with protests and riots. They fight back with birth certificates, impeachments, and other forms of attack. So no, there is no way in hell they'd be protesting. It's just not something the right wing does.

What he's saying is that if the situation weren't just a loss, but one involving a huge disparity in popular vote along with another country's involvement it would have been worse. What they did, the list you just gave, was after true loss, not a questionable one. I think there would have been a lot of threats of real violence if the situation were reversed here and not just mostly peaceful protests.