10 ms·
One would argue that reasonable people be reasonable. Of course, 1% of trump voters may be giving the 99% a bad name.
by kumarvvr 6y ago
One would argue that reasonable people be reasonable.
Of course, 1% of trump voters may be giving the 99% a bad name.
- throwawaysea 6y agoThis is very true. Tens of thousands of Trump supporters showed up to DC this last week, attending one of several fully-legal, fully-permitted protests. Almost all events and participants were peaceful. A few hundred walked into the capitol complex, and I am guessing most did not initially plan to do so but got caught up in the moment, following those in front of them. Of those few hundred, an even smaller group was engaged in violence. It seems that Trump and the entire GOP will be labeled, censored, and banned for the actions of those few while the same standard won't be applied to those on the political left despite hundreds of riots being held across 2020.
- dieortin 6y agoYou say it like “getting caught in the moment” and assaulting the Capitol is something completely reasonable that anyone in that situation might do.
- throwawaysea 6y agoI don't think it is reasonable - I am just explaining the psychology of how people can get swept up in the fervor of crowds. I am fully in support of arresting all who participated. But my point is that it is not reasonable to conclude that Trump's speech incited people to illegally invade the capitol, commit theft/vandalism, and assault officers. His speech literally had a line saying "peacefully protest". The vast majority of people hearing his speech did not break the law. So how can there be a conclusion that he incited people to break the law? Those who broke the law are independent humans who hold personal responsibility for their actions. Unless Trump explicitly urges them to commit crimes, charging him with incitement is wrong.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nelsondev 6y agoOn that note, what specifically from Trump’s speech was inciting violence? “March” != “Riot” This is the section about marching to the Capitol. “ And we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated. Lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today, we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections. But whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time. Far longer than this four year period.” “ Full text of his speech (rambling and painful to read, but there was no advocating for violence: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-told-supporters-stormed-capitol-hill/story?id=75110558 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-told-supporters-storme...
- mushbino 6y agoRudy: "Let's have trial by combat" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5FfcbpVLNo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5FfcbpVLNo Trump: The entirety of this speech, but specifically the "fight like hell" part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjYh4tIhVi4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjYh4tIhVi4 Trump: "Be there, it will be wild": https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/capitol-mob-trump-supporters.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/capitol-mob-t... This article covers a lot of it too. It's been stoked for a while: https://fortune.com/2021/01/07/trump-speech-capitol-attack-riots-pence-we-will-never-concede-maga-rally/ https://fortune.com/2021/01/07/trump-speech-capitol-attack-r...
- lliamander 6y agoAll figurative language that politicians (and non-politicians) use all the time. Joe Biden literally expressed a desire to physically harm the President, and dramatic, ecstatic portrayals of his death have been shared for his entire presidency.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- zdragnar 6y agoToo many people are trying to rationalize the polarization of our society, focusing exclusively on the ends and ignoring the means. Remember NPR's puff piece justifying looting? Or (I think) CNN's reporter standing in front of a burning building while saying that the BLM protests were mostly peaceful? (They were, but the not-peaceful bits were downplayed in an obviously biased way). There was another interview I saw where some guy was talking about the change they wanted to see, and peace and justice and so on, and was interrupted when in the background the crowd cheered when they finally managed to topple a traffic light (that traffic light never hurt anyone)
- maroonblazer 6y agoFalse equivalence. Looting commercial districts (while objectionable) is not the same as falsely claiming a federal election was stolen and looting the Capital.
- phkahler 6y agoOK. The dems ran around for 3 years claiming the Russians somehow handed Trump the 2016 election.
- GavinMcG 6y ago"We found irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling." - Senator Marco Rubio, R-FL, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chair https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/8/rubio-statement-on-senate-intel-release-of-volume-5-of-bipartisan-russia-report https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/8/rubio-s...
- YarickR2 6y agoNow you trust Republicans.
- lliamander 6y agoNowhere near enough to actually influence the election.
- watwut 6y agoIt is transparent lie. They came in prepared for it. They had bombs, zip ties, clubs, etc.
- georgeplusplus 6y agoTheir opposition loses any credibility to attack these few 100s when they accepted the BLM riots and looting as peaceful. Either stop picking sides and come up with a meaningful solution or you’re contributing to the problem.
- glitcher 6y ago> the same standard won't be applied to those on the political left despite hundreds of riots being held across 2020 I beg to differ. Any time protests turn into riots, there are many who will jump at labelling the entire movement as being full of thugs and criminals. Your own words could be used to describe exactly how the BLM protests were viewed by the right. And actually, you yourself only mentioned "riots" without any acknowledgement of how there were far more peaceful protesters in that movement. Hint: the peaceful protests aren't as exciting, so they're not on the news as much. So now am I supposed to feel sorry for the peaceful Trump protesters who are being mislabeled unfairly? Please. I didn't see a whole lot of diversity in those crowds, and somehow I think they are still going to be represented pretty well by their elected leaders going forward. Cry me a river.
- blueflame7 6y agoNo, you are supposed to have empathy because you can understand why people might do that. Remember CHAZ?
- pibechorro 6y agoDing ding ding.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- diveanon 6y agoJust some casual murder and terrorism. These people look real "caught up in the moment". https://teddit.net/r/PublicFreakout/comments/kucaz0/the_moment_officer_brian_sicknick_is_dragged_into/ https://teddit.net/r/PublicFreakout/comments/kucaz0/the_mome...
- derwiki 6y agoLatest numbers I’ve seen are 18% https://thehill.com/homenews/news/533452-poll-18-percent-of-republicans-support-capitol-riots https://thehill.com/homenews/news/533452-poll-18-percent-of-...
- dane-pgp 6y agoIt's sad that in a thread about the need to believe facts over lies, the one person who brings an actual well-sourced statistic is voted down. Maybe society really is doomed.
- refulgentis 6y agoI think you might be catastrophizing, it's definitely positively voted now, a mere 2 hours later. In the short term, votes are a Brownian process :) Edit: this post itself has swung between 3 and -1 over just an hour!
- gabereiser 6y agoPeople are downvoting against their beliefs instead of for the guidelines of discussion. It’s a hot (headed) topic.
- dragonwriter 6y agoThe parent post violates the guidelot in two ways, violating both the rule against commenting on downvotes and the rule about assuming good faith.
- Noos 6y agothere is very litle discussion here any more; its pretty much tribalism by people who aren't honest about being naked tribalists. The irony is that despite the leftist ideas, the actual age is incredibly conformist and conservative; there is a conservative ideology and a conservative spirit, and its possible to be leftist and yet be hidebound or reactionary in terms of free speech or tolerance.
- deleted 6y ago
- Spivak 6y agoI mean we’re talking about 75 million voters and likely about 150 million people in total if everyone was surveyed. The idea that you can say anything meaningful about all Tump or Biden supporters is basically zero. We’re necessarily talking about an absolutely insane and unhinged group of people. It doesn’t mean that you can go around encouraging and feeding that level of crazy and not expect bad things to happen.
- ianai 6y agoNo, there’s no reason to think the sample size which votes is an unbiased reflection of the total sample. It’s very explicitly self selecting. Interesting area to consider though.
- vladTheInhaler 6y agoIt's one of the most insidious problems with political polling - people who feel alienated and disconnected from society are seemingly less likely to respond to surveys so they inherently go undercounted. Kind of like the dark matter of the political world - we can tell that it's there, because we feel the effects, but we can't observe it directly.
- TheGRS 6y agoThen the 99% are doing an awfully bad job at telling their peers they are wrong.
- koheripbal 6y ago> Then the 99% are doing an awfully bad job at telling their peers they are wrong. That's actually very common these days. The mainstream has no control over the fringe. In a similar vein, when anarchists in Portland tried to burn down the Federal courthouse, there was silence from much of the Democrat political establishment.
- TheGRS 6y agoThe context around a lot of riots from the summer sits in my head pretty heavily. I don't like seeing rioting and vandalism as much as the next person, but I also recognize where it came from. I'm having a tough time reconciling the capitol storming in the same manner. The only similar emotion I have is pity toward people who were clearly lied to and who have insulated themselves from rational thought. To be clear I don't ever want to see guns or explosives at a protest, nor do I want to see riots, but I also understood the anger last summer and found it difficult to condemn it when the people most affected were at their wit's end. I get the sense that last week's protestors were in a similar mindset, but their reasoning was highly flawed and easily debunked. I'm sure anyone coming at this from a different perspective would see my view as hypocritical and I recognize that, but there's a feeling in my heart I can't shake about what happened last summer when it came to police brutality, one that can't easily be broken by a whataboutism.
- koheripbal 6y ago> I also understood the anger last summer and found it difficult to condemn it No degree of injustice gives people ethical license to destroy the livelihoods of people who had no role in said injustices. I found the media silence on the violence and destruction over the summer, as a means to further their political objectives, absolutely repugnant. I equally condemn the Capitol Hill rioters and hope they all face long prison sentences. Do not allow violence to be partisan. Whether it's attempting to burn down a courthouse in Portland, or trashing the capital building, laws and gov't are all that keep civilization together.