Jump to content

Thugs refuse to accept Election Result


Rozalia
 Share

Recommended Posts

As was pushed by the media a great deal of thugs have taken to the streets, not accepting the result of the recent election. That damn Donald Trump and his band of stormtroopers! Oh and for the guy ready to pounce because I used the word "thug" and by doing so chiding me on how racist I supposedly am against black people, don't worry, they are mostly white. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-us-election-2016-live-reactio

 

You will notice Cher who promised to leave the country if Trump won is among the crowd. What dishonesty as expected. Grab her by the !@#$ Trump and throw her out, make an honest woman out of her. 

 

So folks what is your thoughts on this? Surely with all the demonising before the election no one here will support these fools I hope.

 

Edit: As most folks don't seem to get it. I think they should protest if they want, whatever. The "thugs" business is because I'm sorry, when these boyos expecting guaranteed victory said any who protested Clinton would be a thug, racist, sexist, or whatever bloody else... I can call them it back here so they know how it feels.

Edited by Rozalia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sore losers, nothing more

at least Kemal was gracious about his defeat, these people know nothing but their own way. this is the temper tantrum response that we've gotten used to from the ultra-left pc crowd. a big bunch of babies, that's all I can say

 

Saw it after Brexit too. Anti-Democracy protests from people who have been foolish enough to support Illegal Immigration as part of their platform. 

Edited by Rozalia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The exact same thing would havd happened if Hillary won. Trump supporters would be out in mass claiming the election was rigged and what not and you all know it. Personally, I've never been a fan of tbe electorial college and since Hillary won the popular vote, thats where things should stand. Since we do have the electorial and he won by that count, I guess time will tell how it plays out. So Roz, answser this, if Hillary did win, and the Trump supports took to the streets, as we all know they would have, what you be calling them?

 

She was winning when voting ended when he crossed the 270 mark and its not over yet so lets not forget that fact. Trump is ahead in the states left overall so should grab more more votes there than her... however it must be said that she may still win the popular vote yet due to her sheer dominance in places like California.

 

You think that is difficult for me to answer? It ain't rocket science. They called Trump supporters (and Brexit) everything under the sun, treated them like they were some sort of Nazi footsoldiers. Themselves on the other hand they treated as these saints who would certainly never act like the evil Trump supporters. As such they deserve mocking and to have their own language used against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think protests and riots were always going to happen no matter who won this election. More a symptom of the political climate within the US in general than any particular issue which can be attributed to any one "side".

 

Truth of the matter is you have a massive element of the population who are disaffected on either "side" of the political spectrum and who simply refuse to act in a civilised manner within a  modern democratic society. Trump is going to have to find an approach which deals with this discontent across the entire political spectrum because if he doesn't he will simply fail to govern the country effectively and won't achieve any of his electoral promises. Pretty keen to see if he can actually do it to be honest.

  • Upvote 4

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think that is difficult for me to answer? It ain't rocket science. They called Trump supporters (and Brexit) everything under the sun, treated them like they were some sort of Nazi footsoldiers. Themselves on the other hand they treated as these saints who would certainly never act like the evil Trump supporters. As such they deserve mocking and to have their own language used against them.

 

Ha, ha......you sound just like a politician yourself by avoiding to answer a direct question and saying what other people would call them.  My actual question was

 

 So Roz, answser this, if Hillary did win, and the Trump supports took to the streets, as we all know they would have, what you be calling them?

 

I don't care what others would call them.....what would you have called them......you personally.

  • Upvote 4

X4EfkAB.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Democracy shouldn't start and end at the ballot box. As an Australian I can't really comment on US politics (first past the post? wtf, the whole system is alien to me), but I do believe people should continue to lobby and be politically involved

  • Upvote 1

As you sow, so shall you reap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha, ha......you sound just like a politician yourself by avoiding to answer a direct question and saying what other people would call them.  My actual question was

 

 

I don't care what others would call them.....what would you have called them......you personally.

 

I answered your question. If Trump had lost they would have taken any protest as sign of Trump's Nazi thugs out in force, white supremacists, blah blah blah. Such people however aren't so pure and are doing the absolute same. 

 

The honest truth is whoever won would result in protests, that is true. However I and others on the Trump side were honest, they stated Trump supporters would protest beforehand and got mocked and insulted for it. The other side lied as they never expected they would be losers and are now protesting showing that they aren't the saints they think they are. Trump side was honest about it, Clinton side were liars as they decided to use that matter to insult and mock Trump and his supporters. Simple.

 

jRfXNce.jpg

 

Now as for what you want, the little bait you think you have me caught on. You think that I lose if I were to say I'd call them thugs, and I've lost if I don't. In actuality I have no problem with them protesting the result, do what they like, what this is for mocking the people who insulted and mocked Trump for it and are now doing exactly what they called so horrible.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Protests were going to happen either way but calling them thugs over it is a bit childish don't you thinks. Its not anti-democracy as you say because they're not satisfied with the result and thus protest about it. I see the same thing in my city when a not so popular law is passed. Does that make them anti-democratic? No, they're upset and using what little power they have left to express how they feel (right to protest).

 

 

Also can I also say don't lump what a chunk said as to what the whole thinks. And before you say I assume Hilary supporters are saints. No, I never did. No one side is perfect.

Edited by Amaryllis
  • Upvote 4

Nerd To The Core

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I answered your question. If Trump had lost they would have taken any protest as sign of Trump's Nazi thugs out in force, white supremacists, blah blah blah. Such people however aren't so pure and are doing the absolute same. 

 

 

 

Now as for what you want, the little bait you think you have me caught on. You think that I lose if I were to say I'd call them thugs, and I've lost if I don't. In actuality I have no problem with them protesting the result, do what they like, what this is for mocking the people who insulted and mocked Trump for it and are now doing exactly what they called so horrible.

 

You never answered my question......you've responded twice with "They" not "I".  I'm honestly not trying to bait you at all, I just find it interesting as someone who is so blindly on one side of an issue as yourself, will be very direct in their views and opinions about the opposing side, but when asked the same questions with the tables turned, those same people start to wobble and waiver and everything gets deflected/diverted to something else.

 

As to who said what and who lied about what, I could give 2 shits, I was just simply asking you a question which you chose/choosing not to answer.  Me personally, I have no problem with people protesting, as long as it's peaceful and not in my way, like on the roads and what not.  I don't care who it is, people on the losing side of an election, sporting event or those on the winning side of an election or sporting event, or those that think things will change if they destroy enough shit, once it gets to that point, then they are all morons, retards, thugs, whatever term you choose to use and should be dealt with accordingly.

X4EfkAB.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True but it was already shown both sides were charged up to a boiling point even more so than when Obama was running.

 

I still don't think protests would've happened.  The majority of protests going on now is from those who were previously doing it from racial issues stirred by police shootings and young people getting involved.

 

Those that supported Trump is mostly middle aged individuals who probably just would've went to work and vocally bashed Clinton's "rigged" election at the water cooler.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't think they would have been the case. Trump still had young supporters and some had made it clear they wouldn't take the results quietly. Also maybe it's more of what I think personally but I don't think them being middle aged would have stopped them from going to the street to raise their voices.

Nerd To The Core

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As was pushed by the media a great deal of thugs have taken to the streets, not accepting the result of the recent election. That damn Donald Trump and his band of stormtroopers! Oh and for the guy ready to pounce because I used the word "thug" and by doing so chiding me on how racist I supposedly am against black people, don't worry, they are mostly white. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-us-election-2016-live-reactio

 

You will notice Cher who promised to leave the country if Trump won is among the crowd. What dishonesty as expected. Grab her by the !@#$ Trump and throw her out, make an honest woman out of her. 

 

So folks what is your thoughts on this? Surely with all the demonising before the election no one here will support these fools I hope.

You asked, I answer.

 

I think people have a right to protest.  I think its stupid though.  We had an election.  There's no credible allegations the election was unfair or that Trump cheated somehow.  Trump is going to be our president.  All of us who are Americans.  Just like Obama was the president of KKK members who hated him.  Unlike them, I'll be rooting for Trump to succeed, because I'm American before I'm anti-Trump.

 

I'm disgusted with your tone, as usual.  "Grab a woman by her !@#$ and throw her out of the country" because you disagree with her?  Whatever.  Just more shock jock Howard Stern type level commentary from you.  

  • Upvote 4

Duke of House Greyjoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hillary won the popular vote, thats where things should stand.

Not confirmed yet. We still have (at the time of this post) about 7% of the country still to be counted. (Recounted if you want to be technical. Those places did it automatically since the vote was within a certain percentage.) CNN is even saying Trump could win the popular vote once they're done. Clinton is only leading the popular vote by about 300,000. 

 

As an Australian I can't really comment on US politics (first past the post? wtf, the whole system is alien to me),

 

but I do believe people should continue to lobby and be politically involved

Here is a quick summary so you know we aren't insane. 

The US indirectly votes for the president through the Electoral College. We have groups of 538 electors from each state who vote the way they are told (although they can vote the other way in some states). We get this number from the number of Senators (2 from each state), Representatives (435 distributed to states based on population), and 3 to Washington DC because of the Twenty-third Amendment (they aren't a state). Each state starts with three electors. Washington DC has the same number of votes as the smallest state (3 as of now). The rest are distributed to states based on population, to add up to a max of 538. All states, except Nebraska and Maine, are winner take all. Whoever wins the state, even if just by one vote, wins all the electors. Many people believed the Electoral College was flawed before Trump possibly won with less than majority (not confirmed yet). 

 

This was a compromise built into the Constitution. In theory, this gives more power to smaller states and compensates for uninformed Americans. In practice, most states are decided before the election even starts. California and Maryland are almost always Democrat, while Texas and Wyoming are almost always Republican. Only a few states, like Ohio, North Carolina, and Florida are undecided. These states get more attention from candidates than any other state. This past election, I (in North Carolina) had a ton of political attack ads on TV. A decent amount of them were from the National Rifle Association. (Side note: Deborah Ross loves sex-offenders. :^) I'd be willing to bet that they didn't have a single ad in California or Texas, even though California had a gun-control proposition on the ballot, because those are already decided. 

 

If it was purely based off of population, then each 592,751 people should have one vote, assuming the US has 318,900,000 people. Ohio should have 20 votes, assuming 11.59 million people live in Ohio. However, Ohio has 18 votes. It is a huge difference when you start talking about states like Texas (27ish million) and California (38-39ish million). Wyoming has about 584,000 people (about 0.18% of the US population), so they would have one vote if it was purely based on population. However, Wyoming has three electoral votes (about 0.56% of the votes). Remember about the winner take all system? I'm too lazy to run numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that these two added together make it mathematically possible to win with less than 30% of the popular vote. (It's not going to happen in the foreseeable future.)


 

This. Clinton people, it's not the end of the world. Most of you aren't going to Canada. Instead of us sarcastically saying "Thanks, Obama," you will be sarcastically saying "Thanks, Trump."

 

I'll take What is the 1st amendment for $200 Alex

Nobody is saying you can't. It's just you are stupid for doing so. You are protesting a free and fair election. There is nothing you can do to change it. 

 

I think people have a right to protest.  I think its stupid though.  We had an election.  There's no credible allegations the election was unfair or that Trump cheated somehow.  Trump is going to be our president.  All of us who are Americans.  Just like Obama was the president of KKK members who hated him.  Unlike them, I'll be rooting for Trump to succeed, because I'm American before I'm anti-Trump.

Reached my like quota for today. 

  • Upvote 1

NODOLsmall.png.a7aa9c0a05fa266425cd7e83d8ccb3dd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These "protests" on the street are just icing on the cake as far as I'm concerned.

 

The poor old rad lefties lost their election and in true leftist fashion they chuck a tantrum.

 

To all the butthurt people on twitter saying shit like "omg trump won I feel like I am gonna kill myself rn".

 

Please do it. You'll be doing the gene pool a favor.

Edited by Sketchy

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was purely based off of population, then each 592,751 people should have one vote, assuming the US has 318,900,000 people. Ohio should have 20 votes, assuming 11.59 million people live in Ohio. However, Ohio has 18 votes. It is a huge difference when you start talking about states like Texas (27ish million) and California (38-39ish million). Wyoming has about 584,000 people (about 0.18% of the US population), so they would have one vote if it was purely based on population. However, Wyoming has three electoral votes (about 0.56% of the votes). Remember about the winner take all system? I'm too lazy to run numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that these two added together make it mathematically possible to win with less than 30% of the popular vote. (It's not going to happen in the foreseeable future.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k

This link is pretty good if you're interested. The bear minimum theoretically possible is 21.91%. This is the 4th time in US history where the popular vote lost. (5th if you include the 1824 election where Andrew Jackson won electoral college and popular vote but didn't have enough electoral votes to make the majority. The result was the house decided on John Quincy Adams) 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thugs? Its easy to villainize the opposition rather then put yourself in there shoes and recognize the face in the mirror. You telling me Trump supporters would have gone quietly into the night if he had lost? Pfft. He even admitted that he would question the validity if the elections of he lost. 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/21/us/politics/campaign-election-trump-clinton.html?_r=0

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-wont-commit-to-accepting-election-results-if-he-loses/2016/10/19/9c9672e6-9609-11e6-bc79-af1cd3d2984b_story.html

 

 

So honestly, who cares? Let the people protest. In 2 weeks it will be old news. Trump won and no one can change that.

Edited by Lam Songman
  • Upvote 2

!å清å¤æ˜Ž!

 

"The resort to wu (warfare) is an admission of bankruptcy in the pursuit of wen (civility or culture). Consequently, it should be a last resort. Expansion through wen... is natural and proper; whereas expansion by wu, brute force and conquest, is never to be condoned.†

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So honestly, who cares? Let the people protest. In 2 weeks it will be old news. Trump won and no one can change that.

 

Exactly, and that makes it hilarious.

 

They can burn our flag, they can assault Trump voters, they can block the roads...

 

...but they can't change the fact that Trump won, and that makes their fear and crying even more delicious!

  • Upvote 1

new_forum_sig_2.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hilarious is a stretch... I'd say expected is the proper term. Just as Trump supporters would have likely done the same thing, the opposition does exactly the same. Nothing new under the sun. Savor the moment, but recognize yourself in the outpouring of rage.

!å清å¤æ˜Ž!

 

"The resort to wu (warfare) is an admission of bankruptcy in the pursuit of wen (civility or culture). Consequently, it should be a last resort. Expansion through wen... is natural and proper; whereas expansion by wu, brute force and conquest, is never to be condoned.†

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.