Total Posts:108|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Media Bias on Full Display

Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 10:13:14 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
Previous incident: One man, a leftist protester who disrupted a Trump rally, is punched in the face.

Headline: Trump protester sucker-punched by supporter in brutal video of Tucson rally.

Highlights: 'Widely shared videos showing a white Donald Trump supporter sucker-punching a black Trump protester at a Trump rally in Fayetteville, N.C., became a key example of growing violence at the Republican front-runner"s campaign events. The video told a story, some said, not just about one candidate"s angry supporters but about the ugly spectacle of American racial violence in the 21st century.'

And this is from a moderate conservative paper.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So how does a more liberal site describe an attack on a Trump protest?

Tonight's incident: Several trump supporters are assaulted, chased down, and their cars are attacked as they leave a Trump rally by anti-trump supporters.

Headline: Protest turns rowdy outside Trump rally in San Jose, Calif.

Highlights: 'A group of protesters attacked Donald Trump supporters who were leaving the candidate's rally in San Jose Thursday night. A dozen or more people were punched, at least one person was pelted with an egg and Trump hats were grabbed from supporters and set on fire on the ground.'

'The mayor, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, criticized Trump for coming to cities and igniting problems that local police departments had to deal with.

'At some point, Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,' Liccardo said.'

http://www.cbsnews.com...

So, in the first instance, someone goes into a Trump rally, holds up insulting signs, screams, and is part of a protest which drowns out the candidate by screaming and turns what was planned as a peaceful rally into a brawl. One Trump supporter punches him, the media calls it a 'brutal' attack, and it dominates the news cycle for a week.

In the second instance, mobs of people chase down multiple Trump supporters after a peaceful rally, pelt them with eggs and food, and physically assault them. The media calls that attacks 'rowdy', and in a stunning display of idiocy, the Mayor levels blame for the attacks at Trump. No mention of this documented attack: 'In one incident captured on camera, a Trump supporter was struck hard over the side of the head as he was walking away from a group of protesters. The attack left him with blood streaming down his head and onto his shirt.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Note that there are no examples of Trump supporters hanging outside a Bernie or Hillary rally and attacking people who are trying to leave. They don't even infiltrate them and try to stop the candidates from speaking. The 'violence' in this campaign is laughably one-sided, yet the media portrays is as the exact opposite.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
tejretics
Posts: 6,080
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 10:50:36 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
That is truly pathetic.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
roun12
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 11:19:21 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
*slow clap*

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to the freak show.
"No, I disagree. 'R' is among the most menacing of sounds. That's why they call it MURDER, not Muckduck." - Dwight

"Tell people there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure." - George Carlin
vortex86
Posts: 559
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 1:54:15 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 10:13:14 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
Previous incident: One man, a leftist protester who disrupted a Trump rally, is punched in the face.

Headline: Trump protester sucker-punched by supporter in brutal video of Tucson rally.

Highlights: 'Widely shared videos showing a white Donald Trump supporter sucker-punching a black Trump protester at a Trump rally in Fayetteville, N.C., became a key example of growing violence at the Republican front-runner"s campaign events. The video told a story, some said, not just about one candidate"s angry supporters but about the ugly spectacle of American racial violence in the 21st century.'

And this is from a moderate conservative paper.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So how does a more liberal site describe an attack on a Trump protest?

Tonight's incident: Several trump supporters are assaulted, chased down, and their cars are attacked as they leave a Trump rally by anti-trump supporters.

Headline: Protest turns rowdy outside Trump rally in San Jose, Calif.

Highlights: 'A group of protesters attacked Donald Trump supporters who were leaving the candidate's rally in San Jose Thursday night. A dozen or more people were punched, at least one person was pelted with an egg and Trump hats were grabbed from supporters and set on fire on the ground.'

'The mayor, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, criticized Trump for coming to cities and igniting problems that local police departments had to deal with.

'At some point, Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,' Liccardo said.'

http://www.cbsnews.com...

So, in the first instance, someone goes into a Trump rally, holds up insulting signs, screams, and is part of a protest which drowns out the candidate by screaming and turns what was planned as a peaceful rally into a brawl. One Trump supporter punches him, the media calls it a 'brutal' attack, and it dominates the news cycle for a week.

In the second instance, mobs of people chase down multiple Trump supporters after a peaceful rally, pelt them with eggs and food, and physically assault them. The media calls that attacks 'rowdy', and in a stunning display of idiocy, the Mayor levels blame for the attacks at Trump. No mention of this documented attack: 'In one incident captured on camera, a Trump supporter was struck hard over the side of the head as he was walking away from a group of protesters. The attack left him with blood streaming down his head and onto his shirt.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Note that there are no examples of Trump supporters hanging outside a Bernie or Hillary rally and attacking people who are trying to leave. They don't even infiltrate them and try to stop the candidates from speaking. The 'violence' in this campaign is laughably one-sided, yet the media portrays is as the exact opposite.

Posts like this are an affront attack on the Freedom of the Press and clearly a bias against liberal supporters that are expressing their right to Free Speech. As you listed in your example a Trump supporter sucker punched a peaceful protester, therefore the other millions of supporters are therefore guilty by proxy and set a dangerous precedent for anyone in opposition to Trump. Obviously as the mayor suggested Trump's presence was quite disrupting to daily activities in the area.

I would assert that you should tone down your rhetoric as you are part of the problem and people with opposing views to your own are offended by your lack of agreement with their principles/beliefs. Agree or refrain from sharing your opinions, this way all will not be offended. Censorship is a very crude word.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 1:59:42 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 1:54:15 PM, vortex86 wrote:

Posts like this are an affront attack on the Freedom of the Press and clearly a bias against liberal supporters that are expressing their right to Free Speech. As you listed in your example a Trump supporter sucker punched a peaceful protester, therefore the other millions of supporters are therefore guilty by proxy and set a dangerous precedent for anyone in opposition to Trump. Obviously as the mayor suggested Trump's presence was quite disrupting to daily activities in the area.

I would assert that you should tone down your rhetoric as you are part of the problem and people with opposing views to your own are offended by your lack of agreement with their principles/beliefs. Agree or refrain from sharing your opinions, this way all will not be offended. Censorship is a very crude word.

Lol, wow. I don't even have to respond to this; it's so idiotic that it rebuts itself.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 2:02:35 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 10:50:36 AM, tejretics wrote:
That is truly pathetic.

Yep. And the 'Trump promotes violence' narrative STILL rolls one.

I love how the people in the mainstream media who are taken aback by brutal attacks like this can't seem to make the connection between them telling people for almost a year that Trump is an evil racist crypto-Hitler set on destroying American freedom and leftists brutally attacking his supporters in ironic, Sturmabteilung-esque fashion.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,222
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 2:18:03 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 1:54:15 PM, vortex86 wrote:

Posts like this are an affront attack on the Freedom of the Press and clearly a bias against liberal supporters that are expressing their right to Free Speech. As you listed in your example a Trump supporter sucker punched a peaceful protester, therefore the other millions of supporters are therefore guilty by proxy and set a dangerous precedent for anyone in opposition to Trump. Obviously as the mayor suggested Trump's presence was quite disrupting to daily activities in the area.

I would assert that you should tone down your rhetoric as you are part of the problem and people with opposing views to your own are offended by your lack of agreement with their principles/beliefs. Agree or refrain from sharing your opinions, this way all will not be offended. Censorship is a very crude word.

Poe?
vortex86
Posts: 559
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 2:24:17 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 1:59:42 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 6/3/2016 1:54:15 PM, vortex86 wrote:

Posts like this are an affront attack on the Freedom of the Press and clearly a bias against liberal supporters that are expressing their right to Free Speech. As you listed in your example a Trump supporter sucker punched a peaceful protester, therefore the other millions of supporters are therefore guilty by proxy and set a dangerous precedent for anyone in opposition to Trump. Obviously as the mayor suggested Trump's presence was quite disrupting to daily activities in the area.

I would assert that you should tone down your rhetoric as you are part of the problem and people with opposing views to your own are offended by your lack of agreement with their principles/beliefs. Agree or refrain from sharing your opinions, this way all will not be offended. Censorship is a very crude word.

Lol, wow. I don't even have to respond to this; it's so idiotic that it rebuts itself.

I think you missed the most important part of my post. See the bolded area.
slo1
Posts: 4,312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 2:35:38 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 10:13:14 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
Previous incident: One man, a leftist protester who disrupted a Trump rally, is punched in the face.

Headline: Trump protester sucker-punched by supporter in brutal video of Tucson rally.

Highlights: 'Widely shared videos showing a white Donald Trump supporter sucker-punching a black Trump protester at a Trump rally in Fayetteville, N.C., became a key example of growing violence at the Republican front-runner"s campaign events. The video told a story, some said, not just about one candidate"s angry supporters but about the ugly spectacle of American racial violence in the 21st century.'

And this is from a moderate conservative paper.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So how does a more liberal site describe an attack on a Trump protest?

Tonight's incident: Several trump supporters are assaulted, chased down, and their cars are attacked as they leave a Trump rally by anti-trump supporters.

Headline: Protest turns rowdy outside Trump rally in San Jose, Calif.

Highlights: 'A group of protesters attacked Donald Trump supporters who were leaving the candidate's rally in San Jose Thursday night. A dozen or more people were punched, at least one person was pelted with an egg and Trump hats were grabbed from supporters and set on fire on the ground.'

'The mayor, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, criticized Trump for coming to cities and igniting problems that local police departments had to deal with.

'At some point, Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,' Liccardo said.'

http://www.cbsnews.com...

So, in the first instance, someone goes into a Trump rally, holds up insulting signs, screams, and is part of a protest which drowns out the candidate by screaming and turns what was planned as a peaceful rally into a brawl. One Trump supporter punches him, the media calls it a 'brutal' attack, and it dominates the news cycle for a week.

In the second instance, mobs of people chase down multiple Trump supporters after a peaceful rally, pelt them with eggs and food, and physically assault them. The media calls that attacks 'rowdy', and in a stunning display of idiocy, the Mayor levels blame for the attacks at Trump. No mention of this documented attack: 'In one incident captured on camera, a Trump supporter was struck hard over the side of the head as he was walking away from a group of protesters. The attack left him with blood streaming down his head and onto his shirt.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Note that there are no examples of Trump supporters hanging outside a Bernie or Hillary rally and attacking people who are trying to leave. They don't even infiltrate them and try to stop the candidates from speaking. The 'violence' in this campaign is laughably one-sided, yet the media portrays is as the exact opposite.

I notice you confidently left this paragraph out:

The chairman of the Clinton campaign, John Podesta, pointed at Sanders backers among the demonstrators in tweeting, "Violence against supporters of any candidate has no place in this election."

Any reasonable person is going to take the stance that Hillary's campaign has. The key difference is that Trump was supporting and making statements early on that advocated his supporters roughing up protesters. Reasonable people don't do that because they understand eye for eye mentality exasperates the problem rather than solves it or mitigates it in the best way possible. Just more evidence that Trump is dangerous when he applies those eye for eye concepts to foreign relationships.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,222
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 2:36:30 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 2:24:17 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 1:59:42 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 6/3/2016 1:54:15 PM, vortex86 wrote:

Posts like this are an affront attack on the Freedom of the Press and clearly a bias against liberal supporters that are expressing their right to Free Speech. As you listed in your example a Trump supporter sucker punched a peaceful protester, therefore the other millions of supporters are therefore guilty by proxy and set a dangerous precedent for anyone in opposition to Trump. Obviously as the mayor suggested Trump's presence was quite disrupting to daily activities in the area.

I would assert that you should tone down your rhetoric as you are part of the problem and people with opposing views to your own are offended by your lack of agreement with their principles/beliefs. Agree or refrain from sharing your opinions, this way all will not be offended. Censorship is a very crude word.

Lol, wow. I don't even have to respond to this; it's so idiotic that it rebuts itself.

I think you missed the most important part of my post. See the bolded area.

Definitely Poe.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,222
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 2:45:55 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 2:35:38 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 10:13:14 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:

I notice you confidently left this paragraph out:

The chairman of the Clinton campaign, John Podesta, pointed at Sanders backers among the demonstrators in tweeting, "Violence against supporters of any candidate has no place in this election."

Any reasonable person is going to take the stance that Hillary's campaign has. The key difference is that Trump was supporting and making statements early on that advocated his supporters roughing up protesters. Reasonable people don't do that because they understand eye for eye mentality exasperates the problem rather than solves it or mitigates it in the best way possible. Just more evidence that Trump is dangerous when he applies those eye for eye concepts to foreign relationships.

Hillary has said on more than one occasion that Trump's rhetoric incites violence. You can't say that one day and then say violence is inexcusable the next day. That is inconsistent. Blaming anyone but the people that chose violence is not presidential. Hillary is not presidential.
vortex86
Posts: 559
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 3:00:13 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 2:36:30 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/3/2016 2:24:17 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 1:59:42 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 6/3/2016 1:54:15 PM, vortex86 wrote:

Posts like this are an affront attack on the Freedom of the Press and clearly a bias against liberal supporters that are expressing their right to Free Speech. As you listed in your example a Trump supporter sucker punched a peaceful protester, therefore the other millions of supporters are therefore guilty by proxy and set a dangerous precedent for anyone in opposition to Trump. Obviously as the mayor suggested Trump's presence was quite disrupting to daily activities in the area.

I would assert that you should tone down your rhetoric as you are part of the problem and people with opposing views to your own are offended by your lack of agreement with their principles/beliefs. Agree or refrain from sharing your opinions, this way all will not be offended. Censorship is a very crude word.

Lol, wow. I don't even have to respond to this; it's so idiotic that it rebuts itself.

I think you missed the most important part of my post. See the bolded area.

Definitely Poe.

Indeed.
simplelife
Posts: 134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 3:36:24 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 1:54:15 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 10:13:14 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
Previous incident: One man, a leftist protester who disrupted a Trump rally, is punched in the face.

Headline: Trump protester sucker-punched by supporter in brutal video of Tucson rally.

Highlights: 'Widely shared videos showing a white Donald Trump supporter sucker-punching a black Trump protester at a Trump rally in Fayetteville, N.C., became a key example of growing violence at the Republican front-runner"s campaign events. The video told a story, some said, not just about one candidate"s angry supporters but about the ugly spectacle of American racial violence in the 21st century.'

And this is from a moderate conservative paper.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So how does a more liberal site describe an attack on a Trump protest?

Tonight's incident: Several trump supporters are assaulted, chased down, and their cars are attacked as they leave a Trump rally by anti-trump supporters.

Headline: Protest turns rowdy outside Trump rally in San Jose, Calif.

Highlights: 'A group of protesters attacked Donald Trump supporters who were leaving the candidate's rally in San Jose Thursday night. A dozen or more people were punched, at least one person was pelted with an egg and Trump hats were grabbed from supporters and set on fire on the ground.'

'The mayor, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, criticized Trump for coming to cities and igniting problems that local police departments had to deal with.

'At some point, Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,' Liccardo said.'

http://www.cbsnews.com...

So, in the first instance, someone goes into a Trump rally, holds up insulting signs, screams, and is part of a protest which drowns out the candidate by screaming and turns what was planned as a peaceful rally into a brawl. One Trump supporter punches him, the media calls it a 'brutal' attack, and it dominates the news cycle for a week.

In the second instance, mobs of people chase down multiple Trump supporters after a peaceful rally, pelt them with eggs and food, and physically assault them. The media calls that attacks 'rowdy', and in a stunning display of idiocy, the Mayor levels blame for the attacks at Trump. No mention of this documented attack: 'In one incident captured on camera, a Trump supporter was struck hard over the side of the head as he was walking away from a group of protesters. The attack left him with blood streaming down his head and onto his shirt.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Note that there are no examples of Trump supporters hanging outside a Bernie or Hillary rally and attacking people who are trying to leave. They don't even infiltrate them and try to stop the candidates from speaking. The 'violence' in this campaign is laughably one-sided, yet the media portrays is as the exact opposite.



Posts like this are an affront attack on the Freedom of the Press and clearly a bias against liberal supporters that are expressing their right to Free Speech. As you listed in your example a Trump supporter sucker punched a peaceful protester, therefore the other millions of supporters are therefore guilty by proxy and set a dangerous precedent for anyone in opposition to Trump. Obviously as the mayor suggested Trump's presence was quite disrupting to daily activities in the area.

I would assert that you should tone down your rhetoric as you are part of the problem and people with opposing views to your own are offended by your lack of agreement with their principles/beliefs. Agree or refrain from sharing your opinions, this way all will not be offended. Censorship is a very crude word. : :

Only stupid people don't understand the difference between freedom of speech and attacking freedom of speech. Donald Trump and his supporters don't attach freedom of speech like the attackers that go to his gatherings. Many of them aren't even LEGAL immigrants or citizens of the U.S.
slo1
Posts: 4,312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 4:16:18 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 2:45:55 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/3/2016 2:35:38 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 10:13:14 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:

I notice you confidently left this paragraph out:

The chairman of the Clinton campaign, John Podesta, pointed at Sanders backers among the demonstrators in tweeting, "Violence against supporters of any candidate has no place in this election."

Any reasonable person is going to take the stance that Hillary's campaign has. The key difference is that Trump was supporting and making statements early on that advocated his supporters roughing up protesters. Reasonable people don't do that because they understand eye for eye mentality exasperates the problem rather than solves it or mitigates it in the best way possible. Just more evidence that Trump is dangerous when he applies those eye for eye concepts to foreign relationships.

Hillary has said on more than one occasion that Trump's rhetoric incites violence. You can't say that one day and then say violence is inexcusable the next day. That is inconsistent. Blaming anyone but the people that chose violence is not presidential. Hillary is not presidential.

His rhetoric does insight violence and it is ok to say violence is inexcusable. Clinton campaign has denounce violence on both sides, so there is no contradiction.

Here are examples how Trump believes in fighting back against protesters. Not a mature method in an advanced country. We ain't some back sand pile that advocates taking justice in one'sown hands with revenge based tactics.

http://mashable.com...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,222
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 4:18:49 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 4:16:18 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 2:45:55 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/3/2016 2:35:38 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 10:13:14 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:

I notice you confidently left this paragraph out:

The chairman of the Clinton campaign, John Podesta, pointed at Sanders backers among the demonstrators in tweeting, "Violence against supporters of any candidate has no place in this election."

Any reasonable person is going to take the stance that Hillary's campaign has. The key difference is that Trump was supporting and making statements early on that advocated his supporters roughing up protesters. Reasonable people don't do that because they understand eye for eye mentality exasperates the problem rather than solves it or mitigates it in the best way possible. Just more evidence that Trump is dangerous when he applies those eye for eye concepts to foreign relationships.

Hillary has said on more than one occasion that Trump's rhetoric incites violence. You can't say that one day and then say violence is inexcusable the next day. That is inconsistent. Blaming anyone but the people that chose violence is not presidential. Hillary is not presidential.

His rhetoric does insight violence and it is ok to say violence is inexcusable. Clinton campaign has denounce violence on both sides, so there is no contradiction.

Here are examples how Trump believes in fighting back against protesters. Not a mature method in an advanced country. We ain't some back sand pile that advocates taking justice in one'sown hands with revenge based tactics.

http://mashable.com...

A president has a right to protect the people of the country. Trump is simply saying that his supporters have a right to protect themselves as well.

You can't get any more presidential than that.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 4:31:15 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 2:35:38 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 10:13:14 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
Previous incident: One man, a leftist protester who disrupted a Trump rally, is punched in the face.

Headline: Trump protester sucker-punched by supporter in brutal video of Tucson rally.

Highlights: 'Widely shared videos showing a white Donald Trump supporter sucker-punching a black Trump protester at a Trump rally in Fayetteville, N.C., became a key example of growing violence at the Republican front-runner"s campaign events. The video told a story, some said, not just about one candidate"s angry supporters but about the ugly spectacle of American racial violence in the 21st century.'

And this is from a moderate conservative paper.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So how does a more liberal site describe an attack on a Trump protest?

Tonight's incident: Several trump supporters are assaulted, chased down, and their cars are attacked as they leave a Trump rally by anti-trump supporters.

Headline: Protest turns rowdy outside Trump rally in San Jose, Calif.

Highlights: 'A group of protesters attacked Donald Trump supporters who were leaving the candidate's rally in San Jose Thursday night. A dozen or more people were punched, at least one person was pelted with an egg and Trump hats were grabbed from supporters and set on fire on the ground.'

'The mayor, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, criticized Trump for coming to cities and igniting problems that local police departments had to deal with.

'At some point, Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,' Liccardo said.'

http://www.cbsnews.com...

So, in the first instance, someone goes into a Trump rally, holds up insulting signs, screams, and is part of a protest which drowns out the candidate by screaming and turns what was planned as a peaceful rally into a brawl. One Trump supporter punches him, the media calls it a 'brutal' attack, and it dominates the news cycle for a week.

In the second instance, mobs of people chase down multiple Trump supporters after a peaceful rally, pelt them with eggs and food, and physically assault them. The media calls that attacks 'rowdy', and in a stunning display of idiocy, the Mayor levels blame for the attacks at Trump. No mention of this documented attack: 'In one incident captured on camera, a Trump supporter was struck hard over the side of the head as he was walking away from a group of protesters. The attack left him with blood streaming down his head and onto his shirt.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Note that there are no examples of Trump supporters hanging outside a Bernie or Hillary rally and attacking people who are trying to leave. They don't even infiltrate them and try to stop the candidates from speaking. The 'violence' in this campaign is laughably one-sided, yet the media portrays is as the exact opposite.

I notice you confidently left this paragraph out:

The chairman of the Clinton campaign, John Podesta, pointed at Sanders backers among the demonstrators in tweeting, "Violence against supporters of any candidate has no place in this election."

Any reasonable person is going to take the stance that Hillary's campaign has. The key difference is that Trump was supporting and making statements early on that advocated his supporters roughing up protesters.

No he didn't though some statements have been taken out of context by pieces of shitt.

For example when he shouted to "get him, get him out of here" which was clearly directed towards his security team. You'd have to be stupid or avliar to tell people that statement is advocation for violence, especially after the beginning of every rally instructions are mad to keep your hands off protestors

Reasonable people don't do that because they understand eye for eye mentality exasperates the problem rather than solves it or mitigates it in the best way possible. Just more evidence that Trump is dangerous when he applies those eye for eye concepts to foreign relationships.
slo1
Posts: 4,312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 4:37:39 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 4:31:15 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 6/3/2016 2:35:38 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 10:13:14 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
Previous incident: One man, a leftist protester who disrupted a Trump rally, is punched in the face.

Headline: Trump protester sucker-punched by supporter in brutal video of Tucson rally.

Highlights: 'Widely shared videos showing a white Donald Trump supporter sucker-punching a black Trump protester at a Trump rally in Fayetteville, N.C., became a key example of growing violence at the Republican front-runner"s campaign events. The video told a story, some said, not just about one candidate"s angry supporters but about the ugly spectacle of American racial violence in the 21st century.'

And this is from a moderate conservative paper.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So how does a more liberal site describe an attack on a Trump protest?

Tonight's incident: Several trump supporters are assaulted, chased down, and their cars are attacked as they leave a Trump rally by anti-trump supporters.

Headline: Protest turns rowdy outside Trump rally in San Jose, Calif.

Highlights: 'A group of protesters attacked Donald Trump supporters who were leaving the candidate's rally in San Jose Thursday night. A dozen or more people were punched, at least one person was pelted with an egg and Trump hats were grabbed from supporters and set on fire on the ground.'

'The mayor, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, criticized Trump for coming to cities and igniting problems that local police departments had to deal with.

'At some point, Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,' Liccardo said.'

http://www.cbsnews.com...

So, in the first instance, someone goes into a Trump rally, holds up insulting signs, screams, and is part of a protest which drowns out the candidate by screaming and turns what was planned as a peaceful rally into a brawl. One Trump supporter punches him, the media calls it a 'brutal' attack, and it dominates the news cycle for a week.

In the second instance, mobs of people chase down multiple Trump supporters after a peaceful rally, pelt them with eggs and food, and physically assault them. The media calls that attacks 'rowdy', and in a stunning display of idiocy, the Mayor levels blame for the attacks at Trump. No mention of this documented attack: 'In one incident captured on camera, a Trump supporter was struck hard over the side of the head as he was walking away from a group of protesters. The attack left him with blood streaming down his head and onto his shirt.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Note that there are no examples of Trump supporters hanging outside a Bernie or Hillary rally and attacking people who are trying to leave. They don't even infiltrate them and try to stop the candidates from speaking. The 'violence' in this campaign is laughably one-sided, yet the media portrays is as the exact opposite.

I notice you confidently left this paragraph out:

The chairman of the Clinton campaign, John Podesta, pointed at Sanders backers among the demonstrators in tweeting, "Violence against supporters of any candidate has no place in this election."

Any reasonable person is going to take the stance that Hillary's campaign has. The key difference is that Trump was supporting and making statements early on that advocated his supporters roughing up protesters.

No he didn't though some statements have been taken out of context by pieces of shitt.

You don't get to redefine the context. What exactly was the content when Trump suggested he should have hit a protester that tried to get on stage. I think he even used the words, "Boom, boom" as a reference of what his punches would sound like. Lol

For example when he shouted to "get him, get him out of here" which was clearly directed towards his security team. You'd have to be stupid or avliar to tell people that statement is advocation for violence, especially after the beginning of every rally instructions are mad to keep your hands off protestors


Reasonable people don't do that because they understand eye for eye mentality exasperates the problem rather than solves it or mitigates it in the best way possible. Just more evidence that Trump is dangerous when he applies those eye for eye concepts to foreign relationships.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 4:41:42 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
You don't get to redefine the context. What exactly was the content when Trump suggested he should have hit a protester that tried to get on stage. I think he even used the words, "Boom, boom" as a reference of what his punches would sound like. Lol

Actually I gave the exact context of that. Him saying that he personally should punch a protester who charged after him is not saying the crowd should. Stop being an idiot. You know that somebody saying " I should whip that guy's asss" Is not the same as saying "An angry mob should kick that guy's asss"

Are you really stupid enough to think those two phrases mean the same thing or are you trolling?
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 5:00:45 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Watch these animals.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
roun12
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 5:07:51 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 5:00:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
Watch these animals.



This country is fvcked.
"No, I disagree. 'R' is among the most menacing of sounds. That's why they call it MURDER, not Muckduck." - Dwight

"Tell people there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure." - George Carlin
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 5:09:50 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 5:07:51 PM, roun12 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 5:00:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
Watch these animals.



This country is fvcked.

Yep.

Trump is pretty much the last hope, and I don't think he's going to win.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 5:13:21 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 10:50:36 AM, tejretics wrote:
That is truly pathetic.

It's pathetic, but it's inevitable. I certainly have never seen a media outlet that is not biased in some way. Reporters write for their bosses, not for the public. If they choose the latter path, they face pressure and retaliation from their superiors. I don't there there's such thing as a neutral media outlet, only a media outlet that agrees with your views.

What we can't do is to change the media scene; what we can do is to look for primary sources or compare different secondary sources of information to get a clearer picture of what's happening.
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,222
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 6:29:27 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 5:09:50 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 5:07:51 PM, roun12 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 5:00:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
Watch these animals.



This country is fvcked.

Yep.

Trump is pretty much the last hope, and I don't think he's going to win.

It really depends on the Bernie supporters. They will have the final say on whether the people will take back the country.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 6:45:11 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
"The mayor, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, criticized Trump for coming to cities and igniting problems that local police departments had to deal with."

^ This guy went to Harvard
1Percenter
Posts: 781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 7:01:39 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 2:35:38 PM, slo1 wrote:
The chairman of the Clinton campaign, John Podesta, pointed at Sanders backers among the demonstrators in tweeting, "Violence against supporters of any candidate has no place in this election."

As it turns out, neither do consequences for such actions.
slo1
Posts: 4,312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 7:17:47 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 7:01:39 PM, 1Percenter wrote:
At 6/3/2016 2:35:38 PM, slo1 wrote:
The chairman of the Clinton campaign, John Podesta, pointed at Sanders backers among the demonstrators in tweeting, "Violence against supporters of any candidate has no place in this election."

As it turns out, neither do consequences for such actions.

I guess you missed the part where the police made a number of arrests.
slo1
Posts: 4,312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 7:20:18 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 4:41:42 PM, Wylted wrote:
You don't get to redefine the context. What exactly was the content when Trump suggested he should have hit a protester that tried to get on stage. I think he even used the words, "Boom, boom" as a reference of what his punches would sound like. Lol

Actually I gave the exact context of that. Him saying that he personally should punch a protester who charged after him is not saying the crowd should. Stop being an idiot. You know that somebody saying " I should whip that guy's asss" Is not the same as saying "An angry mob should kick that guy's asss"

Are you really stupid enough to think those two phrases mean the same thing or are you trolling?

For f:ck sake stop playing games. This is the stupidest thing I've read all day.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 7:22:46 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/3/2016 7:20:18 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 4:41:42 PM, Wylted wrote:
You don't get to redefine the context. What exactly was the content when Trump suggested he should have hit a protester that tried to get on stage. I think he even used the words, "Boom, boom" as a reference of what his punches would sound like. Lol

Actually I gave the exact context of that. Him saying that he personally should punch a protester who charged after him is not saying the crowd should. Stop being an idiot. You know that somebody saying " I should whip that guy's asss" Is not the same as saying "An angry mob should kick that guy's asss"

Are you really stupid enough to think those two phrases mean the same thing or are you trolling?

For f:ck sake stop playing games. This is the stupidest thing I've read all day.

So you are stupid. You think saying you personally should commit violence is exactly the same as encouraging an angry mob to.