If Trump loses I'll be the first to accept it. It's life. I am more worried about what is going to happen when Clinton loses. I am afraid that people like Ogion will do.

"Weird, fringe, lunatic groups endorse major party candidates to get their names in the headlines."

That is exactly the point I was making to PE, thanks for reinforcing it.

*I am afraid of what people like Ogion will do* -correction-

@JMO: But, you never mentioned CPUSA. And you are making a big about one minor fringe group and not another. It is hypocrisy.

@ND

if Trump wins the general, but loses the electoral, what will your reaction be?

Well, it seems you all understood my point that the things Trump advocates are entirely vile and beyond the pale. Yet, here PE and ND are, defending the guy who advocated each of those things.

Funny how doing them to Muslims is totally ok in your book, but when the shoe is on the other foot it isn't so funny.

THAT was precisely the hypocrisy i'd expected to expose.

There's a difference between those two examples. Ogion posts here and participates in the forum. So far as we know, KKK members don't. My post was specific in context to this community. I'm aware that both sides have pretty shitty people supporting them in the broader national context, and I don't consider that to be cause for anybody to be concerned -- shitty people have to support SOMEBODY and the fact that there's so many of them virtually guarantees that every side will end up with someone terrible.

But when you're an undecided voter and you see stuff like that *in the communities you inhabit* (even online ones), it's different. Then you start worrying about enabling toxicity like that in your own community. That, I'd think, would affect your outlook on the election, however slightly, hence the comment.

And maybe somebody did that on the other side and both Trump and Clinton have bad apples here too. I have the benefit of ignorance from recently returning and don't know. If so, then my statement doesn't hold as much water.



I guess what I'm getting at through all this rambling is, I want people to recognize how toxic posts like Ogion's are and to choose, of their own accord, to shun them in favor of a more civil discourse. So far, since I posted my support of Trump and condemnation of Clinton in this thread today, all I've had directed at me are unrealistic demands to refute some several dozen claims against my preferred candidate, and a wish for "hypothetical" brutal violence against me and people who think like me. Not really the climate for real conversation.

I'm sorry, brainbomb, but on what do you base your conclusion that our Trump supporters here would disavow violence? I think given the fact that a great many Trump supporters have advocated violence, that is not an assumption one can make any more without evidence.

Here's the thing ND, I think you are a reasonable enough person that you would not do anything insane. But you have to admit that there are a disturbing number of people ON ALL SIDES (3rd party supporters too) who seem angry enough to act out violently if they don't get their way in this election. It's extremely concerning because disgusting bullshit like what Ogion was spouting seem to be more and more common the closer to the 8th we get.

@Ogion

at least they don't get super pissed and lie about someone, then mute them.

BIIIIITTTTCCCHHHH

@jmo

yeah that's pretty fair. this election has been VERY violent

@Ogion: Um, I took it as you threatening vile action against the American people for having free speech and the right to vote. Just because you don't like the right or their candidate you are giddily saying you hope people rise up so you can watch in amusement while they are killed. I think that your statement is sick and I hope others disavow that kind of language in our political discourse.

@James: Um, if Hillary wins the electoral college she wins the election. It doesn't matter if Trump gets a higher popular percentage. That's life. People will deal with it. If it is the reverse the liberals will go nuts. I am really worried about people like Ogion if that happens.

@PE, I think we're in agreement then. Although I disagree with you on not wanting mod review of that post. And yes, comments of that nature have been posted on both sides over the past few months. Though that one is a special level of douchery including the families statement. Really just disgusting all around.

@President Eden

You've called my facts (each with at least one source; often with multiple sources) bullshit. You haven't provided a shred of evidence to refute just one fact.

Let's look at one of my facts. Can you refute it?

Donald Trump violated the civil rights act by refusing to rent homes to black people.

http://www.nytimes.com/times-insider/2015/07/30/1973-meet-donald-trump/
http://new.www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/29/donald-trump-blacks-lawsuit_n_855553.html
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/15/doj-trump-s-early-businesses-blocked-blacks.html
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/09/07/the-death-and-life-of-atlantic-city
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/27/hillary-clinton/true-hillary-clinton-says-federal-government-sued-/
http://fortune.com/2016/06/07/donald-trump-racism-quotes/
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/back-discrimination-suit-dogging-donald-trump/story?id=41667286

Trump continued to refuse to rent homes to black people three years after Justice Department ruling on the matter sides against Trump.

http://www.nytimes.com/1978/03/07/archives/trump-charged-with-rental-bias.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/10/16/realestate/for-starrett-city-an-integration-test.html?scp=4&sq=trump+discrimination&st=nyt&pagewanted=all

Is the New York Times not a credible news source? The news organisation which broke the story on the Pentagon Papers and has won 117 Pulitzers, more than, more than any other news organisation?

But no, in your mind, Pulitzers are awards given by the mainstream establishment and therefore don't count for shit. The My Lai massacre didn't happen, it was part of the establishment consp... wait no it fabricated by weed-smoking druggy hippies. Watergate was fabricated and the Pulitzer awarded for that is meaningless. NYT is, to you, part of the establishment conspiracy against Trump.

Yes there is undeniably bias in the mainstream media against Trump. What you fail to take into account is that the bias results from the undeniable shittiness of Trump as a candidate.

When you call a entire mountain of evidence to be bullshit without even providing a single source to refute just one fact, yes, as Bill says, it is justifiable to compare you to a Holocaust denier.

Ogion, Hillary supporters have been far more violent than Trump supporters.

Project Veritas showed that Pro-Clinton PAC's were behind violence at Trump rallies.

The point PE, isn't that there are bad people supporting both candidates. That is indisputably true. The point is THE CANDIDATE YOU SUPPORT is a terrible person. The entire list I came up with are all things Trump has advocated. Not his supporters, Trump himself. We've just conceded that you think them deplorable. And thus, that you are supporting a deplorable candidate. Given who you are supporting, you've really no standing to lecture anyone on civil discourse. That also is the point.

And no, I don't see any particular reason why decent people would be interested in real conversation with a group that has shown itself to be racist, sexist, anti-democratic and generally heinous. Sure, we could try to be civil with the neonazis and the alt-right, but I'm certain that it isn't incumbent on decent people to do so. You can't sidle up with such people and then start clutching your pearls about civility when you've aligned yourself with a hate movement. You have little right to complain about an angry response to it either.

Wait is Bill the same guy as the other dude who posted all those links?

lol where do I go to report a multi-accounter?

@Ogion, I understand the point you were trying to make, how you choose to do it was still wrong and sick. And against site rules or at least against their intent.

dammit ND

"Yes there is undeniably bias in the mainstream media against Trump. What you fail to take into account is that the bias results from the undeniable shittiness of Trump as a candidate."

bill, that's not bias It's just reporting. It would be bias against decency to pretend that Trump isn't undeniably shitty. What is dishonest is pretending that his many lies aren't lies but "misstatements" or some such euphemism. It's like pretending torture isn't torture or racism isn't racism.

Mods could you please deal with bill533 and the fucking prince already. Dear god if you'd like to reinstate me for 5 minutes I can handle it myself.

Okay, so half of the American electorate are undecent people involved with the KKK, Alt-Right, neo-nazis, racist, sexist, anti-democratic, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah, blah.

People are sick of this crap. Just because the other side stands for something that you don't like doesn't make them those things.

This guy is calling half of the American electorate sexists, racists, anti-democratic, neonazis, KKK, etc. This is the reason why so many people are upset because you can't have a conversation with a guy like this. It's literally impossible.

Wow.

@jmo, quoting someone's words back to them is wrong and sick? I am not going to trod gently around the delicate sensibilities of people supporting this sort of thing. Site rules be damned.

My dad was enslaved by the nazis and I spent time in German schools where they study in excrutiating detail just where this kind of thing leads if you don't crush it. Sorry, but there are far more important values than "site rules"

I do think after trump loses public beheadings, rapes, mass shootings, riots, public urination will all go up dramatically. Its just what gun ownets do.

Violent people own guns to perpetuate fear and violence

@Ogion, and my grandmother was in the same situation as your father but it doesn't give me or you the right to wish that same thing upon other people. Speaking out against something is absolutely fine, and there are a million and 1 ways to make that point. But you went and choose the one that a survivor of that type of violence would be ashamed to hear you involving them in. The way you choose to state that isn't going to convince anyone of anything, it might make you feel better, so if that's what's important to you well done.

And if you don't like this sites rules then don't let the logout button hit your sorry ass on the way out.

wow. I own several guns.

here is another example of a liberal trying to censor or remove something they don't like.

Instead of pointing fingers at people who lawfully own guns you should be trying to stop black market gun sales and criminals who unlawfully obtain guns to commit crime. The people who do it lawfully are not the problem.

Wow.