If you want to threadshit, or tread as close to the “personal insults” line as you possibly can, why don’t you go do it elsewhere?
Don’t ask the question if you don’t want an answer. The slogan is blatantly and obviously bullshit, as has been explained at length here (has anyone brought up major conservative figures inviting the Proud Boys, an actual violent neo-nazi mob who have very explicitly called for more violence, to speak for them?). The only effect it will have is as red meat for people too ill-informed to know better. And if you personally find yourself in that group, well, that’s really not my fault or my problem.
“Everyone in group A is demonstrably ignorant for reasons x, y, and z.”
“Hey, I’m in group A! Stop insulting me!”
Shouldn’t really be much of a defense, in my opinion. Just for example: every republican who seriously believes the republicans campaigning on fixing health care is demonstrably being fooled and falling for a very obvious, very stupid con. The fact that you can probably find someone here like that is hardly grounds to accuse me of personal insults.
In case someone is wondering what I’m talking about…
Nine members of the far-right Proud Boys group and three protesters are facing riot and assault charges after a street brawl between them Friday night in New York.
The fight wasn’t a random clash, though: The Proud Boys were in Manhattan thanks to an invite from the Metropolitan Republican Club.
[…]
Representatives Mario Diaz-Balart and Devin Nunes have posed for pictures with Proud Boys on the campaign trail. Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson posed in a Fox green room with two Proud Boys and Republican operative Roger Stone earlier this year.
And of course, as usual, we find ourselves looking back to early 20th century europe for parallels:
Some argue that the best way to deal with groups like the Proud Boys, which thrive off the oxygen of publicity, might be to ignore them. But was last weekend’s incident a turning point in the relationship between establishment Republicanism and alt-right neofascists? Shouldn’t we be paying attention on those grounds alone? The Daily Beast’s Kelly Weill and Will Sommer argue that it was, and that the success of the Proud Boys in gaining entrée into places like the Metropolitan Republican Club (as well as past public support from Republican figures like Roger Stone, Tucker Carlson, and Devin Nunes) is reminiscent of the way fascism gained power in Europe between World Wars I and II.
Weill and Sommer quote historian Robert Paxton, who wrote in 2004 that if you take 20th-century European history as a guide, any publicly recognized relationship between the conservative elite and neo-Nazi skinheads (the most fascist-adjacent faction the American fringe had to offer at the time Paxton was writing) would be a warning sign that American fascism was on the rise. So here we are, for the millionth time in the last two years, looking back at the history of interwar European fascism for some lessons.
And in case anyone doubts that the Proud Boys are a violent mob, let’s listen to their founder, Gavin McInnes:
McInnes has a well documented and long-running record of blatantly promoting violence and making threats. “We will kill you. That’s the Proud Boys in a nutshell. We will kill you,” he said on his Compound Media show in mid-2016. His followers often repeat his calls for violence and seemed especially emboldened this past summer as they participated in a number of large-scale “free speech” rallies across the country.
The whole thing is yet another horrifying sign of things gone horribly wrong in America.
This may be the most trifling thread ever started in Elections.
Catchy? Sure: rhyming couplets are catchy.
Sadly-accurate? Given your apparent agreement that “Democrats create jobs, Republicans create mobs” is just as accurate, I don’t see why you’d start this thread. Given any normal and reasonable reading of the statement–in which a clear contrast is implied–no, of course it’s not accurate.
Have I been turned off by vandalism? I wasn’t sexually aroused in the first place, but if you’re speaking metaphorically, listen close: I don’t favor vandalism or violence.
But your list of examples is some trifling shit. You know, of course, that I can come up with a list of grosser calls for violence, and actual violence, on the right, even if I limit myself to Trump’s own words and rallies, right? So why don’t you spend some time asking yourself the more important reflections of the questions you ask leftists?
You should report it, then.
In terms of violent rhetoric, would you say what Holder said was more or less explicitly violentthan
.
This thread needs a second amendment solution.
Then:
Democrats: “Republicans are a bunch of xenophobic, homophobic racists.”
Republicans: “THIS IS WHY TRUMP WON, WE’RE SICK OF BEING ATTACKED.”
Now:
Republicans: “Democrats are a bunch of evil, America-hating extremists who want nothing more than the end of the free republic as we know it.”
I hope you enjoy Speaker Pelosi, I have a bunch of 2 year old talking points to dust off when it’s time.
Democrats stop crimes, Republicans commit them.
I find this statement sadly accurate. Conservatives, how do you feel about it? Do the crimes committed by your fellow conservatives turn you off? Does it bother you that Democrats are out there stopping crime while Republicans are out there committing crime? Even if you personally approve of criminal Republican activity, do you worry that moderates will see Republicans committing crimes and decide to vote for Democrats instead? Or do you think it’ll be a boon for Republicans in the elections?
Hey, Trump’s Cabinet isn’t representative of Republicans! They’re just ‘a few bad apples,’ y’know? 
Don’t give other posters instructions on how to behave. If you feel something’s gone wrong, feel free to report the post. Do not feel free to junior mod. Such irritates actual moderators.
Now, speaking of instructions…
This thread is getting overheated and pointless. If y’all can’t play well I’ll close it. I hope that’s clear.
I had a conversation with my FIL who is a veteran, lives in rural Ohio, and is retired. He INSISTS the economy was horrible when Trump took office and the Great One has reversed the nightmare Obama economy. I showed him unemployment rates, NASDAQ, DOW, S&P numbers, etc., all with positive trends through most of the Obama administration and continuing through the first 18 months of the Trump administration. He just could not believe it. I mean literally, could not allow himself to believe it because it was completely counter to the last 8 years of 10 hours a day of Fox News coverage. He implied the numbers I was showing him were absolutely biased, “fake news” so to speak.
“Getting”?
A thread which starts out with a debate over which side of the political spectrum has more angry mobs than the other is already heading off the edge of the cliff.
To paraphrase OP when he was applauding the patriotic gesture of Tim McVeigh, I’m not entirely sure that Mr. Ditka is entirely …
[deleted]
I’m not entirely sure this comment, however much it makes me laugh, is entirely ingenuous.
If you need a con, then call on Don.
When you over-slurp, you’ll want to burp.
I’ll take a dump, and vote for Trump.
The birds don’t chirp, we chose a perp.
While the idea that concealed within every old person there is a violent waiting to come out is completely bonkers, it, at least, has an internal consistency that your current position lacks.
Before this thread gets closed, let me post some fake news as Trump would call it: the full actual words of Eric Holder.
What description should we apply to posters who deliberately take partial quotes out of context when the full account is available on every news site?
(All bolding mine.)
If that’s what you were hoping for, you should have a word with the other HurricaneDitka who started this thread.
That person presented an “argument” that insinuated Republicans were better at job creation, and that Democrats were more prone to thoughtless violence.
And then expressed personal satisfaction and agreement with that (very baseless) “argument”.
And then proceeded to invite discussion on the presumption that this “argument” was true.
And asked not for our opinion of the impact of this “catchy” slogan, but the impact of the presumedly rampant violent tactics of the Democrats.
Perhaps you weren’t hoping for people to challenge your assumptions, but you certainly didn’t appear to be asking for opinions on the political effect of Trump’s more-than-dubious slogan.
My wag on the topic you didn’t ask for opinions on but apparently wanted to discuss:
[ul]
[li]It’s a trite and largely baseless claim for which there is clear evidence of its antithesis.[/li][li]It will offer Trump’s base another easy-to-remember, thought-numbing mantra to further divert their attention from reality. (A gram is better than a Damn!)[/li][li]It will briefly help to rally the faithful and draw back some of those in danger of realizing they’ve been duped. [/li][li]It will piss off the Leftists and thereby gain news coverage and publicity.[/li][li]It will almost certainly become the basis for Trump’s new bumper-sticker business venture.[/li][/ul]
I had a post (#86) along these same lines. Maybe he’ll respond to yours; he ignored mine.
That’s giving the original post entirely too much credit: HD has explicitly disavowed the idea that which side has more mobs is at issue, claiming instead that the statement is trivially true and therefore worth responding to. It’s the most absurd bait-and-switch I’ve ever seen, and is super ultra pointless from the get-go.
Reported.
Some people — of course this includes no one at SDMB! — lack the mental wherewithal to process paragraphs or even long sentences. That’s why the six-word soundbite had to be invented.
It sounds like you are disparaging the many fine Americans who need facts reduced to soundbites of six words or less. Shame on you!