(November 11, 2016 at 12:06 pm)Tiberius Wrote: I just love how now the tables have turned, the Trumpettes are the ones saying that all the rioting and violence is crazy. You can't have it both ways. Your candidate, before the election, encouraged violence at his own rallies, encouraged his own supporters to beat up his opponent's supporters, and said repeatedly that the election was rigged.
You guys set the tone for this. If Trump had lost, there would still be violence, protests, etc, it would just be coming from Trump's supporters.
The worst Clinton did on the campaign was call half of Trump's supporters "deplorable". Yeah, that's bad, it might have cost her the election, but calling someone names is not as bad as actively encouraging violence.
I did not support Trump, just making sure I'm not being lumped into the Trumpette category.
Trump did set a tone and should be admonished for it, but this partially buttresses my previous point. This rhetoric was delivered specifically in the context of handling people disrupting his rallies. It's inconceivable to me that Clinton would have reacted the same way; however, Republicans en masse did not coordinate disruption of Clinton rallies in this manner.
That said, Trump did not make people racist and bigoted, but it's reasonable to conclude that his statements and the election results have emboldened those that already were. This is why his remarks were so irresponsible. On the other hand, Clinton herself cannot be similarly responsible for any protests that turn violent or destructive in that she emphasized a peaceful transition. The sad observation here is that apparently racist bigots require some sort of tacit approval from leadership to be openly hostile; whereas, Democrat supporters apparently do not.
