It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

WATCH LIVE: NYC crowd marches against election of Donald Trump

page: 11
31
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   
I see calls for California to separate from the USA. I have to be honest, I support all the blue counties in California becoming its own state. It would definitely get rid of a horrible albatros hanging on the neck of the USA.




posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: WUNK22

A New Yorker in the white house and no one's happy, I don't get it



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   
I was triggered 8 years ago, but all I did was pout and get on with life.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   
Just goes to show.

Trump critics only pay lip service to 'democracy'.

Like Crazewok said during the Brexit protest vote.

Snowflakes.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: imjack

originally posted by: WhateverYouSay
a reply to: TrueAmerican

We haven't had 8 years of liberal policies. We've had 8 years of a democrat president and most of that time with an obstructionist congress where very little liberal policies have actually gotten done.

Obamacare? That was created by a conservative, and then conservatives hated it just because Obama made it.

Bailing out the banks? That's hardly a liberal wealth distribution policy.

TPP and TTIP? Not liberal.

Obama was interventionist, hardly what you would consider a "liberal" trait.

What specific policies have been particularly liberal? Anti-gun rhetoric? That thing that's not policy but just words? Obama refusing to say "Islamic terror", again, the kind of thing that is rhetoric and not policy.

The only things that come to mind are the climate change agreement and the deals with Iran and Cuba.


liberal policies? The bathroom bills passed even with Obama as President. You know, the ones our current VP pushed.


Oh you mean the policy that Trump said he's in lock-step with?

www.hollywoodreporter.com...



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Paid Soros Protester Listing in Seattle--Craigslist:
seattle.craigslist.org...

Edit-
Spread the word, people--These protests are paid for!
edit on 10-11-2016 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Paid Soros Protester Listing in Seattle--Craigslist:
seattle.craigslist.org...

Paid protesters.Disgustingly amoral bunch,all involved.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   
LOL...CNN outs itself HOAXING.
CNN is interviewing a 'protester'...then ( @I:00 min.) acknowledges he's one of their cameramen.
twitter.com...

edit on 10-11-2016 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:53 PM
link   
To all the Trump supporters here who say these protesters don't respect democracy:

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by almost 200,000 votes. So yeah, they're allowed to protest. Even if they lost, they're allowed to protest, the same as you saw tea party people protest Obama the past x years. People can be unhappy with the result and protest, even if you don't like it. They can't be violent, but they can protest.

Like you guys have been so fond of saying the past few days: deal with it.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: WhateverYouSay

Actually, CNN projects Trump to win 'Popular Vote' too...AFTER ALL outstanding votes have been counted.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhateverYouSay
To all the Trump supporters here who say these protesters don't respect democracy:

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by almost 200,000 votes. So yeah, they're allowed to protest. Even if they lost, they're allowed to protest, the same as you saw tea party people protest Obama the past x years. People can be unhappy with the result and protest, even if you don't like it. They can't be violent, but they can protest.

Like you guys have been so fond of saying the past few days: deal with it.


Well the problem is that they are destructive (that means they are destroying private property - property of people who probably had jack squat to do with Trump being elected), probably are paid ( seattle.craigslist.org...), and just plain whiners.


Also, it seems that Clinton is projected to lose the popular vote since they are still counting actual votes.

www.cnn.com...



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fools

originally posted by: WhateverYouSay
To all the Trump supporters here who say these protesters don't respect democracy:

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by almost 200,000 votes. So yeah, they're allowed to protest. Even if they lost, they're allowed to protest, the same as you saw tea party people protest Obama the past x years. People can be unhappy with the result and protest, even if you don't like it. They can't be violent, but they can protest.

Like you guys have been so fond of saying the past few days: deal with it.


Well the problem is that they are destructive (that means they are destroying private property - property of people who probably had jack squat to do with Trump being elected), probably are paid ( seattle.craigslist.org...), and just plain whiners.


Also, it seems that Clinton is projected to lose the popular vote since they are still counting actual votes.

www.cnn.com...



Well I specifically said they cannot be violent. And if they are, arrest them.

I suspect that CNN infographic is wrong because it actually lists no projection, just that Donald Trump won, and perhaps it's conflating winning the election with the popular vote.

www.nytimes.com...

Everywhere else I have read suggests she would win.
edit on 10-11-2016 by WhateverYouSay because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:13 PM
link   
But they are being violent. And many of them are being PAID to be violent.
edit on 10-11-2016 by Fools because: ?



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhateverYouSay
To all the Trump supporters here who say these protesters don't respect democracy:
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by almost 200,000 votes. So yeah, they're allowed to protest.

As a non-American third party observer, let me make two points.
1- Since your electoral laws make the "popular vote" irrelevant, they don't have any genuine grievance. The election is fully valid according to law.
2- "Allowed to protest"- yes, but any mass protest is an implied threat of mass violence (otherwise there is no point in turning up en masse), and violence against an electoral vote is disrespect for democracy.

They might at least respect their leaders Hillary Clinton and Obama, who have said that "Peaceful transition of power is the cornerstone of our democracy". They are right, you know. Once violence is overturning election results, democracy is dead. Do they have any desire to head in that direction?



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: WhateverYouSay

Serious question:
Do you think those holding signs saying 'Assassinate Trump'...and those publicly calling on Twitter & FB for Trump to be assassinated should be arrested too?
edit on 10-11-2016 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-11-2016 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:19 PM
link   

edit on 10-11-2016 by WhateverYouSay because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: WhateverYouSay

Well let's also realize this, at the moment it is about 180,000 or so people that voted more for Hillary. That being said, the Democrats have made a name for themselves for getting fake votes. So I wonder how many of that amount is real? Also, you have to be aware that the reason that MOST people are not out protesting is because they have jobs.

People without jobs, on the dole, probably hate the idea of Trump because it might mean that their government teat might dry up and fizzle away forcing them to find a job. Or move somewhere to find a job. Or become a full time criminal, who knows what opportunities await them?



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fools
But they are being violent. And many of them are being PAID to be violent.


From what I have read some of the Oakland protests have been violent, but that there is a protest in New York that is not.

If they are being violent arrest them.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI


but any mass protest is an implied threat of mass violence (otherwise there is no point in turning up en masse), and violence against an electoral vote is disrespect for democracy.



That's ridiculous. It couldn't be that many people feel the same way about something in a city like NYC that has a high population density?

Ban mass protests, welcome to North Korea!
edit on 10-11-2016 by WhateverYouSay because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: WhateverYouSay
I will repeat what I said, because it is the blunt truth.
A mass protest is by implication, and sometimes by intention, at least the threat of mass violence.
And camera footage frequently shows the crowd teetering on the edge of it.
Without that threat, what would be the point? No authority is going to look at a large peaceful crowd and say "There seems to be a lot of them, we'd better change our minds"




top topics



 
31
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join