Trump Threatens Violence?

Sounds like defense if needed, not offence on a whim..

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Tartuffe
Not a threat at all. I would characterize it as more of a warning, and he is not wrong IMO.
It's like a parent "warning" a child that the stove is hot, and it will burn you if you touch it.
Meanwhile the child is grinning, while inching his finger closer, and closer to the burner.
The parent obviously doesnt want the child to burn themself, but if they do, perhaps they will learn a valuable lesson about listening in the future.

...all of which sounds very much like a threat.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Tartuffe
Not a threat at all. I would characterize it as more of a warning, and he is not wrong IMO.
It's like a parent "warning" a child that the stove is hot, and it will burn you if you touch it.
Meanwhile the child is grinning, while inching his finger closer, and closer to the burner.
The parent obviously doesnt want the child to burn themself, but if they do, perhaps they will learn a valuable lesson about listening in the future.

...all of which sounds very much like a threat.

So to you, telling a child that something hot will burn them if they touch it is a threat?

I'm beginning to understand now the sky-screaming vag hat safe space seekers.

SNIP

a reply to: Lumenari

That's why they need anti hate laws.

Can't say mean things to them or they'll cry.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Tartuffe
Not a threat at all. I would characterize it as more of a warning, and he is not wrong IMO.
It's like a parent "warning" a child that the stove is hot, and it will burn you if you touch it.
Meanwhile the child is grinning, while inching his finger closer, and closer to the burner.
The parent obviously doesnt want the child to burn themself, but if they do, perhaps they will learn a valuable lesson about listening in the future.

...all of which sounds very much like a threat.

Not at all. A threat would be if the parent said "touch that stove, and I'm getting my belt".

You honestly don't see the difference?

I understand you predisposition to hate Trump may affect how you view his statement. That's why i tried to put it in simpler terms, but you choose to apply your feeling about Trump to cloud your view, even in an allegory that there was not even a hint of threatening language.

a reply to: Tartuffe

There's a word for when someone attributes another person's statements to what is actually transpiring in their own mind and heart.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Tartuffe
Not a threat at all. I would characterize it as more of a warning, and he is not wrong IMO.
It's like a parent "warning" a child that the stove is hot, and it will burn you if you touch it.
Meanwhile the child is grinning, while inching his finger closer, and closer to the burner.
The parent obviously doesnt want the child to burn themself, but if they do, perhaps they will learn a valuable lesson about listening in the future.

...all of which sounds very much like a threat.

So to you, telling a child that something hot will burn them if they touch it is a threat?
I'm beginning to understand now the sky-screaming vag hat safe space seekers.
They're pussies.

Sure. That's exactly what I said.
Maybe Google 'false analogy', eh?

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Tartuffe
Not a threat at all. I would characterize it as more of a warning, and he is not wrong IMO.
It's like a parent "warning" a child that the stove is hot, and it will burn you if you touch it.
Meanwhile the child is grinning, while inching his finger closer, and closer to the burner.
The parent obviously doesnt want the child to burn themself, but if they do, perhaps they will learn a valuable lesson about listening in the future.

...all of which sounds very much like a threat.

So to you, telling a child that something hot will burn them if they touch it is a threat?

I'm beginning to understand now the sky-screaming vag hat safe space seekers.

They're pussies.

Pretty freaking convoluted thinking with some ppl isn't it.

Even when you put things in the most simplistic terms, they still cant see the forrest for the trees.

I know I'm not right about everything, but the left won't even acknowledge that possibility.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Tartuffe
Not a threat at all. I would characterize it as more of a warning, and he is not wrong IMO.
It's like a parent "warning" a child that the stove is hot, and it will burn you if you touch it.
Meanwhile the child is grinning, while inching his finger closer, and closer to the burner.
The parent obviously doesnt want the child to burn themself, but if they do, perhaps they will learn a valuable lesson about listening in the future.

...all of which sounds very much like a threat.

So to you, telling a child that something hot will burn them if they touch it is a threat?
I'm beginning to understand now the sky-screaming vag hat safe space seekers.
They're pussies.

Sure. That's exactly what I said.
Maybe Google 'false analogy, eh?

But you didn't say it was a false analogy. That would be an arguable position.

You said the analogy itself sounded like a threat. There's a huge difference.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Tartuffe

There's a word for when someone attributes another person's statements to what is actually transpiring in their own mind and heart.

I assume you are talking about transference, but i can think of some others that I would never post....lol

Face it, President Trump could say it's a beautiful day and the left would take that as a threat and the (sic) media would be fanning the flames like they always do.

Looks like Trump has cooled it a bit......at one time he asked the mob to slap protesters around, while personally wanting to punch someone in the face......

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Tartuffe
Not a threat at all. I would characterize it as more of a warning, and he is not wrong IMO.
It's like a parent "warning" a child that the stove is hot, and it will burn you if you touch it.
Meanwhile the child is grinning, while inching his finger closer, and closer to the burner.
The parent obviously doesnt want the child to burn themself, but if they do, perhaps they will learn a valuable lesson about listening in the future.

...all of which sounds very much like a threat.

So to you, telling a child that something hot will burn them if they touch it is a threat?
I'm beginning to understand now the sky-screaming vag hat safe space seekers.
They're pussies.

Sure. That's exactly what I said.
Maybe Google 'false analogy, eh?

But you didn't say it was a false analogy. That would be an arguable position.
You said the analogy itself sounded like a threat. There's a huge difference.

We have a scenario where Trump's supporters are in contortions trying to reassure the rest of us that he didn't mean what he said...and I'm being held to task for not communicating properly?
Sure.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: Tartuffe
Not a threat at all. I would characterize it as more of a warning, and he is not wrong IMO.
It's like a parent "warning" a child that the stove is hot, and it will burn you if you touch it.
Meanwhile the child is grinning, while inching his finger closer, and closer to the burner.
The parent obviously doesnt want the child to burn themself, but if they do, perhaps they will learn a valuable lesson about listening in the future.

...all of which sounds very much like a threat.

So to you, telling a child that something hot will burn them if they touch it is a threat?
I'm beginning to understand now the sky-screaming vag hat safe space seekers.
They're pussies.

Sure. That's exactly what I said.
Maybe Google 'false analogy, eh?

But you didn't say it was a false analogy. That would be an arguable position.
You said the analogy itself sounded like a threat. There's a huge difference.

We have a scenario where Trump's supporters are in contortions trying to reassure the rest of us that he didn't mean what he said...and I'm being held to task for not communicating properly?
Sure.

That it would be it would be very bad, very bad if his supporters played it tough?

What’s to contort?

The "left". Doesn't even understand,.. what "violence",..can look like!
The "Left" should probably seek, a "educated/political/more "democratic", "reasoning" to thier, "agenda"! ...Otherwise? A bullet between the eye? Doesn't seem to be a good "format", for a "political understanding". ... Just saying.

originally posted by: Tartuffe

originally posted by: olaru12
Ok, who's up to support trump with violence? And who deserves to be attacked on the lib side?


thehill.com...

It’s very odd. Hirono said this:

“I think it’s more than an implicit threat,” Hirono said on MSNBC. “It sounds very much to me that encouraging them to engage in something that’s probably illegal, such as assaulting people ... that sounds like a threat to me. I think it’s appalling.”

At what point does this become mass hysteria?

...Yet he didn't speak up when actual congress people were—openly, blatantly, in so many words—advocating menacing specific groups of people in real life. What a double standard.

Hmm...old school hurt you... against sweetness?

2nd

kinda of a know brainer>>>,,..


Would have worked if the tptb would have given said 5 generations but they threw this # on 1 generation