Let's debunk the "Trump didn't tell his followers to riot" argument.

Oh, were you debating? I didn't know. On the issue, no reasonable person would take Trumps words as incitement.

It takes profound levels of gullibility to give loyalty to a political party or a politician regardless of the letter by their name.

 

We're not talking about reasonable people. We're talking about Trump supporters!

 

I realize it took you a long time to come up with that logical fallacy. Those who committed violence do not represent the group. If you want to believe that, you are also part of a group that commits violence.

 

It isn't as though the reason for your fixation on defending Trump's minions falling along the lines of, "they aren't all violent insurrectionists" eludes me. You'll just have to forgive me if that is less than comforting given the number who still believe in the fallacy Biden is not the legit POTUS-elect. Meaning, 3 of 4 Repubs hold delusional beliefs on the matter.
https://www.newsweek.com/republicans-joe-biden-won-election-legitimately-poll-1562343

 

I never defending the actions of these thugs. Hillary played the same hand when she lost. Did her Twitter account get suspended? I agree with you on this issue, but if you are a Democrat, you're not pointing with clean hands.

 

Does it give you pause to learn this?

"Meanwhile, more than half (58 percent) of Republicans think there is solid evidence to support the fact that Biden did not win legitimately while 13 percent said they only have a suspicion."

How do you account for so many people (Repubs) believing in a fantasy?

 

How so?

 

I can't answer since I don't share their belief. Democrats believed Trump was not legitimately elected. 2 sides of the same blind-belief coin.

 

You can't answer how, in your opinion, so many Repubs came to believe a demonstrable falsehood? Please don't be coy.

 

Hillary Clinton: Trump is an ‘illegitimate president’

 

Next time do me the favor of providing a link to your source. Her quote was, "he knows he is an illegitimate president." She goes on to explain why she believes that. This......Hillary Clinton: Trump is an ‘illegitimate.......is misleading at best, disingenuous at least.

You can't answer how, in your opinion, so many Repubs came to believe a demonstrable falsehood? Please don't be coy.

Please proceed.

 

Like Dems who believe Trump was not legitimate. Neither party has a monopoly on gullibility.

 

That is good news. Will the 70 million Trump voters be telling this to those who want violence?

 

I can't speak for them, but so far, not one case where they defended the actions of the thugs that stormed the capitol.

 

Do you understand the difference between Dems subjectively saying Trump was not a legitimate prez for a myriad of reasons, and Repubs objectively believing Biden did not win the election?

 

Are you really not understanding, or just acting? I honestly would like to know, so I don't waste my time explaining this to you over and over.

I'll try one more time: demanding that the results of democratic elections be overturned and the loser be proclaimed "winner" is, in and of itself, an act of violence.

The rioters are just the tools to reach that objective. Those who committed illegal acts, pay for it. But they are not the most relevant element here. What is relevant is who called for, promoted and incited these acts of violence. And that was Donald Trump (and his minions).

You Trump loyalists keep focusing on the riots as a way to throw a smokescreen on what is the gravest issue here: a President* attempting to overturn the results of an election. That is defined as a "coup d'etat". It's not the riots that are the coup. The riots, the violence, and even the peaceful protests were just Trump's way to get his objective: illegally perpetuate himself as President.

 

Yes. The difference is the letter by their name. The belief is exactly the same. I don't care what people believe, but start caring when they force their beliefs on others. I believe it takes a profound level of gullibility to support/believe a party or a politician.

 

Good point, though condemnation would be better.

 

Actually, it isn't. Is saying a baseball player who hit 600 home runs doesn't deserve to be in the HOF because he used steroids the same as denying the player hit the home runs?
I should have warned you my point requires a nuanced understanding of the situation. An ability you may not possess.

 

Repeating your position does not make it valid. Your claim calls for the operation of the mind and is false. These actions are uncharacteristic of those of Trump supporters and that's why they had the element of surprise. It is, however, in the beliefs and opinion section, so it is your opinion and I respect your right to believe what you want. The other side made similar claims regarding rioters and looters. All I see is both sides taking turns being the pot and the kettle.

 

Fun example, but not in the ballpark. Those confident in their position do not need to move the goal posts to baseball and attempt cheap insults. I understand your belief; the psychology behind it is not complicated. All I see is 2 groups taking turns being the pot and the kettle.

 

From one cartoon character avatar to another, fair enough!

 

Your gaze is limited by an inability to understand the analogy. Or an unwillingness to acknowledge its accuracy. Psychology has nothing to do with it.
Until now I had considered you an honest, if misguided, broker. No more.

 

Here in the opinions and beliefs section, you are likely to encounter opinions that uncommon and unpopular. I agree with you on their beliefs being on par with religion. I just don't see Democrats as any better on this issue.

How are Republicans different than Democrats who believe an election was stolen?

 

What makes it valid is the fact that you can't rebut it. And, instead of that, you completely ignore it. Just like you did here.

But I guess I shouldn't expect any better from hard-core Trump loyalists.

Thanks for playing....