Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

'Make America Great Again' marches planned


Farmer77

Recommended Posts

'Make America Great Again' marches planned Saturday; anti-Trump groups vow to stop them 

 On Saturday, backers of President Trump are planning marches across the country in a show of unity and support for his agenda. In several places, anti-Trump groups are vowing to try to undermine the rallies. 

The marches, dubbed “Make America Great Again,” or "MAGA,” have met with opposition in some areas, with anti-Trump groups planning to counter-demonstrate.


Hilarious that they are using' MAGA' which for many stands for "Millionaire ******* Golfing Again"......anyways this should be fun to watch. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Signed me up - flue and all!  I'll march!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, and then said:

Signed me up - flue and all!  I'll march!

Sweet! I really hope the right takes the lefts playbook and runs with it. Not just now but in 3 years and 10 months when there is a democrat president too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America is already great, and has always been great.  These are people that feel like they need the President to make their lives better.  Crybabies...if your life isn't great, it's your own fault.  Conservacrybabies, repubaneedababas...whatever cute little name you want to come up with.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol at Millionaire ******** Golfing Again. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was supposed to be one in my neck o the woods. No one paid much attention to it. Apparently, it fizzled and they didn't even actually march.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“We aren’t going to start fights, but we are going to try to stop them from completing their march,” said Byron Lopez, an organizer, who added that he expects about 100 people.

Yeah right. Anyway, this hasn't been very well organized. As far as I can tell they are only having them in a couple of cities. My city had one a two or three weeks ago with a fairly large turn out. It was comparable to the anti-Trump protests, which didn't have a huge turnout either.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Michelle said:

“We aren’t going to start fights, but we are going to try to stop them from completing their march,” said Byron Lopez, an organizer, who added that he expects about 100 people.

Yeah right. Anyway, this hasn't been very well organized. As far as I can tell they are only having them in a couple of cities. My city had one a two or three weeks ago with a fairly large turn out. It was comparable to the anti-Trump protests, which didn't have a huge turnout either.

What would happen if there was a "Reasonable People March"?

How many people would honesty show up?

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

Sweet! I really hope the right takes the lefts playbook and runs with it. Not just now but in 3 years and 10 months when there is a democrat president too. 

And who would that be?  Bernie and Killary will be on deaths bed, maybe Pocahontas will run, but their best bet is another nobody like Barry to further the destruction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

What would happen if there was a "Reasonable People March"?

How many people would honesty show up?

Now that I would like to see. Unfortunately, almost everyone thinks they are the reasonable ones and it'd probably end up being a big mess. :hmm:

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Michelle said:

Now that I would like to see. Unfortunately, almost everyone thinks they are the reasonable ones and it'd probably end up being a big mess. :hmm:

Some people say that you can't account for human nature. Lately, unfortunately, it's become all too predictable

Edit: 'l' button stuck.

Edited by Likely Guy
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, and then said:

Signed me up - flue and all!  I'll march!

...sound like a fun time for everyone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Michelle said:

Now that I would like to see. Unfortunately, almost everyone thinks they are the reasonable ones and it'd probably end up being a big mess. :hmm:

Well, lets step away from the TV and try to be objective about this-

 

One side is going to show up, waving the flags of their country and singing and chanting to show support for their elected head of state. If nobody gets in their way, that's all there will be to it. 

Kinda boring, to my mind.

 

And then there is the other side; vowing to use force to silence the others for Political reasons, showing up masked in many cases and using their Red-topped flagpoles as spears and bludgeons in another amazing display of something very close to Domestic Terrorism. 

Also slightly boring considering how many times it has been done in the last few months.

 

Meh, I ain't getting involved, but I do know which side will look more human on the evening news. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, AnchorSteam said:

Meh, I ain't getting involved, but I do know which side will look more human on the evening news. 

You couldn't pay me enough to get anywhere near any of these events.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How long before rhetoric becomes 'action'?

What fears me most is that some people relish the thought.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I ain't telling nothin" 

Allegedly his dad helped murder JFK with CIA and covering up tons of skeletons, he's smart for keeping his mouth shut. 

Also this guy can dodge shoes.

Edited by Area201
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Area201 said:

"I ain't telling nothin" 

Allegedly his dad helped murder JFK with CIA and covering up tons of skeletons, he's smart for keeping his mouth shut. 

Also this guy can dodge shoes.

While i definitely think Bush the first was involved in JFK's assassination I think maybe you're in the wrong thread?  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this Trump thing ever going to end  ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Glockornothing said:

And who would that be?  Bernie and Killary will be on deaths bed, maybe Pocahontas will run, but their best bet is another nobody like Barry to further the destruction.

Truthfully I said democrat because thats the safest bet but if I had to lay money on it I would say that the next president will be from some form of a faux third party. 

As for who the dems can run out there , if I were a democratic strategist I would choose a young, unknown local latino politician to be the POTUS and pair him/her with a more well established candidate for VP . Much like they did with Obama although he had been groomed and wasnt exactly unknown. 

Edited by Farmer77
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Darkenpath25 said:

Is this Trump thing ever going to end  ? 

3 years and 10 months at worst .......im hoping for the midterm impeachment myself LOL 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Glockornothing said:

And who would that be?  Bernie and Killary will be on deaths bed, maybe Pocahontas will run, but their best bet is another nobody like Barry to further the destruction.

Trump wasn't even on the radar one election prior to his first try, same for Obama, new names come in 2020.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there ever, in the history of the U.S., been a need for marches supporting a sitting president, outside of an election campaign?

I mean, really, if you go back and look at all the marches in favor of presidents, you won't find a single one that wasn't specifically for increasing support in the current election.

I am going to have to think a bit about what that says about our country and out people at this time, that this sort of thing is happening.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aquatus1 said:

Has there ever, in the history of the U.S., been a need for marches supporting a sitting president, outside of an election campaign?

I mean, really, if you go back and look at all the marches in favor of presidents, you won't find a single one that wasn't specifically for increasing support in the current election.

I am going to have to think a bit about what that says about our country and out people at this time, that this sort of thing is happening.

I think people are getting sick of the anti-police, anti-Trump, anti-Brexit, anti-free speech, anti-this or that and feel they need to be heard. Only one side is being represented/outspoken and apparently there is and always has been a silent majority. It is being proven at the voting booths in many countries at the moment. They will no longer be silenced. People will only be pushed so far before they push back.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really can't see the support for this vaguely defined "silent majority" you speak of.  What they did at the voting booths seems to be at contrast with how they claim to be feeling now (although, not greatly at contrast; after all, the non-silent majority did indeed vote for someone other than Trump).  Nor, for that matter, is anyone silencing them any more than they silenced anyone else.  Neither side has shown any more mercy or aggressiveness in that regard.

I have no doubt that there is a significant portion of people who are not affected in the slightest by the actions of police, Trump, Brexit, free speech, and what have you, and therefor have grown tired of all the hubbub on things that bore them.  I have no doubt that they finally feel emboldened enough to march in support for someone whom they feel represents them (this is, after all, what people have done for a long, long time).  What I am thinking about isn't so much that they are doing it, but rather, why is it happening now, for the first time in this countries histories (not going beyond the borders on this question), and of course, what it means.

A significant portion doesn't not have the same connotation of "silent majority", which implies a defined (to a greater or lesser extent) a set of beliefs that unifies the group, that they feel defines them as a group.  When you have a group that is not so much defined by a set of beliefs as they are by a set of non-beliefs, or rather, a set of things they feel they are being denied, I hesitate to call them a silent majority.  To do so is to give the non-beliefs a certainty and intensity that may not be quite accurate.  A person may be anti-police because they have a loved one who was a victim. or they themselves were a victim, of police abuse.  They may be anti-police because they hold a political view that does not approve of enforcement authorities.  They may be anti-police because they believe the police should be replaced with a civilian military.  There are dozens of reasons why a person could be anti-police.  What their specific belief is is what defines the group they are in.  If, however, you just kind of lump them all in as a "silent majority", of which "anti-police" is merely one among many properties, you haven't really defined the majority that is being spoken of.  Two people in that majority could well have radically different and incompatible reasons for being anti-police.

And, ultimately, I can't help but feel that this lack of definition is precisely why they are marching for Trump.  Simply because they are not actually a minority.  They are actually a whole bunch of minorities that are dying out, and have gathered together under a flag that is becoming more and more general as time goes by.  The consolidation of the various different groups gives the illusion of increased support, even though the reason these groups are consolidating is precisely because their numbers are dwindling.

The same thing happened with the 9/11 conspiracy.  As time went on, and groups found themselves with less and less support, the individual sites and groups failed and collapsed, and the refugees migrated to other groups.  These groups then touted their increasing numbers as evidence that the support for their group was growing.  However, since the group was now composed of people with different yet equally passionate beliefs, they failed to find the support they personally needed, and so the main group, despite growing temporarily, eventually found themselves returning to the same trend as everyone else.

No, for me, as a behavioralist, this feels more like the well-known last throes prior to extinction.  What I am wondering more about is what is going to come next, given that this is occurring.  Will the surviving groups be able to adapt to the new world, or will they too eventually die out, freely giving themselves in to the illusion that their numbers are growing?  Will they be replaced with other parties, or will the concept of parties as a whole become nothing more than a footnote of failed political mechanisms in American history?

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.