2016 Non violent transfer of power?

[+and-then]

The vote is roughly split down the middle.  Those who vote for HC do so because they hate and or fear Trump.  The same can be said of those who vote for Trump against Clinton.  Trump has already put forth the idea that the election might be "fixed".  How likely do you estimate the chance of violence in the aftermath of a close election?  I think that if Clinton loses there will be violent protests.  If Trump loses I expect fewer problems and no violence.

What say you?

[Ozfactor]

I say that if trumpet wins the whole world will fall over in shock, disbelief and grief x

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Cities will burn if Trump is elected. 

[Big Jim]

Protests from the left almost always involve violence, even when violence is what they are protesting.  But if it were mine to choose I would rather have a few days or weeks of protests than 4 years of Hillary.  Any damage to the nation from protests is just a superficial wound compared to the cancer of a Clinton administration.

[Phaeton80]

1 hour ago, and then said:

The vote is roughly split down the middle.  Those who vote for HC do so because they hate and or fear Trump.  The same can be said of those who vote for Trump against Clinton.  Trump has already put forth the idea that the election might be "fixed".  How likely do you estimate the chance of violence in the aftermath of a close election?  I think that if Clinton loses there will be violent protests.  If Trump loses I expect fewer problems and no violence.

What say you?

 

I think it extremely obvious the table is slanted. Kicking in open doors.

I also think it more plausible the Trump crowd will react more emotionally compared to the Clinton crowd. Either way though (HC or DT winning), you and the rest of the world will suffer the consequences. I wouldnt choose between the two if you held a gun to my head. 

[Parsec]

5 hours ago, and then said:

The vote is roughly split down the middle.  Those who vote for HC do so because they hate and or fear Trump.  The same can be said of those who vote for Trump against Clinton.  Trump has already put forth the idea that the election might be "fixed".  How likely do you estimate the chance of violence in the aftermath of a close election?  I think that if Clinton loses there will be violent protests.  If Trump loses I expect fewer problems and no violence.

What say you?

Well,  apparently according to ellapennella and others if Clinton wins the second amenders will take the matter in their hands, so if Trump loses I'd expect at least the same level of violence if not worse. 

Unless of course they are nothing but a lot of talk and a badge. 

Edited September 11, 2016 by Parsec
Typo

[Wes4747]

I don't think there will be much violence, less than 1% of the population might riot(pulled out of the air). Probably less than 1%, I don't know anyone who cares enough to riot.

Trump supporters would buy more guns, but I think they'll wait until provoked hard to use them. Most rioters will be low-income democrats in impoverished areas in need of being rebuilt anyway. 

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, Phaeton80 said:

 

I think it extremely obvious the table is slanted. Kicking in open doors.

I also think it more plausible the Trump crowd will react more emotionally compared to the Clinton crowd. Either way though (HC or DT winning), you and the rest of the world will suffer the consequences. I wouldnt choose between the two if you held a gun to my head. 

I'm not sure what your first sentence means.  My reasoning for the Trump voters not being the ones to riot/protest violently is that the majority of them - by far- are caught up in the day to day struggle to work and pay for a roof, food and clothes.  A very large component of HC's supporters, OTOH, live on assistance from the federal government and do not work.  Of course this isn't a majority of her supporters, nowhere near that, but enough to cause real problems on the inner city plantations.  I agree that the rest of the world will suffer the consequences.  Nothing happens in a vacuum though.  If violence occurs it will have been primed by the sense of frustration caused by 8 years of completely non responsive government.

[+and-then]

42 minutes ago, Wes4747 said:

I don't think there will be much violence, less than 1% of the population might riot(pulled out of the air). Probably less than 1%, I don't know anyone who cares enough to riot.

Trump supporters would buy more guns, but I think they'll wait until provoked hard to use them. Most rioters will be low-income democrats in impoverished areas in need of being rebuilt anyway. 

Yes, I assume that an HC win would certainly boost gun sales.  I don't believe Trump supporters are anywhere near as crazy as the media portrays them to be.  In fact the only way they will take up arms will be if HC attempts to radically restrict their rights in that area.  Short of that, I suspect they will keep their heads down and go to work.  HC voters OTOH will see a Trump victory as apocalyptic because they have heard months of demonization of him and his plans.

[Agent0range]

Of course I'm voting for Hillary, but if Trump wins, I will accept it, and respect him.  Maybe it's just me, but I have a hard time disrespecting the President of the United States.  And in all actuality, I will be fine no matter who gets into office.

[+and-then]

56 minutes ago, Parsec said:

Well,  apparently according to ellapennella and others if Clinton wins the second amenders will take the matter in their hands, so if Trump loses I'd expect at least the same level of violence if not worse. 

Unless of course they are nothing but a lot of talk and a badge. 

Can you cite the thread where Ellapenella said 2nd amendment supporters would become violent just because HC wins?  I don't recall that one.  I am a strong 2nd amendment supporter and would not consider violence just because America chooses this morally bankrupt crook to be president.  That would only happen if she decides to short circuit the Constitutional amendment process concerning the 2nd amendment.  If THAT happens I can assure you that there will be millions of Americans willing to do much more than talk.  In fact the attitude you just expressed will be exactly what leads to violence if it is widely enough held.  It will be the inevitable collision of reality and the toxic fantasy of political correctness.  

[+and-then]

Just now, Agent0range said:

Of course I'm voting for Hillary, but if Trump wins, I will accept it, and respect him.  Maybe it's just me, but I have a hard time disrespecting the President of the United States.  And in all actuality, I will be fine no matter who gets into office.

I wish I could say the same but after the last 8 years I no longer have that level of patience.  I have always respected that office before this resident.  Even the pedophile, Bill, was a politician willing to try to bring Americans together by compromise.  Obama has consistently stuck up the middle finger while saying "I won, get over it". He has governed in a way that is truly unprecedented and if another president, DT or HC follows his example, the presidency and the country could be changed forever for the worse.  As to being "fine" regardless, if violence became widespread enough to impact economic activity I think few people will be able to say that.

[Thorvir]

6 hours ago, and then said:

The vote is roughly split down the middle.  Those who vote for HC do so because they hate and or fear Trump.  The same can be said of those who vote for Trump against Clinton.  Trump has already put forth the idea that the election might be "fixed".  How likely do you estimate the chance of violence in the aftermath of a close election?  I think that if Clinton loses there will be violent protests.  If Trump loses I expect fewer problems and no violence.

What say you?

I agree.  The left tends to rush out and react in an emotionally negative way when things don't go their way--that can't be denied.  The right just tends to sit back and wait for the next election cycle; if Shrillary wins, the right will be upset of course, but won't do too much because unlike most of the left, the right will have responsibilities to tend to (family, jobs, etc), and won't have the free time to violent riot when it's not needed.

And Trump is right, the election just might be fixed.  Voting fraud is a staple of the left.  Just look at the 2000 Presidential election.  They tried to get away with it then and it backfired on them.  For Trump to win, he's going to have to have a substantial lead that negatives the voting fraud.  That's one reason why Romney lost, it was too close and the cheating most likely tipped it in Obama's favor.  That, and he wouldn't bring Obama to task on his record.  Romney wasn't determined enough.  Trump appears to be.

[Phaeton80]

3 minutes ago, and then said:

I'm not sure what your first sentence means.  My reasoning for the Trump voters not being the ones to riot/protest violently is that the majority of them - by far- are caught up in the day to day struggle to work and pay for a roof, food and clothes.  A very large component of HC's supporters, OTOH, live on assistance from the federal government and do not work.  Of course this isn't a majority of her supporters, nowhere near that, but enough to cause real problems on the inner city plantations.  I agree that the rest of the world will suffer the consequences.  Nothing happens in a vacuum though.  If violence occurs it will have been primed by the sense of frustration caused by 8 years of completely non responsive government.

 

Let me elaborate then; it is so overly obvious the game is rigged, and 'a game' it is, this shouldnt even be put forward for discussion. The very fact that out of 300 million people, two of the most sad excuses of human beings can float to the surface to remain as the only two candidates for US presidency is a rather clear indication of this. The US 'democratic system' is just about the most shallow, corporate dictated variants out there; essentially making it a non democracy.

HCs supporters might yield a statistically larger portion on welfare, but the DT crowd has proven on countless occasions to react agressively. Additionally, they seem more zaelous than those backing the grand priestess of the West.

If violence is needed to stop this insanity, so be it. Action has been long, long overdue. Ill even pay for a flight across the Atlantic to join the ranks. Make no mistake about it, stopping this madness is just as much in my interest as it is yours, or any other American citizen.

 

[Parsec]

On 11/9/2016 at 3:35 PM, and then said:

Can you cite the thread where Ellapenella said 2nd amendment supporters would become violent just because HC wins?  I don't recall that one.  I am a strong 2nd amendment supporter and would not consider violence just because America chooses this morally bankrupt crook to be president.  That would only happen if she decides to short circuit the Constitutional amendment process concerning the 2nd amendment.  If THAT happens I can assure you that there will be millions of Americans willing to do much more than talk.  In fact the attitude you just expressed will be exactly what leads to violence if it is widely enough held.  It will be the inevitable collision of reality and the toxic fantasy of political correctness.  

After spending some time reading quite a few of Ella's threads, I couldn't find it either, so you are right,  it was about the 2nd amendment, my bad. 

I'm not sure to follow you,  what attitude did I express? 

[aztek]

On 9/11/2016 at 5:42 AM, Phaeton80 said:

 

 

I also think it more plausible the Trump crowd will react more emotionally compared to the Clinton crowd.

right , just like they did when Obama was elected.

[aztek]

On 9/11/2016 at 10:43 AM, Phaeton80 said:

e, but the DT crowd has proven on countless occasions to react agressively.

they did?? why don't you point us to few examples,  just do not bring up his former compaign manager. 

[Dark_Grey]

Compare violence at Trump rallies and violence at Dem rallies over the course of the elections so far. Clearly, Dem voters have a problem with violence. Ironic, since they willfully choose to stay unarmed, but true nonetheless. Trump supporters have largely been polite and reserved, despite the incredible amount of hate from the other side. Again, ironic coming from a crowd that espouses love and tolerance.

This has been a very eye opening election - the Repubs are pretty much what I expected them to be but the left....the left has been a wolf in sheep's clothing far longer than I had thought just a year ago.

[+and-then]

40 minutes ago, Parsec said:

After spending some time reading quite a few of Ella's threads, I couldn't find it either, so you are right,  it was about the 2nd amendment, my bad. 

I'm not sure to follow you,  what attitude did I express? 

It appeared to me that you had concluded that all 2nd amendment supporters would become violent simply because she won.  IOW the attitude that 2nd amendment types are violent by nature and are without self control.  If I misread then you have my apologies.

[+and-then]

On 9/11/2016 at 9:43 AM, Phaeton80 said:

 

Let me elaborate then; it is so overly obvious the game is rigged, and 'a game' it is, this shouldnt even be put forward for discussion. The very fact that out of 300 million people, two of the most sad excuses of human beings can float to the surface to remain as the only two candidates for US presidency is a rather clear indication of this. The US 'democratic system' is just about the most shallow, corporate dictated variants out there; essentially making it a non democracy.

HCs supporters might yield a statistically larger portion on welfare, but the DT crowd has proven on countless occasions to react agressively. Additionally, they seem more zaelous than those backing the grand priestess of the West.

If violence is needed to stop this insanity, so be it. Action has been long, long overdue. Ill even pay for a flight across the Atlantic to join the ranks. Make no mistake about it, stopping this madness is just as much in my interest as it is yours, or any other American citizen.

 

I agree with most of what you say - with the exception of the zealousness of her supporters.  While I hope you are correct I think that they will become QUITE animated if the Dem party begins spewing hate about the plans of Republicans before the Republicans even announce them (or make them, FTM).  As to joining in to help set things right, just be very thoughtful about which group to help. It wouldn't do to find yourself in the middle of a family squabble.

[+OverSword]

On 9/11/2016 at 7:43 AM, Phaeton80 said:

 

Let me elaborate then; it is so overly obvious the game is rigged, and 'a game' it is, this shouldnt even be put forward for discussion. The very fact that out of 300 million people, two of the most sad excuses of human beings can float to the surface to remain as the only two candidates for US presidency is a rather clear indication of this. The US 'democratic system' is just about the most shallow, corporate dictated variants out there; essentially making it a non democracy.

HCs supporters might yield a statistically larger portion on welfare, but the DT crowd has proven on countless occasions to react agressively. Additionally, they seem more zaelous than those backing the grand priestess of the West.

If violence is needed to stop this insanity, so be it. Action has been long, long overdue. Ill even pay for a flight across the Atlantic to join the ranks. Make no mistake about it, stopping this madness is just as much in my interest as it is yours, or any other American citizen.

 

Ummm...You're nuts.  If Trump wins there will be riots, if Hillary wins there sill be stockpiling.  If you pay any attention to reality, in the USA in the 21st century it is liberal/leftists protest's which turn to violence.

[Likely Guy]

7 hours ago, and then said:

...As to joining in to help set things right, just be very thoughtful about which group to help. It wouldn't do to find yourself in the middle of a family squabble.

When my mother and her sister would squabble my grandmother would tie a thread between their thumbs. She never threatened them with consequences, but they never broke the thread.

Don't make us come down there!

[bee]

On 9/11/2016 at 8:53 AM, and then said:

The vote is roughly split down the middle.  Those who vote for HC do so because they hate and or fear Trump.  The same can be said of those who vote for Trump against Clinton.  Trump has already put forth the idea that the election might be "fixed".  How likely do you estimate the chance of violence in the aftermath of a close election?  I think that if Clinton loses there will be violent protests.  If Trump loses I expect fewer problems and no violence.

What say you?

.

If it's anything like the EU Referendum vote in Britain a few weeks ago then if Trump wins the sore losers are going to kick up a huge fuss - and things could turn nasty - 

If Clinton wins (provided she is actually well enough to continue) maybe there will be rumblings of Trump supporting States seceding from the Union ..?

One way or another - the main stream media has encouraged a cloud of negativity over this election and I'm not sure how America is going to get through it without some serious internal trouble -

.  

[Phaeton80]

18 hours ago, OverSword said:

Ummm...You're nuts.  If Trump wins there will be riots, if Hillary wins there sill be stockpiling.  If you pay any attention to reality, in the USA in the 21st century it is liberal/leftists protest's which turn to violence.

 

"Youre nuts"? That is your preferred response to what I stated in the earlier post huh.. And ofcourse, claiming the DT crowd cannot turn violent isnt nuts at all! Yeay! 

 

[aztek]

yes, you are, even when there is not a single shred of evidence, (there is actually solid proof otherwise)  you still demonize about 1\2 of us voters with no basis, except your fear. yes you are exactly what he called you. 

mc caine crowd is same people that you call DT crowd now, do you remember the violence when obama won?? me neither.

Edited September 13, 2016 by aztek