Clinton's campaign was that all Trump voters were irredeemably deplorable.
Biden ran on Trump being a nazi.
Harris ran on Trump being a nazi and democracy being at stake.
The claim that 99.9% of the left doesnt want civil war is absurd. Look at the way the idiots on this site on X are speaking. If you really want to see some depravity head over to BlueSky.
The left would 100% lose the civil war if it kicks off.
An argument could very easily be made that getting rid of the radical leftists would be very very very good for America in the long run.
The details matter. Why do you have to make things up and rely on exaggerations?
I have no problem with you criticizing their use of “fascist” or deciding that it’s irresponsible for them to say “democracy is at stake.” Irresponsible hyperbole is OK for you, but I realize that they should be held to a higher standard because they are asking the citizenry to trust them. They purport to be leaders. they have much greater reach.
Nevertheless, that’s vastly, vastly, vastly different from wanting Civil War.
No matter whom you would consider the winner of the war, America would lose the war, and enemies of America would win the war.
And it takes a solid bit of delusion to bypass the thought of parents explaining to their children why their neighbors had to be murdered for the greater good.
And you have an overly optimistic sense of how America’s rivals on the global stage would be bolstered while American prospects diminish through the loss of the trust of our allies, and through the lengthy process of building back out of the rubble and the much longer and less likely process of trying to restore some semblance of social cohesion.
You talk about the mental instability of leftists. Any talk of Civil War arises from deep and unsettling instability.
What did I make up?
Your 99.9% stat is entirely made up.
You have no idea what the consequences of the civil war would be. Youre just assuming it would be awful because civil wars have been awful in the past.
America is the last country left in the west.
Europe is dead.
If the left wins the ideological war western civilization collapses and the world is back in the dark ages.
WSJ is reporting that the ammunition found in the rifle was engraved with trans, anti-fascist ideology
Which is all the proof we need to be sure that this was a false flag operation, intended to gin up hate for liberals and trans people, while at the same time distracting from the fact that Trump is a pedophile and the Guardians of Pedohiles (GOP) party is covering for him.
Right Wing Violence!
Are you just trolling? That’s some Alex Jones level thinking.
Congrats Loser shooter, you just turned a lot of people red. Somebody was super butthurt that Kirk’s message was being well received with a lot of college kids. This won’t stop it, only grow it.
That somebody doesn’t represent anyone besides himself. Yeah, someone will pick up the slack, but it will have no effect on the left. It’s appalling that Kirk was murdered, but the story will run its course and politics will go on as before.
I'm not really quite so sure about that. Something palpably changed in our country yesterday.
"Sympathy is a better word, because empathy means you are actually feeling what another person felt, and no one can't feel what another person feels."
You don't know what his wife and two daughters are feeling. You don't know what his father is feeling. You can be sympathetic, but not empathetic. To ignore this context is intellectual dishonesty. Anyway, that is all I will post. I wish all of you well. I am sad for our country and this world. I hope you all have a nice end of the week.
You people have me agreeing with Adult and I almost never agree with him. Kirk was like a glorified debate kid in high school. He would go to campuses and invite people to change his mind. He sometimes had his mind changed. I didn't follow him closely because I am not terminally rage clicking, but I too would like to see instances of his alleged hate speech.
I looked into his comment on empathy and people are taking it totally out of context. All you need is the next line, which was "Sympathy is a better word, because empathy means you are actually feeling what another person felt, and no one can't feel what another person feels."
I know this will change no one's mind, but it is important context. Please provide examples of him being evil.
The dude was a very religious Christian. Christians aren't hateful by definition. None of these people who hate him actually heard anything he said. They heard clips and sound bytes from the left framed intentionally to make the left angry.
The details matter. Why do you have to make things up and rely on exaggerations?
I have no problem with you criticizing their use of “fascist” or deciding that it’s irresponsible for them to say “democracy is at stake.” Irresponsible hyperbole is OK for you, but I realize that they should be held to a higher standard because they are asking the citizenry to trust them. They purport to be leaders. they have much greater reach.
Nevertheless, that’s vastly, vastly, vastly different from wanting Civil War.
No matter whom you would consider the winner of the war, America would lose the war, and enemies of America would win the war.
And it takes a solid bit of delusion to bypass the thought of parents explaining to their children why their neighbors had to be murdered for the greater good.
And you have an overly optimistic sense of how America’s rivals on the global stage would be bolstered while American prospects diminish through the loss of the trust of our allies, and through the lengthy process of building back out of the rubble and the much longer and less likely process of trying to restore some semblance of social cohesion.
You talk about the mental instability of leftists. Any talk of Civil War arises from deep and unsettling instability.
What did I make up?
Did Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” referr to the fact that a lot of white supremacists like David Duke were big supporters and that other bad people were supporters of Trump or was she necessarily and incontrovertibly referring to every last one of his supporters being deplorable?
I’ll gladly admit that she’s smug, that she ran an out of touch and bad campaign, and that her statement was poorly considered. that doesn’t mean she said what you’re saying she did.
when you say, people called Trump a “Nazi,” do you have direct quotes of them actually using that word?
Can you provide a single instance in which Kirk espoused "violent speech."?
In fairness, I am not sure what "violent speech" is. Sounds like nonsensical double-speak that equates an opposing view to violence. I am open to be proven wrong though.
Want a pedestrian example? Taylor Swift submit to your husband! like, you can read that and laugh it off, but he’s preaching oppression and coercion. His gun views and careless views towards victims of gun violence is inherently promoting and tacitly approving of violence
So I was right. It is essentially a euphemism that equates an opposing view to violence. You can engage in semantic gymnastics all you want, but that is what it boils down to.
I agree that you reap what you sow. But there is nothing more fascist than killing someone for disagreeing with you. I just wish people would remember this. It is OKAY to disagree with someone. We don't all have to think the same thing.
There is only a limited amount of people you can crap on for living and only a limited time untill you get hurt. I guess, his time just came.
At the same time, the powers from the right sector can't be excluded from suspects here. Gaining traction with larger audiences can make someone powerful jelous and uncomfortable.
He was just an activist and didn’t deserve to die. He had no influence on anyone he didn’t agree with, much less take a crap on them.
In regard to your second paragraph, he acted alone with no contact with either party. If anyone was caught having conspired with him, it would be as if they pulled the trigger themselves and they would face the death penalty. Who would take that risk just to kill Charlie Kirk?
That somebody doesn’t represent anyone besides himself. Yeah, someone will pick up the slack, but it will have no effect on the left. It’s appalling that Kirk was murdered, but the story will run its course and politics will go on as before.
I'm not really quite so sure about that. Something palpably changed in our country yesterday.
A president assassinate someone Laura Loomer told him was a threat.
I know this will change no one's mind, but it is important context. Please provide examples of him being evil.
Took about 1 second to find something.
“Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, Sheila Jackson Lee … [Black women] do not have brain processing power to be taken seriously. You have to go steal a white person’s slot.”
I’m not a blue haired barista, but I am a far left-winger. Also, ex-military, and I guarantee I could make that shot, not that I ever would. I’m against this type of violence… we have to be able to settle our differences or debate our differences through nonviolent means.
It’s tough when you have somebody like Charlie Kirk, who is advocating for taking rights away from people.
Settling our difference through non-violent means is exactly what Charlie Kirk was doing. He believed in respectful dialogue and debate. He never treated opponents rudely or engaged in ad hominem attacks. By all accounts, he was a peaceful man.
We address our difference through communication, separation, or war. Charlie was a strong advocate for dialogue. He was murdered for trying it the peaceful way.
The dude literally advocated for stoning gay people. Stated that the 1964 civil rights act was a huge mistake. I don’t think this is peaceful rhetoric.
You have no idea what the consequences of the civil war would be. Youre just assuming it would be awful because civil wars have been awful in the past.
America is the last country left in the west.
Europe is dead.
If the left wins the ideological war western civilization collapses and the world is back in the dark ages.
You seem oddly blithe about the prospects of civil war. Millions of people are currently mourning the loss of Kirk.
And rightly so.
Because he should not have been a victim of violence just because somebody else wanted to further their political aims.
So I’ll just go out on a limb and say that it would be even more horrifying for innumerable others to be killed to support anyone’s political aims.
I know this will change no one's mind, but it is important context. Please provide examples of him being evil.
Took about 1 second to find something.
“Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, Sheila Jackson Lee … [Black women] do not have brain processing power to be taken seriously. You have to go steal a white person’s slot.”
That's not debate. It's hate.
Making a comment about a widely-held observation is not hate.
So I was right. It is essentially a euphemism that equates an opposing view to violence. You can engage in semantic gymnastics all you want, but that is what it boils down to.
It’s more than semantics.
He wanted policy that would harm people in real life. It’s not just language. Or else fight words would not be a thing.
All this bs is bs. Kirk’s opinions supported real-life harm. He supported people who had/have the courage to pull a trigger, even though Kirk himself likely would never had had the courage to do the same.