Double standards

[LT56]

Really??? Is voting not "mob rule" or if it goes the way you want you change that to majority rules???? Sounds like the same thing to me.

That’s how I tend to think of it. If my mob gets more votes than your mob then I win and you lose. Democracy at it’s heart is a win/lose kinda process.

 

[curr3n_c1000]

It's less about what a court might say, and more about whether someone should have their lives interrupted by being arrested and charged. Thats not a benign administrative action, it has immediate, long term and potentially enormously disruptive results. A charge means bail of some sort, maybe a restraining order, maybe a restriction on being in the area, or being outside after hours, or being banned for alcohol use. If any of those conditions is ignored or mistakenly overlooked, the consequences can be much harsher and then it doesn't matter what how the original charge could have concluded.

You're arguing just to argue.

 

[oldjones]

I know you understand why Hillary lost, but there are people who believe she actually won based on the majority of voters. Some actually believe that the alt-right, along with their friends in Russia rigged the system, fooled a large group of deplorables (think of how that group would have been treated by Hillary), and pulled off an illegal election to take the presidency from Hillary.

It's actually very sad, with the result that a very large percentage of Americans and others, won't accept the result of the election, and are trying to replace Trump with anyone else. That makes it very difficult for that group to support what Trump is mandated to do.

Thanks for the lesson in how paranoid fantasies take hold, spread and morph into from minor concerns to ludicrous exaggerations.

But do calm yourself. Although it is undeniable that a considerable majority of US votes picked anyone but Trump and only a minority voted for him, that's light years away from your conspiracy fantasy of a very large percentage of American trying to replace him. Never mind the unlikelihood 'they' might be so desperate that "…anyone" would be better.

Your invented conspiracies aside however, we can extract one kernel of reasonableness from the fantasms you conjured: The numbers show that majority of anti-Trump voters still finds it very difficult to support Trump, because he never had more than a minority mandate. He hasn't yet shown he has either the personal competence or a coherent Administration that can carry out even that limited and ill-defined 'program'.

If he — or you — want more Americans to support him, somebody's going to hafta figure out how Trump can say and do what they want in a President. Or give up the whole notion of democracy.

 

[Aardvark154]

Really??? Is voting not "mob rule" or if it goes the way you want you change that to majority rules???? Sounds like the same thing to me.

Jessica their principle concern was checks and balances (although they are less in Canada) to protect the rights of minorities. They were most concerned about mob rule.

 

[Aardvark154]

There is a huge difference between I voted for X and you voted for B and B won the election. As opposed to I say yogurt is disgusting and is the worst thing in the word, you say yogurt is fantastic and I have no right to disparage yogurt in such a manner, and now you forbid me (under penalty of law) from saying yogurt is disgusting.

 

[kkelso]

There is a huge difference between I voted for X and you voted for B and B won the election. As opposed to I say yogurt is disgusting and is the worst thing in the word, you say yogurt is fantastic and I have no right to disparage yogurt in such a manner, and now you forbid me (under penalty of law) from saying yogurt is disgusting.

Yup, that's pretty much it.

 

[t.o.leafs.fan]

The guy who threw the man into the fountain should be charged with assault due to the fact that he assaulted someone.

 

[oldjones]

I ahve no problem with a critique of what I wrote.

This is far from a coherent critique, it's more of a "You SOB, shut the F up and you better agree with what my side is telling you".

Hmmm. That sounds right, doesn't it?

Not at all. But any effort to explain 'why' to you is clearly a lost cause. And no reason to give you another excuse to indulge your sad preference for profanity.

 

[oldjones]

The guy who threw the man into the fountain should be charged with assault due to the fact that he assaulted someone.

And even if the police categorically refused to, the 'victim' could probably pursue a private prosecution. But he likely has enough soggy smarts to realize he could face charges himself — police or private — for causing a disturbance, and considering the low level of harm done either way, he'd best let bygones be the usual, and fight his fight against Islam another day. Hopefully next time, not at a memorial for people innocent of any connection with the object of his hate.

I'd bet the cops told him something similar as they led him away to someplace safe and dry.

 

[oldjones]

There is a huge difference between I voted for X and you voted for B and B won the election. As opposed to I say yogurt is disgusting and is the worst thing in the word, you say yogurt is fantastic and I have no right to disparage yogurt in such a manner, and now you forbid me (under penalty of law) from saying yogurt is disgusting.

How do a pair of folks disgreeing about yoghurt have anything to do mob rule or election results (which are themselves more than a little off-topic)? And how does your fantasy of legal censorship relate to either?

But I can just grasp a wispy thread that might connect their dispute to SignBozo busting into a memorial to shove his his irrelevant and wacko placard into the mourners' faces. Not that anyone applied any such legal sanction to him. Was that the connection you were aiming for?