The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[Kirk Gallaway]

39 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

This is the exact dialogue.@Kirk Gallaway

You are right there Chris! Thanks.

Michael Bechloss has always been  behind the 8 ball in everything! He's smug,  when you have to look beyond the surface, and now he's super concerned? I don't know why he always gets the nod as one of the foremost election MSM pundits. No questions at all about the JFKA, but none of them do.

I expect the vote dispute to be a lot greater in 2024 , if Trump candidates are elected to  key positions now. The biggest  area of dispute that I see right now will be if it's close in Pennsylvania. Though there are potential outliers in Republican cowboy wacko states like Arizona. I see control of the Senate could very well be decided in the December run off in Georgia as neither Warnock or Walker is going to get 50% of the vote. Unless the Dems blow it and don't get a good turnout.

[Matt Allison]

There isn't any real debate about which side is currently piling up arrests for violence lol

The court records don't lie.

[John Cotter]

4 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Some key points here about "stochastic terrorism" and the Trump MAGA cult-- as exemplified by MAGA Bomber Cesar Sayoc, the Baltimore newspaper murders, the El Paso Walmart Massacre, the Whitmer kidnap plot, January 6th, the Pelosi hammer attack, etc.

Stochastic terror in American politics creates an environment of violence - Vox

November 5, 2022

Excerpts

1) Stochastic terror — the idea that even if people in power don’t specifically call their followers to violence, by entertaining it as a legitimate tactic or by demonizing a political enemy on a platform capable of reaching millions of people, one of those millions will be inspired to violent action — provides a framework for understanding the current moment.

2) Stochastic terrorism or stochastic terror is a unique kind of phenomenon that we’ve only really seen emerge in recent years. Stochastic is a term related to statistics that’s meant to define processes that, individually, they’re absolutely impossible to predict when and where something happens.

3) It’s important to note that stochastic terrorism, this indirect incitement, is not illegal. It’s protected by the First Amendment because the legal threshold for incitement to violence is so high. There’s a case, Brandenburg v. Ohio, where the Supreme Court ruled that for something to be incitement, there needs to be direction, and the incident needs to happen immediately after the direction. And stochastic terrorism doesn’t achieve either of those. So although the language does not meet the legal threshold for incitement, it nonetheless motivates people to actually engage in violence.

4) Most of what we call stochastic terrorism has been initiated or has been motivated by deliberately spread disinformation — that demonizes others, that tags other individuals, usually political opponents, as mortal threats. And if you look at most models for violent radicalization or radicalization to terrorism, one of the steps in those processes usually involves perceiving the intended target as being a direct mortal threat to an individual’s survival. So the kinds of disinformation that are being spun about certain targets as being these threats to the United States, to election processes, to political parties, by spinning them as mortal threats, the individual who’s exposed to the message is much more likely to perceive that person as a threat and deserving of violence against them.

 

William,

Could the systematic demonisation of the unvaccinated during the covid “pandemic” be regarded as stochastic violence?

In that case, there was no need for gullible individuals to take it upon themselves to violently attack the demonised targets and suffer the consequences of their illegal actions.

There was no need for that kind of violence because the authorities gratified the viciousness they had deliberately fomented towards the unvaccinated by their discrimination against them.

[Ron Bulman]

4 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

where the Supreme Court ruled that for something to be incitement, there needs to be direction, and the incident needs to happen immediately after the direction.

Pretty clear here.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

Pretty clear here.

That's a reasonable standard.

Otherwise, authorities could contrive to arrest anybody for all sorts of commentary. 

Michael Beschloss says your children could be killed if the 'Phants prevail in 2022.

Well, to protect my children...what is justified? 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

William,

Could the systematic demonisation of the unvaccinated during the covid “pandemic” be regarded as stochastic violence?

In that case, there was no need for gullible individuals to take it upon themselves to violently attack the demonised targets and suffer the consequences of their illegal actions.

There was no need for that kind of violence because the authorities gratified the viciousness they had deliberately fomented towards the unvaccinated by their discrimination against them.

Could the anti-vaxx message be a form of stochastic violence?

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

You got a source and exact quote on that?

Of course if you have guns or weapons, you're much more likely to be able to act out your hostilities.

Re what  W. said. I remember at the beginning, I thought for example with Caesar Sayoc mailing those pipe bombs to anti Trump figures. The MSM was almost sort of matter of fact  about it.  I think they've used too much  restraint about it up to now. I think Matt brought up the background of the Highland Park guy, and some social media from citizens who lived in the area who said he was definitely politically motivated.

There is definitely a climate of permission,  and Trump has not shown any level of condemnation to make it look like it's anything more than the sort of obligatory thing  any politician would say.

On MSNBC’s “All In with Chris Hayes,” Beschloss went all in on the  “democracy-or-death pitch” before the midterms:

“[S]ix nights from now, we could all be discussing violence all over this country. There’s signs that may happen, may God forbid, that losers will be declared winners by fraudulent election officers, or secretary of state candidates, or governors, or state legislatures…

We could be six days away from losing our rule of law, and losing a situation where we have elections that we all can rely on. You know, those are the foundation stones of a democracy…

Joe Biden is saying the same thing tonight, and a historian 50 years from now – if historians are allowed to write in this country and if they are still free publishing houses and a free press – which I’m not certain of – but if that is true, a historian will say what was at stake tonight and this week was the fact whether we will be a democracy in the future, whether our children will be arrested and conceivably killed.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/msnbc-meltdown-our-children-will-be-arrested-conceivably-killed-if-gop-wins-midterm

is this stochastic terror? 

If someone believes what MSNBC-Beschloss is peddling, they could be incited to violence. 

 

[Cliff Varnell]

12 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Well, to protect my children...what is justified? 

Forbidding gay teachers from mentioning their marriage?

 

[Matt Allison]

14 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

is this stochastic terror? 

 

No, it is not.

14 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

If someone believes what MSNBC-Beschloss is peddling, they could be incited to violence. 

Beschloss isn't inciting anyone. He's warning people of further violence from the MAGA Terrorist Movement, which has been terrorizing people via death threats and physical violence for over two years now.

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

William,

Could the systematic demonisation of the unvaccinated during the covid “pandemic” be regarded as stochastic violence?

In that case, there was no need for gullible individuals to take it upon themselves to violently attack the demonised targets and suffer the consequences of their illegal actions.

There was no need for that kind of violence because the authorities gratified the viciousness they had deliberately fomented towards the unvaccinated by their discrimination against them.

John,

   I don't have any data on the subject, but I'm not aware of any violence in the U.S. toward people who refused to wear masks or get vaccinated during the height of the COVID pandemic.

  But I am aware of many news stories and firsthand reports of people getting angry and violent about being told to wear masks in public settings.

    There has also been a strong correlation between anti-mask/anti-vax sentiment, higher COVID death rates, and Trumpism in the U.S.

    Trump, unfortunately, fostered resistance to basic public health measures during the pandemic, even hosting deadly super spreader campaign rallies in 2020.

Edited November 7, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Matthew Koch]

13 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Forbidding gay teachers from mentioning their marriage?

 

My teachers never talked about their personal lives, those are called groomers

[Cliff Varnell]

4 minutes ago, Matthew Koch said:

My teachers never talked about their personal lives, those are called groomers

I always knew whether or not my teachers were married.  It’s only an issue when Christian fascist snowflakes get bent out of shape over nothing.

[Benjamin Cole]

34 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I always knew whether or not my teachers were married.  It’s only an issue when Christian fascist snowflakes get bent out of shape over nothing.

CV-

To be honest, I am not sure whether a male teacher should mention to a group of high school students or younger he is married to a man. Should a female teacher mention her abortion? Should a Trump-supporter teacher positively refer to his political stance? 

But I will tell you this: The Donks may lose big in the mid-terms as they keep making social issues and ID politics their main story, now mixed with rampant fear-mongering. 

Whatever happened to being concerned with wages and working conditions, and the outrageous cost of housing in whole regions of the country? 

Instead the Donks are obsessed with transexual issues and demonizing people who wear MAGA hats. 

Yes, to the Donks, a big issue is the sacred right of gay male school teachers to advertise their marital status.

Maybe after a divorce, a gay male teacher can say, "I am single again, btw." 

I think there are more important issues. The 'Phants are sometimes even worse, btw.  

 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

No, it is not.

Beschloss isn't inciting anyone. He's warning people of further violence from the MAGA Terrorist Movement, which has been terrorizing people via death threats and physical violence for over two years now.

If your take is accurate, I still think Beschloss should have added a sentence, "By all but only peaceful means, and voting, I recommend people support the Democratic Party."  

As it stands, Beschloss strikes me as unhinged, and advocating extreme measures to protect your children from being "arrested and killed." 

But just IMHO....also I suspect not much will change, no matter which major political party wins. 

In your view, are Democratic Party supporters justified in using violence to counter the MAGA movement? 

 

 

[Matt Allison]

17 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

In your view, are Democratic Party supporters justified in using violence to counter the MAGA movement? 

 

No one is justified in using violence for anything besides self-defense.