NBC: Hate crimes spike following the Election

[AmericanNation]

Is there a dispute that the hate crimes committed by leftist affiliated groups / mobs / individuals / protesters vastly outnumber the rare incidents of graffiti or whatever you think is the end of the world?

I mean depending on how you look at it it's 100 to 1 or 1,000 to 1 and you dismiss the 1,000 and try to hammer good people over the head with the 1.  

Here is some steps to fix the country:  
1) Learn how to quantify problems
2) Prioritize the biggest problems
3) promote solutions

So, in practice:
1)
 we have 10,000 crimes motivated by hate or politics committed by leftists and we have 10 "possible" incidents of "hate" coming from Trump supporters or racist groups who prefer Trump to Clinton.  Half of the graffiti incidents are typically proved to be hoaxes done by a democrat.  

2)
So, we have
10,000 crimes and 8 cities overrun with riots by the left
(not denounced by democrats)
and
5 to 10 incidents by right-ish people and some hoaxes by leftists
(denounced by republicans)

3)
I think we need to:
A) pressure democrats, namely clinton, obama, and sanders to publicly slap down these protests  riots / crimes committed in their name.
B) aggressively arrest and prosecute these anarchist agitators.
C) actively educate the public about the error and danger of the lefts actions.  
D) continue to denounce and prosecute the rare incident of someone on the right committing a "hate" crime.  

I hope the country can unite behind my common sense proposals.

[AmericanNation]

As mentioned earlier:

We have literally thousands of crimes committed in protest of the election in the past week and 8 cities+ overrun with riots by the left. Businesses (dozens and dozens and dozens) destroyed, electrical utilities destroyed, police cruisers vandalized, fires set and Trump supporters literally beaten.. totaling hundreds of felonies or misdemeanors committed by these liberal nuts: not a single damn word or denouncement by the Democrats. (Surprise!)

meanwhile there are maybe a couple dozen national reports of incidents by stereotypically far right cousin lovers, with a handful of the bag having absolutely weak claims to intentionally build the narrative or being shown or admitted to as blatant hoaxes.

What a joke, don't even begin to start bitching when the representation of your party is making a complete SHAME of your voting base. You guys just don't have the stones to step up and admit how ridiculous it is because they are the type of voters that pretty much keep your party even alive in elections.

Tough facts, huh.

Were Democrats to denounce the protests, they would only end up legitimizing them. Seriously: you think that thousands of protestors are going to calm down just because Obama or Clinton told them "please stop"? They'd wind up like John Boehner, unable to contain the anger of their party, and suddenly a pariah because of it.

Lol, did you say the same about Trump?

H.Y.P.O.C.R.I.C.Y.

What good do it do Boehner?




 

MUH RACIST GRAFFIT

And these are wrong as well. But it says something when one side can only attack the people, and not the ideas, of the other side. This was Clinton's mistake, and the right won't convince anyone this way either. I would rather join the side whose leaders condemn left-wing and right-wing violence alike, than the side whose leaders ignore hate crime (of all kinds) while glomming onto left-wing protests/violence like moths to a candle.

TL;DR: Your side needs to stop acting like an army of Hillary Clintons.

You mean Democrats need to:
1) run an issues based campaign like Trump did?
2) denounce both sides that get out of line... like Trump did?

...I mean I agree,
i'm not sure you know what you're saying.

Here is some good work documenting the censored coverage you get of these "protesters".   
http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2016/11/the-rest-of-the-story-anti-trump-protests-packed-with-profanity-crude-signs/

[AmericanNation]

Nothing to do with campaigns, so I don't know what you're talking about. Sometimes, a public and private position is needed, because you need to keep the trust of those who agree with you (even when they're angered). That is why I think that Obama and co. have not denounced the violence; they don't condone it, they just know that they're powerless to stop it and would only lose future influence if they tried.

What does Obama or Hillary have to lose? 
...Also, can they ever do the right thing? EVEN IF IT HURTS THEM POLITICALLY? ? ?

[AmericanNation]

Nothing to do with campaigns, so I don't know what you're talking about. Sometimes, a public and private position is needed, because you need to keep the trust of those who agree with you (even when they're angered). That is why I think that Obama and co. have not denounced the violence; they don't condone it, they just know that they're powerless to stop it and would only lose future influence if they tried.

What does Obama or Hillary have to lose?  
...Also, can they ever do the right thing? EVEN IF IT HURTS THEM POLITICALLY? ? ?

"Doing the right thing" is to do nothing, that is my point! Nobody is going to stop protesting just because Obama told them to! Better to give them no attention than to reward them, which is how the GOP should've treated the Tea Party. Except that the Tea Party helped them politically

I strongly disagree.
I think these people are actively supported by some dem affiliated organizations.  This is astro turf in many cases and a easy (silent) step would be to at least stop the organization and money machinery making it possible.  If Obama has to get on the phone with George Soros, than he should. 
The problem is Obama probably doesn't WANT to stop it.  That is the tragedy of the Obama presidency in a nut shell. 
You would be surprised what effect strong public direction can have on mobs... it wouldn't be perfect but it would have an effect.

Do not make an equivalence between the tea party and left wing agitators.  The tea party (not my cup of tea) was a polite quite assembly in parks and on private property with permits and permission, not riots destroying property and disturbing peoples lives. 

[AmericanNation]

Nothing to do with campaigns, so I don't know what you're talking about. Sometimes, a public and private position is needed, because you need to keep the trust of those who agree with you (even when they're angered). That is why I think that Obama and co. have not denounced the violence; they don't condone it, they just know that they're powerless to stop it and would only lose future influence if they tried.

What does Obama or Hillary have to lose?  
...Also, can they ever do the right thing? EVEN IF IT HURTS THEM POLITICALLY? ? ?

"Doing the right thing" is to do nothing, that is my point! Nobody is going to stop protesting just because Obama told them to! Better to give them no attention than to reward them, which is how the GOP should've treated the Tea Party. Except that the Tea Party helped them politically

I strongly disagree.
I think these people are actively supported by some dem affiliated organizations.  This is astro turf in many cases and a easy (silent) step would be to at least stop the organization and money machinery making it possible.  If Obama has to get on the phone with George Soros, than he should. 
The problem is Obama probably doesn't WANT to stop it.  That is the tragedy of the Obama presidency in a nut shell. 
You would be surprised what effect strong public direction can have on mobs... it wouldn't be perfect but it would have an effect.

Do not make an equivalence between the tea party and left wing agitators.  The tea party (not my cup of tea) was a polite quite assembly in parks and on private property with permits and permission, not riots destroying property and disturbing peoples lives. 

Please provide evidence of astroturfing of liberal protests. I'll wait here.

About Tea Party violence... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6mCTU4NpRQ

OK 2 seconds and the top of a bing serch:
https://stream.org/clinton-campaign-dnc-pay-to-incite-violence-at-trump-rallies/

[AmericanNation]

Nothing to do with campaigns, so I don't know what you're talking about. Sometimes, a public and private position is needed, because you need to keep the trust of those who agree with you (even when they're angered). That is why I think that Obama and co. have not denounced the violence; they don't condone it, they just know that they're powerless to stop it and would only lose future influence if they tried.

What does Obama or Hillary have to lose? 
...Also, can they ever do the right thing? EVEN IF IT HURTS THEM POLITICALLY? ? ?

"Doing the right thing" is to do nothing, that is my point! Nobody is going to stop protesting just because Obama told them to! Better to give them no attention than to reward them, which is how the GOP should've treated the Tea Party. Except that the Tea Party helped them politically

I strongly disagree.
I think these people are actively supported by some dem affiliated organizations.  This is astro turf in many cases and a easy (silent) step would be to at least stop the organization and money machinery making it possible.  If Obama has to get on the phone with George Soros, than he should. 
The problem is Obama probably doesn't WANT to stop it.  That is the tragedy of the Obama presidency in a nut shell. 
You would be surprised what effect strong public direction can have on mobs... it wouldn't be perfect but it would have an effect.

Do not make an equivalence between the tea party and left wing agitators.  The tea party (not my cup of tea) was a polite quite assembly in parks and on private property with permits and permission, not riots destroying property and disturbing peoples lives. 

Please provide evidence of astroturfing of liberal protests. I'll wait here.

About Tea Party violence... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6mCTU4NpRQ

OK 2 seconds and the top of a bing serch:
https://stream.org/clinton-campaign-dnc-pay-to-incite-violence-at-trump-rallies/

Yeah your arguments are sh**t if you have to cite James "I edit all the video's" O'Keeffe.

LOL, just admit I win... I mean you just did it unintentionally. 

[AmericanNation]

Nothing to do with campaigns, so I don't know what you're talking about. Sometimes, a public and private position is needed, because you need to keep the trust of those who agree with you (even when they're angered). That is why I think that Obama and co. have not denounced the violence; they don't condone it, they just know that they're powerless to stop it and would only lose future influence if they tried.

What does Obama or Hillary have to lose? 
...Also, can they ever do the right thing? EVEN IF IT HURTS THEM POLITICALLY? ? ?

"Doing the right thing" is to do nothing, that is my point! Nobody is going to stop protesting just because Obama told them to! Better to give them no attention than to reward them, which is how the GOP should've treated the Tea Party. Except that the Tea Party helped them politically

I strongly disagree.
I think these people are actively supported by some dem affiliated organizations.  This is astro turf in many cases and a easy (silent) step would be to at least stop the organization and money machinery making it possible.  If Obama has to get on the phone with George Soros, than he should. 
The problem is Obama probably doesn't WANT to stop it.  That is the tragedy of the Obama presidency in a nut shell. 
You would be surprised what effect strong public direction can have on mobs... it wouldn't be perfect but it would have an effect.

Do not make an equivalence between the tea party and left wing agitators.  The tea party (not my cup of tea) was a polite quite assembly in parks and on private property with permits and permission, not riots destroying property and disturbing peoples lives. 

Please provide evidence of astroturfing of liberal protests. I'll wait here.

About Tea Party violence... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6mCTU4NpRQ

OK 2 seconds and the top of a bing serch:
https://stream.org/clinton-campaign-dnc-pay-to-incite-violence-at-trump-rallies/

Yeah your arguments are sh**t if you have to cite James "I edit all the video's" O'Keeffe.

LOL, just admit I win... I mean you just did it unintentionally. 

You cite a man who edits video's to show something that didn't happen and you think you win.  Trumpist people are real delusional.

So you 2 are denying that protesters are paid by democrat affiliated groups in this case and in others?

delusional?