Who holds the blame for the events in Chicago?

[Meclazine for Israel]

I apportion the fault as follows:
Protestors - 89%
Trump supporters - 7%
Trump - 4%

You cannot blame the protestors more than Trump himself. You are putting the cart before the horse.

Protestors - 93%
Trump supporters - 2%
Trump - 5%

The majoriry of Trump supporters are peace loving Americans who have seen their once prosperous nation turn to custard. I felt the same in Australia about trade and immigration. Chinese currency manipulation is poisonous. Children dying at sea because their parents want a welfare cheque is an appalling outcome.

The supporters are not to blame for this?

I will allow a 2% cap for the nutbag supporters.

[Meclazine for Israel]

So to be clear:

1. Trump's rhetoric attracts some people who might be prone to start sh!t

2. Hundred of protesters show up to start sh!t

3. Sh!t starts

Verdict: Trump's fault.

That is not clear. If you are going to use the "Let's be clear" tagline, you need to follow with statements of fact.

"Let's be clear" is more.of a legal preface to a series of points which you can prove to be true.

What follows are three sentences of sh**t, literally.

Case not proven.

[Meclazine for Israel]

The following seems pretty clear:

• Sadly, it appears that the city of Chicago has decided to set aside a presidential candidate's right of free speech and the right of a group of people to peacefully assemble.
• It was good of Trump to cancel the event, given the activities of the protesters, the possibility of violence/problems, and the recommendations of those law enforcement folks on the ground.
• Apparently the protesters in question are organized supporters of Bernie Sanders. Will we be hearing from Sanders about his support of the rights granted by the constitution? What would happen if protesters prevented a Sanders event from taking place?
• One reason Donald Trump is the GOP frontrunner is the perception many have that there exists a double standard with regard to the treatment of those on the left and those on the right. If freedom of speech applies only to those with whom we agree, haven't we failed as a nation? Can't we all agree that as a principle, we need to protect the rights of those who want to wave the flag as well as those who want to burn it?
• I contend that things like this will only serve to strengthen Trump's support.

You raise some interesting points.

It's not Sanders fault. It is not really Donald's fault.

It is the protesters looking for media attention predominantly.

Trump cant stop it now, and he can only rely on security experts to minimize these protests, but look at the media coverage.

The media spotlight is glaring at Trump. These protesters have figured out the best way to get in his way is to deny him the spotlight.

The Bernie supporters probably got more national airtime than if they had been at a Sanders rally, and that is the point.

A lot of the behaviours around Trump are because of that intense US and global spotlight.

The protesters momentarily took it.

[Meclazine for Israel]

My goodness. I have to laugh at the people who are forcing the argument that protesting a Trump event would be the same as protesting a Sanders event.

It has been clear to anyone with more than half a brain that everything about Donald Trump's campaign and candidacy has been unconventional. It's unlike anything we've seen in modern times. The guy says whatever he wants with no regard for the consequences. He calls Mexicans rapists, associates women who dare to think critically with menstruation, deems all Muslims a terrorist threat, insults prisoners of war who have made huge sacrifices for their country, calls on his supporters to rough up protesters, hurls every kind of bad name at his political opponents, offers zero substantive plans for the country... and we're supposed to treat this man like he's just the same as any other politician? If that were true, he wouldn't get the support he's been getting; it's obvious he's different. His rise has caught everyone off guard.

What makes Donald Trump different is without a doubt the incendiary nature of everything he says. People are shocked at what comes out of his mouth, and there's entertainment value in that. The thing is, it makes him completely different from someone like Bernie Sanders who does have some tact and respect. Accordingly, protesting a Trump event is fundamentally different than protesting a Sanders event; the protestors would be protesting completely different things. Trump protestors protest obvious hate and divisiveness (for proof that this hate is there and being dredged to the surface by Trump, see every Trump event ever). They protest dangerous rhetoric. Sanders protestors would be reacting with revenge to the legitimate Trump protestors (they are legitimate because Trump has threatened the very core of their identities), or responding with bombast to a controversial but tame and detailed set of policies. The reaction would here not match the initial action from Sanders. So Trump protests and Sanders protests are apples and oranges. Actually not even that, because there are good reasons to eat both of those. It's like apples and veal. Eating apples make sense, but eating veal is pretty senseless when you realize there's no need to kill a baby cow 'cuz you can just have steak.

In other words, Bernie Sanders has established himself on policy grounds, which means that the best way to protest him is to dialogue, because dialogue is actually possible. Trump is just a pathos candidate, which means the only way to protest him is to send a counter charge of emotion. These are the terms he's established, and being so inflammatory means it will be worse. This is why no one will protest the other candidates like what we saw yesterday: The other candidates have set different rules for engagement (this is also why yesterday's events are Trump's fault). Since these rules of engagement are different, it also means that it probably will be the protestors' fault if something similar does happen to the other candidates. Yes, it's a double-standard, but it's one ...!!!!!.....Stop....!!!..!

It was starting to sound like the "scantily clad women rape argument".

It's just media attention. Trump has massive media focus. You can see it in the eyes of the protesters how excited they are to be on TV. They look more excited than 13 yo girls at a Taylor Swift concert.

It's possibly their only 30 seconds of national media spotlight and denying Trump that spotlight is their goal.

Job done. It's that simple.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Whose rights did the protesters infringe on last night? Trump called it off.

The 20,000 supporters who came to hear their candidate.

I dont necessarily have to share their political viewpoint, but they do have a right to at least listen to their candidate.

This issue is caused either by:

(a) the locality; or
(b) the political bent of the protesters;

And of course the media. If Trump was running Rubio numbers, this would not be an issue.

The glaring heat of the world's media news outlets all in attendance is simply.something the protesters cannot ignore.

[Meclazine for Israel]

And the protesters had a right to protest. Freedom of assembly.

I applaud their right to protest, but not at the expense of a grandfather and his wife who travelled 150km from rural Illinois to be denied an opportunity to listen to their candidate in a Presidential election year.

That is an apalling outcome for democratic process.

Then these two were heckled to their car as "racist neo-nazis".

If that is your defintion of "freedom of assembly", it is all yours.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Good to get an opinion from the home town.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Donald Trump or his supporters are not being prevented from speaking anywhere.

Thread title comprehension failure.

[Meclazine for Israel]

the intent of the protesters was quite clearly stated to be preventing Trump from speaking.  

...and prevent him from getting in the basking hot glare of the US Political media machine.

...and directly accost and dissuade Trump supporters from voting for him.

Trump says "his supporters are "nice," but they were "taunted" by protesters"