Trump to supporters: 'go out and watch' on election day

[ProudModerate2]

You guys are aware that precincts require people to stand like a couple hundred feet away, right? Even if a hundred Trump supporters show up with signs, they'll be so far away from the doors that no reasonable person would be intimidated. And if they went over the line (usually marked with traffic cones), a police officer will be on hand to keep them back.

Again, I am far more worried that the BLM movement might pull their usual tactics of blocking critical places. They shut down a bridge in San Francisco on rush hour, they blocked Department Stores on black Friday and shoved shoppers who tried to enter anyway, and they frequently enter crowded cafes and stores to make their points. While I am on the whole supportive of the movement, lets be real here about who is more likely (if at all) to go out and cause trouble on election day.

Of course, the hysterical Clinton-klan and their conspiracy theories cannot be met with any form of logical or civil debate, but whatever, keep on making up stories if it makes you guys feel safe.

The only one "hysterical" here is you.
With you BLM bull.
Afraid they might "shake" your bus while your in it ? ..... do you need mommy to hold your hand.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

You guys are aware that precincts require people to stand like a couple hundred feet away, right? Even if a hundred Trump supporters show up with signs, they'll be so far away from the doors that no reasonable person would be intimidated. And if they went over the line (usually marked with traffic cones), a police officer will be on hand to keep them back.

Again, I am far more worried that the BLM movement might pull their usual tactics of blocking critical places. They shut down a bridge in San Francisco on rush hour, they blocked Department Stores on black Friday and shoved shoppers who tried to enter anyway, and they frequently enter crowded cafes and stores to make their points. While I am on the whole supportive of the movement, lets be real here about who is more likely (if at all) to go out and cause trouble on election day.

Of course, the hysterical Clinton-klan and their conspiracy theories cannot be met with any form of logical or civil debate, but whatever, keep on making up stories if it makes you guys feel safe.

The only one "hysterical" here is you.
With you BLM bull.
Afraid they might "shake" your bus while your in it ? ..... do you need mommy to hold your hand.

Your the one who is actually afraid that Trump supporters will spoil the election by attacking Clinton voters, even though the only people who have any history of doing such things are Bernie bots and a handful of BLM protesters. This country doesn't really have any tradition of political violence. Are you going to argue that point or are you just going to ignore Alcon's advice?

[ProudModerate2]

Poll watching is a thing. It happens with every campaign. I spent five hours at the polls in 2012 before heading to the election night party.

I would never send untrained vigilante "poll watchers" to a polling place like Trump is suggested.  Any campaign that does that is going to end up with some of their most paranoid, inappropriate people showing up.  There are official programs for poll watchers for a reason.

It is far, far more likely that BLM protesters start showing up on election day and forming a human chain around polling stations in suburban white precincts. Have you not followed this election at all? Have you seen who is committing most of the political violence?
Hint, hint: young rich white kids backing Bernie.

Now, you are just being stupid and trollish. Typical for you.

I don't want to be a jerk, but I think it's a bad idea to respond with ad hominems instead of simple counterarguments, no matter how unreasonable you think he's being. 

It's part of why Presidential years here suck.  Person A thinks Person B is being unreasonable, so they just attack Person B instead of responding.  Person B (or an ally) gets mad and feels unjustly treated, so he feels justified in attacking Person A.  Then it becomes a downward spiral of people feeling entitled to be hostile instead of engaging on substance.

OK.
But anyone supporting this type of activity proposed by trump, needs to be put in their place.
This is an obvious call to discourage, intimidate and scare people from voting .... yes voting ! Can you believe that !
A right every citizen has. The poll workers and the people who supervise the ballots, will handle any "issues" that might be "questionable". We don't need mobs forming at polling places .... especially "ordinary" trump folk, who will have near zero idea what to even say or do in such a situation. They probably don't even know what the square root of 9 is.
I have no .... none ..... zero tolerance for this "dog whistle" call by the orange-haired clown.
Everyday I think that trump cant possibly be less human, but yet to my surprise, it keep happening !
Disgusting filth.

[Alcon]

You guys are aware that precincts require people to stand like a couple hundred feet away, right? Even if a hundred Trump supporters show up with signs, they'll be so far away from the doors that no reasonable person would be intimidated. And if they went over the line (usually marked with traffic cones), a police officer will be on hand to keep them back.

I'm not sure why you are assuming these will be people with signs.  Every state I know of has prohibitions on electioneering activity within a given range of a polling place, but I don't know of any prohibitions that extend to "observing," which is what Trump is asking for.  If people show up in polling places and claim they have the right to stay and watch, I'm not sure most states even have statutes to deal with that.

And, yes, I've worked the polls too.  I've even had someone show up and claim they can observe.  Fortunately it was a low-turnout primary because dealing with him, looking up the state statute, and figuring out how to get rid of him when he demanded to check voter signatures was a serious distraction.  This is what I think Trump is basically explicitly encouraging people to do.

Do I think this will be a serious source of systematic intimidation?  Almost certainly not, and I doubt many people will do it.  Do I think this is a mind-numbingly stupid thing for a Presidential candidate to say?  Yes.  And, more to the point, I don't think Trump cares, and it's another manifestation of personality traits that make it baffling to me that you are remotely satisfied that he's your nominee.

Of course, the hysterical Clinton-klan and their conspiracy theories cannot be met with any form of logical or civil debate, but whatever, keep on making up stories if it makes you guys feel safe.

Are you addressing me with this?  I hope not.  Look at my recent history.  I just spent several posts arguing against people downplaying the email issue for Clinton.

Again, I am far more worried that the BLM movement might pull their usual tactics of blocking critical places. They shut down a bridge in San Francisco on rush hour, they blocked Department Stores on black Friday and shoved shoppers who tried to enter anyway, and they frequently enter crowded cafes and stores to make their points. While I am on the whole supportive of the movement, lets be real here about who is more likely (if at all) to go out and cause trouble on election day.

...

Of course, Atlas Democrats, 90% of whom are one year newbie trolls, will keep making these stupid threads and I think it is correct to note that if anyone is inclined to act violently at the polls, it is the BLM movement. As I mentioned, I am supportive of Black Lives Matter and I think their voice should be taken more seriously by Trump, and I don't think that BLM will cause any disruption on election day. But given their history, or worse, the history of the young white male Bernie supporters (remember Nevada?), I think if anyone is going to be facing intimidation at the polls, it will be Trump supporters.

I think your observation that the left has been more likely than the right to engage in this behavior recently is true.  But, dude, you literally just responded to a post entirely written to complain you weren't addressing my argument (after your "have you not followed this election at all?" condescension) by ignoring my argument again.

I think the tendency to inhibit democratic participation is often a function of which group is most convinced that democracy is illegitimate.  The Sanders supporters and BLM people definitely fit that bill.  However, it's not like Trump supporters don't have those tendencies too, and we now see Trump actively trying to plant the seeds of distrust in the legitimacy of democracy.  If there's anything that's going to make his supporters higher-risk than the Sanders and BLM people, it's Trump saying stuff like this.

And, regardless of the ultimate effect, let me reiterate my main point again: this is a stupid, irresponsible thing for Trump to be saying and he does not care.

[ProudModerate2]

You guys are aware that precincts require people to stand like a couple hundred feet away, right? Even if a hundred Trump supporters show up with signs, they'll be so far away from the doors that no reasonable person would be intimidated. And if they went over the line (usually marked with traffic cones), a police officer will be on hand to keep them back.

Again, I am far more worried that the BLM movement might pull their usual tactics of blocking critical places. They shut down a bridge in San Francisco on rush hour, they blocked Department Stores on black Friday and shoved shoppers who tried to enter anyway, and they frequently enter crowded cafes and stores to make their points. While I am on the whole supportive of the movement, lets be real here about who is more likely (if at all) to go out and cause trouble on election day.

Of course, the hysterical Clinton-klan and their conspiracy theories cannot be met with any form of logical or civil debate, but whatever, keep on making up stories if it makes you guys feel safe.

The only one "hysterical" here is you.
With you BLM bull.
Afraid they might "shake" your bus while your in it ? ..... do you need mommy to hold your hand.

Your the one who is actually afraid that Trump supporters will spoil the election by attacking Clinton voters, even though the only people who have any history of doing such things are Bernie bots and a handful of BLM protesters. This country doesn't really have any tradition of political violence. Are you going to argue that point or are you just going to ignore Alcon's advice?

I never said or used the word "attack."
Get your facts straight.

[Alcon]

OK.
But anyone supporting this type of activity proposed by trump, needs to be put in their place.
This is an obvious call to discourage, intimidate and scare people from voting .... yes voting ! Can you believe that !
A right every citizen has. The poll workers and the people who supervise the ballots, will handle any "issues" that might be "questionable". We don't need mobs forming at polling places .... especially "ordinary" trump folk, who will have near zero idea what to even say or do in such a situation. They probably don't even know what the square root of 9 is.
I have no .... none ..... zero tolerance for this "dog whistle" call by the orange-haired clown.

Everyday I think that trump cant possibly be less human, but yet to my surprise, it keep happening !
Disgusting filth.

I'm not sure calling someone stupid and making a "mommy" joke really makes them feel "put in their place" in any meaningful way.

Maybe this is me, but stuff like calling him "inhuman" and "disgusting filth" seems pretty ineffective to me too...it mostly makes me think of people taking up pitchforks to ritually murder people for moral impurity, or whatever.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

You guys are aware that precincts require people to stand like a couple hundred feet away, right? Even if a hundred Trump supporters show up with signs, they'll be so far away from the doors that no reasonable person would be intimidated. And if they went over the line (usually marked with traffic cones), a police officer will be on hand to keep them back.

I'm not sure why you are assuming these will be people with signs.  Every state I know of has prohibitions on electioneering activity within a given range of a polling place, but I don't know of any prohibitions that extend to "observing," which is what Trump is asking for.  If people show up in polling places and claim they have the right to stay and watch, I'm not sure most states even have statutes to deal with that.

And, yes, I've worked the polls too.  I've even had someone show up and claim they can observe.  Fortunately it was a low-turnout primary, because dealing with him, looking up the state statute, and figuring out how to get rid of him when he demanded to check voter signatures was a serious distraction.

Do I think this will be a serious source of systematic intimidation?  Almost certainly not.  Do I think this is a mind-numbingly stupid thing for a Presidential candidate to say?  Yes.  And, more to the point, I don't think Trump cares, and it's another manifestation of personality traits that make it baffling to me that you are remotely satisfied that he's your nominee.

Of course, the hysterical Clinton-klan and their conspiracy theories cannot be met with any form of logical or civil debate, but whatever, keep on making up stories if it makes you guys feel safe.

Are you seriously addressing me?  Look at my recent history.  I just spent several posts arguing against people downplaying the email issue for Clinton.

Again, I am far more worried that the BLM movement might pull their usual tactics of blocking critical places. They shut down a bridge in San Francisco on rush hour, they blocked Department Stores on black Friday and shoved shoppers who tried to enter anyway, and they frequently enter crowded cafes and stores to make their points. While I am on the whole supportive of the movement, lets be real here about who is more likely (if at all) to go out and cause trouble on election day.

...

Of course, Atlas Democrats, 90% of whom are one year newbie trolls, will keep making these stupid threads and I think it is correct to note that if anyone is inclined to act violently at the polls, it is the BLM movement. As I mentioned, I am supportive of Black Lives Matter and I think their voice should be taken more seriously by Trump, and I don't think that BLM will cause any disruption on election day. But given their history, or worse, the history of the young white male Bernie supporters (remember Nevada?), I think if anyone is going to be facing intimidation at the polls, it will be Trump supporters.

I think your observation that the left has been more likely than the right to engage in this behavior recently is true.  But, dude, you literally just responded to a post entirely written to complain you weren't addressing my argument (after your "have you not followed this election at all?" condescension) by ignoring my argument again.

I think the tendency to inhibit democratic participation is often a function of which group is most convinced that democracy is illegitimate.  The Sanders supporters and BLM people definitely fit that bill.  However, it's not like Trump supporters don't have those tendencies too, and we now see Trump actively trying to plant the seeds of distrust in the legitimacy of democracy.  If there's anything that's going to make his supporters higher-risk than the Sanders and BLM people, it's Trump saying stuff like this.

And, regardless of the ultimate effect, let me reiterate my main point again: this is a stupid, irresponsible thing for Trump to be saying and he does not care.

The last two posts were directed towards that the I-CA avatar who spews white noise, not you, so please don't take those attacks personally, they were not intended to be directed at you. As to your arguments, you are making a false image of the average Trump supporter to fit this narrative that Trump's talk is dangerous. The average Trump supporter isn't the neo-Nazi biker. The average Trump supporter is a middle class white American who has no desire to turn their anger on anyone in any way other than at the ballot box.

If Trump supporters show up at the polls to watch, you'll see nothing more than a crowd of 48 year old white housewives with Make America Great Again signs and tacky red white and blue clothing apparel. These aren't Golden Dawn activists were talking about here.

[ProudModerate2]

OK.
But anyone supporting this type of activity proposed by trump, needs to be put in their place.
This is an obvious call to discourage, intimidate and scare people from voting .... yes voting ! Can you believe that !
A right every citizen has. The poll workers and the people who supervise the ballots, will handle any "issues" that might be "questionable". We don't need mobs forming at polling places .... especially "ordinary" trump folk, who will have near zero idea what to even say or do in such a situation. They probably don't even know what the square root of 9 is.
I have no .... none ..... zero tolerance for this "dog whistle" call by the orange-haired clown.

Everyday I think that trump cant possibly be less human, but yet to my surprise, it keep happening !
Disgusting filth.

I'm not sure calling someone stupid and making a "mommy" joke really makes them feel "put in their place" in any meaningful way.

Maybe this is me, but stuff like calling him "inhuman" and "disgusting filth" seems pretty ineffective to me too...it mostly makes me think of people taking up pitchforks to ritually murder people for moral impurity, or whatever.

If you are think "that" (taking up pitchforks, etc) ... then you are thinking "strangely."
I think "its just you."
No one is saying this .... at least I'm not.

PS: You don't know this elitist R-avatar from Florida very well. He has come on here drunk, and said some very strange things. A number of people commented and witnessed this. He sent me various personal internal Atlas messages on that night, and acted like an idiot.
He even manipulated and created quotes of things I supposedly said, and posted them on this forum. So he created comments out of thin air, put my name on them, and posted them.
This is an obvious abuse of our forum, and someone who can not be trusted.
I have a right to be pissed at him, and to treat him like the dirt he is.
Don't defend him.

[Alcon]

he last two posts were directed towards that the I-CA avatar who spews white noise, not you, so please don't take those attacks personally, they were not intended to be directed at you.

OK, fair enough, thanks.

As to your arguments, you are making a false image of the average Trump supporter to fit this narrative that Trump's talk is dangerous. The average Trump supporter isn't the neo-Nazi biker. The average Trump supporter is a middle class white American who has no desire to turn their anger on anyone in any way other than at the ballot box.

If Trump supporters show up at the polls to watch, you'll see nothing more than a crowd of 48 year old white housewives with Make America Great Again signs and tacky red white and blue clothing apparel. These aren't Golden Dawn activists were talking about here.

Whoa, what?  When did I say otherwise?  When did I say I was concerned about the "average Trump" voter doing this vigilante poll-watcher thing, let alone say that even the paranoid types would be "neo-Nazi bikers" (?!).  That wasn't part of any point I'm making...

edit: Maybe you're taking my description of the poll watchers as being disproportionately "some of [the Trump base's] most paranoid, inappropriate people" to an extreme?  No, by "inappropriate and paranoid," I didn't mean Nazi bikers...I just meant inappropriate and paranoid, and possible impediments to the poll workers doing their jobs.  If I was talking about "Nazi bikers," why would I have said it's "almost certainly not" going to be a "serious source of systematic intimidation"?

***

I'm not sure calling someone stupid and making a "mommy" joke really makes them feel "put in their place" in any meaningful way.

Maybe this is me, but stuff like calling him "inhuman" and "disgusting filth" seems pretty ineffective to me too...it mostly makes me think of people taking up pitchforks to ritually murder people for moral impurity, or whatever.

If you are think "that" (taking up pitchforks, etc) ... then you are thinking "strangely."
I think "its just you."
No one is saying this .... at least I'm not.

Sigh.  I didn't say you were saying that.  I said that I think that tone is ineffective because it invokes the idea of visceral anger/disgust, which I think makes someone seem like they're not operating totally rationally.  I said your tone invokes that idea, not that you are operating out of uncontrolled anger/disgust, let alone that you literally want to ritually murder people.

PS: You don't know this elitist R-avatar from Florida very well. He has come on here drunk, and said some very strange things. A number of people commented and witnessed this. He sent me various personal internal Atlas messages on that night, and acted like an idiot.
He even manipulated and created quotes of things I supposedly said, and posted them on this forum. So he created comments out of thin air, put my name on them, and posted them.
This is an obvious abuse of our forum, and someone who can not be trusted.
I have a right to be pissed at him, and to treat him like the dirt he is.
Don't defend him.

Even if he beats seals as a hobby, I think it's more productive to address his argument on merit than to derail threads into personal attack exchanges.  Hell, even if you personally attack him, there's nothing stopping you from also addressing his argument.

[ProudModerate2]

Even if he beats seals as a hobby, I think it's more productive to address his argument on merit than to derail threads into personal attack exchanges.  Hell, even if you personally attack him, there's nothing stopping you from also addressing his argument.

I can care less if he wants to beat seals.
Beating seals wont affect how this nation and our world will run for the next four years.
If only people in Germany "spoke up" with more disgust and anger, maybe just maybe, there would not have been 60 million people who were suddenly vaporized of life in WWII.
This orange-haired clown is a dangerous possibility .... don't discount it.

[Alcon]

Even if he beats seals as a hobby, I think it's more productive to address his argument on merit than to derail threads into personal attack exchanges.  Hell, even if you personally attack him, there's nothing stopping you from also addressing his argument.

I can care less if he wants to beat seals.
Beating seals wont affect how this nation and our world will run for the next four years.
If only people in Germany "spoke up" with more disgust and anger, maybe just maybe, there would not have been 60 million people who were suddenly vaporized of life in WWII.
This orange-haired clown is a dangerous possibility .... don't discount it.

I don't think that 1940s Germany was lacking for people accusing others of being "inhuman" and "disgusting filth" but k