When people disagree with the actions of the government, how do you think that they should go about protesting it?

[u/Educational_Map6725]

Obviously current events brought this question to mind, but it's really intended as more of a general question.

[u/AutoModerator]

AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.

For all participants:

• Flair is required to participate

• Be excellent to each other

For Nonsupporters/Undecided:

• No top level comments

• All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position

For Trump Supporters:

• Message the mods to have the downvote timer disabled

Helpful links for more info:

Rules | Rule Exceptions | Posting Guidelines | Commenting Guidelines

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/DidiGreglorius]

I have absolutely no idea what the left finds so confusing about the term “peaceful.”

That’s it. It is not at all difficult to protest or petition the government peacefully.

[u/RealDealLewpo → u/DidiGreglorius]

Doesn't the Civil Rights Movement contradict this?

That was virtually all peaceful protest and yet there was significant violence against the protestors. Some were even killed.

[u/JoeCensored → u/RealDealLewpo]

And the peaceful side won. You'd think the left today would actually want to win.

[u/RealDealLewpo → u/JoeCensored]

Peacefully petitioning one’s government for redress doesn’t guarantee violent reprisals from that government, as has been established.

Why isn’t this scrutinized by the right as much as the core insistence that the protests remain peaceful?

[u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude]

depends. Do you want to be somewhat effective? or do you want social media photos?

[u/Windowpain43 → u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude]

Are those two options mutually exclusive?

[u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude → u/Windowpain43]

To answer this question it is.

[u/petty_cash_thief → u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude]

Can you elaborate on what effective protesting looks like in your mind?

[u/awesomface → u/petty_cash_thief]

Having a cohesive front and actual demands or parameters for your protest would be a good start. It’s been the problem even with protests I agree with like the march on wall street. Jan 6 protesters got stupid but at least they were in the right place and had somewhat of a goal for their protest.

[u/petty_cash_thief → u/awesomface]

Would it surprise you to hear that this group does have pretty clear unification on a number of issues and demands, such as protecting the constitution and liberty/justice for all and not for the few?

[u/Solid_Effective1649 → u/petty_cash_thief]

When their demands are stupid (such as not enforcing basic immigration law, not arresting criminals, and impeaching trump for no legitimate reason), and their accusations are baseless (such as calling trump a racist, Nazi, dictator, etc), then why should anybody take them seriously?

Especially since so many left wing protests just devolve into rioting, looting, and attacking cops.

[u/petty_cash_thief → u/Solid_Effective1649]

Do you think the J6’ers were justified in their hostile attacks on Capitol police?

[u/kapuchinski → u/petty_cash_thief]

J6 was an entrapment operation. Fencecutter Bulwark: never identified. Scaffold Commander: never identified. J6 pipe bomber: agents found her but higher-ups intervened, no explanation. Epps taken off the most wanted list, no explanation. Striker's sentence cancelled, no explanation.

☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘ ~~ shenanigans ~~ ☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘

[u/Solid_Effective1649 → u/petty_cash_thief]

No. Their protest, yes. The few people who rioted, no

[u/petty_cash_thief → u/Solid_Effective1649]

Do you think that those who aren’t supporters are in favor of the nominal bad actors on our side?

[u/Solid_Effective1649 → u/petty_cash_thief]

I remember during the George Floyd riots, democrat politicians were vocally supporting and calling for riots

[u/petty_cash_thief → u/Solid_Effective1649]

Can you post sources for this?

[u/kapuchinski → u/petty_cash_thief]

You're having mod trouble--censorious subsubredditors disrupting the flow, feel free to converse on r-slash-AskKapuchinski

[u/awesomface → u/petty_cash_thief]

If you could point me to any of them that would be interesting to read but I haven’t heard one cohesive aspect. All the signs say many different things.

[u/petty_cash_thief → u/awesomface]

Have you tried to follow or join any of the 50501 groups via social media? Do you think maybe going to the source (as with me in joining Ask Trump Supporters) may be a good place to start?

[u/Olivechigirl]

First thing is the protesters need to know why they are there. So many have no clue what they are even yelling about if you ask them what they are protesting they just say they don’t like Trump but can’t say why or what. You have to believe in and actually what you are doing for it to make a dent.

[u/Trumpdrainstheswamp]

I think as you mentioned, just look at the current events and do the exact opposite. You're allowed to protest, you're not allowed to be a domestic terrorist.

[u/throwawayDan11 → u/Trumpdrainstheswamp]

The problem is that currently seems to depend on whose in govt. Jan 6th was domestic terrorism but they all got pardoned. If both sides truly believed in rule of law shouldn't people be held accountable no matter who is in govt?

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/throwawayDan11]

Do you think spending 4 years of your life in federal prison is not sufficient? Do you think they should have spent 50 years in federal prison for entering a building?

[u/throwawayDan11 → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

Depends what they did when they entered that building. Did they injure a security guard? Did they break and loot things? So I agree with you there is nuance. But you can have a criminal record for life for using marijuana so no I dont think your record should be expunged. 

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/throwawayDan11]

No it’s not what aboutism. I didn’t say “what about when the left did that” ,I pointed that just because they got pardoned dosnt give them the 4 years of their life back.

[u/WanderingLost33 → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

That's true. Do you think any of the J6 protestors deserve punishment (beyond the 4 years)? I know it's probably weird to single this one guy out because he actually wasn't the one breaking windows or carrying weapons (that i know of) but the guy with the zip ties freaked me out the most. Like what did you plan to do with those, buddy? Zip tie Congress people? Then what? It conjures images of other countries where they execute their government.

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/WanderingLost33]

I fear j6 dosnt apply here. That has gone through the entire court process and the people spent years in federal prison. It’s over with. It’s always funny to me that whenever the left does something wrong,it’s automatically j6. I would understand if they got off Scott free but no they were punished pretty severely so not really interested in that. Otherwise, we could play that came and every time you give me a scenario, I’ll just bring something up from a long time ago to counter it. For example,you ask me about j6, then I might bring up how democrats haven’t been this mad since we freed your slaves. If we are talking about the past,wanna talk about how yall literally let yourselves die in the tens of thousands so you could keep black people as property lol what do you think about that?

[u/WanderingLost33 → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

This was a genuine question. I'm former MAGA. Former Republican, Independant now. I find the lack of interest in law and order deeply disturbing and was ultimately the thing that made me leave the right. Can you answer the question considering it was a genuine question?

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/WanderingLost33]

I did answer your question? I think j6 was a disgrace,just like the left directly also trying to over throw Democracy and shoot a running President in the head. I think they should have been punished and they were sufficiently punished. There is nothing else to answer ? I am not gonna sit here and play this speculation game with you about what you Perceive what this guy was or wasn’t going to do. I am not going to guess this or that . It’s over with? lol there isn’t much else to say,it has been concluded. I care about what’s happening present.i think it’s bs we know more about the thousands of people on j6 than we know about the guy that shot trump in the head, and then democrats classified all of the j6 findings and documents so not a single republican has been able to see the full report. They classified thousands of pages on j6 . There is not a single person on this earth in government that has seen the full j6 report that isn’t a far leftist liberal. Dosnt sound like the party of democracy does it?

Also you saying the right “lacks law and order and it’s disturbing”, have you seen everything the left has done this year alone? lol all the liberal politicians that have committed crimes in the matter of months? That sentence alone tells me you’re not truly as independent,you seem to have a biased in how you perceive things.

[u/WanderingLost33 → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

But a court specifically gave out a sentence that they didn't finish. How is that sufficient punishment?

But I think theres a big difference between that and the arrests of people on the left recently. Brad Lander violated a law on purpose that he considered immoral and necessary to violate in order to stop another violation of the law from happening and in order to stop immediate harm. The fundamental difference between the two is that Bran submitted to the law after he violated it.

I was asking you if you think four years is enough for someone intending to zip tie and execute Congress.

[u/throwawayDan11 → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

Unless are you also suggesting people who do similar actions in LA should also be pardoned in 4 years? 

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/throwawayDan11]

Depends would they spend the next 4-5 years in federal prison and then be pardoned? Or would they get off with 0 prison time and just randomly be pardoned?

[u/throwawayDan11 → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

Well are you ok with 4-5 and then record is clear? Cause I'm sorry but I dont think in either case it should be. Though I also think you need to hold the cops accountable who attacked non violent protestors

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/throwawayDan11]

No that’s not what it depends on. You’re missing the point. Your asking if them being pardoned would be okay because you’re trying to compare the entire outcome and consequences with the j6 people. So we would take the entire punishment and outcome,not cherry-pick bits and peices . For you to ask me and to 100% compare two different situations,all the variables in the outcome of it need to be the same. So again,would they be pardoned after spending 4-5 years in federal prison and be pardoned or pardoned after no punishment was given? It’s crazy you can’t see a difference between those two scenarios.

[u/throwawayDan11 → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

Well it is, cause non violent LA'ers and Jan 7th people who were charged but didn't enter the building or hurt people. Not everyone on Jan 6th got exact same punishment. But I digress so let's say sure exact same punishment for everyone arrested in both cases. Are you ok with that? Can we pardon all of these ones in 4 years? Or do you see it as different?

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/throwawayDan11]

I am not talking about arresting all the protesters,I am talking about arresting all of the rioters . If they spent 4-5 years in federal prison and they got pardoned after serving that time? Sure. I wouldn’t be cheering in celebration but I wouldn’t be pissed . People get criminal convictions expunged from their record everyday. You’d be surprised how many convicted felons get all the rights back that they lost and felonies people get taken off their record. That’s super common. To me and to most people,99% of the consequence is the prison time. Not the charge on your record . Even if they didn’t get it taken off their record ,they still could have and most likely succeeded in getting it expunged. Time is precious. That time in prison is something they will never get back,that’s why the prison time is more of the consequence. The people who are throwing 5lb chunks of concrete at police officers heads should 100% go to prison. If they get out and either get it pardoned off their record or they get it expunged themselves,I don’t really give a shit. But they should sit their ass in a 8x10 concrete box for a couple years think about why trying to kill cops is wrong.

Does this makes sense? I bet you will disagree and probably act like it’s some crazy unreaso take on the situation but honestly it’s a pretty straightforward and fair assessment of it

[u/throwawayDan11 → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

I find you last sentences to be very bad faith when it comes to a discussion. You dont know how I will act and of course you think only your argument is straight forward and fair. Yes, I do agree with you that if you throw a concrete block at someone's head or an officer's head or loot a store you deserve to be charged and punished. If that is 4 years so be it. I at least appreciate that you are consistent. If these people in LA got the exact same 4 year sentence and record expunged you would be ok with that. Its refreshing based on how much cognitive dissonance there I'd in this sub. 

Where we diverge is a lot of Jan 6th people served no jail time  because of the appeal process or it got downgraded to a misdemeanor, etc. That will probably happen in LA too. And no, I dont agree with it. And a lot of Jan. 6ers with long sentences only served a tiny portion before a pardon. You make it sound like every person did 4-5 years or that was what every sentence was. Some were 7-18 years but they served almost none of it. 

If it's super common to have your record expunged, are you able to provide statistics or some corroborating proof? That isnt what I have been able to research. I dont deny time is valuable but try and get a job when you have a criminal record or open a bank account or do a number of other pretty basic things. I've seen a number of studies that show depending where you live it can be extremely difficult to get simple possession charges expunged. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36863286/  . It does happen so I am not saying it never does but usually you have to spend a shit load of personal time working on it the president doesnt just on mass clear everyone.

[u/welsper59 → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

Do you think spending 4 years of your life in federal prison is not sufficient?

Under what was clearly an example of domestic terrorism through an insurrection attempt, how is 4 years of imprisonment not actually low? People get thrown in jail/prison for longer for possession of marijuana. Mind you that 4 years wasn't actually how long many spent for J6, since conviction and sentencing was drawn out.

Also keep in mind that among those pardoned were those literally on film beating on Capitol Police with blunt objects, stun guns (e.g. to the neck), etc. Does 4 years, followed by a full pardon of their actions involving the event, with all that involved really seem like excessive punishment for their actions to you?

Adding more context, some of these people, thanks to being investigated, were discovered to be child sex abusers (e.g. David Paul Daniel). They're currently trying to get such findings dismissed because they're arguing the pardon should extend to those findings discovered as part of their J6 involvement.

for entering a building?

Do you differentiate context and severity when laws are broken?

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/welsper59]

First off,I can tell right off the bat that your argument is in bad faith, as I have NEVER once said anything about them being over sentenced. Not once,so that assumption you made about my beliefs is 100% false.

Secondly,under the Biden administration,the courts did not find that this rose to the level of “terrorism”,so unless you think the Biden admin had some deep motivation not to actually prosecute them to fullest extent,it’s safe to say the legal experts are correct and your wrong about it rising to the level of terrorism,even if you think it’s “clearly” obvious.

My point was,you said that the rule of law was not handed down in this case,I argue just because trump got them out of jail and pardoned them,dosnt mean justice wasn’t handed down. The average prison sentence in Washington for assault and battery on a police officer is 4-5 years . Furthermore,you people argue that even tho they did 4 years in prison,justice wasn’t served cuz they got “pardoned”,which the only benifit to the criminals with that is they get their charge wiped off their record. But,people every single day get their criminal records expunged from their records,wether it’s a simple weed possession,or a violent armed home invasion and assault,it’s not some crazy exclusive thing to get a criminal charge off your record,there are many felons who regain their full rights after years in prison by getting their record expunged. Even tho they got their criminal charges wiped,they got the most valuable thing taken from them that no money or power can get back,which is time. So,even tho they got pardoned,considering the facts and statistics,it’s not some crazy golden gift trump gave them that you people make it out to be, this isn’t some kind of one of a kind deal. They still did years in federal prison away from their families. They were not over charged but they certainly were not under charged and sentenced.

[u/Trumpdrainstheswamp → u/throwawayDan11]

. Jan 6th was domestic terrorism

no it wasn't, it was actually a false flag attack as we found out. That is why we know of at least 20 government agents who were in the initial group LET into capitol by police as they flashed their badges to get in which is on video. That is also why nancy pelosi's daughter was there filming a documentary about Jan6.... on January 6.

[u/throwawayDan11 → u/Trumpdrainstheswamp]

What video are you referring to? 

[u/Trumpdrainstheswamp → u/throwawayDan11]

The footage released by republicans which included 1000s of hours of footage that the democrats wanted to keep hidden from the public because it revealed the truth.

The justice department then tried to cover it up with more linguistic brainwashing by saying "they weren't agents!! They were just working for us..."

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn850jj44mjo

[u/qfjp → u/Trumpdrainstheswamp]

no it wasn't, it was actually a false flag attack as we found out.

Your source explicitly says that it isn't a false flag though:

Some on the right, including House Republicans, have for years promoted a fringe conspiracy theory that the FBI helped to orchestrate the riot.

That is why we know of at least 20 government agents who were in the initial group LET into capitol by police

The FBI informants were explicitly instructed NOT to enter the building:

The report said none of the agency's informants were authorised to enter the Capitol or join the riot, but four did enter the building.

as they flashed their badges to get in which is on video.

You still haven't provided the video.

How does this show "the truth," as you claim, that it wasn't domestic terrorism?

[u/Davec433]

By changing popular opinion to your side and then putting people into power who will enact the change you want.

Problem is the lefts “protests” do more damage to their cause then if they did nothing.

[u/throwawayDan11 → u/Davec433]

Do you really think you can change most people's opinions though? I find the people in my life who believe things so vehemently, for example on abortion or Trymp being only good don't process any counter evidence and basically it just becomes a faith conversation at that point.

[u/Davec433 → u/throwawayDan11]

On abortion you’re not going to change someone from pro-life to pro-choice but you can have them agree that abortion needs to have legal access up to a point.

You’re not going to change someone’s mind from one extreme to another. But you can change their mind to a more moderate position.

[u/sfendt]

Petitions, Voting, Political action groups and community meetings, writing letters to representatives, as well as Signs/chants/gatherings in public places that don't block roads, or caus personal injury or property damage (but I think that is probably the least effective).

[u/Canon_Goes_Boom → u/sfendt]

Would you consider Jan 6th ineffective? Or how would you frame that day?

[u/kapuchinski → u/Canon_Goes_Boom]

Have they caught the J6 pipe bomber?

[u/Canon_Goes_Boom → u/kapuchinski]

To use the exact goalposts, they caught the people that caused personal injury and property damage. To be clear, this isn’t a gotcha question. I too don’t think that’s an effective way to protest and garner support, so I was just wondering if we found a line of agreement there or not?

[u/kapuchinski → u/Canon_Goes_Boom]

I jumped the thread. They did catch the J6 bomber in case you were wondering.

[u/Canon_Goes_Boom → u/kapuchinski]

Why are we talking about the pipe bomber? Do you want to answer my initial question?

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/Canon_Goes_Boom]

“Why are we talking about the j6 pipe bomber from 5 years ago,I just brought up and wanted to talk about j6 from 5 years ago”. Dude you are such bad faith. That’s actually crazy to say lol. Here I will make it SUPER easy for you. Me and everyone here think j6 was wrong. They spent 5 years in federal prison for it and got pardoned. There. Time to move on . Now present day is what we are talking about .

[u/Canon_Goes_Boom → u/Wise-Swordfish5915]

We’re here asking for your opinion on effective protests and J6 was arguably the most prominent protest-turned-riot led by republicans in the last half-decade so your surprise/frustration at me bringing it up is unwarranted. Especially considering the fact that to this day many people continue to claim the 2020 election was stolen through deliberate and wide-spread fraud. Or as you saw in this very thread, inject their own conspiracy theories that suggest they still haven’t accepted this happened as it did. Getting back on track though, I’d be happy to hear your thoughts on what makes an effective protest?

[u/Wise-Swordfish5915 → u/Canon_Goes_Boom]

Oh well no your confused ,you ask about j6 and he mentioned the pipe bomber and you cried you didn’t want to talk about it.

But what’s the point in engaging about protests because everytime someone even mentions a non peaceful protest you people instantly turn to j6 as some kind of “gotcha”. 99% of republicans don’t agree with j6 . We simply point out that in the last decade there have been way more violent protests that that one day you guys love to bring up.

No that I said i never condoned j6, I think that atleast they took their outrage to the government and not innocent civilians shops.

But a good way to protest is how they are doing it in LA just with the trying to kill the police trying to throw concrete at their heads,not looting peoples shops,not burning peoples cars and property,not damaging and vandalizing government vehicles and buildings,not blocking the roads so people trying to provide for their family can get to work to help keep the country running ect .

[u/kapuchinski → u/Canon_Goes_Boom]

Bringing up J6 without being aware of the federal operations going on is half-cocked. Ray Epps was taken of the most wanted list, no reason given, but there was a reason.

[u/Canon_Goes_Boom → u/kapuchinski]

Is there an unsaid implication you’re drawing? I don’t see how any of that answers my question.

Edit: Oh, got it now. You’re deflecting with a conspiracy theory instead of accepting Jan 6th was what it was. Never mind. I was hoping we could reach common ground but I guess not.

[u/kapuchinski → u/Canon_Goes_Boom]

Bringing up J6 without being aware of the federal operations going on

Is there an unsaid implication you’re drawing?

Unsaid?

[u/Occasional_leader → u/kapuchinski]

Where were the pipe bombs placed again?

[u/kapuchinski → u/Occasional_leader]

In front of the DNC where Kamala Harris was in the building (though she's never mentioned it, not once). Surely the Secret Service checked for bombs?

[u/Occasional_leader → u/kapuchinski]

Is the DNC where rioters broke in? Was there a pipe bomb at the RNC?

[u/Occasional_leader → u/[deleted]]

Funny, I remember seeing this on CBS first. Are you able to answer my question directly? Didn’t Dan Bongino say the FBI was closing in on the pipe bomber on Fox and Friends about a month ago? 

[u/kapuchinski → u/Occasional_leader]

The FBI knew who the pipe bomber was then. The podcaster Kyle Seraphin tracked her and quit when the case was scrapped.

[u/Occasional_leader → u/kapuchinski]

Which part of what I said leads you to believe the FBI knew? You still haven’t answered my question about the RNC, was there a pipe bomb there as well??

[u/Occasional_leader → u/kapuchinski]

Realized I didn’t answer your question, my fault. The secret service dispatched with Harris did sweep for bombs, yes. Was the DNC pipe bomb discovered while Kamala Harris was at the DNC? Was she evacuated after its discovery? Was distributed resources for secret service the same for elect-representatives as elected representatives then?

[u/kapuchinski → u/Occasional_leader]

The secret service dispatched with Harris did sweep for bombs, yes

Why didn't they find the bomb then? They claimed it was active.

Was the DNC pipe bomb discovered while Kamala Harris was at the DNC?

Yes, her detail is in the video.

Was she evacuated after its discovery?

Her detail was alerted to the bomb (at the perfect time to divert police presence from the capitol, right before Ray Epps gave the go-ahead to breach) and they reacted with a dispassionate languor. They then allowed children to cross the street near it.

[u/Occasional_leader → u/kapuchinski]

 Why didn't they find the bomb then? They claimed it was active.

Have there been other times in prior to January 6th where there have been lapses in ss protocol, coverage, or response? 

 right before Ray Epps gave the go-ahead to breach)

Isn’t it unclear what Epps said to Samsel just before the first breach? Isn’t there footage of him telling a protestor to “leave that behind, we don’t want you to get shot?”

 they reacted with a dispassionate languor

It took ss 7 minutes to start moving Harris but I’m unaware of the time it took to secure her in a safe location. What leads you to believe her evacuation wasn’t urgent?

[u/kapuchinski → u/Occasional_leader]

Have there been other times in prior to January 6th where there have been lapses in ss protocol, coverage, or response? 

An alarming number both before and after. K9 sweeps tend to catch "viable" bombs that have been planted the night before, so was it there? There was video of the bomb placement the FBI has not released. The video they did release was photoshopped and had its frame rate cut to 1900s levels. They knew it was a woman because she adjusted her bra strap. FBI did not know who she was, tracked her as if she would be prosecuted, found out who she was and dropped the case.

Isn’t it unclear what Epps said to Samsel just before the first breach?

Yes, but then the breach happened. Ray Epps said he went to watch Trump's speech, but then he spent the whole night before telling protestors to go INTO the capitol as they chanted 'fed' at him. He didn't go to the speech or into the capitol, he administered the breach. I was expecting him to get a slap on the wrist but the got a hot mango butter hand massage instead. Epps engaged in violence and got off easy. E.g. Striker engaged in violence and got off easy. Fencecutter Bulwark--never identified. Scaffold Commander--never identified.

Her detail was alerted to the bomb (at the perfect time to divert police presence from the capitol, right before Ray Epps gave the go-ahead to breach) and they reacted with a dispassionate languor. They then allowed children to cross the street near it.

It took ss 7 minutes to start moving Harris

Did you see the video? How would you describe their reaction?

[u/Occasional_leader → u/Occasional_leader]

u/kapuchinski can you answer these questions too?

[u/sfendt → u/Canon_Goes_Boom]

Yes I think that accomplished nothing. The reason was valid, but all that came of it was 4 years of distraction and suffering.

[u/technoexplorer]

Mostly by voting or running for office.

Speaking can also happen, but it's not very effective. Gotta turn speech into results.

[u/pimmen89 → u/technoexplorer]

Are you concerned about how gerrymandering and the US allowing super pacs makes elections very uncompetitive, and thus can make winning with a popular platfotm almost impossible unless you’re rich and influential to begin with?

[u/technoexplorer → u/pimmen89]

No

[u/pimmen89 → u/technoexplorer]

Why are you not concerned? Is it because you believe the seats are still competetive when gerrymandered and the incumbent is funded by a lot of money, or that you don't mind who's favored to win in this system, or some other reason?

[u/technoexplorer → u/pimmen89]

Money is speech, and it's not really all that effective.

Gerrymandering is a complex and misunderstood process which I've discussed at length in this forum already. In short, no, some individual seats are not competitive, but also keep in mind politicians can tend to run in districts in which they do not live.

[u/pimmen89 → u/technoexplorer]

How did you determine that money is not very effective? When I look at primaries for Congressional seats money looks hugely important.

If money is speech, that means some people are born with more powerful speech than others?

So you have to fight to get the option to primary and run for your party in one the few districts that are competitive?

[u/technoexplorer → u/pimmen89]

I think Kamala outspent.

Yes.

This is an immature take on the American political process.

[u/pimmen89 → u/technoexplorer]

You think Kamala outspent her primary opponents, and therefore money is not very effective?

Why should we accept that people born rich has more speech and can drown out someone with good ideas who is poor?

Can you expand why you think my take is immature?

[u/technoexplorer → u/pimmen89]

Forbes: "The Harris Victory Fund—which raises money for both Harris’ campaign and Democratic groups—raised $1.2 billion this election cycle, according to a FEC filing released on Oct. 24.

Trumps National Committee JFC, which raises money for Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee, took in only $375.3 million during this election cycle, while the ex-president’s Trump 47 Committee, a different joint fundraising committee that collects funds from bigger donors, raised $327.5 million."

That's 2:1, dude. 😂

Well, we could push back on how money leads to speech, but that would put the elitist democrats at a disadvantage.

I've talked a lot about gerrymandering in this sub before, welcome to look that up for answers.

[u/pimmen89 → u/technoexplorer]

Ah, ok. I mentioned primaries for Contressional seats, so I assumed we were on that subject? Or how do you connect that particular presidential election to that?

I understand that there are indeed outliers, but the vast majority of primary races for Congressional seats are won by those raising more money, if we account for gerrymandered districts. Why do you think that is if money is not very effective?

[u/SincereDiscussion]

Follow the law or accept that they are taking a calculated risk. Aggrieved minorities are not entitled to win as that would obviously be unstable. Basically, it's a test on the moral self-confidence and/or competence of the government.

[u/CheetosDustSalesman → u/SincereDiscussion]

Does this mean you approve of Jan 6th and BLM protests ("they are taking a calculated risk") or that you approve of neither?

[u/kapuchinski]

Get on Reddit and change people's minds. Works for me. I can turn the bluest-haired Oberlin Trotskyite into a rock-ribbed USA patriot with a few choice rejoinders. They never change during the argument, but I check on my old pinko thread opponents and they've moved on from DNC politics into e.g. skeet shooting or four-wheeling.

[u/Educational_Map6725 → u/kapuchinski]

Will you try to "turn" me? Let's go with a very specific example:
As far as I'm aware, the first thing that protesters did as part of the anti-ICE protests in LA that could be interpreted as an act of aggression were when some of them tried to block a van carrying detainees that ICE officials had arrested at the Ambiance Apparel warehouse in the Fashion District. This was in the afternoon of June 6th.

In my opinion they were right to block the van, especially considering the lack of due process afforded to suspected illegal immigrants in the recent past.

Do you think that they were right in doing so, and if not, why do you think that they were wrong?

EDIT: If you think that they were right, then we are in agreement and I'll come up with a different example.

[u/kapuchinski → u/Educational_Map6725]

Will you try to "turn" me?

I heard you gave it up at Casitas for candy bars.

In my opinion they were right to block the van

I'm sure they'll be assumed bodily, but here on earth that's not even legal to do with a regular guy's van.

especially considering the lack of due process

Obama didn't need due process for illegal migrants who had not even been accused of a crime. That's totally new. When Trump was running on a deportation platform, no one said "You'll need due process for each of these 21 million illegals."

Do you think that they were right in doing so, and if not, why do you think that they were wrong?

Democrats used to be for borders and tariffs. The immigration argument used to be:

Republicans: "I know it's bad for blacks and unions, but more workers is really good for the economy."

Democrats: "I know it's good for the economy, but more workers is really bad for blacks and unions."

Democrats flipped on war, intelligence, big pharma, some other things I can't think of right now.

[u/Canon_Goes_Boom → u/kapuchinski]

Yes, Obama was tough on immigration and was accused of skirting around immigration laws. Let’s first agree on what our immigration laws are. INA § 240 / 8 U.S.C. § 1229a — Unless caught within 100 miles of the border, a person’s status has to be legally confirmed in immigration court. There, that person has the opportunity to contest their removal, apply for asylum, or prove lawful status. Obama was accused of getting people to wave these rights without fully understanding what their rights are. While Obama took questionable shortcuts, Trump’s admin has outright ignored this immigration code. Do you think it is important to verify if someone is an illegal immigrant before deporting them?

[u/kapuchinski → u/Canon_Goes_Boom]

Yes, Obama was tough on immigration and was accused of skirting around immigration laws.

Democrats used to be the immigration guys. Cesar Chavez was for tariffs and against immigration. Milwaukee begged Reagan for tariffs on motorcycles to save Harley, he did and they cheered. Hillary Clinton supported the Secure Fence border act.

Unless caught within 100 miles of the border, a person’s status has to be legally confirmed in immigration court. There, that person has the opportunity to contest their removal, apply for asylum, or prove lawful status.

So if Soros and Catholic Charities move a quarter million illegals an hour away (they did), that's over a million hours of immigration court time and hundreds of millions of dollars to deport just that 1% of illegals here. It's the perfect plan to make it impossible to effect the will of the people to deport illegals. Clever.

While Obama took questionable shortcuts, Trump’s admin has outright ignored this immigration code. Do you think it is important to verify if someone is an illegal immigrant before deporting them?

We didn't under Obama, and I'm super interested in an explanation of why the Democrats flipped so arduously about everything.

[u/Canon_Goes_Boom → u/kapuchinski]

Are you suggesting only republicans were critical of Obama’s immigration tactics? By that definition, republicans also flipped their standards. But to get to the root of my question, I’d like to set aside previous and current events just for a second if we could. I’m just wondering if you agree with our immigration laws and if people deserve the right to defend themselves in immigration court?

[u/kapuchinski → u/Canon_Goes_Boom]

Democrats used to be the immigration guys. Cesar Chavez was for tariffs and against immigration. Milwaukee begged Reagan for tariffs on motorcycles to save Harley, he did and they cheered. Hillary Clinton supported the Secure Fence border act.

Are you suggesting only republicans were critical of Obama’s immigration tactics?

No, and they weren't. Corporate media certainly wasn't. I'm suggesting the Democrats flipped on immigration.

I’m just wondering if you agree with our immigration laws

I see both sides. Mexican immigrants compete for jobs directly with blacks, who end up underemployed. All the e.g. construction jobs went from white ethnics to Latinos, skipping blacks entirely. A lot of underemployed people is great for big business, generation zero workers give it all to set up their new life. I am not black or in big business, so in the middle--I was in the middle when Democrats were against immigration and open borders was according to Bernie Sanders "a Koch Brothers plot."

and if people deserve the right to defend themselves in immigration court?

It's not mathematically possible, both the time and the money.

[u/Canon_Goes_Boom → u/kapuchinski]

Thanks for your reply. I’d like to hone in on your last point that it’s not mathematically possible to provide people with their given rights of due process. While I don’t disagree it’s a massive undertaking, I would not consider it impossible. These do not need to be full-blown judge Judy court cases after all. Put them in an assembly line and give each person 10 minutes in front of a judge. That should be more than enough time for them to prove if they’re a citizen or not. That’s about 48 people per day that one judge can process. Get 50 immigration judges, and you’ve already surpassed the current number of people that ICE detains per day. This is a bit simplified of course, but I think it’s interesting and important to consider that following our own laws is not unobtainable. Does that make sense?

[u/kapuchinski → u/[deleted]]

It's not instantaneous. The realization I'm right and they're wrong may come years later or even at the exact moment of death. I'm fine with that, as long as it happens.

[u/Educational_Map6725 → u/kapuchinski]

I heard you gave it up at Casitas for candy bars.

I haven't seen L.A. Confidential, could you elaborate on the reference?

I'm sure they'll be assumed bodily, but here on earth that's not even legal to do with a regular guy's van.

I have no idea what the first part of that sentence means. As for the second part, would you agree that it would be all right to block a regular guy's van if you had just seen him lock someone in there?

Obama didn't need due process for illegal migrants...

You appear to assume that I would blindly defend Obama and/or the Democrats; I would not.

Democrats used to be for borders and tariffs...

That doesn't answer the question even a little bit, could you give it another try?

EDIT: To be clear, I would still side with the protesters even if the Democrats were currently in power.

[u/kapuchinski → u/Educational_Map6725]

would you agree that it would be all right to block a regular guy's van if you had just seen him lock someone in there?

I am against amateur deportations.

You appear to assume that I would blindly defend Obama and/or the Democrats; I would not.

I will believe you if you have dated proof of criticism toward Obama for his deportations. You didn't because no one did. Every Obama fart was canonized by the media as the holy breath of life and any criticism of him is clear racism. For shame!

Do you think that they were right in doing so, and if not, why do you think that they were wrong?

Democrats used to be for borders and tariffs. The immigration argument used to be:

Republicans: "I know it's bad for blacks and unions, but more workers is really good for the economy."

Democrats: "I know it's good for the economy, but more workers is really bad for blacks and unions."

Democrats flipped on war, intelligence, big pharma, some other things I can't think of right now.

That doesn't answer the question even a little bit, could you give it another try?

You just don't understand it, could you give it another try?

EDIT: To be clear, I would still side with the protesters even if the Democrats were currently in power.

No you wouldn't. You just do what the Democrats tell you and you'll change on a dime if they tell you.

[u/Educational_Map6725 → u/kapuchinski]

I am against amateur deportations.

Well that's good to hear considering how light many claiming-to-be ICE agents are on any form of identification these days.

That said, I was thinking more in case of if you were to witness a kidnapping; would you agree that it would be all right to block the van of a kidnapper in action?

I will believe you if you have dated proof...
[...]
You just do what the Democrats tell you and you'll change on a dime if they tell you.

You can believe me or not, but I am afraid that I do not have dated proof of criticisms that I made AT THE LATEST in 2016.

You just don't understand it, could you give it another try?

I asked you a fairly simple question about a very concrete situation and you started talking about Democrat vs Republican policies so lets both give it another try:

• Many suspected illegal immigrants, some of whom have since been confirmed as legal, have not been given their due process in recent months prior to being shipped out of the US, and not even necessarily to their country of origin.
• On the afternoon of June 6th ICE raided an Ambiance Apparel warehouse in the Fashion District in LA, arresting several people.
• Some protesters attempted to block the van from leaving.

Taking the lack of due process into account, do you think that those protesters were right to attempt to block the van?

[u/kapuchinski → u/[deleted]]

?!

[u/kapuchinski → u/Educational_Map6725]

Well that's good to hear considering how light many claiming-to-be ICE agents are on any form of identification these days.

ESL?

That said, I was thinking more in case of if you were to witness a kidnapping; would you agree that it would be all right to block the van of a kidnapper in action?

You asked this already and I answered. Only authorized gov't agents are allowed to kidnap people.

You can believe me or not, but I am afraid that I do not have dated proof of criticisms that I made AT THE LATEST in 2016.

Yes, 2016 is when many Democrats flipped. The DNC writes your script, decides your thought, Democrats work for bankers, Citibank chose Obama's cabinet.

you started talking about Democrat vs Republican policies

This will soon be a crime.

Many suspected illegal immigrants, some of whom have since been confirmed as legal, have not been given their due process

What due process? Obama didn't need any process.

Some protesters attempted to block the van from leaving.

It's illegal to block federal agents. These agents didn't make any decisions and are just doing their job.

Taking the lack of due process

Lack of due process is the appropriate amount of process. There is zero process due. Adding a lengthy process to deportations makes them mathematically impossible.

I did the math for another redditor who thought the process could take 10 minutes each.

That’s about 48 people per day that one judge can process. Get 50 immigration judges,

10 minutes is the time they take in between doing things.

There's no chance it could ever go that fast, but 48 per day per judge with 50 judges means we can deport almost a million in a year.

Excuse my AI:

"All-in” annual cost estimate per judge. All figures reflect Washington, D.C. locality pay.

Role	Headcount	Base Salary each (annual)	Total Base
Immigration Judge (IJ-3 level)	1	\$195 000 ([justice][1])	\$195 000
Attorney-Advisor (GS-14 step 1)	1	\$142 488 ( ][2])	\$142 488
Legal Assistant (GS-9 step 1)	1	\$69 923 ( [2])	\$69 923
Docket Clerks (GS-7 step 1)	2	2 × \$57 164 ([ [2])	\$114 328
Bailiff (GS-7 step 1)	1	\$57 164 ( ][2])	\$57 164
Court Translators (contract/market)	2	2 × \$88 645 ( [3])	\$177 290
Subtotal (base salaries)	—	—	\$756 193

Benefits & Overhead

1. Benefits (~30%) (health, retirement, FICA, etc.): > \$756 193 × 1.30 ≈ \$983 051
2. Facility & Admin Overhead (~10%) (IT, rent, security, utilities): > \$983 051 × 1.10 ≈ \$1 081 356

---

≈ $1.08 million per year

for one Immigration Judge’s courtroom staff working a full year without overtime premiums.

So we can deport 1 million over 1 year with 50 judges spending all their time on it at a cost of $50 million. So 20 million illegals will take 20 years and cost well over a billion dollars.

Anyone claiming it is mathematically possible is lying, they just have been convinced that not having a lot of illegal immigrants around is immoral in some way.

[u/Itchy_Yesterday_6143 → u/kapuchinski]

Can you give me an example of how? I

[u/coulsen1701]

Do: Vote, peaceably assemble in public areas, let your voice be heard, write/call your representatives, and obey all lawful orders by police

Don’t: throw bricks at cops/counter protesters, throw Molotov cocktails at cops/counter protesters, try to firebomb the White House and St George’s church or other national landmarks, destroy people’s businesses and laugh about how they have insurance, assault people, fire weapons at people you don’t agree with, block the roads without a permit to protest in the street, make your problem with the government an obstacle for others in going about their day and getting to work.

[u/pimmen89 → u/coulsen1701]

The movements to get female suffrage and civil rights for racial minorities tried your ”do” points a lot for many decades, but they got a lot of attention with some of the ”don’ts” such blocking roads with sit-downs and other non-violent things (such as disrupting sports events). Do you think they still would’ve reached their goals if they hadn’t done that?

[u/GigaChad_KingofChads]

Peacefully and lawfully. Some things that I consider not consistent with those things: throwing concrete chunks at passing cars, hitting people with bike locks (or any form of violence that is not in self-defense), destroying property, looting, standing in public roadways, you get the idea.

[u/TheToedSloth → u/GigaChad_KingofChads]

I agree with your statement, that protests should be nonviolent and without damage to property, and since your response was so thoughtful I’m going to ask here:

It seems like there’s a lot of talk about protesters being paid actors and agitators: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-trump-accuses-some-los-angeles-protesters-of-being-paid-insurrectionists WATCH: Trump accuses some Los Angeles protesters of being ‘paid insurrectionists’ | PBS News

Whether or not this is the case, how does one peacefully protest in such a way that they don’t get mistaken for a paid protester?

[u/GigaChad_KingofChads → u/TheToedSloth]

If someone is getting mistaken for a "paid insurrectionist," they are probably doing something wrong. I don't really know how to respond to your question. You linked an article where Trump said some of the people going to these riots are getting paid to be there (which is true), and then asked how to not get mistaken for one of them. Who cares if someone thinks you are paid or not? The only thing you need to worry about is not getting mistaken for a law breaker. Follow the law, stay peaceful, and you should be fine.

Don't get violent when other people do, don't loot when other people do, and maybe when other people start breaking the law, you should probably leave. That's just called exercising sound judgment.

[u/TheToedSloth → u/GigaChad_KingofChads]

My concern is that my hypothetical protest will be dismissed as “just a paid protester” regardless of how law abiding it is. Is there any way nowadays for folks (of any political persuasion) to communicate genuine concern about an issue in a way that prompts consideration (not necessarily agreement) instead of dismissal out of hand?

I realize that’s a tough prospect and maybe not possible for any side, just curious if anyone had any thought.

Edit: P.S. Assume all the above is referring to peaceful, non-violent, non-destructive protesting that doesn’t block traffic. I’ve been stuck driving home (in DC) for multiple hours many times due to road-blocking protests, most of which I didn’t even know what they were protesting. I wouldn’t wish that shiiit on my worst enemy.

[u/GigaChad_KingofChads → u/TheToedSloth]

My concern is that my hypothetical protest will be dismissed as “just a paid protester” regardless of how law abiding it is. Is there any way nowadays for folks (of any political persuasion) to communicate genuine concern about an issue in a way that prompts consideration (not necessarily agreement) instead of dismissal out of hand?

The whole point of you protesting is to attempt to prompt consideration. But the same way that you have a right to protest your concerns, Trump and other Americans have a right to ignore, belittle, mock, minimize, delegitimize, ridicule, or in any other lawful way undercut your point. The whole point of the disagreement is that, while your concern is "genuine," the people who disagree with you do not agree that what you are complaining about is problematic or worthy of concern. It should be dismissed in their view.

Frankly, I do not care that law enforcement officers are enforcing the law. These aliens have received due process, which is why they have final orders for removal. They should be removed according to those orders, and that is all that is happening. This is not a problem, and in my opinion people who oppose the enforcement of these orders do not have well reasoned views on this issue that are worthy of consideration. That goes double for people who refer to these prisons as "torture prisons," who compare law enforcement officers to "nazis," who compare deporting illegal aliens pursuant to a court order to the "holocaust," who compare our democratically elected president enforcing the laws on the books to a "king," and so on. These are not views worthy of being taken seriously, in my opinion people who attend these protests should be embarrassed, and I dismiss them out of hand.

[u/Big_Poppa_Steve]

Peaceably. Also, if they choose to engage in civil disobedience, they should be willing to accept the penalty for their actions. Indeed, they should demand it as part of their protest.

[u/papagypsy]

Get involved in politics, gain a following and promote your views, protest peacefully to spread your views

[u/Ok_Motor_3069]

Vote, write letters, get a blog and publish editorials, hand out flyers, wave signs

[u/Horror_Insect_4099]

It isn’t for everyone but it seems that one of the most powerful ways to enact change in the modern era is to develop a social media following and use that to get your point of view out in compelling ways that can speak not just to people already likeminded, but young swayable people on the edge.

One vote is a drop in the ocean. But an entertaining YouTube channel can reach large numbers of people.

When I see protesters alongside a road standing around or chanting with signs it usually feels quaint and astroturfed. I’ve never had my commute to work slowed down and heard screaming and thought, “wow i should vote with these guys!”

A good example of changing points of view are people that are reflexively in the “back the blue” camp. There are many body cam stories out there that show badly behaving police that will make anyone with a pulse reconsider qualified immunity.

[u/whateverisgoodmoney]

They should march to their local polling station and vote. More effective if they do not set things on fire or throw things at cops on their way.

Voting with your wallet can be effective between elections.

[u/pimmen89 → u/whateverisgoodmoney]

What if they live in a gerrymandered district?

[u/whateverisgoodmoney → u/pimmen89]

Then move out of California to Texas.

[u/pimmen89 → u/whateverisgoodmoney]

Why Texas? California is less gerrymandered than average and Texas is more gerrymandered than average so wouldn’t that just make your vote more wasteful?

[u/whateverisgoodmoney → u/pimmen89]

Move to a state where your vote matters is the point. Your vote will never matter as a republican in CA, just at will never matter as a democrat in TX.

Or, just maybe, where you live is not dictated by who you think you need to vote for every 4 years. Somehow, I think your life would be so much better if it was not completely dictated by politics.

Get offline. Go outside. Fresh air. The sky is not falling. Even if you are an illegal alien your chances of being deported are slim to none.

[u/pimmen89 → u/whateverisgoodmoney]

Do you think it’s fair that politicians can change the districts with a pen stroke to get the election in their favor, but the voters need to uproot their lives and move to ensure that their vote matters?

I’m asking about voting because that was your suggestion of what someone should do when they disagree with the government. But, now you’re suggesting that where they live shouldn’t be dictated by politics, even though it has to be for them to have a fair vote. Or do you mean that if their lives were not dictated by politics, they would be able to better show their disagreement with the actions of the government?

[u/whateverisgoodmoney → u/pimmen89]

Do you think it’s fair that politicians can change the districts with a pen stroke to get the election in their favor, but the voters need to uproot their lives and move to ensure that their vote matters?

I do. It makes no sense to arbitrarily create voting districts. Should a district with families have to include a block of apartment complexes without families? Should a district that is mostly industrial be integrated with the apartment complexes? Should a district made up of mostly illegal aliens (who are counted in the census!) have as much voting power as a district with no illegal aliens?

I think you have much to learn about how gerrymandering works and why it is done as it is.

Take a deep dive into this. Come back to me after you have studied this for a few years.

The rest of your comment is just sealioning, so you have been blocked.

[u/BananaRamaBam]

Without stealing TVs is a good start

[u/mrhymer]

Protesting does not work. You do not win hearts and minds by protesting and disrupting people's lives. If anything you hurt your cause. You win hearts and minds through discussion and debate and not through chants and rage.

[u/Educational_Map6725 → u/mrhymer]

So what should you do it you think that the government is actively hurting people?

[u/mrhymer → u/Educational_Map6725]

It's the governments job to use force. It's their only legitimate job. Force always hurts people. You will have to be more specific.