A "Small vocal group" doesn't span basically every major city in the United States. Democrats have been on this tear for a long time now dating back to Ferguson and slowly building momentum to where we are at today And the fact your party leaders don't ever do anything to try to calm your party down shows they are fine with this and clearly think it "helps the cause"

[quote]A "Small vocal group" doesn't span basically every major city in the United States. Democrats have been on this tear for a long time now dating back to Ferguson and slowly building momentum to where we are at today And the fact your party leaders don't ever do anything to try to calm your party down shows they are fine with this and clearly think it "helps the cause"[/quote] Sure, it is, by definition, a minority portion of the greater Democrat party. Do I condone the actions of these people? Of course not. Have I condoned any of their protests which turned violent? Absolutely not. Furthermore, to clarify something for you, I actually tend to vote republican and did vote for Trump. If I were you, I wouldn't jump to asinine assumptions.

The millions who have participated in these protests and riots over the years dating back to Ferguson combined with the amount of Democrats who stay at home and agree with their actions combined with ALL the Democratic politicians who condone this nonsense easily equates to the majority of Democrats But it doesn't even have to be the majority. If there's, random guess, 150 million people with Democratic views in the US out of the 330 million or so US population and only 1/4 support these actions then that's still tens of millions of people. That's still a problem This uprising is not a small portion of their party. The people literally rioting might be but its easy to see most Dems don't disagree with whats been going on in the country lately. Read around the web, talk to them irl, they think they are making some "Change" in the US right now

[quote]The millions who have participated in these protests and riots over the years dating back to Ferguson combined with the amount of Democrats who stay at home and agree with their actions combined with ALL the Democratic politicians who condone this nonsense easily equates to the majority of Democrats But it doesn't even have to be the majority. If there's, random guess, 150 million people with Democratic views in the US out of the 330 million or so US population and only 1/4 support these actions then that's still tens of millions of people. That's still a problem [b]A minority is a minority. And I doubt most political leaders condone any form of violence. However, I'm sure they condone protests such as the women's march and other peaceful protests against government/etc. The problem with your argument is that it's all assumption, not real hard facts. [/b] This uprising is not a small portion of their party. The people literally rioting might be but its easy to see most Dems don't disagree with whats been going on in the country lately. Read around the web, talk to them irl, they think they are making some "Change" in the US right now[/quote] The uprising isn't a small section, but the violence is. The uprising is over actions taken by the new administration, some of which I agree with as well. So far, the new administration has put itself in opposition to the media, democrats, and even some of our allies (see Australia). Trump and his team need to sit down and realize that having the support of both parties will be much better for the country than continuing to drive them apart. Some of that has to do with his rhetoric, though, which I don't see changing.

Well why don't you condemn them instead of mentioning the left right dynamic? And I noticed you condemned the [i]fire[/i] but of [b]course[/b] you didn't say a WORD about the [i]violence[/i]. How typical.

[quote]Well why don't you condemn them instead of mentioning the left right dynamic? And I noticed you condemned the [i]fire[/i] but of [b]course[/b] you didn't say a WORD about the [i]violence[/i]. How typical.[/quote] I condemned the setting of the fire because that's all I read from your posts besides the "threat of violence". I didn't read your source, as I assumed my point would be made clearly -- that I was condemning the act. I mention the "left right dynamic" as you call it, because you, in your original post clearly make the distinction with the term "violent leftists". If you had just said "protesters turn violent" instead of being inherently and unabashedly partisan, I wouldn't have mentioned a thing about politics.

When the -blam!- has the right invaded a speech by a left wing speaker and burned and looted and attacked people modern day? You're going to have to link me a video of that before I take you seriously. Stop playing make believe.

Well excuuuuuse me if this dies t happen again and again and again from the left at every Milo event to every trump rally to the inaugural itself. Maybe if people like you stopped pretending violence was coming equally from the left and the right I wouldn't have to interject partisanship into it.