Most liked posts in thread: American Election

Just needed to put those bits together to show the dilemma and my unease with the situation.

So in the summer....after the first time that a protest turned from a peaceful gathering into a destructive riot......people knew that there were elements of the crowds who were angry, armed and potentially spoiling for a destruction.

If people were then subsequently encouraging the joining and escalation of the protests with terms such as "fight", "liberate", etc, etc, then aren't they at the very least doing something similar to Trump?

They knew their was the potential for violence and destruction (because those things had already happened) but used words that we now know can be contextualised as inciting that behaviour

Without looking at it through the prism of the race protests being right and the Trump supporters being wrong the behaviour and language behind it is difficult to accurately split.

 

Another one of the issues. I'm quite clearly questioning twitters policy and quite clearly saying the white supremacists who entered the Capitol were idiots and terrorists. The insinuation of any support for them is deeply insulting to be honest and undermines the debate.

The idea that nobody went on the BLM Marches went looking fot trouble is clearly unknowable. I would saynthat amongst such a large number of people the range of intentions would be mixed and the damage, destruction and death to an extent speaks for itself, not everyone who went on the marches was an angel. Don’t be an apologist for that. No one person was probably responsible but that still means that everyone involved was accountable.

Once again back on the Twitter rules. If he'd been banned for spreading disinformation and the final tweets were reflective if that then nobody would have had any complaints. Because they banned him for inciting violence and referenced tweets that used pretty standard language but required context to stretch to that is what causes the problem in consistency across the range of opinions.

 

Yep, those are what he got banned for. I took that screenshot straight from the Twitter explanation of his ban and I completely agree he's said worse things in the past. If they were banning him for consistent minor rule breaks then nobody could complained but that's not what occurred,

That's where the consistency issue becomes impossible. If that is the barometer of when people should be banned then how can that be applied fairly? Especially when the BLM statement are judged as completely fine.

 

Nor will he have the power/desire to address these problems..

 

You can get the Guardian app on your phone for free. You can also be a subscriber for £50 a year, which I am, which gets you extra features, like the ability to save articles for later.

 

What are you actually telling me to get real for? Get off your high horse. It was trending on twitter and is in major news outlets so I thought I'd share it.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-says-he-requested-10k-national-guard-troops-at-capitol-on-day-of-riot

 

Imagine being 'the worlds leading superpower' and having the best political representatives you can muster being Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

 

I’m not sure America has ever been more polarised, other than perhaps for the period of the Civil War. The left moves further left, the right, further right and any attempt at compromise, civil discourse or the willingness to ‘agree to disagree’ has been almost completely eroded.

 

I apologise, in my head I was reacting to the story not you, but can see how that came across!

My bad.

 

Same here. I have a nephew now an american citizen over there, he was shouting for Biden up to the election, if his dad (my brother) was still alive he wouldn't half be having a word with him...

 

Yeah, I agree, said that watching his inauguration

 

Step forward the Duchess of Netflix...

 

We should televise major cases here as at present there is no transparency in our justice system

 

I think that'll be important. Purely speculative on my part, but I think manslaughter is the most likely outcome.

 

A lawyer was saying he believed that would be the outcome, que the rioting looting etc, certainly in America supported by BAME over here.

 

I don't think it was. Reasonable doubt would be easy to infer - what police officer would deliberately set out to murder someone in that manner, in full view of a public armed with recording devices. I believe murder requires intent and pre-meditation. Equally, he'll likely argue that the manner of 'restraint' is a justifiable and accepted use of force in police tactics.

It'll turn nasty again. Nastier than last summer.

 

There is an old saying in politics, Never instigate an inquiry or review unless you know or can influence the outcome

 

It’s certainly looking grim.

 

Despite the fact it looks like Sleepy Joe will be triumphant, its not been the comfortable victory he must have hoped for.

Trump has amassed 80 million votes so far, not exactly a wholesale rejection of Trumpism

 

Has there been any rioting or anything that was predicted?

I’ve only caught bits of the news but not seen anything