login
Protests
-
No new posts
|
 2017-01-20 7:56 AM |
Champion  10157    Alabama |  Subject: ProtestsI just don't get protests. Oh I know it is considered an American fundamental right. I'm not arguing against protests.....I just don't get it. You amass dozen, hundreds or thousand of people and you march down the road going "hey-hey, ho-ho, xyz has got to go!" But xyz never goes. I may be wrong but I just fail to see where protests ever changed anything. I was not around during the civil right era so maybe those marches caused things to change. But really, the only change comes from legislation at the local, state or federal level. So when 100,000 woman 'protest' a litany of issues tomorrow in DC, what do they expect to accomplish? |
| 2017-01-20 9:42 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
| Deep in the Heart of Texas | Subject: RE: Protests You didn't understand protests back in July either. I'm organizing a walkout today at about 11:30 CST. |
| 2017-01-20 9:47 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by Rogillio I just don't get protests. Oh I know it is considered an American fundamental right. I'm not arguing against protests.....I just don't get it. You amass dozen, hundreds or thousand of people and you march down the road going "hey-hey, ho-ho, xyz has got to go!" But xyz never goes. I may be wrong but I just fail to see where protests ever changed anything. I was not around during the civil right era so maybe those marches caused things to change. But really, the only change comes from legislation at the local, state or federal level. So when 100,000 woman 'protest' a litany of issues tomorrow in DC, what do they expect to accomplish? SHHHHHH!!!! That work is sometimes 75-100.00 an hour for us. |
| 2017-01-20 9:49 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Extreme Veteran 3025  Maryland | Subject: RE: Protests then don't go |
| 2017-01-20 9:51 AM in reply to: Hook'em |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by Hook'em You didn't understand protests back in July either. I'm organizing a walkout today at about 11:30 CST. LOL Wow, good memory!! Yeah, I still don't get it. I guess maybe it makes the protestors feel better by venting their frustration. Kinda like a kid who pitches a hissy fit and the parents just let them vent. |
| 2017-01-20 9:52 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by dmiller5 then don't go LOL OK, I will skip the protests/hissy fits..... |
| 2017-01-20 10:02 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
New user 1351 Austin, Texas | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Hook'em LOL Wow, good memory!! Yeah, I still don't get it. I guess maybe it makes the protestors feel better by venting their frustration. Kinda like a kid who pitches a hissy fit and the parents just let them vent. You didn't understand protests back in July either. I'm organizing a walkout today at about 11:30 CST. So the people marching for civil rights in the '60s were just a bunch of whiny babies throwing a hissy fit? Or do you think they had legitimate concerns? |
| 2017-01-20 10:14 AM in reply to: trijamie |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by trijamie Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Hook'em LOL Wow, good memory!! Yeah, I still don't get it. I guess maybe it makes the protestors feel better by venting their frustration. Kinda like a kid who pitches a hissy fit and the parents just let them vent. You didn't understand protests back in July either. I'm organizing a walkout today at about 11:30 CST. So the people marching for civil rights in the '60s were just a bunch of whiny babies throwing a hissy fit? Or do you think they had legitimate concerns? Read my post again and note: " I was not around during the civil right era so maybe those marches caused things to change." Guess you missed that part. :-) And btw, I never said the protestors did not have a legitimate concern did I? I just take exception to how they think they effect change. Do congressmen watch protests and decide to introduce legislation because some body is carries a sign that says "Stay out of my uterus!" Probably not..... |
| 2017-01-20 10:16 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
New user 1351 Austin, Texas | Subject: RE: Protests I did read that part. I wasn't around in the 60s either, but I know what effect the protests had. |
| 2017-01-20 10:27 AM in reply to: trijamie |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by trijamie I did read that part. I wasn't around in the 60s either, but I know what effect the protests had. Really? How do you know this? The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) is a landmark civil rights and US labor law in the United States[5] that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.[6] It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public (known as "public accommodations"). "Bloody Sunday" events. On March 7, 1965, an estimated 525 to 600 civil rights marchers headed southeast out of Selma on U.S. Highway 80. The march was led by John Lewis of SNCC and the Reverend Hosea Williams of SCLC, followed by Bob Mants of SNCC and Albert Turner of SCLC. Note this famous march happened AFTER the Civil Rights Act become law. |
| 2017-01-20 11:26 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
| 1731 Denver, Colorado | Subject: RE: Protests Are you only referring to the protests in the US, or worldwide? Because they did change or helped change, or at least influenced some actions in other countries. I can give you plenty of examples from the history of my country, Poland, you should remember what happened in China as well. The women's march? There was just one few months ago (so not 60s) in Poland. It was heard worldwide. And guess what: that march actually made the legislation to be revised and changed. |
| 2017-01-20 11:37 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Veteran 1019 St. Louis | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by trijamie Really? How do you know this? The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) is a landmark civil rights and US labor law in the United States[5] that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.[6] It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public (known as "public accommodations"). "Bloody Sunday" events. On March 7, 1965, an estimated 525 to 600 civil rights marchers headed southeast out of Selma on U.S. Highway 80. The march was led by John Lewis of SNCC and the Reverend Hosea Williams of SCLC, followed by Bob Mants of SNCC and Albert Turner of SCLC. Note this famous march happened AFTER the Civil Rights Act become law. I did read that part. I wasn't around in the 60s either, but I know what effect the protests had. The Selma march and others around that time were for voting rights, and led to LBJ pushing through the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Congress introduced that act on 3/17/65. I think protests have a huge effect on politics, but not in a way that it ever changes anyone's opinion on anything. It might sway a person who was already on the fence over an issue. But I think what they really do is bolster the politicians who already agree with the protesters, lets them convince themselves that they're fighting the good fight for their people. Democrats aren't swayed to vote pro-life when they see a half million people showing up every year at the March for Life rally, but Republicans see that crowd and use it to justify their continued pro-life platform. Republicans won't change because of the Women's March tomorrow, but Democrats will use a big turnout to justify being an obstructionist Congress throughout Trump's presidency. Don't get me wrong, they were going to do that anyway. But these big protests help them validate it to themselves that it's the right thing to do. Going back to the Selma march, LBJ already had the voting rights act more or less written up before it happened. But he had to sit on it until the right spark came along. The protests were the catalyst he needed. Above all else, politicians are concerned about keeping their job/power. |
| 2017-01-20 11:48 AM in reply to: Bob Loblaw |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by trijamie Really? How do you know this? The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) is a landmark civil rights and US labor law in the United States[5] that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.[6] It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public (known as "public accommodations"). "Bloody Sunday" events. On March 7, 1965, an estimated 525 to 600 civil rights marchers headed southeast out of Selma on U.S. Highway 80. The march was led by John Lewis of SNCC and the Reverend Hosea Williams of SCLC, followed by Bob Mants of SNCC and Albert Turner of SCLC. Note this famous march happened AFTER the Civil Rights Act become law. I did read that part. I wasn't around in the 60s either, but I know what effect the protests had. The Selma march and others around that time were for voting rights, and led to LBJ pushing through the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Congress introduced that act on 3/17/65. I think protests have a huge effect on politics, but not in a way that it ever changes anyone's opinion on anything. It might sway a person who was already on the fence over an issue. But I think what they really do is bolster the politicians who already agree with the protesters, lets them convince themselves that they're fighting the good fight for their people. Democrats aren't swayed to vote pro-life when they see a half million people showing up every year at the March for Life rally, but Republicans see that crowd and use it to justify their continued pro-life platform. Republicans won't change because of the Women's March tomorrow, but Democrats will use a big turnout to justify being an obstructionist Congress throughout Trump's presidency. Don't get me wrong, they were going to do that anyway. But these big protests help them validate it to themselves that it's the right thing to do. Going back to the Selma march, LBJ already had the voting rights act more or less written up before it happened. But he had to sit on it until the right spark came along. The protests were the catalyst he needed. Above all else, politicians are concerned about keeping their job/power. Thanks for the correction and good analysis. You are probably right, the protests let politicians sense which way the wind is blowing. I'm pretty sure absolutely NOTHING came of all the 'Occupy' protests. And protests that devolve into riots have a negative result IMO as it just confirms the biases and opinions people have. That kid on TV last night starting a fire and saying "...screw the president' also has a negative impact. |
| 2017-01-20 12:30 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Protests I'm watching video feeds of protestors running through downtown DC breaking every window of every business they pass......probably millions of dollar in damage. The "protestors" are armed with hammers and other implements. Unfortunately for the democrats in this country, they are becoming the face of your party. If you don't believe that you aren't paying attention. I'm sure many here agree......THAT is not protest, so no point in the media, or anyone else, referring to it as such. |
| 2017-01-20 12:51 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by Left Brain I'm watching video feeds of protestors running through downtown DC breaking every window of every business they pass......probably millions of dollar in damage. The "protestors" are armed with hammers and other implements. Unfortunately for the democrats in this country, they are becoming the face of your party. If you don't believe that you aren't paying attention. I'm sure many here agree......THAT is not protest, so no point in the media, or anyone else, referring to it as such. This just sad. Makes us look like a banana republic. The 60 boycotting democrats are partly to blame. |
| 2017-01-20 7:06 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Protests |
| 2017-01-21 11:31 AM in reply to: #5210867 |
| New user 175 | Subject: RE: Protests I believe many protests are for good cause and effective. Many more than that appear to be just 'fits. ' |
| 2017-01-21 3:31 PM in reply to: goforit |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Protests I've been watching all the protests today and really can't see the purpose.....I guess it makes them feel better. I did see a lot of crude and vulgar signs....and think that is counter productive. Is anything going to change because 500,000 marched? I don't think so. 60,000,000 people voted for Trump. |
| 2017-01-21 4:27 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Expert 2373 Floriduh | Subject: RE: Protests ... and this is not like the tea party, how? Better get used to it, it isn't going away. |
| 2017-01-21 5:35 PM in reply to: Oysterboy |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by Oysterboy ... and this is not like the tea party, how? Better get used to it, it isn't going away. No it's not......that's ok with me. |
| 2017-01-21 6:09 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by Oysterboy ... and this is not like the tea party, how? Better get used to it, it isn't going away. No it's not......that's ok with me. Agree, I kind of hope it sticks around because it guarantees the Democrats never win significant majorities ever again. |
| 2017-01-22 7:16 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Expert 2373 Floriduh | Subject: RE: Protests Guys, people said this about the Tea Party too but it ended up being an organic political movement that had a tangible effect in the election of a GOP majority. I will admit that as a left-leaning centrist I did not get the Tea Party at the time, and would have viewed it much like you viewed yesterdays marches. The question is can they keep it going like the Tea Party did, this is something that libs are not necessarily good at, they skip the midterm elections and fail to organize at the state level. With that said, I have done a lot of work with breast cancer survivors and I will tell you guys that if women have an issue they care about they will not let go of it like a dog with a bone. The ball is in Trump's court and he can do a great deal to soothe ruffled feathers from a historically contentious election. Just sayin', hard to credibly run the country with a 30% favorability rating. |
| 2017-01-22 10:09 AM in reply to: Oysterboy |
Pro 6838 Tejas | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by Oysterboy Guys, people said this about the Tea Party too but it ended up being an organic political movement that had a tangible effect in the election of a GOP majority. I will admit that as a left-leaning centrist I did not get the Tea Party at the time, and would have viewed it much like you viewed yesterdays marches. The question is can they keep it going like the Tea Party did, this is something that libs are not necessarily good at, they skip the midterm elections and fail to organize at the state level. With that said, I have done a lot of work with breast cancer survivors and I will tell you guys that if women have an issue they care about they will not let go of it like a dog with a bone. The ball is in Trump's court and he can do a great deal to soothe ruffled feathers from a historically contentious election. Just sayin', hard to credibly run the country with a 30% favorability rating. That 30% favorability rating is generally taken with what 1000 or so people on the east and west coasts? I'd say since he took half of the popular election votes, his rating might be a bit higher than 30%. Same goes for obama being rated higher than 50% in any poll on any subject. I'd suspect the polling pool to be little bit on the blue side. I hope he does absolutely nothing to soothe ruffled feathers. Extending an olive branch to the democrats will only result getting your hand bitten. The people have spoken the last four election cycles. Republicans have gained in the House and Senate since the ACA was jammed in during obamas first 2 years in office. These duly elected representatives of the people went to work, doing the things their constituents elected them to do. Only to be labeled as the party of 'NO' by the minority democrat party and their lapdog media. Even though it was obama saying no to everything they were trying to accomplish. The people have grown increasingly unhappy with this political stalemate and elected even more Republicans and now, Donald Trump, of all people to get things turned around. So no, I hope he goes into full on war mode against the left, the democrats and everything they accomplished through the past 8 years. |
| 2017-01-22 10:19 AM in reply to: 0 |
Expert 2373 Floriduh | Subject: RE: Protests Originally posted by mdg2003 Originally posted by Oysterboy Guys, people said this about the Tea Party too but it ended up being an organic political movement that had a tangible effect in the election of a GOP majority. I will admit that as a left-leaning centrist I did not get the Tea Party at the time, and would have viewed it much like you viewed yesterdays marches. The question is can they keep it going like the Tea Party did, this is something that libs are not necessarily good at, they skip the midterm elections and fail to organize at the state level. With that said, I have done a lot of work with breast cancer survivors and I will tell you guys that if women have an issue they care about they will not let go of it like a dog with a bone. The ball is in Trump's court and he can do a great deal to soothe ruffled feathers from a historically contentious election. Just sayin', hard to credibly run the country with a 30% favorability rating. That 30% favorability rating is generally taken with what 1000 or so people on the east and west coasts? I'd say since he took half of the popular election votes, his rating might be a bit higher than 30%. Same goes for obama being rated higher than 50% in any poll on any subject. I'd suspect the polling pool to be little bit on the blue side. I hope he does absolutely nothing to soothe ruffled feathers. Extending an olive branch to the democrats will only result getting your hand bitten. The people have spoken the last four election cycles. Republicans have gained in the House and Senate since the ACA was jammed in during obamas first 2 years in office. These duly elected representatives of the people went to work, doing the things their constituents elected them to do. Only to be labeled as the party of 'NO' by the minority democrat party and their lapdog media. Even though it was obama saying no to everything they were trying to accomplish. The people have grown increasingly unhappy with this political stalemate and elected even more Republicans and now, Donald Trump, of all people to get things turned around. So no, I hope he goes into full on war mode against the left, the democrats and everything they accomplished through the past 8 years. Well put Mr. Rove, well put. Edited by Oysterboy 2017-01-22 10:19 AM |
| 2017-01-22 10:21 AM in reply to: mdg2003 |
Pro 6838 Tejas | Subject: RE: Protests Oh and those aren't protests. Protests are lawful assembly of like minded people working towards a peaceful resolution to something that is unjust or some violation of constitutional rights. As soon as someone breaks a window or starts a fire, it's unlawful and nothing more than rioting IMO. I hope you get arrested, prosecuted and that mark on your civil record will haunt you for the rest of your life. Enjoy the criminal justice system and good luck getting that job paying more than 14K a year because you have an arrest record for assaulting a police officer with rocks and breaking windows on your hate fueled intolerant temper tantrum. |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Protests for $15 an hour minimum wage Pages: 1 2 3 | ||
| |||
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK