Do You Ever Expect the intensity of anti Trump rhetoric to escalate to violence?

SHUTUP YOU ALT-RIGHT PARTISAN HACK NAZI-SUPPORTING SON-OF-BITCH!!!!!!

HOW DARE YOU POINT OUT SUCH AN OBVIOUS FACT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GET BACK IN YOUR GROUP WITH THE REST OF THOSE FILTHY DEPLORABLES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That would be odd - if that were my claim.

as explained - very slowly - to FF in subsequent posts.

let's put it another way

Regardless of context, this statement is true. As a member of the House, she's at least mostly harmless while retaining high levels of entertainment value. The same can't be said of the President.

Oh, and while we're on the subject, what about pejorative terms for the President? A few people here on this very board were fond of calling President Obama the "novelty President." Wouldn't that be even more true for President Trump? Either way, I'm voting for Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho in 2020.

If you don't believe that then you really should edit the OP. It is there for everyone to see.

Yeah, because everyone to the right of you is the KKK, right? This is why you fail.

This is why you can't have nice things. You take a particle of something, and turn it into the boulder you carry on your Sisyphean task to civilize those crazy liberals who think Mexican immigrants are people.

I quoted the response from FF and used a different subject than "genocide" to illustrate in metaphorical block letter written in crayon what the actual point is - and you pretend not to see it. Do your reading, I'm not yo mama

^
That moment when you are trying to impress me with your superior intellect and you misspell "KKK"

Completely agree that if "novelty prez" applied to Obama it applies doubly to Trump.

As to Mad Max, her bold advocacy to practically 'assault' in response to Trump's obnoxiousness certainly helps us all to notice the one "right" after adding up the wrongs. [obviously I mean assault in a legal sense of reasonable belief of threat of attack]

Clue: When a lot of people talked about Obama being a "novelty" they were talking about a visual feature that Trump doesn't share.

Maxine specifically said non-violent. no one was called upon to assault anyone and, indeed, cautioned against it. Meanwhile Trump specifically said "punch him and I'll pay your legal bills" and not ONE member of #Cult45 is on record saying "he went to far and that's very dangerous" but they are now out in force piling on Waters.

of course, she's black and female so....

(here's another example - Dana Loesch makes a video - dressed in black and looking very very angry and says to the media on behalf of armed right wingers "your time is up, we are coming for you" and NOBODY currently criticizing Waters said a mumbling word along the lines of "maybe that's going to far?"

Again, what one trait distinguished Waters from Loesch?

We see through the bullshit very clearly.

I did not misspell it. Fucking spellchecker changed it. It changes all sorts of random shit.

You do know that Maxine Waters is a current long serving member of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Dana Loesch is well I don't have a clue who that is without looking it up.

Surely you can see a difference?

Again with the lies. Do you think you were born with pathological tendencies or is it just your complete lack of logical abilities which causes you to lie about other people's positions? There is certainly something very wrong with you here.

Keep rolling that stone.

Why don't you turn off the spellchecker?

Check most legal definitions of assault, please. In many, battery is the striking, assault is the fear of imminent battery. Getting in someone's face to the extent seen on the teevee in many cases exceeds the legal definition of "assault." I even specified which meaning of assault I was using. Max's admonition to get in their face, given the liberal excesses of the "liberals" is a recipe for assault - that's a clear, accurate statement.

Though it was my fault for using a term of art when the connotation obviously means 'physical contact' to most people. : ( But she's still a nutjob. : )

Yes, progressive liberals often rely on mind reading to make their case.

Clue: assuming things in your mind about others is generally as bad as the negative thoughts you attribute to others.

See, most folk check for misspellings as they type, and that includes autocorrect changes. That you don't either suggests you're too drunk or lazy to check your own shit, or you don't actually care about making fucking sense.

Any of these would explain much.

No, we don't. It would be foolish to base our opinions of you on such limited source material.

Mostly just typing on a cellphone with a not so large screen, the keyboard takes up half of it, the browser from a bit more, thought I confess to being to lazy to bother scrolling back up through the small lines. Usually I will hit post, read it (if I feel like it), and then do editing then after the post.

They do do that a lot. They attribute motive, normally without evidence but more based upon what ever is easiest or what they really hope the motive to be, they don't bother to listen and understand the basic argument, and then they run around pretending they are some how correct instead of just the fools they are.

Now, it is not all of them, there are a few thoughtful and diligent ones though they are a minority, and other groups (notably partisans of other flavors such as the right) due the same. So it is really more of a partisan thing than a left or right thing however there just are so many brain dead partisans these days. They tend to drown out the decent discussion with claims like anyone to the right of Mao is a Nazi/KKK member or anyone to the left of Antilla the Hunn is a communist, etc...

Uh huh. Sure you don't.

You are dodging the point that one encouraged non-violent protest, the other all but said "watch your back bitches" and ALL the people out there saying "OMG Maxine!" know perfectly well who both women are.

well yeah. Because she doesn't agree with you.

Let's stop using clues and let people talk for themselves:

Thread: "Why Do Some Consider the Term "Novelty President" Racist?" - Starts with:

End Thread: "Why Do Some Consider the Term "Novelty President" Racist?"

And finally, one last "clue"...

^Sorry, pal, that's your baggage holding you back in error and wrong assumptions, and is ultimately most revealing about your heart and mind. [good job on finding the one time I used that expression, don't believe your head, your life is actually worthwhile and not wasted on nonsense and stupidity.]

You never saw before, and will not see again, someone with such an insubstantial resume/background be elected to the highest office in the US.

Please prove me wrong however you see fit.

As to why I'd say Trump novelty - maybe try the mind-read again and score one out of two?

George W. Bush?