CDZ The right way to deal with protesters

[320 Years of History]

Bill Clinton faced protesters the other day as he was delivering a stump address to voters. Perhaps you have already seen the video, but if not....



Now this thread isn't about whether one agrees with his assertions about his policies. It's about the way in which he handled the protesters.

• He didn't throw them out of the rally.
• He didn't encourage folks to punch them.
• He didn't call them names.
• He didn't show up at a rally organized at his (his wife's) behest unprepared for what any fool could have anticipated would transpire.
• He did take them on directly himself.
• He did show that he knew more about what he was saying and what the protesters were saying than they did.
• He did make an effort to show them how and why they are mistaken in their claims.

That's not political correctness. That's called respecting folks who raise a point by directly taking on their grievance(s) and making the case that while they may have the grievances they do, they are misplaced insofar as they issue from his policies. That's what defending a position is. And that is not what Trump does with/to protesters who appear at his events, and that is one way for voters to know Trump doesn't truly have any respect for them, but he knows what empty promises and remarks to utter so as to appear to the small minded that he does.

 

[jwoodie]

How about Bernie's handling of the BLM protesters? Was he right to give them the stage?

 

[GaryDog]

Obama's been showcasing the right way to do this for over 7 years.

 

[320 Years of History]

Obama's been showcasing the right way to do this for over 7 years.

I agreed with you just to do so and since I did, I won't undo it. I don't actually know what Obama's done with protesters at his events. I do know I haven't heard anything about them in the news....at least none that come to mind.

 

[320 Years of History]

How about Bernie's handling of the BLM protesters? Was he right to give them the stage?

Sure. Why not? I'm certainly not going to say his doing so was wrong, even if I don't think it was a good idea. He didn't incite others to harm them or make veiled entreaties for his supporters to harm them.

 

[FA_Q2]

Trumps bombastic treatment of protesters is hurting him in the end IMHO.

It shows that he does not have the temperament to lead. Leading is not about yelling and being abrasive - it is about getting people to to do what is right and necessary. A trait that Trump does not seem to have.

 

[Manonthestreet]

How bout Ohio States....leave now or go to jail and get expelled

 

[TheOldSchool]

How about Bernie's handling of the BLM protesters? Was he right to give them the stage?

Bernie's a clown and a XXXX -- mod edit. He probably gave them the stage to catch his breath and get some oxygen.

 

[Elvis Obama]

How to handle loudmouths at your public event? Tell the they're idiots? It's true, but it's not a good strategy. Engage with them? How do you talk with someone who's shouting? How do you talk to a disruptive group when you've got a mic and they don't? It's absurd, and does no one any good. The speakers look weak or uncivilized. The disruptors look like misbehaving children. The best strategy is Obama's. Keep that "adult in the room' vibe. Of course, he's the president, and no one gets to grab mics out of his hands. I don't think there's going to be any more of that for the primary candidates either. Just shouting from the crowd.

 

[jwoodie]

How about Bernie's handling of the BLM protesters? Was he right to give them the stage?

Sure. Why not? I'm certainly not going to say his doing so was wrong, even if I don't think it was a good idea. He didn't incite others to harm them or make veiled entreaties for his supporters to harm them.

I wonder if you would take such such a charitable attitude if "right wing" protesters took over one of Hillary's events?

 

[JoeMoma]

How to treat protestors depends on how the protestors act. If the protestors become too disruptive (disturbing the peace) in a venue purchased by a particular candidate, they may need to be escorted out by the proper authorities. They have the right to free speech, but they don't have the right to shut down someone else's speech in his venue.

 

[JoeMoma]

How to treat protestors depends on how the protestors act. If the protestors become too disruptive (disturbing the peace) in a venue purchased by a particular candidate, they may need to be escorted out by the proper authorities. They have the right to free speech, but they don't have the right to shut down someone else's speech in his venue.

As Ronald Regan once said: I paid for this mic.

 

[GaryDog]

How about Bernie's handling of the BLM protesters? Was he right to give them the stage?

Sure. Why not? I'm certainly not going to say his doing so was wrong, even if I don't think it was a good idea. He didn't incite others to harm them or make veiled entreaties for his supporters to harm them.

I wonder if you would take such such a charitable attitude if "right wing" protesters took over one of Hillary's events?

I've seen people quietly sitting and wearing Bernie hats at Trump rallies who were expelled immediately. No noise, no disruption. I can guarantee you this kind of thing wouldn't happen if the situation were reversed.

Trump is a thin-skinned ****.

 

[JoeMoma]

How about Bernie's handling of the BLM protesters? Was he right to give them the stage?

Sure. Why not? I'm certainly not going to say his doing so was wrong, even if I don't think it was a good idea. He didn't incite others to harm them or make veiled entreaties for his supporters to harm them.

I wonder if you would take such such a charitable attitude if "right wing" protesters took over one of Hillary's events?

I've seen people quietly sitting and wearing Bernie hats at Trump rallies who were expelled immediately. No noise, no disruption. I can guarantee you this kind of thing wouldn't happen if the situation were reversed.

Trump is a thin-skinned ****.

That would be just wrong. Is there a youtube link for that?

 

[FA_Q2]

How to treat protestors depends on how the protestors act. If the protestors become too disruptive (disturbing the peace) in a venue purchased by a particular candidate, they may need to be escorted out by the proper authorities. They have the right to free speech, but they don't have the right to shut down someone else's speech in his venue.

This is true. Technically speaking, they don't have any right whatsoever to 'express' themselves in a private venue. The real point here is not what they have the right to do but rather the image and message that the particular politician dealing with them sends in their interactions with them.

In the video, Clinton basically takes their own point and smashes them over the head with it using facts and rationality. Trump has taken a different approach by being bombastic and over the top with them. Rather than shutting them down though it makes him look childish or mean and amplifies their message.

A politician can either use a protest to reinforce their position and popularity or they can be taken down a notch by them. It is totally up to the politician how it ends up being perceived.

 

[320 Years of History]

How to treat protestors depends on how the protestors act. If the protestors become too disruptive (disturbing the peace) in a venue purchased by a particular candidate, they may need to be escorted out by the proper authorities. They have the right to free speech, but they don't have the right to shut down someone else's speech in his venue.

This is true. Technically speaking, they don't have any right whatsoever to 'express' themselves in a private venue. The real point here is not what they have the right to do but rather the image and message that the particular politician dealing with them sends in their interactions with them.

In the video, Clinton basically takes their own point and smashes them over the head with it using facts and rationality. Trump has taken a different approach by being bombastic and over the top with them. Rather than shutting them down though it makes him look childish or mean and amplifies their message.

A politician can either use a protest to reinforce their position and popularity or they can be taken down a notch by them. It is totally up to the politician how it ends up being perceived.

I wish I'd written that. Spot on!

 

[Publius1787]

Bill Clinton faced protesters the other day as he was delivering a stump address to voters. Perhaps you have already seen the video, but if not....



Now this thread isn't about whether one agrees with his assertions about his policies. It's about the way in which he handled the protesters.

• He didn't throw them out of the rally.
• He didn't encourage folks to punch them.
• He didn't call them names.
• He didn't show up at a rally organized at his (his wife's) behest unprepared for what any fool could have anticipated would transpire.
• He did take them on directly himself.
• He did show that he knew more about what he was saying and what the protesters were saying than they did.
• He did make an effort to show them how and why they are mistaken in their claims.

That's not political correctness. That's called respecting folks who raise a point by directly taking on their grievance(s) and making the case that while they may have the grievances they do, they are misplaced insofar as they issue from his policies. That's what defending a position is. And that is not what Trump does with/to protesters who appear at his events, and that is one way for voters to know Trump doesn't truly have any respect for them, but he knows what empty promises and remarks to utter so as to appear to the small minded that he does.

And then he semi apologizes because he fears the misses will lose the racial black bigot vote.

 

[320 Years of History]

Bill Clinton faced protesters the other day as he was delivering a stump address to voters. Perhaps you have already seen the video, but if not....



Now this thread isn't about whether one agrees with his assertions about his policies. It's about the way in which he handled the protesters.

• He didn't throw them out of the rally.
• He didn't encourage folks to punch them.
• He didn't call them names.
• He didn't show up at a rally organized at his (his wife's) behest unprepared for what any fool could have anticipated would transpire.
• He did take them on directly himself.
• He did show that he knew more about what he was saying and what the protesters were saying than they did.
• He did make an effort to show them how and why they are mistaken in their claims.

That's not political correctness. That's called respecting folks who raise a point by directly taking on their grievance(s) and making the case that while they may have the grievances they do, they are misplaced insofar as they issue from his policies. That's what defending a position is. And that is not what Trump does with/to protesters who appear at his events, and that is one way for voters to know Trump doesn't truly have any respect for them, but he knows what empty promises and remarks to utter so as to appear to the small minded that he does.

And then he semi apologizes because he fears the misses will lose the racial black bigot vote.

What part of his remarks struck you as an apology? Where does he attest to apologizing because "he fears the misses will lose the racial black bigot vote?" Did either/a statement such as those you claim he made occur in a part of his comments that are not among those in the OP video? Do you have the remainder of the speech/rally? If so, I'd be happy to listen to it.

 

[JoeMoma]

Bill Clinton faced protesters the other day as he was delivering a stump address to voters. Perhaps you have already seen the video, but if not....



Now this thread isn't about whether one agrees with his assertions about his policies. It's about the way in which he handled the protesters.

• He didn't throw them out of the rally.
• He didn't encourage folks to punch them.
• He didn't call them names.
• He didn't show up at a rally organized at his (his wife's) behest unprepared for what any fool could have anticipated would transpire.
• He did take them on directly himself.
• He did show that he knew more about what he was saying and what the protesters were saying than they did.
• He did make an effort to show them how and why they are mistaken in their claims.

That's not political correctness. That's called respecting folks who raise a point by directly taking on their grievance(s) and making the case that while they may have the grievances they do, they are misplaced insofar as they issue from his policies. That's what defending a position is. And that is not what Trump does with/to protesters who appear at his events, and that is one way for voters to know Trump doesn't truly have any respect for them, but he knows what empty promises and remarks to utter so as to appear to the small minded that he does.

And then he semi apologizes because he fears the misses will lose the racial black bigot vote.

What part of his remarks struck you as an apology? Where does he attest to apologizing because "he fears the misses will lose the racial black bigot vote?" Did either/a statement such as those you claim he made occur in a part of his comments that are not among those in the OP video? Do you have the remainder of the speech/rally? If so, I'd be happy to listen to it.

It was the next day that he "semi apologizes".

Bill Clinton ‘almost’ apologizes to Black Lives Matter activists - The Chronicle of Winston-Salem

 

[JoeMoma]

How to treat protestors depends on how the protestors act. If the protestors become too disruptive (disturbing the peace) in a venue purchased by a particular candidate, they may need to be escorted out by the proper authorities. They have the right to free speech, but they don't have the right to shut down someone else's speech in his venue.

This is true. Technically speaking, they don't have any right whatsoever to 'express' themselves in a private venue. The real point here is not what they have the right to do but rather the image and message that the particular politician dealing with them sends in their interactions with them.

In the video, Clinton basically takes their own point and smashes them over the head with it using facts and rationality. Trump has taken a different approach by being bombastic and over the top with them. Rather than shutting them down though it makes him look childish or mean and amplifies their message.

A politician can either use a protest to reinforce their position and popularity or they can be taken down a notch by them. It is totally up to the politician how it ends up being perceived.

Part of Trump's appeal to his base is that is a strong alpha-male type of leader. It is to his advantage (with his base) to be seen as strong and decisive when he deals with disruptions caused by protestors.