Strange thing I have noticed at both the DNC and the RNC

Rob Henderson said:
SignS. I saw several. I can't prove they were all Democrats, but I'd wager they weren't Republicans either...
Click to expand...

Right. And if they were a member of the Green party? The Communist party of America? The neo-nazi movement? Thats my point. Just because they arent republican does not mean they ARE democrats. Thats an obvious logical fallacy.
 
Then that's what they were... But if that's the case, why didn't the protest to that extent at the DNC... Aren't communists against democracy as a whole? I didn't know they had party affiliations, especially liberal ones...
 
Rob Henderson said:
Then that's what they were... But if that's the case, why didn't the protest to that extent at the DNC... Aren't communists against democracy as a whole? I didn't know they had party affiliations, especially liberal ones...
Click to expand...

I have not heard in complete detail why people who choose to protest at the RNC more, but my guess would be its because the Republicans have been in power for the last 8 years. Many people, for right or for wrong, tend to blame the party in power for mistakes made during their tenure. And a lot of people feel there were significant mistakes made in the last 8 years.
 
Rob Henderson said:
And a lot of those people are....... Democrats.
Click to expand...

Come on now. A lot of those people is not all of those people, and is not even a majority of those people. What you did there is a logical fallacy known as "Fallacy of Accident" (You can read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(fallacy))

Basically, you are trying to say the following:

People who dont like the republicans are protesting at the RNC.
Democrats dont like the Republicans
Thus, Democrats are protesting at the RNC.

Logical fallacies are bad for debates.
 
I can personally guarantee that there were many Democrats at that rally. Whether it was a majority or not is not provable, so neither of us can say anything different. But like I said, I will guarantee that there were several Dems in the rally.


BTW, I do not claim to be a genius, but I DO know what a fallacy is, thanks.
 
Rob Henderson said:
I can personally guarantee that there were many Democrats at that rally. Whether it was a majority or not is not provable, so neither of us can say anything different. But like I said, I will guarantee that there were several Dems in the rally.
Click to expand...

Well, since its the majority that matters, you just destroyed your entire argument. Obviously you will always have the fringe few individuals who will do stuff like that, just like you had the few fringe Republicans who did the same at the DNC. But unless the MAJORITY of the protesters were Democrats, then there really is nothing to complain about.

I was trying to point out the actual fallacy, not tell you what one was. Sorry if thats how it came across.
 
WNxRogue said:
Well, since its the majority that matters, you just destroyed your entire argument. Obviously you will always have the fringe few individuals who will do stuff like that, just like you had the few fringe Republicans who did the same at the DNC. But unless the MAJORITY of the protesters were Democrats, then there really is nothing to complain about.

I was trying to point out the actual fallacy, not tell you what one was. Sorry if thats how it came across.
Click to expand...
But, and please correct me if I'm wrong as I didn't get to see the Obama or Biden speeches, there were not crazies rushing the stage at the Democratic National Convention...No one was dragged out of the stadium kicking and screaming, were they? My original point being that you didn't see things like this at the DNC, regardless of whether they were Republicans or not.
 
Rob Henderson said:
But, and please correct me if I'm wrong as I didn't get to see the Obama or Biden speeches, there were not crazies rushing the stage at the Democratic National Convention...No one was dragged out of the stadium kicking and screaming, were they? My original point being that you didn't see things like this at the DNC, regardless of whether they were Republicans or not.
Click to expand...

True that none of that happened at the DNC, but even if it did you would not see me railing against the Republicans for protesting so badly at the DNC. Obviously, I have no idea who those people are or what they believe in, and I personally try not to make serious accusations with out proof. Thats just me though, some people like to blame people first and think about it later.

And as I pointed out earlier, the party in power tends to have more people against them when things dont turn out like people want them. So whatever party they were, more people in the US dont like the Republicans at the moment, thus more people are going to protest at the RNC.
 
Well, for the sake of making an ass out of myself, I'm going to go ahead and assume that there were probably a strong number of Democrats there, just my opinion though, not like it matters anyway.

And you're right, the party in power DOES tend to have more people against them... An unfortunate byproduct of the electoral process... But just because they didn't do the best job doesn't mean people can be more violent in a protest... That's against the law.
 
Rob Henderson said:
Well, for the sake of making an ass out of myself, I'm going to go ahead and assume that there were probably a strong number of Democrats there, just my opinion though, not like it matters anyway.
Click to expand...

You my good sir, never back off of a mistake do you? Assuming is not good, it leads to mistakes and to problems. Better to be sure before you say something.

And you're right, the party in power DOES tend to have more people against them... An unfortunate byproduct of the electoral process... But just because they didn't do the best job doesn't mean people can be more violent in a protest... That's against the law.
Click to expand...

True, and I certainly am against violent protests like that. But I also would try and be sure who it is that need to be punished, and not assume on who it is and take action from there.
 
WNxRogue said:
You my good sir, never back off of a mistake do you? Assuming is not good, it leads to mistakes and to problems. Better to be sure before you say something.
Click to expand...
And that's why I said "at the risk of making an ass of myself." It was a bit of a joke... Only saying that there were probably a lot of Democrats there... And I'd be willing to wager that if we could figure out how many there were, I'd be right.


WNxRogue said:
True, and I certainly am against violent protests like that. But I also would try and be sure who it is that need to be punished, and not assume on who it is and take action from there.
Click to expand...
They did figure out who needed to be punished... Police don't know party lines... (Aside from Luis) They only arrested those in violation of the law.



EDIT: I must retract the statement about police.... Check out AikiRooster's post here... "FOP Endorses McCain."

And laugh at the irony. It's ok. I did too. Hahaha.
 
Last edited:
Well, those protesting the Republicans have much, much better and more numerous reasons to be angry.

I think it's a joke anyways, we need protests like the ones that scared Washington back during Viet Nam to make any real changes.

But that's not possible these days; they'll either herd you into a chain link cage called a "Free Speech Zone" (oh, the irony) or spray you with mace and throw you in jail.
 
major liability said:
Well, those protesting the Republicans have much, much better and more numerous reasons to be angry.

I think it's a joke anyways, we need protests like the ones that scared Washington back during Viet Nam to make any real changes.

But that's not possible these days; they'll either herd you into a chain link cage called a "Free Speech Zone" (oh, the irony) or spray you with mace and throw you in jail.
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
major liability said:
Well, those protesting the Republicans have much, much better and more numerous reasons to be angry.

I think it's a joke anyways, we need protests like the ones that scared Washington back during Viet Nam to make any real changes.

But that's not possible these days; they'll either herd you into a chain link cage called a "Free Speech Zone" (oh, the irony) or spray you with mace and throw you in jail.
Click to expand...
George Bush isn't running for president last time I checked... It's John McCain and Sarah Palin. They don't deserve to be protested like that. March on the White House if you want to, but do't do it to the new people just because they're in the same party...
 
Rob Henderson said:
George Bush isn't running for president last time I checked... It's John McCain and Sarah Palin. They don't deserve to be protested like that. March on the White House if you want to, but do't do it to the new people just because they're in the same party...
Click to expand...

Or voted 90% of the same?
 
Rob Henderson said:
George Bush isn't running for president last time I checked... It's John McCain and Sarah Palin. They don't deserve to be protested like that. March on the White House if you want to, but do't do it to the new people just because they're in the same party...
Click to expand...

John McCain has publically bragged that he has supported BUSH 95% of the time. Its even on Youtube. His record indicates a 90% agreement of Bush policies. Mrs Palin views are even more extreme that McCains.

Therefore its totally acceptable to equate the two as being a continuation of the Bush Doctrine.
 
They do have the right to protest as they are right: if McCain is elected there probably won't be any huge changes, at least not in the beginning.
However, beating up cops and doing the typical "ohhh look at us, we're anarchists" stuff really has to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top