329
specifically what "rhetoric" are they trying to blame this on, and specifically how is it worse than GOP's rhetoric?
rhetorical question. i know there's no valid answer that's rooted in reality
It's just Trump's typical defense - accuse the other side of what you're doing before they can, so when they say it, it's at worst a "both sides" issue to the public.
not just trump.. its the P in GOP... projection
Oh, you got them bad with the reality. Otherwise they'd have plenty of answers!
"Your divisive rhetoric caused action from this domestic terrorist we've been radicalizing! It's sneaky to make them go after us! They're supposed to attack the groups we hate.
"Why can't we cooperate on the real issues (immigrants stealing and eating cats)?"
He had a self published book calling for the assassination over trump's political acts as president and out of fear what a second term would mean. There's no party rhetoric there.
Ryan Routh, the man arrested in connection with an apparent attempt to shoot Donald Trump on Sunday, urged in a self-published book the assassination of Trump over the former president’s decision to withdraw from a diplomatic agreement restricting Tehran’s nuclear program.
The 2023 book, a rambling diary of Routh’s attempts to join Ukraine’s fight against Russia and his political views, describes his growing disillusionment with Trump as well his anger at the 2021 U.S. exit from Afghanistan and other foreign-policy decisions he describes as blunders.
“I must take part of the blame for the removed child that we elected for our next president that ended up being brainless, but I am man enough to say that I misjudged and made a terrible mistake and Iran I apologize,” Routh wrote, criticizing Trump for leaving the deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, in 2018.
“You are free to assassinate Trump as well as me for that error in judgment and the dismantling of the deal,” he said in a passage apparently directed at Iran’s government. “No one here in the US seems to have the balls to put natural selection to work or even unnatural selection.”
- wsj article titled "Suspected Gunman in Apparent Trump Assassination Attempt Said He Was Willing to Fight and Die in Ukraine"
This is what I think needs to be pointed out more often. He is a former Trump supporter who feels betrayed by Trump's actions in office. A former cult member woke up and realized that Trump was a threat to the nation. Of course, being a former cult member, and lacking the strongest of connections with reality, he decided that hiding in the bushes and trying to shoot him was a reasonable solution.
The article however says, "Routh’s past online posts suggest the suspect has not been consistent about his politics in terms of supporting Democrats or Republicans."
All these articles are trying to say he wasn't really a Republican or a Democrat and trying to run cover for the GOP. But that's not true. The fact is that he's a former Trump supporter, a former Republican, who realized that Trump was full of shit but he still had a head full of the GOP's and Trump's violent rhetoric. Being a consistent supporter of one party or the other is irrelevant. This had nothing to do with Democrats and everything to do with the GOP and Trump promoting violence and availability of deadly weapons like the one he used.
That's a bingo.
Yeah. His actions were unwise and influenced by the violent rhetoric of the far right, but he was right to feel betrayed. I want other trump cultists to come to those realizations, but instead of choosing violence to choose to stand up, speak to those still in, and try to help heal this country and bring it onto the right path.
With a headline like that I expect some reactions from Republicans in the article. You can't just say they are ignited but give me no descriptions or, even better, pictures.
At best you were going to get some tweets. Nothing might actually be better. Lol
this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
329 points (98.5% liked)
politics
19096 readers
2011 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS