It's a bit early to start drawing parallels between 1968 and today but one scenario that could repeat itself is the destruction of the party at the center of the disruptions.
In '68 it was the Democrats and their candidate Hubert Humphrey who paid the price, this year, if history repeats will it be Republicans and Donald Trump who pay the price?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2016 08:58PM by RgrF.

We will have a better idea when someone roughs up Dan Rather...

[m.youtube.com]

---

=wr=

"I think we've got a bunch of thugs here, Dan."

1968 was quite different in a couple of ways. We were in the middle of a major war effort, with a draft and a widespread cultural change.

However, as I mentioned a couple of days ago, there is definitely some sort of weird vibe running through events nowadays. 1968 had two major assassinations and other strange occurrences. Now we are still in the the backwash of a colossal financial collapse and a cultural restructuring due to internet and computer tech in addition to a changing world order, both political and financial. Basically different, but still really, really weird.
Anything can happen. Watch out for the comet.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2016 10:33PM by Steve G..

What do you think of this AP story?

[hosted.ap.org]
CHICAGO (AP) -- Hundreds of jubilant protesters chanted victory cries and jeered at glum Donald Trump supporters as they filed out of an auditorium where the Republican presidential candidate abruptly canceled a campaign rally Friday night. Outside the auditorium, a protester shouted through a megaphone that Trump's appearance had just been canceled. The crowd roared in delight and began chanting: "We stopped Trump! We stopped Trump!"

The protesters outside closed in on the building, obstructing most of the exits just as Trump supporters began filing out. The Trump supporters had little choice but to push through the anti-Trump crowds that parted only slightly. Many protesters shouted at the Trump backers walked from the building: "Racists, go home! Racists, go home!"

After walking through what he described as a gauntlet, Trump supporter Bill Tail described protesters cursing at him as pushed through holding his 9-year-old daughter's hand. She cried, he said. "They scream about tolerance, but are being intolerant themselves," Tail, 43, of the Chicago suburb of Oaklawn, said. "That doesn't make sense."

Trump supporters Stu and Roberta Aschauer from suburban Warrenville echoed that. "I hear all this free speech crap, but they want to shut down free speech for us," Stu Aschauer said. "This is unfair, the protesters, the way they are treating us," said Roberta Aschauer.

There were some isolated physical confrontations among members of the crowd. Chicago police said they made some arrests.

Protesters inside had rushed the arena floor in jubilant celebration after the announcement that he was calling off the event due to security concerns. Many jumped up and down, with arms up in the air, shouting profanity, "We stopped Trump!" and "Bernie! Bernie!"

One demonstrator, Karie Otteburn, 28, of Chicago, said she had little sympathy that Trump supporters felt uncomfortable as they left. "If you are going to support a divisive candidate, you're opening yourself up to that kind of thing."

That will all depend on what narrative people generally accept.

Today Fox spent time attributing the disturbance to an organized effort led by the organization Move On, while Rachel Maddow at MSNBC ran a series of clips showing Trump exhorting his followers to the use of violence against protesters.

During a phone interview Rubio, unsurprisingly went both ways and Cruz during a live interview did about the same. They want to blame Trump but are cowed by their own political self-interests. They don't know how to speak their mind and speaking their mind is one of the driving forces behind the appeal of both Trump and Sanders.

I saw helicopters circling over the rally but was unable to get any sort of glimpse as I passed on the train right around the time it was supposed to start. I am happy it was cancelled but have to agree with the free speech argument- there is no justification for intentionally preventing Trump from speaking.

---

New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]

Both the Chicago PD and University PD say they never suggested it be cancelled, it was a decision made by the campaign once they learned they couldn't control admission to the event. In past rallies event organizers controlled who was admitted, because this was on the site of a public university, they couldn't do that.

They had no desire to have their candidate appear in front of a crowd they had no control over.

All in all, it was a good decision. Had they gone forward and had The Donald been booed off the stage the ensuing tumult might have been far worse.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2016 11:36PM by RgrF.

Quote
RgrF
Both the Chicago PD and University PD say they never suggested it be cancelled, it was a decision made by the campaign once they learned they couldn't control admission to the event. In past rallies event organizers controlled who was admitted, because this was on the site of a public university, they couldn't do that.

They had no desire to have their candidate appear in front of a crowd they had no control over.

All in all, it was a good decision. Had they gone forward and had The Donald been booed off the stage the ensuing tumult might have been far worse.

Got it-thanks-- was reacting more to very popular sentiment I've been hearing 'round here, and from students quoted in news articles that he shouldn't be allowed to speak.

---

New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]

[www.nbcnews.com]

---

New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]

The more they battle him, the more they rail against him the more it enlivens them. Just defeat him.

Quote
vision63
The more they battle him, the more they rail against him the more it enlivens them. Just defeat him.

Just do it, sounds much a Trump argument - it'll all be great just vote for me. Our question how exactly do you do that?

Quote
RgrF

Quote
vision63
The more they battle him, the more they rail against him the more it enlivens them. Just defeat him.

Just do it, sounds much a Trump argument - it'll all be great just vote for me. Our question how exactly do you do that?

Wake up. This is an election remember. This is why you don't waste votes.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2016 01:36AM by vision63.

Your practicable approach to what Americans can do politically, leaves many of us bereft of any sort of hope for any real change!!

I'll stick with Bernie until it's over.

If Bernie wins watch for Elizabeth Warren to be the of first cabinet choices he makes. She's a wonk and elevating her to a cabinet seat will be something long overdue.

Quote
RgrF
Your practicable approach to what Americans can do politically, leaves many of us bereft of any sort of hope for any real change!!

I'll stick with Bernie until it's over.

If Bernie wins watch for Elizabeth Warren to be the of first cabinet choices he makes. She's a wonk and elevating her to a cabinet seat will be something long overdue.

Stick with him. Just vote properly in November. And bring some enthusiasm. I wouldn't want Elizabeth in some cabinet position. She's fine where she is. She might be able to run the Senate.

It's a ~50-year cycle..

2016 - populist Trump, widespread mistrust of Government, etc...
1960's - Geo. Wallace candidacy, widespread mistruct... etc
1920's - (this period spread from the teens to the 30's) populist political figures would include Ted Roosevelt in 1912, Follette in 1924, Huey Long in the 30's; isolationism, Socialist movement
1860's - Civil War, 'buff said
1810's - Nation forming with typical growing pains, decline of the Federalist party in this decade led to the rise of populist Andrew Jackson in the 20's along with numerous alternative political parties coming and going.


“The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.” -- Winston Churchill

“The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.” -- Winston Churchill

Were that 50 year cycle model you suggest so and were we to go back far enough for it to be proven out, would we not today be discussing the merits of Henry the XVIII compared to Louis the XVI vs the rule of Pope Unctuous?

But is not our society currently arguing religion and it's place amongst our leaders? Same old, same old...

---

“No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong.” -- François de La Rochefoucauld

"Those who cannot accept the past are condemned to revise it." -- Geo. Mathias

I read Soros was contributing millions to stop Trump. The clash of the dollar signs.

This will be spun hard by talk radio and Faux News and will work for Mr. Trump and against the Democrats. This isn't like '68 or even '64. Spin, spin, spin. Mr. Trump has and will play this masterfully - this cancellation was well planned.

---

Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2016 07:49AM by Speedy.

Quote
samintx
I read Soros was contributing millions to stop Trump. The clash of the dollar signs.

I'd be skeptical of that one. Soros has acheived some sort of mythical status as a bogeyman among the right, and I could easily see Trump supporters dreaming this one up, since they seem to have a need to feel oppressed by the "powers that be".

In fact, Trump is a the biggest gift for the left in many years.

400,000 people are expected to gather in Chicago today to demonstrate about immigration and immigrants. Many hundreds of police are marshaling to keep control of the massive demonstration.
















Gotta love St. Patricks Day.

---

Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.

Quote
samintx
...and I could easily see Trump supporters dreaming this one up...

Trump supporters don't dream.

---

New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]

Quote
vision63

Quote
RgrF
Your practicable approach to what Americans can do politically, leaves many of us bereft of any sort of hope for any real change!!

I'll stick with Bernie until it's over.

If Bernie wins watch for Elizabeth Warren to be the of first cabinet choices he makes. She's a wonk and elevating her to a cabinet seat will be something long overdue.

Stick with him. Just vote properly in November. And bring some enthusiasm. I wouldn't want Elizabeth in some cabinet position. She's fine where she is. She might be able to run the Senate.

We don't want both Bernie and Warren taken out of the Senate at the same time without good replacements waiting to step in.

---

In tha 360. MRF User Map

Quote
samintx
I read Soros was contributing millions to stop Trump. The clash of the dollar signs.

God I hope so.
[www.nytimes.com]

Soros is not the top contributor to Dems or even close, but he did give $8 million to pro-Hillary and liberal SUPER Pacs in 2015.

He gave a lot to unseat W in 2004 and after that didn't work he started spending significantly less on campaigns. Maybe he's back now. I sure hope so.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2016 09:55AM by Lemon Drop.

This photo pretty much says it all.

[twitter.com]

Back to the future - 1939 edition.

That photo is a pic of a protester dressed as a Trump supporter..at least that's the story. (just rechecked this and it's still up for grabs as to whether this woman is Trumpeteer or a Mimic..)

I was there last night..it was pretty great. I did not go inside but I had many friends in there and they related a pretty great experience..folks coming together.

the AP story there is a bit puffed up, IMO. I was outside the UIC Pavilion for a long time and the protest was executed properly..always a few wild cards in these things though, can't account for the crazies on either side.. The Trump folks were a bit taken aback for once...good.

Of course..with a bunch of protesters there things are gonna get loud..that's what protesters do..they chant.

All in all it was an effective night and Im proud of Chicago for being the first to make a strong statement on Trump's dangerous behavior...The city felt better than it has in years last night...definite good vibe around the streets while walking home..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2016 11:00AM by Kraniac.

Quote
Kraniac
That photo is a pic of a protester dressed as a Trump supporter..at least that's the story. (just rechecked this and it's still up for grabs as to whether this woman is Trumpeteer or a Mimic..)
..

Trump supporter outside UIC
E. Jason Wambsgans / Chicago Tribune

Donald Trump supporter Birgitt Peterson, center, of Yorkville, argues with protesters March 11, 2016, outside the UIC Pavilion after the rally for the Republican presidential candidate was canceled.

who is saying she's a protestor? just curious. If they got her name then the reporter would have verified that she was in fact a supporter.

anyway - good for Chicagoans. And whoever declined to let Trump dictate who could be inside the rally.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2016 11:04AM by Lemon Drop.

Quote
Kraniac
That photo is a pic of a protester dressed as a Trump supporter..at least that's the story. (just rechecked this and it's still up for grabs as to whether this woman is Trumpeteer or a Mimic..)

I was there last night..it was pretty great. I did not go inside but I had many friends in there and they related a pretty great experience..folks coming together.

the AP story there is a bit puffed up, IMO. I was outside the UIC Pavilion for a long time and the protest was executed properly..always a few wild cards in these things though, can't account for the crazies on either side.. The Trump folks were a bit taken aback for once...good.

Of course..with a bunch of protesters there things are gonna get loud..that's what protesters do..they chant.

All in all it was an effective night and Im proud of Chicago for being the first to make a strong statement on Trump's dangerous behavior...The city felt better than it has in years last night...definite good vibe around the streets while walking home..

An aside. I 'LOVE" Chicago.

[www.msnbc.com]#

MSNBC reporting that the protest to shut down Trump's Chicago rally was organized by Bernie supporters.

Quote
Speedy
This will be spun hard by talk radio and Faux News and will work for Mr. Trump and against the Democrats.

Yup.

The Faux radio talking heads are saying that the protesters have no respect for the Constitution and are suppressing Trump's 1st Amendment right to speak. Trump picked up on it and is running with that angle.

(Yes, they're implying that private-citizen protesters exercising their 1st Amendment rights are violating the 1st Amendment which protects against the government suppressing such things as public protests by private citizens.)

---

Quote
Lemon Drop

Quote
Kraniac
That photo is a pic of a protester dressed as a Trump supporter..at least that's the story. (just rechecked this and it's still up for grabs as to whether this woman is Trumpeteer or a Mimic..)
..

Trump supporter outside UIC
E. Jason Wambsgans / Chicago Tribune

Donald Trump supporter Birgitt Peterson, center, of Yorkville, argues with protesters March 11, 2016, outside the UIC Pavilion after the rally for the Republican presidential candidate was canceled.

who is saying she's a protestor? just curious. If they got her name then the reporter would have verified that she was in fact a supporter.


anyway - good for Chicagoans. And whoever declined to let Trump dictate who could be inside the rally.

Lemon..for a while..couple of different stories floating on that picture..either scenario..it's either a funny shot or a creepy shot of a really messed up old lady.

: )

12:42 p.m.

A spokeswoman for Donald Trump says a man tried to breach the security buffer at his event in Ohio, leading U.S. Secret Service agents to briefly rush the stage to surround the Republican presidential candidate.

Spokeswoman Hope Hicks says the man "was removed rapidly and professionally."

Trump was speaking Saturday at a campaign rally in Dayton when he was briefly surrounded by Secret Service agents, who formed a protective barrier around him.

The agents left the stage quickly, and Trump was able to finish his speech and did so without apparent incident.

A personal angle from a friend...looks like a nice friendly Stop The Hate Monger event to me.
[www.youtube.com]

When it comes to issues like this I like to test my first inclination of judgment against how I would assess the situation if the facts were reversed in a partisan perspective - what if conservative activists mobilized to disrupt a Sanders rally in the same way that liberal activists mobilized to disrupt Trump's rally? How would I have judged the conservative activists?

One thing that makes it tricky to assess is how to account for the effect of Trump inciting violence at his rallies against protesters. Sanders wouldn't do that. Clinton wouldn't do that. Probably none of the other remaining Republican candidates would do that. I think it is likely that the strength of the mobilization by liberal activists to disrupt Trump's rally was due in no small part as a reaction to Trump's provocation of violence on the part of his supporters against people who protest against him. That factor is pretty much unique to him, so it is hard to see this situation in a fully symmetrically reversed partisan perspective (conservative activists mobilizing a large number of people to disrupt a Sanders' rally).

Never-the-less, I am inclined to be cautious about saying that the people who came out to show support for Trump at the rally were "deserving" of having their rally so completely disrupted. Greatly disrupting political rallies should not be accepted as a normal expectation. People should be able to attend rallies to support their candidate without protests keeping them from having the rally at all. People should be able to gather in public places near the rally to express their protest against the candidate. People should not physically engage with people they disagree with (though actual self defense when there is no other recourse is always justified), even if a person is a vocal protester at a rally.

---

e pluribus unum

The temperature was mild and it is almost spring in Chicago. Lots of people out having a good time.

---

Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.

Trump said that if right wing Republicans constantly disrupted Clinton rallies, the media would go nuts. I agree.

I don't care for Trump or his message, but he has a right to be heard, and allowing a crowd to exercise a heckler's veto (used in the loose sense) is in fact a suppression of free speech. The protesters are welcome to protest outside, picket, boycott, and demonstrate inside the venue up until they drown out the speaker. At that point, rights are being curtailed.

As for Trump inciting violence, I am not sure. He uses a lot of careless and crass rhetoric, but is hardly alone in this. (Consider the anti-abortion foes and their use of words and symbols.)

Or put another way: for whom is the shutting down of this rally a victory?

If I am not mistaken, wasn't this the first rally where attendees were not screened by Trump operatives? Something about the venue being public property?

---

=wr=

Quote
J Marston
I don't care for Trump or his message, but he has a right to be heard, and allowing a crowd to exercise a heckler's veto (used in the loose sense) is in fact a suppression of free speech. The protesters are welcome to protest outside, picket, boycott, and demonstrate inside the venue up until they drown out the speaker. At that point, rights are being curtailed.

As for Trump inciting violence, I am not sure. He uses a lot of careless and crass rhetoric, but is hardly alone in this. (Consider the anti-abortion foes and their use of words and symbols.)

Or put another way: for whom is the shutting down of this rally a victory?

Based on details that are making their way through the muck of MSM spin, it seems that the problem may have been more poor turnout of supporters than good turnout of protesters, and that Trump cancelled the rally to avoid embarrassment, trying to play it like it was a collaborative decision between him and police based on 'security concerns.'

---

New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]

Quote
Lemon Drop
[www.msnbc.com]#

MSNBC reporting that the protest to shut down Trump's Chicago rally was organized by Bernie supporters.

You don't get your lefty wings unless you can prove you can mix messages.

---

New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]

Quote
vision63

Quote
RgrF
If Bernie wins watch for Elizabeth Warren to be the of first cabinet choices he makes. She's a wonk and elevating her to a cabinet seat will be something long overdue.

Stick with him. Just vote properly in November. And bring some enthusiasm. I wouldn't want Elizabeth in some cabinet position. She's fine where she is. She might be able to run the Senate.

I agree. Why does everyone keep trying to pull Warren out of the Senate? The Senate is not a holding tank for future VPs and cabinet members. It's part of the legislative branch of the Federal Government and IT IS VERY IMPORTANT. We NEED GOOD SENATORS.

---

Quote
wave rider
If I am not mistaken, wasn't this the first rally where attendees were not screened by Trump operatives? Something about the venue being public property?

No. Saw a personal account online regarding the recent Kansas City rally. Two people wanted to see what a Trump rally was like. They showed up wearing Bernie livery and were accepted in. But that was it, no chanting, so sign waving etc.

They said they had some decent exchanges with some of the attendees but at one point a "real" protester got involved in something and was escorted out, whereupon Trump encouraged the crowd to get rid of anyone else like that. Once the two Bernie supporters, who had done/said nothing were outed to the wider audience they too were yanked, even as some other Trump supporters vocally objected to them being forcibly removed.

Quote
deckeda

Quote
wave rider
If I am not mistaken, wasn't this the first rally where attendees were not screened by Trump operatives? Something about the venue being public property?

No. Saw a personal account online regarding the recent Kansas City rally. Two people wanted to see what a Trump rally was like. They showed up wearing Bernie livery and were accepted in. But that was it, no chanting, so sign waving etc.

They said they had some decent exchanges with some of the attendees but at one point a "real" protester got involved in something and was escorted out, whereupon Trump encouraged the crowd to get rid of anyone else like that. Once the two Bernie supporters, who had done/said nothing were outed to the wider audience they too were yanked, even as some other Trump supporters vocally objected to them being forcibly removed.

I don't get the "No"- I think wave rider is essentially right.

---

New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]

Quote
Black

Quote
deckeda

Quote
wave rider
If I am not mistaken, wasn't this the first rally where attendees were not screened by Trump operatives? Something about the venue being public property?

No. Saw a personal account online regarding the recent Kansas City rally. Two people wanted to see what a Trump rally was like. They showed up wearing Bernie livery and were accepted in. But that was it, no chanting, so sign waving etc.

They said they had some decent exchanges with some of the attendees but at one point a "real" protester got involved in something and was escorted out, whereupon Trump encouraged the crowd to get rid of anyone else like that. Once the two Bernie supporters, who had done/said nothing were outed to the wider audience they too were yanked, even as some other Trump supporters vocally objected to them being forcibly removed.

I don't get the "No"- I think wave rider is essentially right.

Misspoke. The people I'd read about were FROM KC, not going to the KC rally. This was a few weeks ago, so either screening wasn't happening or they got in some other way.

Addition to 1968 section.
Russians invaded Czechoslovakia in August 1968.

Quote
Black
Based on details that are making their way through the muck of MSM spin, it seems that the problem may have been more poor turnout of supporters than good turnout of protesters, and that Trump cancelled the rally to avoid embarrassment, trying to play it like it was a collaborative decision between him and police based on 'security concerns.'

That would be a slick way to spin a negative into a positive, "positive" in this case defined as "sure to whip up the base into an even bigger state of anger and resentment".


The other thing to note is that there were big objections from the start to having Trump appear at the University of Illinois at Chicago. It may not seem appropriate to us. but the fact is that students can feel proprietary about their campus and it's normal for them to attempt to ban commencement speakers they don't want or to try to keep people they don't like from appearing on campus. It's not normal for it to become so yuuuuuge but everything around Trump is magnified these days.
[www.dnainfo.com]
[money.cnn.com]
I think msnbc is making the mistake of assuming that, since many of the anti-Trump people were Bernie supporters, that this was a Sanders rally invading a Trump rally. They say "activists tapped into existing networks of pro-Bernie Sanders and Black Lives Matter activists" and then morph that into "How Bernie Sanders supporters shut down a Donald Trump rally in Chicago". Not only do I find this intellectually lazy, it feeds into Trump's calls for his supporters to go disrupt Sanders rallies in revenge. So rather than report news msnbc seems to have chosen to fan the flames of the worst aspects of Campaign 2016. I don't have cable and don't watch msnbc but if this is the caliber of their reportage then I think they are no better than FOX.

---

Quote
$tevie

Quote
Black
Based on details that are making their way through the muck of MSM spin, it seems that the problem may have been more poor turnout of supporters than good turnout of protesters, and that Trump cancelled the rally to avoid embarrassment, trying to play it like it was a collaborative decision between him and police based on 'security concerns.'

That would be a slick way to spin a negative into a positive, "positive" in this case defined as "sure to whip up the base into an even bigger state of anger and resentment".


The other thing to note is that there were big objections from the start to having Trump appear at the University of Illinois at Chicago. It may not seem appropriate to us. but the fact is that students can feel proprietary about their campus and it's normal for them to attempt to ban commencement speakers they don't want or to try to keep people they don't like from appearing on campus. It's not normal for it to become so yuuuuuge but everything around Trump is magnified these days.


[www.dnainfo.com]
[money.cnn.com]
I think msnbc is making the mistake of assuming that, since many of the anti-Trump people were Bernie supporters, that this was a Sanders rally invading a Trump rally. They say "activists tapped into existing networks of pro-Bernie Sanders and Black Lives Matter activists" and then morph that into "How Bernie Sanders supporters shut down a Donald Trump rally in Chicago". Not only do I find this intellectually lazy, it feeds into Trump's calls for his supporters to go disrupt Sanders rallies in revenge. So rather than report news msnbc seems to have chosen to fan the flames of the worst aspects of Campaign 2016. I don't have cable and don't watch msnbc but if this is the caliber of their reportage then I think they are no better than FOX.

yeah, they picked the old Circle Campus..the most diverse campus in town. I went to Circle (that's what it used be called) and I don't doubt for a second that they knew this..The sensible choice would have been a facility somewhere in the NW suburbs, closer to Trump's jet at Ohare..and no doubt closer to his @#$%& as well.