Who holds the blame for the events in Chicago?

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Trump.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

The apologists for Trump's bigotry know no bounds. After today it should be pretty damn clear what the consequences of letting Trump ascend to power would be. Anyone who isn't terrified and disgusted is fooling themselves.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

The apologists for Trump's bigotry know no bounds. After today it should be pretty damn clear what the consequences of letting Trump ascend to power would be. Anyone who isn't terrified and disgusted is fooling themselves.

I am terrified and disgusted by the lengths anti-Trumpists are willing to go to silence political discourse. Tonight was a sham and the protestors should be embaressed.

Donald Trump does not offer political discourse. He's a buzzword candidate who plays on fear and base emotions to manipulate people. There's no substance.

Even if there was substance, your desire for discourse is pretty hypocritical under the current circumstances.  "Discourse" is something that involves an exchange of ideas between two competing parties. If you were really interested in discourse you would understand that the people you call terrorists () also have something to say and have just as much right to make their voices heard as Donald Trump—a man who's finally starting to experience the reality that if you play with fire enough you're bound to get Berned. These protesters have freedom of speech too.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

My goodness. I have to laugh at the people who are forcing the argument that protesting a Trump event would be the same as protesting a Sanders event.

It has been clear to anyone with more than half a brain that everything about Donald Trump's campaign and candidacy has been unconventional. It's unlike anything we've seen in modern times. The guy says whatever he wants with no regard for the consequences. He calls Mexicans rapists, associates women who dare to think critically with menstruation, deems all Muslims a terrorist threat, insults prisoners of war who have made huge sacrifices for their country, calls on his supporters to rough up protesters, hurls every kind of bad name at his political opponents, offers zero substantive plans for the country... and we're supposed to treat this man like he's just the same as any other politician? If that were true, he wouldn't get the support he's been getting; it's obvious he's different. His rise has caught everyone off guard.

What makes Donald Trump different is without a doubt the incendiary nature of everything he says. People are shocked at what comes out of his mouth, and there's entertainment value in that. The thing is, it makes him completely different from someone like Bernie Sanders who does have some tact and respect. Accordingly, protesting a Trump event is fundamentally different than protesting a Sanders event; the protestors would be protesting completely different things. Trump protestors protest obvious hate and divisiveness (for proof that this hate is there and being dredged to the surface by Trump, see every Trump event ever). They protest dangerous rhetoric. Sanders protestors would be reacting with revenge to the legitimate Trump protestors (they are legitimate because Trump has threatened the very core of their identities), or responding with bombast to a controversial but tame and detailed set of policies. The reaction would here not match the initial action from Sanders. So Trump protests and Sanders protests are apples and oranges. Actually not even that, because there are good reasons to eat both of those. It's like apples and veal. Eating apples make sense, but eating veal is pretty senseless when you realize there's no need to kill a baby cow 'cuz you can just have steak.

In other words, Bernie Sanders has established himself on policy grounds, which means that the best way to protest him is to dialogue, because dialogue is actually possible. Trump is just a pathos candidate, which means the only way to protest him is to send a counter charge of emotion. These are the terms he's established, and being so inflammatory means it will be worse. This is why no one will protest the other candidates like what we saw yesterday: The other candidates have set different rules for engagement (this is also why yesterday's events are Trump's fault). Since these rules of engagement are different, it also means that it probably will be the protestors' fault if something similar does happen to the other candidates. Yes, it's a double-standard, but it's one that has come directly from the candidates themselves.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I apportion the fault as follows:
Protestors - 51%
Drumpf supporters - 19%
Drumpf - 30%

Could you do the rest of us a favor and change quotes to use Trump instead of Drumpf?  I don't like seeing other people misquoted or being misquoted myself by your little John Oliver extension.

Sounds like an assault on free speech to me.