Biden’s recent statement to donors saying “it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye.”

[bèlla]

The decision to shoot Trump is on the shoulders of the one who did it and anyone who helped if applicable. We hear inappropriate things all the time and don't respond with violence. Put the responsibility where it belongs.

~bella

 

[DaisyDay]

Yeah your team. Unless somehow you have just changed sides and become a staunch conservative.

Oh yeah, I forgot that in your world view everything is black or white. If someone is not a staunch conservative they must be a flaming Marxist Democrat who calls for the elimination with extreme prejudice of the opposition.

You won't believe me, I know, but a lot of people aren't on teams.

I didn't say a single untrue word and I'll say it again.

You did when you said that people on my team when I am not on a team. Did you know that some people are independent? Shocking, I know, but true nonetheless.

There were people on your side who kept claiming Trump is dangerous.

I say he is dangerous. I truly believe it.

A Democratic congressman said Trump can't be allowed to win and is dangerous and he has to be eliminated.

Two thing: I am not a Democrat or a congressman and what was the context? By eliminated, voted out of office, tried for his crimes and not allowed to be president again or mafia-style? You understand, I presume, that those are entirely different.

Never said you did.

And yet you're trying to hold me responsible somehow for what other people say? That's not better.

But it's pure hypocrisy to attack Trump for his so called dangerous rhetoric and not do the same thing regarding people on your side. No you didn't say a peep against it. In fact I bet you defended it.

Do you see what you just did? I do.

Yes we should wait, and you should take your own advice.

Well! You sure told me!

 

[SavedByGrace3]

A number of Republicans are pointing fingers at President Joe Biden for Saturday’s shooting at a Trump rally, with some citing Biden’s recent statement to donors saying “it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye.”

In a Politico article shared Monday, Biden reportedly told donors: “I have one job, and that’s to beat Donald Trump. I’m absolutely certain I’m the best person to be able to do that. So, we’re done talking about the debate, it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye.”

Citing his recent comments, Republicans blame Joe Biden for Donald Trump rally shooting

President Biden recently told donors he wanted to "put Trump in a bullseye." Now some Republicans are blaming him for Trump's shooting.

www.usatoday.com

OH!!! We are going to start taking words and statements in context! I hope that goes both ways.
And John Wilkes Booth thought he was killing a tyrant when he assassinated Abraham Lincoln.
I wonder if Thomas Matthew Crooks yelled "Sic Semper Tyrannis” (thus always to tyrants) as he killed two innocents and wounded another as well as Trump?

 

[Brihaha]

Of course it's important. Until we know exactly why a person tries to assassinate a presidential candidate it's perfectly reasonable to ascribe political reasoning of rhe shooter. And it's perfectly reasonable to suspect the vitrioloc rhetoric against Trump played a part. Was it the cause? Probably not solely. And I certainly don't believe Biden meant a literal bullseye. He wad using pitical speech. Just like Trump and umpteen other politicians used the word fight ad political speech and didn't mean it literally. When the Democrat congressman said Trump needed to be eliminated I don't think he meant literally. But we all have to recognize that when it gets that bad as calling someone Hitler and a threat to all people that it might help some weak minded person decide to take action.

Rhe responsibility of the shooting is on the shooter alone. But it should give us pause and make us consider how our rhetoric effects others.

It's surprising if that shooter even heard Joe Biden say we need to put the bullseye on Trump. I certainly didn't and I voted for him. I didn't realize everyone listens to what Mr Biden says. I thought he couldn't even form sentences from reading foxnews and breitbart and the gateway pundit lol. Y'all fell in love with Donald Trump due to his harsh, unforgiving rhetoric. You cannot have it both ways friend. We didn't start the fire that is Donald Trump.

So y'all will pause..............
Right before you vote for Trump lol.
Brilliant!

 

[bèlla]

You won't believe me, I know, but a lot of people aren't on teams.

Many don't get that. They're so polarized they assume everyone thinks that way. Thankfully, the majority aren't in a position to put their ideas in action.

~bella

 

[rjs330]

Do you see what you just did? I do.

Oh yeah, I forgot that in your world view everything is black or white. If someone is not a staunch conservative they must be a flaming Marxist Democrat who calls for the elimination with extreme prejudice of the opposition.

You won't believe me, I know, but a lot of people aren't on teams.

Yet you blame my team all the time for things. People on the right... or the right...

Don't you understand that your team is the left? Progressives including Democrats and the media. Yes your team. And I'm not just referring to the wild left radicals. It wasn't just wild left radicals who have called Trump Hitler and called him a threat.

You did when you said that people on my team when I am not on a team. Did you know that some people are independent? Shocking, I know, but true nonetheless.

You are a progressive leftist. I suspect you are a Democrat as well. Yeah you are in a team whether you realize it or not. You might try to fool yourself but every single topic I've seen you comment on you have spounted left wing ideology and left wing arguments. So yes you are on a team.

say he is dangerous. I truly believe it.

I know you do.

Two thing: I am not a Democrat or a congressman and what was the context? By eliminated, voted out of office, tried for his crimes and not allowed to be president again or mafia-style? You understand, I presume, that those are entirely different.

You mean you are not a registered Democrat. I get that, I'm not a registered Republican.

Oh I don't doubt what the congressman meant. He didn't really mean Trump should be killed. Just like Trump didn't mean that people should actually physically fight or physically attack people.

You say he's a threat. Should you say he's Hitler? A Dictator?

And yet you're trying to hold me responsible somehow for what other people say? That's not better.

Im holding you responsible for what you say.

Do you see what you just did? I do.

Yes I pointed out your hypocrisy.

Well! You sure told me!

No I think you told you. I hope you listen to yourself.

 

[rjs330]

It's surprising if that shooter even heard Joe Biden say we need to put the bullseye on Trump. I certainly didn't and I voted for him. I didn't realize everyone listens to what Mr Biden says. I thought he couldn't even form sentences from reading foxnews and breitbart and the gateway pundit lol. Y'all fell in love with Donald Trump due to his harsh, unforgiving rhetoric. You cannot have it both ways friend. We didn't start the fire that is Donald Trump.

So y'all will pause..............
Right before you vote for Trump lol.
Brilliant!

Yes we will. People voted for him because they were tired of the harsh unforgiving rhetoric from the left. They liked that he punched back.

 

[FireDragon76]

Rhe responsibility of the shooting is on the shooter alone. But it should give us pause and make us consider how our rhetoric effects others.

This isn't sincere coming from Republicans, that suddenly they've found a civil conscience. For years, progressives have talked about the dangers of stochastic terrorism, particularly directed against LGBT persons, but they've been dismissed.

 

[rjs330]

This isn't sincere coming from Republicans, that suddenly they've found a civil conscience. For years, progressives have talked about the dangers of stochastic terrorism, particularly directed against LGBT persons, but they've been dismissed.

You are right I'm trying to.make a.point. if one is going to talk about some like stochastic terrorism like the left has been doing then they should take a long alhard look in the mirror becauae they've been doing it for a long time. They obviously have not been listening to their own warnngs.

We've done nothing like that to the LGBT community.

 

[wing2000]

Of course it's important. Until we know exactly why a person tries to assassinate a presidential candidate it's perfectly reasonable to ascribe political reasoning of rhe shooter. And it's perfectly reasonable to suspect the vitrioloc rhetoric against Trump played a part.

Sure, speculate all you want....as long as you understand that to date, there is no information whatsoever that suggest the shooter's motives were political. That may change as the FBI dissects his phone, computer etc.

 

[FireDragon76]

You are right I'm trying to.make a.point. if one is going to talk about some like stochastic terrorism like the left has been doing then they should take a long alhard look in the mirror becauae they've been doing it for a long time. They obviously have not been listening to their own warnngs.

We've done nothing like that to the LGBT community.

The rhetoric from fundamentalist Christians about LGBT people is stochastic terrorism. Stochastic terrorism is speech that is recognized to have violence as an inevitable, but random, result.

 

[civilwarbuff]

 

[DaisyDay]

Yet you blame my team all the time for things. People on the right... or the right...

The difference is that I blame "your team" - I don't refer to it as that, it is your claim that this is your team - for what they do whereas you're trying to blame me for what you think people like me - who are not me - do. You are claiming blame assigned to your identity group while trying to blame me for what some group I don't claim membership in did.

I do not disparage staunch conservatives wholesale as I known and admired honest, thoughtful staunch conservatives. There are also crummy liberals who I do disparage.

Don't you understand that your team is the left?

No, you don't get to assign my team to me. While I generally do hold views that you consider to be leftist, I have not sworn any fealty to views not my own.

Progressives including Democrats and the media. Yes your team. And I'm not just referring to the wild left radicals. It wasn't just wild left radicals who have called Trump Hitler and called him a threat.

No, you do not get to pick out something someone you consider to be "like" me and pin their sayings on me. And calling Donald "Hitler" is not the same as acknowledging the threat he actually poses to our country. You can hold me to my own views but not to other people's.

You are a progressive leftist.

In the same way that you "are" an authoritarian, fascist. See how that works?

I suspect you are a Democrat as well.

That's interesting that you suspect what I have clearly, repeatedly said I am not; that says more about you than it does about me.

Yeah you are in a team whether you realize it or not.

No, I know which teams if any I'm on and which I am not. It is for me to decide my own affiliations, not you.

You might try to fool yourself but every single topic I've seen you comment on you have spounted left wing ideology and left wing arguments. So yes you are on a team.

No, I do not divide people into teams according to what I think about their views. I agree with some on some things and with others on other things. Overall, I tend to lean progressive but I have never taken the pledge.

I know you do.

Good, I've said it often enough.

You mean you are not a registered Democrat. I get that, I'm not a registered Republican.

I mean I am not a Democrat but I am a democrat and a republican, for that matter. I wish you would stop telling me what I mean and try to understand what I actually mean. Your post is an extended ad hom.

Oh I don't doubt what the congressman meant. He didn't really mean Trump should be killed. Just like Trump didn't mean that people should actually physically fight or physically attack people.

This is where we disagree - I do think Donald meant and means that people should actually physically fight and attack people. He has "joked" enough about it that I believe him.

You say he's a threat. Should you say he's Hitler? A Dictator?

That is a weird question. Why "should" I say he's a Hitler when I've already said he's not? While he is not a dictator (why the capital "D"?) I think he would like to be like Putin and Orban and put himself above the laws of our country. Absolute immunity? That's not Constitutional.

Im holding you responsible for what you say.

That's fine, just stop trying to hold me responsible for what other people say.

Yes I pointed out your hypocrisy.

Mote, beam.

No I think you told you. I hope you listen to yourself.

I always do even when I don't agree.

 

[rjs330]

In the same way that you "are" an authoritarian, fascist. See how that works?

You so realize progressive is not the opposite of authoritarian and leftist is not the opposite of fascist. I'm beginning to see the problem here.

Now if you said, "you are a right leaning conservative" that actually would be more in line with being the opposite of progressive leftist. To be rhe same or close to authoritarian facist I would have had to call you a radical communist or some such thing.

So no it doesn't quite work.

No, you don't get to assign my team to me. While I generally do hold views that you consider to be leftist, I have not sworn any fealty to views not my own.

I didn't say you swore fealty to anyone. Gee I don't know why you are so upset about this. My team is definitely right leaning Constitutional conservatives. I'm not ashamed of that. I do t swear fealty to them. I probably don't hold exactly every view they hold. But it's still my team.

In all rhe conversations I've seen you be a part of you have ALWAYS taken the side of the progressive leftist view. I don't know what you differ with them on because I haven't seen you differ with any. That makes you part of the progressive leftist group.

I don't know if you have some sort of ideal that your views are your own and no one else's, but I hate to break it to you they aren't. You share the same exact views of so many on the left. And I share the same exact views as many on the right.

Thats okay if you are not some original lone thinker. Few of us are.

That's fine, just stop trying to hold me responsible for what other people say.

Then stop saying the same things that other people say.

mean I am not a Democrat but I am a democrat and a republican,

Oh? When's the last time you voted for a republican?

This is where we disagree - I do think Donald meant and means that people should actually physically fight and attack people. He has "joked" enough about it that I believe him.

See you are doing exactly what I said. Not condemning those on your side for their speech but condemning Trump for his. Hypocritical.

Mote, beam.

I don't think that applies. Becauae I've been critical with my side and with Trump specifically for things he has said. In fact I didn't like stuff he said so much that I didn't vote for him in 2016. I thought he was a blow hard phoney who wouldn't accomplish a thing. I actually thought he was probably a RINO. Turned out I was wrong about that.

But I haven't heard a peep out of you condemning anyone on your side.

Quite frankly I think both sides need to dial it back a bit. We have gone way over the line when we start saying that someone is Hitler or Someone is going to destroy democracy. I'm sure there have been some on the right whomhave claimed Biden is going to destroy democracy as we know it. I think we've said that once Biden in no republican will ever win another election or some such.

I think that's going too far. Can we please agree.that both sides have gone too far and that we need to be willing to call out our side for it as well as the other side.

You and I will never agree on politics. But we can agree that the rhetoric on both sides has gone to far. Can't we?

 

[rjs330]

The rhetoric from fundamentalist Christians about LGBT people is stochastic terrorism. Stochastic terrorism is speech that is recognized to have violence as an inevitable, but random, result.

I disagree.

 

[rjs330]

Nevermind

 

[DaisyDay]

You so realize progressive is not the opposite of authoritarian and leftist is not the opposite of fascist. I'm beginning to see the problem here.

I'm not playing the Opposite Game, so your comment, while true, is worthless to my point.

Now if you said, "you are a right leaning conservative" that actually would be more in line with being the opposite of progressive leftist. To be rhe same or close to authoritarian facist I would have had to call you a radical communist or some such thing.

So no it doesn't quite work.

Again, I'm not playing the Opposite Game nor did I realize that was what you were intending to do.

I didn't say you swore fealty to anyone. Gee I don't know why you are so upset about this. My team is definitely right leaning Constitutional conservatives. I'm not ashamed of that. I do t swear fealty to them. I probably don't hold exactly every view they hold. But it's still my team.

I don't know why you're being hysterically tenacious about this, but I get to choose to be on a team or not. It is not for you to define me. You people are so into labels and identity politics.

In all rhe conversations I've seen you be a part of you have ALWAYS taken the side of the progressive leftist view. I don't know what you differ with them on because I haven't seen you differ with any. That makes you part of the progressive leftist group.

Yes, I'm generally sympathetic to progressive ideas, but that does not mean that you get to attribute to me whatever you think some other progressive thinker said or did. I am my own person responsible for my own self.

You want to call out characteristics you think place me in a group, while saying I cannot do the same for you because your characteristics are not "opposite" - totally weird and useless argument for you to make.

I don't know if you have some sort of ideal that your views are your own and no one else's, but I hate to break it to you they aren't. You share the same exact views of so many on the left. And I share the same exact views as many on the right.

Why yes, I do hold that my views are my own. You go a step further though and say that since other people may have similar views on some things, I must share views of theirs which I do not. You don't get to tell me what I think or that since some other person you think is like me called Trump Hitler that I have done that too. This is your mistake and your continuing to perpetuate it reflects badly on you.

Thats okay if you are not some original lone thinker. Few of us are.

My thoughts are mine, whether original or not, and for me to determine, not you.

Then stop saying the same things that other people say.

No, that doesn't work. If you agree with something someone else said that doesn't mean that you can be held to any and every thing else they say.

Oh? When's the last time you voted for a republican?'

Just because you refuse to vote for a Democrat, does not mean that I don't vote for good, decent Republicans. Confession in a mirror.

See you are doing exactly what I said. Not condemning those on your side for their speech but condemning Trump for his. Hypocritical.

Lols, you really think when you criticize a politician for anything you then have an obligation to seek out something similar to criticize on someone you agree with just to avoid "hypocrisy"? That is a redonculous obligation that you yourself do not follow. It's "both sides!!!" taken to an absurdity.

I don't think that applies.

Of course you don't - that beam is keeping you from seeing the obvious.

Becauae I've been critical with my side and with Trump specifically for things he has said. In fact I didn't like stuff he said so much that I didn't vote for him in 2016. I thought he was a blow hard phoney who wouldn't accomplish a thing. I actually thought he was probably a RINO. Turned out I was wrong about that.

But I haven't heard a peep out of you condemning anyone on your side.

You don't hear very well.

Quite frankly I think both sides need to dial it back a bit. We have gone way over the line when we start saying that someone is Hitler or Someone is going to destroy democracy. I'm sure there have been some on the right whomhave claimed Biden is going to destroy democracy as we know it. I think we've said that once Biden in no republican will ever win another election or some such.

Both sides. See, that's the problem with you - black or white, good or evil. You can't see or acknowledge, evidently, that there are more than two sides, that problems may be multifaceted.

Trump trying to steal the 2020 election by submitting a false slate of "alternative" electors during certification and having Pence go along with the plot was going over the line - even though he failed, he tried.

I think that's going too far. Can we please agree.that both sides have gone too far and that we need to be willing to call out our side for it as well as the other side.

Can't you agree that there are more sides than just two? Attempting an insurrection should be uniquely disqualifying. Biden has his own problems, but lawlessness isn't one of them.

You and I will never agree on politics. But we can agree that the rhetoric on both sides has gone to far. Can't we?

No, but perhaps we can agree that over the top rhetoric by anyone on any side is too far. Okay?

 

[rjs330]

I'm not playing the Opposite Game, so your comment, while true, is worthless to my poin

Okay, well you can forgive me for thinking so due the fact you went to the total extreme. It seemed like you were making a comparison which usually means something relatively equal.

don't know why you're being hysterically tenacious about this, but I get to choose to be on a team or not. It is not for you to define me. You people are so into labels and identity politics.

Well I don't think I'm hysterical. But if you want to say all the progressive liberal things and not want to be labeled a progressive liberal, okay.

My thoughts are mine, whether original or not, and for me to determine, not you.

I don't think I determined your thoughts. I'm not a mind reader. But I do read your thoughts when you write them down on a forum.

Can't you agree that there are more sides than just two? Attempting an insurrection should be uniquely disqualifying. Biden has his own problems, but lawlessness isn't one of them.

I am talking about rhetoric, not lawful or unlawful actions.

No, but perhaps we can agree that over the top rhetoric by anyone on any side is too far. Okay?

You don't think it's gone to far on both sides? Do you think it's gone too far on one side then? Which side if so?

 

[DaisyDay]

Okay, well you can forgive me for thinking so due the fact you went to the total extreme. It seemed like you were making a comparison which usually means something relatively equal.

If you want my forgiveness, just ask. If you want to label me, then you should accept my labeling you in turn. You think the label you chose for me is apt and I think the one I chose for you is.

Well I don't think I'm hysterical. But if you want to say all the progressive liberal things and not want to be labeled a progressive liberal, okay.

What is with your obsession with slapping labels on people?

I don't think I determined your thoughts.

Oh, you don't. That was my point.

I'm not a mind reader. But I do read your thoughts when you write them down on a forum.

If you tell me what I think and I let you know where you're mistaken, then you might want to reevaluate your original, mistaken opinion.

I am talking about rhetoric, not lawful or unlawful actions.

Yeah, so?

You don't think it's gone to far on both sides? Do you think it's gone too far on one side then? Which side if so?

I think as I have said repeatedly that there are more than just two sides. Is that idea really so incomprehensible to you that you keep repeating the same mistake?

Don't you understand that your team is the left? Progressives including Democrats and the media. Yes your team. And I'm not just referring to the wild left radicals. It wasn't just wild left radicals who have called Trump Hitler and called him a threat.

Funny thing - a prominent member of your self-proclaimed "team" (never-Trumper turned pro-Trumper) called Donald "an American Hitler".

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/jd-vance-once-compared-trump-hitler-now-they-are-running-mates-2024-07-15/

And yet you want to pin that on me because someone somewhere on the left made a similar comparison?

 

[rjs330]

What is with your obsession with slapping labels on people?

You never do this? You never label anyone?

Oh, you don't. That was my point.

Okay then, something we agree on.

If you tell me what I think and I let you know where you're mistaken, then you might want to reevaluate your original, mistaken opinion.

Like said I don't have to tell you what you think. You tell us all what you think when you bang the keyboard. Your thoughts on things are not a mystery.

Yeah, so?

Well just pointing out the difference since you brought up laws and such whn I was talking rhetoric. I was a bit confused as to why you brought up laws when I was talking rhetoric.

Funny thing - a prominent member of your self-proclaimed "team" (never-Trumper turned pro-Trumper) called Donald "an American Hitler".

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/jd-vance-once-compared-trump-hitler-now-they-are-running-mates-2024-07-15/
And yet you want to pin that on me because someone somewhere on the left made a similar comparison?

Yeah they did. And it was wrong for him.too. The left has gone far overboard on that issue though. Just for grins and giggles I did a search on people calling Trump Hitler. I got page after page of hits of people calling g him Hitler or referring to him as being like Hitler is some fashion or another. Pretty much all leftists. Like 99.9%.

You did it to a few times. I looked up your posts.

So anyway that's that.