Warning Sign

Warning Sign Meme | WARNING, YOU DON’T HOLD THE MORAL HIGH GROUND WHEN YOU SUPPORT TERRORISM AGAINST THE LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT, OR SUPPORT THE DESTRUCTION O | image tagged in memes,warning sign | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
15,187 views, 142 upvotes, Made by BurntFingerForge 6 months ago memeswarning sign
Warning Sign memeRe-caption this meme
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
14 ups, 1 reply
Creepy Condescending Wonka Meme | I WISH I WAS COURAGEOUS ENOUGH TO ATTACK CHILDREN AND STATUES | image tagged in memes,creepy condescending wonka | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
1 up
Leonardo Dicaprio Cheers Meme | THAT'S A GOOD ONE | image tagged in memes,leonardo dicaprio cheers | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
lol
reply
15 ups, 2 replies
N | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
8 ups
Leonardo Dicaprio Cheers Meme | YOU SIR YOU ARE RIGHT! | image tagged in memes,leonardo dicaprio cheers | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
2 ups
. | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
13 ups, 5 replies
AND YOU CERTAINLY DON'T HOLD IT WHEN YOUR CANDIDATE LOSES BY 2.8 MILLION VOTES | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
13 ups, 4 replies
The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing when they created the Electoral College. It saved us from a Hillary administration.
reply
12 ups, 1 reply
reply
[deleted]
4 ups, 2 replies
So would you still be complaining about this if a democrat won the election without winning popular vote? If the system is really that messed up, why don't you (or the democratoc party) do something to fix it?
reply
5 ups, 3 replies
I've accepted the system having worked as it was meant to be, though the electoral college is for a time of very small towns and mostly rural living prevailing during colonial times. It is unnecessary for a country interconnected by high-tech communications and with far more similarities than differences, and a large population to boot. It's up to all free-thinking Americans to fix. But the question here regarding complaints is whether all the people in this commentary stream taking the pro-electoral college view would be saying the same thing should Clinton have won with the same exact results but in inverse. Of course not; most would be screaming bloody murder that she stole the election. It's rank partisanship, which I'm fine with if they'd actually not coat it in a hypocritical veneer. It's fine for them to be self-righteous now, but if you were able to look four years into the future and should the Democratic party candidate win the election, you would see these same users in a snit-fit about how conspiracies of the elites and liberal media took away a second Trump term.
reply
[deleted]
6 ups, 3 replies
Even today the electoral college is necessary. Just like I stated to damagedgoods, the popular vote was seperated by almost 3,000,000 votes. California had a difference of 4,000,000 in votes in favor of Hillary. This alone shows how 1 state that holds many of the same views, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with them, can control the election on popular vote alone.

However as far as your f-ed up comment regarding how people on the right would react if Hillary won without the popular vote, I am calling you out on your bullshit right there. There have been more protests, attacks, destruction of private and public property from people on the left because of Trump being elected than there was of those from the right when Obama was elected both first and second time, and we definately did not want him a second time. But we weren't out there raising hell, protesting against cops, stating "he is not our president" because we didn't like it. Yes we would be pissed if Hillary would have won, because she is a f**king crook and should have been sent to prison for her crimes against this country. And in some aread when I saw the results of the election, I do believe she somehow stole certain areas. She was awarded Hawaii before a single vote there was counted. And to take DC by 270,000 votes when there are only 300,000 votes there, I find something off about that as well. But to say the right would be doing the same bullshit that the left has been doing over the last year, I am calling that nothing but f**king bullshit.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
I guess you and I just live in different worlds, TheRoadWarrior. But the judge I respect will be time and history. Get back to me in 30 years and we'll see who has clearer vision. In 100 years time, when neither of us are here, I'm convinced the Trump years will be viewed in the popular imagination as 'what the hell were they thinking?'
reply
[deleted]
5 ups
In all honesty, if Hillary had been elected, I don't think this country would be around in 30 years, let alone 100 years. She would have enacted policies allowing more illegal immigrants to come here, illegally, and made it easier for terrorists to enter the country as supposed refugees and be getting attacked by them constantly. Considering who our 2 choices were, I really think we would be worse off had it gone the other way around.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
You don't hear many people bragging they voted Nixon do ya?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Nixon was the last President that couldn't be bought , that's why the big corporations had to conspire to get him out of office . Nixon knew about the phony gas shortage plan to raise prices on everything and tried to stop it . Woodward and Bernstein weren't heroes , they were corporate stooges who sold us all into slavery to the Energy Companies !
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
4 ups, 6 replies
reply
[deleted]
4 ups, 1 reply
Many would disagree with you on that. Also people were protesting Trump before he even officially took office. He wasn't allowed to do anything before people tried calling for impeachment.
reply
5 ups, 5 replies
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 2 replies
Racist because he wants to keep illegal immigrants out of the country, as well as possible terrorists? Guess that makes me a racist too.
3 ups
When he's employed thousands in his hotels over the years? He's full of sh*t. The only reason why he ran that platform is because he knew he could appeal to the racist bum f*cks in the south and across the country. He knew if he could appeal to the racist whites in the country, he'd win. We all know he was liberal and friends with Hillary back in the day. And now that he's defending Nazis and the KKK, that only proves what everyone knew all along...
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 1 reply
"There was only one side who plowed into a crowd with a car and killed somebody." Correction, there was only 1 man that plowed a car through the crowd. 1 MAN! If you want to look at the facts, how about these facts. Regardless of who they are, the white supremacist group had legal rights to be there to protest the removal of the statue. Out of the 2 groups that were there, they were the only ones that legally were allowed to protest because they were the only ones that filed the proper paperwork to have an organized protest. Had the anti-racist group not showed up, there is a high probability that there would have been no one who would have gotten injured or killed. They have had many protests in which no violence took place, no destruction of property, no one getting injured or killed. Can't say that about the other group. The anti-racists went there to cause violence, to attack other people, so it is on them that anyone got injured. So yes, there was hatred on both sides. It is time for you to fess up and accept the fact that it was the anti-racist that provoked the fights that broke out.

"Enjoy it while you can, though, because he's about to get impeached for treason." What treason has he done? Leaked secret information that is for this government's eyes only? No wait that was Hillary. Have a private server in which he holds information that should only be on a government server? No that again was Hillary. Vandalized and stole property from the White House? No once again that was Hillary (and Bill) after his second term. Hiring someone that has known connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and allow them access to classified information? No, Hillary once again did that. Shall I keep going or do you want me to list all the other treasonous acts performed by Hillary since 1996?
0 ups
Last I checked, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, those are constitutional rights. I don't care that the kkk had a permit to walk around at night with torches and carry machine guns around the streets during the day. What do you think all that was for? To show how peaceful they were? Or to subtly frighten the daylights out of people?

The "one man" who plowed into a crowd was going to a Trump rally (per his mom) and a known member of the KKK (per his friends). So you can deny being a party to his actions but he is, whether you like it or not, on your side. You can't distance yourself from what happened there and defend it at the same time. I don't care about paperwork or probability. The white supremacists had been planning and ruminating on message boards the legality of running over a crowd of protesters if they were standing in the street for at least a month prior to this happening.

You can go on all day about HIllary. Hell, why don't we talk about all the past candidates who never made it to the White House? That doesn't sound like a completely pointless waste of time. The fact is that a woman was killed by a Trump supporter. So far Antifa hasn't killed anyone during their protests. It's pretty much that simple at this point.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 3 replies
Just because I want people to enter this country legally and not have terrorist enter this country and attack us doesn't make me a f**king racist.

Back then, he might have found that the Clintons were acceptable, but like everyone else, people change. There is absolutely no reason to back Hillary, or any Liberal as far as that goes, today.

How the f**k is he defending Nazis and KKK?

Stop getting your "facts" from CNN.
[deleted]
3 ups
I always love it when someone comments in a way in which you sre not allowed to respond ti their attacks.
2 ups
No but defending the kkk, saying what the kkk likes to hear, pardoning a known supremacist and criminal sheriff does oh and being raced in a documented racist household does too. Open your eyes
0 ups
Look man, I don't watch CNN. I guess you guys think that anyone who disagrees with Trump automatically watches CNN, but that's not true. I've seen his speech online and on TV several times, posted by several different sources, just as you have. And you all know that Trump refused to condemn what was done by HIS supporter, who is a nazi, and a Republican. "On many sides" was how he got out of it. There was only one side who plowed into a crowd with a car and killed somebody. But no, he couldn't condemn that, he had to play Switzerland. You want to be in denial of that FACT, go ahead. Even the nazis praised Trump's response because by not coming out against their actions specifically, he was basically defending them. He had a lot to say about the left, though, didn't he? No problem coming out against them even though they weren't the ones who killed someone.

As far as changing, not sure if that's exactly the right word since Trump said years ago that if he were ever to run, it would be as a Republican, because it was so easy to say the things they wanted to hear to get them on your side. You've all been bamboozled by a conman. Enjoy it while you can, though, because he's about to get impeached for treason.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
"Fields wasn't having any emergency, which was the original topic before you tried so hard to find a good reason to run people over." Hey f**king retard, quote me where I stated it was acceptable for what he did. Oh wait, I never said what he did was acceptable. But instead of apologizing for your attacks, you just make it seem like it isn't important that I would only end up running over someone if it was a life or death situation and f**king idiot asshole protesters are completely blocking the road. You can't even justify how it is acceptable for assholes like in the image I posted to completely block traffic for hours keeping people who did absolutely nothing to them or anyone else from being able to continue on with their day. No instead you still try to take the 1 asshole that ran people over and say he is 100% tied to the other protesters that were there and that they told him to do it, without anything showing that this was the case. But see I had to also keep explaining myself to you because your retarded brain couldn't comprehend the difference in what I would end up doing to what Fields did. You are so f**king stupid you think they were one and the same.

"He floored it into a crowd of innocent people who weren't keeping anyone from going anywhere." I did watch it after you posted about it. And I did say, multiple times now, that what he did was not acceptable. But there have been multiple other instances in which protesters are completely blocking the highway keeping people from being able to go anywhere FOR HOURS. I am sure that the comments by those white supremacists on that page were referencing to people who do that, not people who allow traffic to go through.

So they joked around about it. How many f**king assholes have "joked" about assassinating Trump, or about killing supporters, or even about killing cops? Yes these are the type of assholes that you are associating yourself with. Assholes that want to commit treason, 1st degree murder on both innocent people and innocent cops. Some have done this as well, all out of hate.

"This was premeditated MURDER by a Trump supporter. Sad!" Why do you have to say "Trump supporter"? Why not just "by a racist"? By trying to say it like you did, you make it seem like every Trump supporter is going to or will do that in any situation they feel like it. It would be like calling all those who killed cops for no reason Obama supporters or Hillary supporters.
0 ups
My attacks? You have been using profanity and calling names for several of your responses now. You also have been attempting to find some rational reason for running down protesters. Meanwhile, you have yet to acknowledge the fact that the white supremacists were discussing running protesters over in the weeks prior to the incident. Like Trump, you haven't condemned Field's actions, just posted rambling, nonsensical tirades attacking me personally repeatedly when I have only responded to what you've said. And again, here you go passing it off like they were just joking around. They were talking about the legalities of running protesters over if they're blocking the road. Even if I was being blocked for hours, I would find another route. I'm not going to run people over just because I have to get to work.

I'm not going to sugarcoat this BS. Fields is a Trump supporter and a nazi. His mom said he was going to a Trump rally. That's who he is. And I don't care whether someone told him to do it or he went rogue. It was beyond unacceptable. Destroying public property and assault is unacceptable. What he did was abhorrent, insane, horrific, despicable, and should not be tolerated or excused on any level whatsoever ....
reply
[deleted]
0 ups
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
"Last I checked, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, those are constitutional rights" How about you read this information, specifically where it talks about if you need a permit to protest.
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_pdf_file/kyr_protests.pdf

"carry machine guns around the streets during the day. What do you think all that was for?" http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/08/the_first_and_second_amendments_clashed_in_charlottesville_the_guns_won.html Read this and you will see that it was NOT just the white supremacists that carried guns that day. And considering their protest a month before this ended because another anti-racist group came to attack them for protesting the removal of the statue, why wouldn't they want to carry something to protect themselves from another attack?

"So you can deny being a party to his actions but he is, whether you like it or not, on your side. " Considering I have never stated anything to suggest I am racist or that I think the statue should stay because of racist reasons, I can clearly state that that guy is in no way, shape, or form on my side. "The white supremacists had been planning and ruminating on message boards the legality of running over a crowd of protesters if they were standing in the street for at least a month prior to this happening." So how about you show me where exactly these message boards are at where they are talking about this and exactly where they gave the orders to that guy to run people over in his car. I would almost bet that any talk over running over a crowd of protesters was in the context of them standing in the middle of the street blocking people from being able to go to work or any place else, which is common protest among the left in many of their protests in the last couple years. If I was in a hurry to get somewhere because of an emergency and some idiots decided they think they should be able to block traffic in some form of protest, I would first give them multiple warnings, but if they refused to leave, I would probably start driving through them as well. I find it utterly stupid and ridiculous to block traffic keeping people from being able to go to work, go home, or even take care of an emergency because they have nothing better to do with their lives but complain.
reply
0 ups, 3 replies
I'm not getting drawn into some long cat and mouse game of "you show me where"... just google it. It's there. Believe it. Don't believe it. I don't give a rip. But are you seriously trying to defend/justify what your fellow Trump supporter did to Heather? Good grief. I know you saw the video. The guy wasn't going to work. His mother said he was going to a Trump rally. He saw the protesters up ahead, there was a side street he could've turned on but no - he gunned it. And you would've, too. I'm out.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Who the f**k do you think you are? You think you have the f**king right to attack me under false pretenses and then when showed you are wrong by what you said you don't need to f**king apologize for it? Your refusal to provide a shred of evidence for your claims only shows that you like making shit up in order to justify attacking people. You are no better than the asshole who drove his car, under his own free will with no orders or requests from anyone else, right into Heather killing her.
0 ups
https://www.vibe.com/2017/08/white-supremacists-joked-about-running-over-counter-protesters-before-charlottesville/

Why don't you do yourself a favor and watch the video before you make yourself look any more ignorant than you already have. You're the one who said you would run over people if they were blocking the street. And according to your lovely meme below, you clarified it and said it again. BTdubs... pedestrians ALWAYS have the right of way...
reply
[deleted]
1 up
WHERE THE F**K DID I F**KING DEFEND THE GUY WHO KILLED HEATHER????????????? YOU ARE A F**KING RETARD IF YOU THINK YOU CAN TWIST MY WORDS IN ANY WAY FOR THAT TO TAKE PLACE. IF YOU WAS TO SHOW ME WHERE YOU F**KING READ THAT THE KKK WAS TALKING ABOUT THE LEGALITY OF RUNNING PEOPLE OVER, I WOULD BE ABLE TO SHOW YOU THAT THEY WERE MOST LIKELY REFERRING TO ISSUES IN WHICH THE PEOPLE WERE BLOCKING TRAFFIC IN SUCH A WAY THAT THERE WOULD BE NO OTHER F**KING WAY TO GET TO WHERE THEY NEED TO BUT STRAIGHT THROUGH. THAT IS WHAT I WAS F**KING REFERRING TO WHEN I STATED I WOULD DO IT IF I WAS IN A F**KING EMERGENCY AND THEY WOULDN'T ALLOW ME THROUGH AFTER MULTIPLE WARNINGS. I NEVER F**KING JUSTIFIED ANYTHING THAT ASSHOLE DID. I NEVER WATCHED THE VIDEO EITHER F**KTARD, SO DON'T BE F**KING CLAIMING YOU KNOW SHIT THAT YOU CLEARLY DO NOT KNOW. I DON'T GIVE A F**K WHAT HIS MOTHER SAID OR WHAT HIS FRIENDS SAID. I SAID TO SHOW ME WHERE THE F**KING WHITE SUPREMACISTS GAVE HIM THE ORDER TO DO IT IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY YOUR F**KING CLAIM OF HIM BEING A PART OF THAT GROUP TO THROW THEM ALL UNDER THE F**KING BUS FOR IT. YOU NEED TO LEARN HOW TO F**KING READ AND NOT TWIST PEOPLE'S WORDS TO MAKE YOU FEEL SUPERIOR. YOU CLEARLY HAVE SHOWN YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A F**KING HATEMONGER. YOU IGNORE EVERY SINGLE FACT I GAVE YOU CONCERNING YOUR F**KING FRIENDS WHO LIKE DOING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF DAMAGE TO PRIVATE AND PUBLIC PROPERTY TO SHOW THEIR OWN HATRED TOWARDS PEOPLE. YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN ANY OF THOSE "PEOPLE" WHO CALL FOR THE DEATH TO COPS AND TO THE PRESIDENT.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
This image here shows the type of f**king bullshit I was referring to that I would drive through if I was dealing with an emergency or needed to get to work. This f**king bullshit is f**king stupid. This is f**king different than what was taking place in Charlottesville where people were walking the streets and still allowing vehicles to go through. I never f**king said I would plow through that for no f**king reason but to hurt or kill someone. Learn to f**king read asswipe.
0 ups
Whatever, I don't really care what you would or wouldn't do. Fields wasn't having any emergency, which was the original topic before you tried so hard to find a good reason to run people over. Watch the video. He floored it into a crowd of innocent people who weren't keeping anyone from going anywhere. Also, if you followed the link I posted, the white supremacists were joking about running over protesters in the weeks prior. This was premeditated MURDER by a Trump supporter. Sad!
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
So I noticed that you decided to completely ignore the question as to what treason Trump is guilty of. Is that because all the acts of treason by Hillary far exceed that of anything you might be able to come up with for Trump? Mentioning all I did about what Hillary did was to point out the multitude of treasonist acts she performed as the only other possibility of who would have become president. So no it wasn't a pointless waste of time, it was to point out what you proved by refusing to answer the question, Trump hasn't done anything to make him a traitor to this country or to be impeached due to treason.

After reading https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-clad-antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/?utm_term=.bc3be7dd7efa I am surprised that someone hasn't died from an Antifa protest. Hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of damage, cars burned, windows broken, many people being brutally attacked. And you think this is a peaceful bunch just because they haven't rammed a car into a group..... yet. How about you explain why they decided to crash the funeral of Heather Heyer, who was supposedly one of their own, with shields and weapons.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Go back and read my comments again asswipe. I said I would only do it IF THEY WOULD NOT MOVE AFTER MULTIPLE WARNINGS AND I WAS IN AN EMERGENCY OR NEEDED TO BE AT WORK. I never f**king said I would do it just because they were standing there. I don't consider people intentionally blocking the f**king highway refusing to allow people to get by pedestrians. They are a menace to society. If I was seriously injured or had someone bleeding in the back of my vehicle, do you think I should sit there and wait hours for them to leave or do the right thing and get to the emergency room at any cost? And go back and look at my picture again. Those assholes are not doing a peaceful march down the street allowing vehicles by, like what happened in Charlottesville. They are standing in the middle of the f**king highway, blocking people from being able to go anywhere. There is a huge f**king difference. 1 is accepted and respectful, the other isn't. So how about you learn to f**king read my comments and understand exactly when I would drive through a group of protesting assholes and when I would allow peaceful protestors to do their thing while I am still allowed to do what I need to do.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO RUN PEOPLE OVER WITH YOUR CAR...Wtf is wrong with you?
reply
[deleted]
1 up
What is wrong with the f**king assholes that are blocking highways keeping people who did absolutely nothing wrong from being able to carry on with their life. Once again I said I would ONLY DO IT IF THEY REFUSED TO MOVE AFTER MULTIPLE WARNINGS AND IF IT WAS AN EMERGENCY. Why should I or someone else be left bleeding to death stuck on the highway because some whinny ass libtards think they should be allowed to stop traffic for hours for no good f**king reason? If you was left with the choice of your life or risk that of some protestor you don't know, I am sure you would choose to save your life at any cost.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Upvotes for BlueNinja1! :)
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
I would much rather have a president willing to stand up against terrorist, then bow down to them and not even be able to refer to them as terrorist like Obama did for 8 years.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
So a narcissist who makes this great country weaker with every morning tweet and who encourages terrorists to aspire to more terrible feats by his inability to understand the modern world is tougher than a president who halted Iran's nuclear weapons program, held North Korea's weapons program in check, and built alliances against authoritarian leaders and regimes instead of kissing their asses?
[deleted]
0 ups
I think you are completely confused about who did what. If Obama had kept North Korea's weapons program in check, there is no f**king way in hell that they would have been able to build the program they have today in just 9 months. Unless you have other sources that you care to site, Iran's nuclear weapons program stopped in 2003 for the most part. Small sales of it had continued after that point. So Obama had nothing to do with that. And if I read your f**ked up comment correcrly, you are excusing the actions of Isis because the modern world has changed? Do you also praise allah every morning? It also looks like you missed the major talk Trump had with the UN where he called out some of these leaders and drew a line in the sand letting them know if they try to f**k with us and our allies that they will get their asses handed to them. That in no way shape or form is kissing their ass. Obama on the other hand could never state radical Islam or referred to any of the attacks as terrorist attacks. He would also say whatever he wanted to please those in the UN. So yea I think you have all your facts wrong, dumbass.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Yes your attacks. My profanity didn't stary until your f**king ass started twisting my words, taking my comments out of context, to try and make it look like I am some heartless, racist, killing bastard. And you are still doing it. I didn't f**king say I would only do it if I needed to get to work. I have said multiple times now that it would also have to be an emergency, but you completely ignore that. And go back and look at that picture I posted. If you was in that vehicle that is stuck between te Fedex trujs, how the f**k would you be able to get out of there and find a different route? You wouldn't. And have acknowledged multiple times now how f**ked up it was what that asshole did, but yet you completely ignore it because you need to f**king attack me like you need to every Trump supporter to make yourself feel superior. Not all Trump supporters are the same. Not all Trump supporters are racist nazis. And just because there are Trump supporters who are, that doesn't make Trump one either. And I am not going to be like you and take snippets of conversations to either base my opinion on or to twist someone's words to justify attacking them. And like I said, if you expect me to take their comments seriously in some thread, then you better take the comments of your friends seriously who constantly talk about assassinating the president and attacking and killing innocent cops. But yet you ignore all that because their values match yours, right?

FYI, it does f**king matter if someone told him to do it or if he went rogue. If someone told him to do it, then that means the comments in that thread should be taken more seriously than just having a conversation about the legality of it. But if he went rogue, then it is just as wrong to blame all of them for what he did as it was for him to do what he did. Just because you hate Trump, if someone was to assassinate him tomorrow, would it be acceptable to associate you with that person saying you are just like them?

You better get this through your f**king skull. I have not once stated it was acceptable, tolerated, or anything similar to that. Even before I saw the video I never said anything like that. I have stated that if I was in a f**king emergency, like someone in my back seat bleeding to death that I wouldn't sit there and wait hours for some f**king protestors to get over themselves. I have stated I would give them warnings and if they refuse to move that it would be different.
reply
0 ups, 4 replies
Maybe you need to go back and read what you wrote. Little things like "I would've driven through them AS WELL..." You have repeatedly tried to give scenarios where it would've been okay to drive through a crowd of protesters. You even posted a meme with a pic showing a situation that in your mind warrant driving through. You first denied that the white supremacists discussed running over protesters prior to the event then tried to excuse it by saying they were only joking. Maybe you're just in denial. Honestly, IDGAF. You have continued to excuse/rationalize and deny meanwhile making vulgar, personal attacks against me for disagreeing. Then you're going to play victim? We really are done here. Trying to wade through your deep pool of delusion has been a ridiculous waste of time so as I said earlier - I'm out.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
You want to talk about excusing the actions of others. If you have the guts to say you still wouldn't drive through a group of protesters after this scenario, then you are no better than Fields. Lets say you are in that white car with your dad. You have been patiently waiting for these protestors to move. All of a sudden your dad starts having a massive heart attack. Depending on the severity he could survive only a couple hours or he could be fine for 10-12 hours, but you don't know. You start honking your horn at the protesters, yelling at them to get out of the way because your dad is having a heart attack. They refuse to move. Your dad passes out. You are still pleading with them to get out of the way, you need to hurry up and get to the hospital. They still won't move, claiming you guys are faking it and trying to impede on their right to protest. You call 911 and they said they will try to get to you, but because how far traffic is backed up because of the protesters they can't tell you how long it will be. So do you continue to sit there and risk your dad dying or do you start inching your way towards the protesters blaring your horn at them yelling to get out of the way and risk hitting some of them to save your dad? If you respond with anything similar to that being a very rare situation and that it would be impossible to answer will only prove to me that you are a heartless bastard just like Fields. Saying you would drive thru them shows you are a hypocrite by admitting that there is a scenario in which it would be acceptable to drive thru them. Yes I know that this scenario is a trap for you, but you put yourself in the position to allow this trap to exist. So which bullet are you willing to take?
reply
[deleted]
1 up
"Maybe you need to go back and read what you wrote. Little things like "I would've driven through them AS WELL..."" If you are going to quote me, use the full quote and don't change the words. Here is the full quote. "If I was in a hurry to get somewhere because of an emergency and some idiots decided they think they should be able to block traffic in some form of protest, I would first give them multiple warnings, but if they refused to leave, I would probably start driving through them as well." Notice I stated that "IF I WAS IN A HURRY TO GET SOMEWHERE BECAUSE OF AN EMERGENCY..." and "I WOULD FIRST GIVE THEM MULTIPLE WARNINGS, BUT IF THEY REFUSE TO LEAVE..." No where did I say that I would drive through the protesters there at Charlottesville without any warnings and without any reason needing to be somewhere what so ever. So there you go again twisting my words to make me look like the asshole.

"You first denied that the white supremacists discussed running over protesters prior to the event then tried to excuse it by saying they were only joking" Once again you are f**king twisting my words. I said for you to show me. You refused by saying I should just google it, "I'm not getting drawn into some long cat and mouse game of "you show me where"... just google it.". After that I said that if you couldn't show it to me than I have no reason to believe it happened. So it wasn't that I denied it, it was that I hadn't seen it and I wasn't going to waste my time trying to find it when it was your responsibility to provide evidence and proof of your claims.

"You have continued to excuse/rationalize and deny meanwhile making vulgar, personal attacks against me for disagreeing." Once again, the cursing ONLY STARTED AFTER you went and twisted my words saying "He saw the protesters up ahead, there was a side street he could've turned on but no - he gunned it. And you would've, too." trying to make it look like I would have blatantly run them over when nothing I stated ever said I would. You attacked me first, asshole, so stop trying to play the victim here.

The first personal attack (by you) started with this comment "So you can deny being a party to his actions but he is, whether you like it or not, on your side." You tried to say that I am the same as that racist asshole. That was the first personal attack. So not you are not the victim here, f**ktard. Next time you want to quote me, how about you use the full quote and show a pic of it.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
It would be best if you just left, for your own sake. You may claim to not watch CNN, but you comment like their reporters. Using portions of comments that you can re-write in order to change what was actually stated to spew your "facts". You are only making it easy form me to expose what you really are by doing that. So your choice, make the decision not to comment and stop trying to re-write the truth to justify yourself, or come and comment again like you have been and give me even more of a reason to grab screen shots and show how you are clearly twisting everything you say to justify attacking someone, just like every other liberal does when they decide to shoot a cop, vandalize buildings and statues, and bruttally attack innocent people for bo reason other than their own hatred.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups
So you thought it important to mention the white supremacists that talking in a thread about the legality of running people over in a protest. Well now lets talk about what your brothers and sisters in the antifa are talking about doing November 4th. A violent protest to overthrow our president Donald Trump. They are literally calling for another civil war. They are taking donations in order to purchase weapons. This isn't just talks, this is them taking action. How are you going to defend your brothers and sisters in antifa with their actions and what they are planning on doing November 4th?
reply
1 up, 2 replies
I think the electoral college will become extinct soon. It isn't needed today. It would have been interesting the right's reaction to an Obama presidency IF he lost the popular vote.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 1 reply
And yet you are just showing me more and more that you are not fully reading my comments. Had it been based off of popular vote, California would have been the deciding factor of who is president. 1 state should not be allowed to make the final decision on who is president. You are only complaining about the electoral college because it has yet to work in favor for Democrats when popular vote wasn't won. If anything needs to change it needs to be adding a couple more parties in the mix that are actually allowed at debates. Of course I will only find them viable options if they are actually willing to call and concede the race when they lose. Never heard of that happening during the 2016 election with the Green and Libertarian parties.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
I read it, but I find it not very likely. For someone who has posted anti-Trump memes, I find it highly unlikely that you would be upset had Hillary won without popular vote. You can say it all day long, but there is nothing you have done to prove to me otherwise.
1 up
I post anti-trump memes because he is not worthy of the office. I don't have a problem with Trump supporters, I have a problem with proud Trump supporters. Same as Clinton supporters. Neither is deserving of someone being so proud to vote for them
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
What Democrats fail to consider is the fact that, if we ever get rid of the electoral college, Republican candidates will change their tactics to go after the popular vote. Then Democrats will whine about how unfair it is when their candidate still loses.
reply
0 ups
I don't consider myself a Democrat or a Republican. I am a voter.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
KenJ, you don't know anything about me. And what matters is what actually happened, not "what if." The electoral college deflected a corrupt woman. That's a good thing. The electoral college prevents New York City and Los Angeles from deciding the election for the rest of us.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
And you know nothing about me. If Clinton had won the electoral college while losing the popular vote, and those who supported Trump protested, would you have submitted the same meme?
reply
1 up
I wouldn't knock the electoral college. I'd just keep promoting good ideals, and fight to keep the President in check.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
Truth!

Meanwhile in an alternate reality:

"Clinton stole the f**king election, she is not my f**king president! #ClintonStoleTheElection!"
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Ha. Just keep dreaming about this alternate reality. In that universe, I bet Justin Bieber is good at singing and Brian Williams is known for telling the truth.
I'm hoping you weren't one of the immature people who went around breaking windows, turning over trash cans, and stuff like that because president Trump was elected.
"I'm so angry that Donald Trump will inevitably destroy America, I'm gonna go out and start destroying America!"
Hey, I should submit that.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Nope

Just idiots rioting.
Same as here.

The 2016 election was very divisive, had two idiots running for office, and just encouraged many of the negative stereotypes non-Americans have about Americans (you know, the ones about Americans being idiots). I hated the entire process and wish that people could actually think for themselves enough to realize that being a violent, hateful, far-left/far-right f**khead will get us nowhere, and voting for either Trump or Clinton would be like choosing between a rattlesnake and a cobra.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
President Trump has been in office less than one year. Wait and see what he does.
reply
2 ups
Ok I'll give him a chance.

Not that I expect that much from any president, especially one of the 2016 loonies.
reply
2 ups
;)
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Yes I would complain about any president losing the popular vote yet still becoming president, no matter the political party. Most people think the electoral college was created to prevent highly populated states from determining national elections. It was created because of slavery. IMO it is absurd that how your state's neighbors vote in a "national election" has so much influence. Today the electoral college creates just as many problems as it solved back then. There has been 3 times the popular vote winner has lost the presidency. Two of those times have been in the last 16 yrs.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
Actually there are 4 times the popular vote lost the presidency. Now to go against your argument for highly populated states controlling the election if it was based on popular vote alone, look at the last election. Hillary had almost 3,000,000 more votes. The difference in votes in New York almost covers the difference overall, but California was almost if not over 4,000,000 votes different. So by popular vote alone, California alone could have given her the presidency. So yes it does prevent 1 state, or even 1 area, from controlling the election. This may not be the case in 2000, and I am not sure about 1976 or 1888, but it sure does hold true for 2016.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
The democrat/republican states are created by the electoral college. Why would a republican vote if living in CA? Why would a democrat bother to vote in WY? The electoral college creates these disparities. If people knew their vote mattered despite the way their neighbors vote these disparities would disappear or be greatly reduced IMO. CA is hugely democrat because the republicans in that state refuse to vote knowing it is futile.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
With how hugely California may be Democrat right now, 24 of the 42 elections they have been involved with they voted Republican. Now granted the last Republican they voted for was George H.W. Bush, but that don't mean it couldn't change in the future and they go Republican again even with the electoral college. And really, the electoral college should give them more reasons to vote than not. If the Republicans want change there, they should be voting to make their voice heard. The times in which the electoral college actually deters people from voting is when they would vote for the same person their state would vote for so they feel their one vote won't matter. I didn't vote. I live in Kansas. Kansas has gone Republican for at least the last 40 years, if not longer. So really it is the exact opposite of what you think it is one what would cause people to vote in regards to electoral college vs popular vote.
reply
0 ups, 5 replies
The electoral college causes as many, if not more, problems that is solves. You didn't bother to vote because you knew your party would win the state. There are just as many that didn't vote because they knew their state was voting for the other way. A couple of states their electoral college votes are split, not a winner takes all. IIRC This is going to happen to them all eventually, just as marijuana will be legalized in all states eventually. Just a matter of time
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
You really need to watch this video, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aIZzOJlJzRQ which explains everything you don't know and don't understand about the electoral college and why it is important. This is only a short clip briefly explaining what some people have taken years to study and understand. I don't remember her name, but the woman in the video is an expert on the subject.
0 ups
Thanks. But when someone says I really need to watch a video it is a dead giveaway I dont really need to watch it. Unless it is porn
Lol
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
What evidence do you have that the electoral college causes more people to not vote if they think their candidate won't win the state than those who don't vote because they know their candidate will win the state? That really defies all logic as then it means they don't want things to chane because they are not willing to voice their opinion. If they want change and they want a chance for their candidate to win, then they would vote.
0 ups
They same evidence you use for not voting since you knew your candidate would win the state. Same logic just a mirror image. The electoral college lets a few swing states determine the outcome, so the candidates focus on those swing states when it should be a national thing. If you want more than just 2 main political parties the easiest way to achieve that is to eliminate the EC. IMO
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
Also if you read my comment, I stated it is not logical for the electoral college to be a reason for someone not to vote thinking their candidate won't win. The only reason they wouldn't vote is if they didn't want any changes to take place. If they are Republican and wanted to get rid of the Democrats, why sit back and not vote just because they think it couldn't happen. Doing that only ensures it won't happen. Trying to say my evidence proves your point when used in reverse is just flat out stupid, especially when I had already explained why that is illogical.

The electoral college would not have to go away to add more parties. It could be modified to change the amount of votes needed, or even go into what the constitution states will happen of neither candidate gets enough votes. But I guess that would require you to do real research on the subject and not just rely on what you think you know, which you are showing me to be very little.
0 ups
Good luck to you!
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
When someone refuses to watch something that will teach them something they need to learn, they are only showing me how ignorant and arrogant they are about learning the truth and only shows me even more that I need not waste any more time on such a pathetic little lifeform. Goodbye.
0 ups
Goodbye and good luck to you!
reply
2 ups
Majority rule is not always wisdom. The Founding Fathers knew that even the people need to be kept in check.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
I upvote dobby
reply
3 ups
God Bless you for your courage to speak out in the name of freedom against those who will violently attack you just because your opinions differ from theirs.
reply
0 ups
Always remember that when given overwhelming evidence of Russian tampering and zero evidence of voter fraud Trump chose to investigate us.
reply
10 ups, 2 replies
reply
6 ups
Thank you for speaking the truth... and pointing out all that really matters in an election.
reply
5 ups
reply
5 ups, 3 replies
Unfortunately for you and the rest of the left, the electoral college is the best way to keep elections fair. It keeps cheating to a minimal (which has been proven this election cycle Hillary Clinton and her people were doing and still lost, thanks to the electoral college). It ensures that most, if not every state, has a voice in most elections instead of just the most populated ones like California and Texas. It also ensures that not only highly populated urban areas dictate an election.

The United States is a Republic, not a democracy where the majority rule.
reply
3 ups
I clap and second that.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Which is why you and I tend to stay in the funnies. :)

(1) - as I have told so many people before, I am not of the left. I have nearly as many disagreements with them as with the right. I am a classical liberal. I believe in the autonomy of the individual, and the freedoms contained therein.

(2) - there was no conspiracy on the left or by the Democrats. In 100 years time history books will say so and look coldly upon Trump and his missteps. And your grandchildren and great-grandchildren will learn this. And you won't be there to 'protect' them.

(3) one person one vote. There is little difference in this high-tech age between regions beyond some cultural dictates. There is no reason to protect everyone else from California if everyone else could move to California and fit in, under the same basic protections.

(4) the United States of America is a liberal democratic republic. A republic - as opposed to a monarchy - whose laws and representatives are determined by democrtic processes. The concept of a constitutional republic is a recent invention of the right, an attempt to change history to say that the founding fathers never intended people to live free and have a say in their lives, but are bound by restraints that - though not eluded in the document - are somehow magically created when an angry conservative doesn't like someone who think differently from them being able to have a say.

Now back to the funnies...
reply
1 up, 1 reply
"2) - there was no conspiracy on the left or by the Democrats."

Oh well that settles it. Never mind the DNC stole the nomination from Sanders, and CNN funneled Clinton debate questions before hand. Nope no conspiracy, just standard leftist behavior.
reply
0 ups
Just happy to educate you callow young 'uns.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I can't believe only democrats want to live in CA. The electoral college is no longer needed.
reply
1 up
They why didn't Obama do something about it? Or Bill Clinton before him? ... The Electoral College was the Metric That Every Candidate and semi-literate Voter knew would determine the race... and By that measure Trump won 30 States to 20... If we are the UNITED States, then the wishes of those States must also be considered.

and if you change the way the race is run, then you change the way Candidates will run that race. When competing for the Popular Vote a candidate's strategy will vary from what one uses when aiming for the Electoral College.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
It doesn't matter who got more votes. It matters who's president.
Btw, where'd you get that info? CNN? LOL.
reply
2 ups
And where did you get your education?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups
:D
reply
6 ups
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
What are you? One of them peace loving hippies?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Who, me? Chronologically, I could possibly qualify, but no. I'm not a hippie, peacenik, tree-hugger, or anything else in that vein. I'm just here on imgflip to enjoy a laugh or two, hopefully cause a laugh or two, and basically enjoy myself.
But this particular post contains so damn much political debate, half-formulated opinion and hot air, IT MAKES ME WANT TO VOMIT!
I mean; Jesus, Mary, Joseph....If you want to debate politics, have pity on the rest of us and take it over to The National Review and knock your socks off. That's not what Imgflip is here for. It is here to have fun!
I'd had enough. I couldn't stand it anymore, and so that's why I posted that photo!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Not that what I am is any of your business!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
reply
0 ups
Yeah...you're a hippy. Have a flower baby. And have some peace.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
I don't support mob vandalism. But neither do I support state-sponsored monuments to racism and sedition.
reply
8 ups, 2 replies
Yes, yes you do. I am not the one attempting to justify the violence, you are. If you really want to fight racism, stop voting democrat, the party that built the monuments you hate because you have no grasp of US history and follow blindly a party that lives to separate Americans through hatred.
reply
2 ups
There's a reason the left want to erase the southern history by taking the statues down and firing history professors who actually teach real American history. Slavery and sexism was created by their party. If they delete their wretched history, no one can blame them for it.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Dude, I'm a Republican. And I think Neo-Confederate pride is a source of continued racism and violence. I just said that I DON"T support the antifa and blm mobs.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I am a silence is support kinda guy, if you support the act by ignoring it, you support the act. I am not sure what neo confederate pride is but if it celebrates southerners I am all for it. I saw plenty of rescue craft flying the stars and bars risking their lives to save Americans. I didn't see a one refuse anyone of a darker shade, different political party or questionable immigration status. Thankfully what the left calls rednecks, own giant trucks, boats, camping gear and tools. I would let them fly whatever they want, build any statue they want and still honor them for their work.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
I never said ignore the mobs. Arrest ANYONE who's spreading terror--blm, antifa, kkk, neo-nazis, etc. Expecting blacks, Asians, and Latinos to be okay with state-sponsored Confederate monuments is like asking Jews to be cool with state-sponsored Nazi monuments. We need to do away with racial self-interest altogether, and protect the rights of EVERYONE. Seriously, some people care more about their Confederate past than their American future. There is NO honor in favoring tradition over logic and conscience.

I don't buy into Neo-Confederate revisionist history. The North and South had been at each other's throats over the issue of slavery for years (hence the Missouri Compromise, the Dred Scott controversy, etc). Finally, the Southern states seceded, because they didn't want to live under a North-dominated federal government. It's not a coincidence that every Confederate state was a slave state. Nor that the Confederate battle flag was waved by KKK lynchers and white supremacist governors throughout the 20th century. Whereas the Stars-and-Stripes represent 240 years of liberty, unity, and social progress, the Confederate battle flag is associated solely with a divisive period that we don't need to go back to.

The Confederacy was too big a fan of local government. Local government can be blinded with local prejudices (like racism, and persecution of unpopular minorities). The federal government, on the other hand, can remain aloof and impartial. That's why the American Union is so important--so that the federal government can uphold universal truths and preserve the rights of unpopular minorities, and punish state officials who violate the bill of rights. The Confederacy rebelled against that American Union. Not something to be proud of.

The Confederacy only existed for five years. Doesn't the South have more positive things from 300 years of American history to celebrate?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
The hard truth is southerners could use a multicolored sleeping baby as a symbol and still be insulted as racists because the stripes went the wrong direction. Censorship is never a good policy, we will remain on opposite sides on that point.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
I have no desire to silence speech. If you want to wave the Confederate flag on your private property, that's your business...I think it's distasteful, but it should remain legal. But the people's government would do better not to sponsor memorials to bad causes. I say sell the Confederate monuments to private collectors, museums, and Civil War reenactors. This wouldn't erase facts from the history books either. We don't have to rewrite history, but we can at least stop state-sponsored romantization of anti-American causes.
reply
2 ups
I agree with newer monuments but some are well over 100years old and Vets from both sides met peacefully when they were built. Just because today people are ignorant of the fact that every single Confederate soldier, white, and black were American soldiers by act of congress, many rejoined the American military after the war, some even fought again. The war was also considered the first modern conflict and many of the lessons and tactics are taught in military academies. The ignorance of the people might require education but never censorship. Today's democratic party can't erase its past.
reply
1 up
reply
[deleted]
3 ups
So the statue of Robert E. Lee should be taken down because of his 5 years of being a Confederate soldier (marking him as being racist), regardless of the fact he freed slaves, opened schools for slaves, fought in the Mexican-American War, and many other positive things both before and after the Civil War for this country? Are you trying to say that the statue, which never had the word Confederate on it, was only created to honor the man for what he did for 5 years of his life? Then what about Abraham Lincoln? Statues of him should be destroyed as well, even though he helped free the slaves? And he wasn't even part of the Confederacy. There is absolutely no justification for all this destruction of public property, all because someone decided they are now offended by it.

"The Confederacy rebelled against against that American Union. Not something to be proud of." But rebelling against our president, police officers, and everything else Liberals want to be offended by is something to be proud of? Be serious. What Liberals are doing today is no better than the rebelling that the South did then.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
thanks....
reply
2 ups
I love Chick-fil-A, I wish they would open Sundays
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
The mainstream media represent one giant hate group that promotes violent propaganda.
reply
1 up
True, a lot of people pretend to hold the moral high ground but stop short of condemning violence as long as it doesn't affect them directly.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
I agree
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
where did the Dow Close Today? how many records have been broken since December?
reply
0 ups
It isn't even close. When comparing democrat whitehouse stock market returns against rebublican whitehouse stock market returns. Orders of magnitude different
reply
1 up, 1 reply
better fact check that warning sign.
reply
1 up
Um, you be a dim one.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
2 ups
impossibru
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Always remember that when given overwhelming evidence of Russian tampering and zero evidence of voter fraud Trump chose to investigate us.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
If you have evidence turn it in, all I have seen are rumors. I could play the dem game of he is your president, you lost get over it, I heard that crap for 8 years. I didn't vote for Trump but given the last three Burnie, Hillary and Trump, I am really glad he is dealing with the hurricane and all the do nothings in office. The more hate I see tossed at him the more support I give him. His people are out and helping, the others are distracting, rioting and doing nothing at a time America needs them. I grew up a southern Democrat because that is what we did, blindly follow the leader, I grew up. I have already voted for my last democrat.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
Mueller has the evidence. He got it from everyone who knows Trump. Subpoenas are on the way. Sit tight.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
As long as the Clinton empire goes down with um, I am ok with it.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I'm sorry to inform you there are no Clintons being investigated in the Trump-Russia collusion scandal.
reply
0 ups, 2 replies
I am no fan of either but if you investigate one, investigate them all. All of congress, anyone running for or holding office. I am all for cleaning the swamp. I doubt a one in either party is actually working for the people that elected them. The Clinton's are self serving scum.
http://www.wnd.com/2017/09/trump-hillary-got-off-because-of-rigged-system/
reply
1 up
How about investigating where probable cause is found and ignoring the b.s. aimed at people who consider themselves possible fans. Reality TV has no place in the US govt.

And if you want to "clean the swamp" I think we should start public campaign finance and disallowing lobbyists.
reply
0 ups
*with
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
the Govt. isn't that good at plugging leaks (without shooting people; remember Hillary actively inquired about assassinating Assange) if Mueller had 'the Goods' someone would have leaked the 'Smoking Gun'... instead all we get are "maybes", "mights", "I hopes" and "could Possiblys"
reply
0 ups
Oh yes. Hillary's a murderer. I forgot. The last document I heard about this week allegedly shows Trump in direct talks about building a Trump Tower in Russia during the campaign while swearing every day he had no ties to Russia. When this investigation ends it will be ugly. Brutal. You can expect resignation or impeachment.
Flip Settings
Warning Sign memeRe-caption this meme

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
WARNING, YOU DON’T HOLD THE MORAL HIGH GROUND WHEN YOU SUPPORT TERRORISM AGAINST THE LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT, OR SUPPORT THE DESTRUCTION OF PUBLIC, PRIVATE OR CULTURAL PROPERTY.
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back