How Anti-Trump Protesters Will Get Votes For Trump.

Anti-Trump protesters have taken to violently confronting Trump supporters at rallies and attempting to blockade them from attending. In Chicago, a hotbed of Left-Progressivism, there was nearly a riot. An anti-Trump mob violently accosted Trump supporters trying to attend a rally. Their threats and violent antics became so bad that the Trump campaign cancelled his rally appearance for fear of bloodshed.

In Phoenix, anti-Trump protesters blockaded public roads in an attempt to harass Trump supporters, not allowing anyone through until the mob was dispersed by police.

What if someone trying to get through a blocked road was not a Trump supporter, but an unrelated and uninvolved party? Tough luck, said the protesters. The innocent might not be interested in political violence, but political violence is interested in the innocent.

I do not like Trump, and would never vote for him. But that does not mean I approve of what the anti-Trump protesters have been doing. On the contrary, I despise the anti-Trump protesters. The crybullies who denounce Trump as a bastion of hatred and tyranny are themselves servants to hatred and tyrannical impulses. These are people who think violence is OK as long as it serves the correct political goals. They are a gutter of criminals and fools.

They did not merely show up to make their voice heard, which is fine. They showed up to violently shut down their opposition. “We oppose you because ‘shut up.’ ” Then they rejoiced. It goes without saying that these are not people who favor thinking freely and exchanging ideas.

This was a golden opportunity for Trump’s conservative opponents to show some principle in action. Yes, Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich were his rivals; but this was their opportunity to reiterate their commitment to free speech and the rule of law over political violence. All they needed to do was call out the anti-Trump protesters as the violent goons they are. “I don’t support Trump, but I damn well support free speech. The anti-Trump hooligans in Chicago and Phoenix should be arrested.”

This isn’t what happened. What did Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich do? They blamed Donald Trump.

As Pat Buchanan explains:

With his “dangerous style of leadership,” Trump stokes this anger, mewed Rubio, “This is what happens when a leading presidential candidate goes around feeding into a narrative of bitterness and anger and frustration.”

Rubio implies that if Trump doesn’t tone down his remarks to pacify the rabble, he will be responsible for the violence visited upon him.

Kasich echoed Rubio: “Donald Trump has created a toxic environment (that) has allowed his supporters and those who sometimes seek confrontation to come together in violence.”

But were the thousands of Trump supporters who came out to cheer him that night really looking for a fight? Or were they exercising their right of peaceful assembly?

Cruz charged Trump with “creating an environment that only encourages this sort of nasty discord,” thus offering absolution to the mob.

Friday night cried out for moral clarity. What we got from Trump’s rivals was moral mush that called to mind JFK’s favorite quote from Dante: The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in time of moral crisis maintain their neutrality.

Who claimed responsibility for this madness?

People for Bernie, a pro-Sanders outfit, tweeted, “[This] wasn’t just luck. It took organizers from dozens of organizations and thousands of people to pull off. Great work.”

Hmmm. Bernie Sanders has previously discussed being the victim of political violence as a former hippie and also a Jew. He has proclaimed himself as a staunch supporter of civil rights, claiming to have even been dragged away in handcuffs from anti-racism rallies in the 1960s. The good Mr. Sanders would never stand for such behavior, even from his own followers… right? As Buchanan says:

Now, Sanders did not order this assault on the civil rights of Trump supporters. But has endorsed him, and “Bernie” signs and T-shirts were everywhere among the disrupters. Hence, he has a duty to disavow this conduct and those who engaged in it.

If Sanders refuses, he condones it, and is morally complicit.

What was Bernie’s response? First, nothing. Silence for a few days. Then, he claimed his supporters had nothing to do with it and blamed Trump for “inciting violence.” Never mind the fact that his supporters took public responsibility.

We are surrounded by spineless and opportunistic losers – Sanders, Clinton, Cruz, Kasich, Marco Rubio (who has since dropped out) – all of them. None of them should be President.

Most American Presidents should never have been President. The current crew is no exception. I will probably be voting “None of the above”.


Here’s the main question: what exactly did the anti-Trump protesters think they would achieve? Presumably, they figure such outbursts of rage against Trump will rally the left-wing troops against him and galvanize his opposition.

In 1968, far-left protesters in Chicago began causing trouble outside of the Democratic National Convention, protesting presidential candidate Hubert Humphrey and his pro-Vietnam War views. I also believe the Vietnam War was wrong, but the protester’s behavior was utterly appalling: throwing rocks, smashing windows, and harassing bystanders. The riots got so bad that the Chicago PD eventually had to go all in and start beating protesters in order to get them to clear out. The protesters deserved to get bloodied at this point.

Voters across the nation saw photos in the newspapers the next day and watched the riots on the news. Everyone knew the hippies and leftist militants were responsible for the madness. Unfortunately for Humphrey, voters identified him with the protesters even though he was the target of the protest. Both Humphrey and the rioters were on the left. In the coming election, Richard Nixon destroyed Hubert Humphrey in a landslide. Voters completely rejected the left-wing hooligans. As journalist Hunter Thompson would later say about the election, “Richard Nixon is living in the White House today because of what happened that night in Chicago.”

It might not be too far off to say the same thing about Donald Trump. Far from somehow rallying support against Donald Trump, it appears to have merely rallied support for Trump:

The left-wing radical groups behind [the protest] hoped to embarrass Trump and make him look too extreme for voters to support him on the eve of the Illinois primary.

Voters say their plan backfired

A new poll found that twice as many people said the Chicago confrontation made them more likely to vote for Trump than to shy away from him.

Pollsters at Monmouth University reported that likely voters “interviewed on Saturday and Sunday were asked how that incident affected their vote intentions. Most (66%) say it had no impact on their support.”

“However, twice as many said it made them more likely (22%) rather than less likely (11%) to support Trump,” they wrote.

The scenes of blood and violence turned off so many people that nearly one in every four was more likely to vote for Trump out of spite.

These protesters are complete idiots. They are slaves to their own anger and stupidity. They know nothing about the history of politics in America. By all accounts, what happened in Chicago has done nothing but increase resolve of voters to vote for Trump.

The Silent Majority is referred to as “silent” for a reason. They are voters who are not interested in getting overly involved with political mumbo-jumbo beyond debate with family and friends. They will speak at the ballot box, and that’s about it.

The Silent Majority hates violent goons. So do I. If I were a driver on the Phoenix turnpike blockaded by anti-Trump protesters, it would’ve taken every ounce of my willpower to not gun it and run them over. Not because I like Trump or want to defend his honor, but simply because I want violent goons to butt out of my life and take their political games with them. Such antics almost make me want to vote for Trump simply to spite them. Like the Silent Majority, the Spite Vote is a very real thing as well.

I’d be saying the same thing even if I supported the cause of the protesters. Nobody should be allowed to get away with sacrificing the civil rights of law-abiding citizens simply as part of a political statement. These people deserve jail, no matter their reasoning for the protests.


All of the major Presidential candidates running for office are total hacks. This was their chance to stand on the side of the innocent: “Violent thugs who trample the civil rights of innocent citizens should be jailed.” Instead, they opted to use the events for potshots at Trump, who was 100% innocent in the matter. Hardly a commitment to principle.

The real victims of these events were simple law-abiding citizens. When push came to shove, everyone ignored the law-abiding citizens in favor of tickling their own political whims. None of these schmucks should be President.

For protesters, there is a lesson to be learned: before making any public spectacles, think through what the real reactions will be first.

Tags: , , , ,

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: