I think there seems to be a yuuge disconnect here. I’m feeling they’re saying you’re doing exactly what you’re saying they’re doing.

Maybe we can all agree that there rhetoric on both sides and we should condemn/not condemn them equally regardless of the political affiliation we agree with?

No where in their comments did they say both were wrong.  Instead they have just found someone else to point the finger.  If all you are going to do is say, "what about this person" then its not enough.  Instead you could say, yes, Trump should tone it down or we could see the same thing played out like this.

I totally agree with your second paragraph.  The political landscape has definitely become more toxic now since it ever has.  We can never underestimate the power of leadership.  When any leader no matter how you view them, promote any kind of negative conduct, it does trickling down.  It would be great if Trump could even come half way and just tone it down, but his personality so far is to just double down or blame someone else.  Lets see how this goes from here on out.  Will he tone it down, or double down.

1. I think influence and impact of words is much more nuanced than “whodunit” or more accurately “whosaidit”. We take into consideration things like credibility and likability of speaker, power of words, method and passion of delivery, social relevance, relatability of ideas towards target audience, oratorial skill, etc. It doesn’t matter if the words come from the God Emperor of Man, if he says “lol u shud tackle the noob”, it won’t have the same impact as an empassioned speech delivered by a master orator directly to his bread-and-butter target audience. At the end of the day, it is the constant repetition by the media, their spin and exaggeration of the relevance of such words is what really gives Trump’s careless words impact. Impact it does not deserve.

Again, everyone might be looking at the wrong parties here on who is really is at fault regarding the spread of all the negative rhetoric. Maybe instead of asking Trump to STFU, maybe we should stop listgening to him and just let him shout into the wind? Better yet, maybe it is time to switch off the TV and stop reading biased (left or right) news?

3. I disagree. Rhetoric is just rhetoric. It is up to us how we decide to act on it. If you really want to have an impact, extend your hand to other side and offer to talk things out (like we are doing right now). I think it would be amazing how the same we are the second we don’t allow media to divide us by telling us what and how to think. Let’s work on ourselves and then work on changing others.

I feel they are doing that because they feel you are doing that. Maybe someone needs to step up and be the adult here and just go ahead and stop going “no u!”. How about I just go ahead and do it for both sides and say: “Hey look both sides have kinda violent-inciting rhetoric “! :p

Well, I’m glad you agree but finishing off with a “but Trump” makes me wonder if you really did. I, personally, am in the camp of “don’t care tbh”. We cannot control how rhetoric can affect others but we can control how it affects us. I prefer to be the one being apathetic on the rhetoric of both sides and disregard them as simply stupid and live my life based on my own beliefs. Well, at least I hope I am.

Lets be honest.  Even if someone posted the same message and said, here is Maxine Waters and look what happen, this is why the President should also tone it down because his influence and reach is much greater than hers, I believe we would just see more finger pointing or worst just ignored.  People have defended Trump no matter what he says or does as if the man is infallible or that by pointing out his flaws, its an attack on their decision to vote for him.

My second paragraph isn't a but Trump.  Since the top is him, I am wondering if he will tone it down from here on out or will he continue to double down.  If he doesn't tone it down what will be your line from there.  Will you ignore it, find some other person to point the finger at and say ah ha, look over here or will you condemn them all.   

I condemn them both.  I condemn any politician that use their influence to harass other political opponents and I definitely condemn any politician who promote any type of violence.  I am not a democrat or republican.  I am neither left or right so when I see those labels jumping around I only see people looking to make excuses for either sides flaws.  Right now I am looking at Trump because he is at the top and he sets the political tone.  If he wants to fight dirty, everyone will follow his lead.  If he tones it down but everyone else continues then you have something to work with.  

Yes we individually can be "Who Gives a F" but the thing is a lot of people do.  I personally do not believe we need that from the President.  I do not believe any President can really bring America together but I do believe that one can increase the divide.

1. I already posted in a separate reply whatI think about “impact” on why I feel don’t get how him being the President seems to have inflated the value of his words (see my discussion above). I disagree (or at least don’t see the logic of it) about what looks like a subjective and abritrary valuation on the impact of his words. His words are stupid. If we keep it at that and not let allow media to rile us up (or better yet, if media stopped using them to try and rile ppl up), then his words will lose all power. It seems ppl might be looking at the wrong parties on who really is to blame regarding all this negative rhetoric.

2. And I will reiterate on how that is all irrelevant to me as I do not care about the rhetoric as I chose to not allow it to control or affect me. I won’t point the finger at anyone as that is not what I am trying to do here. I will (like I did in this thread) most likely say that you may be blaming the wrong ppl and if I do go “look over here”, and I point out an act similarly done by the other side, it is to ask ppl to be logically consistent or to explain their logic, not to assign blame. I really have no prolem so long as ppl are logically consistent. I don’t know why you ask if I would condemn all as I already stated that I condemn none as I find this rhetoric talk absurd, stupid, petty and silly.

3. Trump doesn’t set the political tone on his own. If anything, the media has far more to do with it. I say this because the things I find in political discussions tend to be talking points presented by media (whether it is to condemn him or defend him) than it is by Trump. I have yet to see someone being quoted as saying “but Trump said it is ok to tackle someone so I did”. But how many ppl basically repeat what CNN/Fox are telling them?

4. Of course we do not need it from the President. We do no need it from anybody, tbh. And I’ll agree that I do not like Trump’s divisive tone. But it’s not like we’d be getting much better from Hillary had she been President from how she spoke in her campaign. And it’s not like the media, the celebs, heads of industry or the next organized angry mob are helping make things better. Just looks like this is the climate now. Started way before Trump, it’s just more out in the open now. In the end, it comes down to if you allow yourself to rise above it or allow yourself to be consumed by it.

You pretty much say in your post what my point was. If you are going to condemn Trump's rhetoric then you need to condemn Waters'. But as far as i am concerned people are responsible for their own actions. That someone lacks impulse-control is on them, no one else

Ya'll compering a planned out terrorist attack with bombs against Democrats VS a Democrat (Maxine Waters) who had death threats and said you should confront them. /s Not serving them in restaurants is sssooo terrible.. /s

Also, Democrats in the Senate condemned what Waters said, you can hardly say the same for what the Republican senate has done when Trump say something stupid or similar. They're enablers, you can't compare the two.

The left in general, see's power and authority on (almost) a religious level. Where righties generally look to the word of God, or their priests, the left (who also can look to God) looks to people like the President or individuals at the top pf their class, whether it be Hollywood stars, or media journalists, etc.

That's why you see the freak outs about Trump, or Roseanne, or Kanye, or Megyn Kelly. That's why there was a much bigger push from the media and Hollywood to promote Hillary, compared to a weak Hollywood/media push for Trump. Righties don't really care about power and spotlight as much, they mostly only care about what it can do for them, where as the left looks at it in awe and as inspiration, as well as what it can do for them.

Since the left believes so strongly in authority, trickle down is a big thing for them when it comes to everything. They assume if Trump, at the top of the pyramid, is acting like a 'lunatic', then it stands to reason that it will lead to everything below him becoming destabilized. Which gives the political lefties, and/or righties, a bit of a pass when they say crazy things too, because it's naturally trickling down to them from above, based on their viewpoint.

The left views the pyramid in an upside down fashion. They think the capstone is the most important, and that everything below is heavily impacted by it. The right understand that the capstone can only remain seated and intact in it's position, as long as all of the individual stones below hold their fair share of the burden. If the capstone falls apart on it's own, you just end up with a few chips out of some of the stones below, and an "ugly" slightly imperfect pyramid. That capstone can be repaired or replaced fairly easily however. Now If the stones below become too unstable, the capstone doesn't stand a chance on it's own, and you end up with a heap of rocks resembling nothing. The left looks at things from a top down perspective, and the right look at things from the bottom up.

The main reason you see the right coming in droves to Trump rallies, and why they seem so passionate about him, is because they see that for the first time in a long time, that a 'political' candidate understands this. That if America keeps going down a road where the Country is run from a top down political perspective, the Country will slowly eat away at itself until it crumbles. The capstone can twist and turn and degrade all it wants for the most part, to a certain degree, and the rest of the pyramid couldn't care less, as long as it's receiving the care it needs to support the entire structure.

You can't bring in too many new blocks while focusing mostly on new pyramids, if you know the blocks supporting the Great Pyramid are falling apart. If you lose the main draw, you might as well not have even bothered in the first place.

A random person? Obviously not. But that’s not what my question is about however.

Check a few posts above as I’ve had a discussion about exactly this already.