I have a hypothetical question for you all: If the election was stolen and there was clear and undeniably evidence of this fact, would you support citizens taking over the Capitol building in protest (assuming nobody died in the process)?

No, because if there was actual facts of corruption that were proven, the process would be started over again. but there isn't. so it wasn't. 

Protesting is one thing; You can protest anything, no matter who foolish or bone-headed the cause may or may not be, so long as protesting is all you are doing. But if that protest escalates to a riot, that's a different story.

A lot of things are worth protesting over, NOTHING is worth rioting over; The moment you inflict physical harm upon other people and your actions put others in imminent, potentially life-threatening danger, especially those who have nothing to do with what is going on and are unfortunate enough to get caught in the crossfire, that's when you lose major credibility. It doesn't matter what the cause is or which side of the political spectrum you lean. You are just as guilty and just as extreme as the opposite side when you do that.

The problem with fighting fire with fire is that eventually, everything is burned to ash and cinders.

You are kind of cheating the question. I am basically asking "If Trump was right, would you support something kind of similar to this", not "What is your opinion on how the processes of the country would react to large scale electoral fraud"...

Only if after taking the right steps like using the legal system and protesting were tried and not worked, would I agree that an armed uprising would be justifiable. I'd still not like it, but if there was provable corruption, then yeah.

I'm still trying to figure out why I'm the bad guy for repeatedly, aggressively declaring these people to be villains. I've literally been banned from this forum in the past for 'generalizing' that the alt-right are terrorists. When they definitely, absolutely are. I've been worried about this exact thing happening for four and a half years now, and I get told I'm a hypocritical bigot every time. 

For anyone wondering: Protesting and riotting because you are systemically targetted and unsafe due to racism is justified outrage. Progress rarely happens without violence, and the BLM/Antifa protests are absolutely justified violence given the circumstances. Ideally we'd be beyond this and not need violence, but the oppressed never stop being repressed without action, and the chance of the oppressors giving up power without violence is historically a fiction. BLM just wanted to not be killed or abused or treated as lesser humans. Antifa was countering the rise of fascism like the Proud Boys and Alt-Right. Both of those are noble causes. 

Storming the capitol and enciting acts of terrorism because you lost an election is NOT justified rage or violence. It goes against everything the first world collectively stands for. We're supposed to be better than this. 

And for the love of fuck, Trump's first amendment rights are not being trampled because he was kicked off all the social media platforms. You're entitled to free speech, but there are limits. For one, you're not permitted to use your speech to incite violence or commit conspiracy to do violence. and for two, no private entity - no matter how far reaching and ubiquitous - are obligated to host your speech or amplify your words. Twitter can ban his hate-spewing ass as much as I can kick any racist ass out of my house. Twitter is not a government-owned property and is in fact a private company. I find it hilarious how so many people think the first amendment is a catch-all, get-out-of-jail-free card that protects a person from having to deal with any and all consequences for what they say and do. 

I also find it delicious that the same people that loudly protected people's rights to discriminate against making gay wedding cakes are also the same people who now suddenly have a problem with a private company denying the president a platform to spew his hate. Bloody snowflakes can't handle consequences for their actions. 

It's also hilarious that the same people (usually old boomers) who complain about participation trophies and call people snowflakes for wanting safe spaces are the same ones literally committing a coup against the capital because they came in second place and can't handle the fallout from their actions. The hypocrisy is mind-boggling and it astounds me that there are not only people out there who actually are like this despite the fact that the right answers are one google search away, but that they spew righteous indignation if their bullshit is called out, followed by aggressively calling everyone who disagrees with them communists or snowflakes. 

These people are the bad guys. Plain and simple. The modern right - you know, the ones who hate gay people, don't tolerate muslims, pretend the racism problem is cured so they don't have to feel bad about reality, bitch about the war on christmas, hate it when poor people get help, loooooove the military's power, and have a fetish for guns all while actively downplaying environmental issues and devaluing the importance of education - are villains. They are the bad guys. They are making the world a worse place by nearly every metric, and now they feel like they're the oppressed ones despite them being the ones with power and guns. That is incredibly dangerous, and until we do something about it, it's only going to get worse. 

There are few things more dangerous than when those with power believe themselves to be oppressed. We're seeing the reality of that firsthand. And the snowflake, safe-spaced, democractic libs have been saying this for years, warning y'all of the dangers of enabling these people and getting treated like we're hypocrites for it. 

We've all been expected to treat both sides as equal, like there are 'fine people' on either side of the debate. Like it'd be hypocritical to criticize one while not doing the same for the other side. and in an effort to not look biased or ignorant, a lot of people I know do tend to try to not criticize one without the other. Everywhere you look, you hear people saying that both sides suck or they make a point to counter their own point with one against their own side...but the reality is that one of the sides is good, and one is bad. In theory, both concepts (left-wing and right wing politics) have their value, but what you have in the US isn't left and right, it's center and far right. Democrats are not left compared to the rest of the developed world, but the american right are borderline extremists.

The reason I tend to err on the side of the democrats/liberals is because, despite the right's attempts to demonize them for being communists, their actual policies are pretty much right down the middle. They are the balance the world needs. Some socialist agendas, sure, but balanced out with America's obsession with freedom. Some socialism is good - 19 out of 20 of the world's best nations identify as socialist - but Americans outright villainize it even though it has been proven to work in many of the most prosperous and happy and safe countries in the world. 

It's like the climate argument. Every time you see a climate change debate, it's the same amount of people on either side of the argument to give it a feeling of fairness. In reality, something like 99.8% of all climate scientists agree that Climate Change is very real and very dangerous and very much so affected by our actions. so the REALITY is that, for every 1 scientist that believes it's a hoax, 499 believe it is real. The skewed perspective is doing America - nay, the whole world - a disservice. 

and while I truly do wish we could clean up our act without violence, I think at this point it's clear that the only way any progress is going to be made is if we protest and if we riot for what's truly important. 

Black lives are worth rioting over. 

LGBT+ Lives are worth rioting over.

Women are worth rioting over.

White dudes with fragile egos and more guns than common sense upset about losing an election is not a cause worth fighting for. These people are villains. Terrorists. And yes, historical context is important. There is no white genocide. There is no conspiracy against men or straight people, but there is a historical precedent for minorities being opressed. How some people out there don't get this is absolutely baffling to me. 

Alright, interesting. I agree, and I think acknowledging this opinion goes a long way to demonstrating why Trump's recent rhetoric is so dangerous.

I have a hypothetical question for you all: If the election was stolen and there was clear and undeniably evidence of this fact, would you support citizens taking over the Capitol building in protest (assuming nobody died in the process)?

I have a hypothetical question for you all: If the election was stolen and there was clear and undeniably evidence of this fact, would you support citizens taking over the Capitol building in protest (assuming nobody died in the process)?