Michael Moore calls for protesters to 'disrupt' Trump's inauguration

foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/12/07/michael-moore-calls-for-protesters-to-disrupt-trumps-inauguration.html

Michael Moore – who predicted Donald Trump would win the presidency months before his surprise victory – is now encouraging people to protest the President-elect’s upcoming inauguration.

"Disrupt the Inauguration. The Majority have spoken – by nearly 2.7 million votes & counting! Silence is not an option,” Moore tweeted Wednesday.

The liberal filmmaker shared a link to the website for DisruptJ20, a campaign for “a bold mobilization against the inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20, 2017.”

This is why promoting the Popular Votes count in this election as relevant are so dangerous. They aren’t valid at all. I’ll cut & paste again the info here…

Re: He just can’t stand the fact that Clinton won the popular vote by at least 2 million votes.

That’s actually a non-argument. For one thing, there are just too many republicans in solid, hardcore blue states (with high populations) like California and NY who don’t bother going to vote because it wouldn’t matter. But there’s also this…I’ll just cut & paste my comments from another thread…

Quote:
Originally Posted by RosyAnne View Post
A very important thing to remember is that strategy is reflected in those numbers. If you are a republican, you don’t spend a lot of time and money in places like California, Oregon, New York, etc., because you know it’s a blue lock, states are superglued tight and although you could gain some serious votes, it would never be enough to topple the majority. Now if the popular vote mattered, that changes everything and you would hustle from sea to shining sea for every single vote.

Arguing for popular vote numbers AFTER an election win that was based on who performed best in the electoral college is not kosher at all IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RosyAnne View Post
Elections based on electoral college numbers have a different strategy than elections based on popular votes. It’s like arguing that the winner of a foot race (strategy was speed, cross the finish line first) shouldn’t be the winner because he made less strides than his opponent. It’s nonsense. Agree upon the rules beforehand, base your strategy on that and voila! only one winner. This didn’t use to be difficult, for some reason nowadays it is. I don’t know why.

If the foot race was based on strides & speed…then you would adjust your strategy to include more strides. If it’s just on speed…you don’t worry about the stride count. Do you see how that makes a difference? Not only for a sense of fair play…but how the strategy would affect the variables involved?

So comparing popular vote numbers is really not valid in any way (in an election such as this). There are just so many variables…people don’t vote because they don’t think it doesn’t count…strategies…what election promises you make to who…etc.

But here’s the really sneaky thing to consider: The media knows this. The political talking heads know this. So the question is…

Why do they keep sliding that out there to the masses? Why are they continuously fanning those flames (re: popular vote counts)? What are they trying to start?

From your post: "Why do they keep sliding that out there to the masses? Why are they continuously fanning those flames (re: popular vote counts)? What are they trying to start? "

The answer is very simple. Because they’re leftists, the left is inherently totalitarian, and they don’t care what they disrupt or destroy in pursuing that goal.

This dude is a troll.

Lock him up.

Commentator

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.