I think elections are won and lost by social image, not just MEDIA but now also INTERNET

if enough conspiracies are floating around (per Hilary), that NEGATIVE "image" can lose an election

Hilary may have had a better chance if Investigations of her EMAILS were not all over the news, further adding fuel to all the conspiracies already floating about


Trump did a very salesperson thing, by making himself immune to the normal issue of IMAGE by coming out the gate and planting the seed that the MEDIA was out to get him whenever they reported anything negative. So all he has, for many seeking to validate their stereotypes and bias's of 'the others', are things that he decides to put out about himself, because he convinced so many to ignore Press that didnt elevate his image and that there was a conspiracy among anyone doing other wise to 'make him look bad.'

He knew how to market, the Russians helped plant the seed all over the press of the 'image' of 'corrupted' Hilary and voila


I honestly dont know if he will be elected or not, I dont take anything for granted. We are a very divided country with alot of negative biases towards others that can be used successfully to garner support for a candidate. it is no longer about voting on a candidate based on what they have done, but voting against others based on what they have ALLEGEDLY done.

with those cards in play, anything is possible.

The answer is yes. Finding a job should be there #1 priority. When it isn't, you know that person really doesn't want to support themselves.

My brother lost his job when the housing market crashed. He called me one day very upset. He said he had put in 267 applications and hadn't received a job offer. I could barely sleep that night because I was worried because he was so upset. The next day he received a job offer. For the next year he worker out of town and only got to see his family when he had a day off.

He is a heavy equipment operator who was working 80 hours a week before the housing crash.

okay. My number one priority is feeding and clothing my daughter, yet I dont spend 24/7 on activities solely related to that one priority.

also, there arent enough jobs to apply to, of those that are in an area and matching one's resume, for them to truly spend 24/7 sending out resumes ... especially in the internet age, when you may be sending your resume out several times to the same employer without knowing it and making yourself appear more desperate than like a serious candidate.

When you are productive member of society, you have things like a home, car, etc. Say you have $100,000 invested in a home, you become Desparate not to lose what you've spent your life working for. If you have no ambition and just renting an apt, getting evicted and moving in with family till you rent again, isn't a big deal. This is how people can gauge that the protesters aren't productive members of society.

no offense. but I dont think that made any sense.

how can one know looking at a protestor whether they rent or invest in a home. and since when does home ownership status define productiveness?

Home ownership is a big responsibility. That is where the majority of my money goes. Let me give you an example. An ex coworker pays $500 a month rent for a tiny apt. I pay more than twice that on a mortgage taxes and insurance. On top of that I paid $9300 for a new roof 2 years ago. Monday, I spend the day appealing my property tax, not protesting.

The productive part is the taxes they charge me to keep things running. School, police, fire, roads etc. Because somebody has to pay those things.

and that is all great for you. but what has that got to do with whether a protester is being productive with their life?


the line of thought that only homeowners and taxpayers can possibly be of value or doing anything productive or of value is classist, to say the least. It leaves no room for anyone but those who already have privileges in life to have a voice.

and that is all great for you. but what has that got to do with whether a protester is being productive with their life?


the line of thought that only homeowners and taxpayers can possibly be of value or doing anything productive or of value is classist, to say the least. It leaves no room for anyone but those who already have privileges in life to have a voice.

Productive people have responsibility. I just had a friend as me what I'm doing this weekend. I said I don't know. It's father's day weekend so I might get some free time. But even if my daughter goes to her dad's, I have to collect rent Saturday.

Most people pay taxes in one form or another. Property, income, sales. The only ones not paying are unproductive members of society.

I don't think people who aren't paying should have a voice with the exception of senior citizen. But honestly they might be paying more taxes in some cases.

I checked this morning. The sky didn't fall. All the liberals can relax.

everyone pays, one way or another. the idea that only financial payment via income tax, ie financial status, should determine the merit of a citizen or their right to voice grievances is a classist and scary one.

And this still does not explain how protestors can be assumed to not be being 'productive'

For example look at the woman who was ran over and killed at the protest last year. They interviewed her parents and they didn't seem upset. No husband, kids, coworkers. Church family, etc. She was unemployed and bored that day and it got her killed.

Facts of life are you aren't contributing to society if you can't even support yourself. Only exception might be a house wife/mom or senior citizen who has already paid their debt. But even in these circumstances taxes are usually being paid.

wow, not that it should matter in regards to someone killing her, but Heather Heyer was a paralegal. Despite the judgments, Im sure she didnt work 24/7 anymore than most with jobs do. She went to a protest because she often went to said events, and what 'seems' like someone being upset over loss is completely subjective to when and where and how often that someone is observed.

What got Heather killed was a neo nazi in a car, probably employed too. plain and simple.

Facts of life are many people can't support themselves but still 'contribute' through charity or volunteer, many are working and still cant 'support' themself because they dont earn ENOUGH.

Life should not be valued by some classist value of socioeconimic class or earned income taxpayer status and it is scary to actually hear someone with such a firm basis in the belief that it should.

Paralegals make $10 an hour. She would have been food stamp poor even if she had been taking herself to work.

She was killed because she went to a Neo-nazi rally. They were badass attacking people's cars until it got serious. Now people who shouldn't have even been there at all, want to cry.

Like I said, she was unproductive, trying to make herself seem important. Clearly she wasn't very smart. She did nothing to help people that day.

wow, classism is alive and well...

haaaa... wow, just wow.

Paralegals on the bottom end actually make about 30 grand a year, which is roughly 14 per hour, which would mean bringing home 2500 FOR ONE PERSON, that would not have been 'food stamp poor'.

there are no people 'that shouldnt' be at a protest, certainly not by some BS qualifier of food stamps or income level

when people work, they dont usually work all minutes of the day, so they have times that they are not AT work even if they are EMPLOYED (and paying taxes even) who is to tell others whether they 'should' spend that time in a theater, or at a festival or at a protest?



if she was working, she was not unproductive, especially if she made 30000 a year for one single person, she would have even had to pay taxes

I hope no one is ever in a position to tick off boxes regarding the value YOU have in this world ... I really do.

Protesting and free speech is a right and whats makes a free democratic society works, although America is a republic but that is another story.

Protesting for change is productive, protesting because you dont like the democratically elected person isnt productive ,most productive people are not out protesting against someone who is democratically elected.

Productive means at least in 1st world advanced means something that provides a positive result, but in this case we are talking financial

Protesting like for women's right, civil rights are example of positive changes.

Occupy wall street, protesting against Donald Trump , women's marches that exclude conservative right wing women , transgendered women aren't real women's marches

These protesters are not contributing to society in any way, they are not productive.

I know what it pays because when my company closed they offered to send me to school. The pay was about $10 an hour. I said, so you want to educate me on how to make less money than I was making...no thanks.

You are right, people don't work 24/7. They go home to cook, clean, laundry, errands, spend time with kids, yardwork, etc. Then they sleep so they can go back to work again. It's like the other poster said, they are unemployed or underemployed.

For argument sake, say it's $14 an hour. That's not enough to support yourself at 40 hours a week. She needed to be working. Plus get a side job.

People who support themselves understand what it takes.

HAAAAAAAAA,, you have had SO MANY EXPERIENCES

SHE didnt have kids, people who RENT an apartment (single people without kids) dont have alot of lawn to keep. Which meant she was cooking, cleaning, and doing laundry for ONE. how much time do you think that took on average on a DAILY Basis?


and I dont know when THIS experience happened, but a research of paralegal pay is easy enough to search

and being that I WENT to paralegal school AND graduated back in the 90s and starting pay was more than ten THEN,

Im doubting this is more than either a factor of an outlier in a place with very low cost of living, or a deception

but in either case, for a paralegal, the pay at the lower end is 30,000.

and 14 an hour IS PLENTY to support one person, unless ... well, never mind

where I stay, rent (one bedroom) is 900 per month, if you put 400 for a car/insurance, 250 for food, and 200 for utilities, and 200 for gas a month. that is only 1950 a month ONE PERSON would need.

which is why that type of one person salary is not 'food stamp' eligible.


people who understand math, know what it takes too ...

and it is BAT **** CRAZY that how much someone earns should have ANYTHING to do with whether they should be able to attend WHATEVER free event they choose, let alone whether their murder is therefore somehow their fault for not happening to be at a job in that moment.

protesting is a right. Positive change comes not by one event or overnight but over time, through exposure, conversation, and action.

I agree it is silly to protest an election once it is done, (unless election results are in question) just as much as it would be to protest criminals killing people(though it would be sensible to protest for measures to make citizens safer from such criminals)

most protest in modern time is either protest of an economic or political system, where Representatives have powers to invoke change, and the people use their voice to let them know the changes they expect them to make.




There is NO way to know if someone is 'contributing' merely by the events you see them attending.