Amazon Customers Sign Letter To Jeff Bezos To Dump Donald Trump (thestreet.com) 623
An anonymous reader writes: More than 13,000 Amazon customers (including upwards of 5,000 Amazon Prime subscribers), have signed a letter to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos calling for the company to stop selling Trump's line of menswear. UltraViolet Action is the organization hosting the petition, which calls for Amazon to "stop profiting off of [Trump's] brand of hate." The letter reads: "Donald Trump has consistently lobbed racist, sexist, and xenophobic attacks against entire groups of people, encouraged violence and vitriol against his political enemies and perpetuated a culture of violence against women. Amazon.com should want to distance themselves from this hateful rhetoric, but instead, they're profiting off his brand," explained Karin Roland, Chief Campaigns Officer at UltraViolet, in a statement. "Jeff Bezos needs to listen to his customers and ensure that Amazon doesn't profit off of Trump hate, and take immediate steps to dump Trump." If Amazon does take action, they wouldn't be the first. Macy's stopped carrying Trump's products last summer, and Univision and NBC cut ties with Trump over his statements as well.
Valid Action (Score:2, Interesting)
Petitions are always just samples of the real objection, so this shows a sizable segment of the customer base objects to Trump's posturing.
It is a simple request to stop funding it by selling his merchandise, which Amazon must decide with weight on its PR impact now too.
Personally if Amazon drops Trump, I will make a point to buy more from them, even at a modest price increase per item.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So you supported Proposition 8 then? That was a real petition that showed a sizable segment of California were opposed to gay marriage.
Oh I'm sorry... Are only certain shows of mass movement allowed?
Oh now you want to argue civil rights while you simultaneously support people being blocked from selling stuff openly?
Yeah fuck you!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
a popular measure to remove someones civil rights is cannot itself be considered a pro civil rights movement.
not everything is valid when put to a vote.
not slavery, not jim crow, not the discrimination against LGBT.
Re: (Score:3)
not everything is valid when put to a vote.
Yes, it is actually. That's life. That's why we did in fact have slavery, jim crow, and discrimination against various groups.
The fact that everything is valid when put to a vote is why that stuff can change though, rather than saying "No no no, GOD wants slavery, so you can't just 'vote' it away, that's blasphemy."
Re: (Score:3)
What you may be confused about is that "majority" strictly means 50% + 1, but in our system we have mutually agreed on stronger majorities required for some actions like amending the constitution. It's still a tyranny, and yes everything, EVERYTHING, is subject to vote. We could reinstate slavery tomorrow (well, maybe next election cycle) if enough people supported it.
It's funny that you're criticizing my understanding of civics. Where exactly do you think checks and balances comes from? God? The King? The
Re: Valid Action (Score:2, Funny)
( ) provide argument counterpoint
(x) insinuate mental illness
Re: Valid Action (Score:4, Insightful)
No, the invisible hand would be Amazon not stocking these items because they don't sell.
The fact that a bunch of whiny crybabies want to deprive some manufacturer of his rights has nothing to do with the "invisible hand". The invisible hand doesn't need petitions. It just sweeps players aside on it's own.
This is a bunch of people that can't handle the fact that the market isn't conforming to their pet political agenda. That is why they want a particular person shunned as if the US were some sort of cult (or Europe).
Re:Valid Action (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't like Trump and I am scaird to think of him as president. However protesting Amazon for selling his goods that he was selling before he ran as president sound more like stereotypical liberal intolerance to contending ideas. Don't target the store selling the goods where there is a population that seems to demand it. Use the energy to boycott trump products not pressure the store to not offer it. If the stores stop selling then these products will just be more valuable.
Re:Valid Action (Score:5, Insightful)
I really didn't approve of the decision to drop the confederate flag from sale.
I feel this falls into the same box of stupid.
Re:Valid Action (Score:5, Insightful)
It is the same box of stupid. Unfortunately, that box is getting too small for it's contents and they're spilling over. I'm not a fan of Trump, but I can't make the leap from disliking the guy to infringing on his ability to make money. If people want to buy his shit, let them. If people don't want to buy his shit, . . . wait for it . . . don't buy his shit.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
He can't be any worse than Hillary, who was a big supporter of the big bank bailout with no strings attached, so that bank executives could give themselves huge bonuses thanks to the taxpayer. Not to mention how she sells arms to nations with terrible human rights records and they give her Clinton Foundation big kickbacks.
As a progressive, I plan on voting for Trump if the election comes down to him versus Hillary. I just can't go along with today's stupid pro-corporate, pro-Wall street liberals and their
Re: (Score:3)
I agree. Today is all about "I don't like what you're doing so I'll start a bandwagon to censor you and shut you down."
It's either the far left censoring stuff like Trump or the far right trying to shut-out LGBT from everyday life because they feel it's immoral and goes against their beliefs even if they never interact with a gay person in their life.
Re: (Score:3)
> Infringing on his right to make money? Things that are not rights for $1000 Alex.
An obvious liberal.
Our rights are nearly boundless. It's the powers of government that are limited. Our constitution is a set of limitations on government, not a comprehensive list of rights granted to us by that same government.
Re: (Score:3)
A whole 15,000 subscribers and a petition with 5000 signatures are an insignificant amount of people to force anyone's hand. Amazon deals with millions of subscribers. The righteous indignation of the few is just background noise. And the people starting these boycotts demand that all their views and opinions be taken seriously while any dissenting opinions need to be quashed.
Re:Valid Action (Score:5, Insightful)
The most intolerant are those who demand others respect their own tolerance. And follow their rules about tolerance.
In other words, modern SJWs.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why must I be tolerant of intolerance? If Trump wants to ban Mexicans and Muslims, why am I not allowed to try to ban every trace of Trump?
Expressing the desire to do something (ban Mexicans and Muslims, in this example) is not the same as doing it.
The issue is not tolerance of intolerance. It is tolerance of other people's ideas and beliefs, whether or not you agree with them. Tolerance is, by definition, the willingness to allow (not necessarily accept) ideas which are contrary to your own. Acceptance of ideas which are similar to one's own is not tolerance; it is agreement.
You may certainly "ban every trace of Trump" within spaces you ow
Re:Valid Action (Score:4, Informative)
Attempting to do the same anywhere else (especially in my space), is simply an attempt to exert control over others and -that- is an act of intolerance.
Ridiculous. To express my disapproval is not the same as silencing your voice. To petition a private company as a means to express your viewpoint is no different. As Amazon is free to carry whatever products they want, to consider that carrying those products is equivalent to supporting to those ideas is perfectly reasonable. It's the basic idea behind every boycott. (Would you have us dispense with those entirely? Wouldn't that be a terrifying suppression of free speech?)
To say "I won't buy your products as long as you support x" is not intolerance as you're under no obligation to underwrite speech with which you disagree by supporting the company that enables said speech to further disseminate. Tolerance does not mean "you must pay to support my ideas, regardless of your beliefs". You'd have us believe that by not funding your message, we're being intolerant.
Amazon's customers are saying "we don't want to pay you to provide a platform for these ideas". That's not intolerance. That's not saying "I want to prevent Trump from sharing his ideas" (he's free to do so on whatever platforms he controls) it's saying "I don't want to pay you to promote ideas I dislike." Amazon is free to continue to carry those products and their message if they're willing to accept the natural social and potential financial cost the comes from supporting those ideas. Speech is never free from social consequences, nor should it ever be. How else would ideas compete?
If you are right and his ideas are so repugnant, then those ideas will simply die in the open air. To quote a well-know political commentator, "Sunlight kills bacteria."
This is all part of that process. People aren't perfectly rational actors, after all. Ideas die when they become socially unacceptable, not because they're shown to be objectively wrong, harmful, or whatever. Alternative ideas and dissent constitute the "sunlight" in your metaphor.
What the fuck? (Score:3)
So Trump attempting to ban minorities by seeking the highest office of the free world and riling up mobs until they start beating up said minorities = "He has a right to speak!"
What the fuck?
He hasn't done any of that!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Way to completely lose all perspective and conflate crap to fit your own desires.
Re:What the fuck? (Score:4, Insightful)
Second, the ban on Muslims is a temporary measure and what actual right should someone have to actually immigrate in USA? Once you are an American citizen you are protected by the USA Constitution, but until you are, what the fuck?
Third, what's the point of protesters to invest Trump's rallies and try to prevent him to address his supporters? This is a bullying attitude in very first place from the protesters. I would like to see Bernie and Hillary being treat the same way just to see their very reaction and the reaction of their own supporters for fun.
Re: (Score:3)
Umm... So, I cheated and looked. None of those say any of the things you claimed. There's no banning Muslims or Mexicans in any of that. In fact, now that I've looked, I'm rather inclined to disbelieve your further utterances.
Re:Valid Action (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the position is a little bit more nuanced that your simple statement on banning Mexicans and Muslims.
On Mexicans, he is proposing that we remove Mexican's/Latinos that came into the country illegally.
On Muslims, he proposed a suspension of travel until we figured out what was going on with respect to terror and the religion of peace.
It seems as if you are painting with the same broad brush you are accusing Trump of painting with.
While I will not try to defend Mr. Trump, I will point out the our system of government has let a lot of questionable and illegal things deliberately slide for the benefit of the top 1%. This is has led to an erosion of our laws and standard of living for many who used to be known as middle class.
The derivative housing market collapse, H1-B abuse, the blind eye to undocumented works who entered the country illegally and use stolen identities are just the tip of the iceberg. Additionally, our government picks winners and loser and hampers the free market in so many areas including but not limited to insurance, health care, commodities/food, copyrighted works, and prescription drugs. Meanwhile we have perpetual cash-cow wars and unconstitutional search and seizures of cash with documented abuse of police power. Meanwhile the ware on drugs rolls along with the high school to prison pipeline creating a steady stream of felons who will never get jobs because one brush with the law resulting in a felony means you can never answer 'NO' to "Have you ever beed convicted of a felony?"
Someone eventually needs to drop the hammer and fix the scales so they are honest again. Is this Trump? Is the Bernie? I know it isn't Clinton.
In any case, Trump is the first person to stand on the national stage and call this stuff out in a big way. This resonates with all the people who have been crushed and hurt.
Any means possible (Score:5, Insightful)
stereotypical liberal intolerance to contending ideas
Why must I be tolerant of intolerance? If Trump wants to ban Mexicans and Muslims, why am I not allowed to try to ban every trace of Trump?
Because it's morally "the ends justify the means".
It's going outside the process just because you don't like the results. That's not how we do things.
Effectively, the rule seems to be "it doesn't matter how we do it, we *have* to stop Trump. BY ANY MEANS!!!"
People shout at him during speeches. That didn't work, so they started being rowdy. That didn't work.
(Not letting him speak - how is this any different in principle to censorship?)
They dressed up in KKK robes and *that* didn't work either.
(I read about a 16yo protestor that falsely accused a rally goer of sexual assault. Willing to ruin a man's life for the cause - that's some dedication!)
I'm waiting for the assassination attempt, because "STOP TRUMP" is more important than how it gets done.
In the newspapers, they called him as clown. That didn't work, so they called him a sexist. That didn't work, so they called him a racist.
I remember reading analysis a couple of months ago, where pundits were astonished (!) that people were still supporting Trump, even after they called him a clown! (What are the Americans thinking?)
Then it was his supporters. We're all under-educated, unemployed, white, disempowered losers who are angry and want to take our country back. You don't want to be part of *that* group - do you?
That didn't work either.
Then they turned the crazy up to 11. Trump is Mussolini, Stalin, Satan, Hitler. The Washington Post said Cthulhu [washingtonpost.com] supports Trump.
That didn't work. Now it's backroom deals, delegate stealing, and rule changes.
Here on Slashdot, most of the political dialogue is name calling and unfounded drivel. We're the smart ones in the room, and even *we* have bought into the hatred. No one can put together a cogent political argument, simply because the other candidates don't have a clear position.
200 people [usnews.com] control the election, and they do NOT want someone who will make the place better for the citizens.
It doesn't matter how many votes Trump gets, so long as he doesn't get 1237 on the first try. So long as we can prevent *that*, we can drop him from the race and pick someone we support.
It's as if voting doesn't matter.
The ends justify the means. Stop Trump using ANY MEANS POSSIBLE!
Re:Any means possible (Score:5, Interesting)
Then they turned the crazy up to 11. Trump is Mussolini, Stalin, Satan, Hitler. The Washington Post said Cthulhu [washingtonpost.com] supports Trump.
I really hope the news media loses a lot of their power this election cycle.
Re:Valid Action (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Except that's not what he said, or what he's advocated.
Intolerance I can handle. Ignorance, however, is to be stamped out with prejudice.
Re: (Score:3)
Why must I be tolerant of intolerance? If Trump wants to ban Mexicans and Muslims, why am I not allowed to try to ban every trace of Trump?
You are allowed to try to ban every trace of Trump...However, do not then attempt to claim that you are tolerant. By attempting to ban every trace of Trump, you are declaring that you are every bit as intolerant as Trump, just of different things.
Re: (Score:3)
Umm... I'm relying on the research of others and very little of my own. So, for what it's worth, I'm pretty sure it's easier to immigrate to the US than it is to immigrate to Mexico, for instance. The US has some of the more lax immigration laws on the planet. I realize it's fashionable to say something about the EU at this point and I'll preemptively point out that they're moving within a union and to immigrate to one of those countries is actually quite difficult unless you're blessed with a certain amoun
Re:Valid Action (Score:4, Interesting)
There is something dark in that request that resembles a thing that I was for blowing up later in my face.
Re: (Score:2)
Conversely, I will stop buying from Amazon if they drop Trump. Simply for the fact I don't want to be a customer of a company who attacks people financially for their political opinions. (Even if I don't agree with them. (And in this case, it's about 50/50.))
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like harassment and intolerance to me. (Score:5, Insightful)
This sounds a lot like harassment and intolerance to me.
Can you image the uproar from leftists if some Christian fundamentalists had written to Amazon requesting that products associated with, say, transsexuals be pulled from sale?
Maybe the leftists don't realize this, but people in general are getting awfully fed up with their hypocrisy. That's why we see a candidate like Trump gaining so much support. People across the political spectrum, even including some moderates on the left, are getting fed up with how so many leftists say one thing, but do another.
Leftists say that bullying is wrong, yet they'll turn around and target certain individuals they dislike for some reason without showing any remorse.
Just look at the case of Brendan Eich for a good example of this. The way they savagely attacked him and his reputation is disgusting. Somebody shouldn't lose his job merely because of his stance on marriage! Leftists would throw a fit if somebody lost his job for supporting homosexual marriage, yet the moment somebody supports traditional marriage the leftists unleash on him with extreme fury and hatred.
Leftists really need to address their hypocrisy problem if they want to be taken seriously. To everyone else they're starting to look like total jokes.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Philosopher Karl Popper defined the paradox in 1945 in The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1.
"Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them."
He concluded that we are warranted in refusing to tolerate intolerance: "We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant."
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
We call it a boycott. Boycotts are a means by which a people can exercise their right to speak, as well as participate more fully in the free market. You'll find that boycotts have been employed for centuries, for various reasons, across the entire political spectrum. It's an old tradition. Here in the US, they go back well before the revolution. We've never been without them.
As for public shaming, that's really what decides what ideas are and are not accepted by a society. Some beliefs, actions, and
Re: (Score:3)
Ill say it one more time
Repeating it won't make any difference. It's still incomprehensible.
Why do people boycott an business? Because they want some aspect of that business to change. People might boycott a business because they want them to stop sponsoring a particular television program. They might boycott a business because they want to stop particular labor practices in their supply chain. They might boycott a business because they want them to stop carrying a particular product for various reasons.
In any and all cases,
Re: (Score:3)
>Free speech is demanding businesses stop selling things from people you don't like and publicly shaming them if they don't comply?
It's not "people we don't like" - it's a politician proposing a government policy we don't like and have every right to protest.
Trump trumps himself (Score:3)
The masses, by which I specifically mean a majority of voters and potential voters, show no indication of this at all. On the contrary, Trump is disliked and deemed unacceptable by a very large majority of those same people; unless that can be turned around, something there is also no indication of, the man is outright not electable.
The fact that a majority of voters in t
Re: (Score:3)
Then you don't know what harassment and intolerance is. These actions are SPEECH. A boycott is a traditional use of commercial power to express political views. It has a LONG history in the US. The primary goal of most Boycotts is to get the retailer to drop a product. This is an act of SPEECH by both the participants of the boycott and on the part of the retailer.
There is nothing at all wrong with these actions. They are at their essence counter speec
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, I can imagine the uproar. Trump supporters are free to supply their own uproar if they like. It's a free country. Trump is free to say stupid things, Amazon is free to sell or not sell his stuff, people are free to ask Amazon not to sell it, and people are free to object to that.
Re: (Score:2)
"Personally if Amazon drops Trump, I will make a point to buy more from them, even at a modest price increase per item."
So this 'relationship' by Amazon is carrying a line of Trump menswear?
Going into the primary season I was a Rand Paul voter, but the party changed the delegate rules to lock Paul out in case his open-market policies caused problems for any major party donors, like the pharma lobby. So I will probably support Trump just to spite the party apparatchiki
Yeah, this isn't going anywhere (Score:2)
Amazon isn't exactly a liberal-loving corporation, I mean look at their PAC name:
AMAZON CORPORATE LLC SEPARATE SEGREGATED FUND (AMAZON PAC)
I kid you not [opensecrets.org]. It's like openly... ahem, separate, -ist!
Re: (Score:2)
Well.. (Score:2)
In fifteen years, when they write the two paragraphs in the 8th grade history books about this election, do you think Donald Trump will even be mentioned?
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly. He's brought out a lot of angry people. That could cause a paragraph's worth of trouble.
It's not like they need to give two paragraphs over to Hillary winning.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
In fifteen years, when they write the two paragraphs in the 8th grade history books about this election, do you think Donald Trump will even be mentioned?
I think he may have as much effect as Ross Perot had in 1992...
Re: (Score:2)
I think he may have as much effect as Ross Perot had in 1992...
I've been saying this for a long time. We'll see when the dust settles what tally Trump has on the final score. I'm very curious to know if he's a 'Perot' candidate (one who takes enough votes away from one party so that the other can win with a very simple majority) or is he actually going to be elected.
Re: (Score:3)
No, Perot didn't, he took votes from the Republican side by a large margin the accurate exit polls show this,
Ah, a republican de-skewering the polls to justify their dismal performance... what else is news.
Again, polls indicate Perot took votes equally. Also they were disenfranchised anti-NAFTA voters. Had Perot not been there what exactly makes you think they would have turned to Mr. Establishment, NAFTA negotiator Bush Sr?
In all likelihood they would have either (a) stayed home or (b) voted for change (i.e. Clinton).
The same is true for Nader and democrats by the way. In most states not having Nader on the ballo
Re: (Score:2)
Only if he wins and if he win's I expect a whole chapters worth.
Re: (Score:2)
If he loses the election: NO.
If he wins the election: YES.
If he wins the election but triggers Armageddon: NO. (There won't be any history books)
If he loses the election but triggers Armageddon anyhow via his YUUUGE mouth: NO. [nytimes.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Not that I support either Bernie or Trump, but this flagrant disregardful for the base will simply not fly this time.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can't trust an Atlantic City casino boss to look after you then who can you trust
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
In the 2016 US Presidential Elections, several large national news-agencies and financial institutions decided that Hillary should be the next president.
I think predicting that she would be President is different from deciding that she should be President. The Democratic Party had, and still has, almost no leaders who could credibly make a presidential run. When Elizabeth Warren announced that she would not run for President (she had to do it several times since not many people believed her the first few times) it seemed like Hillary had a straight shot. And really, who was there to derail her campaign? She'd been building support for a decade now. In the p
Yes, but no. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Same here. I could almost see a case if the Trump merchandise was branded with overtly hateful messages (and not just something like "Trump 2016"). As far as I can tell, however, this is a case of "I don't like Trump, so no-one should be able to buy his stuff."
Re: (Score:3)
I don't support chick-fil-a and their hate-group funding, but that does not mean I demand all restaurants be closed.
you put the filter on the receiving end, not the sending end. some of us still understand what america and freedom USED TO BE about.
Re: (Score:3)
This is analogous to people writing to a bakery demanding that the bakery refuse to sell wedding cakes to gays and only gays.
What is wrong with that? Sure, it's repugnant, but as a matter of free speech it's important that people should be able to write those letters.
Re: (Score:2)
I think Trump would make a wonderful dogcatcher.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't HAVE to be a douche bag not to get my money...
but if you are it puts you at the top of the do not buy list.
I wouldn't buy anything from Hillary either, and you couldn't even GIVE me one of Bill's cigars!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Yes, but no. (Score:5, Interesting)
Hate speech? OK. I admit that I am NOT a Trump fan, and I generally try to ignore any news about him (except to skim the headline), but what has he said that is so hateful?
I know that people call him racist, but he has been against "illegal" (which is not a race) and urges caution in terms of Islam (once again, not a race, but a religion that creates more than 90% of terrorists).
Has he said something else that I have missed?
Plus, which types of speech are NOT regulated by the 1st amendment? There is the old "yelling fire in a theater" thing, which does not apply. There is also inciting to violence, but, from what I have read, the majority of violence caused at Trump rallies are caused by protestors. Has Trump ever actaully issued a call for violence? If so, I must have missed it.
Re: (Score:3)
Hate speech? OK. I admit that I am NOT a Trump fan, and I generally try to ignore any news about him (except to skim the headline), but what has he said that is so hateful?
'Hate speech' is beside the point here, I think. But I think he has said plenty to insult large sections of society, American as well as international, and his views and behavior are already a major embarrasment for America; just imagine him as president. A bit like Yeltsin, but perhaps fundamentally less honest.
I know that people call him racist, but he has been against "illegal" (which is not a race) and urges caution in terms of Islam (once again, not a race, but a religion that creates more than 90% of terrorists).
You should probably check your numbers. True, most of the terrorism we hear about is carried out by people who claim to be muslims, but there are significant other groups with other credos. Some cal
Re: (Score:3)
Name the last IRA bombing. Name the last Catholic murder. I have never heard of Maoists before today, and they are not of any religious belief (leadership may be Christian, but the revolution is all inclusive) . No looking it up on Wikipedia, or Google, off the top of your head. Go on.
The problem with people like yourself is that you have NO idea what you're spewing, you just are repeating something you heard without ANY facts to back it up. You believe it, because you WANT to believe it, and it suits your
Re: (Score:3)
I know that people call him racist, but he has been against "illegal" (which is not a race) and urges caution in terms of Islam (once again, not a race, but a religion that creates more than 90% of terrorists).
Has he said something else that I have missed?
Donald Trump [washingtonpost.com]: "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." So being a Mexican immigrant means you're either a drug dealer or a rapist according to Trump. That's racism.
Donald Trump [washingtonpost.com]: "But you have people coming in and I'm not just saying Mexicans, I'm talking about p
Re:Yes, but no. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
So you don't have an argument beyond "metaphors confuse me!"
Re: (Score:3)
If she adopted a bit of a southern drawl in front of white southerners, is it white-on-white racism?
Does she do New York, Jersey, Minnesota, Valley Girl and Boston accents too? Does she customize her southern for the regional varances such as Carolina, Mississippi, and Texas ? Does she pick up a Hispanic accent in Miami?
Having listened to the speeches in question, it was contrived.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
If the cost of buying a new car is if far beyond the means of your average American, it's no wonder so many will seek to further their families by doing it illegally. Steal a car -- it is OK because you c
Constitutional Law FAIL (Score:2)
Incitement to violence is a VERY narrow category of speech. See R.A.V. v. St. Paul and Snyder v. Phelps.
Re: (Score:2)
13,000 people is like spitting in the ocean. I mean really, that's such a tiny fraction of Amazon's customer base it's just silly.
Re: (Score:2)
I think I'm voting for Trump now (Score:5, Insightful)
I normally vote third party but after seeing all the hyperbole about Trump being a racist because he (GASP!) wants the legal process of immigration to be followed is really just pissing me off. I'm sick of hearing this assholes who scream "racism" anytime you don't agree with the leftist agenda.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You must be racist! You don't believe in the agenda of all left thinking Americans! Why should Latinos have to follow the law? Hillary doesn't. Are you saying they aren't as good as Hillary? That's racist thinking there!
Re:I think I'm voting for Trump now (Score:5, Informative)
People do have a tendency to call people racist when they really mean they disagree about race relate political issues. But that isn't what is going on here. Trump's words far exceed any sort of attempt to enforce current immigration laws. For example, his claims that Mexico was deliberately sending its criminals to the US http://www.laweekly.com/news/heres-a-fact-check-of-donald-trumps-mexico-bashing-5754639 [laweekly.com] which was demonstrably false. He plans on making a wall between Mexico and the US and making Mexico pay for it, despite the fact that the number of illegal immigrants has in the last few years been stable or declined http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/ [pewresearch.org]. He's claimed that a judge in a legal case was biased against him purely under the basis that the judge was Hispanic http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-02-27/trump-university-argues-ex-student-can-t-bow-out-as-trial-nears [bloomberg.com]. And then there was the bit where he refused to disavow the KKK and then lied about it, claiming it was due to mishearing the question when his response indicates he understood exactly what was being asked http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/28/politics/donald-trump-white-supremacists/ [cnn.com]
And this is before we get to the fact that many of his other policy ideas about immigration have nothing to do with enforcing current rules (e.g. his ideas about banning all Muslims from entering the US).
I don't know if Trump is racist, but he's made a lot of comments that certainly move in that direction, and if he isn't racist he's making a concerted effort to appeal to racists and general xenophobic sentiments.
What a wonderful world we're moving towards (Score:5, Insightful)
"Donald Trump is a fascist! I demand we silence him, burn all his books and ban all his merchandise. We must not allow him to speak or be heard!." The irony of the anti-trump people is beyond comprehension.
Re:What a wonderful world we're moving towards (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
A censor is a government agent. A boycott is speech at it's core. The boycott is one of the few political protests with a long history in the US going back to the founders and still in use today. Various christian groups have probably more than 100 active boycotts in process right now.
So you think we should ban one of the oldest methods of public speech there is?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That explains all the Democrat support for this crap.
The Republican support is harder to explain, but based on polling numbers its really only the OG Republicans that support this shit..
Re:What a wonderful world we're moving towards (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, as someone who supports a lot of progressive causes and is a fan of Bernie, I think this stuff is ridiculous, and I really don't understand why liberals are so hateful about Trump and focusing their attention on him, when to me, Cruz is far, far more dangerous, and even Hillary is a worse choice.
Cruz is a Dominionist Christian who wants to turn the US into a theocracy, and whose policies are extremely far-right, far more so than Trump's . Hillary is clearly sold out to Wall Street, is a criminal, is an imperialist warmonger, and has done all kinds of shady stuff with the Clinton Foundation to fill her pocketbook.
Why liberals think I should support Hillary, I have no idea. They talk about how great it'll be to have a female President, but I never saw them supporting Carly Fiorina, not to mention Sarah Palin.
That is 0.1 % of the people he'd like to fire. (Score:2)
Here's an easy solution (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't buy his cheap fucking suits.
Different than Macy's, NBC, Univision situation (Score:2)
No one is forced to listen to him or buy his stuff (Score:5, Insightful)
Do the more profitable thing, keep selling it. (Score:2, Insightful)
Every time that someone has appeased these social justice warriors, they lost money or profits. On the other hand, ignoring them (and selling the product) has been more profitable.
Consider these people to be the kind of customers that Amazon does not want and should gladly let go.
13,000? (Score:2)
Fight ideas (Score:2)
Stalin said that when one could not fight ideas, one should fight the persons. It seems somebody here had the idea to go against the business.
This is an improvement over Stalin's approach, however it remains a terribly weak way of fighting ideas.
A whopping blow to Trump... (Score:2)
Wow, this would definitely take Donald Trump down a peg -- if it were ever to happen. Hitting him right in the pocket book when men can't buy Trump underwear on Amazon.com. Good campaign, democrats, you've got him now!
Either have democracy or don't (Score:5, Interesting)
If you want freedom of speech, a free exchange of ideas, freedom of association, civic participation in government by the people... then we can do that.
Or if the progressive peasants are just too triggered by contrary opinions they can give up all that and the nobility will take care of them. No need for any more elections. Hereditary nobility for... ever. Hillary's daughter is already being groomed for high office. They very ready to simply accept your offer at ennoblement... right now.
You can all sit in communal buildings every Sunday and chant along from a book of dogma. And everyone can live by the strict new code of political correctness. We can have religious conformity inspectors... they'll probably be blue/pink haired hipsters wearing ceremonial trilby's that will scream in my face about how tolerant they are... You can see it now.
And then we can have government enforced gender equality... but only in jobs women want to do... or often as not... just get the pay and status of doing the job. Because after all, a lot of those jobs are hard, boring, lonely, and really only a bunch of nerds would do them anyway. But its unfair that there aren't equal numbers of women in those fields. Maybe we should just figure out how many women want to do a given job, then say that equal number of men can also do that job. But no more than that even if there is a need for more than that. After all, that would be sexist.
The whole political scene in the US has been fucking retard inception for the last 10 years at least. You want to cite a longer duration... sure. Cite your favorite flavor of ice cream and we'll go with that. But its just so stupid.
Listening to code pink go on and on and on about how bad war is and how we should just bring everyone home... and then when the people they campaigned for start blowing up Libya or whatever... fucking crickets.
Endlessly being told that there's too much money in politics... except when that money happens to be used by progressives... then its fine. Use tax dollars to bribe people to vote for you? No problem. Use tax money to run partisan propaganda campaigns for your faction? No problem. Use billionaire slush funds to advance your position... No problem. But anyone else does even a shadow of the shit that they get away with on a daily fucking basis... clearly the second coming of literal Hitler.
The sophistry on display is so astounding that I can't take anyone seriously anymore on these issues. Too many people are full of shit. No one can claim they're serious with any sincerity because its been outed at bullshit too many times.
Gents, just express yourselves... actually be tolerant... as in... actually... not just tolerant of YOUR OWN stupid opinions whilst naturally being utterly intolerant of any view that contrasts with your own. Because, that's not tolerance.
I Own a Donald Trump Shirt. (Score:3)
I don't think my neck is all that odd, but two years ago in Las Vegas, the only shirt in TJ Max with my neck size was branded by none other than Donald Trump.
So I now have a Donald Trump shirt. Maybe I could auction it to Trump supporters on Ebay.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course their stock tumbled. They did something that looked like it wasn't making immediate short term profit.
Nevertheless, it could score them some sweet PR in the longer term.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Trump's Wearhouse tagline... (Score:3)
A US retailer catering to men offers rack quality clothing at generally inflated prices is named 'Mens Wearhouse' and their slogan is "you're going to like the way you look" or something to that effect.
Re: (Score:3)