Fearful of Violence the Trump 2020 Voter

Fearful of Violence the Trump 2020 Voter

Fearful of Violence the Trump 2020 Voter

Fearful, hushed conversations are the underpinning of Trump 2020 voters. Supporters show up in groups because there is safety in numbers. Safety from professional censure, ridicule, and physical confrontation directed at them from people who more closely resemble Sturmabteilung than freedom loving Americans. Three reasons why I, and I suspect many other people, are quietly supporting the President’s re-election.

Violence against Trump supporters

The intentional acts of violence against Trump supporters and their property is escalating. Aggression directed at them has been forefront since a high school student was the victim of a media lynching. I’m NOT overstating what they tried to do to a child, all because he was wearing a hat they didn’t like.

Nick Sandmann exhibited more self restraint than any of the adults antagonizing him on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. He returned fire with the legal system, winning judgements against the purveyors of hatred and vitriol.

Let that sink in. The media was hellbent on lying to destroy a child because he was wearing a MAGA hat. God Bless Nick because he’s shown more fortitude than many adults.

You know their names. Rand Paul, Brandon Stratka, Bernell “the Ras” Trammell, etc. There is an even longer list of average Americans who are targeted because they are exercising their First Amendment rights. In USAToday (in an Opinion piece) Gil Smart highlights some of the egregious behavior perpetrated against people wearing MAGA hats. 

Florida, bus aide allegedly ripped a “Make America Great” hat off a 14-year-old student, an 18-year-old student in Edmond, Oklahoma, was charged with assault and battery after he allegedly demanded a classmate remove a similar MAGA hat, then knocked the hat off the younger kid’s head when he didn’t comply.

The same day that the Oklahoma incident occurred, Feb. 25, an 81-year-old man was allegedly assaulted by a much younger man outside a ShopRite in Franklin, New Jersey, in a physical altercation over a hat.”

How bad is it when freaking USAToday is telling readers to stop the violence? Apparently not so bad that the stories make headlines beyond the local news.

But they should.

Imagine if the following event happened to a Biden supporter, and then tell me how it would be handled in the media.

It was last Thursday morning around 7 a.m. when Jonathan Rempel, a farmer in Sutton, Nebraska, received a phone call from the Sutton Volunteer Fire Department. They told him that his combine (WHICH HAD BEEN FLYING TRUMP FLAGS), two semis, and a tractor had all caught fire in his cornfield “at about the same time.” The tractors had all been parked a safe distance apart, and it looks like the equipment hadn’t been used since the night prior (which makes this extra fishy).”

The news outlet covering this story…. Not the Beethe news site sister to everything conservative satire site The Babylon Bee (recently facing overt scrutiny from Facebook fact checking. You know, because in today’s world, satire and fact are interchangeable. Not that Facebook understands either….).

Workplace censure and bias against Trump supporters

Ever fearful of being labeled a supporter of Trump, many in academia keep their views hidden. Their social media sites are bereft of politics, their homes are void of signage, and no way do their automobiles reflect their support. I know a few teachers and professors who are supporting Trump in 2020. We talk about it in private groups, like some sort of “Trump Anonymous” meeting.

One PhD in particular, whom I personally know and will not name, has lightly danced around liberal co-workers overt dislike of POTUS during work meetings. The good doctor has withheld personal views, or changed the topic. The understanding is explicit that the PhD’s position and credibility will be undermined by people who don’t think political support should go for anyone but their chosen candidate.

More recently we can see what happens to celebrities who publicly transition or remain steadfast in their support to the President. Newsweek.com snarkily titles this piece, “Every Celebrity to Speak Out in Support of Donald Trump” before listing a handful of names. Written under a video of the celebrities against him….

The article quotes Isaiah Washington’s Fox Nation interview (citing The Hill piece while completely eliminating any reference to Fox Nation)

His career was waining after being let go from “Grey’s Anatomy” after uttering a “homophobic slur” (whatever that means…). But any hope of reviving it is gone after this admission.

The Federalist cites an alarming Cato Institute report  highlighting the under 30-set’s complete disregard for the First Amendment.

…62 percent of Americans are inclined to self-censor what they say politically “because others might find them offensive.” Even moderate leftists report they feel increased fear of offending the offendable, while only the most “staunch liberals,” as Cato described them, feel free to speak their minds. The “very conservative” have been pushed deepest in the closet: they are most likely to refrain from saying what they think politically, at nearly twice the rate of the “very liberal.”

It goes on to further report something that is bone chilling for the future of our Republic,

Buried deeper in the report, however, is a stunning data point that might be one of the most troubling current cultural indicators. Forty-four percent of Americans younger than age 30 believe a company is correct in firing an executive because he or she personally donated to President Trump’s reelection campaign.”

The lack of anything resembling a Civics lesson in the last 30 years is rearing its ugly head. The future is ignorant of the blessing afforded every American in our Constitutional Republic. And they don’t care. Punish people for holding contrary views. I love this line about “fascism” from the article,

People throw the word “fascist” around today much too carelessly for it to be useful. If that word can be applied to an everyday person, however, someone who believes you should lose your job based on who you vote for is a pretty sturdy working definition.”

Ridicule as a weapon

Nobody wants to be considered stupid, ignorant, or “less than” within their social circle. But it is exactly how the anti-Trump crowd feeds the hubris. Most notable within the Lincoln Project and Foreign Affairs crowds, is the co-opted liberal slant of, “If only you were smarter you’d understand why Trump is the wrong choice.”

The New York Times gleefully reports on the growing number of “conservative” (aka RINO) groups forming against Trump.

Mr. Schott, who sold his business software company to Salesforce in 2018 for a reported $6.5 billion, decided to spend $1 million of his own money to start a new group, Reclaim Our Party, a super PAC targeting right-leaning independents and soft Republicans and telling them it was OK to vote against Mr. Trump.

“To me, it’s just having another voice,” he said in an interview. “It’s saying, ‘Here’s yet another group of Republicans that are saying it’s OK to vote against Donald Trump.’ More voices saying it is better.”

Because dear Republicans and right-leaning Independents, you are too stupid to make your own fact based decisions. Just listen to your betters and do what we tell you, “It is better.”

Well sure, who wants to speak up when there’s a herd of RHINOs rampaging toward your grass hut? Best just to move out of the way and stay silent so they pass on by.

Of all the fearful outcomes, this might be the most pervasive and destructive. It certainly is the one with greatest impact on me. My husband is a “leadership” guy. 29 years as a Marine officer will do that to a person. He abhors Trump’s brash style, perceived intellectual void, and his entire presidential train wreck  (though, he does agree with me that Melania is smoking hot). My husband is absolutely more Lincoln Project, Foreign Affairs, and rightfully proud of being a “big picture thinker.” Between the two of us, he’s unquestionably the better student and more inclined to ruminate a topic (to death if our kids can be believed). So in our conversation about this topic his response wasn’t surprising, but something to consider.

He said, “if you’re going to publicly support a candidate you should be able to articulate WHY you are doing so, in a thoughtful way, and defend your position.”

Okay, I considered. Take a moment for yourself.

Time’s up.

I disagree, and don’t think I should have to defend my choice to anyone. Because the only person who needs to feel as though it’s the right choice… is me. And we should be able to support any candidate, or no candidate, without fear of reprisal, violence, or ridicule.

Unfortunately, it looks like the era of “agree to disagree” then move on is gone.

Thank you Sarah Hoyt, and welcome to our INSTAPUNDIT readers.

Featured Image: Pixabay License: Free Image Cropped: 400×400







Written by

"CC" to her friends. Recent escapee from Northern VA to the Great State of Texas. I'm a Pro-LIfe, Pro-Gun, Libertarian type... There is very little that fresh lime juice and good tequila can't fix.

  • Joe R. says:

    I’m fearful of violence, after Trump wins in a week and a half. Trump winning won’t make up for a single thing the Democrats and their minions have pulled over the last 100 years, much less the last 4. And there’s always next year. The Left losing in a crushing defeat won’t make them give up their criminal line of bull****.

    What if Conservatives suddenly want to be the part of Society that needs forgiveness? What then.

    That better give you nightmares.

    Let’s hope Trump can calm us through his second term, and keep us from taking pelts from the left.

    Or not.

  • Pam says:

    For some reason the only thought I ever have when I think about this intimidation is: bring it bitch. I’ve never responded well to it. It always back fires on the person trying it with me. In anarchy there are two types of people: those who summon the will to kill and those who submit. I pray that is not the future for our children. And there is “not always next year”. Trump has exposed a deep rot in our Republic that left untreated will be its demise. It is time for a second revolution and with Trump we might be able to avoid the devastating features of 1860 and beyond in terms of killing each other to save it. And maybe these times will tell us in its present incarnation it cannot be saved. A house divided cannot stand. So maybe a peaceful divorce is an option this time.

    All I know is that submission to this rot and tyranny is not in my Scotch-Irish DNA. I am not afraid of what happens in a Trump second term, but someone is. And that cabal is the puppet master of the disinformation and manipulation of the people who are burning down our cities. That cannot stand and will only if we submit to the “wait til next year” concept. The Uni-Party is shaken and they want their country back so they can continue to launder our tax money to get rich at our expense. Time to live like the rulers of our lives rather than the servants of the Washington elite.

  • mer says:

    Your ending is true; I don’t have to justify my choice to anyone. Sorry, your husband is flat out wrong.

    This part:
    “He said, “if you’re going to publicly support a candidate you should be able to articulate WHY you are doing so, in a thoughtful way, and defend your position.””

    Ask him to articulate WHY NOT Trump.

    Based on what you’ve written here, your husband seems to be against Trump for style reasons, not for substance. Specifically ask him about the policies that Trump has been able to implement: military, economy, Foreign Policy (ask him if it’s bad what Trump was able to get done in the Middle East and with North Korea).

    Leadership is about getting things done, keeping promises you’ve made.
    Leadership is not “looking good and speaking nicely while not doing anything”.
    29 years in the Marines, he should be able to understand the difference.

    That last sentence is not meant to be disparaging of your husband, the Marines or anyone in the military; it’s just pointing out that in the Military there are leaders “you must obey my rank” and leaders that beat you to the top of the hill.

    • Mimi says:

      Wonderful comment. And so true in all its points.

    • He happily articulates his points. I just didn’t feel particularly inclined to add them because they are superfluous to the post (It’s NOT about why people aren’t supporting him).

      Leadership to him is not remotely “do what I say because I outrank you” (that’s autocracy). He’s in the camp that real leadership is “Leaders Eat Last.” But his reasons, like anyone’s, are his own and he’s welcome to them. I’m pretty sure he’s voting for me… so keep your eyes open for the electoral upset. 😉

      • mer says:

        Electoral upset 🙂

        As you say he’s welcome to his reasons, as are you, as am I. As my wife and I have discussed lots of times “As long as you know why you are voting the way you are, I’m good with it”.

        Even if the reason is “I like his hair”.

  • Mad Max says:

    The more you try to threaten and intimidate me, the more hardened my position becomes and the angrier I get.

    And you don’t want to make me angry…I will bring you down. Step by step…

    Further, I’m retiring very soon and have my own secure retirement fund that nobody can get at. I really have nothing to lose and a Republic and liberty to protect.

  • Linda Hagen-Mooney says:

    About the ending: we can all articulate why we are voting for trump. It’s just that we have to articulate it from a hospital bed with broken teeth, after being beaten up by the ” tolerant” “hate has no home here” set

  • Mark Kaulius says:

    I can’t spare this man. He fights.

  • SDN says:

    “firing an executive because he or she personally donated to President Trump’s reelection campaign.”

    No, what’s bone-chilling is that the executive can be personally targeted because our government has legally mandated that they have to provide what the NAACP refused to when facing the Klan.


    The site described in this article was built by mining the FEC database for information about Trump donors. That database contains your address and your employer’s name, and you have to provide that information.

    In the brief time it was active, I was able to find my name and a map showing how to get to my house. That’s bone chilling.

    • This is terrifying. Overseas donors litter the political landscape, but the FEC data mines Americans for “election fraud”, and that makes it easy to find their residences. This is where the Libertarian in me fights over a national Voter ID that masks personal information.

  • Wilhuff Tarkin says:

    I have no idea who is going to win on Nov 3. The only way Trump can win is by a landslide; if there are a number of close states like last time, there will be endless court challenges and recounts. The Dems have already wargamed various strategies for challenging a narrow Trump victory.

    A Dem landslide, as the polls currently indicate, will be very bad for the Republic. If the Dems retake the Senate, it is highly likely they will abolish the filibuster and start enacting a wishlist of laws including statehood for most of the territory in DC and authorization for Puerto Rico to become a state (along with lots of goodies to encourage the territory to vote in favor of statehood).

    The GOP has only controlled the Presidency, the Senate, and the House for just less than six years since 1954. The Dems may hope that the GOP will never be able to do that again, so they will feel safe in making these changes.

  • 1396 says:

    In your last paragraphs, you say that you don’t need to defend your choice to anyone. But let’s revisit what your husband said. He said if you are going go publicly take a stand on a candidate, you should be able to defend your position. Publicly. That means with a yard sign or around the water cooler. So if a neighbor sees your Trump sign and asks why you like him, would you answer “none of your business?” Wouldn’t a better response be that you like Trump’s policies here, here, and here, and he has been good for the economy? That is what your husband means, that a public declaration means a public defense. Of course, if you don’t want to engage, you don’t have to. But at least you should have an answer. It is a reasonable argument. On the other hand, if you have private position on something, you don’t need to defend it to anyone, even if they ask.

  • Robert Houghton says:

    I think that the odds of post election violence are wildly over estimated. Rioting is largely a summer phenomenon, and the election is in early November, and in the northern climes, winter weather has already set in. A convincing Trump win will, I think, have a deflating, not an enraging effect on the Biden rioters. Blizzards and nor’easters are hell on molotov cocktails. Also, post election, Barr might finally get off of his ass and start handing down indictments on certain people of interest. Bottom line is; Trump will be stronger, the Dems much, much weaker, and the Biden, Clinton, Obama criminal network will be thoroughly exposed and brought to justice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner