Why does the media do this? Why do they put "thugs" in quotes? Are they saying people who show up at a social gathering and start beating up everyone there aren't thugs? These are productive law-abiding members of society and totally not thugs, right?
Because it doesn't fit their narrative to call them what they actually are.
>>67197826
No no no no anon
They are downtrodden upstanding urban youths protesting for a just cause against this hitler fascist evil hitler hairpiece hitlerly hitler that is Drumpf. :^)))))))))))))
It's to cast doubt and incredulity upon anything he says, if you quote a word, immediate suspicion is drawn to it.
"Donald Trump" Blames "Thugs" for "Cancelled" Chicago "Rally"
thats racist
he should have said "youths" it's much more PC
>>67197826
It isn't complicated.
Pawns/Puppets of the machine = good goys who can do no wrong
Outsiders who can't be controlled or people who clearly oppose the agenda of the machine in any serious way = bad goys who are evil nazis etc... anyone who supports them is a dumb fucking fuck face and should be beaten and jailed
Trump is an outsider or at the very least isn't a puppet candidate who the machine can feel comfortable knowing they can probably control him.
That is why they will fight tooth and nail to demonize and if not ruin atleast prevent his nomination/electment.
Freedom of choice is not what the people currently in power want.
They don't care about American citizens.
They are globalists with an agenda.
Scary world we live in nowadays.
>>67197945
this
He is a racist for calling many of the fine young black gentlepersons a racist terms like thugs.
>>67197826
Him blaming the "thugs" is actually suppose the soften the blow for the berniefags at the protest. He said that some of the protesters were thugs. It suggested that there are some bad individuals among the crowd (whom there are plenty in that part of chicago) who incited violence for opportunistic looting and disruption. It suggested that perhaps there are peaceful protesters but there were few bad seeds among them. Liberals are too dense to read between the line
>>67197826
Thugs and 'thugs' are two different thing. The first is an actual thug. The second is a conservative euphemism for niggers. It is their way of saying it publicly, without actually dropping the n-bomb.
>>67197826
im real fuckign sick of the media narrative against trump.
im also fuckign sick to death of reddit being packed full with pro-sanders, anti-clinton/anti-trump shit.
just fuckign tired of it.
>>67197826
JUST CALL THEM NIGGERS
>>67199021
Well assuming "niggers" is just a ehuphemism for black people who act like thugs then is there really any difference in this particular case?
If black people act like a stereotype then calling some of them by that stereotype isn't at all offensive but accurate.
Anyway Thug is not a racist word so you can't call Trump racist for calling people thugs who were acting like thugs.
>>67197826
>Why does the media do this? Why do they put "thugs" in quotes?
He said the word thugs, so they put it in quotations marks.
That's how English works.
>>67197826
Sometimes it's a legitimate journalistic practice emphasizing an exact quote.
>>67199329
>implying there is not an agenda in those quotation marks
Nice try liberal media shill
What a world we live in where instead of directing our anger and disgust at people who acted like uncivil, childish thugs we instead attack someone who called them out because... racism?
Fucking hell. Everything is backwards.
>>67197826
its in quotes to show it is the actual word Donald Trump used & not just the word that the writer of the article chose
>>67200480
No, it's to show the writer doesn't agree with Trump's terminology.
Thug lives matter.
>>67200480
Right, that's why the journalist used that clickbait headline, purely to represent Donald Trump's views on the matter and not to make money for his tabloid
