Are some of the fake? With near certainty, there are copycats everywhere. However given the amount of reports it's also near-certain that a significant number did indeed happen roughly as reported.

With your "if not all" you do exactly what you implicitly reproach others of doing: generalising on the basis of few individual cases.

Several sources cited an uptick in violent or racist behaviors right after the election, although they have declined over time, e.g.,

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/10/us...nd-fears-trnd/

The southern poverty law center received reports of 700 incidents, 65 % occurring in the first three days after the election.

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...now-number-701

So, focusing on one or two suspect events gives one impression, looking at 700 self reports provides an other. Are all 700 genuine? I don't know, but even if half are real, it's rather appalling.

I've seen photos of some of the grafitti - it worries me.

the latest appointment to his cabinet.

How easy is it to draw some graffiti photograph it and then put it out on the internet?

An "incident" is just a reported event. They haven't even been investigated. They used to be called allegations, now they simply get recorded as hate crimes.

graffiti is exactly the kind of stuff i had in mind when i mentioned "no footage, low cost to victim = bs". its a good rule of thumb. notice btw that the only actual crime caught in the act was the one where the supposed trump voter (because white) was battered, from you cnn link.

anyone can spray "trump" on the wall and take a pic for facebook saying the nazis are here. or spray easily washable "nword" on your car's windows and then shout its them racists.

if you think that only happens a handful of times, i think youre underestimating the zeal of the PC brigade. people WANT to be the victim so bad, theyll do anything to make it happen.

i think its not very likely that trump voters go out and to start spray swastikas the moment they win the election. why not before? it seems to be the kind of thing to do when you are angry. it goes down after the election because its old news now, boring, so its less trendy to fake the hate.

no the points is that people who do that shoot their "cause" in the foot. the crying wolf effect.

i dont think its fair to blame me for being simple if i start doubting all hatecrime stories if i see a lot of fake ones.

that is the effect of fakenews. sorry for the handful of people that underwent actual hatecrime.

as if the hate is a one way street anyway. enough craziness from antitrumpers as well, but thats generally thought of as pretty cool, normal, or at least not as bad.

interesting opinion here.






This should show up without a paywall


http://www.wsj.com/articles/steal-th...ion-1481759796

Handful of people? You do not know what you are talking about do you.

An attention-seeking woman crying wolf falsely clearly has other motives than pointing out discrimination or similar.
You're a fool if you're not taking all news with a grain of salt to begin with.
Thank you for negating the previous objection and confirming my initial reproach.
Thx again for making my case and confirming that you're deliberately spewing hate. You're arguing on the intellectual level of a six-year old: "but he started it so I'm innocent".

the msm and people like you are the ones crying wolf over every little fake hatecrime. that is why people just start dismissing any news story on it since its probably fake again. hell, you can already dismiss so much of it because its just plain whining to begin with. oh noes, "go trump" on the wall

that is why the ones faking, and spreading those stories are shooting themselves in the foot. nobody takes it serious anymore.

this actually goes broader. you see the same effect with the abuse of terms like racist, fascist, sexist. it worked for a bit, but then people realize that people shouting those terms want to be the victim. calling yourself jokingly "Hugh Mungus" in the presence of a woman is already sexist? well fukkit, ill take all the other reports of sexism with a grain of salt then as well. etc.

Having seen it first hand in the days after the election, I am sure whilst there are bound to be fabrications, there are also plenty of real instances.

Two days after the election, Bahnhof Altstetten had "N***** go home" (for some reason, every single graffito was singular...probably demonstrating the cognitive abilities of the sprayer!) plastered all over it. Now, it is possible that some SJW do-gooder did it out of a victim complex, but Occam's Razor would say to me, it was probably done by an SVP or further right wrong'un.

Dismissing all hate crimes after Trump's election as fabricated (or not caring about any as some might be) is as stupid as believing them all to be true.

Source

So much for Obama quietly leaving the White House!

Where exactly did I?
Not really, you dismiss them because it fits your narrative. Focusing on those that are indeed fake and using that as reason to dismiss he vast majority simply serves you as a scapegoat.
Could be paraphrasing "ami go home" which was also using singular only.

i said people *like* you didnt i?

conversely, people *like* you focus on those stories (whether they are fake or not does not matter to them), because it fits their narrative. all im saying is that that is counterproductive for them because it's conditioning people to simply discard everything they claim.

strange mechanism. somebody cries wolf, i react "wait a minute, you cried wolf yesterday and it was bs". and then i am the biased dumbass feeding some narrative. shrug, keep on crying wolf for all i care.

probably the only reason we are "discussing" is that you guess lets say 10% is fake and i guess lets say 10% is real. your frame is "white power nazi trump voters everywhere", my frame is "sjw snowflake reverse racist libtards everywhere".

Regarding the Southern Poverty Law Center, in their report they apparently omitted all the hate crimes against white students. They have been accused of omitting these results as it would not fit their ideological narrative.

Obviously. You place me in a group you claim to react a given way, therefore you say that I react in that given way.

As if you didn't know what you're saying

It's the Trump get-out clause of plausible deniability. Oh, I didn't mean ALL Mexicans, you are OK.


Or maybe he just REALLY hates one specific person. Either way, cretin.

A couple of days ago a man from Florida faked a 'Trump-inspired' hate crime but was caught.

I find it remarkable that in this digital age where everybody seemingly records everything (instead of helping ) there seems to be an astonishing lack of evidence of any of these Trump-inspired hate crimes having taken place.

Fixed that for you!

Some real examples
Jackson Ten Sentenced in Hate Crime Case, Murdered Man Among Multiple Victims
FBI You will have to wait a while for the 2016 numbers, patience is a virtue!

What has that got to do with the post-election hate crimes we are discussing? Hint: it occurred in June in 2011.

Did that crime even have anything to do with Trump or the election? No, I thought not. Perhaps move it to another thread?

As I previously said, in this digital age one would think that with a wave of Trump-inspired hate attacks there would be some video footage.
You know, like the anti-Trump hate attacks like the man in Chicago who was beaten by a group for supposedly supporting Trump and the 15 year old student who was bashed for having a Trump hat.