Boycott Trump and his revolting family with this handy spreadsheet.

[whichphilosophy]

Lol good luck avoiding Amazon.

Amazon already dropped the merchandise.

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sl_bs_...7cb-4abb-b1df-94af1b460bc2&pf_rd_i=3031836011

Amazon seems to still be hosting this. Mixing politics with trade is never a good idea long term.

 

[LordKiran]

Is it? Trump ran a nationalistic campaign that mocked women, the disabled, and minorities. His family completely back him. I don't shop at Hobby Lobby or eat at Chick-Fil-A.

Sure, he won, and he'll be our President. I have to accept that. I don't, however, have to share a dime of my salary to corporations that help him or his family. They are wrong.

Boohoo dry your eyes.

How childish. It makes sense you'd accuse others of churlishness, classic projection.

 

[TSwizzle]

Boohoo dry your eyes.

How childish. It makes sense you'd accuse others of churlishness, classic projection.

Jog on.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's pretty asinine to call on the sheeple to boycott products from Trump's wife if the target is Donald Trump.

 

[LordKiran]

It's pretty asinine to call on the sheeple to boycott products from Trump's wife if the target is Donald Trump.

Except they're married, which implies that their wealth is tied together, no? What's hers is his and so forth? It may not be the exact case, but its certainly a safe assumption.

 

[blastula]

What do mean they are wrong? Wrong to not overlook the pettiness in someone who genuinely wants to make things better for our country? Ungrateful!

LOL. Are you a Trump University graduate?

 

[barbos]

Good, looks like I have been boycotting Trump for a while. Now, what should I do to boycott Clintons?

 

[Juma]

No, the list simply allows people who wish to boycott "Trump" supporters to have a convenient list. There is nothing undemocratic about the list or boycotts.

I think most people don't care a Rat's butt if the person they are trading with has different political views. Anyway it's not clear how a boycott of Amazon.com and Paypal could be taken seriously.

If that is your view, then there really is no realistic issue here.

I think many look at the quality of the product not the politics of the person behind it. There isn't a real issue as I doubt if there will be any serious impact. Perhaps one or two may decide to boycott these productions. I could easily boycott Paypal because I've only used them once in the last 10 years.

There is really alot of important aspects to consider besides the quality of the product: how the workers are treated, salaries, the productions effect on the environment, and the political aspect.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's pretty asinine to call on the sheeple to boycott products from Trump's wife if the target is Donald Trump.

Except they're married, which implies that their wealth is tied together, no? What's hers is his and so forth? It may not be the exact case, but its certainly a safe assumption.

So all one has to do is accuse with no evidence. The accounts will state who each party is involved and so what. I don't see any constructive reason to start boycotting individuals purely for political reasons, at least not in a modern democracy. Boycotting the Jews because their businesses did not curry favour was similarly bad. Boycotting Tom Cruise and Travolta movies on account of their religion didn't work. I don't think boycotting Trump will not work either. The election is over and it is time for the Americans to move on.

 

[Sarpedon]

I imagine that boycotting Cruise and Travolta films didn't work because the vast majority of people don't think it's right to persecute people on account of their religion. There may be enough people to effectively cost Trump money. Unfortunately, now that he is president-elect, he has access to new sources of income.

 

[TV and credit cards]

There were calls to boycott BP gas stations after the gulf spill. I did not agree with this. It's fair to say these franchisees knew nothing of BP's safety violations. Why should they suffer for BP's malfeasance?

Folks can boycott for a variety of reasons, and it's for the individual to say what is a right and proper reason to do so. Is it fair to boycott Trump products for past business practices, the recorded comments he has made? I think so. Similarly, should Melania's products be boycotted do to her relationship to Donald? Again, I think so. She who lieth down with Donald shall raise up with Trump taint. She is but another of Donald's golden baubles with the Trump brand on her. Unless, of course you think she married for love. I don't. She is not The First Lady. She is The First Piece of Ass.

The list? I think they may have just thrown everything in there with little vetting. I know New Balance's crime was an ill-considered comment by one of their corporate officers regarding Trump, TPP, and American manufacturing. New Balance is a company who has always strived to make their athletic shoes in the US as much as practical.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's pretty asinine to call on the sheeple to boycott products from Trump's wife if the target is Donald Trump.

Except they're married, which implies that their wealth is tied together, no? What's hers is his and so forth? It may not b e the exact case, butits certainly a safe assumption.

No one gives a rat's butt about the politics of the retailer if the product is attractive. Unless he is impeached enjoy him for 4 to 8 years.

 

[Elixir]

Unless he is impeached enjoy him for 4 to 8 years.

Are we allowed to do that?

 

[skepticalbip]

The people most hurt by boycotts are the low level workers who have nothing to do with the company decisions that end up getting laid off if sales drop.

This is why I had to smile at the Trump supporter movement of telling the baristas at Starbuck's that their name was Trump when ordering rather than boycotting Starbuck's. As I understand, this started because a Trump supporter was refused service. The supporters decided that the baristas having to call out "Trump" when their order was ready was a good way to make a point rather than vindictively causing baristas to lose their jobs.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The people most hurt by boycotts are the low level workers who have nothing to do with the company decisions that end up getting laid off if sales drop.

This is why I had to smile at the Trump supporter movement of telling the baristas at Starbuck's that their name was Trump when ordering rather than boycotting Starbuck's. As I understand, this started because a Trump supporter was refused service. The supporters decided that the baristas having to call out "Trump" when their order was ready was a good way to make a point rather than vindictively causing baristas to lose their jobs.

Is it common in the USA for people to be refused service in restaurants or cafes because of their political views?

 

[skepticalbip]

The people most hurt by boycotts are the low level workers who have nothing to do with the company decisions that end up getting laid off if sales drop.

This is why I had to smile at the Trump supporter movement of telling the baristas at Starbuck's that their name was Trump when ordering rather than boycotting Starbuck's. As I understand, this started because a Trump supporter was refused service. The supporters decided that the baristas having to call out "Trump" when their order was ready was a good way to make a point rather than vindictively causing baristas to lose their jobs.

Is it common in the USA for people to be refused service in restaurants or cafes because of their political views?

It is quite rare but is does happen. Some people seem to take politics entirely too seriously and come to actually hate anyone who disagrees with them just for disagreeing.

 

[LordKiran]

The people most hurt by boycotts are the low level workers who have nothing to do with the company decisions that end up getting laid off if sales drop.

This is why I had to smile at the Trump supporter movement of telling the baristas at Starbuck's that their name was Trump when ordering rather than boycotting Starbuck's. As I understand, this started because a Trump supporter was refused service. The supporters decided that the baristas having to call out "Trump" when their order was ready was a good way to make a point rather than vindictively causing baristas to lose their jobs.

Is it common in the USA for people to be refused service in restaurants or cafes because of their political views?

It doesn't even have to be political views, there are small shops that will refuse service to "faggots and niggers". Though this has become less common as time passes.

 

[J842P]

Is it common in the USA for people to be refused service in restaurants or cafes because of their political views?

It doesn't even have to be political views, there are small shops that will refuse service to "faggots and niggers". Though this has become less common as time passes.

While my lifetime has been relatively short, I have never in my lifetime even heard of something like that (unless it was in history books).

 

[whichphilosophy]

Is it common in the USA for people to be refused service in restaurants or cafes because of their political views?

It is quite rare but is does happen. Some people seem to take politics entirely too seriously and come to actually hate anyone who disagrees with them just for disagreeing.

It's just a few people who may do this but certainly not enough for a nationwide boycott.

 

[skepticalbip]

It is quite rare but is does happen. Some people seem to take politics entirely too seriously and come to actually hate anyone who disagrees with them just for disagreeing.

It's just a few people who may do this but certainly not enough for a nationwide boycott.

It may be many more than you think. I haven't been refused service anywhere but then I am not a Trump supporter. But I have had several people in my face screaming because I don't support some of their views that I consider extremest left wing ideas. I could easily see these people refusing to serve someone wearing a Trump t-shirt if anyone was dumb enough to hire them for a position where they had to deal with the public.