Democrat Primaries

[BotanyBoy]

"Progressives" cannot achieve their goals without first disarming the citizenry.

Not a chance in hell, thus their drive to do exactly that.

Everything must be controlled by the state, for the sake of equity.

 

[SpeareChucker]

I'm seeing a Bloomberg ad every time I turn on the TV or view a Youtube video. he's spent over 400 million dollars on this ad campaign.

I didn't watch it, but from the reports I have read this morning
Pocahontas cleaned his ever-loving clock...




(That's not a typo, clock, not cock! )

 

[SpeareChucker]

Any "brokering" will take place prior to the convention.

The key is whether the leader in delegates is close enough to 50% to make denying them the nomination politically impossible. No one really knows where that number is because there's no precedent in the modern (post-1968) era, but if one candidate is over 40% and no one else is over 30%, that's probably pretty close to a sure thing.

And I do not think the nomination would go to someone who didn't run in the primaries. It's technically allowed (after the first ballot); I just don't believe enough people would find it legitimate.

I beg to differ on one small point.
If they think they have someone who can beat Trump,
full speed ahead and damn the legitimacy...

 

[HisArpy]

I beg to differ on one small point.
If they think they have someone who can beat Trump,
full speed ahead and damn the legitimacy...

This only works if they can find a candidate whom they believe doesn't need the fringe vote to win.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I didn't watch it, but from the reports I have read this morning
Pocahontas cleaned his ever-loving clock...




(That's not a typo, clock, not cock! )

Warren went for the jugular and went after Bloomberg's many NDAs (Hush money to women he has sexually harrassed). Bloomberg stumbled badly.

 

[SpeareChucker]

This only works if they can find a candidate whom they believe doesn't need the fringe vote to win.

I think the analysis that says if they don't get their candidate
then they won't vote is highly flawed. No matter what, in the long run,
I think that TDS and their hatred of the man will unite the clans...





(They spell it with a c now instead of a k. )

 

[Rightguide]

Did you hear the audience in last night's debate when Bernie was attacked? he has successfully converted the Democrat Party into what I have called the New Communist Party, that's where this party is going, right down the shitter in November.

 

[SpeareChucker]

As I stated earlier, I didn't watch it.
I've read some opinion about it.
That's about it...

 

[DeluxAuto]

Did you hear the audience in last night's debate when Bernie was attacked? he has successfully converted the Democrat Party into what I have called the New Communist Party, that's where this party is going, right down the shitter in November.

Trump has converted the Republitard Party into what I have called the New Alt Right Party and has destroyed the once proud republican squad.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Trump has converted the Republitard Party into what I have called the New Alt Right Party and has destroyed the once proud republican squad.

At no point in my lifetime has anybody on the Left
described the Republicans as "proud."
You're just making that up...

 

[bigsly]

Funny someone mentioned "progressives" and slavery when it was largely Democrats who defended slavery as righteous, who constitutionally insisted their slaves be counted as wholly free individuals in electoral representation (thus illegitimately increasing their slave States' tyrannical political power under the proposed Constitution), even while audaciously also insisting their slaves had no freedom to actually vote at all, and it was largely Democrats who instituted instituted racist Jim Crow laws after their repugnant righteousness was constitutionally amended out of their lives, and it was largely Democrats who initially enacted anti-2nd Amendment, repugnant to the Constitution (therefore) illegitimate laws specifically to prevent former slaves and their progeny from exercising their inalienable right to defend and protect themselves against and from exactly that putrid longing for even more statist slavery, and it was largely Democrats who fought the civil rights movement all the way to the end when, alas, fate once more rebuffed their beloved tyranny...

...and Democrats today claim the title of "progressives" so proudly.

If it was up to socialists/Democrats/progressives, every individual would be bound by their native statism.

 

[DeluxAuto]

At no point in my lifetime has anybody on the Left
described the Republicans as "proud."
You're just making that up...

It's obvious that YOU'RE not proud to be a republican.

 

[SpeareChucker]

It's obvious that YOU'RE not proud to be a republican.

No, I'm proud to be a Libertarian.


You just make shit up in your mind
and then run with it...

 

[DeluxAuto]

No, I'm proud to be a Libertarian.


You just make shit up in your mind
and then run with it...

Then act like one.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Show me where I do not.
You just keep making things up
and calling me a liar.
I haven't voted for a Republican
on the national level since 1976...

 

[BotanyBoy]

Trump has converted the Republitard Party into what I have called the New Alt Right Party and has destroyed the once proud republican squad.

What exactly about the (R)'s is alt-right??

Show me where I do not.

Never going to happen, DeluxAuto NEVER backs up it's comments.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Show me where I do not.
You just keep making things up
and calling me a liar.
I haven't voted for a Republican
on the national level since 1976...

You ONLY support republicans and NEVER support a Dem position. It's fairly simple, just like you.

 

[bigsly]

1971:

Q

What do you think of the libertarian movement?

AR

All kinds of people today call themselves “libertarians,” especially something calling itself the New Right, which consists of hippies who are anarchists instead of leftist collectivists; but anarchists are collectivists. Capitalism is the one system that requires absolute objective law, yet libertarians combine capitalism and anarchism. That’s worse than anything the New Left has proposed. It’s a mockery of philosophy and ideology. They sling slogans and try to ride on two bandwagons. They want to be hippies, but don’t want to preach collectivism because those jobs are already taken. But anarchism is a logical outgrowth of the anti-intellectual side of collectivism. I could deal with a Marxist with a greater chance of reaching some kind of understanding, and with much greater respect. Anarchists are the scum of the intellectual world of the Left, which has given them up. So the Right picks up another leftist discard. That’s the libertarian movement.

Ayn Rand Answers: The Best of Her Q&A, ed. Robert Mayhew, p. 72.

Libertarians are no different a Party than the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, or any other statist collective political Party which, by their mere existence, repugnantly betrays objective INDEPENDENCE of political ideology in order to further all political collectives' primary mission: to quash INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY by varying degrees.

 

[SpeareChucker]

You ONLY support republicans and NEVER support a Dem position. It's fairly simple, just like you.

There's a simple reason that I do not support Democrats
the party my family and I always identified with.

It has been taken over by angry voices such as yours
who are unable to compromise and who seem to
truly believe that if you don't think like me you are (a):

stupid
racist
bigoted
homophobic
xenophobic
misogynist/misandrous
A REPBUBLICAN!

Oh please don't tell me you're a Libertarian
that only means you're ashamed to admit you're a Republican!


The party left my family and me in degrees
sometime after the demise of JFK.

But no, I did not become a Republican
I became a Libertarian.
If it seems that I support Republican positions
it's because they are closer the the Democrat Party I grew up with...

 

[SpeareChucker]

Case in point (Reason.com - Libertarian):

Kaitlin Bennett, a far-right gadfly associated with Infowars and Liberty Hangout, visited Ohio University on Monday to make a video for Presidents Day. In response, mobs of students surrounded her, screamed in her face, and threw liquids at her.

The students' behavior is contemptible. It's also a terrible strategy for countering the kind of narrative that people like Bennett want to tell about college campuses—indeed, it gives them the exact ammo they need to claim censorship. I would implore student activists to consider the optics: A mob of people surrounding and throwing things at a woman with a camera phone is only going to invite well-deserved opprobrium from the wider public.

Unsurprisingly, Bennett has leveraged the situation to her advantage, calling on President Donald Trump to "strip funding from universities like this that harbor terrorists." In her tweets about the incident, she also slammed the police for failing to prevent the students from throwing liquids at her.

https://reason.com/2020/02/19/ohio-university-kaitlin-bennett-riot-free-speech/