Quite a few liberals voted for it as well, but leftist like you like to leave that out. You speak of ignorance yet show it in all your posts, that and your clear hate and anger that is typical of an Antifa mindset.
Reap the whirlwind
- Thread starter chipotlehusker
- Start date
Prop 8 won the Popular Vote. According to Clinton voters, that's what really matters.
Liberal stupidity is the removal from sense or sensibility in statements, policies, or actions by adherents of liberalism which are authoritative in form, but the end of which is devoid of reality or common sense, with the general public in most cases forced to pay for them. An example is the incredible statement by DemocratHank Johnson of Georgia, who feared that the relocation of 8,000 Naval personnel to Guam would "capsize" the island.
Or how about Obama and his pronouncing Corpsman “corpseman?”
Real smart, those leftist liberal democrats.
Or how about Obama and his pronouncing Corpsman “corpseman?”
Real smart, those leftist liberal democrats.
You are conflating a ballot measure left to the plebiscite with a presidential election. Good one, genius.
So you're suggesting that because some liberals voted for bigoted, conservative legislation, they are as bad as...conservatives?
I guess that makes sense, in its own weird way.
More like how it balances the court towards an entity that judges based on what law is instead of trying to make laws on what a particular judge thinks it should be.
That is not how jurisprudence works. Jesus, do you have any, ANY idea about how the rulings of the last few years have gone? Particularly Citizens United? Clearly you don't.
Anyway it's been fun ya'll. I've gotta go do other stuff.
Still holding out on that fantasy? And you're calling people idiots and fools in this thread...
Some liberals? You really are ignorant. Millions voted (for) the issue, not some. Oh, how about that obama guy, was against in 2008, then for in 2012 to win some votes. Hilarious.
Other stuff? Like figuring out what other stupid, ignorant rants you can come up with? Or going to your Antifa meeting?
So because you disagree, their votes dont mean anythjng?
And why call out Mormons. Sounds like religious bigotry to me. Dont they teach you tolerance in college?
That is just flat out stupid and wrong what in the world are they teaching you people
Dudz has his first name correct, and as you can see by all of his rhetoric, the “person” is not only a bigot, he’s no doubt quite unhinged with an Antifa mentality, and would show up at those he disagrees with homes and menace/terrorize women and children.
John Stuart Mill-encamp was as far left for his time as Dudz is now, the man was as unhinged as Dudz is today.
It certainly can be, and you're the poster child for that.
I'm going to go out on pretty sturdy branch here in saying that I'm probably more educated that most on this board. I've been around far too many "elitists" in the education system.
I can unequivocally state that educated does not make one intelligent. There is a high percentage of educated people that aren't very smart and/or have no common sense. The education system is set up to pass people through and promote an agenda, not to educate young adults.
So, how was your antifa meeting?
Last edited:
Antifa are just peaceful, patriotic protesters to these people.
Absolutely not..
It’s so nice of them to show up in peaceful neighborhoods and terrorize women and children, they are so well behaved with their threats.
It’s so nice of them to show up in peaceful neighborhoods and terrorize women and children, they are so well behaved with their threats.
Hell, most of them don’t even know that Antifa does these sorts of things because CNN, etc. tells them a different story. No they didn’t attempt to trash a USMC recruiting station, violently attack those they disagree with, carry communist flags, scream racial slurs to ice (lol), attempt to kick in Tucker Carlsons door, etc.
Nothing to see here folks. Antifa are patriots to the resistance..
I do love watching those soy boys getting knocked out when they pick a fight with those who will fight back though.
More democrat chicanery:
https://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt...s-critics-say/O0TrZUq6wOaGnOzlsHV3RL/amp.html
https://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt...s-critics-say/O0TrZUq6wOaGnOzlsHV3RL/amp.html
Same story:
Clinton: 65,845,063
Trump: 62,980,160
Johnson: 4,488,931
Stein: 1,457,050
Nope, I pointed out that Democrats have also passed laws from the courts because their ideas weren't popular amongst the majority. But I find it funny that when they lost an election in 2016, they started whining about the popular vote.
Maybe the will of the majority isn't always a good thing, and we should stick with following the constitution and appointing judges that strictly follow that constitution. Not activists like RBG who said she prefers the South African constitution.
Oh thats just a conspiracy theory. If CNN didn’t report it then it’s not true..lol
I can't. It would be an unnatural act and God would not approve.
The popular vote would have California and New York ruling this country. Yeah, thank god for the electoral college.
But one could argue that it's just as ridiculous that the electoral college slants toward allowing the minority to rule the majority. My personal take is that a compromise would work...specifically that the all-or-nothing aspect of electoral college votes is stupid. If the vote in a given state is 51% for one candidate and 49% of the other it doesn't make sense to give all of the electoral votes to the one side...it would make a lot more sense to split the electoral votes based on the % of the state that you win. So in that case if a state has 20 electoral votes, one candidate would win 10.2 votes, and the other gets 9.8 votes.
That's a much better representation of the vote within a state. It would make republicans voting in California have more of a say, and democrats voting in Kansas have more of say. Seems like an easy middle-of-the-road compromise to me. At least on the surface. It may also motivate more voter participation and force presidential candidates to pay more attention to every state, not ignoring the ones they know they have in the bag...because every % you win within a state would matter.
Last edited:
I choose to side with those who appreciate our system and our constitution. The left has made it more than clear that they’re half assed on either.
Socialism? No
**** on our LEO’s? No
**** on our military? No
March and protest to remove our freedoms? No
**** on our flag? No
**** on our constitution? No
Obviously the right isn’t always right. I certainly don’t agree with everything there but I am not going to side with those who support society’s degenerates. I came from a poor liberal infested ********. Now I live in a nice conservative place and I’m as happy as ever. I’m sorry if I don’t side with those who think they’ve done well by creating a place like Detroit.
I can agree with that but we both know that it wont happen. We either have the electoral college or mob rule democracy. I do like that idea though. It could offer a more fair shake from state to state.
Agreed it's far too simple of an idea/change to ever actually be adopted. It'll either remain status quo or they'd change to some other version that was too far screwed up in the other direction.
The electoral college was set up so that the president would have support from many states throughout the country - not just serve the interests of the urban areas on the coasts. Otherwise, a presidential candidate would not have to care about the heartland - where much of the food is grown, and where most of the natural resources and aquifers are located.
Obama and Bill Clinton had no problem winning the electoral college easily twice each. Just between the 3 states of California, New York, and Illinois, Dems have over 100 electoral votes guaranteed. Hillary knew how the electoral college works, yet chose to spend her time at fundraisers in the Hamptons and Beverly Hills, while Trump was holding rallies every night all over the country.
Personally, I think both sides need to do better at appealing to the traditional demographics of the other party. The country would be much healthier if we did that.
Obama and Bill Clinton had no problem winning the electoral college easily twice each. Just between the 3 states of California, New York, and Illinois, Dems have over 100 electoral votes guaranteed. Hillary knew how the electoral college works, yet chose to spend her time at fundraisers in the Hamptons and Beverly Hills, while Trump was holding rallies every night all over the country.
Personally, I think both sides need to do better at appealing to the traditional demographics of the other party. The country would be much healthier if we did that.
Ever been in the the sand triangle? Any foothold extremists can take, they will. I have no acceptance of anything of extremist Muslim ideology. Politicians are corrupt. I expect that. They say anything questionable agreeing with Muslim ideologies and possibly rationalize acceptance of a deplorable culture. I say gtfo.
Isn't he riding a girls bike?
Rugged masculinity!
If the electoral college is ever done away with, all the states with small populations will have absolutely no say in the presidential election.
How many of those votes are even legit? Let's get real here on the mass voter fraud in this country. Florida and Arizona are perfect examples of what has been going on for years.
Voter ID’s should be a requirement. Damn near evrything requires an ID but not to vote..
But, libtards think black folks are too stupid to aquire ID’s so they consider it as a form of voter suppression.