Some questions literally can’t be answered with yes or no answers. Some questions have explanations behind their answers that need to be said.
I personally just want whoever wins the GOP nomination to actually be able to win the election and not have a terrible VP as a part of the ticket, but considering the history of why .win exists as a domain, I understand why many of us are so laser-focused for Trump to be who wins the nomination.
At some point I need to go find election results and polls from suburban areas so that when the topic comes up it doesn’t go to accusing people of being lefties when they aren’t just because they don’t like Trump.
If elections are fake, then there's no democracy.
The best case scenario is some sort of conflict, rather than slowly and silently going under.
Sir, this is clearly speech that promotes, advocates, glorifies, or endorses violence.
As this is an obvious violation of rule 2, please ban yourself for 48 hours.
You have your chicken and egg mixed up. One pulse one vote, lowest common denominator, is the driver of fraud and corruption here.
If you think elections don't matter, then there is by definition no democracy. I'll also never understand people who think that the elites have too little power.
One pulse, one vote. As opposed to? Giving Zuckerberg a million votes? Yes, the system sucks, but not because ordinary people have too much power.
IQ tests for every government office and for voters. Electoral colleges or district voting at all levels, so rural areas are not dominated by the corrupt cities - perhaps even disallow cities over a certain size from having a vote at all. Otherwise one vote per property-owning head of household, then add a narrow path of various ways to earn citizenship through service or sacrifice.
Who would score higher on an IQ test, Zuckerberg or the average coal miner?
That probably would have a desirable effect, but is that just?
A lot of people who are not doing well, due to the corruption of the elites, are Trump supporters. I'm not sure why they should lose out to VP of diversity earning $250,000 for doing literally nothing.
You're not actually arguing, you're just repeating the same flawed premise I already addressed.
You didn't actually address it. You just made an assertion.
Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Comment Approved: That is heavily inferred. A "conflict" especially in the context of an election does not mean a violent conflict.
As this is your most recent post using this to point out Rule 4 is currently spelled "Slacious" on the report tab. It's spelled correctly in the sidebar and I have no idea what you might see so I tagged this post with a Rule 4 flag if that highlights things any differently.