8
Gizortnik 8 points ago +8 / -0

That wasn't the only time they pulled that stunt. They've tried this several times after it failed.

9
Gizortnik 9 points ago +9 / -0

The guy is as bad as a violent street thug. I saw nothing that suggested he was prepared to leave, and his removal was very suspicious. I wouldn't be surprised if he made her fail.

The "garbage" comment i can accept that he just hates us. But doing it again? Right before the election?

It's too much. I think it's on purpose.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

At a fundamentally more primal level it brings up the point anyone claiming this has never had children, or pets, because they are absolutely retarded enough at times to end up getting hurt and/or killed simply through sheer lack of awareness at every day things like cars, stairs, and a whole list of other things.

Literally "Dad Reflexes"

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't disagree with that, I just think the sugar is probably the primary culprit.

5
Gizortnik 5 points ago +5 / -0

Whoops. I was looking at the 2000 demographics, not the 2020 ones.

Jesus, Why did they import Honduras?

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +3 / -2

We all know you're voting for Cornell West.

3
Gizortnik 3 points ago +3 / -0

Carry out voting is nice so you can do research of candidates at home. You have to request it explicitly though. Talk to the BoE on how to do it.

Feel free to go to the county BOE if there are issues with your local polling stations. In my state, they typically take you.

3
Gizortnik 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is slightly incorrect. The Vice President doesn't certify the election. The Vice President counts the votes. What happens before this is that governors certify electors of which to send officially to DC.

Now, let me try to clear up some shenanigans.

In 2020, it was legal for the Vice President, as it had been for the entire history of the country, to choose which electors to count. If he refused to count electors sent to him & certified by the governor he could do that. The Democrats claimed that despite this happening 3 times, this (in and of itself) was an insurrection. Since it was somehow an insurrection that never happened before, Kamala Harris herself pushed for a bill to make sure that the VP's role was now ceremonial in nature, and could only count certified slates of electors.

The governors of the state certify the slates of electors of which the governor claims represent the state's final popular vote. THERE ARE ALWAYS A REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC SLATE OF ELECTORS PREPARED AHEAD OF TIME. Depending on the vote outcome, the governor chooses one to certify. As I mentioned previously, the VP has previously counted uncertified slates of electors. The VP also refused to count certified slates of electors. This was legal until 2021.

What Trump and Trump supporters got in trouble for was that they sent uncertified electors to DC, and claimed they were "duly elected". This has been declared insurrection. Just so we're clear. The DOJ claims that because they called themselves "duly elected" and not certified, this is fraud. It's not. In fact, anyone, including the Libertarian and Green Party, can send slates of uncertified electors. What they really didn't like is that Trump managed to send slates of electors that weren't the official pre-designated republican slate. Again, this is legal, but this is being treated as terrorism by the feds.

The problem with Harris is that she shot herself in the foot 3 years ago and didn't know it. She can't stop the count. She made it criminal for her to do so. Now, it's possible that she could break the law and do it anyway, creating a constitutional crisis, an impeachment struggle, and a House of Representatives vote. I've argued this may still happen, but it's unlikely if Trump does well.

The real danger here comes from the governors. People like Shapiro and Hobbs may simply certify the Democratic electors regardless of whether or not the vote count has stopped, or what it's at. If the Republicans send up their electors, those electors may go to jail, causing a constitutional crisis. If Trump orders them, he may be arrested, causing a constitutional crisis. It won't get her any new votes, but it won't get Trump to 270.

However, this requires Harris to have the political capital that could afford a major constitutional crisis... I don't think she has it, and I think a few people, like Shapiro himself, would rather watch her fail, that risk it all on a House Vote for president that Trump could potentially still win.

3
Gizortnik 3 points ago +3 / -0

Trump says he will protect women. What a misogynistic opinion!

Sharp opinion here. If you tell me you shouldn't "protect someone against their will", then it means you've never protected anyone.

Protecting you whether you like it or not is what every cop, fireman, emt, trauma nurse, medic, or corpsman is trained to do. They'll save your life, sometimes while you beg for death; because that is what it actually means to try and save people.

Women voting for their own rape is something we have an obligation to protect them from, whether or not they approve. Doing what is right is not necessarily popular.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +8 / -6

This is mostly coming from the dedicated effort of the New York Republicans MAGA wing doing grass-roots work, as well as Lee Zeldin paying particular attention to them since Bill "The Jew Hunter" DeBlasio began attacking them during the lockdowns.

You can expect this demographic of Orthodox Jews to swing 80% to Trump and take a chunk out of New York state. More over, there might be some big wins in the House and State Government because of this.

Edit - What, you don't believe me? Fine. Let's come back to this after the election and see what the return rate is.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +2 / -0

Libertine, not Libertarians. We are not the same.

My neighbor being gunned down by a horde of communist illegals effects me.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

The interstate commerce clause is broad, but I still think it would be a hell of a challenge to claim federal regulation on it in the first place.

7
Gizortnik 7 points ago +7 / -0

If they're dependent on anyone else, they shouldn't get the right to vote. This is what Adams and Blackstone were pointing out with land requirements. If you don't own your own home and your own business, you are dependent on someone else, and you are voting in their best interests. Not yours. If they are dependent on the government, they don't get to vote. The government shouldn't vote for itself. In fact, I think there's an argument to ban government officials from participating in elections.

15
Gizortnik 15 points ago +16 / -1

The American right is definitely further right than the AfD, the issue is that the young rightists quickly realized that there's no point in pulling your punches when someone is shooting at you.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +3 / -1

They also had no protections of liberty or property, unlimited jurisdiction, and they sure didn't have the "no confidence" vote that I specified.

I get what you are saying, but I don't think the system I'm suggesting would have the same kinds of holes in it that the Soviet system intentionally created.

For example, I'm saying that the top level can't make laws for the lowest level. At all. The top level can only go one step down. They can only regulate relations to their immediate subordinates.

-1
Gizortnik -1 points ago +1 / -2

I don't know that that's exactly true, I'd want to read the decision in detail. But for the sake of argument, lets assume it is. Abortion, like murder, doesn't fall within federal jurisdiction in the first place unless it's a crime on federal property or on federal land.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +4 / -2

And just because you said that, some middle-managerial bureaucrat is crying & panicking hysterically as he throws tubes of toothpaste into the local reservoir.

"AAAAAAAGGGHHH! YOU DON'T TRUST THE SCIENCE!!! GHHHAAAAARRRGHHH!!!!"

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +3 / -1

I don't disagree, I just think static boarders of states, counties, townships v. cities, are already in place and make sense.

19
Gizortnik 19 points ago +21 / -2

There is a 100% chance that the Left will claim "concentration camps" when Trump starts allowing local police to arrest illegals.

As you said, we need to treat Leftist cities like Springfield, OH. Not this namby-pamby Greg Abbot & Ron DeSantis bus tour crap where 40 Guatemalans got off a bus, and were told to leave by the National Guard.

For example, the population of Providence, RI is around 190,000 people. To prevent the abuse of CBP agents in Immigration "concentration camps", then we need to slam fuck 64,000 criminal migrants into the city, to push it up to a population of 254,000.

If that stretches the city's capacity to operate, then we have to take the same approach as they did with us and say, "Fuck you, kill yourself you racist faggot. Why don't you just fucking die? Learn to speak <insert alien tongue here>"

Now this would make the city of Providence minority white at that point, but, you know, I seem to recall being told: "Shut the fuck up and kill yourself mayo monkey. Demographic replacement isn't happening, but it is, and it's reparations, and it's a good thing." is what they told me; so what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If it's really that big of a problem for them, we can probably find 64,000 illegal Albanian migrants and it would do the same thing. That way it stays majority white and if they have a problem we'll just tell them to use their White Privilege. Anyways, they should be glad they're not Sacramento who's population just increased by 174,000, or Detroit who just got 888,000.

Now, because we're better than them, we'll actually deport the criminal migrants eventually, but we've got to clean our house first.

16
Gizortnik 16 points ago +17 / -1

'Service Guarantees Citizenship' and 'only citizens can vote' is a good system, but I think there's some other components that should be considered.

I understand why some people on the populist Left want direct, but this is one of the reasons I want stratified voting. The only things that you should vote on are the things directly within your community and the government you create to govern you. From there, those local government members are the only people that vote on state issues. Those state governments then vote on Federal issues. Etc.

The only people voting on a thing, should be the people effected by the thing. Thus, you only vote one step up in the stratification. The government's jurisdiction should be only one step down. The government can only really regulate the relationships of the people that put it in power.

A direct vote on something like boarders may be too broad. The only exception to this in my mind would be "votes of no confidence". If you pissed X number of raw people off at the bottom rung, then you must have fucked something up royally, and you should get removed.

0
Gizortnik 0 points ago +2 / -2

I don't believe it's ever shown that it does. I think it's protected the equipment and some portion of the water.

I mean, hell, purified water is actually quite difficult to maintain historically. Grog exists because alcohol was a great way to increase the longevity of water at sea.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +2 / -0

What in the fuck...

Did they seriously just murder them because the suicide machine failed?

... I got nothin'.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›