whats wrong with this country ?? i'll tell you

[Mojouw]

Ok, at least you got one part correct. In general, I don't think other people should vote. They're bad at it and it's embarrassing, and I could care less what they want.

Beyond that, I'm just trying to cover all the possibilities here. Most people don't like violent, racist lunatics, and they don't like being harangued by bureaucrats. So what happened? Best case, it's cheating or bending the rules. Worst case, people really are that stupid.

Like I said, I prefer the first explanation because it at least leaves more hope for humanity. It sort of fits with the more recent results, too. Shady California-style bullshit doesn't work as well in other more mainstream places without the big bad Trump boogeyman. Two years ago, you had a million hateful little gremlins standing by to do whatever it took to win "by any means necessary" (their words, not mine). This time, maybe not so much.

Anyway, the important part is, in any situation from flat-out cheating to a completely legitimate (though doubtful) win, they're an abomination and that way of thinking needs to be exterminated.

Ok, I'll bite.

Where are you drawing the line on who gets to vote? Only a specific party affiliation? Anyone who scores above a benchmark on an aptitude test? Go back to only landowning white dudes? You get the idea. What is the criteria for determining who gets to vote in this modified democracy?

I don't understand how a specific party is able to rig an election in Year A but not in Years B, C, and D, etc. I mean either they are capable of executing a complex interlocking conspiracy or they are not. It is kind of an either/or binary.

On top of that, what was the incentive to leverage this large-scale grift to gain only the Presidency? Why leave the Senate in such a marginal position as to allow the opposition to have any sway at all? Historically, groups willing and able to steal an election(s) are not known for their restraint and light touch. It just doesn't make a lick of sense.

[steelreserve]

Ok, I'll bite.

Where are you drawing the line on who gets to vote? Only a specific party affiliation? Anyone who scores above a benchmark on an aptitude test? Go back to only landowning white dudes? You get the idea. What is the criteria for determining who gets to vote in this modified democracy?

I don't understand how a specific party is able to rig an election in Year A but not in Years B, C, and D, etc. I mean either they are capable of executing a complex interlocking conspiracy or they are not. It is kind of an either/or binary.

On top of that, what was the incentive to leverage this large-scale grift to gain only the Presidency? Why leave the Senate in such a marginal position as to allow the opposition to have any sway at all? Historically, groups willing and able to steal an election(s) are not known for their restraint and light touch. It just doesn't make a lick of sense.

Who should ideally be allowed to vote? Only me, that's it. Since that's unfortunately not very likely, what would the closest approximation of that look like? Something like: All people who are too stupid, meaning all current Democrats and roughly 75% of Republicans, chosen by me, are banned for life from voting or participating in politics at any level.

Of course, the way people always love to do this is to use general categories as a proxy for what they really mean. So in those terms: Only people 30 or older who have a job; all military of any age are included and all government employees of any age are excluded. There, your electorate just got 50,000% smarter.

Why would a party be able to slant election results better in one year than the next? Level of hate, that's all. If you're doing it mainly by leaving the door open for anyone who feels so inclined, you need that "by any means necessary" level of hatred for those people to come out. Two years ago they were saying it openly, this time they weren't. Big difference.

[Mojouw]

Who should ideally be allowed to vote? Only me, that's it. Since that's unfortunately not very likely, what would the closest approximation of that look like? Something like: All people who are too stupid, meaning all current Democrats and roughly 75% of Republicans, chosen by me, are banned for life from voting or participating in politics at any level.

Of course, the way people always love to do this is to use general categories as a proxy for what they really mean. So in those terms: Only people 30 or older who have a job; all military of any age are included and all government employees of any age are excluded. There, your electorate just got 50,000% smarter.

Why would a party be able to slant election results better in one year than the next? Level of hate, that's all. If you're doing it mainly by leaving the door open for anyone who feels so inclined, you need that "by any means necessary" level of hatred for those people to come out. Two years ago they were saying it openly, this time they weren't. Big difference.

Got it. Nonsense on the voting privileges stuff. And now we aren't really talking about election fraud, theft, or corruption but simply turnout. Use hatred/fear to turnout a large % of one side or the others bloc and what do you know....math wins again. Math is undefeated.

[steelreserve]

Got it. Nonsense on the voting privileges stuff. And now we aren't really talking about election fraud, theft, or corruption but simply turnout. Use hatred/fear to turnout a large % of one side or the others bloc and what do you know....math wins again. Math is undefeated.

I don't see how any of what I said about voting rights is "nonsense," it just isn't what you want. There was a good reason why things were originally set up so that voting was limited: Stupid people shouldn't vote because they have bad ideas, and people who have no skin in the game also shouldn't vote, because they also have bad ideas.

It is really, really hard to make a reasonable argument against that. So naturally, what does the left do - they make an unreasonable argument against it. It's all because they were racists and misogynists, there couldn't have been any other point to it all. Just racist people doing racist things all racist day so they could be more racist. Why, I heard right after the Founding Fathers decided the part about who was allowed to vote, George Washington shouted "1488!" and committed a racially-motivated mass shooting with a semiautomatic assault musket, but nothing happened to him because of white privilege. And that's how they thought up the Second Amendment. Racist racist racist.

Anyway, while "white male landowners" was certainly a rude attempt at that and it shows that it's 250 years old, you can either take the lazy way out and yell into the sky about racism, or you can say what was the real point, and what would be a better way to keep stupid people and self-interested people from controlling things.

Well, young people are overwhelmingly stupid, so shoving them out takes care of a large swath of that. Government employees have a self-interest in growing the government and seeing that they are highly paid, to the point where it's become a conflict of interest, so get them out of there too. Some people don't have jobs because of temporary situations or bad luck, but you are also catching far more junkies, deadbeats, and sketchy people with that. Is it fair to every single person? Nope. Too bad, so sad. I don't really care about fairness or feelings though, I care about results. So yeah, even though it's the opposite if what's been drummed into your lemming brain, it's many times more effective.

Anyway, let's say your other assumptions about election integrity are all true, what does that leave us? The Democratic Party was able to ride a wave of hatred that it created, in order to claim victory on the backs of the dumbest and the most selfish. Lots to be proud of. See, this is why all that nonsense I said about voting rights up there was important.

[Mojouw]

I don't see how any of what I said about voting rights is "nonsense," it just isn't what you want. There was a good reason why things were originally set up so that voting was limited: Stupid people shouldn't vote because they have bad ideas, and people who have no skin in the game also shouldn't vote, because they also have bad ideas.

It is really, really hard to make a reasonable argument against that. So naturally, what does the left do - they make an unreasonable argument against it. It's all because they were racists and misogynists, there couldn't have been any other point to it all. Just racist people doing racist things all racist day so they could be more racist. Why, I heard right after the Founding Fathers decided the part about who was allowed to vote, George Washington shouted "1488!" and committed a racially-motivated mass shooting with a semiautomatic assault musket, but nothing happened to him because of white privilege. And that's how they thought up the Second Amendment. Racist racist racist.

Anyway, while "white male landowners" was certainly a rude attempt at that and it shows that it's 250 years old, you can either take the lazy way out and yell into the sky about racism, or you can say what was the real point, and what would be a better way to keep stupid people and self-interested people from controlling things.

Well, young people are overwhelmingly stupid, so shoving them out takes care of a large swath of that. Government employees have a self-interest in growing the government and seeing that they are highly paid, to the point where it's become a conflict of interest, so get them out of there too. Some people don't have jobs because of temporary situations or bad luck, but you are also catching far more junkies, deadbeats, and sketchy people with that. Is it fair to every single person? Nope. Too bad, so sad. I don't really care about fairness or feelings though, I care about results. So yeah, even though it's the opposite if what's been drummed into your lemming brain, it's many times more effective.

Anyway, let's say your other assumptions about election integrity are all true, what does that leave us? The Democratic Party was able to ride a wave of hatred that it created, in order to claim victory on the backs of the dumbest and the most selfish. Lots to be proud of. See, this is why all that nonsense I said about voting rights up there was important.

Math is hard to beat.

The overwhelming number of people alive and of voting age today completely disagree with your preferred points of view and ballot choices. You do not have to agree with it or like it but the math is undefeated.

Pretty easy to see that you recognize this at some level. You've gone from blaming the integrity of elections to blaming the demographic weight of voters with only the slightest of pushes.

[steelreserve]

Math is hard to beat.

The overwhelming number of people alive and of voting age today completely disagree with your preferred points of view and ballot choices. You do not have to agree with it or like it but the math is undefeated.

Pretty easy to see that you recognize this at some level. You've gone from blaming the integrity of elections to blaming the demographic weight of voters with only the slightest of pushes.

None of that is really the case at all. But as you have shown over and over again, you will tell yourself whatever is necessary so that you can pretend that you have not been gaslighted into white-knighting for hatred and stupidity. But that is the nature of being in a cult.

You also seem to confuse my saying things like "even if you were right" with an acknowledgement that you actually are right. Please don't make that mistake, nearly everything you have to say about politics is absolute rubbish. What I am saying is that you are wrong, and also that what you want is so stupid that even if you were right, the goal should be to get away from that as urgently as possible. Sometimes things like that are lost in translation when people try to come down to your level.

Anyway, to summarize: Stupid people should not have any say in how things are run. If you do in fact end up doing what the stupid people want, then their influence should be taken away at once. And if you do want stupid people to have more of a say, then you are too stupid to have a say.

[Mojouw]

None of that is really the case at all. But as you have shown over and over again, you will tell yourself whatever is necessary so that you can pretend that you have not been gaslighted into white-knighting for hatred and stupidity. But that is the nature of being in a cult.

You also seem to confuse my saying things like "even if you were right" with an acknowledgement that you actually are right. Please don't make that mistake, nearly everything you have to say about politics is absolute rubbish. What I am saying is that you are wrong, and also that what you want is so stupid that even if you were right, the goal should be to get away from that as urgently as possible. Sometimes things like that are lost in translation when people try to come down to your level.

Anyway, to summarize: Stupid people should not have any say in how things are run. If you do in fact end up doing what the stupid people want, then their influence should be taken away at once. And if you do want stupid people to have more of a say, then you are too stupid to have a say.

If only the rest of us weren't so vanishingly stupid we would agree with your galaxy brained views.

First the election was stolen. Then it was because everyone is in a leftist hate cult. Then it was because stupid junkies are allowed to vote. Then it was your intricate and amazing arguments didn't translate it when you had to dumb it down.

Sounds like whining and rationalizing to me.

[ALLD]

Manufactured products operate like the Steelers STs squad.

[steelreserve]

If only the rest of us weren't so vanishingly stupid we would agree with your galaxy brained views.

First the election was stolen. Then it was because everyone is in a leftist hate cult. Then it was because stupid junkies are allowed to vote. Then it was your intricate and amazing arguments didn't translate it when you had to dumb it down.

Sounds like whining and rationalizing to me.

All this coming from a guy whose single theory to explain everything is, "Anyone who doesn't agree with me is just some angry white dude, and there are like 6 of you." Yawn.

You seem like you're really cranky from losing the election last month, but seriously, this is some real stretching and goalpost-moving even for you.

You do realize that when someone says one thing, and then you say, "well actually, you said this other thing that I made up right now," that doesn't actually mean you actually won the argument or outsmarted anyone, you just look like a dickhead. No, of course you don't realize that, you're a liberal. You shouldn't talk about politics, you're too bad at it.

[Orion]

[Orion]

[Orion]

[Orion]

[Orion]

we just had the fifth year anniversary of the horrific event in Vegas and yet not a peep about it from the media. its almost like they WANT it to be forgot about. you would think this event would be "remember the Alamo " Type of battle cry and it, and would stay under the spotlight for their gun grabbing efforts and they would bring it up every chance they had. are they being silent on it because just like 9/11 there are a ton of plot holes in the story that they dont want questions about ? reminds me of the jauary 6th bomber they never found despite cameras everywhere and they immediately stopped talking about. i mean for gods sakes , AOC was almost murdered !!!

[Orion]

[Steeldude]

It's how they will get around their no new taxes policy.

[willy]

we just had the fifth year anniversary of the horrific event in Vegas and yet not a peep about it from the media. its almost like they WANT it to be forgot about. you would think this event would be "remember the Alamo " Type of battle cry and it, and would stay under the spotlight for their gun grabbing efforts and they would bring it up every chance they had. are they being silent on it because just like 9/11 there are a ton of plot holes in the story that they dont want questions about ? reminds me of the jauary 6th bomber they never found despite cameras everywhere and they immediately stopped talking about. i mean for gods sakes , AOC was almost murdered !!!

Clearly you're crackers.

[Steeler-in-west]

"How does this war end? When Russia breaks, and they take Putin out. Anything short of that, the war’s gonna continue."


--Lindsay Graham, war monger pushing us to the brink.

[Orion]

[Orion]

[Mach1]

[willy]

Oh no, $3.6 million out of $1.7 trillion.

'Michelle Obama Trail' $3.6M Funding in Omnibus Bill Sparks Republican Fury

By Khaleda Rahman On 12/21/22 at 4:33 AM EST

Republicans have been railing against a relatively small provision in the $1.7 trillion omnibus bill unveiled on Tuesday: funds for a hiking trail named after Michelle Obama.

Lawmakers are racing to pass the sprawling package—likely the last major bill of the current Congress—before a Friday deadline or face the prospect of a partial government shutdown.

The bill, which runs for 4,155 pages, includes another large round of aid to Ukraine, $858 billion for defense and about $772.5 billion for non-defense, discretionary programs, according to The Associated Press.

https://www.newsweek.com/michelle-ob...n-fury-1768635

[Orion]

[Orion]

this shows you how far out there the liberals really are

[Mach1]

[Orion]

[Steeldude]

this shows you how far out there the liberals really are

It's interesting how the liberals in the video say who are they to judge. So why do they judge people who vote for Trump?

So to liberals, incest is ok , but you are pure evil if you vote for Trump. Haha. Liberal logic 101.

- - - Updated - - -

The idiocy of liberals

[willy]

Here, have a safe space:

Police initiative aims to provide a safe space for LGBTQIA+ hate crime victims

By: WMAR STAFF

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.65)][/COLOR]

https://www.wmar2news.com/news/local...-crime-victims

[Mach1]

[Orion]