Your voters are dying and the young now hate you

evince said:
ales jones and infowars keep saying that these shootings are not real.


the right here keeps presenting articles from these evil shits


they should be condemned for it



they actually got the parents of sandyhook attacked when they spoke of their dead babies


yet that is fine with you huh
Click to expand...

I condemn infowars for claiming Sandy Hook didn't happen. Happy now?

If the Sandy Hook parents want to use their dead children as a soapbox to infringe upon my rights, I will verbally attack them as well. Going through a tragedy doesn't put you off limits for criticism when you use it to advocate for political causes. Although I'm sure you wish it did.
 
evince said:
The 2016 election is likely to be the last presidential contest in which a majority of voters belong to the Boomers or prior generations
Click to expand...

End of the line for the bitter white christian geezers, good riddance !!

And i say this as a 67 year old non christian who has more confidence in the younger generation, then the old peckerwoods
 
guno said:
End of the line for the bitter white christian geezers, good riddance !!

And i say this as a 67 year old non christian who has more confidence in the younger generation, then the old peckerwoods
Click to expand...

So you're a self admitted old peckerwood? Not surprising.
 
guno said:
End of the line for the bitter white christian geezers, good riddance !!

And i say this as a 67 year old non christian who has more confidence in the younger generation, then the old peckerwoods
Click to expand...

I'm 60


I'm with the kids too
 
guno said:
End of the line for the bitter white christian geezers, good riddance !!

And i say this as a 67 year old non christian who has more confidence in the younger generation, then the old peckerwoods
Click to expand...


I am 67 too and can't wait for the trumpster Boomers to be in their grave
 
Sirthinksalot said:
I condemn infowars for claiming Sandy Hook didn't happen. Happy now?

If the Sandy Hook parents want to use their dead children as a soapbox to infringe upon my rights, I will verbally attack them as well. Going through a tragedy doesn't put you off limits for criticism when you use it to advocate for political causes. Although I'm sure you wish it did.
Click to expand...

Actually a tragedy is a good point for explaining what can happen if we don't have better regulations. We have to have serious background checks including mental stability . We should not allow military weapons in the hands of civilians. Gun butyers should have to go through classes showing them how to handle and store weapons. They should have top pass a test. Yep, much like drivers license regulation.
 
Nordberg said:
Actually a tragedy is a good point for explaining what can happen if we don't have better regulations. We have to have serious background checks including mental stability . We should not allow military weapons in the hands of civilians. Gun butyers should have to go through classes showing them how to handle and store weapons. They should have top pass a test. Yep, much like drivers license regulation.
Click to expand...

"If your goal in purchasing this weapon is to shoot up somewhere we want to make sure you are fully trained in how to do so."

Makes sense to me...
 
katzgar said:
same situation during the vietnam war protests and yet the kids prevailed
Click to expand...

Yet they didn't. Had the entire generation of kids been lost, considering most protesters were in college and of voting age, Nixon wouldn't have been President, Carter would have had 8 years, Reagan would have never won, nor Bush follow him...

The reality doesn't reflect your "feels" here, man.
 
Damocles said:
Yet they didn't. Had the entire generation of kids been lost, considering most protesters were in college and of voting age, Nixon wouldn't have been President, Carter would have had 8 years, Reagan would have never won, nor Bush follow him...

The reality doesn't reflect your "feels" here, man.
Click to expand...

why did Nixon break into the Watergate ?

so the republicans could Cheat to a win
 
Nordberg said:
Actually a tragedy is a good point for explaining what can happen if we don't have better regulations. We have to have serious background checks including mental stability . We should not allow military weapons in the hands of civilians. Gun butyers should have to go through classes showing them how to handle and store weapons. They should have top pass a test. Yep, much like drivers license regulation.
Click to expand...

Which of the above that you proposed would have stopped Sandy Hook from happening? *drops mic*
 
evince said:
why did Nixon break into the Watergate ?

so the republicans could Cheat to a win
Click to expand...

Reality: Nixon would have won before that, and Nixon didn't order it he just tried to cover it up after, often the coverup is what gets you. And even with that, just a few years later a President chosen by those "kids" you said were lost to "the right" still voted for Reagan overwhelmingly over Carter.

This idea that some people protesting are a sign of the demise of one of the political parties is stupid. I said that when the republicans were winning elections and had the TEA Party protestors, I'll say it now with the left. The constant prediction of the "death" of one of the parties is always wrong, and will always be wrong.
 
Damocles said:
Reality: Nixon would have won before that, and Nixon didn't order it he just tried to cover it up after, often the coverup is what gets you. And even with that, just a few years later a President chosen by those "kids" you said were lost to "the right" still voted for Reagan overwhelmingly over Carter.

This idea that some people protesting are a sign of the demise of one of the political parties is stupid. I said that when the republicans were winning elections and had the TEA Party protestors, I'll say it now with the left. The constant prediction of the "death" of one of the parties is always wrong, and will always be wrong.
Click to expand...


Nixon KNOWN for his dirty tricks Damo

TRICKY DICK
 
evince said:
Nixon KNOWN for his dirty tricks Damo

TRICKY DICK
Click to expand...

Yet everything I said was true. Nixon was paranoid and IMO, way too leftist for comfort, but he would have won that second term without any of the BS and you know it.

Reality so far has left all of the predictions of the demise of a political party DOA.
 
http://www.umich.edu/~lawrace/disenfranchise1.htm


Techniques of Direct Disenfranchisement, 1880-1965







"Direct" disenfranchisement refers to actions that explicitly prevent people from voting or having their votes counted, as opposed to "indirect" techniques, which attempt to prevent people's votes from having an impact on political outcomes (e.g., gerrymandering, ballot box stuffing, stripping elected officials of their powers).
The 15th Amendment prohibited explicit disenfranchisement on the basis of race or prior enslavement. So Southern states devised an array of alternative techniques designed to disenfranchise blacks and, to a lesser extent, poor whites. There were three broad, overlapping phases of the disenfranchisement process. From 1868-1888, the principal techniques of disenfranchisement were illegal, based on violence and massive fraud in the vote counting process. Starting in 1877, when Georgia passed the cumulative poll tax, states implemented statutory methods of disenfranchisement. From 1888-1908, states entrenched these legal techniques in their constitutions. Here we explore the principal means of direct disenfranchisement, and the attempts to use Federal law to prevent disenfranchisement, through 1965, when the Voting Rights Act was passed. For the most part, until the advent of the Civil Rights Movement in the 20th c., the Supreme Court acquiesced in the methods used to disenfranchise blacks by gutting the Federal laws enacted to protect blacks. Whenever it resisted, the Southern states followed the motto "if at first you don't succeed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top