Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Goukosan

Official Politics Thread.

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Vini said:

And for the record I'm talking about background checks here. I'm pro gun all the way I think the second amendment is as important as the first and they depend on each other. 

 

And I also don't think NRA is some evil entity it's a legal gun owner lobby that has a little too much power but I would never stop a law abiding citizen from owning a semi automatic weapon and joining a gun lobby. Especially in the face of so many clueless leftists overreacting every time some broken asshat shoots up a school. 

 

:drake:

 

Your Naivety and how clueless you are never cease to amaze me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Vini said:

And for the record I'm talking about background checks here. I'm pro gun all the way I think the second amendment is as important as the first and they depend on each other. 

 

And I also don't think NRA is some evil entity it's a legal gun owner lobby that has a little too much power but I would never stop a law abiding citizen from owning a semi automatic weapon and joining a gun lobby. Especially in the face of so many clueless leftists overreacting every time some broken asshat shoots up a school. 

 

 

Why are you for background checks and against other further restrictions on guns? I'd like to hear your opinion on bump stocks, blocking CDC research into gun violence, and concealed carry (it's a pretty broad topic, so be as specific as you would like).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump stocks should be illegal and cracked down on, so is anything else that can simulate or turn a semi automatic into a fully automatic weapon. 

 

I'm for strict background checks to make sure people with a criminal record or mental illness don't get a hold of guns, otherwise any mentally healthy law abiding citizen in America should be able to own a semi automatic weapon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Vini said:

I'm for strict background checks to make sure people with a criminal record or mental illness don't get a hold of guns,

 

What about confiscating their guns once convicted/diagnosed? And what are your opinions on the federal law of restricting gun purchases for people subject to a restraining order not applying to non-spouses?

 

And just so you know a bit more about my stance: I agree that access to semi-automatic weapons is fine. The vast, vast majority of gun violence is committed by handguns with semi-automatic weapons barely being a blip from a statistical standpoint. The semi-automatic focus is just a result of how the media covers mass shootings, which we can already try to help curb by limiting access to guns for the mentally ill.

 

I also accept the reality that even with all reasonable methods of gun control there is still going to be gun violence and the existence of such doesn't suggest the need for further gun control by adopting ineffective policies.

Edited by Hot Sauce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, would you look at that. People who identify as Green party candidates have ties to local Republican parties, and try to run against Democrats in places where the Republican party can't.

 

 

Quote

 

APNewsBreak: Green Party candidate was on state GOP payroll

By MATT VOLZ

Today

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A man who registered as a Green Party candidate for Montana's U.S. Senate race was on the state Republican Party's payroll and heads a newly formed anti-tax group, according to a review of election documents.

Timothy Adams filed as a challenger Monday against Democratic Sen. Jon Tester, who faces a tough re-election campaign, in a race where a Green Party candidate could siphon votes from the Democrat.

The Green Party qualified as a political party in Montana on Monday, which was also the state's deadline for candidates to file for office. Green Party officials blasted an email that morning to solicit candidates who could register by the day's end.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hot Sauce said:

 

What about confiscating their guns once convicted/diagnosed? And what are your opinions on the federal law of restricting gun purchases for people subject to a restraining order not applying to non-spouses?

 

And just so you know a bit more about my stance: I agree that access to semi-automatic weapons is fine. The vast, vast majority of gun violence is committed by handguns with semi-automatic weapons barely being a blip from a statistical standpoint. The semi-automatic focus is just a result of how the media covers mass shootings, which we can already try to help curb by limiting access to guns for the mentally ill.

 

I also accept the reality that even with all reasonable methods of gun control there is still going to be gun violence and the existence of such doesn't suggest the need for further gun control by adopting ineffective policies.

 

I'm including hand guns in the semi automatic category but yea I agree

 

As far as confescating guns I am all for it, anyone diagnosed mentally unstable or convicted criminal should not have access to weapons, this seems obvious to me.

 

As for restraining orders it would depend on the circumstances I guess, if convicted violence and/or mental illness is involved I'm all for confescating and blacklisting. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jehurey said:

Oh, would you look at that. People who identify as Green party candidates have ties to local Republican parties, and try to run against Democrats in places where the Republican party can't.

 

People? Who are the others? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, jehurey said:

Oh, would you look at that. People who identify as Green party candidates have ties to local Republican parties, and try to run against Democrats in places where the Republican party can't.

 

 

This shit should be illegal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Saucer said:

 

People? Who are the others? 

Well, considering Russian money is being sent through the GOP at the national level, I'd say this qualifies:

 

jill-stein-putin-678x381.png

 

And its not a recent phenomenon:

 

 

Quote

 

Green Party Candidate Finds He's a Republican Pawn

By SAM HOWE VERHOVEKAUG. 8, 2001

Young S. Han, who graduated from Mountlake Terrace High School in suburban Seattle two months ago and was a volunteer for Ralph Nader last fall, describes himself this way: ''I'm just an idealistic guy out there that wants to make some changes.''

So early last month, just as he was flirting with the idea of running as a Green Party candidate for the Legislature, the 18-year-old Mr. Han was flattered to get an e-mail note from a man named Stan Shore encouraging him to go for it.

Mr. Shore showed up several days later to help organize a ''legislative district convention'' at which Mr. Han's name was put in nomination. Mr. Shore paid for the hotel room where it was held. He brought doughnuts for the two dozen delegates.

And several days after that, Mr. Shore returned to take Mr. Han out to lunch at Red Robin, a local hamburger chain, and persuade him to take the final step of filing his declaration papers with the state. Mr. Shore wrote out a campaign donation for $250.

''He seemed really decent,'' the teenager recalled. ''He said he was this guy who wanted to help take down the establishment.''

But whatever passion Mr. Shore may have exhibited for the Green Party, he is in fact a longtime campaign consultant for Washington Republicans. And here, in a part of the country where the Green Party has the proven ability to siphon votes from Democrats in close races, Mr. Shore, who never identified himself as a Republican consultant to Mr. Han, now says that is exactly what he hopes will happen.

''This is like the friendship treaty between Russia and China,'' Mr. Shore said today of his role in helping the Greens. ''There are some commonalities of interest here.''

Mr. Shore's role in the state legislative race, and that of his wife in a similar situation in a county race in Seattle, are at the center of a growing political fracas featuring accusations by the Green Party that Republicans have been infiltrating their ranks and cries of shame and foul by Democrats.

 

"he seems like a really decent guy" as this supposed innocent bystander kept on receiving money and paid expenses without finding a solid 20 minutes to question what was going on.

 

I mean...........if you can imagine how NCAA college athletes get paid under the table by boosters, it shouldn't be hard to figure out how this would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Rebel Rebel said:

 J Edgar Jerry :drake:

LOL you can tell that I hit a nerve

 

I love how he thinks I'm doing hard investigatin'.  Apparently, 30 seconds of googling is beyond his capabilities. LOLOLOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jehurey said:

Well, considering Russian money is being sent through the GOP at the national level, I'd say this qualifies: look

 

jill-stein-putin-678x381.png

 

 

Jill Stein is a Republican double agent? Is that your argument? :ben:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rebel Rebel said:

 

 

The double talk from the SocJus left on this one is dead funny. 

 

Polygon and Anita: Games cause toxic masculinity and toxic masculinity causes violence.

Trump: Games cause violence.

Polygon and Anita: Games do not cause violence! U so dumb, Trump!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Saucer said:

 

Jill Stein is a Republican double agent? Is that your argument? :ben:

Promoting peace and the environment=/Republican Russian double agent even my Democrat brother says so.  :snoop:

Edited by Rebel Rebel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saucer said:

 

Jill Stein is a Republican double agent? Is that your argument? :ben:

I'm not making an argument but rather answering your question. Unfortunate that your copy+paste function lost that other text.:ben:

 

Love the attempts to try and move the conversation off to other places.  Yeah, that's not working. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pennsylvania 18th Congressional District special election has been going on this past hour, and it was always a matter of the Democrat (Lamb) pulling ahead in the early reporting from a couple of counties, and then waiting to see if the Republican (Saccone) get all of his surplus votes that he is expected to receive in the other two counties, the last county usually being Westmoreland.

 

Anyways, prediction models ended up being turned off because the county of Westmoreland went against their word and were not going to be reporting by districts, but rather just huge data dumps of districts.

 

But its looking like the Democrat has a good-enough cushion to hold off the expected surge of Republican votes:

 

Quote

 

9:44 EST:

Allegheny is about +13k for Lamb, 85% in. Westmoreland is -6800 for Lamb, 77% in. Washington is -60 (just sixty) for Lamb, 33% in Greene is -767 for Lamb, 100% in.

So, in total, Lamb still has a 5400 vote cushion, but if those percentages hold, Saccone has about 2300 extra votes in Westmoreland and about 150 votes left in Washington.

Saccone needs to do very well, above his performances so far to catch up, and this is assuming there isn't any more margin in Allegheny for Lamb.

 

 

 

WHoever wins, is going to win by less than a thousand votes, possibly less than 500 votes.

 

The reason why this is noteworthy, is that this is a heavy, heavy Republican-leaning district. And the GOP actually felt threatened in this race and outspent the Democrats by a 2:1 margin.

 

AND its gerrymandered in favor of Republicans, this district, as its currently drawn for this election.

 

Even if the Democrat loses by a hair, this is an absolute disaster for the Republicans. Statistically speaking, the Republicans have about 108 other Congressional Districts that are, historically, MORE competitive that this one was, prior to tonight.

 

So, if they lose this one, the shift in numbers applied nationwide, would mean that they would LOSE over 100 House Congressional seats in the mid-terms.

 

24ElSmj.png

Edited by jehurey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rebel Rebel said:

Promoting peace and the environment=/Republican Russian double agent even my Democrat brother says so.  :snoop:

 

42 minutes ago, jehurey said:

I'm not making an argument but rather answering your question. Unfortunate that your copy+paste function lost that other text.:ben:

 

Love the attempts to try and move the conversation off to other places.  Yeah, that's not working. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Saucer said:

 

 

And Saucer just relied on a Biohazard quote to save himself.

 

Think about that.:sass1:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×