The far right wants to eliminate the left

[Half-Life]

If the left keeps acting out of control like they are, they will sadly most likely lose the war. The left hates guns so less of them own guns. A lot of feminine men with blue hair "soy boys" are on the left who don't believe in fighting so they will just be pushovers. The left is supposedly anti-war and peace and love. If it does come to war, the right will win. I do not want it to come to this but if the left keeps banning conservatives from speaking at colleges, and antifa keeps taunting and beating people, we will have no choice but to fight back, as much as it pains me to say. The left already wants to genocide white christian males anyway. If a group wants you exterminated, it's OK to want to fight back.

 

[Angry Floof]

If the left keeps acting out of control like they are, they will sadly most likely lose the war. The left hates guns so less of them own guns. A lot of feminine men with blue hair "soy boys" are on the left who don't believe in fighting so they will just be pushovers. The left is supposedly anti-war and peace and love. If it does come to war, the right will win. I do not want it to come to this but if the left keeps banning conservatives from speaking at colleges, and antifa keeps taunting and beating people, we will have no choice but to fight back, as much as it pains me to say. The left already wants to genocide white christian males anyway. If a group wants you exterminated, it's OK to want to fight back.

Right wing terrorism is now on par with ISIS, according to the FBI. It's amazing what mountains of hatred, violence, and irrational, out of control behavior you can ignore from state sanctioned right wing terrorists in favor of OMG TEH EBIL DEMS. Astounding, really.

 

[Arctish]

If the left keeps acting out of control like they are, they will sadly most likely lose the war. The left hates guns so less of them own guns. A lot of feminine men with blue hair "soy boys" are on the left who don't believe in fighting so they will just be pushovers. The left is supposedly anti-war and peace and love. If it does come to war, the right will win. I do not want it to come to this but if the left keeps banning conservatives from speaking at colleges, and antifa keeps taunting and beating people, we will have no choice but to fight back, as much as it pains me to say. The left already wants to genocide white christian males anyway. If a group wants you exterminated, it's OK to want to fight back.

So you're saying antifa isn't the left.

Feminine men with blue hair aka "soy boys" who don't believe in fighting are on the left. But antifa keeps taunting and beating people, so it must be on some other side. The upside, perhaps?

 

[Half-Life]

If the left keeps acting out of control like they are, they will sadly most likely lose the war. The left hates guns so less of them own guns. A lot of feminine men with blue hair "soy boys" are on the left who don't believe in fighting so they will just be pushovers. The left is supposedly anti-war and peace and love. If it does come to war, the right will win. I do not want it to come to this but if the left keeps banning conservatives from speaking at colleges, and antifa keeps taunting and beating people, we will have no choice but to fight back, as much as it pains me to say. The left already wants to genocide white christian males anyway. If a group wants you exterminated, it's OK to want to fight back.

So you're saying antifa isn't the left.

Feminine men with blue hair aka "soy boys" who don't believe in fighting are on the left. But antifa keeps taunting and beating people, so it must be on some other side. The upside, perhaps?

There are both. There are men who completely lack any masculine qualities. These are the soy boys.

But then you have antifa who are a group that taunts people and beats people. It is a small group.

 

[Half-Life]

If the left keeps acting out of control like they are, they will sadly most likely lose the war. The left hates guns so less of them own guns. A lot of feminine men with blue hair "soy boys" are on the left who don't believe in fighting so they will just be pushovers. The left is supposedly anti-war and peace and love. If it does come to war, the right will win. I do not want it to come to this but if the left keeps banning conservatives from speaking at colleges, and antifa keeps taunting and beating people, we will have no choice but to fight back, as much as it pains me to say. The left already wants to genocide white christian males anyway. If a group wants you exterminated, it's OK to want to fight back.

Right wing terrorism is now on par with ISIS, according to the FBI. It's amazing what mountains of hatred, violence, and irrational, out of control behavior you can ignore from state sanctioned right wing terrorists in favor of OMG TEH EBIL DEMS. Astounding, really.

That is because they lowered the standard of what constitutes a hate crime. So of course the numbers will be inflated. A swastika spray painted on a random rock in a park could be considered a hate crime. No actual violence or harm done.

 

[ZiprHead]

If the left keeps acting out of control like they are, they will sadly most likely lose the war. The left hates guns so less of them own guns. A lot of feminine men with blue hair "soy boys" are on the left who don't believe in fighting so they will just be pushovers. The left is supposedly anti-war and peace and love. If it does come to war, the right will win. I do not want it to come to this but if the left keeps banning conservatives from speaking at colleges, and antifa keeps taunting and beating people, we will have no choice but to fight back, as much as it pains me to say. The left already wants to genocide white christian males anyway. If a group wants you exterminated, it's OK to want to fight back.

Right wing terrorism is now on par with ISIS, according to the FBI. It's amazing what mountains of hatred, violence, and irrational, out of control behavior you can ignore from state sanctioned right wing terrorists in favor of OMG TEH EBIL DEMS. Astounding, really.

That is because they lowered the standard of what constitutes a hate crime. So of course the numbers will be inflated. A swastika spray painted on a random rock in a park could be considered a hate crime. No actual violence or harm done.

Do you have an example of a case of a swastika being painted on a random rock in a park being considered a hate crime or is this just another item plucked from your nether regions?

 

[ZiprHead]

If the left keeps acting out of control like they are, they will sadly most likely lose the war. The left hates guns so less of them own guns. A lot of feminine men with blue hair "soy boys" are on the left who don't believe in fighting so they will just be pushovers. The left is supposedly anti-war and peace and love. If it does come to war, the right will win. I do not want it to come to this but if the left keeps banning conservatives from speaking at colleges, and antifa keeps taunting and beating people, we will have no choice but to fight back, as much as it pains me to say. The left already wants to genocide white christian males anyway. If a group wants you exterminated, it's OK to want to fight back.

Right wing terrorism is now on par with ISIS, according to the FBI. It's amazing what mountains of hatred, violence, and irrational, out of control behavior you can ignore from state sanctioned right wing terrorists in favor of OMG TEH EBIL DEMS. Astounding, really.

When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

 

[Half-Life]

If the left keeps acting out of control like they are, they will sadly most likely lose the war. The left hates guns so less of them own guns. A lot of feminine men with blue hair "soy boys" are on the left who don't believe in fighting so they will just be pushovers. The left is supposedly anti-war and peace and love. If it does come to war, the right will win. I do not want it to come to this but if the left keeps banning conservatives from speaking at colleges, and antifa keeps taunting and beating people, we will have no choice but to fight back, as much as it pains me to say. The left already wants to genocide white christian males anyway. If a group wants you exterminated, it's OK to want to fight back.

Right wing terrorism is now on par with ISIS, according to the FBI. It's amazing what mountains of hatred, violence, and irrational, out of control behavior you can ignore from state sanctioned right wing terrorists in favor of OMG TEH EBIL DEMS. Astounding, really.

When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

It's actually leftists who do that. Trump did not win the popular vote, but he won the electoral vote fair and square. The leftists are screaming how unfair it is and want the electoral college abandoned. They will change their tune once their candidate wins by electoral vote and not popular vote.

Winning the popular vote just because you have more people in California doesn't mean anything. California doesn't get to decide the other states.

 

[ZiprHead]

When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

It's actually leftists who do that. Trump did not win the popular vote, but he won the electoral vote fair and square. The leftists are screaming how unfair it is and want the electoral college abandoned. They will change their tune once their candidate wins by electoral vote and not popular vote.

Winning the popular vote just because you have more people in California doesn't mean anything. California doesn't get to decide the other states.

Do you understand what the word democratic means? I don't think you do.

 

[Half-Life]

When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

It's actually leftists who do that. Trump did not win the popular vote, but he won the electoral vote fair and square. The leftists are screaming how unfair it is and want the electoral college abandoned. They will change their tune once their candidate wins by electoral vote and not popular vote.

Winning the popular vote just because you have more people in California doesn't mean anything. California doesn't get to decide the other states.

Do you understand what the word democratic means? I don't think you do.

Founding fathers put the electoral college in place because otherwise they knew the big states would only be focused on by the candidates and they would ignore the small states. The electoral college makes them campaign in the small swing states so everything is fair.

Deciding an election because the majority of California or Texas voted for a candidate isn't fair.

 

[ZiprHead]

Do you understand what the word democratic means? I don't think you do.

Founding fathers put the electoral college in place because otherwise they knew the big states would only be focused on by the candidates and they would ignore the small states. The electoral college makes them campaign in the small swing states so everything is fair.

Deciding an election because the majority of California or Texas voted for a candidate isn't fair.

States don't vote. People do.

And it doesn't change the fact that the electoral college system is undemocratic.

 

[Arctish]

Do you understand what the word democratic means? I don't think you do.

Founding fathers put the electoral college in place because otherwise they knew the big states would only be focused on by the candidates and they would ignore the small states. The electoral college makes them campaign in the small swing states so everything is fair.

Deciding an election because the majority of California or Texas voted for a candidate isn't fair.

States don't vote. People do.

And it doesn't change the fact that the electoral college system is undemocratic.

Also, candidates didn't campaign in states when the Constitution was written so Half-Life's assertion about why the Electoral College exists isn't even credible.

 

[Half-Life]

Do you understand what the word democratic means? I don't think you do.

Founding fathers put the electoral college in place because otherwise they knew the big states would only be focused on by the candidates and they would ignore the small states. The electoral college makes them campaign in the small swing states so everything is fair.

Deciding an election because the majority of California or Texas voted for a candidate isn't fair.

States don't vote. People do.

And it doesn't change the fact that the electoral college system is undemocratic.

Please try to understand me! Candidates would only focus on the big states because they have more people! Nobody would go campaign in the small states because they have a smaller number of people. But because each state has electoral votes, they have to go campaign there in order to try and win those small states. If it just went by popular vote, most candidates would just campaign in California, Texas, New York, etc.

 

[Arctish]

States don't vote. People do.

And it doesn't change the fact that the electoral college system is undemocratic.

Please try to understand me! Candidates would only focus on the big states because they have more people! Nobody would go campaign in the small states because they have a smaller number of people. But because each state has electoral votes, they have to go campaign there in order to try and win those small states. If it just went by popular vote, most candidates would just campaign in California, Texas, New York, etc.

Unless the small states banded together and pledged their Electoral College votes as a bloc, making themselves as important as Florida and forcing campaigns to pay attention to them.

 

[bilby]

States don't vote. People do.

And it doesn't change the fact that the electoral college system is undemocratic.

Please try to understand me! Candidates would only focus on the big states because they have more people! Nobody would go campaign in the small states because they have a smaller number of people. But because each state has electoral votes, they have to go campaign there in order to try and win those small states. If it just went by popular vote, most candidates would just campaign in California, Texas, New York, etc.

Whereas instead they just focus on the swing states, and the safely blue or red states get ignored.

Could you explain for us why it's better that a large number of states both large and small - and therefore a larger fraction of the total population - gets ignored, than it would be for a large number of low population states to be ignored?

Then you could go on to tell us why states matter at all to presidential candidates in the absence of the electoral college - why would a candidate care about state borders at all? The entire nation would compromise a single electoral division, and every person in it would be equally valuable to the presidential candidates. Which sounds suspiciously like representative democracy to me.

Perhaps your nation would be better off if presidents were not chosen only by voters in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Maybe residents of the other thirty eight states should be allowed to have their opinions considered?

 

[ZiprHead]

States don't vote. People do.

And it doesn't change the fact that the electoral college system is undemocratic.

Please try to understand me! Candidates would only focus on the big states because they have more people! Nobody would go campaign in the small states because they have a smaller number of people. But because each state has electoral votes, they have to go campaign there in order to try and win those small states. If it just went by popular vote, most candidates would just campaign in California, Texas, New York, etc.

Whereas instead they just focus on the swing states, and the safely blue or red states get ignored.

Could you explain for us why it's better that a large number of states both large and small - and therefore a larger fraction of the total population - gets ignored, than it would be for a large number of low population states to be ignored?

Then you could go on to tell us why states matter at all to presidential candidates in the absence of the electoral college - why would a candidate care about state borders at all? The entire nation would compromise a single electoral division, and every person in it would be equally valuable to the presidential candidates. Which sounds suspiciously like representative democracy to me.

Perhaps your nation would be better off if presidents were not chosen only by voters in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Maybe residents of the other thirty eight states should be allowed to have their opinions considered?

Not to mention deciding on a candidate because he visits your state or not is pretty shallow thinking.

 

[Harry Bosch]

States don't vote. People do.

And it doesn't change the fact that the electoral college system is undemocratic.

Please try to understand me! Candidates would only focus on the big states because they have more people! Nobody would go campaign in the small states because they have a smaller number of people. But because each state has electoral votes, they have to go campaign there in order to try and win those small states. If it just went by popular vote, most candidates would just campaign in California, Texas, New York, etc.

I've always wondered why this is such a big deal to people? Do you not have the internet or TV? Why can you only vote for a person who "campaigns" in your state? I never Obama. Loved the guy. Supported him. I met HRC and Bernie, didn't really like either one. But I voted for HRC. I don't get it...

 

[Loren Pechtel]

States don't vote. People do.

And it doesn't change the fact that the electoral college system is undemocratic.

Please try to understand me! Candidates would only focus on the big states because they have more people! Nobody would go campaign in the small states because they have a smaller number of people. But because each state has electoral votes, they have to go campaign there in order to try and win those small states. If it just went by popular vote, most candidates would just campaign in California, Texas, New York, etc.

And that's somehow a feature? I care about a candidate's positions, not where he visits.