Politically motivated violence thread

[bwframe]

There is only one vote for gun rights. Anything else is aiding the ememy.

 

[jamil]

I am not wanting to have a long argument with you, I cannot keep up with you.

I am not a one issue voter.

The Democrats, Socialists and Communists/Progressives are diametrically opposed to nearly everything I believe in.

There is only one other viable party, there is only one President (not HILLARY) and there is only one viable gun rights organization.

I refuse to waste time and possibly turn people against MY side.

I wasn't arguing. You asked me a question. I took the question at face value and answered. I don't think we're all that far apart on issues. I am not a one issue voter either. I'm also not a group-loyal voter. I owe Republicans nor Trump any loyalty. But, if one of those socialist/communist/progressive democrats diametrically opposed to nearly everything I believe in is the only alternative, I'll pick the least evil.

 

[jamil]

There is only one vote for gun rights. Anything else is aiding the ememy.

It doesn't appear from things you've posted that exactly who is the enemy is all that clear. Seems to be most apparent, that anyone who disagrees with Trump, or is not sufficiently loyal to whatever group you think you belong to, is the enemy. If my perception is inaccurate, I'd love to be wrong about that.

 

[2A_Tom]

What I meant was we sometimes get into a long conversation and I am a hunt and peck typist and it gets difficult foe me.

 

[2A_Tom]

It doesn't appear from things you've posted that exactly who is the enemy is all that clear. Seems to be most apparent, that anyone who disagrees with Trump, or is not sufficiently loyal to whatever group you think you belong to, is the enemy. If my perception is inaccurate, I'd love to be wrong about that.

My biggest issue is along the lines of the old saying, "Don't throw out the baby with the bath water!" Which I take to mean that Yes the guy in office has done/said some stupid things and is not a true conscientious conservative, but he is all we have at present.

It seems that some would like to see him primaried, which would likely guarantee us a Democrat President in 2000.

US pointing out every foible and beating it to death will turn people against him and possibly give us a Democrat President in 2000.

 

[bwframe]

Some are happy to poison the good on the foolish belief that they'll get their perfect.

 

[jamil]

It sounds like the family that is married in the little Church, gets counseling for years, and loves the pastor for 20 years or so, until he preaches one sermon they don't like and they leave the Church.

Well. Maybe that's a difference which explains why I've come to this place where I think it's better not to be loyal to sides, but rather to be loyal to family, friends, and issues important to me. I'm really not a church person. You grow up in a church (I did) and you become part of the congregation, it's kinda like an extended family. And I guess you could get to the point where it may be very difficult to conceptualize what I'm talking about. When I talk about sides, I don't think we're seeing the words the same way. It's not easy to explain exactly what I mean by sides are retarded.

I'd say if I'm fiercely loyal to anything it would be the principles I value most. I am an individualist foremost. Which might be why I'm just not a group person. Doesn't mean I'm anti-social. I'm just talking more about political/ideological groups.

BTW, I did leave the church. But it had nothing to do with any specific sermon. It wasn't any one thing. There was no bad blood. No one did me wrong. No animosity. I didn't walk away. I drifted away. It was more like a journey towards concepts which made more sense to me.

 

[jamil]

Some are happy to poison the good on the foolish belief that they'll get their perfect.

Who would that "some" be? You got screen names? I'd like to talk to them about that. Find out what's really going on. It's not that perfection isn't something worth striving for. It's just an unobtainable goal. And for the perfectionists I've come into contact with personally, it's been my experience that they're often unhappy. If you're hung up on perfection, you're in for a disappointing life.

Or. Maybe that's not what you were talking about.

 

[jamil]

My biggest issue is along the lines of the old saying, "Don't throw out the baby with the bath water!" Which I take to mean that Yes the guy in office has done/said some stupid things and is not a true conscientious conservative, but he is all we have at present.

It seems that some would like to see him primaried, which would likely guarantee us a Democrat President in 2000.

US pointing out every foible and beating it to death will turn people against him and possibly give us a Democrat President in 2000.

Who's doing that? When the dude acts like he has some sense, I say he makes sense. When he acts like he's dumb as a bag of ****. I say he's dumb as a bag of ****. Focused loyalty is on issues and behavior. Not on him.

Now, I wouldn't mind seeing Trump primaried actually. If there were someone better, why not go with the better someone? And if someone did try to primary Turmp, who is more loyal to the principles I value, I'd be good with that. You know, someone who doesn't have the character to brag about grabbing women by the *****. Maybe someone who is more loyal to the 2A, that they wouldn't try to redefine a plastic novelty add-on as a machine gun. Or that they're actually pretty good at political deal making that they don't have to resort to exploiting emergency powers to do what he couldn't make a deal with congress to do.

I don't owe any loyalty to Trump. And don't get me wrong about loyalty. I'm not opposed to loyalty per se. But when it gets in the way of judgement, to the point where you get angry with people because they dare to criticize the person you're loyal to, I think it's really gone too far. And I'm not talking about friends or family. We get to get mad when someone attacks or insults friends or family. I mean, that kind of loyalty is just part of being human, and I'd say it's an important part of what made Humans successful. It's just better to override the loyalty when it comes to politicians.

 

[KG1]

The way I look at voting is for candidates to submit to me thier proposals and I’ll chose the one that comes closest to the position that I’m looking to fill.

So far I’ve not heard anything from the left that comes close. They will never get my vote as long as they continue down the current trending path so that’s what keeps me leaning Republican.

They are by no means perfect but so far they are staying several steps ahead of the alternative IMO.

 

[jamil]

The way I look at voting is for candidates to submit to me thier proposals and I’ll chose the one that comes closest to the position that I’m looking to fill.

So far I’ve not heard anything from the left that comes close. They will never get my vote as long as they continue down the current trending path so that’s what keeps me leaning Republican.

They are by no means perfect but so far they are staying several steps ahead of the alternative IMO.

Exactly. I'm not loyal to Republicans but I generally have to look to them because the Democrats are kinda crazy. And they're getting crazier. Soon they'll all be AOC crazy, which means AOC will have progressed to uber crazy.

Seeing democrats laugh the only sane democrat off the stage last primary season told me right then that there's a cancer growing in the DNC which has metastasized and infected all the organs.

 

[2A_Tom]

Who's doing that? When the dude acts like he has some sense, I say he makes sense. When he acts like he's dumb as a bag of ****. I say he's dumb as a bag of ****. Focused loyalty is on issues and behavior. Not on him.

Now, I wouldn't mind seeing Trump primaried actually. If there were someone better, why not go with the better someone? And if someone did try to primary Turmp, who is more loyal to the principles I value, I'd be good with that. You know, someone who doesn't have the character to brag about grabbing women by the *****. Maybe someone who is more loyal to the 2A, that they wouldn't try to redefine a plastic novelty add-on as a machine gun. Or that they're actually pretty good at political deal making that they don't have to resort to exploiting emergency powers to do what he couldn't make a deal with congress to do.

I don't owe any loyalty to Trump. And don't get me wrong about loyalty. I'm not opposed to loyalty per se. But when it gets in the way of judgement, to the point where you get angry with people because they dare to criticize the person you're loyal to, I think it's really gone too far. And I'm not talking about friends or family. We get to get mad when someone attacks or insults friends or family. I mean, that kind of loyalty is just part of being human, and I'd say it's an important part of what made Humans successful. It's just better to override the loyalty when it comes to politicians.

That is exactly what I am talking about.

We will either get Donald Trump or Camala Harris in 2000.

If Trump is primaried we will get Camala Harris.

I used Camalla Harris as any Democrat, Sosialist or Communist/Progressive.

 

[2A_Tom]

Seeing democrats laugh the only sane democrat off the stage last primary season told me right then that there's a cancer growing in the DNC which has metastasized and infected all the organs.

Who?

 

[jamil]

Who?

Jim Webb. I'm not saying if he were the democratic nominee that I'd have voted for him. But he was the only sane democrat in the 2016 primary. And they booed and laughed him off the stage pretty much. He just wasn't woke enough to be on stage with the other Democrats.

 

[jamil]

That is exactly what I am talking about.

We will either get Donald Trump or Camala Harris in 2000.

If Trump is primaried we will get Camala Harris.

I used Camalla Harris as any Democrat, Sosialist or Communist/Progressive.

Nonsense. Vote for the challenger.

 

[mmpsteve]

Jamil, I get where you're coming from; have for some time. We (all of us) argue a lot here on INGO, but we're not that far apart, and you bring a lot of good points. To boil down one thing you argue against, I'll say this: the progressives will not stop, ever; they'll continue, at all costs, to push their agenda, forever ;.... I get it, your point about the Presidential over-reach. The problem is, conservatives have been so downtrodden for so long, with no hope in sight, that we're essentially colorblind to any dangers involved when we see progress on 'our' front. Call it tribalism if you like, but I prefer to think of it as existensialism (sp), and/or pragmatism. We cannot continue on the course we're going, socially, politically, economically, if we wish to survive; physically, nationally, or any other 'nally. So we take some risks because it's all the hope we have left. I'm not condoning it, but we're getting close to critical mass, and people do what they have to, to survive. Best regards,

Steve

.

 

[2A_Tom]

Trump won, because the Democrats and the Media thought he could never win. They pushed him through the primary and gave him all the free air time he could handle.

When he became the candidate they tried to run him down, but could not stop the monster they had created. He fought back whereas any other Republican would have apologized them-self into defeat.

Hillary was sick and or thought she was in a cake walk or both and did not fight a vigorous campaign.

Trump will fight back in 2020. any other candidate hasn't got a chance in the current atmosphere.

Your tack seems to be that you can trash Trump all the way up to election day and hold your nose and vote for him. It matters not how many you influence to vote for anyone but him in the mean time.

 

[jamil]

Trump won, because the Democrats and the Media thought he could never win. They pushed him through the primary and gave him all the free air time he could handle.

When he became the candidate they tried to run him down, but could not stop the monster they had created. He fought back whereas any other Republican would have apologized them-self into defeat.

Hillary was sick and or thought she was in a cake walk or both and did not fight a vigorous campaign.

Trump will fight back in 2020. any other candidate hasn't got a chance in the current atmosphere.

Your tack seems to be that you can trash Trump all the way up to election day and hold your nose and vote for him. It matters not how many you influence to vote for anyone but him in the mean time.

It's not my goal to influence people not to vote for Trump. It's to say what's true and what's not true about the issues. It's like I said, I'm going to say when I think Trump does a good job and I'm going to say when I think he's full of ****. There are many issues on which he's done a good job. Then there are the areas where his authoritarian streak is just over the top, which needs to be criticized.

 

[Leadeye]

President Trump won the election because he spoke to a large group of people in this country who felt left behind, many of whom would have been traditional democrat voters. He'll get elected again unless the DNC can figure out howto plug that hole, because as long those people perceive him as being in their corner, they'll be out voting for him, bringing in states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

 

[KG1]

Jim Webb. I'm not saying if he were the democratic nominee that I'd have voted for him. But he was the only sane democrat in the 2016 primary. And they booed and laughed him off the stage pretty much. He just wasn't woke enough to be on stage with the other Democrats.

I knew exactly who you were referring to. Webb was the only Democrat that I did'nt discount entirely.