Democrats are Willing To Provoke Riots To Win Elections

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by XXJefferson#51, Sep 9, 2022.

  1. jcarlilesiu

    jcarlilesiu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2010
    Messages:
    29,744
    Likes Received:
    11,918
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And still, the hypocritical left leans on January 6 while completely ignoring months of riots, looting, and violence.

    Until they are capable of rationally admiting that was wrong and driven by divisive democrats, every word about January 6 means absolutley nothing.
     
  2. Lucky1knows

    Lucky1knows Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2022
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You continue to use "words" to make your point but do not offer data to support it.

    The Democrats are not the ones that have tried to change the Constitution. Show me clear examples of your beliefs and use actual data and not just words.

    On the other side of the coin, the Republicans have:

    1) not been open for compromise (which the Constitution is all about)
    2) refused oversight by the House of Representatives (checks and balances in the Constitution)
    3) interfered in Department of Justice investigations (not permitted in the Constitution)
    4) abusing power in several ways, including appointment powers (was impeached for violating the Constitution)
    5) ignored the emoluments clauses in the Constitution

    there are more things on this list which can be found at this link:

    An Exit Survey of Trump’s Constitutional Misdeeds

    It is now your turn to be a debater and show proof of your words. Believing something as you do is meaningless if you cannot prove your beliefs.
     
  3. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    54,793
    Likes Received:
    26,712
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Finding ways to shrink the size and power of the necessary evil seems like the best course of action to me.
    Of course the Communists felt the same way -- easier to talk than do. ;-)
     
  4. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    54,793
    Likes Received:
    26,712
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Shall not be infringed".
     
  5. Lucky1knows

    Lucky1knows Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2022
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Shrink the size and power? Who decides what is the right size and power, the rich? the egotists? the capitalists? or the citizens (based on majority vote)?

    BTW and as a side issue, this goes to prove that the Democrats (who do want a bigger government) are not corrupt and have the best intentions for the nation given that more people in government means less corruption and more distribution of benefits to the population.
     
  6. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    15,318
    Likes Received:
    4,958
    Trophy Points:
    113
    On what basis are you concluding that more people in government means less corruption? Do you have anything you can provide to support this conclusion?
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2022
    Ddyad likes this.
  7. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    54,793
    Likes Received:
    26,712
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The people should decide, but that requires free and fair elections.

    But for systemic institutional racism election rigging and voter suppression the DP could not exist as a viable political party. It has always been by far the most dangerous political institution in the US where there is stiff competition.
     
  8. wist43

    wist43 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,285
    Likes Received:
    1,313
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I will reply to this post instead of your other reply because of your call for "distribution of benefits" - which on the Federal level is wholly unconstitutional.

    And therein is the reason we can't "debate" the subject, we view government and the Constitution from two diametrically opposed positions.

    I view the Constitution as our Founders intended it, i.e. a negative government, which is empowered only with the specifically enumerated powers. If the Constitution does not specifically grant the Federal Government the power to do something, such as "distribute benefits", then the FedGov has no legal authority to expend funds or legislate on the topic.

    You on the other hand, erroneously believe the FedGov can do anything as long as the people want it - that is not how a republic works.

    We are not a democracy.

    As for "checks and balances", that ship sailed many decades ago when, in 1909 the 16th Amendment was passed, and in 1913 when the 17th Amendment was passed.

    The 17th Amendment especially, was one of the most damaging things ever done to the Constitution, and a direct attack upon the liberty of the people.

    Both of these damaging, unamerican legal attacks were carried out by The Money Trust.

    The Money Trust as they were known then, or Robber Barons as they were also known,
    had been trying to undermine the Constitution for over 100 years by that time. By the 1930's they were able to rewrite the Constitution from the bench of the Supreme Court, and our fate was sealed.

    All of this is well known by students of the subjects; but the average bloke, like yourself, is completely in the dark.

    Since you don't understand these things, and you don't understand the restrictive nature of the Constitution itself, you are an easy mark for manipulation.

    Your worldview is grounded in authoritarianism, mine is grounded in republicanism and the rule of law, i.e. liberty.

    There's nothing to debate because you don't understand the subject matter.
     
    mngam and Ddyad like this.
  9. Lucky1knows

    Lucky1knows Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2022
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Common sense

    Corruption means people working to accomplish a mutual goal but that is normally a low number for the simple reason that the more people involved in the corruption the more of a chance of it being found out and reported.

    It is like the supposed fraudulent election. I have clearly stated that to get a big fraudulent election done requires tens of thousands of people working together to accomplish it. We are not talking about 1 ballot box, 1 district or even 1 state. When you have tens of thousands of people need to generate a fraudulent election, you will always find some that will blab about it and with proof. No such proof has been given.

    The same thing applies with Corruption. The Mafia is a perfect example...............few people involved. If more than a few get involved, one always squeals and the Mafia disposes of him. Corruption needs to be kept quiet and small.
     
  10. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    54,793
    Likes Received:
    26,712
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Inconvenient Truth: America has always been notorious for vote fraud, voter suppression and and election rigging. The DP even rigs its own primaries, and could not exist as a party without rigging elections.
     
  11. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    15,318
    Likes Received:
    4,958
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Common sense"?...In other words, NO, you do NOT have anything of substance with which to back up your assertion that more people in government equates to less corruption.

    You use the mafia as your example. The mafia is a quintessential example of corruption. The entire reason for their existence is in fact corruption and as such it is a very poor choice for what you are trying to prove, but I will be happy to refute it. The mafia does not magically become less corrupt because its numbers get larger. When the mafia gets larger, despite your assertion, it spreads more corruption rather than less. Your own example refutes your entire premise.

    The more people that are in the mafia, the more mayhem that they will create. THAT, is common sense. To imply the opposite is to abandon any semblance of "common sense".
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2022
    Ddyad likes this.
  12. Lucky1knows

    Lucky1knows Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2022
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I will "admit" that I know very little about the definitions of what makes the Constitution. I am not a student of it and therefore my opinion can be easily proven to be inaccurate (as you have effectively done).

    Nonetheless, let me state unequivocally that I NEVER have allowed myself to be steered in one direction by the media or by people with their political views.

    I am truly an independent. In fact, the truth is that I never voted until 2020 and I am 77 years old. Politics was never a key issue with me.

    What has always been an issue with me, since my childhood, is a search for knowledge, for fact, for data and more importantly for common sense (what works and does not work). My basis for it all is that I believe morals, ethics, principles and humanity should be the golden rule and everything else needs to fall below that. In fact, one of the reasons I never voted before is that every single candidate that was nominee for the presidency (since I could vote some 55 years ago), had at least 1 of the 4 items I mentioned. If at least one of the 4 items is found in a person, that person will not be capable of making the kind of damage to the nation that is lasting and destructive. Yes, some presidents will be better than others and worse than others but in the end it will all work out.

    BTW, the reason for my belief in this is that I was a student of Zen Buddhism when I was young and one of the principles of Zen Buddhism is the idea that "it will change. When things are going great, they will get bad at some point and when things are bad, they will get great at some point" so there was never a diving force reason to vote as no one president was going to cause changes that would ultimately destroy the nation. With Trump, that changed as he has none of the 4. In addition, he is incompetent.

    Getting back to the topic at hand, I may not know totally what the Constitution is supposed to be though I do know that it was intended so that the bad could be controlled and the good stimulated. As such, I base my beliefs on that.

    All types of governments can be good if the right factors are there. For example, an Anarchy can be good if the person at the stop has morals, ethics, principles and Humanity. Even Socialism can be good, such as is seen in Norway, Finland, Denmark, New Zealand and other nations such as that which have developed Democratic Socialism.

    Therefore, I am not anywhere near what you state that I am. I have a high IQ, I care about others, and have done extensive reading all my life. I give the benefit of the doubt to everything at first, but I totally research the topic so that I can determine where it fails to be faithful to its principles.

    In addition and on a side note, I am a stock market analyst and have been one for 47 years. I worked for the two biggest companies in the 80's and was put in a high position of being an official analyst for the Southeast with one of those companies. I mention this because I have been quite successful in the market consistently and a dumb or blind person can never say that. Yes, a dump person can hit the lottery and become rich but to do that every year for 47 years and be a trader (not a buy and hold investor) requires extensive amount of knowledge and "common sense" to accomplish that.

    I would be more careful in making such assumptions with so little knowledge of who I am, what I know, and how my mind thinks.
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2022
  13. bobobrazil

    bobobrazil Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2022
    Messages:
    1,672
    Likes Received:
    893
    Trophy Points:
    113
    fascism always has a loud mouthed leader who demands loyalty, rightys always point to the low turnout of Biden speech's and non-rally's without realizing they are simultaneously saying he is not a fascist, and just look at the trump "supporters" fall all over themselves defending chief trumpo
     
  14. Lucky1knows

    Lucky1knows Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2022
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, there has always been voter fraud but never in a conspiracy kind of way. It has basically been on an individual (or a few people getting together) way. Every year some voter fraud has been found but it has never been in the kind of numbers that could change an election. Nothing in life is ever perfect.

    When you are talking about a difference of 7 million votes, you are talking about an impossibility of it happening with voter fraud.

    In addition and as I have always stated, the chances of their being a conspiracy type of fraud occurring, it would most likely be in benefit of the Republicans than in benefit of the Democrats. The Republicans have clearly shown over and over again that they try to control the story. It is they that support corruption, who refuse to seek the truth (it is all fake news according to the Republicans). It is they that want a smaller government and for those at the top to be in charge. It is much more likely for them to look to do voter fraud to accomplish their goals than the Democrats. The Democrats are the ones that are trying to win using the majority of votes to do so and that is totally against the possibility of there being massive voter fraud...............and by the way, aren't the Republicans that constantly accuse the left of being dumb? How can a dumb person be so competent as to be able to make such an accomplishment as rigging an election. That is an oxymoron.
     
    bobobrazil likes this.
  15. wist43

    wist43 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,285
    Likes Received:
    1,313
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lucky, the problem is you don't understand liberty. It has nothing to do with intelligence - it has to do with having put in the necessary time to study the subject.

    You surmise it is common sense to grow the government which is the complete opposite of what the Constitution intends. The Constitution was designed to protect, We The People, from government itself by constraining it and ensuring it remained small.

    Americanism and freedom are based on severely restricting the power of government.

    It doesn't matter what you believe or what your worldview is, as long as you can agree on the one unique thing about America that makes us free and sets us apart from other countries - and that is that neither you, nor I, nor anyone else has the right to wield the power of government against anyone else.

    But you don't agree with that - which means we have a problem.

    I understand that you want to use the power of government to help people, but in order to do that you have to empower the government to take from someone else. It becomes a very slippery slope from there.

    That enticing, altruistic carrot is predictably being used by the unscrupulous and corrupt to open up the government vaults and loot to their hearts content. We're being bankrupted - deliberately so.

    The bottom line is that your positions are at odds with our Founding Fathers and the Constitution they designed to protect us from the corrupt political class that is a reality in every society.
     
  16. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    24,895
    Likes Received:
    9,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    "Well regulated militia"
     
  17. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    24,895
    Likes Received:
    9,279
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ah nope, sorry.
     
  18. Lucky1knows

    Lucky1knows Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2022
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I disagree with your evaluation of what I am doing and I also disagree with the Constitution on this. You say "We the people" and that is exactly what I am saying. The Democrats generally represent "We the people" as there is no one at the top of the Democrats (like Trump) that say "I am the one that calls the shots" . In Congress, the will of the people (by voting) is what should be what happens and yet what is happening is that someone like McConnell says "I will decide what gets voted on or not". This is not what the Constitution was intended to do..........have one person decide what happens to all of us. The Constitution has something called "Checks and Balances" and it is the Republicans that have worked to destroy that and give power to the elite.

    You key on the Constitution saying "small government is what we need" and in a small way I do agree, BUT when we are given two bad choices (big government for the people or small government for the few), the choice is clear. Big government is better. The Constitution did not address this issue under these conditions.

    What the right is not doing is making the choice that helps the nation the most.

    In addition, the Constitution was written at a time where the world did not have social media. Social media has made one part of the Constitution obsolete and that is the separation of States with each State having the power to decide for themselves. The world is now mostly one nation because of social media. This is no longer a country where there are different thoughts in different states. It has become one thought everywhere. What the right is trying to do is turn the UNITED States into the disunited States with 52 different nations. That is not what the Constitution was intending to do. The Civil War (which occurred after the Constitution was written) made that perfectly clear. World War 2 made it perfectly clear that we are one nation and not 52 divided nations.

    As such and in this respect, the Constitution needs to change.

    It also needs to be included in the conversation that economically the Democrats (which represent big government) have actually been better for the nation than the Republicans and economics as it is today is not anything like what was seen when the Constitution was written. Economics is a basis for life these days. It wasn't so when the Constitution was written.

    Economists Agree: Democratic Presidents are Better at Making Us Rich. Eight Reasons Why.

    So Wist, you seem to be a rational person. Debate the points I made using common sense and show me where I am wrong.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2022
  19. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    158,628
    Likes Received:
    68,292
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "'This year US online sales will rise just 9.4% to $1 trillion, the first time growth has slipped into the single digits.'"

    yet republicans whine the people have too much money?

    which is it, inflation is caused by a supply issue due to covid, or people having too much money? make up your minds....
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2022
  20. ToddWB

    ToddWB Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,770
    Likes Received:
    6,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Democrats cannot afford to lose. They have to cover up their corruption at all cost or they could be going to prison. They cannot allow people to uncover anymore of their corruption. Not only will they continue to steal elections, but they will murder whoever they can’t throw in Shayla.
     
  21. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,980
    Likes Received:
    19,967
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Have you ever seen light run through a prism? A rainbow of color emerges. That rainbow is the range of our color spectrum.

    It exists, it can't be changed, it just is. Similarity, there is a range on both sides of the political spectrum. In the political spectrum, there are really only two colors, blue and red, though there are many shades of each. In some countries, both sides of those two basic colors are chopped up in to several groups, and in their parliaments, no one ever gets more than 50%, or anything close to it, in any vote, ever.

    Just as there are shades of Blue, and shades of Red, from dark to light, it makes more sense to coagulate the sides, the various groups of similar color, regardless of hue, so that a stronger group, the sum of a larger total, emerges. IN fact, the two party system makes more sense. Adding more groups only dilutes the side on which any group will inevitably find itself. Is not the Green Part left of the DNC? Why siphon votes from the DNC? They should disband and join the DNC that way they'd have a better chance at influencing their side of the spectrum because apart they have no chance, ever, fo forward their agenda as a stand alone party. Same for the Libertarian party and the GOP (which is now a tangled mess due to Trumpism). There are really only two sides of the political spectrum, from left to right. More parties just chops up, and thereby dilutes the strength of, their respective sides of the spectrum. In this fashion, the American bicameral system is vastly superior to the English Commonwealth parliamentary system because the American Bicameral system rewards coagulation on each side of the spectrum, which is why the DNC and the GOP are dominant. There never will be a strong third party, the bicameral system doesn't allow it to emerge because it dilutes strength of whatever side it will inevitably find itself on, and it will find itself on one of the sides, or if it truly is a centrist party, it will dilute both. Ross Perot tried a centrist approach, though, in my view, he was left of center, and because of that, siphoned votes from Clinton more than the other side.

    Those who argue 'there should be a new party' forget that this has been tried many times. The Libertarian Party, and the Green Party, and a few others hardly worth mentioning, formed out of this idea 'there should be a new party', and none still haven't gained much traction in the last 50 years, though they flounder on.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2022
  22. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,980
    Likes Received:
    19,967
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Inflation is the ultimate result of fiat currency issues (the result of a few different levers, one of which is the discount rate) by the Fed Reserve resulting in money supply expansion faster than the GDP can absorb it, creating a condition where too much money is chasing too few goods. What inspires the fed to issue them, AKA 'quantitative easing' varies. In the last couple of years, it was the pandemic.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2022
  23. Lucky1knows

    Lucky1knows Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2022
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is very "convenient" for the right to blame Biden for this situation for political gain but the reality is that blaming Biden is pure BS.

    If inflation was only a U.S. problem, I would agree with you. Nonetheless, the truth is that it is a world-wide problem and we here (in the U.S.) seem to have inflation lower than most anywhere else in the world, meaning that we should actually be giving Biden credit and not blame.

    Then again, the right is blind-by-choice and do not care for the truth when it doesn't support their fake news narratives. Simply stated, the right is a group of con men trying to get their way and not a group of people trying to do what is right for the nation.

    Is U.S. inflation higher than other countries?

    Looking at the most recent monthly inflation numbers, more than a dozen OECD members had a higher inflation rate than the United States' 8.6%. These were predominantly Baltic and Eastern European nations, which have been hit especially hard by the consequences of Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

    U.S. inflation rate is in the middle of the pack globally
     
    Patricio Da Silva likes this.
  24. Lucky1knows

    Lucky1knows Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2022
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    570
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You are offering Pure and Unadulterated BS!
     
  25. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    54,793
    Likes Received:
    26,712
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Republicans who accuse the left of being dumb are why the RP is called The Stupid Party. ;-)

    Election rigging has always been the organized and carried out by our ruling political class. It is very anti-democratic.

    DURING ITS SUMMER meeting over the weekend, the Democratic National Committee quietly amended its bylaws, giving the narrower body power to override decisions made by its members at its quadrennial convention.

    The national committee approved language requiring that it must ratify any bylaw amendments that the convention, a broader body, wants to adopt. “No such Bylaw or amendment shall be effective unless and until it is subsequently ratified by a vote of the majority of the entire membership of the Democratic National Committee,” the amended measure from the Rules and Bylaws Committee states.

    “These decisions are made to move ultimate power from the members of the convention into the hands of the committee, and that can become a dangerous precedent,” Nevada Democratic Party Chair Judith Whitmer told The Intercept. “These seem to us as increasingly anti-democratic decisions. And it brought a lot of outrage from progressives and moderates alike.”

    The amendment removes the authority over DNC decisions from the national convention, which includes thousands of members, and places it instead with the smaller national committee of just under 500. According to three people present, several DNC members were frustrated with the change.”
    THE INTERCEPT, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE EDITED BYLAWS TO LET IT OVERRULE CONVENTION,
    The new language requires the smaller committee to ratify any changes that its broader membership at the national convention wants to adopt., By Akela Lacy, September 14 2022.
    https://theintercept.com/2022/09/14/dnc-overrule-convention-bylaws/
     
    XXJefferson#51 and ButterBalls like this.

Share This Page