Post SOTU Opinions Here

1) I don't have a party. None of them represent my interests.
2) The Republican Party, at this point in time, is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party.
3) Election fraud is not an election.

What "calm smile"? Every time I see clips of the guy, he is shouting about how much he hates me (well, the words that can be comprehended, of course).

There's nothing humiliating about being a victim of election fraud.

Biden IS senile. It is a self evident truth. Just watch any extended speaking event of his (media pressers, SOTU address, campaign speech, etc.)

No, because it doesn't do any of that. Rather, it shows that I am both a thinking person and an honest person.

Darn, you caught me. Yup, my posts are all just copy/pasted straight from the Kremlin. I love Vladimir Putin and I hope that he "rigs our 2024 election" just as he "rigged our 2016 election". I also hope that Putin causes gas prices to skyrocket once again even though Biden is somehow considered by liberals to be incapable of causing gas prices to skyrocket because, according to liberals, "Presidents have no control over gas prices", except for Putin of course. He, as a President, is somehow supposedly capable of causing gas prices to skyrocket, even though leftists claim that it's "not possible".

 

Trump also uses cheap insults. Perhaps you admire him to emulate him as you do. I don't blame people for voting against Biden.

 

He mentioned trump throught the whole campaign speech. His overall approval rating is very low. As an independent that voted against trump twice, I could never vote for biden because of his border, gun, and tax policies. Living in CA, I can see the damage caused by the Dems firsthand.

 

I am not dodging that. It was part of the bill.
Not a problem with that.

Border apphrensions are highest in history. So no, it was not secured better. Not even by the failed 2x impeached incumbent loser.

...

US border apprehensions (usafacts.org)

 

I insulted no one. Unless you felt insulted. Why you would, I don't know.

 

You attempted to insult those with opposing beliefs.

 

Again, where's your proof? If you want credibility, show your sources and prove your claims.

And please try to lose the attitude. I've been civil with you, so stop insulting me.

 

You claimed that Biden was pushing independents towards Trump. As an independent voter, I think it was the other way around. I found myself kinda liking Darth Brandon. My favorite moment in the speech is when he had the cajones to get pointy with the Supreme Court. They deserved a little public scolding, IMO.

 

As a left-leaning independent, he exempted him and the party from my vote with his attack on my second amendment rights and his promise to take more money from tax payers. Your "cajonies" remark is sexist.

 

LOL. NOPE.

I am an independent. I did not insult myself or anyone. Unless you yourself felt insulted for no reason.

 

So if an independent has no brains if they don’t agree with you?

 

Is that what you think? I don't.

 

And that's what the polls show.

Hence the Trump cult hysterics.

 

And yet you faithfully parrot every single RepubliRussian conspiracy theory.

Just be honest. Your "independent" song and dance fools nobody.

See? No matter how insane the conspiracy theory is, no matter how crazy it makes you sound, you still parrot it.

That's some serious devotion to DerParteiRepublikkan and MotherRussia.

 

Can you clarify what you mean by:

“Not any independents with an ounce or bigger brain.”

 

Sexist it may be, but it is common vernacular readily understood. First rule of communicating: know your audience.

Do you need bumper stocks? Or assault rifles? How much do you think would be too much in the eyes of the men who wrote the 2nd Amendment? They didn't have such weapons and likely could not imagine how that Amendment would be used to excuse today's mass shootings.

2nd or no, something must change and some weapons are too much. Are we allowed to have RPGs? Grenades and launchers? Does the 2nd include the right to use mines in our yards as a deterrent to burglars?

Just how far does one poorly, ambiguously written law go before we realize we've outgrown it and need to update it? Yes, we should be allowed to own weapons for hunting, recreation, and defense. Not to mention that one big difference between us and countries that have fallen to authoritarian regimes, like Hungary, is that the citizenry here are armed. I find that comforting.

 

Why do YOU get to determine what I need? Shouldn't that be up to ME?

Why should YOU (or anyone else) get to determine what is "too much"? Shouldn't that be up to ME?

Irrelevant.

The only people today who are excusing homicide (including mass shootings) are liberals (but only whenever the perp is a black person and/or the victim is a white person). Because, you know, "diversity, equity, inclusion", "diversity is our strength", etc etc

Nothing must change and nothing is "too much".

Yes.

Yes.

Technically yes, but mines wouldn't work for most yards (as they are located too close to neighboring yards) and mines would be too damaging to the area around them (so not a very practical option).

There's nothing poor or ambiguous about it.

So why are you advocating for taking that comfort away from yourself?

 

Wow. ^^^This^^^ speaks for itself.

 

Can you tell me what an assault rifle is?
Do you know how a bump stock works?

 

Where did I advocate taking anything away? I have a handgun. Unless I lived rural, or wanted to go hunting, or a recreational shooting such as skeet shooting (which is fun!), that's adequate.

The problem with it being "up to ME" is that your statement applies to far too many nut jobs who are eager to prove what mighty men they are by gun-waving and hopefully getting to shoot someone someday. I'm talking about men with poor emotional impulse control, a type with which I'm all too familiar. Combine deep insecurity with testosterone and alcohol, stir well, then add gunpowder. What could possibly go wrong, eh?

I think that we are easy to kill, and gun laws should exist to counter that as much as possible. But hey, that's just me.

Your claim that liberals are excusing homicide is ridiculous, but I think you know that.

 

Yes, and yes. Don't flame bait me, please, and don't try arguing the semantics of the word "assault." That would be petty.

 

Asking if you have working knowledge on a subject is not flame baiting. A politician says "I will ban assault weapons" and people cheer. I have yet to hear a supporter of such bans define what an "assault weapon" is. I asked you and you dodged. Are you able to tell me the difference between an AR15 and an ordinary ranch rifle? I am not talking semantics; I am talking about functionality.

 

The post that I responded to.

Great, but then don't tell other people who feel that a handgun isn't adequate that they somehow "don't need" anything more than a handgun.

Fear mongering.

Gun laws don't stop homicides. They just take away rights from law abiding citizens (and make it harder for them to defend themselves from criminals).

No, it's the truth. Look at all the reduced charges that black criminals get just because they're black. For example, committing homicides but only being charged for "assault".

 

He asked very sensible questions.

 

It means virtually no independents believe it