destruction of america

[datzenmike]

Damn I've said that about the GOP. Lose with Trump regroup and hit it in '28.

[tr8er]

Trump will lose the popular vote for certain.  I do expect he will attempt to steal, or rather the party will attempt to steal the election through the House.  They have enough measures in place to withhold certification in many states.  Johnson will not swear in the newly elected House members after the election in order to maintain a majority.  That will be your first indication.  Voter fraud will be lauded from ever conservative mouth available.  Supreme court will refrain from involvement.  The end result will be a house vote for president.  House will either vote on party lines awarding Trump the presidency, or they will stand against the effort which I doubt because they will literally fear for their families safety.  There is basically zero doubt that the groundwork has been planned out and is organized for this outcome.  Half the country will actually believe the election was stolen.  With all of the elections globally being questioned, it wont be far fetched at all.  I will be ugly.  The worst case scenario is that the executive mobilizes the military, and the republicans wet dream of an armed civil war breaks ground.  I wonder which nations would come to help the fighting build.  

[frankendat]

15 hours ago, IZRL said:

 

 if you know who to talk to.

Therein lies the rub. Most people wouldn't know who to talk to, which goes back to my earlier post, if I started going to the right parties again and associating with the right people to get an introduction "a friend of a friend" then deals might be made. But Joe America decides he needs him a "disposable" "non registered" firearm and goes cruising the Arizona Walmart parking lots and asking around, he has a much better chance of being arrested, robbed, told to go fuck himself, or killed, then acquiring the firearm. Now Joe America might meet the right person and get one, but he is risking multiple mandatory time Federal crimes not to mention his life, even if he is successful, I doubt he would say it was "easy". 

If there are places, like the old Silkroad, where it is a bazaar of weapons and anything else, just walk in and put your money down, please educate, but it still appears that the "anybody can get a gun easily in the United States" is an anti gun rhetoric used to promote universal background checks, a national firearms database, gun registration, gun confiscation and force gun relinquishment.

I haven't smoked weed since the late 1980's, anymore I only know one or two that still do. Weed is illegal in Idaho, people are busted for it all the time. I am confident, that if went out tonight, to places where no one knows me and chilled, I could find some weed to buy. If it was a Friday or Saturday night, then I would lay money on it. illegal weed is easy to get. Like I said, I don't even know someone who has heard of someone that could be selling hot guns.

Final thought on hot guns and this one is a question, but I think I know the answer. There have been a couple cop dramas in recent years where the "so many firearms easy to get" theme has been played, but they added a new layer. Both television shows (fictional) promoted that illegal firearms were not only easy to get, they were also much cheaper than legally obtained firearms. I think that is more media bullshit, but, as I keep saying, I have never encountered a stolen gun salesman. I would think a gun not traceable to you would command a higher price point than one trackable, but I don't know.

[frankendat]

15 hours ago, Dguy210 said:

 

Lol, did you not see my earlier post? However, I did find that badge assigned to someone else as far back as 2021. 

 

bananhamuck rocks

[frankendat]

16 minutes ago, tr8er said:

Trump will lose the popular vote for certain.  I do expect he will attempt to steal, or rather the party will attempt to steal the election through the House.  They have enough measures in place to withhold certification in many states.  Johnson will not swear in the newly elected House members after the election in order to maintain a majority.  That will be your first indication.  Voter fraud will be lauded from ever conservative mouth available.  Supreme court will refrain from involvement.  The end result will be a house vote for president.  House will either vote on party lines awarding Trump the presidency, or they will stand against the effort which I doubt because they will literally fear for their families safety.  There is basically zero doubt that the groundwork has been planned out and is organized for this outcome.  Half the country will actually believe the election was stolen.  With all of the elections globally being questioned, it wont be far fetched at all.  I will be ugly.  The worst case scenario is that the executive mobilizes the military, and the republicans wet dream of an armed civil war breaks ground.  I wonder which nations would come to help the fighting build.  

Maybe, I doubt it will be as dramatic as we envision. A couple dustups, some death, a few sorties, America has proven it lacks the stomach for war, so lines will be drawn, territories established and the United States will be no more. We will be fractionalized like the Middle East.  The joker in the deck is other nations. I could see one of our Saudi "allies" kicking a billion or two in weapons over to one group, just to watch Americans fight. 

The popular vote is a funny thing and I am glad our nation isn't governed by it. The Democrats are making the million or millions depending upon who you ask, illegal (well, I guess formerly illegal) immigrants eligible to vote. And, well, I say Fuck that, voter ID is not fascist, or voter repression and no one should be able to stroll into a country uninvited and impact national policy, it's silly, so FUCK the popular vote.

[tr8er]

21 minutes ago, frankendat said:

Therein lies the rub. Most people wouldn't know who to talk to, which goes back to my earlier post, if I started going to the right parties again and associating with the right people to get an introduction "a friend of a friend" then deals might be made. But Joe America decides he needs him a "disposable" "non registered" firearm and goes cruising the Arizona Walmart parking lots and asking around, he has a much better chance of being arrested, robbed, told to go fuck himself, or killed, then acquiring the firearm. Now Joe America might meet the right person and get one, but he is risking multiple mandatory time Federal crimes not to mention his life, even if he is successful, I doubt he would say it was "easy". 

If there are places, like the old Silkroad, where it is a bazaar of weapons and anything else, just walk in and put your money down, please educate, but it still appears that the "anybody can get a gun easily in the United States" is an anti gun rhetoric used to promote universal background checks, a national firearms database, gun registration, gun confiscation and force gun relinquishment.

I haven't smoked weed since the late 1980's, anymore I only know one or two that still do. Weed is illegal in Idaho, people are busted for it all the time. I am confident, that if went out tonight, to places where no one knows me and chilled, I could find some weed to buy. If it was a Friday or Saturday night, then I would lay money on it. illegal weed is easy to get. Like I said, I don't even know someone who has heard of someone that could be selling hot guns.

Final thought on hot guns and this one is a question, but I think I know the answer. There have been a couple cop dramas in recent years where the "so many firearms easy to get" theme has been played, but they added a new layer. Both television shows (fictional) promoted that illegal firearms were not only easy to get, they were also much cheaper than legally obtained firearms. I think that is more media bullshit, but, as I keep saying, I have never encountered a stolen gun salesman. I would think a gun not traceable to you would command a higher price point than one trackable, but I don't know.

You wont gain ground on the gun debate.  Gun regulation has globally proven time and again to reduce gun related crime and deaths.  It wont matter.  We have it baked into our charter that we will have guns and I'm happy for it.  Sadly it has turned into a dialogue of "they want to take away our guns, vs. We want every person to have an arsenal".  No reasonable concessions nor debate.  All just dire outcome posturing.  Most mass shootings are disturbed loners.  These are the people who would have a very hard time acquiring a gun illegally in a Home Depot parking lot.  There are always other ways, but it doesn't mean its easy.  Countries with strict gun laws have far greater knife crime.    This isn't some strange coincidence.  They are easier to get, and they carry a lesser sentence.  Mass shootings are limited because it is not particularly easy to get a gun that would allow it.  Criminals will always get guns and that is not really debatable, but I'm more worried about the mentally unfit, disgruntled, angry loner.  If they are thinking about killing themselves because they hate the world they are in, they may choose to go out shooting.  And since they can just go down to the gun show and buy one, they do.  If that wasn't an option, they may choose to just drive off a cliff.  It would not stop all gun vilolence.  It may even make some stats worse.  But if we can slow down the mass shootings of innocent victims, I say we try.  Background checks please.  

[datzenmike]

10 minutes ago, tr8er said:

You wont gain ground on the gun debate.  Gun regulation has globally proven time and again to reduce gun related crime and deaths.  It wont matter. 

 

Thank-you for that sane opinion. Why can't all think this way? Have all the guns you want but keep them out of the hands of the crazy people and criminal... if you can. Mostly common sense but how to achieve?

 

Convicted criminal caught with gun automatic death sentence? Considering the harm he could do with it, seems fair. Unburdens society of looking after his ass in jail and recidivism.

 

Crazy people/loners/bullied people/students. Why is this not addressed until someone pops??? Always after a mass shooting it come out they were disturbed, had a history of being disturbed, violent, on/off meds or was bullied at work/school/home and legally acquired a gun. Here locally we had a character who was an alcoholic, domestic violence wife left him or had him removed, probably some other threats and shit and the popo came and took his guns away. I'm ok with that. I was also asked by a co worker (we are not friends or anything) to sponsor him when getting his FAC so he could buy guns or ammo? anyway he's an avid hunter but never talks gun nut stuff, no history of being violent, or weirdness and known him at the time for over 15 years. Filled out the questionnaire and signed it.    

[datzenmike]

Page 732 of POST ASS.

 

On 7/13/2021 at 4:29 PM, bananahamuck said:

      Is there going to be badges given out for looking at ass ? 

 

 

 

 

.

 

On 7/13/2021 at 5:53 PM, datzenmike said:

Check your recently awarded badges for.....

 

 

[IZRL]

30 minutes ago, datzenmike said:

 

Thank-you for that sane opinion. Why can't all think this way? Have all the guns you want but keep them out of the hands of the crazy people and criminal... if you can. Mostly common sense but how to achieve?

 

Convicted criminal caught with gun automatic death sentence? Considering the harm he could do with it, seems fair. Unburdens society of looking after his ass in jail and recidivism.

 

Crazy people/loners/bullied people/students. Why is this not addressed until someone pops??? Always after a mass shooting it come out they were disturbed, had a history of being disturbed, violent, on/off meds or was bullied at work/school/home and legally acquired a gun. Here locally we had a character who was an alcoholic, domestic violence wife left him or had him removed, probably some other threats and shit and the popo came and took his guns away. I'm ok with that. I was also asked by a co worker (we are not friends or anything) to sponsor him when getting his FAC so he could buy guns or ammo? anyway he's an avid hunter but never talks gun nut stuff, no history of being violent, or weirdness and known him at the time for over 15 years. Filled out the questionnaire and signed it.    

 

Good lord....

 

 

Edited August 7 by IZRL

[john510]

2 hours ago, tr8er said:

Trump will lose the popular vote for certain.  I do expect he will attempt to steal, or rather the party will attempt to steal the election through the House.  They have enough measures in place to withhold certification in many states.  Johnson will not swear in the newly elected House members after the election in order to maintain a majority.  That will be your first indication.  Voter fraud will be lauded from ever conservative mouth available.  Supreme court will refrain from involvement.  The end result will be a house vote for president.  House will either vote on party lines awarding Trump the presidency, or they will stand against the effort which I doubt because they will literally fear for their families safety.  There is basically zero doubt that the groundwork has been planned out and is organized for this outcome.  Half the country will actually believe the election was stolen.  With all of the elections globally being questioned, it wont be far fetched at all.  I will be ugly.  The worst case scenario is that the executive mobilizes the military, and the republicans wet dream of an armed civil war breaks ground.  I wonder which nations would come to help the fighting build.  

The popular vote doesn't matter for a reason. Otherwise California and New York would decide who the President would be. And it would always be a Democrat. Our founding fathers were smart when they came up with the electoral college. I'm curious how you could think Trump will steal the election considering he has zero authority over anything but his campaign. You think Johnson will go astray and not swear in newly elected officials ? The guys nearly a Democrat just pretending to be a Republican. He's all talk and full of shit. If Harris won I would think something happened that shouldn't have. Call it stolen or rigged, whatever but it surely wouldn't make any sense. And why do you think Republicans want a civil war ? A few nuts aren't what most of the party stands for. Maybe it's the Democrats that want the civil war just so they can retain power. Like that Zelensky guy did in Ukraine. We're at war with Russia so we're not going to vote right now. Why not ? Was he afraid of being ousted ? 

Edited August 7 by john510

[Dguy210]

6 hours ago, jbirds510 said:

No idea. Dguy? Sounds sketch. is it?

 

 

[Dguy210]

4 hours ago, yenpit said:

I read a bit about this theory..............don't remember if I posted here or just on my FB?  The fact that they skipped over Shapiro of PA as VP, apparently sparked this theory.  Something about NOT using their best picks at this point, as to NOT tarnish their "experience" with a loss.  They chose Walz, which even some dems are questioning.  Like you may be implying, 2024 is a losing battle for the dems, let it go, hold on to Senate, gain the House, Trump's hands are basically tied throughout his second term, to make big changes, dems gear up for 2028.............?? 🤔

 

4 hours ago, yenpit said:

.........perhaps for 2024, then hit hard in 2028? 🤔

 

 

They dropped Shapiro because he is Jewish and currently a large portion of the Democratic party are strong supporters of Palestine and pretty damn anti-Jewish.

[a.d._510_n_ok]

[tr8er]

30 minutes ago, frankendat said:

Maybe, I doubt it will be as dramatic as we envision. A couple dustups, some death, a few sorties, America has proven it lacks the stomach for war, so lines will be drawn, territories established and the United States will be no more. We will be fractionalized like the Middle East.  The joker in the deck is other nations. I could see one of our Saudi "allies" kicking a billion or two in weapons over to one group, just to watch Americans fight. 

The popular vote is a funny thing and I am glad our nation isn't governed by it. The Democrats are making the million or millions depending upon who you ask, illegal (well, I guess formerly illegal) immigrants eligible to vote. And, well, I say Fuck that, voter ID is not fascist, or voter repression and no one should be able to stroll into a country uninvited and impact national policy, it's silly, so FUCK the popular vote.

Non citizens cant just walk into a booth and vote like people seem to posit.  Maybe if you knew someone was a registered voter but was sick and unable to vote maybe you could go in and vote with their name.  But you'd need to know they were not voting.  Know they were registered.  And know what pooling place to go to for that person.  It's simply not a significant issue, nor is it one sided. But if the vote is discredited as corrupted, the loser always gains from that.  And in recent history, that is the republican party by numbers.  So there is strategic advantage to discrediting the vote.  Requiring identification makes a ton of sense logically.  But when you actually look at the numbers, you start to see the real motivation behind it.  The majority of the folks without a drivers license are the democratic voters.  These are often impoverished, homeless, ng elderly, minority, or disabled.  Often not having a mailing address even.  The percentage of voter fraud is much smaller than this impacted group.  But as they are generally voting blue, the attack on voter ID is seen as desirable to the right as it will help their numbers.  Not to negate fraud.  If there is fraud, it is not happening at the walk in voting centers.  Thee were hundreds of claims for fraud that were investigated, and very few were found to be with merit.  And I believe the majority were voting for Trump anyway.  So the voting fraud was never the issue.  The votes are the issue.  And any party that wants to win an election by disenfranchising eligible voters is weak and pitiful.  Stop watching Fox all day long...  Actually, turn off the TV all together.  I'm 25 years since I had cable TV.  Fuck that noise.  

 

[tr8er]

48 minutes ago, john510 said:

The popular vote doesn't matter for a reason. Otherwise California and New York would decide who the President would be. And it would always be a Democrat. Our founding fathers were smart when they came up with the electoral college. I'm curious how you could think Trump will steal the election considering he has zero authority over anything but his campaign. You think Johnson will go astray and not swear in newly elected officials ? The guys nearly a Democrat just pretending to be a Republican. He's all talk and full of shit. If Harris won I would think something happened that shouldn't have. Call it stolen or rigged, whatever but it surely wouldn't make any sense. And why do you think Republicans want a civil war ? A few nuts aren't what most of the party stands for. Maybe it's the Democrats that want the civil war just so they can retain power. Like that Zelensky guy did in Ukraine. We're at war with Russia so we're not going to vote right now. Why not ? Was he afraid of being ousted ? 

The electoral college exists because we are a republic.  It is foundational.  We were never supposed to be a democracy.  I do disagree with you though, even though I support the electoral college.  You state that republicans would never win if there was no electoral college.  Wrong.  There is a reason the two party system has existed for fucking ever.  The parties evolve with the electorate.  It is literally peoples job.  Parties will evolve to garner support and will always be fighting to get more than half.  This is why it is so damn close.  The two parties are constantly fighting to get slightly more support than the other guys, and they will pander to get those votes.  Even if it means deciding to support EV's because Elon gives you a ton of campaign money, or supporting coal miners even though you are going to kill the industry anyway.  The electoral college is the line they are focusing on because it exists.  If it didn't the same battle would be fronted with the people in place of the electors.  

 

What would change would be the republican party would likely be more supportive of the people, and less supportive of corporations.  

Edited August 7 by tr8er
increasing the troll level.

[john510]

7 minutes ago, tr8er said:

Non citizens cant just walk into a booth and vote like people seem to posit.  Maybe if you knew someone was a registered voter but was sick and unable to vote maybe you could go in and vote with their name.  But you'd need to know they were not voting.  Know they were registered.  And know what pooling place to go to for that person.  It's simply not a significant issue, nor is it one sided. But if the vote is discredited as corrupted, the loser always gains from that.  And in recent history, that is the republican party by numbers.  So there is strategic advantage to discrediting the vote.  Requiring identification makes a ton of sense logically.  But when you actually look at the numbers, you start to see the real motivation behind it.  The majority of the folks without a drivers license are the democratic voters.  These are often impoverished, homeless, ng elderly, minority, or disabled.  Often not having a mailing address even.  The percentage of voter fraud is much smaller than this impacted group.  But as they are generally voting blue, the attack on voter ID is seen as desirable to the right as it will help their numbers.  Not to negate fraud.  If there is fraud, it is not happening at the walk in voting centers.  Thee were hundreds of claims for fraud that were investigated, and very few were found to be with merit.  And I believe the majority were voting for Trump anyway.  So the voting fraud was never the issue.  The votes are the issue.  And any party that wants to win an election by disenfranchising eligible voters is weak and pitiful.  Stop watching Fox all day long...  Actually, turn off the TV all together.  I'm 25 years since I had cable TV.  Fuck that noise.  

 

Non citizens can vote. I don't know why people keep saying they can't. Here in Cali they issued drivers licenses to illegals. It wasn't to make the roads safer. It was so they could register to vote. Other states have done the same thing. It's illegal supposedly but who's watching ? It's even encouraged. You live so far away from the reality here in the states. And you're suggesting others stop watching Fox ? 

[john510]

2 minutes ago, tr8er said:

The electoral college exists because we are a republic.  It is foundational.  We were never supposed to be a democracy.  I do disagree with you though, even though I support the electoral college.  You state that republicans would never win if there was no electoral college.  Wrong.  There is a reason the two party system has existed for fucking ever.  The parties evolve with the electorate.  It is literally peoples job.  Parties will evolve to garner support and will always be fighting to get more than half.  This is why it is so damn close.  The two parties are constantly fighting to get slightly more support than the other guys, and they will pander to get those votes.  Even if it means deciding to support EV's because Elon gives you a ton of campaign money, or supporting coal miners even though you are going to kill the industry anyway.  The electoral college is the line they are focusing on because it exists.  If it didn't the same battle would be fronted with the people in place of the electors.  

Four states could control the Presidency. Why would you think lets use New York City as an example, would ever change over to mostly Republicans ? Los Angeles ? Look at California. The west coast is Democrat dominated permanently. That's not fair to the sane people in the rest of the country.

[IZRL]

2 hours ago, tr8er said:

You wont gain ground on the gun debate.  Gun regulation has globally proven time and again to reduce gun related crime and deaths.  It wont matter.  We have it baked into our charter that we will have guns and I'm happy for it.  Sadly it has turned into a dialogue of "they want to take away our guns, vs. We want every person to have an arsenal".  No reasonable concessions nor debate.  All just dire outcome posturing.  Most mass shootings are disturbed loners.  These are the people who would have a very hard time acquiring a gun illegally in a Home Depot parking lot.  There are always other ways, but it doesn't mean its easy.  Countries with strict gun laws have far greater knife crime.    This isn't some strange coincidence.  They are easier to get, and they carry a lesser sentence.  Mass shootings are limited because it is not particularly easy to get a gun that would allow it.  Criminals will always get guns and that is not really debatable, but I'm more worried about the mentally unfit, disgruntled, angry loner.  If they are thinking about killing themselves because they hate the world they are in, they may choose to go out shooting.  And since they can just go down to the gun show and buy one, they do.  If that wasn't an option, they may choose to just drive off a cliff.  It would not stop all gun vilolence.  It may even make some stats worse.  But if we can slow down the mass shootings of innocent victims, I say we try.  Background checks please.  

 

So pretty much the left's solution to every problem. Beg for the Government to take their rights away.

 

"Sadly it has turned into a dialogue of "they want to take away our guns, vs. We want every person to have an arsenal".  No reasonable concessions nor debate.  All just dire outcome posturing.  Most mass shootings are disturbed loners.  These are the people who would have a very hard time acquiring a gun illegally in a Home Depot parking lot".

 

The Gov sole purpose in recent times has been to take as many rights from us as possible. You think giving them the power to decide what guns and how many we're allowed to have is just gonna stop there? They've shown time and time again that every time you give them a finger, they take an arm AND a leg. We are on the fast track towards tyranny and the leftist are currently fighting to get us their as faster. Bigger government has never and will never work. Think Socialist countries, what rights are you and the the rest of the left fighting for them to be taken away from us, that were taken away by Socialist regimes to take control of their population. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to bear arms etc..etc. Do you understand where this is heading?

 

Edited August 7 by IZRL

[tr8er]

7 minutes ago, john510 said:

Non citizens can vote. I don't know why people keep saying they can't. Here in Cali they issued drivers licenses to illegals. It wasn't to make the roads safer. It was so they could register to vote. Other states have done the same thing. It's illegal supposedly but who's watching ? It's even encouraged. You live so far away from the reality here in the states. And you're suggesting others stop watching Fox ? 

In non- federal elections, some jurisdictions do allow non citizens to vote.  But not many.  Zero allow non citizens to vote in federal elections.  AKA the presidential election.  Cases exist, but in the audits resulting from Trumps challenges, the numbers are tiny.  Georgia found less than 2000 illegal voter registration applications of non-citizens in the last 25 years.  Zero were awarded registration.  Zero voted as a result.  This won't matter though because it's just a conspiracy when the facts don't match the narrative people are given.  And Trump did a fantastic job of that.  Making his people feel disenfranchised is his greatest ability.  

[Dguy210]

Just now, tr8er said:

In non- federal elections, some jurisdictions do allow non citizens to vote.  But not many.  Zero allow non citizens to vote in federal elections.  AKA the presidential election.  Cases exist, but in the audits resulting from Trumps challenges, the numbers are tiny.  Georgia found less than 2000 illegal voter registration applications of non-citizens in the last 25 years.  Zero were awarded registration.  Zero voted as a result.  This won't matter though because it's just a conspiracy when the facts don't match the narrative people are given.  And Trump did a fantastic job of that.  Making his people feel disenfranchised is his greatest ability.  

 

Places with mail-in ballots often send them out ONLY based on the driver license rolls. There is no test involved for citizenship.

 

I HAVE LITERALLY SEEN THIS WITH MY OWN EYES. My wife before she was naturalized would get a mail-in ballot on a regular basis even when it was reported she was not a citizen. 

[bottomwatcher]

5 hours ago, yenpit said:

I read a bit about this theory..............don't remember if I posted here or just on my FB?  The fact that they skipped over Shapiro of PA as VP, apparently sparked this theory.  Something about NOT using their best picks at this point, as to NOT tarnish their "experience" with a loss.  They chose Walz, which even some dems are questioning.  Like you may be implying, 2024 is a losing battle for the dems, let it go, hold on to Senate, gain the House, Trump's hands are basically tied throughout his second term, to make big changes, dems gear up for 2028.............?? 🤔

This isn't making any sense. They beat Trump with a corpse last time. Just need to dig up a slightly fresher one for the win. The rules are out the window so I don't get why they would pic Kamala? Shit Hillary a corpse too but would have a better chance than Kamala. Why give up the presidency by running such a shitty candidate?

[tr8er]

3 minutes ago, IZRL said:

 

So pretty much the left's solution to every problem. Beg for the Government to take their rights away.

 

"Sadly it has turned into a dialogue of "they want to take away our guns, vs. We want every person to have an arsenal".  No reasonable concessions nor debate.  All just dire outcome posturing.  Most mass shootings are disturbed loners.  These are the people who would have a very hard time acquiring a gun illegally in a Home Depot parking lot".

 

The Gov sole purpose in recent times has been to take as many rights from us as possible. You think giving them the power to decide what guns and how many we're allowed to have is just gonna stop there? They've shown time and time again that every time you give them a finger, they take an arm AND a leg. We are on the fast track towards tyranny and the leftist are currently fighting to get us their as faster. Bigger government has never and will never work. Think Socialist countries, what rights are you and the the rest of the left fighting for them to be taken away from us, that were taken away by Socialist regimes to take control of their population. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to bear arms etc..etc. Do you understand where this is heading?

 

You are running scared from a boogie man that simply isn't there.  What gun legislation has taken an arm and a leg after you've given a finger?  Seriously.  Almost NOTHING has happened in gun regulation in forever.  Bump stocks were made illegal under Trump, and that was later overturned under Biden.  (see how crediting the sitting president isn't always appropriate?)  Assault weapons were banned, but there was now arm and leg to follow it.  In fact it expired largely on its own.  There is almost zero effort, nor traction in the direction you fear.  And it is all fed to you to build fear and influence your vote.  Most democrats I know would never want to lose their guns.  It's not just republicans who like them.    

[tr8er]

2 minutes ago, bottomwatcher said:

This isn't making any sense. They beat Trump with a corpse last time. Just need to dig up a slightly fresher one for the win. The rules are out the window so I don't get why they would pic Kamala? Shit Hillary a corpse too but would have a better chance than Kamala. Why give up the presidency by running such a shitty candidate?

Democrats would never run a losing candidate again.  Hillary is not a winner.  Just no.  Republicans would never run a dead horse either, but Trump took over the party, so they are.  Kamala is the obvious choice as she is the VP.  I think Democrats were not willing to take that opportunity from her because the reason to do so is to pander to bigots.  I also thought she was a bad choice because there are many who simply will not vote for a woman, and I hate to lose based on such a dumb fact.  But here we are.  She is qualified.  More so than you or I.  Can she win?  Well, as I stated I believe she will win the popular vote.  The electors will likely go rogue or the vote will not be certified so whether she wins or not will be interesting and debated for generations.    

[tr8er]

15 minutes ago, Dguy210 said:

 

Places with mail-in ballots often send them out ONLY based on the driver license rolls. There is no test involved for citizenship.

 

I HAVE LITERALLY SEEN THIS WITH MY OWN EYES. My wife before she was naturalized would get a mail-in ballot on a regular basis even when it was reported she was not a citizen. 

I cant refute what you've witnessed.  Nor do I care to.  But that is an application to register.  They are not registered automatically by filling out a form and mailing it.  I could certainly be wrong, but the registration office does go on record stating that the system does not allow anyone without legal status to enter the registration for federal ballots.  

 

“Undocumented Californians are not eligible to register to vote and [the] DMV has programming measures to prevent that from occurring,” Jessica Gonzalez, the California DMV spokeswoman, told us in an email. “One example is the technician is unable to enter information that would allow the undocumented customer to register. It is automatically greyed out and cannot be bypassed.”

 

Could they be lying?  certainly.  Maybe they are all part of the cabal that is taking the country over.  

[yenpit]

Just gonna plunk this down here..................

 

https://www.facebook.com/reel/859459229356524/?s=single_unit&__cft__[0]=AZVHB44Uk7NL2wllgt4wPSFqgCB-bgQVXtRuVZSsonvQhe0bNkNp7gRaW1dNi0Be1Vk0b_toJk09GqKgbZV1mBTBpA2M3n5vGTjqBZHmYt5E1N0rRV8kJFE6NdSrxet-FeNNbW5GnAU7FNx1cb4xhKLb1ovMMuDpNIERdPrnC4Ijrg&__tn__=H-R