ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
The problem is that your side picked the wrong candidate if you were truly interested in winning the election easily and putting your agenda in place. Any other Republican primary candidate would have won in a landslide. The Republicans brought this close election on themselves and it’s entertaining to watch you guys scratch your heads trying to figure out why the race is close.
False. There are a lot of lazy corrupt people out there like yourself who lack character and hate this country that are making this close. People who are lazy as hell and want everything given to them so, Dumbala and the left tell you what you want to hear, and you guys are dumb enough to believe it.
 
Last edited:
Kamala/Walz went months without giving any interviews to suddenly making multiple media appearances over the past few days.

Changing strategies like this tells me they think they need a Hail Mary to pull off a win come November.
realclearpolling has trump up in the battleground states by 1/2 point or more. Which means probably 3-4 point lead for the bad orange man who happens to be worse than hitler and wants to be a dictator for one day and end democracy as we know it? Did i miss any??? Oh, hates women and discriminates against blacks, steals money from the poor (which doesn't make any cents, but whatever). Others?
 
The question isn't one of when it becomes a human homo sapiens. The question is when it becomes a legal person with legal rights. Toddlers have rights, fetuses don't. Legal status is conveyed upon birth. The rights of the mother trump the fetus before that, as it doesn't have rights.
Once again, not true.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."[1]
 
California regularly elected Pub candidates until demographic changes in the 90s. There will NEVER be a Pub elected in that state again. demo☭rats will see to that. They OWN the state with super-majorities. Look, you don't even acknowledge facts, so GFY.

The only thing demo☭rats are good at is underhandedly gaining power, pushing Marxism, and brainwashing weak emotional idiots like you.
The party bullying and taking rights away from women, trans and immigrants is the same one always whining about their victimhood. How ironic.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Dionysus444
It will all boil down to PA. Right now, trump is up, barely. However, this day in 2020 was Biden +7 (trump was up 8 points when the counting stopped and lost by 1 ... interesting.) and in 2016 was Hitlary +9 (trump won by 1).

so, if trump overperforms by 6-8 points for a 3rd time, then this thing is WAY over and that is why Kamalahoe and Tampon Tim are so desperate.
 
That's purely your own opinion and how you interpret the nature of the existence of fetal homicide laws. These laws implicitly recognize that fetuses have value as human beings deserving of protection. There is nothing in the laws that states "fetuses are not human." These are laws specifically designed to protect them. Just as though within the law we have "protected classes" of citizens. Just because those laws are specific to them, doesn't mean the law is saying they aren't human. Show me in any of those laws where it says "fetuses are not human"?
They keep trying to dehumanize the fetus by saying it is not human. I have challenged them in the past to show me where that fetus can be manipulated or changed to be anything other than human. They never answer that challenge. Why? Because there is nothing that can be introduced anytime during the pregnancy that would change that human fetus into anything else. It would only kill it.
 
Once again, not true.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."[1]
Wait ... Econ Dion lied?!?!
ofx84.jpg
 
TrumPutin Commie Party.
Russia, Russia, Russia.
No wonder Trump won't back Ukraine. 🤬

Not even bothering reading that shit link. We've been through 8 years of you treasonous f**ks manufacturing hoaxes to tie President Trump to Russia, Russia, Russia. A whole cast of top demo☭rats should be serving prison sentences or more appropriately facing a firing squad by now. GFY.

Back on point: Your party has bought and paid for millions of illegals, given them benefits, and strategically located them in swing states, and now are pushing to make them legal. You think most of them WOULDN'T VOTE DEMO☭RAT? The party that provides the handouts? Idiot.

Hell, demo☭rats actually don't GAF about citizenship for voting. 14 states (demoshit) and DC don't require an ID to vote. CA passed a bill to make it illegal to ask for f**king ID when voting. Registrations are are joke too. It's insane. Election integrity needs fixed, but your party won't do shit to help that get passed.

Your "responsible" demo☭rat party is anti-American trash and they will be the downfall of our country. That's your legacy if they win this time.
 
Not even bothering reading that shit link. We've been through 8 years of you treasonous f**ks manufacturing hoaxes to tie President Trump to Russia, Russia, Russia. A whole cast of top demo☭rats should be serving prison sentences or more appropriately facing a firing squad by now. GFY.

Back on point: Your party has bought and paid for millions of illegals, given them benefits, and strategically located them in swing states, and now are pushing to make them legal. You think most of them WOULDN'T VOTE DEMO☭RAT? The party that provides the handouts? Idiot.

Hell, demo☭rats actually don't GAF about citizenship for voting. 14 states (demoshit) and DC don't require an ID to vote. CA passed a bill to make it illegal to ask for f**king ID when voting. Registrations are are joke too. It's insane. Election integrity needs fixed, but your party won't do shit to help that get passed.

Your "responsible" demo☭rat party is anti-American trash and they will be the downfall of our country. That's your legacy if they win this time.
So let me get this straight ... he is saying it is "responsible" to let ANYONE vote in an election?!?! Oh good grief...
 
Wall Street Journal, 2:42 pm EST today:

Federal Deficit Hit $1.8 Trillion for 2024, CBO Says​

U.S. budget shortfalls fueled by interest costs, Social Security, Medicare​


Thanks, Joe! Thanks, Kamala!
OK, but Trump is committed to not touching SS or Medicare. So how is he going to even dent that?
 
When the law came in to existence adds no weight to your argument that it isn't just your opinion as to why the law was passed. Why would it be so important to be able to charge people for a double murder if they are only killing one person and a clump of cells?
Yes it does. A pregnant woman was murdered there before the law. Her murderer could only be charged with one murder, even if prosecutors wanted more. Why? If fetuses were already people you wouldn't need the law and could double charge them without it.
Why do we need "hate crime laws" to protect homosexuals when there are already laws against doing the same thing to any "HUMANS?" There are special laws designed for different classes of people. Doesn't mean they aren't people. I'll argue that fetuses are just a "protected class" like LGBTQ people and minorities. They are all "human" regardless of what special laws are made to protect them.
No, hate crimes are a classification that ups the severity. If you commit a crime against someone you will be charged for that crime. If hate was the motive the penalty can then be upped. You could always charge them with the original crime though, without the hate crime law. Unlike fetuses which require a special law to even be a crime. See the difference?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Lost In FL
Theres some truth to this. I think Haley would be up huge right now.

But isn't it better to choose your candidate, rather than have one shoved down your throat without being elected by the people?
Sure. That doesn't mean the choice will be a winner.
 
So let me get this straight ... he is saying it is "responsible" to let ANYONE vote in an election?!?! Oh good grief...

You can't reason with him. He just uncontrollably posts unrelated shit links. His brain is fried on TDS.

If Trump wins he'll need a padded cell. I plan to visit him and slip a personalized Trump photo under his cell door and watch his brain explode through the little observation window. Save taxpayer money.
 
Yes it does. A pregnant woman was murdered there before the law. Her murderer could only be charged with one murder, even if prosecutors wanted more. Why? If fetuses were already people you wouldn't need the law and could double charge them without it.
I would think "Mr. Progressive" himself of all people would understand that we make new laws all the time to correct flaws in the system. Afterall, at one point in time we had laws that didn't recognize slaves as people. Were slaves not people before we changed the law? So sure, one could argue that at one point in time, fetuses were not recognized as people. But laws were put in place to change that. And they have. Just because you have some weird view of the intent of the law doesn't change the fact that there is more legal precedent for fetuses being "persons" than there isn't. The only claim you had was Roe V Wade and that has, as I said before, been rightfully overturned and no longer holds any ground for legal precedent.
 
There is nothing that says legal status is conveyed upon birth. That's a statement you keep spouting but there is nothing in the laws that back that up.
That's how it is in every single law. Otherwise specific carveouts wouldn't even be necessary. Can a pregnant woman drive in the carpool lane? Can she claim her fetuses as a dependent? Can she do a single thing in America that requires two people?
 
  • Like
Reactions: sambowieshin
Not even bothering reading that shit link. We've been through 8 years of you treasonous f**ks manufacturing hoaxes to tie President Trump to Russia, Russia, Russia. A whole cast of top demo☭rats should be serving prison sentences or more appropriately facing a firing squad by now. GFY.

Back on point: Your party has bought and paid for millions of illegals, given them benefits, and strategically located them in swing states, and now are pushing to make them legal. You think most of them WOULDN'T VOTE DEMO☭RAT? The party that provides the handouts? Idiot.

Hell, demo☭rats actually don't GAF about citizenship for voting. 14 states (demoshit) and DC don't require an ID to vote. CA passed a bill to make it illegal to ask for f**king ID when voting. Registrations are are joke too. It's insane. Election integrity needs fixed, but your party won't do shit to help that get passed.

Your "responsible" demo☭rat party is anti-American trash and they will be the downfall of our country. That's your legacy if they win this time.
How do you have time to respond during election denial and US Capitol attack season?? The irony is that TrumPutin is everything you accuse me of being.
 
I would think "Mr. Progressive" himself of all people would understand that we make new laws all the time to correct flaws in the system. Afterall, at one point in time we had laws that didn't recognize slaves as people. Were slaves not people before we changed the law?
You’re clearly right, but don’t get him going on that again.
 
I would think "Mr. Progressive" himself of all people would understand that we make new laws all the time to correct flaws in the system. Afterall, at one point in time we had laws that didn't recognize slaves as people. Were slaves not people before we changed the law? So sure, one could argue that at one point in time, fetuses were not recognized as people. But laws were put in place to change that. And they have. Just because you have some weird view of the intent of the law doesn't change the fact that there is more legal precedent for fetuses being "persons" than there isn't. The only claim you had was Roe V Wade and that has, as I said before, been rightfully overturned and no longer holds any ground for legal precedent.
I've said over and over you're free to make those laws according to your personal moral code. But until you do fetuses are not people.
 

The single biggest threat to this country, as it has been for over 150yrs, is the Democrat party. The name says it all. This is not a democracy, and never has been for a very specific reason.

This country is and always has been a Republic, again, for a many specific reasons. To speak of eliminating the electoral college is to speak against the foundation of this country, and EVERYTHING that has been done to try to unite this collection of states together.

The plain truth is that the D party cannot win without changing the rules or cheating outright. They don't want to compete on a level playing field and won't, so we need to make the rules iron clad and enforce them.
 
Once again, not true.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."[1]
Again, why does this law exist? It wouldn't be necessary if they were already people, right? They would already be covered. They aren't charging them with an additional crime.
 
That's how it is in every single law. Otherwise specific carveouts wouldn't even be necessary. Can a pregnant woman drive in the carpool lane? Can she claim her fetuses as a dependent? Can she do a single thing in America that requires two people?
Come on VHcat, you are better than using circular arguments. We've already gone over that being able to be claimed as a dependent has no bearing on if someone is a person. Are you smart enough to even know why carpool lanes exist? That fact that you are using that in this argument suggests that you don't, which means you are dumber than I thought. The reason an unborn child doesn't count in carpool lanes is because an officer cannot visibly establish the occupancy of a vehicle before making the traffic stop. It doesn't validate your position that an unborn child isn't a person. You really let your arguments get more and more ridiculous as you lose.
 
They keep trying to dehumanize the fetus by saying it is not human. I have challenged them in the past to show me where that fetus can be manipulated or changed to be anything other than human. They never answer that challenge. Why? Because there is nothing that can be introduced anytime during the pregnancy that would change that human fetus into anything else. It would only kill it.

If it wasn't human, what need would there be for an abortion? It's really that simple. You can't end something that hasn't begun. That's why they don't call removing a dead baby an abortion. It's why they don't call removing cancer an abortion. It's why they don't call removing necrotic tissue an abortion.

If the fetus isn't alive, there is no need to abort the process of birth, for a birth can't take place without life, and therefore the process already cannot take place. Life doesn't spontaneously appear from nothing. Only life begets life.

So "abortion" is by definition ending life, and a human life at that, which is murder.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT