Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by toonkee

  1. All systems are only as good as the people maintaining them. American elections have been relatively cool because the people running them often have a sense of American pride about them and what they mean. That feeling has been bigger than party. 

    We're going to have big problems in the near future as more and more people feel their party is more important than the actual things that make America great, like faith and reverence for American elections and institutions. When you believe any Republican is better than any Democrat, or vice versa, there is no market for good people in office, and no market to run fair elections.

    The laws and courts will not save us when the running of elections is so thoroughly politicized. It is up to us to be good and to believe in the goodness of those things.

  2. 1 hour ago, Rebels18 said:

    I'm not talking about any cringe-worthy influencers. I doubt you've talked to many outside of your bubble--no offense but since you don't work in the 'real world'/private sector, you're naturally more inclined to be out of touch with what real everyday working Americans believe...If I wanted to know what pompous college campus ideologues believed, you would be the foremost authority---btw props to you for getting your masters and whatever else you're studying. 

    back to the topic matter...Kamala Harris will do more harm than good with black voters and will push the needle in Trump's favor. She's a fraud who has identified as an Indian-American her entire life until Obama became president. She's spent most of her career persecuting blacks as opposed to lifting them up. She lied about smoking weed and listening to Tupac/Snoop in college when she graduated in 1986 before they even released their first album (almost as pathetic of a pandering attempt as when Hillary said she keeps a bottle of hot sauce in her purse to black voters).---She hasn't even begin to be put on blast for her history yet, and the more people know the more she will fall out of favor. 


    What do you mean push the needle in Trump's favor. Like Trump will get 51 percent plus of the black vote?

  3. 1 hour ago, smltwnrckr said:

    This is largely correct. And maybe I'm picking at you out of respect, or because you were the first one in front of me. But I get the sense that you were going to see whomever was picked as uniquely bad for one reason or another. That's not an accusation of being disengenuous. I think you see Democrats as a bigger threat to the country and the things that make it good than the current trajectory of the gop. Which I dont believe is necessary an insane notion, but one that I don't currently share.

    I think Kamala harris is underwhelming, but I was going to be underwhelmed no matter what. I hope she makes the case for police reform and draws on her sins as a prosecutor to do so. That's a much more effective kind of reckoning I believe we need as a country on the issue of police abuse than doxing Karens and looting bodegas. But I do think team trump needs to pick a lane - is she an extreme left wing kook who's gonna force biden to let felons loose in suburbia, or an ex cop who's not progressive enough to do the work that Needs to be done on police reform? Cuz the right is leaning into both.

    The right doesn't need to be logically consistent to score points. Smart guys like you and Lawlor aren't the target audience. They're going to accuse her of everything and with overt racism and sexism riding shotgun.

    • Haha 1

  4. 1 hour ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    Yes, you created a straw man to call me classicist.  I am aware.

    Let's get past your hurt feelings.  I said that creating an extra cost to own guns was classicist.  In this case, a law that is not enforceable.  No cop can do the equivalent of pulling you over on a road to check your insurance, with a gun safe law.  This should be common sense.  The only thing creating a safe law would do is encourage the buying of Walmart special safes that one man can carry out, making them a target.  The people who feel they need to sleep with their pistol under the bed or keep in in the dresser will still do so.  Nobody can enforce them not to.  

    The only things a mandatory safe law would accomplish is creating a lot more criminals with no victim, and discourage would be law abiding citizens from purchasing a gun.  The ones discouraged would be the poor.




    I think you're more of a modernist.

    • Haha 1

  5. 7 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    Ahh yes, my response to your straw man argument about car insurance where you called me classicist... 

    I called car insurance classist based on your logic that requiring an additional cost to gun ownership was classist.



  6. 22 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    So you did not mean it when you asked why I was against a functional society?  I am confused.  Articulate better.

    Of course not. I was putting in kind horseshit into your mouth for the statement you put into my mouth directly preceding that which was something about not wanting poor people to defend themselves and now Sean called me racist and told me I hate brown people. Thanks, asshole. 



  7. 8 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    Dude, chill.  You asked me "why I was against a functional society" before I asked "why do you hate black people"  You escalated the conversation using a strawman argument so I responded in kind.  


    "It's just a prank, bro."





  8. 9 minutes ago, sean327 said:

    This is where you and I will have to agree to disagree. Gun Control advocates are racists period. The laws they push adversely affect people of color. They know this and push them anyway. I’m not letting them off the hook so easily my friend.

    I'm a racist for saying car insurance is racist/classist? That's a new one.

    I just found halfman's initial argument for why we can't have additional costs to gun ownership inconsistent and then he started in with "when will you stop beating your wife" talk so I gave it back to him.




    1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    Glad we agree.

    The ability to defend your person and property, however is a right.  One that gun laws make harder and harder for the poor.

    yes, we agree that car insurance affects poor people disproportionately but owning a car or gun is a choice. 

    • Idiot 1

  10. Just now, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    Unlike voting and self defense.  It is not a right.  Just like the hill folk do not have a right to public transportation being built in podunk nowhere.

    Public transportation is something their communities would have to decide to pay to build and assume the responsibilities for. It's like a choice, like car ownership.

  11. 5 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    Do you think the argument that it is harder for African Americans and tactic of voter suppression has any merit?

    Man, I never thought about that before. Holy smokes I think you've exposed the real intent behind those proposed laws. OMG, Republicans really don't care about election security at all.  This is messed up!

  12. Just now, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    You did not answer my question.  

    Voter ID laws.  

    Driving is not a right.  Why do you hate black people?

    Logic is my god, I can see that a piece of paper that said women can't vote and blacks were 3/5 of a person is yours.

    Why do you hate women and black people? 

  13. 2 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    Making it a law to own a gun safe punishes poor communities.  Are you for or against Voter ID laws?  Why?

    Making it a law to require insurance punishes poor communities. Are you against having a functional society and why?

  14. 4 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

    We get it, you think the under privileged should not be able to defend themselves.  MOARD MURDER AND RAPE!

    Driving is not a right.

    I see you are a rights without responsibility kind of guy. That mindset doesn't seem to be working out so well these days. 


  15. 15 hours ago, Rebels18 said:

    lol, her stance on death penalty is flip-floppy at best. Her words vs. her actions concerning it are very different. i'm sure Kevin Cooper would have something to say about it considering she blocked DNA evidence that would've exonerated him....instead he's currently on DEATH ROW. 


    Do you support her for her heinous record of pushing for maximum sentencing for blacks on non-violent marijuana charges?

    What about when she failed to support body-cams for police?

    Or when she defended the 3-strikes law that incarcerates blacks 20 times more than whites

    or when she fought a federal order to expand early-parole programs on the grounds that it would "deplete their stock of prison labor..especially those who fight wildfires" (the prisoners make $1/hr btw)

    She will use her identity as a black woman to fool you---but she's a f*cking cop dude. The worst of the worst--what she stands for is everything the BLM movement is against. (Won't stop them from giving her a glowing endorsement tho) Anyone that thinks she's gonna destroy that stiff Pence in the debates is fooling themselves, all he has to do is discuss her record as a prosecutor/AG and she's toast. 


    If records and logic and making sense were important in these things Trump would not be president.