Trump Assassination Attempt Discussion

[zombie]

well trump will certainly take his house again. and he will certainly reveal all of the evil plans the powers that be intend to do to our country, in the way that kennedy failed to do! yay!

[Jason]

well trump will certainly take his house again. and he will certainly reveal all of the evil plans the powers that be intend to do to our country, in the way that kennedy failed to do! yay!

I doubt both. Lol

[zombie]

well trump will certainly take his house again. and he will certainly reveal all of the evil plans the powers that be intend to do to our country, in the way that kennedy failed to do! yay!

I doubt both. Lol

don't be such a downer.

[Jason]

well trump will certainly take his house again. and he will certainly reveal all of the evil plans the powers that be intend to do to our country, in the way that kennedy failed to do! yay!

I doubt both. Lol

don't be such a downer.

I am definitely a political pessimist. I think no matter the outcome it will get worse, even with a Trump presidency.

[zombie]

well trump will certainly take his house again. and he will certainly reveal all of the evil plans the powers that be intend to do to our country, in the way that kennedy failed to do! yay!

I doubt both. Lol

don't be such a downer.

I am definitely a political pessimist. I think no matter the outcome it will get worse, even with a Trump presidency.

so we're not as far off as i thought, just possibly for different reasons. although i want to be an optimist, so i'm willing to be surprised.

[Jason]

[zombie]

the transgender population have a higher rate of depression and suicidal ideation than the general populace, but not because of puberty blockers. transition usually, but not always, seems to actually decrease the depressive thoughts and suicidal ideation. support from family and community also plays a role in that decrease as well.

*edit* disregard this post. while it stands, in general, i jumped the gun regarding that document and the findings discussed within it.

[zombie]

i spoke out of turn, possibly. this looks like it's some kind of list of potential side effects to whatever specific drug is being tested on those patients, a handful of which happen to be transgender. were the side effects so substantial that the drug should be pulled or were they within the limits that it should be safe for prescription?

something like this?
https://www.fda.gov/media/159663/download

is america first legal taking action against the fda? why was this document shared on twitter, out of context?

[Lazerus]

I like to stay positive as much as possible and despite the current divide I do think things can (and will) turn around eventually. Unlike my brother who’s convinced that we’re going to have a civil war.

[zombie]

I like to stay positive as much as possible and despite the current divide I do think things can (and will) turn around eventually. Unlike my brother who’s convinced that we’re going to have a civil war.

eww i don't think it will get that bad. just more unrest and riots and taking rights away from people and hopefully giving them back after political pressure.

[Lazerus]

I like to stay positive as much as possible and despite the current divide I do think things can (and will) turn around eventually. Unlike my brother who’s convinced that we’re going to have a civil war.

eww i don't think it will get that bad. just more unrest and riots and taking rights away from people and hopefully giving them back after political pressure.

All of this is about fear, the far right is afraid of change and the truth about change is that it’s inevitable and in a constant state of flux. You cannot stop change. It will happen regardless of what people do to try and stop it.

[zombie]

stephen miller is the president of america first legal. does he have something to do with donald trump? is he doing this for some kind of political reason?

[zombie]

"walz is going to turn the midwest into mogadishu" - the same stephen miller.

[Jigsaw]

At least 16 independent or third party candidates are on at least one ballot.

1) Shiva Ayyadurai (independent)
2) Claudia De la Cruz (Party for Socialism and Liberation)
3) Lucifer “Justin Case” Everylove (independent)
4) Rachele Fruit (Socialist Workers Party)
5) Chris Garrity (independent)
6) Blake Huber (Approval Voting Party)
7) Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (independent)
8) Joseph Kishore (Socialist Equality Party)
9) Chase Oliver (Libertarian Party)
10) Jasmine Sherman (Green Party of Alaska)
11) Joel Skousen (Constitution Parties of Idaho, Utah, and Nevada)
12) Peter Sonski (American Solidarity Party)
13) Jill Stein (Green Party)
14) Randall Terry (Constitution Party)
15) Cornel West (independent)
16) Michael Wood (Prohibition Party)

Hopefully that list will grow - I'd love to see both Bill Stodden (Socialist Party USA) and Dennis Schuller (Legal Marijuana Now) get ballot access.

Fun fact - Legal Marijuana Now had ballot access, but Democrats screwed them over because 'democracy.' What a joke of a party.

[Jigsaw]

Here's a statement from the Claudia De la Cruz campaign (via X):

"The Claudia De la Cruz campaign gathered 17,000 signatures–more than DOUBLE the required amount—to qualify for the presidential ballot access in Georgia. Despite this, the Democratic Party of Georgia is attempting a flagrantly undemocratic legal attack on third parties and independent candidates to prevent presidential ballot access.

Democratic Party operatives have filed a legal challenge trying to prevent the people of Georgia from having the option to vote socialist in November. Afraid that they cannot secure a victory on the merits of their own political program and record, the Democrats are turning to the courts to block any alternative outside the two major capitalist parties.

It is clear that the Democratic Party believes that the right to ballot access in this country should be reserved only for those who serve the interests of the billionaires and the corporate elites, like their own candidate, Kamala Harris. The Democratic Party machine is not a defender of democracy, but its enemy!

The working class people in this country deserve an option in the Presidential elections that stands decisively against war, racism, environmental destruction, poverty, and all the evils of capitalism. The working class deserves a socialist option!"

Democrats are clearly anti-democratic. I will keep repeating this and repeating this until I'm dead. To say that voting for Democrats is to vote for "democracy" is to say you have zero idea of what Democrats actually stand for.

[zombie]

if the electoral college takes away the ability of third party candidates to win, why also deny them the ballot access?

[Jigsaw]

if the electoral college takes away the ability of third party candidates to win, why also deny them the ballot access?

They're not worried about third parties winning, they're worried about third parties "taking votes" from them.

To be clear, that's not how it works. Nader didn't "take votes" from Al Gore in 2000. Nader earned votes in 2000 that Gore didn't.

When I voted for Jill Stein in 2016, my vote wasn't "taken" from Clinton - as everyone here knows, I would have rather slit my wrists than have voted for that piece of shit (which is something I've never once regretted).

However, Democrats (and some Republicans who are annoyed at Libertarians for the exact same thing) simply don't understand, or even care to understand, this.

And I apologize if I sound angry - it's just that I am absolutely sick of the "vote Democrats for democracy" argument I see all over the internet. It's an insult to everyone's intelligence.

[zombie]

if the electoral college takes away the ability of third party candidates to win, why also deny them the ballot access?

They're not worried about third parties winning, they're worried about third parties "taking votes" from them.

To be clear, that's not how it works. Nader didn't "take votes" from Al Gore in 2000. Nader earned votes in 2000 that Gore didn't.

When I voted for Jill Stein in 2016, my vote wasn't "taken" from Clinton - as everyone here knows, I would have rather slit my wrists than have voted for that piece of shit (which is something I've never once regretted).

However, Democrats (and some Republicans who are annoyed at Libertarians for the exact same thing) simply don't understand, or even care to understand, this.

And I apologize if I sound angry - it's just that I am absolutely sick of the "vote Democrats for democracy" argument I see all over the internet. It's an insult to everyone's intelligence.

yeah, i can see that. it's a "watching that movie is taking a watch from this other movie" kind of thing. i think the "vote democrat for democracy" is a slogan based on fear. or have you heard it before trump?

[Lazerus]

At least 16 independent or third party candidates are on at least one ballot.

1) Shiva Ayyadurai (independent)
2) Claudia De la Cruz (Party for Socialism and Liberation)
3) Lucifer “Justin Case” Everylove (independent)
4) Rachele Fruit (Socialist Workers Party)
5) Chris Garrity (independent)
6) Blake Huber (Approval Voting Party)
7) Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (independent)
8) Joseph Kishore (Socialist Equality Party)
9) Chase Oliver (Libertarian Party)
10) Jasmine Sherman (Green Party of Alaska)
11) Joel Skousen (Constitution Parties of Idaho, Utah, and Nevada)
12) Peter Sonski (American Solidarity Party)
13) Jill Stein (Green Party)
14) Randall Terry (Constitution Party)
15) Cornel West (independent)
16) Michael Wood (Prohibition Party)

Hopefully that list will grow - I'd love to see both Bill Stodden (Socialist Party USA) and Dennis Schuller (Legal Marijuana Now) get ballot access.

Fun fact - Legal Marijuana Now had ballot access, but Democrats screwed them over because 'democracy.' What a joke of a party.

The problem here is the GOP and Dems have a monopoly on the system and have made it nearly impossible for a third party or Independent candidate to win.

[Jigsaw]

if the electoral college takes away the ability of third party candidates to win, why also deny them the ballot access?

They're not worried about third parties winning, they're worried about third parties "taking votes" from them.

To be clear, that's not how it works. Nader didn't "take votes" from Al Gore in 2000. Nader earned votes in 2000 that Gore didn't.

When I voted for Jill Stein in 2016, my vote wasn't "taken" from Clinton - as everyone here knows, I would have rather slit my wrists than have voted for that piece of shit (which is something I've never once regretted).

However, Democrats (and some Republicans who are annoyed at Libertarians for the exact same thing) simply don't understand, or even care to understand, this.

And I apologize if I sound angry - it's just that I am absolutely sick of the "vote Democrats for democracy" argument I see all over the internet. It's an insult to everyone's intelligence.

yeah, i can see that. it's a "watching that movie is taking a watch from this other movie" kind of thing. i think the "vote democrat for democracy" is a slogan based on fear. or have you heard it before trump?

Democrats have used the "most important election of your lifetime" line multiple times in the past. Obviously, I'm only thirty, but I know people who heard the same thing from Democrats back in the 1960's through the 1980's.

So the whole "vote Democratic for democracy" may be a post-Trump slogan (keep in mind, Democrats were one of the reasons Trump won in 2016), but the idea of having to vote Democratic, or else it's "a vote for the GOP" (again, mathematically false) has been really heavily leaned into since they started (incorrectly) blaming Gore's loss on Nader.