ILikePie5

I actually think it's funny that conservatives on here are defending Obama.  Who would've ever thought this would happen lol.

Imagine getting the highest praise for doing basic things like sending kids to school.

I think in this particular case, RCV allowed voters to both express their preference and their antipathy towards Palin or MAGA (hard to separate in this case since Palin brings a lot of baggage to the game independent of MAGA).

A smart GOP would use this data to drop Palin, support Begich in November.

Both AOC and Ilhan Omar faced strong moderate opposition during the primaries, I wonder how RCV would have impacted those elections.

think this conversation is encouraging.  Republicans will blame Democrats or RCV or whatever rather than recognize that MAGA is dividing the GOP vote- which should significantly help Democrats in the next two elections.

jesus christ, it's EXACTLY THE SAME as a "run-off" election

does a "run-off" election violate "1 voter = 1 vote" ?

since they are called back to the same poll and vote on the same office a second time ?

this is exactly the same as failing to show up for a "run-off" election

should all voters be REQUIRED BY LAW to show up for a "run-off" ?

As I said, exit polling strongly suggests those Republicans who left second place blank weren't confused- overwhelmingly the refused to vote for a democrat or Palin.

53,810 voted for Begich first

of these, 42,520 (80%) listed a second choice

of these,  15,467 (36%) preferred a democrat to Palin

I think that would happen in many situations but Trump voters aren't allowed to break ranks.  If Republicans want that seat back in November, Trump is going to have to throw his support to Begich.

Guys! don't scare this poster away. It's important to learn about the extreme people polled that say with conviction that Biden is a better president than Obama so that we may discover the inherent weakness of some people in a democratic republic before it is too late.

• Multiple presidents have intended to get out of the middle east and instead use resources to rebuild our own country's infrastructure.  Biden is the only who actually did it.  
  

• 100 accomplishments in the first 100 days.
  

• Biden passed significant pieces of legislation in a narrowly divided Congress.  Most other presidents with significant legislative achievements have done so with a comfortable majority, but it takes political skill to negotiate with a 50-50 Senate.
  

• First president in history to pass significant legislation toward climate change.
  

• First president in history to actually pass legislation to negotiate drug prices with Medicare.  
  

I also heard Liz Cheney was looking for some romance.

Tell her to stop flirting and that you are shy.

Gee, that's a good way to start a beneficial conversation!

Hillary loves you.

You guys are gonna be known as the 3 Trump morons on this site.

We need cars for our society to function. We definitely do not need assault weapons and as I said there is nothing in the 2A that guarantees an individual right to own assault weapons.

It’s idiotic and it’s definitely not what the Founders intended as I have shown before.

Well they don’t have to go buy a gun because there is likely one lying around nearby, either it’s their own gun or a family member or a friend.

All those other things you mentioned are less likely to result in the suicidal person being successful in taking their own life.

But my argument is to ban assault weapons because they are so deadly in mass shootings and there is no good reason for an ordinary citizen to own one.

Preventing suicides in America is another battle for another day. If we don’t have the common sense to ban assault weapons then we deserve what we get. A society where crazy people, of all ages take a weapon of war and indiscriminately gun down a bunch of innocent people, including children. All for what, so some loser can feel like a man with a big dick because the rest of his life is so pathetic.

I omitted it because it is a ridiculous idea. How long would it take to raise an army, train and equip it? How long should these enlistments be for to put down the rebellion? And why do you think this is a valid point worth making here?

This is nonsense. Do you think the “National Defense Authorization Act” was a law made by the Constitution in 1787? That really doesn’t sound like language from the Constitution.

They form a vast majority? Is that right? Assault weapons are a minor problem? Is that right?

You should tell that to the parents of all those children.

You probably thought Covid was a minor problem too. Lol You’re so funny, like the village idiot speaking at the town council.

Tell me what makes you so much tougher than the rest of Society.

They’d definitely laugh at the idiots who voted for Trump. Guys like you.

Didn’t Trump dodge the draft for the Viet Nam war by pretending to have a bone spur and getting a phony doctors note from one of his Dad’s tenants?

What a real man he is. Right? You are so wise to support him. He was going to make America white again!

Not the concept, but the constitutional right was made out of thin air. It simply isn’t there in the words of the Second Amendment the way it appears to be in the PA version.

Did the Supreme Court cite the PA DOR in the Heller decision? I’m guessing no and I’m pretty sure you have no idea.

Did you also know that justice Scalia wrote in Heller the Federal Government absolutely has the right to restrict which  type of  guns citizens can own and the places they can be carried?

That’s also incorrect. Suicide is often an impulse that will  pass if given enough time. An hour, a day, a bad night. If the person in crisis could get past that brief period of extreme sadness or loss of hope or will to live, without accessing a gun, they would likely go on to live - with the right support. But having guns around just reduces the time and opportunity a person has to get the treatment or support they desperately need.

Oh really? You mean like the Proud Boys and the 3 Percenters? Those idiots are not a Well Regulated Militia.

Yes, that’s what I wrote earlier. But to not ban assault weapons because it won’t do much to prevent suicides is not the kind of thing reasonable adults do.

And the only time Republicans say they care about mental health is when they are using it to deflect away the need for sensible gun laws.

Washington leading several state militias against the Whiskey Rebellion shows how the state militias were controlled by the Federal government. That was my point and why I included that historical fact. 

The 2A is part of the Federal Constitution. How is the PA Declaration of Rights relevant? However, your quote from the PA Constitution does offer support that the Founders didn’t want a standing army in Peace time which you seemed skeptical of in an earlier comment.

Ok, not knowing how the Founders and Framers felt about standing armies in that period of time is like not knowing that they drew their S like an F in those times.

Because the United States didn’t have, and didn’t want at the time, a standing army (or navy) , militias - that is, well regulated militias, were needed to provide a defense against attack, invasion, and civil unrest. You’ll recall that President George Washington requested and led the militias sent by several states to put down the Whiskey Rebellion in western Pennsylvania.

The Second Amendment reads as follows: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

From these words it should be clear that the original intent of the Second Amendment was to ensure that no State passed a law to prohibit the people from owning guns, because that would impede the ability of states to form and maintain militias for the purpose of defending the new country that the Constitution was creating. Because the United States didn’t have, and didn’t want at the time, a standing army (or navy) , militias - that is, well regulated militias, were needed to provide a defense against attack, invasion, and civil unrest.

You’ll recall that President George Washington requested and led the militias sent by several states to put down the Whiskey Rebellion in western Pennsylvania.

The 2A was never about an individual right to own firearms for self defense or to defend against a tyrannical federal government. That idea was created out of thin air by the Supreme Court in the 2008 DC v. Heller decision. This decision was very ironic coming from the strict constructionist and textualist wing of the court. 

The 2A as written is firmly obsolete, much like the third amendment prohibiting the quartering of troops in peoples’ houses. The reason of course is that we don’t have well regulated militias anymore.

We have standing armies (and a Navy and Air Force) that makes militias a thing of the past. To make matters worse, guns have become a scourge in America with their numbers exceeding the number of citizens, and were used in the death of nearly 50,000 Americans annually.

That is according to the most recent data from the Center for Disease Control, which tracks the number of gun related deaths including suicides, which accounts for approximately half of all gun deaths in the country.

Perhaps even worse than the number of gun deaths in this country is the fact that guns are the leading cause of death for children in this country. More than car accidents, or drownings, illness or disease. That is a pretty high price to pay for a right that fundamentally doesn’t exist or offer much of a benefit to society. The ownership of weapons of war makes no sense even in the context of the recently invented right to self defense from the Heller decision.

Nobody needs an assault weapon with a 30 round magazine to defend themselves or their homes.

But the proliferation of these kinds of firearms has resulted in mass shootings becoming a common event in the United States in this century and resulting in the deaths of hundreds of people each year in completely random acts of violence.

The 2A needs to be amended, spelling out exactly what should be allowed and for what purpose. 

Insulin is expensive because of the free market - there’s no onerous regulation: no new or unreasonable huge hurdles or steps that require pharmaceutical companies to spend much more - it’s not regulation causing the issues at all - this would be a lie.

No, because nothing Mueller said contradicts anything I said.

First all, “did not find” evidence does not = “we found evidence of innocence”.

Second, Trump never spoke to Mueller because he refused. Apparently when you’re the president the law doesn’t apply to you.

Third, when Trump practiced his testimony with his own attorneys they told him if he testified he’d end up in an Orange jumpsuit. Again; his attorneys.

Regarding what we both said, both statements affirm that Russia interfere in our election.

Welcoming help from a foreign adversary is not conspiracy.

Organizing your campaign around what you anticipate a foreign adversary is going to do is not conspiracy.

So once again, you’ve taken the intentionally high standard of beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law and are applying it to a conversation based in the court of public opinion. When you have no defense against the facts, this is what you have to stoop to.

The facts indisputably show that Russia interfered with the 2016 election, the Trump campaign welcomed that help, and to some extent they organized their campaign around the help Russia was providing.

There is nothing corrupt or dishonest about acknowledging this and reasonably speculating as to how far it went.

Pelosi has zero investments in oil.... what does that tell the average investor?

No, you haven’t. You listed a few things Biden did that were “bad”, but failed to mention the part that actually matters and I’ve asked you for repeatedly; to quantify the impacts of any of the things you mentioned. Never asked for an exact figure, but some kind of reasonable estimate we can use to advance the conversation. Unsurprisingly, you’ve offered nothing.

If gas prices went up $3 a gallon and Biden is responsible for 35 cents, I’m not interested in hearing what you’re talking about. You’re the one claiming he’s responsible. Support your damn claim.

And the whole forties futures thing is especially entertaining. Essentially your argument was that Biden is responsible because of the things he said he was going to do, thereby freaking out the entire market. I mean, you really think investors are this stupid.

If it’s all about futures and what someone says then you just undercut your own argument on why Trump was so good. You keep excusing his conduct because of his policies but also according to you his policies on this do not matter since it’s all about what investors feel.

So investigating a president who tried to overthrow an election and invited a mob to attack the US Capitol gives good reason for republicans to investigate a president for anything?

Interesting logic there.

What did he do to raise prices globally?