US Midterm Elections Megathread III: Hitting The Wall

[USS Monitor]

Remember, doing what a veteran advised you to do means you hate veterans.

> trans

I don't think that mentally ill can understand patriotism.

There is another thread about that topic. You may want to go over there and tone down the rhetoric just a bit.

The caravan stopped so the Dems would not lose too much in the Midterm. They gave them the order to halt to make think people Trump would not stand for it. But it does. They will be moving soon to the border. Very dangerous for America. Democrats can't be trusted, think of Killarys mails! Sane Americans vote Republicans, but the Dems keep importing people to vore Democratic. Which is fraud. The invasion and replacement of Americans must be stopped.

*** Warned for trolling ***

Picking on Vass for being trans added nothing to this conversation except for being rude, and neither do political nicknames like "Killary." Please read the forum rules because you're not off to a good start.

[Napkiraly]

Pretty sure no one has cared about the 10th Amendment for a hundred years.

You may find this hard to believe, but there are Progressives that believe in States Rights, just in a different way than many Conservatives.

Yes we are aware that a lot of progressives wish to shove their ideals onto everyone but when it comes to things like gun control all of a sudden the wishes of the local state population matters.

[Petrasylvania]

Shame that the FAKE media is piling up on the Donald again. Democrats are traitors to America.

Account founded today, David Duke 2020.

Not Suspicious At All.

[Post War America]

Never change social media, never change.

Can we just nuke twitter?

How tho?

[Shrillland]

You may find this hard to believe, but there are Progressives that believe in States Rights, just in a different way than many Conservatives.

Yes we are aware that a lot of progressives wish to shove their ideals onto everyone but when it comes to things like gun control all of a sudden the wishes of the local state population matters.

Not right now. I think I-1639 was somewhat premature given the current climate. Like WRA, I too believe we're on the cusp of total chaos in this country.

[Post War America]

You may find this hard to believe, but there are Progressives that believe in States Rights, just in a different way than many Conservatives.

Yes we are aware that a lot of progressives wish to shove their ideals onto everyone but when it comes to things like gun control all of a sudden the wishes of the local state population matters.

Kinda like how evangelicals want to do it the same?

[Napkiraly]

lol this woman is in congress

(Image)

other lols

(Image)
(Image)
(Image)

Never change social media, never change.

Someone should write a book titled The Biggest Lie: How the Internet Drew Us Further Apart.

[Thermodolia]

Can we just nuke twitter?

How tho?

Idk. Shut them down and arrest them?

[Napkiraly]

Yes we are aware that a lot of progressives wish to shove their ideals onto everyone but when it comes to things like gun control all of a sudden the wishes of the local state population matters.

Kinda like how evangelicals want to do it the same?

I'm not a big fan of evangelicals and some of the shit they want to impose either.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Yes we are aware that a lot of progressives wish to shove their ideals onto everyone but when it comes to things like gun control all of a sudden the wishes of the local state population matters.

Not right now. I think I-1639 was somewhat premature given the current climate.

I'm actually kind of excited for it tbh, it has all sorts of constitutional issues and we're already gearing up to give Justice Kavanaugh his first chance to put out a pro-gun ruling.

[Mardla]

Yes we are aware that a lot of progressives wish to shove their ideals onto everyone but when it comes to things like gun control all of a sudden the wishes of the local state population matters.

Kinda like how evangelicals want to do it the same?

That would be bullshit, social conservatism has almost never been pushed on a Federal level. What is considered "social conservatism" on a Federal level is states' rights, that is, leaving the states to decide, whereas social liberalism on a Federal level means pushing lib agendas on the states.

[Thermodolia]

Kinda like how evangelicals want to do it the same?

That would be bullshit, social conservatism has almost never been pushed on a Federal level. What is considered "social conservatism" on a Federal level is states' rights, that is, leaving the states to decide, whereas social liberalism on a Federal level means pushing lib agendas on the states.

right...

[Great Franconia and Verana]

Kinda like how evangelicals want to do it the same?

That would be bullshit, social conservatism has almost never been pushed on a Federal level. What is considered "social conservatism" on a Federal level is states' rights, that is, leaving the states to decide, whereas social liberalism on a Federal level means pushing lib agendas on the states.

Casually forgets that DOMA was a thing.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Kinda like how evangelicals want to do it the same?

That would be bullshit, social conservatism has almost never been pushed on a Federal level. What is considered "social conservatism" on a Federal level is states' rights, that is, leaving the states to decide, whereas social liberalism on a Federal level means pushing lib agendas on the states.

Actually both sides at the federal level are staunch federalists, but for their own ends.

There's nothing about either side that says "vote for me and I will roll back federal powers so that the states can have more power".

[Seangoli]

Kinda like how evangelicals want to do it the same?

That would be bullshit, social conservatism has almost never been pushed on a Federal level. What is considered "social conservatism" on a Federal level is states' rights, that is, leaving the states to decide, whereas social liberalism on a Federal level means pushing lib agendas on the states.

The last time states rights were stronger, wonderful and amazing abuses against various all sorts of people were not only allowed, but accepted and encouraged at times.

You can blame a select number of Southern states for the lack of "states rights".

[Mardla]

That would be bullshit, social conservatism has almost never been pushed on a Federal level. What is considered "social conservatism" on a Federal level is states' rights, that is, leaving the states to decide, whereas social liberalism on a Federal level means pushing lib agendas on the states.

Casually forgets that DOMA was a thing.

DOMA didn't actually take away the rights of states to grant same-sex marriage.

[Mardla]

That would be bullshit, social conservatism has almost never been pushed on a Federal level. What is considered "social conservatism" on a Federal level is states' rights, that is, leaving the states to decide, whereas social liberalism on a Federal level means pushing lib agendas on the states.

The last time states rights were stronger, wonderful and amazing abuses against various all sorts of people were not only allowed, but accepted and encouraged at times.

You can blame a select number of Southern states for the lack of "states rights".

I rather blame Woodrow Wilson.

[Arlenton]

lol this woman is in congress

(Image)

other lols

(Image)
(Image)
(Image)

Lmfao

[San Lumen]

Shame that the FAKE media is piling up on the Donald again. Democrats are traitors to America.

Yeah what a shame the media isnt propaganda like in China or Russia. That damm first amendment

[Petrasylvania]

lol this woman is in congress

(Image)

other lols

(Image)
(Image)
(Image)

Lmfao

You two are acting like she assaulted a journalist.

[Petrasylvania]

Shame that the FAKE media is piling up on the Donald again. Democrats are traitors to America.

Yeah what a shame the media isnt propaganda like in China or Russia. That damm first amendment

Founded Nov 7.

[Mardla]

That would be bullshit, social conservatism has almost never been pushed on a Federal level. What is considered "social conservatism" on a Federal level is states' rights, that is, leaving the states to decide, whereas social liberalism on a Federal level means pushing lib agendas on the states.

Actually both sides at the federal level are staunch federalists, but for their own ends.

There's nothing about either side that says "vote for me and I will roll back federal powers so that the states can have more power".

That's the nature of the system, as per John Calhoun. That's caused by leaving the appointment of SCOTUS judges up to executive instead of the states. Obviously the Constitution will empower the National Government more and more and take away more and more power from the states if its interpretation is left to a court made up completely of judges selected by the National Government. The only way this could really be fixed is a new system of appointing judges that the state government's are involved with, or perhaps selecting them by an organization directly accountable to state governments.

[Petrasylvania]

Casually forgets that DOMA was a thing.

DOMA didn't actually take away the rights of states to grant same-sex marriage.

I could swear it restricted marriage benefits to heterosexual couples.

[Napkiraly]

I would say that the GOP has a genuine state's rights faction and a federalist faction that at times pretends like it's pro-state's right, whilst the Democrats are almost entirely federalist at heart. While there are/were Republicans that campaigned heavily to ban things like same-sex marriage at the federal level there were still a lot who purely just wanted that handled at the state level. Same goes for gun rights, where you have some Republicans that are okay with NY or CA controlling guns however they want but don't want it imposed on their own states whilst others are for full blown nationwide deregulation. Democrats are really only more "state's rights" as a stop gap until they feel they can impose their ideals on the rest of the country whilst with the GOP it's more of a mixed bag.

[Mardla]

DOMA didn't actually take away the rights of states to grant same-sex marriage.

I could swear it restricted marriage benefits to heterosexual couples.

In Federal matters, not in state matters.