2020 US General Election Thread VIII: Cs, Ds, and Es

[San Lumen]

I didn't say that. I told you to do it.

So then why aren't you go to Belarus and start one there? It's only fair.

Because Im not a Belorussian citizen that's why.

[Dresderstan]

So then why aren't you go to Belarus and start one there? It's only fair.

Because Im not a Belorussian citizen that's why.

Then why is it you constantly keep calling for a revolution and standing up to Putin when you don't even have to fight at all?

[San Lumen]

Because Im not a Belorussian citizen that's why.

Then why is it you constantly keep calling for a revolution and standing up to Putin when you don't even have to fight at all?

Belarus isn't the thread topic. You merely dont want to answer the fact you want election officials to be in contempt of court and aren't willing to do what you say is necessary to get what you want.

[Post War America]

True. I mean they fall generally on the 'left' but I would describe them as more centre. To be fair his argument still works, given that many probably see SocDems as being leftist anyway, although not as often on here.

That brings up another point, the concepts of "left" and "right" are outdated and make no sense in modern political contexts

An example, Italian fascism, generally considered far-right, is a revolutionary ideology calling for massive societal change

Absolute monarchism, also considered far-right, is the opposite of a revolutionary ideology and calls for a return to tradition

Anarcho capitalism, yet another "fair-right" ideology calls for radical libertarianism without government intervention

Its almost as if an 18th century French Republican parliamentary array from monarchists to radical republicans isn't applicable to modern political descriptions.

[Dresderstan]

Then why is it you constantly keep calling for a revolution and standing up to Putin when you don't even have to fight at all?

Belarus isn't the thread topic. You merely dont want to answer the fact you want election officials to be in contempt of court and aren't willing to do what you say is necessary to get what you want.

Because robbing the people of a different democratic choice that isn't the duopoly of Democrats or Republicans is a violation of their democratic will full stop.

[Zurkerx]

We're getting a bit off topic here: the thread is about the 2020 Election, not Belarus. Take it to the Belarus Thread.

[San Lumen]

Belarus isn't the thread topic. You merely dont want to answer the fact you want election officials to be in contempt of court and aren't willing to do what you say is necessary to get what you want.

Because robbing the people of a different democratic choice that isn't the duopoly of Democrats or Republicans is a violation of their democratic will full stop.

Not following the law isn't robbing anyone of anything. What is the point in having filing requirement if they are just going to be ignored? It's not undemocratic to throw a party off the ballot of not properly filing.

If it was the either the Democrats or Republicans parties kicked off the ballot would you singing the same tune?

[Dresderstan]

Because robbing the people of a different democratic choice that isn't the duopoly of Democrats or Republicans is a violation of their democratic will full stop.

Not following the law isn't robbing anyone of anything. What is the point in having filing requirement if they are just going to be ignored? It's not undemocratic to throw a party off the ballot of not properly filing.

If it was the either the Democrats or Republicans parties kicked off the ballot would you singing the same tune?

Why do you hate democracy so much to deny people different choices?

[San Lumen]

Not following the law isn't robbing anyone of anything. What is the point in having filing requirement if they are just going to be ignored? It's not undemocratic to throw a party off the ballot of not properly filing.

If it was the either the Democrats or Republicans parties kicked off the ballot would you singing the same tune?

Why do you hate democracy so much to deny people different choices?

I don't. I have no problem with people having choices but rules have to be followed too.

Why do you hate democracy by wanting urban areas shafted out of their fair share of representation and have by having no issue with unfair maps you say could be won by the other side if they just tried harder?

[Major-Tom]

Because robbing the people of a different democratic choice that isn't the duopoly of Democrats or Republicans is a violation of their democratic will full stop.

Not following the law isn't robbing anyone of anything. What is the point in having filing requirement if they are just going to be ignored? It's not undemocratic to throw a party off the ballot of not properly filing.

If it was the either the Democrats or Republicans parties kicked off the ballot would you singing the same tune?

Reading the article at hand here, it would appear that the decision honestly should've been to let them stay on the ballot. They made a small mistake, as do many parties in many states, but they shouldn't have been denied ballot access as a result.

I really can't stand the Green Party either, but at the same time, their denial was politically motivated.

[Dresderstan]

Why do you hate democracy so much to deny people different choices?

I don't. I have no problem with people having choices but rules have to be followed too.

Why do you hate democracy by wanting urban areas shafted out of their fair share of representation and have by having no issue with unfair maps you say could be won by the other side if they just tried harder?

No it's a blatant attempt to prevent a "spoiler" from appearing on the ballot.

I don't, that's just you making noise.

[San Lumen]

I don't. I have no problem with people having choices but rules have to be followed too.

Why do you hate democracy by wanting urban areas shafted out of their fair share of representation and have by having no issue with unfair maps you say could be won by the other side if they just tried harder?

No it's a blatant attempt to prevent a "spoiler" from appearing on the ballot.

I don't, that's just you making noise.

How is a blatant attempt?

You have said multiple times in the past that urban areas shouldnt get the representation they do and you literally said earlier that Democrats could win in Wisconsin if they just tried harder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Californi ... ngress.tif

You called this map horribly gerrymandered and said the Los Angeles area having as many districts as it does gerrymandering.

[Dresderstan]

No it's a blatant attempt to prevent a "spoiler" from appearing on the ballot.

I don't, that's just you making noise.

How is a blatant attempt?

You have said multiple times in the past that urban areas shouldnt get the representation they do and you literally said earlier that Democrats could win in Wisconsin if they just tried harder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Californi ... ngress.tif

You called this map horribly gerrymandered and said the Los Angeles area having as many districts as it does gerrymandering.

From your AP article

The court in a 5-2 Democratic majority reversed the ruling by a Republican judge on the candidacy of Howie Hawkins. In this case, Democrats targeted what they said were disqualifying irregularities in how the Green Party candidate filed affidavits that accompany paperwork to get on the ballot.

"They say" is not proof or evidence or anything, it was a clear blatant political action.

I did not say that stop lying do you fucking want me to say I no longer hold such position or what to get you to shut up?

[San Lumen]

How is a blatant attempt?

You have said multiple times in the past that urban areas shouldnt get the representation they do and you literally said earlier that Democrats could win in Wisconsin if they just tried harder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Californi ... ngress.tif

You called this map horribly gerrymandered and said the Los Angeles area having as many districts as it does gerrymandering.

From your AP article

The court in a 5-2 Democratic majority reversed the ruling by a Republican judge on the candidacy of Howie Hawkins. In this case, Democrats targeted what they said were disqualifying irregularities in how the Green Party candidate filed affidavits that accompany paperwork to get on the ballot.

"They say" is not proof or evidence or anything, it was a clear blatant political action.

I did not say that stop lying do you fucking want me to say I no longer hold such position or what to get you to shut up?

Have you therefore changed your mind and understand the concept of population density and that determines how much seats they get therefore it’s not gerrymandering?

[Dresderstan]

From your AP article



"They say" is not proof or evidence or anything, it was a clear blatant political action.

I did not say that stop lying do you fucking want me to say I no longer hold such position or what to get you to shut up?

Have you therefore changed your mind and understand the concept of population density and that determines how much seats they get therefore it’s not gerrymandering?

If you think so then yes, now can you please drop it, forever?

[San Lumen]

Have you therefore changed your mind and understand the concept of population density and that determines how much seats they get therefore it’s not gerrymandering?

If you think so then yes, now can you please drop it, forever?

Yes or no? It’s a simple question.

[Dresderstan]

If you think so then yes, now can you please drop it, forever?

Yes or no? It’s a simple question.

If you think so then yes

[San Lumen]

Yes or no? It’s a simple question.

If you think so then yes

That’s not an answer.

[Dresderstan]

That’s not an answer.

Are you blind do you not see the yes in there?

[San Lumen]

That’s not an answer.

Are you blind do you not see the yes in there?

You said if I think so. That does not mean you no longer hold this belief.

[Dresderstan]

Are you blind do you not see the yes in there?

You said if I think so. That does not mean you no longer hold this belief.

Probably because I don't.

[San Lumen]

You said if I think so. That does not mean you no longer hold this belief.

Probably because I don't.

There is no probably. It’s a simple yes or no. How hard is it for you to say I no longer believe a metropolitan area getting its fair share of representation is gerrymandering.

[Dresderstan]

Probably because I don't.

There is no probably. It’s a simple yes or no. How hard is it for you to say I no longer believe a metropolitan area getting its fair share of representation is gerrymandering.

Because I don't?

[San Lumen]

There is no probably. It’s a simple yes or no. How hard is it for you to say I no longer believe a metropolitan area getting its fair share of representation is gerrymandering.

Because I don't?

Do you believe that or not? Why is it so difficult for you to say yes or no?

[Dresderstan]

Because I don't?

Do you believe that or not? Why is it so difficult for you to say yes or no?

I just said I don't why is it so hard for you to understand that?