Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
No you're not. The only thing you've done since suddenly becoming active in the last month is talk politics and try to bait people into reacting to "questions". I expect you to go dark in December like you were the past 9 years.
Say something specific about the recent 3 SC justices or say nothing at all.
2000 was won through the legal process that has been established through most of the country's history. A heist is breaking into businesses because it's convenient when you're already wearing a Covid mask, young, and an idiot amongst a crowd of other idiots, protected by politicians that hamstring law enforcement from doing the jobs they were specifically paid to do.
As I said, I'm open to changing the electoral college because it won't matter in the long run. The result is the same; the non-contributors or worse will make the contributors feel so bad they won't stick up for themselves, and liberty will be murdered.
My vote doesn't matter anywhere, and especially Oregon. I'll vote with my will and intellect, which is way more formidable than my political persuasion.
|
You call it 'baiting' because I ask solid questions that basically go unanswered.
The 2000 election was a heist and the appointments are much about contesting the upcoming election, if need be. 2016 was mostly done through voter roll purging done under the guise of many people with similar names (targeted, as well as what district they're in) supposedly voting in more than one state. Look up Greg Palast for an explanation.
That old saw about reds being the 'contributors' has always been dull.
Explain:
Quote:
|
... will make the contributors feel so bad they won't stick up for themselves, and liberty will be murdered.
|