jesus if he ends up as president because sanders people split the vote ....
Then I will live in the woods like Thoreau and write my musings upon the nature of simple living, only twice as long: four years, four months and four days.
Suck it, Thoreau.
I guess compared to you, he wasn't as Thoreau as he could have been.
jesus if he ends up as president because sanders people split the vote ....
it's bizarre that people are seeing polls like that and are taking away the notion that it was Sanders that made them more conservative, and not that Sanders drew in a substantial number of conservative voters who wouldn't normally vote for a Democrat (or, at least, who wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton)
It's West Virginia, things are going to be skewed anyways. It's really weird to make any kind of national prediction based on one state's primary exit polling.
+3
Options
kaceypwe stayed bright as lightningwe sang loud as thunderRegistered Userregular
ah, I thought it was an open primary, but no, you're right, it's all registered Democrats. still, it's a little short-sighted to blame Sanders for the fact that a substantial number of conservative West Virginia Democrats are going to defect to vote for the Republican candidate (or at least that's what they say they're going to do, six months away from the election) in lieu of voting for Clinton. after all, Sanders didn't make her say that she was going to hamstring the coal industry prior to the primary in the state that's the most dependent on said industry.
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
Sanders is the democrat that doesn't believe in gun control and west virginia is a state ripe for a populist of any brand against an establishment of any brand- It's both very white and very poor. Poor white guys with nothing to lose don't stand to lose much in a Trump presidency. I'm not sure why people are shocked that WV would split that vote for him.
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
jesus if he ends up as president because sanders people split the vote ....
Then I will live in the woods like Thoreau and write my musings upon the nature of simple living, only twice as long: four years, four months and four days.
Suck it, Thoreau.
Also you won't go home three times a week for cookies.
Blackhawk1313Demon Hunter for HireTime RiftRegistered Userregular
I know it's CNN... but did anyone see their breakdown of the political realities of building a wall? It's fascinating both from a general view of our processes and also from a view of the extraordinary unliklihood of such a thing ever actually being done.
Sanders is the democrat that doesn't believe in gun control and west virginia is a state ripe for a populist of any brand against an establishment of any brand- It's both very white and very poor. Poor white guys with nothing to lose don't stand to lose much in a Trump presidency. I'm not sure why people are shocked that WV would split that vote for him.
Strengthening and better enforcing the instant background check system, closing the gun-show loophole, making 'straw man' purchases a federal crime and banning semi-automatic assault weapons counts as "not believing in gun control" now?
0
Options
Blackhawk1313Demon Hunter for HireTime RiftRegistered Userregular
When gun makers get to run off scott free and make weapons that kill without repercussions... yes...
Sanders is the democrat that doesn't believe in gun control and west virginia is a state ripe for a populist of any brand against an establishment of any brand- It's both very white and very poor. Poor white guys with nothing to lose don't stand to lose much in a Trump presidency. I'm not sure why people are shocked that WV would split that vote for him.
Strengthening and better enforcing the instant background check system, closing the gun-show loophole, making 'straw man' purchases a federal crime and banning semi-automatic assault weapons counts as "not believing in gun control" now?
Is that phrase still in vogue?
0
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
Sanders is the democrat that doesn't believe in gun control and west virginia is a state ripe for a populist of any brand against an establishment of any brand- It's both very white and very poor. Poor white guys with nothing to lose don't stand to lose much in a Trump presidency. I'm not sure why people are shocked that WV would split that vote for him.
Strengthening and better enforcing the instant background check system, closing the gun-show loophole, making 'straw man' purchases a federal crime and banning semi-automatic assault weapons counts as "not believing in gun control" now?
Is that phrase still in vogue?
Among anti-gun people, apparently it is. Makes it easier to get rid of "scary looking" weapons that are pretty much functionally identical to Grandpa's old hunting rifle.
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
0
Options
PwnanObrienHe's right, life sucks.Registered Userregular
When gun makers get to run off scott free and make weapons that kill without repercussions... yes...
Trying to sue companies and stores for legally selling a product that was then used in an illegal act is stupid. Yeah, the action will make you feel catharsis but it's not going to work. There's no logical legal basis for suing them over a product that's perfectly legal to sell. They're not marketing guns as anything other than guns like how tobacco companies were sued over misrepresenting the health effects of their product. The guns aren't faulty like a product that accidentally kills or maims people because when guns kill and maim people it's not an accident. Even if the lawsuit had a leg to stand on the gun industry is going to throw money at that lawsuit until they win and then they're going to counter-sue for damages. You think they won't? These are people whose business model is based around selling guns specifically designed to kill large crowds of people to the kind of people unstable enough to want to own something like that. They'll sue the victims and families of victims of a mass shooting for slander or whatever trumped up charges they can get away with and with the fervor of republican pundits and gun nuts they'll be cheered while doing it. Hell, any time there's scaremongering about spooky liberals coming to take guns away (usually after the sort of mass shooting that probably should result in somebody taking some guns away) their sales go up. The answer isn't suing them, even if by some miracle it worked it would be a slap on the wrist that only inconveniences them. Car manufacturers deal with negligence law all the time and it doesn't stop them and unlike guns cars aren't supposed to kill people. The answer is to ban this shit. Make it illegal. To what degree guns should be banned and to what degree the American people will want is debatable but we're not going to get anywhere trying to convince the gun industry not to sell guns.
Legally protecting the companies from being sued is also stupid. No other industry in the country gets protections like that.
A ton of industries have protections for liability. I literally can't even use iTunes without signing off on the part of the EULA that says I can't use the product to develop, design, manufacture or produce missiles, or nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
Legally protecting the companies from being sued is also stupid. No other industry in the country gets protections like that.
A ton of industries have protections for liability. I literally can't even use iTunes without signing off on the part of the EULA that says I can't use the product to develop, design, manufacture or produce missiles, or nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
What? Why are you conflating a EULA--something that hasn't even been proven enforcable in court since no one's taken the time/money to find out and see--with a law that protects gun manufacturers from being sued for any reason? I could sue Apple if I wanted for whatever reason I wanted to, including that I think their EULA's full of shit. I might lose, but I'd still be able to sue them. I couldn't do that with gun manufacturers in areas protected by laws like Sanders supported, the suit would be shut down at the word go.
I wholeheartedly believe we're in for eight years of President Trump. Because good is dumb
Thing is here evil is dumb too.
Honestly the depressing thing is that the reason Hillary will win here is because powerful people both stand to lose if Trump wins and gain if Hillary wins.
a Trump win would be extraordinarily bad for the status quo
Legally protecting the companies from being sued is also stupid. No other industry in the country gets protections like that.
Vaccine makers can't be held liable or taken to court. Even if the vaccine itself is faulty.
Small aircraft makers can't be taken to court once aircraft reach a certain age.
ISPs can't be taken to court or held liable for anything anyone does with their service.
Medical device makers can't be held liable for most things.
Gun makers can be held liable for defects. Sellers can be held accountable for not following checks and registration, selling to someone who makes known they intend to use it for illegal purposes.
So there are still instances where they are liable, much like any industry, you just can't try to sue them for their product working as intended.
Just do what Australia did and ban all guns unless you can show an actual need for them, and then you get something that is functional for that purpose. Legislate education with an emphasis on gun safety and require proper storage or the permit is revoked or suspended.
Also allow people to keep guns at shooting ranges (with proper permitting and oversight) so that hobbyists can still do their thing.
Then snook the white liganta and immediately polish the dramentic shtakk because you're fucking dreaming if you think any of that will fly in 'Murrica.
Sanders is the democrat that doesn't believe in gun control and west virginia is a state ripe for a populist of any brand against an establishment of any brand- It's both very white and very poor. Poor white guys with nothing to lose don't stand to lose much in a Trump presidency. I'm not sure why people are shocked that WV would split that vote for him.
didn't Hillary also give a speech where she said that we need to get rid of coal
"Be full of faith and so full of joy that this team was chosen to fight a long battle," Heidi Cruz said. "Think that slavery -- it took 25 years to defeat slavery. That is a lot longer than four years. ... We're going to keep moving forward."
Posts
Fuck it! I'm going to bed!
Aww I was about to make this one
I laughed so hard I woke the baby.
Goddammit Josh.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
it's bizarre that people are seeing polls like that and are taking away the notion that it was Sanders that made them more conservative, and not that Sanders drew in a substantial number of conservative voters who wouldn't normally vote for a Democrat (or, at least, who wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton)
Or was I reading it incorrectly?
ah, I thought it was an open primary, but no, you're right, it's all registered Democrats. still, it's a little short-sighted to blame Sanders for the fact that a substantial number of conservative West Virginia Democrats are going to defect to vote for the Republican candidate (or at least that's what they say they're going to do, six months away from the election) in lieu of voting for Clinton. after all, Sanders didn't make her say that she was going to hamstring the coal industry prior to the primary in the state that's the most dependent on said industry.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
Also you won't go home three times a week for cookies.
but what if Bernie Sanders was an alien trying to prevent Hillary Clinton from getting access to those files
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
Hey!!!
Strengthening and better enforcing the instant background check system, closing the gun-show loophole, making 'straw man' purchases a federal crime and banning semi-automatic assault weapons counts as "not believing in gun control" now?
Is that phrase still in vogue?
Among anti-gun people, apparently it is. Makes it easier to get rid of "scary looking" weapons that are pretty much functionally identical to Grandpa's old hunting rifle.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Trying to sue companies and stores for legally selling a product that was then used in an illegal act is stupid. Yeah, the action will make you feel catharsis but it's not going to work. There's no logical legal basis for suing them over a product that's perfectly legal to sell. They're not marketing guns as anything other than guns like how tobacco companies were sued over misrepresenting the health effects of their product. The guns aren't faulty like a product that accidentally kills or maims people because when guns kill and maim people it's not an accident. Even if the lawsuit had a leg to stand on the gun industry is going to throw money at that lawsuit until they win and then they're going to counter-sue for damages. You think they won't? These are people whose business model is based around selling guns specifically designed to kill large crowds of people to the kind of people unstable enough to want to own something like that. They'll sue the victims and families of victims of a mass shooting for slander or whatever trumped up charges they can get away with and with the fervor of republican pundits and gun nuts they'll be cheered while doing it. Hell, any time there's scaremongering about spooky liberals coming to take guns away (usually after the sort of mass shooting that probably should result in somebody taking some guns away) their sales go up. The answer isn't suing them, even if by some miracle it worked it would be a slap on the wrist that only inconveniences them. Car manufacturers deal with negligence law all the time and it doesn't stop them and unlike guns cars aren't supposed to kill people. The answer is to ban this shit. Make it illegal. To what degree guns should be banned and to what degree the American people will want is debatable but we're not going to get anywhere trying to convince the gun industry not to sell guns.
You would think..... but with the wonderous world of contractors you have another layer of ablative armor
This is actually pretty close to where I live back home and I have it memorised as a party trick of sorts
A ton of industries have protections for liability. I literally can't even use iTunes without signing off on the part of the EULA that says I can't use the product to develop, design, manufacture or produce missiles, or nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
What? Why are you conflating a EULA--something that hasn't even been proven enforcable in court since no one's taken the time/money to find out and see--with a law that protects gun manufacturers from being sued for any reason? I could sue Apple if I wanted for whatever reason I wanted to, including that I think their EULA's full of shit. I might lose, but I'd still be able to sue them. I couldn't do that with gun manufacturers in areas protected by laws like Sanders supported, the suit would be shut down at the word go.
But like not in a good way
Vaccine makers can't be held liable or taken to court. Even if the vaccine itself is faulty.
Small aircraft makers can't be taken to court once aircraft reach a certain age.
ISPs can't be taken to court or held liable for anything anyone does with their service.
Medical device makers can't be held liable for most things.
Gun makers can be held liable for defects. Sellers can be held accountable for not following checks and registration, selling to someone who makes known they intend to use it for illegal purposes.
So there are still instances where they are liable, much like any industry, you just can't try to sue them for their product working as intended.
Considering how important hunting is to my state's economy, I have some issues with that.
eeeeh, bare minimum it's still a good idea to enable and allow proper hunting
https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
Also allow people to keep guns at shooting ranges (with proper permitting and oversight) so that hobbyists can still do their thing.
Then snook the white liganta and immediately polish the dramentic shtakk because you're fucking dreaming if you think any of that will fly in 'Murrica.
Handguns, on the other hand, are an awful idea with little to no redeeming use. Pretty much every gun related crime or whatever is a damn handgun.
That shit needs to be sorted.
And firearms fucking terrify me.
didn't Hillary also give a speech where she said that we need to get rid of coal
of course she did poorly there
good post content/sig combination here
Heidi Cruz, everybody.
... Yeeeeah.