2016 Presidential Primaries
- Thread starter Al
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
funkblast
I posted in the RO-me thread
and all I got was
a pink username!
All corny Trump memes aside, who here is actually going to vote for Trump in November?
Last edited:
Festering Anus
Cheeto Hans
funkblast
I posted in the RO-me thread
and all I got was
a pink username!
And to make it even better, it's real.
http://www.richmond.com/obituaries/article_c21b60bc-1153-5abd-b3c8-268cfd32eb57.html
![[GU]elmur_fud](/data/avatars/s/47/47919.jpg?1425583194){kind=avatar}
[GU]elmur_fud
I have balls of Depleted Uranium
I still don't know who I'm voting for.
Both democratic candidates are unfit for the presidency on the grounds that they promise to ban civilian ownership of all modern, serious, non-toy rifles. You can't just ignore the constitution and be president. Come on now.
It's a sad day indeed when the stupid, racist, dishonest, unqualified man-child that is Trump might be our best option out of the two major parties.
Maybe I'll just stay home again.
What I'd like to do is vote on policies, not representatives. I'm for universal basic income, absolutely no foreign military action that isn't voted for by the people, and an honest-to-goodness "shall not be infringed" policy. Who is my candidate?
Both democratic candidates are unfit for the presidency on the grounds that they promise to ban civilian ownership of all modern, serious, non-toy rifles. You can't just ignore the constitution and be president. Come on now.
It's a sad day indeed when the stupid, racist, dishonest, unqualified man-child that is Trump might be our best option out of the two major parties.
Maybe I'll just stay home again.
What I'd like to do is vote on policies, not representatives. I'm for universal basic income, absolutely no foreign military action that isn't voted for by the people, and an honest-to-goodness "shall not be infringed" policy. Who is my candidate?
He says that but it's a lie. He calls essentially all non-toy firearms (any pistol with a detachable mag, all AR and AK types, etc.) "assault weapons", has voted to ban them, and will do so again.
Despite the reassuring language he's in truth as anti-gun as they come, and his administration would seek to criminalize everyone acquiring the guns used in regular old 3-gun competition. His policies would outlaw the sale of the pistol in my waistband right now, the pistol in my laptop bag, the AK-47 in my trunk and the AR-15 by my bed.
Despite the reassuring language he's in truth as anti-gun as they come, and his administration would seek to criminalize everyone acquiring the guns used in regular old 3-gun competition. His policies would outlaw the sale of the pistol in my waistband right now, the pistol in my laptop bag, the AK-47 in my trunk and the AR-15 by my bed.
Last edited:
anyone who cares so much about guns is not a well-rounded citizen.
with all the extremely important and significant social and economic policies up for grabs in this election, the fact that you're focusing on guns as your deciding vote is really sad.
with all the extremely important and significant social and economic policies up for grabs in this election, the fact that you're focusing on guns as your deciding vote is really sad.
I don't think it's reasonable that you should get to determine how much another person should care about anything. I'm also not interested in your opinion of how well-rounded I am.
There is one point that I'd like to clarify, though, which is that I'm not focusing on guns. I think there are a variety of topics that more deserve our attention—the end of undemocratic uses of military force, global warming, universal basic income, single-payer healthcare, single-payer public university education, police reform, education reform....
In fact, I think I shouldn't have to pay attention to guns in politics at all. We settled this dispute hundreds of years ago. The citizens of the United States of America have a protected right to arms. The end. There are much more productive topics that we should be basing our votes on. Instead, we somehow have major candidates promising to dick up remedial things.
If a Presidential candidate promised to reinstitute slavery, I would dismiss that candidate out of hand. Not because I'm focused on slavery. Not because I care about the topic so much. I would dismiss them because slavery is plainly not acceptable. We already solved that problem long ago. A person who would recommend slavery should not be regarded as a serious candidate. Perhaps you would agree.
Similarly, a person who designs to undercut the Second Amendment and violate our natural right to self-defense is not a candidate for American office. They do not meet the basic criteria. We shouldn't even consider them seriously.
There is one point that I'd like to clarify, though, which is that I'm not focusing on guns. I think there are a variety of topics that more deserve our attention—the end of undemocratic uses of military force, global warming, universal basic income, single-payer healthcare, single-payer public university education, police reform, education reform....
In fact, I think I shouldn't have to pay attention to guns in politics at all. We settled this dispute hundreds of years ago. The citizens of the United States of America have a protected right to arms. The end. There are much more productive topics that we should be basing our votes on. Instead, we somehow have major candidates promising to dick up remedial things.
If a Presidential candidate promised to reinstitute slavery, I would dismiss that candidate out of hand. Not because I'm focused on slavery. Not because I care about the topic so much. I would dismiss them because slavery is plainly not acceptable. We already solved that problem long ago. A person who would recommend slavery should not be regarded as a serious candidate. Perhaps you would agree.
Similarly, a person who designs to undercut the Second Amendment and violate our natural right to self-defense is not a candidate for American office. They do not meet the basic criteria. We shouldn't even consider them seriously.
Last edited:
[GU]elmur_fud
I have balls of Depleted Uranium
Hey not all of us are packing that much heat. There is 1 gun, a 9 shot .22 rifle, in this house. And it was given to my wife by her grandfather. Not that I don't support the right to own as many guns as you do. Just saying I know loads of Texans that don't even own one. Then again, I know plenty that own way more then you.
single-issue voters are generally low information voters.
and so far you're not making your case much brighter by harping on the 2nd Amendment as though it were found in the bible...
there's no such thing as "the end" when it comes to amendments, especially the 2nd. do some homework. you sound like a demagogue.
the 2nd Amendment - like every other amendment - has seen its share of violations and undercutting and regulation long before people like you started pretending that there was a vast Liberal conspiracy to abolish it. no one is talking in such terms. some people just want more regulations than you do. they're not saying we should ban guns. but you guys are over there like FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS, DON'T GIVE AN INCH as though the 2nd Amendment were a religious institution over whose grounds you're willing to live or die.
it's sad.
and so far you're not making your case much brighter by harping on the 2nd Amendment as though it were found in the bible...
this is just silly logic, in addition to being ignorant.
there's no such thing as "the end" when it comes to amendments, especially the 2nd. do some homework. you sound like a demagogue.
the 2nd Amendment - like every other amendment - has seen its share of violations and undercutting and regulation long before people like you started pretending that there was a vast Liberal conspiracy to abolish it. no one is talking in such terms. some people just want more regulations than you do. they're not saying we should ban guns. but you guys are over there like FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS, DON'T GIVE AN INCH as though the 2nd Amendment were a religious institution over whose grounds you're willing to live or die.
it's sad.