What would it take for you to switch?

A shotgun and judge are better.

 

I need a nuclear weapon to protect my free state from people like you. Should I get one?

 

This is why i would never vote D.

 

No they aren't. Shot guns typically have a limited capacity, are slow to reload and are inaccurate except at short range. And they have a lot of recoil making them harder to shoot. An Ar 15 is much much better.

Are you going to use the judge as a human shield?

 

Can you carry aka bear it?

 

Tell me what weapon exactly were they carrying?

You realize an ar 15 is not a high powered rifle which is partly why it's such a good tool.

 

Just in case the context matters, hint, it does.

like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man's case that just took place in Florida ... to go to court would have taken a long time," Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.

"Take the guns first, go through due process second," Trump said.

 

I would vote for a Democrat who does not:
- Advocate Keynesian economics.
- Bring up Identity Politics whenever given the chance.
- Believe a bigger government equals greater freedom.
- Think equality can come without liberty.
- Think competition is something evil.
- Regard the individual as a helpless baby.
- Support interventionism and war.
- Wish to take away people's guns.

 

Yes,. a shot gun and a Judge are better. You don't need an AR 15 in a neighborhood.

 

I disagee and so do experts. Which is why i disagree

 

The sad things is most people agree with the same ideas, we have all just been manipulated into believing that any ideas outside of the party we identify with is evil.

I saw a program a few years back and reporters were asking people if you support specific ideas your candidate did and just about everyone agreed — then the reporter would tell them it wasn’t actually their candidates ideas but the idea of their opponents.

I think one of the easiest solutions would be to just remove the party affiliation on ballots so voters have to pick policy and not party. The duopoly is what’s destroying this country.

 

With a presidential candidate I could pick policy over party but congress is a different story. Once elected they are pretty much forced into the party vote even if that's not what they think or said to get elected.
Having said that a presidential candidate will never make it to the general election if his policies stray to far from the party's policies so it's a moot point and you pretty much have to vote party.

 

When Trump is gone, I can switch back to the GOP.

from the BaltimoreSun.com

"Finally, while we would not sink to name-calling in the Trumpian manner — or ruefully point out that he failed to spell the congressman’s name correctly (it’s Cummings, not Cumming) — we would tell the most dishonest man to ever occupy the Oval Office, the mocker of war heroes, the gleeful grabber of women’s private parts, the serial bankrupter of businesses, the useful idiot of Vladimir Putin and the guy who insisted there are “good people” among murderous neo-Nazis that he’s still not fooling most Americans into believing he’s even slightly competent in his current post. Or that he possesses a scintilla of integrity. Better to have some vermin living in your neighborhood than to be one."

 

Narrator: He's never switching back to the GOP.

 

Why did the signees make a provision for amendments?

 

Why was a SCOTUS created, when nine states had judicial review as part of their constitutions?

 

As a social left leaning fiscally right leaning independent for me to vote republican.

Healthcare is a right.
A national ID card with smart tech that includes automatic voter registration and needed for employment.
A flat tax
replacement of SS with a fed poverty level income at retirement.

 

It's not a provision.

 

Yes, Robert E. Allen, it is a provision and your disagreement is not part of it.

The Founders did not expect us to read the document literally more than 200 years ago, and that is why it has a provision for amendments and a SCOTUS.

 

I'm sorry i misread your post..

My brain was thinking 2nd ammendment. And i thought you were saying that the malitia was A provision for the right to keep and bear arms, which of course it has proven not to be.

I would howeve say that it is written in stone that and provision to change the constitution would not include anything that eliminates anything in thr bill of rights. Attempting to change the bill of rights would be legitimate grounds for legitimate revolution.
For instance a repeal of the 2nd ammendment would give gun owners the moral obligation to resist the government.

 

A repeal of the 2dA by amendment or SCOTUS (the latter which would never happen) would morally require the loyal Americans to put down any 2dA set-in-stone treason.

I don't think LEO or military would be necessary. Americans who understand the Constitution would put down easily the so-called 'constitutionalists.'

 

No that's wrong, a repeal of the 2nd ammendment would morally require gun owners to stand and fight against the government a fight nearly all of the police and military would side with gun owners.

It is morally wrong to supoort any more gun control laws im America.

 

You are wrong. True Americans would put the 2dA gun supporters down before the LEO or police were even notified.

The police and LEO would never line up with the 2dA supporters..

 

Are you suggesting violence against supporters of the 2nd Amendment?

 

So you're saying that as long as the stated policies are more to your liking, you're willing to overlook everything else. How sad.

IMO, there should be threshold qualifications for candidates that apply BEFORE any political positions are taken into account:

1. Are they basically honest?
2. Are they reasonably transparent?
3. Are they at least marginally informed?
4. Do they understand that the president represents ALL Americans? Are they divisive or uniting?

Trump fails all of those tests. He should never have been in contention, for reasons that have nothing to do with politics.

So kick him out. ANY replacement GOP candidate will support the policies you prefer, and you won't have to hold your nose to vote for them.

If Trump wins the 2020 GOP nomination anyway, don't vote for him. Better four years of governance by someone you disagree with politically than allowing a completely unsuitable person like Trump to continue occupying the Oval Office.