Post: #126

Obama consoles feminist:

Post: #127

I'm surprised that nobody has started a "Another reason to vote the Obama Biden ticket" thread.

Post: #128

(10-23-2012 03:43 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Is Romney going to steal the election? Interesting that his family will own voting machines in swing states. Now if the Obamas were buying up voting machines in Ohio can you imagine how loud the right would be screaming?

How the fuck is this even legal? Yeah, no conflict of interests here!

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/r...d-Colorado

I'm not defending this, it definitely looks sketchy. But he merely maintains a financial interest in a company that invests in these machines. He doesn't have a controlling share in that firm, and as many know he doesn't even manage these investments. Someone does it for him. Many people especially the wealthy have investments in companies that if they were up for election would make them look "sketchy" as well.

Secondly, these machines have extremely complex algorithms that cannot be hacked or tampered with by even some of the most gifted experts. Not only this, each machine must be approved by a plethora of U.S. Organizations including NIST.

Plus, think about the ramifications of this. Do you really think Romney is that stupid to try and implicate himself with something like this at this juncture of the election? Seems like further fear mongering drawing tangential connections that aren't really founded.

Post: #129

(10-23-2012 03:34 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

(10-23-2012 02:20 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Feminists are universally voting for Obama. Why are you guys voting with the feminists? Blue-pill.

Instead I'll vote with the traditional/religious conservatives, white nationalists and assorted racialists who put women (particularly white women) on absurdly high pedestals.

That wouldn't be blue pill at all, I'm sure.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I would much rather vote with traditional/religious conservatives, white nationalists and "assorted racialists" (pot, kettle, black), misogynists and what-have-you, than vote with feminists. Easily. Any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

How about you? How do you feel about the fact that your vote essentially makes you a feminist/manboobz sympathizer?

You're well within your rights. No one's judging you. But stop beating around the bush.

Own it.

Post: #130

(10-23-2012 04:01 PM)soup Wrote:  I'm surprised that nobody has started a "Another reason to vote the Obama Biden ticket" thread.

There isn't another reason.

Post: #131

(10-23-2012 04:03 PM)rationalize_this Wrote:  

(10-23-2012 03:43 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Is Romney going to steal the election? Interesting that his family will own voting machines in swing states. Now if the Obamas were buying up voting machines in Ohio can you imagine how loud the right would be screaming?

How the fuck is this even legal? Yeah, no conflict of interests here!

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/r...d-Colorado

I'm not defending this, it definitely looks sketchy. But he merely maintains a financial interest in a company that invests in these machines. He doesn't have a controlling share in that firm, and as many know he doesn't even manage these investments. Someone does it for him. Many people especially the wealthy have investments in companies that if they were up for election would make them look "sketchy" as well.

Secondly, these machines have extremely complex algorithms that cannot be hacked or tampered with by even some of the most gifted experts. Not only this, each machine must be approved by a plethora of U.S. Organizations including NIST.

Plus, think about the ramifications of this. Do you really think Romney is that stupid to try and implicate himself with something like this at this juncture of the election? Seems like further fear mongering drawing tangential connections that aren't really founded.

Voting machines can be hacked: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/22...92992.html

At the very least, all electronic voting machines should be required to print out a paper receipt.

I'm not saying Romney necessarily is going to do something shady here, but I do think we need to draw a line legally that no candidate should have any stake in any contractors or companies evolved in the election process. This is the type of financial-political cross-pollination that we really need to be vigilant against. Having Bain Capital as a major investor in the company that makes voting machines just looks bad, even if it isn't. I think it's much more suspect than someone owning a basket of stocks through a mutual fund that they don't closely monitor.

Post: #132

The current culture chaos and demise of Western civilization due to feminism, radical liberalism and rampant multiculturalism is definitely to the red-pill man's advantage, because his knowledge of seduction enables him to capitalize on freed female sexuality and rabid slutiness. As the same time, he is no doubt as to the reason for his happy times - and he knows that its soul-destroying force will eventually spell an end to civilization that made it possible. Does he bemoan this?

If you are angry, as a lot of guys on this forum are - constantly whining and yapping about feminism and all of its evils, then your whining only makes sense if you want to change it, and you change it by voting against its enablers - Obama, liberals, multiculturalists, Democrats, the New Left. Then you know you are esentially voting to end your fuck-fest, but you do so because you care more about society than your own penis. And you accept that voting this way somehow will disappoint Athlone because you vote the same way as a few hundred thousand racists in the Deep South. So then you should be consistent or STFU.

If you are pleased and want to enjoy the ride while its lasts and go out with a bang, I'd vote for Obama and those who follow in his wake, to send it spinning faster as taxes are raised that you will write more posts in here on how to avoid, redistribution increase as you discuss with Roosh buddies how to scam more, and regulation imposed and tips and tricks are shared on what to be aware of, to sate the agenda and feed the mobs that rally behind him in their quest to create some kind of new, just, egalitarian America, somehow infinitely diverse but at the same time with everyone the same and equal (equally fat, poor and stupid - where the hotties become fewer and fewer but sluttier and sluttier and we talk more and more of how much America sucks).

Post: #133

(10-23-2012 04:07 PM)captaingeneric Wrote:  I can't speak for anyone else, but I would much rather vote with traditional/religious conservatives, white nationalists and "assorted racialists" (pot, kettle, black), misogynists and what-have-you, than vote with feminists. Easily. Any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

I'd rather stand next to a feminist than a white nationalist, or folks like these.

You can take a quick look at my profile (focus on the "Additional Info" section) if you'd like to know why that is.

Quote:How about you? How do you feel about the fact that your vote essentially makes you a feminist/manboobz sympathizer?

I don't know. How do you feel about the fact that your vote essentially makes you a sympathizer to a racist (and at times outright genocidal) cause?

See how useless this game is? You sure you'd like to keep playing?

Quote:You're well within your rights. No one's judging you. But stop beating around the bush.

Own it.

Sure. I'll "own it" when you do the same on your end.

I'm acting in the self interest of myself and my family by not supporting the people who want to throw me under the bus (or out of the country) because of the way I look. I'll understand your taking a stance contrary to mine in order to serve the same purpose (were I a white male it is likely that I too would still be a conservative*), so long as you don't pretend to hold a moral high ground after you do.

*Interesting side note: I used to be a conservative.

Post: #134

(10-23-2012 04:19 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(10-23-2012 04:03 PM)rationalize_this Wrote:  

(10-23-2012 03:43 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Is Romney going to steal the election? Interesting that his family will own voting machines in swing states. Now if the Obamas were buying up voting machines in Ohio can you imagine how loud the right would be screaming?

How the fuck is this even legal? Yeah, no conflict of interests here!

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/r...d-Colorado

I'm not defending this, it definitely looks sketchy. But he merely maintains a financial interest in a company that invests in these machines. He doesn't have a controlling share in that firm, and as many know he doesn't even manage these investments. Someone does it for him. Many people especially the wealthy have investments in companies that if they were up for election would make them look "sketchy" as well.

Secondly, these machines have extremely complex algorithms that cannot be hacked or tampered with by even some of the most gifted experts. Not only this, each machine must be approved by a plethora of U.S. Organizations including NIST.

Plus, think about the ramifications of this. Do you really think Romney is that stupid to try and implicate himself with something like this at this juncture of the election? Seems like further fear mongering drawing tangential connections that aren't really founded.

Voting machines can be hacked: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/22...92992.html

At the very least, all electronic voting machines should be required to print out a paper receipt.

I'm not saying Romney necessarily is going to do something shady here, but I do think we need to draw a line legally that no candidate should have any stake in any contractors or companies evolved in the election process. This is the type of financial-political cross-pollination that we really need to be vigilant against. Having Bain Capital as a major investor in the company that makes voting machines just looks bad, even if it isn't. I think it's much more suspect than someone owning a basket of stocks through a mutual fund that they don't closely monitor.

I think accusing Obama or Romney of corruption is ridiculous. I'm pretty sure both these guys are basically gold. Instead of conspiracy theories to justify more insane hamsterims, the outcome of this election will clearly represent that Obama has no where near the support or mandate he did four years ago. Whether he wins or not I don't think is as important... he's going to have a very tough presidency if he does win, because his mandate will be so contested, so really maybe it'll be better for him if he loses because he wouldn't really be able to achieve anything even if he did (with a Republican house).

At the same time, I think there could be potential for great things... so I don't think Obama winning will be the end of the world. But I do fear what will come after him.

Post: #135

Look both parties suck.

Democrats suck because it is the party of femcunts, femnazis, "feelings" feminism and nanny-statism. See my thread on Stephanie Cutter. She is the poster lizard for the movement.
Republicans suck because within the party there is this thread of anti-scienctism, stupid religiosity, and pedestalization of women.

But the reality is, liberalism is like rust. It's insidious. It's a rot, economically and culturally. Its collectivist turn of mind is emasculating. It's principles are at root immoral -- making financial promises that can't be kept, forcing free individuals to do things they don't want to do, telling us that experts and bureaucrats know best, that "it takes a village."

Fuck that.

Liberalism exalts feelings while it falsely claims a non-ideological rationality. And above all, its proponents don't understand their own contradictions and hypocrisies. Republicans can be demagogues, but, frankly, the demagoguery of Democrats is more blatant and more destructive.

Liberalism has to be stopped, or at least slowed down.

Post: #136

I mean, I dislike the dumb religiosity of the right as much as anyone in here.

But at least they believe in old-school gender-roles that everyone in here keeps on complaining has disappeared. Most folks who vote left do so because they believe in blue-pill stuff, like the basic good of man that red-pill guys ALWAYS laugh at because they know there is no basic good - just id, ego and hamster. Makes NO sense.

Also lulz at Athlone's links.

I think it's a perfectly natural reaction to be a grossed out if your white and a white girl fucks a black dude. I guess you can call it racism. It's just a natural reaction to more competition. Don't black guys get hissy if a white dude fucks a super-hot black chick (however incredibly rarely that event occurs) - at some really primal level? It's about competition. I don't see anyone advocating we need to start killing people because they look different. Cool down, champ.

Post: #137

I like how voting against feminists is the number one issue for a lot of guys on this forum, while other issues are less important, stuff like the economy, social liberties, education, health care, foreign policy, war, etc.

The argument that Republicans are for smaller government is B.S. as far as I'm concerned, not when it comes to social freedoms, Republicans are all for the police state and the war on drugs, but I guess you conservatives are too square to smoke a little plant matter. What else, how about they are against abortion, so if you knock up that skank and she wants to keep the kid, I hope you're down for fatherhood.

Not to reiterate the police state, maybe you like asshole cops fucking with you every where, but I don't. Remember the Bush years and a little something called the Patriot Act? Some how you conservative geniuses always like to blame that one on Obama, but it was your boy Bush, Cheney, Rove, and the "red-pillers" who put that in effect.

Also the argument that you are automatically blue pill if you vote Democrat is a crock of shit, just because more feminists vote Obama, doesn't automatically make you a feminist sympathizer if you vote Obama too. Furthermore I think the manosphere makes a little bit too much of a big deal out of feminism. Sure, I'm not a fan of it, but it gets a little old when people act like the world is going to end because of it.

Post: #138

(10-23-2012 04:39 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  Look both parties suck.

Democrats suck because it is the party of femcunts, femnazis, "feelings" feminism and nanny-statism. See my thread on Stephanie Cutter. She is the poster lizard for the movement.
Republicans suck because within the party there is this thread of anti-scienctism, stupid religiosity, and pedestalization of women.

But the reality is, liberalism is like rust. It's insidious. It's a rot, economically and culturally. Its collectivist turn of mind is emasculating. It's principles are at root immoral -- making financial promises that can't be kept, forcing free individuals to do things they don't want to do, telling us that experts and bureaucrats know best, that "it takes a village."

Fuck that.

Liberalism exalts feelings while it falsely claims a non-ideological rationality. And above all, its proponents don't understand their own contradictions and hypocrisies. Republicans can be demagogues, but, frankly, the demagoguery of Democrats is more blatant and more destructive.

Liberalism has to be stopped, or at least slowed down.

Liberalism/Socialism will always end because, like the saying goes: You eventually run out of other people's money to steal.

Post: #139

(10-23-2012 04:45 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  I like how voting against feminists is the number one issue for a lot of guys on this forum, while other issues are less important, stuff like the economy, social liberties, education, health care, foreign policy, war, etc.

The argument that Republicans are for smaller government is B.S. as far as I'm concerned, not when it comes to social freedoms, Republicans are all for the police state and the war on drugs, but I guess you conservatives are too square to smoke a little plant matter. What else, how about they are against abortion, so if you knock up that skank and she wants to keep the kid, I hope you're down for fatherhood.

Not to reiterate the police state, maybe you like asshole cops fucking with you every where, but I don't. Remember the Bush years and a little something called the Patriot Act? Some how you conservative geniuses always like to blame that one on Obama, but it was your boy Bush, Cheney, Rove, and the "red-pillers" who put that in effect.

Also the argument that you are automatically blue pill if you vote Democrat is a crock of shit, just because more feminists vote Obama, doesn't automatically make you a feminist sympathizer if you vote Obama too. Furthermore I think the manosphere makes a little bit too much of a big deal out of feminism. Sure, I'm not a fan of it, but it gets a little old when people act like the world is going to end because of it.

Remind me again, when did Obama end the War on Drugs, repeal the Patriot Act, etc.?

Also, why is Holder threatening states that have legalization of weed on their ballots with increased federal prosecution of recreational use?

Post: #140

Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  *Interesting side note: I used to be a conservative.

Me too. I was once a huge fan of Larry Elder. This is in the mid 90s.

Post: #141

(10-23-2012 03:41 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  

(10-23-2012 02:55 PM)kosko Wrote:  Your not fully red-pill until you see the bullshit and not vote.

Look how much energy is wasted debating the differences between two men whom are the same. Listen to the crap they say in the debates, then good read thier hard copy polices. They are the exact same. You fall for rethoric like females falling for our game. They are all running game on you 100%... and yes they (R-money and Big Beta O) all want to fuck you... Over.

Your City and County (State level in some instances, but barley anymore) elections are the only ones that matter. This is where real men can pull up thier socks and run for positions that effect your everyday life.

Real Men have no access to the political spheres of DC. Unless your a old-liner, evrey DC lawmaker is a blue-pill whore.

Evrey true red-pill man won't be voting on election day.

There are differences between Dems and Repubs.

If you like higher taxes and more government regulation, then vote for the Dems.

In the long run, though, both parties are probably not going to do much about the entitlement bombs coming because old people vote in high numbers.

In the mean time, I would like there too be as low taxes as possible since I can always save money in the mean time and figure out an exit strategy.

That ship has sailed. Both parties have sold their bases out for money. Both will expand Government and raise taxes (via inflation). It's not a matter of political leanings more-so the reality that is present in America.

Look in December how many lawmakers will sell out and shill during the lane-duck session of Congress. Obama win or loose will weasel crap in, lawmakers retiring will sell out for that cushy job at Goldman Sachs or Cargill.

It's all the illusion of choice. Real Democracies have many sides and many parties bargaining for power. They roll out two puppets in America, Americans would not no the difference if next election only one person ran. I'm serious. They (the 1%, elite) really do think normal folk are that dumb.

There is no difference between the Dems or Repubs anymore.

Post: #142

I don't like it but it appears to me that Athlone is a race troll. He'd rather vote with a feminist than a white nationalist even though the white nationalist's interests are probably more in line with his own values. I'm gonna miss the pictures you post man but, I really can't take this "poor black me" stuff anymore. Hidden.

You make it sound like there's this tide of WHITE slave owners trying to wash over the banks at any second and the only thing holding them back is the liberal masses. We just elected a black president 4 years ago! The only racists were the black people that voted for Obama without knowing a single fucking thing about his agenda.

It's fucking insulting to me. I'm a racist sympathizer to a genocidal cause because I believe freedom is the key to prosperity?? News flash bro, no one gives a fuck about your skin color. The few people who do are insignificant or powerless. Grow up.

Post: #143

(10-23-2012 04:50 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  Remind me again, when did Obama end the War on Drugs, repeal the Patriot Act, etc.?

Also, why is Holder threatening states that have legalization of weed on their ballots with increased federal prosecution of recreational use?

Well genius if you knew anything about recent U.S. history and politics you'd know that it has always been the Republican party that has pushed the war on drugs. Jimmy Carter was talking about legalizing pot back in the 70's and then the conservative super-hero Ronald Reagan came in and really pushed the war on drugs, as did Bush in the 80's.

It's about the lesser of two evils, sure Democrats suck too man, they haven't done nearly enough to decriminalize drugs in this country. But comparatively they are much less worse then the Republicans.

Now tell me, which conservative Republican states have medical marijuana laws? Texas, Alabama, Nebraska? Any coincidence that they are all liberal democratic states?

I think you should come out to Cali eat some shrooms, smoke some ganja, and expand your mind.

Post: #144

(10-23-2012 05:01 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  

(10-23-2012 04:50 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  Remind me again, when did Obama end the War on Drugs, repeal the Patriot Act, etc.?

Also, why is Holder threatening states that have legalization of weed on their ballots with increased federal prosecution of recreational use?

Well genius if you knew anything about recent U.S. history and politics you'd know that it has always been the Republican party that has pushed the war on drugs. Jimmy Carter was talking about legalizing pot back in the 70's and then the conservative super-hero Ronald Reagan came in and really pushed the war on drugs, as did Bush in the 80's.

It's about the lesser of two evils, sure Democrats suck too man, they haven't done nearly enough to decriminalize drugs in this country. But comparatively they are much less worse then the Republicans.

Now tell me, which conservative Republican states have medical marijuana laws? Texas, Alabama, Nebraska? Any coincidence that they are all liberal democratic states?

I think you should come out to Cali eat some shrooms, smoke some ganja, and expand your mind.

So you admit Obama has done nothing different than the Repubs or even tried to change Repub policies? Ok.

BTW, I have smoked weed and I am in favor of states rights. In Cali, for instance, the gun laws are super restrictive whereas in Texas you can pretty much buy any gun you want.

That is the way it is supposed to be: Different states have different laws and people can choose to move where they want.

For me, the economy is the main reason to vote. I don't care too much about social issues since you can always move to a state that has the kind of laws you like.

For that reason, I just can't vote for Obama. Too much of a lefty socialist, pie-in-the-sky approach to the economy for me.

Post: #145

Kosko, I think the major difference between the parties is what they would do if they could get away with it. Of course once in office, they tend to move away from the base of their party and towards the middle while throwing an occasional bone to the diehards(a nod to gay marriage, or vow to kill Obamacare). They do this because this is really the only way you can govern.

Now let's say both parties were allowed to do whatever they wanted unfettered from opposition, you'd see a major difference. One would be banning abortion, gutting social programs, the department of education, ramping up military spending, probably ending immigration,have all conservative justices and deregulating the economy. The other party would usher in gay marriage, have single payer healthcare, abortion on demand for all, increase the education budget, slash military spending, have everyone on public transit or hybrid cars, and dramatically raise taxes on the wealthy.

At the end of the day, neither will be able to do half the stuff they wish they could do. AND NEITHER WOULD ANY THIRD PARTY.

Post: #146

(10-23-2012 04:59 PM)Fisto Wrote:  I don't like it but it appears to me that Athlone is a race troll. He'd rather vote with a feminist than a white nationalist even though the white nationalist's interests are probably more in line with his own values.

I'm sorry, what?

Quote:It's fucking insulting to me. I'm a racist sympathizer to a genocidal cause because I believe freedom is the key to prosperity??

And its ok to label me a feminist sympathizer because I believe strongly in the idea of racial equality and diversity also being keys to prosperity?
For the record, the statement you're referencing was tongue in cheek-I do not believe that all conservatives are genocidal racists. Likewise, I consider it similarly irrational to label all who support democrats as "feminist/manboob" sympathizers, as captaingeneric attempted to do. The label regarding conservatives was an attempt to show the absurdity of that statement.

I'm sure captaingeneric's characterization would have been fine by you, though.

Quote: News flash bro, no one gives a fuck about your skin color.

We clearly don't live in the same country.

Quote:I'm gonna miss the pictures you post man but, I really can't take this "poor black me" stuff anymore. Hidden.

The same to you...and I'm not sorry about it.

Post: #147

(10-23-2012 04:43 PM)ElJefe Wrote:  I mean, I dislike the dumb religiosity of the right as much as anyone in here.

But at least they believe in old-school gender-roles that everyone in here keeps on complaining has disappeared. Most folks who vote left do so because they believe in blue-pill stuff, like the basic good of man that red-pill guys ALWAYS laugh at because they know there is no basic good - just id, ego and hamster. Makes NO sense.

I mean, I dislike the dumb idealism on the left as much as anyone in here.

But at least they believe in the provision of rights to all citizens regardless of their race, and are less likely to exclude me on that basis. Many folks who vote right do so because of blue-pill stuff, like a belief in the sanctity of marriage above all else and a fear of non-whites. I always laugh because I know there is no sense here-just ignorance and hamsterization.

Well, that game was fun. Want to keep playing?

Quote:Also lulz at Athlone's links.
I think it's a perfectly natural reaction to be a grossed out if your white and a white girl fucks a black dude. I guess you can call it racism. It's just a natural reaction to more competition.

Interesting.
So we're cool then. We're both into game and "red-pill" philosophy when it comes to chicks. We post on the forums and (let's say hypotehtically) we get along swimmingly when it comes to talk of game and the like.

But when I suddenly get with a cute white girl, you're going to be grossed out by it...because I'm black. Not because I'm a thug, or a pathetic beta/mangina, or because you have a thing for the particular girl I'm with...but because I'm black.
Were I white, I'm sure you'd have no problem, even if I were white trash. But I'm black...so there's an issue, even if we're otherwise cool.

And you consider it irrational for me to take offense to this?

Quote:Don't black guys get hissy if a white dude fucks a super-hot black chick (however incredibly rarely that event occurs) - at some really primal level?

Most of the women in my extended family are married to white men and/or regularly date them. I have Jewish and Italian uncles and cousins, English nephews, and much more.
So no, it really doesn't bother me. I'm not uncomfortable with the idea of black women dating out (with whites, asians, or whoever) anymore than I am with the idea of seeing a black male or a white male dating outside of his race. I'm simply not that insecure.

Quote:It's about competition. I don't see anyone advocating we need to start killing people because they look different. Cool down, champ.

I see plenty of nationalists on the far-right advocating just that.
If we're going to get into a pissing contest about who's associated with who, then I'm going to take them into account.

Post: #148

(10-23-2012 04:45 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  I like how voting against feminists is the number one issue for a lot of guys on this forum, while other issues are less important, stuff like the economy, social liberties, education, health care, foreign policy, war, etc.

The argument that Republicans are for smaller government is B.S. as far as I'm concerned, not when it comes to social freedoms, Republicans are all for the police state and the war on drugs, but I guess you conservatives are too square to smoke a little plant matter. What else, how about they are against abortion, so if you knock up that skank and she wants to keep the kid, I hope you're down for fatherhood.

Not to reiterate the police state, maybe you like asshole cops fucking with you every where, but I don't. Remember the Bush years and a little something called the Patriot Act? Some how you conservative geniuses always like to blame that one on Obama, but it was your boy Bush, Cheney, Rove, and the "red-pillers" who put that in effect.

Also the argument that you are automatically blue pill if you vote Democrat is a crock of shit, just because more feminists vote Obama, doesn't automatically make you a feminist sympathizer if you vote Obama too. Furthermore I think the manosphere makes a little bit too much of a big deal out of feminism. Sure, I'm not a fan of it, but it gets a little old when people act like the world is going to end because of it.

Feminism is the manifestation of the liberal ideology.

No guy on here gives a flying fuck about abortion so don't even try that.

Most "red pillers" are driven by economic and personal freedom, if you knew anything about controlling the masses it's done through social programs, LEFTIST control over people. You support Obamacare which gives the gov't control over you health. YOUR HEALTH!

Post: #149

(10-23-2012 05:13 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Kosko, I think the major difference between the parties is what they would do if they could get away with it. Of course once in office, they tend to move away from the base of their party and towards the middle while throwing an occasional bone to the diehards(a nod to gay marriage, or vow to kill Obamacare). They do this because this is really the only way you can govern.

Now let's say both parties were allowed to do whatever they wanted unfettered from opposition, you'd see a major difference. One would be banning abortion, gutting social programs, the department of education, ramping up military spending, probably ending immigration,have all conservative justices and deregulating the economy. The other party would usher in gay marriage, have single payer healthcare, abortion on demand for all, increase the education budget, slash military spending, have everyone on public transit or hybrid cars, and dramatically raise taxes on the wealthy.

At the end of the day, neither will be able to do half the stuff they wish they could do.

No speakeasy, the logical conclusion to leftist ideas is central planning on all levels, and ultimately the rise of a tyrant who then controls through a police state.

At least the "ideology" of conservatives is to "conserve" the size of gov't thereby preserving some manner of freedom.

Personally I believe in Libertarianism as the best form of gov't which is in opposition to conservatism and liberalism.

Post: #150

Athlone:

Look, other than your forum contributions, I don't know you from a hole in the ground. I don't wish you and yours any harm, but at the same time, in an election, the greater good should take precedence over what's best for the individual, in my view anyway. And while I perfectly understand the rational desire for self-preservation, only one of us has the truth on our side, and it's not yours. It's all been said ad infinitum in the manosphere and I'm sure you've been around long enough to know better, even if, should the dreaded right-wing/anti left-wing revolution of your worse nightmares ever occur, you as an individual would not benefit from it.

Also, as I've alluded to before, this should not be read as an endorsement for the Republican party. I support them insofar as they are the lesser of two evils, but I recognize that they aren't a particularly attractive option either. If I were American on November 6, I would simply stay home. Which begs the question: why don't you do the same? Your vote won't matter anyway.