As I posted earlier, Revolution 2.0. a lot more would fight than some think.
Shooting and Mass Casualties - Part 2
- Thread starter Deeeefense
- Start date
Let's say there were a revolutions Left vs Right, is there any doubt who would win? I mean keep in mind that laws would pretty much cease to exist during a civil war.
I bet if they actually stopped to think about it, they may quickly shut the hell up and quit shoving crap down the countries throat in the name of "civil liberty".
I bet if they actually stopped to think about it, they may quickly shut the hell up and quit shoving crap down the countries throat in the name of "civil liberty".
The point isn't to grab all of weapons now, it's to chip away at it. And this is something the left understands quite well. Over time, little chunks add up. The embodiment that results results from the term "progressive" is never ending. Progressive ideologues have a false understanding of life in general. Believe it or not, some things are better left alone. They simply refuse to accept an end point at all times.
As soon as you give them "no fly list" and limits on magazines, they'll start work immediately on California's bullet button law and bans on collapsable buttstocks. Past that it wouldn't be too far into the future they'll attack all semi-automatic weapons in general, before eventually landing at a register; which is always followed by confiscation.
And anyone who thinks that's paranoia, just go research anti-gun lobby liberal think tanks. It's in black and white. The law center to prevent gun violence has been advocating quietly as far as bans of semi-automatic weapons and double stack magazines. They openly support the governments right to register every firearm in the country with the federal government.
This is why there is not, and will never be, perceived bending of the second amendment in any form by the NRA.
On your other point, conservatives would DOMINATE if everything split up. The western European america would have all of the same issues, never solved, while the traditional american's would basically flourish. One can wish.
Yeah, Boss, I'm serious because I know the left couldn't exist without the right's money and protecting their dumbasses.
Seriously, everything the left is all about could totally happen on their side. Have all of the entitlement programs, all of the deadbeats you want, all of the illegals, all Muslims, everything PC, all of your transgender education stuff, have no guns to worry about and you'd no longer have to worry about the right, which is apparently nothing but greedy, gun toting racists trying to keep all of these special interests groups down.
You guys know damn well the left needs the right, the right sure as hell doesn't need the left.
Seriously, everything the left is all about could totally happen on their side. Have all of the entitlement programs, all of the deadbeats you want, all of the illegals, all Muslims, everything PC, all of your transgender education stuff, have no guns to worry about and you'd no longer have to worry about the right, which is apparently nothing but greedy, gun toting racists trying to keep all of these special interests groups down.
You guys know damn well the left needs the right, the right sure as hell doesn't need the left.
Best post in the thread, and completely accurate. Just by the nature of the parties it's completely accurate.
If one needs proof of how well the left would do if separated from the right, take a look at this list from 2013. Doubt the list has changed much, and it's pretty telling. So "progressives", keep telling yourselves that you all know what your doing and your way is the only way. Damn near every city dominated by Democrats for any lengthy amount of time is either a crime hotbed or failing horribly economically.
1 - Flint, MI - Strong Support for Democrats
2 - Detroit, MI - Strong Support for Democrats
3 - Oakland, CA - Strong Support for Democrats
4 - Bridgeport, CN - Leans Democrat
5 - New Orleans, LA - Over 100 years of Democratic dominance
6 - Cleveland, OH - Strong Support for Democrats
7 - St. Louis, MO - Strong Support for Democrats
8 - Jackson, Miss - Leans Democrat
9 - Baltimore, MD - Strong Democratic Support
10 - Newark, NJ - Over 150 years of Democratic dominance
Without going through the thread, in regards to the Left and Right splitting up.. you mean as separate unions/countries? I guess my question would be, who does the menial jobs on the Right? Even though there's a lot of blue collar workers to middle class workers who still side with the right, we (no chance I go live in whatever crap the left builds) would lose a lot of minorities and low-income families. Hate to say it, but they provide a lot of low-income jobs.. the type of jobs that also, hate to say, the mid-to-upper crust of the Right don't want to do.
Or.. do we begin going the route of automation, because, maybe we don't need to find nearly as much work for the low-income..?
Finally, how can we get this started?
Or.. do we begin going the route of automation, because, maybe we don't need to find nearly as much work for the low-income..?
Finally, how can we get this started?
I would say those jobs go back to the 16-18 year old range, and people who want/need a second job. There was a day when people raised their children that hard work was rewarding.
[laughing]
It's the truth! One side is all about minimal incarceration, and the other wants an express lane on death row. I'm all for the express lane.
Not to mention the people that would take lots of those jobs on as a career. Conservatives at this point in time want to build a surplus, create a flat tax, de-regulate the small businesses and get entitlements under control. With those accomplishments happening at some point with a guy like Paul Ryan in charge, wages would increase dramatically.
Not to mention the LEGAL WORK STATUS IMMIGRATION that would be allowed in said system.
Easy answered question.
who said anything about fighting. we would have the guns douchebag
The country may well split. The left is very intolerant. As to your post, impossible.
That sounds pretty violent for such a peaceful and progressive person. Hasn't your party told you that violence isn't the answer?
I cannot see who you're replying to but if he's suggesting they'd win some kind of war id suggest 3 things in this type of scenario where half the country is split into two equal parts both fulfilling the agendas of their ideology.
1. We'd have the guns.
2. We'd have the stronger military.
3. We'd have the balls.
but they would have all the hugs and thugs @.S&C.
Don't you understand that the progressive way is the right way. I mean who wouldn't want to live in a world were the government was taking care of EVERYTHING for you, and you had NO responsibility?!
but they would have all the hugs and thugs @.S&C.
Don't you understand that the progressive way is the right way. I mean who wouldn't want to live in a world were the government was taking care of EVERYTHING for you, and you had NO responsibility?!
I refused to buy into "group personified" ideology. I'm an individualist. And it takes an individualist to actually get to the root of sociological problems because those issues are made up entirely of individual decisions. Once you put a label in front of words like "correctness" the truth is no longer defined. "Political" correctness is not correctness. Its just a slogan to make people believe they operate in a way that they don't. The same can be said for the lefts newer slogans like "institutional racism". Racism is evil in its own right, but when you claim "institutional" in front of it, it becomes something else entirely. A big ghost that can't be defined. But it gets the little lemmings rowled up doesnt it?
If you're a truth seeker you nearly cannot hold liberal ideals in 2016. "Progressive" is an infinite term. There is no real conclusion to a problem.
I have no idea if I answered you or if that has anything to do with your point. I felt like saying it and I'm on the sauce early.
Last edited:
[QUOTE=".S&C., post: 4728333, member: 12422"]I cannot see who you're replying to but if he's suggesting they'd win some kind of war id suggest 3 things in this type of scenario where half the country is split into two equal parts both fulfilling the agendas of their ideology.
1. We'd have the guns.
2. We'd have the stronger military.
3. We'd have the balls.[/QUOTE]
someone is coming close to being added to ignore. and i don't typically ignore anyone. i like watching idiots
1. We'd have the guns.
2. We'd have the stronger military.
3. We'd have the balls.[/QUOTE]
someone is coming close to being added to ignore. and i don't typically ignore anyone. i like watching idiots
someone is coming close to being added to ignore. and i don't typically ignore anyone. i like watching idiots[/QUOTE]
I've only got the extreme morons on ignore, minus a few that just irritate the **** outa me. If he's on ignore, he's bad.
Is this conversation really taking place? Really? This is the dumbest **** I've seen on here since I've been posting. Seriously. And there has been some dumb ****. It's like a conversation you would over hear at a dairy bar in Knott county. My god.
it is the internet, does it have to be real? really? and what you got against dairy bars.
It's dumb in what way? Showing which side could actually thrive and survive based on policies and ideals and which one is a total parasite?
It's a legitimate argument and one that should put things in perspective. The right does not need the left. A leftist utopia would destroy itself off of their extremely stupid ideology.
I've yet to see you and now Ed here, challenge this notion and present why it's incorrect.
Answer us this...if the left got everything they wanted and Republicans all left the country, took their money and guns with them, would the left survive with everything they have promised to these "victim classes?"
I ain't answering ****. If it was up to me we would burn the whole effing thing down and start over. I'd kill all the blue team and the red team and start a new team.
But it's not that easy.
No truly believes every tenet of each party. How it works.
1. You find group that you have similar beliefs
2. Affirm beliefs through group acceptance
3. Blindly believe every evolving idea
4.Suffer
5.Question group purpose
6. GTFO
7.Find new group to categorize with
8. Vote Libertarian
Or you do the smart thing from the onset. Register Independent first. Then evolve into party beliefs once you find acceptance
I get what you're saying completely. My post was loaded with 50 rounds of sarcasm.
I had it for the sensitive libertarians, but a vote for Gary Johnson is nothing more than a vote for Hillary. Just the way it is.
Sorry willie.
It's the apologetic left. They now call themselves "libertarians" because calling yourself a "red team" isn't cool enough. But since they got a good look at the true Western European party, they can't claim it anymore.
Most "libertarians" I run into identified as a liberal in 2007.
Work visa's, after the money runs out with most of the deadbeats taking and not enough to support them, some would come over just to feed their families.