Yzermandius19

Overturning Roe v Wade wouldn't mean banning abortions, it would make it a states rights issue, as it should be, constitutionally speaking. It is not the doomsday for abortion rights that Democrats portray it to be.

Just win baby, SCOTUS 6-3 coming right up. All his other faults combined are made up for by his SCOTUS picks alone, the Democrats will be paying the price for that, for decades to come.

Not right now they aren't, that happened long before Trump got there, now the Republicans are expanding their coalition and the Democrats are shrinking theirs.

Just win baby. 6-3 SOCTUS coming right up. ACB FTW.

Ain't no Democrat Trump in 2020, they all suck dude. Not one of them has a chance against Trump.

One party is doing that right now, the other is growing it's base. When Obama was in power the Republicans were purity spiraling too, to a much lesser degree, but they aren't anymore.

If the far left had their way, they would check your ideology before doing business with you. They are trying to bully businesses into not doing business with "alt-right nazi's" and some of them are even caving, like most social media companies, and even Mastercard.

Lots of rubes prefer walking to talking, especially the left wing nutjobs, who knew? We quick to say, it's just the game that's dealt, that gave them that rope, so they can hang themselves.

The effect they want it to have on right wing nutjobs, is they want others to see them as Nazi's, because they know that it's loaded term with tons of baggage, and it makes easier to discredit their views than actually addressing their points. They don't want anyone listening to right wing nutjobs like us, so they call us alt-right nazi's, but what they don't realize is that when they turn themselves into "the boy who cried nazi" because they end up calling everyone who is to the right of Antifa a Nazi, it diminishes the power of label they are trying to tar us with. It backfires on them in spectacular fashion when all the non-left wing nutjobs know that it's just a term used to refer to anyone who disagrees with the far left, which is what it has become through overuse.

The left likes to blow sunshine up each others asses and live in an echo chamber, and the second one them doesn't play along, they are thrown under the bus as an alt-right nazi. The right is a team of rivals who actually call each other out on their bullshit, but won't throw each other under the bus because of a simple difference of opinion. This is why the right is kicking the lefts ass in America right now. One party turns on itself and shrinks it's base in a purity spiral, the other forms a coalition with like minded people with many disagreements, which results in bigger tent coalition where iron sharpens iron.

Canadians also repeat Democrat Party talking points ad nauseam as well. You aren't fooling us by claiming that isn't you to a tee. /shrugs

There is no voting out the Liberals, if the Red Liberals lose the only realistic alternative is the Blue Liberals. Then there is the Orange Liberals and Green Liberals, who are the two biggest parties with no real shot of winning, but play spoiler to the Red Liberals. But it's all Liberals, hell, even the PPC is lead by a former Liberal Lite nomination runner up.

A "deplorable" who is "undermining" the "social cohesion" of Canada, which make you a "traitor". Silly Eskimo Communists.

"Social Cohesion" according to the Eskimo Communists, is hating on American Freedom and embracing their worldview. If you don't do that, then you are a "deplorable".

Some people who think social cohesion is a good thing don't think government intervention can make it better, you do. You use the social cohesion argument as a way to sell bullshit government intervention to infringe on the rights of those you disagree with. You are using "social cohesion" as cover to push your left wing extremism. You think social cohesion is when people embrace Eskimo Communist extremism, which you exalt as safety, and hate on American freedom, which you vilify as dangerous.

I've found that the "social cohesion" canard is often code for, "society would be better off if everyone agreed with me and want to implement my counter-productive policy proposals".

Guns give people carrying around such good will the opportunity to express it in the best ways, obviously. It's not one or the other, it's an inanimate object, it's not inherently positive or negative. It's the person, not the tool. Stop demonizing inanimate objects just because you don't like them.

Anecdotal evidence colored by confirmation bias. Your experience is not representative of reality, it's an outlier, and your experience is filtered through anti-American/anti-gun lens, distorting it even further.

Since you assert that America is a relatively dangerous area, because of guns and lack of gun control, clearly you don't know the difference, and are just repeating the anti-American propaganda you've heard other anti-American Canadians spouting.

Feeling safe and actually being safe can be two different things entirely, who knew? Some people trust the government to protect them from people with guns and from poverty naively, others have no such delusions.

They got drowned out because their proposed solutions are to make the problem worse and destroy the economy. Throw the anti-capitalist crusaders under the bus, they are real reason environmentalists make no headway.

Climate scientists make for pretty shitty economists, who knew?

Yes they do. Antifa might not, but others do, Antifa does not speak for everyone. Y'all are trying to shut down Dave Rubin and Maxime Bernier at Mohawk College and you think no one wants to hear them just because Antifa doesn't? Neither are White Supremacists, y'all just see White Supremacists under every rock, it's a term devoid of all meaning these days simply used to describe people the far left disagrees with. Antifa are terrible judges of who is and isn't engaging in hate speech, and hate speech is free speech, so even the few times you are right, that doesn't warrant shutting them down. No one made Antifa the arbiters of who is and isn't allowed to speak, and being arbiters of who is and isn't allowed to speak is an act of censorship, not free speech. Antifa's right to free speech does not supercede the right of free speech of those who disagree with Antifa. I don't care how much more popular you think your protest is than those who want to hear people speak, that doesn't justify your actions one bit. Antifa is despicable group, you being blind to reality doesn't change those facts. Y'all aren't fighting fascism, you are the fascists. Projecting your own faults on others is a helluva drug.

If government intervention does more damage to the environment and economy than it fixes, then it should stay out. A market failure occurring doesn't mean that replacing it with a government failure will be any better. Government should interfere when it actually does some good in a few rare instances, not when it does more harm than it helps. The tobacco industry was right that the laws being proposed don't save anyone from themselves, and that the overreach by the anti-smokers was a bad idea. They simply fought dirty to try and prevent that from happening. Just because smoking is bad for your health doesn't mean that is should banned and regulated to a ridiculous extent. If a bar wants to allow smoking, they should be allowed to, and if you don't like it, then frequent another establishment, don't ruin it for everyone who doesn't agree with you, just because it would be better for their health. The anti-smoking moral panic was not a good thing, it wasn't enough for the people who don't like it to stop smoking or not take it up in the first place, they have to try and force other people who don't agree with them to change their behavior or somehow you don't care about people's health, absolute insanity.

When it's time to pounce, I for one will slurp up them Antifa tears.