Bison06

Well if you didn’t mean it as racist, you certainly assumed a gender and didn’t properly ask for their preferred pronouns. Your transphobia is showing.

March. When did we deem other infectious diseases that have had the ability to kill and also spread via respiratory droplets inert?

Did you wear a mask before March?

Boy? Not very woke of you pal. Don’t you know that the left has deemed that word racist?

Antifa is made up? What color is the sky where you live?

Literally not one word I said has anything to do with the president’s opinion of the group. Simple observation of their actions and tactics will show you what they are about. They brutally beat people who disagree with them, the definition of fascism.

I’m not surprised that simple logic seems insane to you.

I’m not sure how, but the point I was making completely missed you. its hypocritical for a group to be named “Antifa”(anti fascism) and then practice literal fascism in the streets.

It’s so surprising that news outlets aren’t keeping a yearly counter of deaths for that to make sure people are aware of how in danger they are.

Hypocrisy isn’t exclusive to either side of the aisle. Look no further than Antifa being named anti-fascism while beating people that disagree with them.

Through all of the political discussions I've had on this board and in my personal life, the one thing that comes through always is how different we are in different areas of the country. For me, that always highlights the need for the federal government to continue to reduce in power and to give more choice to the individual states. Does it surprise anyone that someone who lives in Manhattan or Downtown San Francisco would be for gun control, while a person living in rural North Dakota would want to have access to weapons? And both of them are probably correct in their thinking as it pertains to their personal situation. Different areas require different lifestyles and have different needs from their local and federal government. I often wonder if the United States will at some point become more similar to Europe with the states becoming separate countries, with some sort of United Nations-esque agreements. Seems like we might be headed that direction.

Actually the ACA did require you to be insured or be fined(that penalty was later repealed I believe) Healthcare is an interesting subject, as someone involved in healthcare, I see being able to see a doctor is a human right and see the value of "socialized medicine". On the other hand, from a financial and ethical standpoint, I see major challenges when the state is in charge of your plan.(dictating what care you can and cannot receive, mandating one treatment over another, barring individuals from public places if they aren't in compliance etc) As it stands, we have the worst possible system, we aren't fully free market and we aren't fully socialized. I think a commitment in either direction would be a major improvement over what we currently have.

When I say required, I’m using the legal definition of that word. You are not legally required to buy food. You can grow your own, you can hunt, you can fish. Obviously not viable for most people, but the point is, nobody from the government is forcing a consenting adult to buy food.

Not sure what you’re asking. You seem to be arguing the opposite point and making my point. Things that you don’t have a choice about shouldn’t be mandated and have people forced to pay for them. If you are forced by law to pay for a product Or service, it’s a tax and should be treated that way when it’s being discussed by our representatives.

Car insurance is a false equivalency as you aren’t forced to drive and can opt out of owning a car. Having a body is inherent to life. You can’t opt out of it. Mandating people to buy any such product is akin to a tax and has been treated as such by those opposed to it.

Which vision do you speak of?

I love the “you people are getting played” rhetoric, as if trump invented BS as a politician. We’re all getting played, by both sides. Trump is no savior, anymore than Obama was. They’re all garbage and in it for themselves. It’s all different flavors of Dog feces.

You’ve gone non-sensical my friend. Enjoy your evening.

Peaceful is a word and it has meaning, it was included for a reason. You don’t get to minimize it.

You simply don’t accept real evidence when it’s presented. Maybe ignorance is bliss, you sure seem to laugh out loud a lot. Good on you, glad you are happy.

Peaceful protests are protected by the first amendment, left out a pretty important word there.

You stated illegal immigrants don’t vote. I provide links showing they do. End of discussion.

I have no proof that illegal immigrants are voting in municipal elections in democratically run cities? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/01/23/politics/nyc-noncitizen-voting-rights-bill/index.html https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_permitting_noncitizens_to_vote_in_the_United_States “twelve municipalities in Maryland and California allow non-citizens to vote” That took all of ten seconds, you need to upgrade your googling skills.

Where in my comment did I say illegals voting on a federal level. Democrats are pro illegals voting, it’s already happening.

Illegals are already voting in local elections in many areas, democratic areas. Why is it out of the realm that they would want to expand that?