If the Democrats want to win seats next election...

[richard_daily]

What is an "assault weapon" anyways? and why did banning these imaginary devices fail to stop crime?

"It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do," Beckett said.

According to FBI data, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle in 2012 — and the continued focus on assault weapons stems from heavy media coverage of "mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle," she said.

"This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.

"Most Americans do not know that gun homicides have decreased by 49 percent since 1993 as violent crime also fell, though rates of gun homicide in the United States are still much higher than those in other developed nations," Beckett said.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/assault-weapons-ban-failed/2014/09/14/id/594500/

 

[BotanyBoy]

You have a false impression of everyone on the left. You've proven it with your posts.

Do you have any precision with your words of any kind?


What impression do I have that is false?

 

[Ghostee]

they need to stop running anti-gun candidates.

Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Ohio all have a huge amount of law-abiding gun-owning folks who do not want to see their rights infringed. These are the battleground states. Now, it might not make as much of a difference in the mid-terms, but people don't just re-set and forget what a political party has done every election. Actions have consequences, and continuously running anti-2nd Amendment candidates is at least a mitigating factor in why we have Trump now.

Democrats need to run candidates with a history of actually doing actionable good for the people, rather than stuff from 30-40 years ago, before they "got into" politics.

Pelosi needs to go, as do a lot of the old guard who are completely out of touch with the average american.

Love it or hate it, populism has a broad appeal, whether it's leftist or right-wing populism.

The RINO's need to go as do most of the anti freedom, commie loving and muslim paid for Democrat traitors that shoved Obamacare down our throats, taxed us blind and ruined the 40 hour work week while importing terrorist into our nation and opening the borders to thugs and cartels....... if not for democrats would we need guns at all?

Help nice crutches Hillary man that MS is really spreading fast or is it the untreated STD's

 

[richard_daily]

Do you have any precision with your words of any kind?


What impression do I have that is false?

All of this:

Not just gun owners, but gender/racial blocks as well, the (D)'s are the absolute worst about that.

(D)'s need to quit with the hardcore identity politics.

So far they have alienated:

Gun owners.

The working class.

White people that don't hate themselves for being born white.

Men that aren't trans (SJW's are now even firing shots at males of color and gay guys. )

Anyone who's religious and not Muslim.

Any citizens with even the slightest shred of patriotism.

Liberals

Libertarians

Centrist

Free speech advocates of any flavor.

Veterans and I'm sure some others as well.

Pretty soon the DNC is going to consist of a half dozen pansexual transgender Muslims and some rich white people who support them and their struggle for demographic supremacy.

Identity politics within the union is not only divisive but totally counterproductive even to the stated goals of the folks who engage in identity politics in the name of social vengeance....I mean social justice.

Our government desperately needs to cut that shit out, especially the social vengeance crowd on the left.

 

[BotanyBoy]

All of this:

Is entirely accurate.

Care to get precise and pick an aspect about the left to discuss or are you going to keep dodging and weaving?

 

[richard_daily]

Is entirely accurate.

Care to get precise and pick an aspect about the left to discuss or are you going to keep dodging and weaving?

None of that is accurate. I'm not going to make your argument for you, and I can't polish a turd.

 

[BotanyBoy]

None of that is accurate. I'm not going to make your argument for you, and I can't polish a turd.

Yes, it is, that's why white women put Trump in office.


You can't make an argument against any of it without looking like a willfully ignorant partisan....and you know it.

 

[richard_daily]

Yes, it is, that's why white women put Trump in office.


You can't make an argument against any of it without looking like a willfully ignorant partisan....and you know it.

Wrong. Clinton wasn't trustworthy, she was wishy-washy/career politician, she had scandal attached to her, she under-estimated her opponent, and she colluded to exclude Sanders from a fair shot during the Democratic Primary.

The only group on your list that Clinton was guilty of alienating was gun owners with her anti-2nd Amendment rants.

The rest of your statement is fantasy and hyperbole.

 

[Que]

...The rest of your statement is fantasy and hyperbole.

Please illustrate how his assertions are fantastical or hyperbolic; be specific.

 

[richard_daily]

Please illustrate how his assertions are fantastical or hyperbolic; be specific.

They aren't based in reality or have any empirical evidence backing them up.

As I stated, it's his argument he's trying to make, and you both want me to make it for him?

Fuck off.

 

[Rightguide]

Wrong. Clinton wasn't trustworthy, she was wishy-washy/career politician, she had scandal attached to her, she under-estimated her opponent, and she colluded to exclude Sanders from a fair shot during the Democratic Primary.

The only group on your list that Clinton was guilty of alienating was gun owners with her anti-2nd Amendment rants.

The rest of your statement is fantasy and hyperbole.

She also conspired with the Russians to sell out the national security of the United States.

 

[richard_daily]

She also conspired with the Russians to sell out the national security of the United States.

I thought you put me on "iggy", Jack?

 

[Que]

They aren't based in reality or have any empirical evidence backing them up.

As I stated, it's his argument he's trying to make, and you both want me to make it for him?

Fuck off.

"Not based in reality" was not at all specific.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Wrong. Clinton wasn't trustworthy, she was wishy-washy/career politician, she had scandal attached to her, she under-estimated her opponent, and she colluded to exclude Sanders from a fair shot during the Democratic Primary.

The only group on your list that Clinton was guilty of alienating was gun owners with her anti-2nd Amendment rants.

The rest of your statement is fantasy and hyperbole.

That's the only reason you want to see.


No it's not fantasy and hyperbole.

If you don't think the "White privilege" and other bullshit bigotry against white male cis scum didn't run a bunch of Obama voters into the arms of Trump you better go back and re-evaluate what just happened.

Identity politics is destroying the left....

 

[richard_daily]

"Not based in reality" was not at all specific.

Fantasy. False. Made up. Invented.

Take your pick.

 

[richard_daily]

That's the only reason you want to see.


No it's not fantasy and hyperbole.

If you don't think the "White privilege" and other bullshit bigotry against white male cis scum didn't run a bunch of Obama voters into the arms of Trump you better go back and re-evaluate what just happened.

Identity politics is destroying the left....

Those are multiple reasons, not one reason.

Clinton is a shit politician (and to the right of center, just for the record). She had to be crap, to lose against the most unpopular candidate in modern history.

All of your histrionics about "identity politics" are wholly and fully your own personal prejudices. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Que]

Fantasy. False. Made up. Invented.

Take your pick.

Be - specific: what - about - his - assertions - were - faaaaaaalllllllsssssse?

 

[richard_daily]

Be - specific: what - about - his - assertions - were - faaaaaaalllllllsssssse?

All of it.

If he has an argument to make, let him make it. I'm not going to take a few words of invented blather as an argument. It's his right to make misguided opinions that are completely without factual merit, but I'm not going to lend credence to those opinions that are without factual merit.

 

[Que]

All of it.

If he has an argument to make, let him make it. I'm not going to take a few words of invented blather as an argument. It's his right to make misguided opinions that are completely without factual merit, but I'm not going to lend credence to those opinions that are without factual merit.

"All of it" is not only not specific, it doesn't address at all what is wrong with "all" or any of it.

 

[richard_daily]

"All of it" is not only not specific, it doesn't address at all what is wrong with "all" or any of it.

I did address what is wrong with it. It is all made up, and without any factual merit.

"There are lizard aliens on the moon, and they're coming to steal your pie. Prove me wrong".

 

[Que]

I did address what is wrong with it. It is all made up, and without any factual merit.

"There are lizard aliens on the moon, and they're coming to steal your pie. Prove me wrong".

The moon has no oxygen and does not in any way currently support any form of life.

 

[richard_daily]

The moon has no oxygen and does not in any way currently support any form of life.

All of BBs arguments are based solely on his opinion, and he has not provided any evidence to support them, nor do I believe that he ever will.

 

[Que]

All of BBs arguments are based solely on his opinion, and he has not provided any evidence to support them, nor do I believe that he ever will.

His opinions are bolstered by the DNC's election postmortem to a greater degree than your sole, unsupported opinion that gun-rights is a primary driver.

 

[richard_daily]

His opinions are bolstered by the DNC's election postmortem to a greater degree than your sole, unsupported opinion that gun-rights is a primary driver.

Try English.

Clinton made numerous anti-gun references. She did not make anti-white male references, anti-libertarian references, or anti cis-gendered male references.
To claim otherwise is foolish and idiotic.

Infowars isn't news. Just saying.

 

[Que]

"Basket of deplorables" was about people of color?