Prescription for a revolt.

I would argue that it's the center (mostly those not affiliated with either party) third of the voters that determine the winners. A third are hard core left Democrats and a third are right wing nutter Republicans. Those two thirds vote party, not candidate. it's the other third that makes the choice.

Yes, good point.
 
Hence my first post.....all talk, pussy talk. We all know you so well.

"Why would I do anything??

I've been through real revolts, invasions and full on house to house, block to block running gun fights that went on for days at a time.

I don't want that, so I'm not going to start it."
 
Voter Participation

At the last General Election, there was a cross-Party group that tried to get more people voting. They didn't press for votes for either side, but that people should VOTE.

In the Canterbury City constituency, students outnumber residents but traditionally students registered to vote at their home address, not at the University.

A massive campaign by the Students' Union persuaded many students to register AT the University and vote. The result? For the first time in 200 years, a Conservative didn't win - the Labour candidate did by a slim margin.

The local residents were appalled but the Labour MP is a moderate and hard-working constituency MP (which the previous Conservative was not). She has won friends, even from people who could never vote for the Labour party, for her dedication to representing all the people, residents and students, of her constituency.

Normally, come the next election, one would expect her to lose to a reasonably competent Conservative candidate, but she might not because people genuinely like her.

But the people who did not bother to vote could scupper her chances because they don't like Labour...
 
Hence my first post.....all talk, pussy talk. We all know you so well.

So childish name calling for not wanting to try and start a kinetic war is your big response???

The guy itching for a fight, threatens me on a regular basis that he and his comrades are gonna come and 'get me' and 'tick tock' because I'm not a psychotic authoritarian control freak like him..... is mad he has to swing first....

https://c.tenor.com/V2XfBuYtzZgAAAAM/group-laugh.gif

Absolutely priceless.

You have blue/pink hair and live in your moms basement don't you???

Is this you???:confused:
https://www.evilmilk.com/galleries/social-justice-33/sjw-17.jpg
 
Last edited:
So childish name calling for not wanting to try and start a kinetic war is your big response???

The guy itching for a fight, threatens me on a regular basis that he and his comrades are gonna come and 'get me' and 'tick tock' because I'm not a psychotic authoritarian control freak like him..... is mad he has to swing first....

https://c.tenor.com/V2XfBuYtzZgAAAAM/group-laugh.gif

Absolutely priceless.

You have blue/pink hair and live in your moms basement don't you???

Is this you???:confused:
https://www.evilmilk.com/galleries/social-justice-33/sjw-17.jpg

You keep posting these racist and anti- trans gender posts. We know your game.
 
oggbashan;94381899[B said:
]The Weimar Republic and Venezuala are not the best examples of hyperinflation - Zimbabwe is.[/B]

As Rhodesia, it was an agricultural exporter to many other African countries. The (usually) white-run farms were productive and employed thousands of workers who lived with reasonable living standards by African norms.

After Mugabe came to power, his 'veterans' invaded and took over those farms and imported subsistence farmers who barely produced enough for themselves. Mugabe and his cronies systematically looted the country, taking over whatever they could until the infrastructure and finances collapsed leaving people unable to find paid work and inflation rocketing day by day.

It wasn't a political philosophy, it was just greed. We have, you can't have.

Yet there has been no rebellion. Why not? because the army and the generals are recipients of the stolen largesse.

*Chuckle* A couple of years ago I bought a $10 Trillion Zimbabwe bank note for the yucks of it. I think I paid $19-20 for it. I notice they're now selling for $29.96. Yippeee!!!!! My monies growing in value. :)
 
*Chuckle* A couple of years ago I bought a $10 Trillion Zimbabwe bank note for the yucks of it. I think I paid $19-20 for it. I notice they're now selling for $29.96. Yippeee!!!!! My monies growing in value. :)

I have some German inflation notes - one is for a billion billion marks. (A European Billion then was what is now called a Trillion).

The week after its issue it wouldn't buy a loaf of bread.
 
This is the 'perfect storm' in the brewing and there's no near term end in sight. It's expected that the republicans will take the congress in 2022, but they won't be able to do much of anything. They won't have veto proof majorities and no one should expect the current administration to do anything but veto whatever the republicans come up with.

So buckle up, it's going to be a rough ride.

Obama lost 63 seats in the House and 6 Senate seats in his midterm. Clinton lost 52 in the House and 8 seats in the Senate in his mid term. We have every reason to believe and hope that Biden's lunacies have eclipsed those of Obama and Clinton. It seems to me they have. Joe Biden is a babbling lunatic.

If by chance Republicans do take the House, it will be the end of the Biden agenda. He will face impeachment, the DOJ, the woke Pentagon, the feckless SecState, Homeland Security, Department of Education, etc, will all be buried in congressional investigations and funding recriminations.
 
Obama lost 63 seats in the House and 6 Senate seats in his midterm. Clinton lost 52 in the House and 8 seats in the Senate in his mid term. We have every reason to believe and hope that Biden's lunacies have eclipsed those of Obama and Clinton. It seems to me they have. Joe Biden is a babbling lunatic.

If by chance Republicans do take the House, it will be the end of the Biden agenda. He will face impeachment, the DOJ, the woke Pentagon, the feckless SecState, Homeland Security, Department of Education, etc, will all be buried in congressional investigations and funding recriminations.

Idk if the gop has it in them for any of that.
 
A revolt that rises above the level of a riot has to have an end-goal. That is, the rebels have to have a post-revolt agenda, something in mind that could not only replace the status quo, but have some plausible chance of solving their problems.

There is no such thing in play here. The RW has nothing in mind that has not been tried and failed before. What are they going to try, supply-side economics?! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Historically, people have not risked their lives for a revolution unless they felt that their lives were already in danger from the government.

At the present time, the USA has millions of people controlled by propaganda that think that their lives are in danger.
 
It's as if you're the one spoiling for a fight,
you really want a civil war based upon your rhetoric.

I suppose this is the point where to inform us
that you are in charge of the government
and the military is loyal to the government.

The military is loyal to the government.
 
You're talking about revolt. Against a representative democracy. What you want instead is a fair question.

That representative government has a minimum vote advantage in the House and a virtual tie in the Senate but is trying to fundamentally change America with zero mandate to do so.
 
The military is loyal to the government.

The military should be loyal to the Constitution, and take an oath to do so. Commissioned officers of the US military take the following oath. They do not take an oath of loyalty to the "government" or the "President":

I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
 
The military should be loyal to the Constitution, and take an oath to do so. Commissioned officers of the US military take the following oath. They do not take an oath of loyalty to the "government" or the "President":

I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

The military does not get to decide what is constitutional.
 
The military is loyal to the government.

In the UK, we have a real distinction. The military (and Police) are commissioned by the Crown. They are Crown Servants, not government servants.

In practice, they take direction from the government in power, but their oath of allegiance is to the Monarch, not the Prime Minister.
 
In the UK, we have a real distinction. The military (and Police) are commissioned by the Crown. They are Crown Servants, not government servants.

In practice, they take direction from the government in power, but their oath of allegiance is to the Monarch, not the Prime Minister.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but years ago I read that it was the Queen who told Maggie Thatcher to go down and get her Falklands back, or words to that effect.
 
Oh, but it does. Military personnel are free to disobey an unlawful order.

That's fine when it comes to "Shoot that prisoner!" It's fine when it comes to, "I'm the president, and I'm telling you to arrest Congress!" But at any point between those two extremes, orders had damned well better be orders.
 
Back
Top