The Question that Makes Cowards out of Leftists

IBDaMann said:
You are correct, of course. The former Republican Party is now the RINO Party (Republican In Name Only) and is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party. They HATE Donald Trump, as ordered by senior management.

You have once again hit the nail on the head. Geeko Sportivo has once again hit his thumb with the hammer.

attachment.php
Click to expand...

Bingo. The Democrat Party and their RINO Party subsidiary can both kiss my ass. I no longer begrudgingly vote for either club's chosen 'holy' candidate, not that either of them need my vote anyway due to ballot and voter roll fraud/harvesting.

For 2024, the RNC Club (aligned with groups like Club For Growth and the Republican Governor's Association) can push for their 'holy candidate' Ron DeSantis all they want, while pathetically pretending that Ron "hasn't decided yet" even though it's clear that his 2024 run has already been decided since late 2021/early 2022 when Christina Pushaw's (on Ron's behalf) first organizing of "Big Con" conservative media influencers happened.

Now, since Ron DeSantis and his professional handlers need to keep up with the pretense that he's not been already having '2024 President' aspirations since the end of 2021, he will sit on the sideline for as long as possible. The RNC Club plan is to have, like they did for the 2016 cycle, a long line of "Hollywood Squares" candidates line up and enter into the race to launch attacks against Trump meanwhile their 'holy candidate' DeSantis sits on the sidelines so that he can benefit from the pretense of "remaining above the fray, above the personal attacks, blah blah blah". It appears that Nikki Haley is the first one in line. After others have done all the dirty work, DeSantis will be the final candidate to enter the race later this year, as close to the filing deadline as possible. Then (maybe even a bit before then), the "Hollywood Squares" candidates will all start systematically filing out and endorsing 'holy candidate' DeSantis. As long as Trump doesn't win, they all win.

I suspect that Trump will be wise and continue to point out the truth behind this strategy and continue to direct his attacks towards the DeSantis campaign (and its proxies) rather than the "Hollywood Squares" candidates being propped up as distractions to attack him on behalf of DeSantis who currently has to keep up his pretense that he isn't running for President.

Once you see the strings, you can't unsee them. Now that I see the strings, I can't even fathom begrudgingly casting my already disenfranchised vote for DeSantis if he were to win the nomination. I would at this point purposely write in Trump's name if need be because he's the MAGA candidate in the race... he's the candidate who actually represents a "2nd option" in this corrupt Uniparty system.
 
Last edited:
gfm7175 said:
FUCK no.

2024 for me is "Trump or bust". I will write in his name if need be. I will not be casting my already disenfranchised vote for anybody else for President but Trump.
Click to expand...

You are a victim of a cult! Making the same mistake over and over again is not a winning strategy!

But, this is good news for Democrats.

Your sacrificial vote will help the Democrats win in 2024!

Thanks in advance!
 
IBDaMann said:
I have explained your duplicity. Why are you unable to accept what you yourself are doing? All of this could have been very easy at the beginning but you brought it here.
Click to expand...

You being unable to accept my answer is not my problem.

1. Admit up front that consciousness is not needed to not express something.
Click to expand...

Are you denying what you wrote?

You wrote: "How many leftists will own up to approving of the killing of a living human who has committed no crime and who has expressed no desire to die?"

"Who has expressed". "Who" is a being. "Has expressed" is a conscious act, Either you are dishonest or are lying.

2. Acknowledge up front that you do not find any logical contradiction in my question and that obviously no fallacies exist therein.
Click to expand...

I never said that your question by itself contains any logical contradiction and fallacies. You are lying again.

3 Admit up front that the question we are addressing is what I have written below.

"Do you support/advocate the killing of living humans who have committed no crime and who have not expressed any desire to die?"
Click to expand...

See number 1.

... then when you give the correct answer ("No"), your answer will be to this question and not to some attempt at evasion.
Click to expand...

I already answered.
 
Phantasmal said:
Policemen are ambushed all the time. Unless, you are using DUI deaths, the purpose of automobiles is not to purposefully kill but for transportation. It’s not the same as a gun.
Click to expand...
One purpose of a firearm is for self defense. Why are you so hell bent on rendering law-abiding citizens defenseless?

One purpose of a firearm is to hunt. Why are you so hell bent on making law-abiding people go hungry?

One purpose of a firearm is target shooting. Why are you so hell bent on preventing law-abiding people from relaxing and/or becoming more proficient at defending themselves?

All you yap about is persecuting law-abiding citizens while never addressing the criminal element. At least now you understand why no rational adult will take you seriously.
 
IBDaMann said:
One purpose of a firearm is for self defense. Why are you so hell bent on rendering law-abiding citizens defenseless?

One purpose of a firearm is to hunt. Why are you so hell bent on making law-abiding people go hungry?

One purpose of a firearm is target shooting. Why are you so hell bent on preventing law-abiding people from relaxing and/or becoming more proficient at defending themselves?

All you yap about is persecuting law-abiding citizens while never addressing the criminal element. At least now you understand why no rational adult will take you seriously.
Click to expand...
I understand you are unable to read the content of my post and understand it. Your ASSumptions are incorrect about my position on guns. I was simply pointing out the errors of your post, comparing automobile deaths to gun deaths.
 
Phantasmal said:
I understand you are unable to read the content of my post and understand it. Your ASSumptions are incorrect about my position on guns. I was simply pointing out the errors of your post, comparing automobile deaths to gun deaths.
Click to expand...

Sybil is incapable of understanding anything beyond his preconceived notions. IMO, he’s outside the normal range of behavior with the biggest clues being his little sock army and the manifesto linked in his signature.

Yes, he removed the signature from is IBDaMan sock which I found interesting, but it remains on his other two accounts, Into the Night and gfm7175.
 
Last edited:
Doc Dutch said:
Sybil is incapable of understanding anything beyond his preconceived notions. IMO, he’s outside the normal range of behavior with the biggest clues being his little sock army and the manifesto linked in his signature.

Yes, he removed the signature from is IBDaMan sock which I found interesting, but it remains on his other two accounts, Into the Night and gfm7175.
Click to expand...

You just have wars going on with EVERYONE don't you? Is there anyone in the world you get along with? LOL.
 
Phantasmal said:
I understand you are unable to read the content of my post and understand it.
Click to expand...
This erroneously presumes there is something you understand.

One more time, all you yap about is persecuting law-abiding citizens while never addressing the criminal element. This wouldn't be the case if you understood anything.
 
Perry Phimosis said:
You just have wars going on with EVERYONE don't you? Is there anyone in the world you get along with? LOL.
Click to expand...
You are wasting your time. Doc Dutch thinks there are only two people in the world, and that the other guy is running around posing as millions of socks. Doc Dutch is never going to fall for this ruse, which is yours and my ruse as well since we are two of the socks.

A more insightful way to look at it is to recognize that Doc Dutch is too stupid to distinguish between different people, and his screaming accusations of "SOCK!" are just a desperate cry for help. Pity him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top