thats an astounding over prosecution

Does he have the same lawyer as cantwell did? I hope not.

if they really go for that on the grounds that it was 1st degree murder I think he might get off

he committed manslaughter and fled the scene of an accident - I dont think you can get the death penalty for that

even though technically he never even struck heyer with his vehicle

This is all speculation, guys.

It wasn't even manslaughter

Manslaughter is when you kill someone due to reckless actions. He was chased by a guy with a gun, attacked by the crowd with a baseball bat, freaked out, and hit the break. It honestly could have happened to anyone.

it can probably be argued that it was because prosecution can probably argue that the accident induced enough stress for the heart attack - 'a situation was created by fields that heyer wouldnt have otherwise been in'

accelerating into a crowd is kind of reckless lol

It's easy to say that we would have been the cool level headed ones in that situation, but I think almost anyone would freak out if being chased with a gun and having your car attacked by a maniac with a baseball bat.

or crowbar or whatever

but maybe this isn't the place for such conversations

@Koba The official cause of death, used in court, is blunt force trauma to the chest.

that was admitted to court as evidence?

It was the conclusion that the medical examiner reached

Yea because they gave her CPR.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1053730343847690240

CPR will mess up ribs, this is full retard because the negligence of the medical personnel then could be argued to be a superseding factor

you guys think Bernie will run?

hes a mega cuck

maybe but he'll probably lose

The Democrats are literally retarded if they run Bernie

I could see even liberals refusing to vote for him since he could die in office

Nvrm the negligence of medical personnel is 'foreseeable' enough to not be a defense

www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUIA_Ga6q4E

I got scared when I saw this title at first

because I didn't notice the double negative

I really want him to run

Cool painting I saw in a museum today:

My ballot came. Should I just vote straight down the line Republican?

research the candidates

I usually vote straight republican non jewish

Good democrats will still vote on the side of the democrats the vast majority of the time

I'll read the voters pamphlet

Isn't the Republican candidate guaranteed to be better than the Democrat, though?

we should really be shooting for an 'aryan sandwhich' sort of phenomenon but i think itll be way more difficult to get white guys into the democratic party in white states

I guess not if they're strong neocons

I would vote straight down Republican for the institutional clout and because they’re beholden to the party

Rep and Dem are both garbage. Rep is only better in that Trump can, in theory, corral them into supporting his agenda.

I probably would have voted Bernie Sanders over John Kasich

If I hated both I wouldn't have voted.

"Consent of the governed." Voting is consent.

Better to vote for lesser of two evils tbh

Nah. Lesser evil is still evil, and what got us here.

Don't play the game.

if you want better candidates then get better candidates in

I voted for Trump because I actually believed in what he said, and I'll vote R on the 6th only because I want him to be able to forward his agenda, and to continue the general right wing cultural revolution.

Did that get us, here, though? If we consistently voted for the most far right candidate available, then the selection of candidates would have shifted right over time

Frog in the boiling water. Taking the thing that's the least bad compromise.

Don't like it.

Well... if you don't take what's least bad, then you get a higher chance of getting what's more bad

Better to take nothing. What would happen if everyone, or even a substantial portion of the population, just refused to vote? Refused to consent to be governed by any of the evils? I don't know, but it would have to be better than continuing to play a game set up so there's no way for us to win.

Morally, I refuse to choose evil.

Lesser or not.

What would happen? The elites would laugh at us, I guess

that's a pretty stupid position for a smart guy like you to take @sigruna14

In the short term.

@Deleted User So the elites, system, whatever, present two candidates, no meaningful difference between them, both slaves to interests who hate you, and they ask you to choose - think it's stupid to refuse to play the game at all?

Write ins are our equivalent of a vote of no confidence

@sigruna14 yes. you're still playing the game

"not playing the game" would be going anprim. removing yourself from society.

Whether or not you vote, you're still governed, still pay taxes, still "live in a society"

Might as well support incremental improvement, bu voting for the less bad option.

Let me ask you this. Did you even vote for Trump?

okay guys help me decide

But if my vote isn't going to actually change a damn thing, I'd rather not vote for evil, and have at least the satisfaction of knowing I didn't vote for evil. Then work to get a worthy candidate on the ballot, then vote for him, when it's actually worth doing and means something. Yeah, I voted for Trump because I thought he could actually do good.

In 2012 I voted third party.

This measure would charge pollution fees on sources of greenhouse gas pollutants and use the revenue to reduce pollution, promote clean energy, and address climate impacts, under oversight of a public board.

Based and redpilled, or cringe and bluepilled?

Your vote will change *something*, though, just not as much as you'd like

@Jacob It sounds good, but I don't trust our current government to do anything and would prefer them to have less power than more, so I'd probably vote no.

hard choice then

wait a second

Will it really? Would voting for Mitt Romney or John McCain really change anything? Or just maybe make it seem so in some illusory ways?

Voting yes = less money for corporations = less money for them to lobby for immigration

Romney or McCain? Probably not

Maybe even make it worse

hmmm the initiative is backed by the Latino Community Fund, though

Always follow the money...

holy shit

the initiative exempts the largest polluters

"Six of the state's top 10 carbon admitters would be exempt"

uhhh wut

Voting for the govt to "help" anything...

also, why write "six" as a word but "10" as a number?

it looks stupid

>just don't ~~goys~~ guys

Granted there are some really valid criticisms of republican democracy, but I think we have to engage and play with the paradigm that we've inherited.

lmao

there's an initiative to ban food and beverage taxes

To be clear I'm not saying don't ever vote, or don't vote for a candidate that you actually think will do some good. I'm just saying, if presented with two options that are both garbage, both going to hurt my people and my own interests, but maybe one will do it less - no thanks. When someone decent is on my ballot, hopefully thanks in part to my own efforts, I'll definitely vote for them.

and the "rebuttal" of the argument for the initiative says that it "reduces choice" for local communities

what a retarded argument

if I don't like a certain choice, wouldn't I *want* to "reduce choice"?

wtf

the Republican senate candidate opens her statement with "Our people"

🤔

In 2016 I voted straight Republican except for the House because my congressman was terrible on immigration and anti-Trump

She also managed to include her German and Norwegian ancestry in the statement

this is weird