I think this goes well here... do not feed the trolls.

because antifa is an ideology and blm is not an organized milia but a movement. in a majority of protested filled cities, the crime rate is barely above average, there are riots, and they are bad, but they are not the blm movement, nor are they emblematic of its ideals. Those ideal being "all men are created equal, " and currently the blm movement is fighting those ideals. The duty of every American is to fight for the ideals set out in the constitution and the moral philosophical moments outlined in the declaration of independence.

The constitution does not spell out ANY duties to American citizens. It spells out strict limits on government infringements of sovereign rights.

“All men are Created equal”, but we never end up as equals, in any vast array of ways. That is what Communism/Unions preach and is why they are outdated as far as representing the Working Class Blue Collar workers.
I’ve ended up in Unions most of my life & in my 1st year in Steamfitters Local Union in Maryland, my entire Apprentice Class and I all switched from registered Democrats to Republicans, due to the very Statement that “All Men & Woman are Equals”, which becomes painfully obvious once you try to better yourself.
Notice that Unions Never Represent the Hard Worker/Over Achiever, but they always go to bat for the Lowest Denominator of the bunch. Those Sleeping on the job, doing drugs & drinking on the job, etc..
I see paying dues to Unions as “Taxation without Representation”.
The fact is that the Cream always Rises to the Top, but it is a Very Long and Tough Fight to get there in Today’s Union Society!

"all men equal" i think only refers to how they ought to be treated under Law, and not a statement of merit or ability

Good Point.
I just get tired of hearing it shoved down my throat without anyone telling the other side of the Statement.

Sorry chaz but antifa is an ideology? Wow didn't know an ideology could be organized to start riots and throw molotov's at people, or have huge facebook groups with leaders. Also BLM not being a militia really try NFAC a branch off of BLM who actively goes to "protest" armed to the teeth with no weapons training or discipline, and ends up shooting their own not once but twice... Maybe once apon a time when there was an actual unjustified shooting of someone, but those idiots back thugs and criminals. They go out and demoralize police with sickening chants like "pigs in a blanket fry em up like bacon." pigs in reference to police. Keep also in mind back in 2016 dallas had a huge "protest" that ended with a couple officer shot and killed because of a blm supporter look it up it happened. Here is the other thing, when and if you dig deeper into these sjw groups you realize that their end goal is marxism aka communism. I think I remember a leader of blm saying they are trained marxist. If you are unaware what a marxist is let me explain, a marxist is a person who believes holly in communism. So please don't come in here with that crap and try and throw it at us okay thanks.

*all of them are marxists

^ yes thank you sorry forgot antifa is in the plan of marxism.

Well here is the bottom line, communism has been a long proven failure and doesn't work because it goes off the idea that all men are infallible and can't be corrupted. Democratic socialism is a huge failure when you look at canada and other any other country that has it, canada is easiest for me because it throw a huge wrench into the thing all socialist want witch is free health care and free collage. Mk well who has to pay for all of that? You & me & the rest of society in taxes, witch means at the end of the day when we all get that nice paycheck we always love getting, that dollar amount is now just 40% of what you could of had but now don't because of those taxes. Why do you think the canadian dollar is not worth anything right now? Because of inflation of their taxes, and the lost of trust in that dollar. Let me also ask you this who here knows what gives that amazing green piece of paper everyone loves it's worth?

It valued just if people trust in it, and are willing to accept it as payment, right?

Yes

90% correct it also has value based on the trust in said government printing that currency.

Now, what do you think will happen to said dollar if it was related to a government that does nothing but screw over people and makes bad policy choices?

Mike Pence is a great guy but I don't think he is best suited for President with the current news and left. We need someone like Trump who can play by the new dirty rules and keep them on their toes. I think Pence is better in the Vice President role by being a balance on the scale and (as much as I love Trump) act as the calm voice of reason.

Maybe a calm push like what Pence can do is what we need after Trump but I see the news and left just walking all over him.

I don't think we need to keep running with a Trump like figure. I could see us running with someone more refined, who can punch out at times. For example, I could see a Cruz push with a larger focus on being personable.

I'd go for either a Pence or Cruz presidency in 2024.

I don't like this Vice President runs after the President sort of thing since it usually never works for the American people.

I don't think Pence runs. Honestly, Ted Cruz is my first guess. I think there needs to be some form of name recognition, and the only Republican candidate that I could see with the recognition is Cruz. I like Dan Crenshaw, but he isn't the most policy driven guy, from what I can recall.

I like Pence, policy wise and his demeanor, but I don't think he is a good move from Trump's energy level.

*Pence gets picked as Vice President a third time.*

He'll be known as America's Vice President. <:salut:730846445732888630> (historically)

Hope you aren't trying to start a poll, here, since this is the poll discussion channel. That being said, if he is a candidate, yes.

idk maybe

I respect Dan Crenshaw but I disagree with him on manh of the policies he has made.

Facts

Which policies? I don't know much about his policy making, but I do know his general stances.

For one he supports red flag laws

Yikes...

As far as section 230 goes
I think the companies should be responsible for promoted content, and "fact checks" which are also published content
the rest of the "platform" content they shouldn't be responsible for

True. I think that is the important distinction. Are they simply platforms or are they publishers? Fact checking and promoting is a form of publishing. That is not and should not fall under S 230, but I agree the platform aspect, as long as they don't remove content that shouldn't be removed, can still fall under S 230.

You just have to be very clear in the rules about what should be removed.

that's one of the problems
the rules are super vague

Section 230 was to protect platforms from the content of their subscribers. If the platform steps in for an editorial role, they should lose those protections.

should we trust polls this year

no

hail no

Look at 2016

Hillary was predicted to win by like 5 so add like 7 to trump

It will be more accurate

.warnlog