The Thread of Democrats

[Cunt]

I'm not supporting anybody (other than Bernie). I'm just pointing out the fallacies in your posts.

I wouldn't support anyone in the Dems, until the smoke clears from the spygate shit. Some of the players will be found to have been corrupt.

Probably on both sides. Be fucking funny if Durham jailed Clintons AND Trumps.

[JimC]

So, the paedos are all left-left-leaning liberals, eh?

Not ultra-rich businessmen, or Hollywood moguls, or degenerate royalty, or mega-church pastors, or...

[pErvinalia]

When are these paedo "revelations" going to come out? Any day now? Or is this like Tyrannical's nonsense prediction that the impeachment hearing was going to bring down Biden? You guys believe in some ridiculous conspiracies.

The impeachment hearing IS going to bring down Biden.

The impeachment hearings are long over. Did you miss that little detail?

As to the paedo 'revalations', they are all over the news.

ABC/Disney/Epstein (I keep accidentally typing 'Epstain' lol)
Wexner (who claimed that he wouldn't use plus-sized models because 'no-one goes to get plastic surgery to look fatter')
Weinstein (HUGE Clinton donor)

How many do you need, before you think it's true? How about endless streams of the Hollywood elite praising those pedos? How about Ricky Gervais accusing them of it to their FACES during that awards ceremony?

Everybody knows, it's just recently they are getting sentenced (compared to what happened to Epstain when he was convicted before)

What does any of this have to do with the Democrats? You just post any old shit, don't you?

[pErvinalia]

I'm not supporting anybody (other than Bernie). I'm just pointing out the fallacies in your posts.

I wouldn't support anyone in the Dems, until the smoke clears from the spygate shit. Some of the players will be found to have been corrupt.

No they won't. You and your right wing buddies live in a bubble.

[Cunt]

So, the paedos are all left-left-leaning liberals, eh?

Not ultra-rich businessmen, or Hollywood moguls, or degenerate royalty, or mega-church pastors, or...

No JimC, but I think the Republicans are lining things up to look like that's what is going on.

Bust a bunch of sex-traffickers, and make it look like it was all one party.

When are these paedo "revelations" going to come out? Any day now? Or is this like Tyrannical's nonsense prediction that the impeachment hearing was going to bring down Biden? You guys believe in some ridiculous conspiracies.

The impeachment hearing IS going to bring down Biden.

The impeachment hearings are long over. Did you miss that little detail?

The impeachment hearings sparked the current investigations in Ukraine.

He's doomed (if he did anything sketchy)

As to the paedo 'revalations', they are all over the news.

ABC/Disney/Epstein (I keep accidentally typing 'Epstain' lol)
Wexner (who claimed that he wouldn't use plus-sized models because 'no-one goes to get plastic surgery to look fatter')
Weinstein (HUGE Clinton donor)

How many do you need, before you think it's true? How about endless streams of the Hollywood elite praising those pedos? How about Ricky Gervais accusing them of it to their FACES during that awards ceremony?

Everybody knows, it's just recently they are getting sentenced (compared to what happened to Epstain when he was convicted before)

What does any of this have to do with the Democrats? You just post any old shit, don't you?

You really can't put it together?

Ok, you're right. There is no danger to the Dems from all the high-profile sex-traffickers being busted. The Rep's won't be using it to smear the Dems, and there will be lollipops and rainbows for EVERYONE.

[pErvinalia]

Any day now.

[Cunt]

Will Weinstein get 'Clintoned'?

[Hermit]

One is open borders.

Not that they are claiming that - they oppose border ID, ICE and back sancuary cities - but NOT OPEN BORDERS.

Guess what? It looks a lot like open borders, no matter what their moderates really want.

Just find me some who are advocating for improved border security or immigration enforcement, and which candidates are standing behind it. (we KNOW some of them do, but they have to stick to the fringe 'open borders' policy)

Once again, opposition to the way border policies are run only look like open border policy to rabid Republicans. Their policy is to reshape and reform the USA's immigration enforcement system, including breaking up ICE and CBP and redistributing their functions to their proper authorities, decriminalising immigration and demilitarising the Mexican border. All right wing media and supporters of Trump interpret this as "Open Border Policy", which of course it is not. He is just proposing to dismantle Trump's racist based Festung Amerika policy.

You can read Sanders's border policy in full on his own web site.

[Joe]

Will Weinstein get 'Clintoned'?

Weinstein would be happy to get 'Clintoned.'

[L'Emmerdeur]

See, their usual attack now, is to force the left to defend their most ludicrous fringe ideals. It's been working very well.

What is the 'ludicrous fringe ideal' that Democrats are supposedly being forced to defend?

One is open borders.

The preceding point was in regard to the Republican bill we were discussing. You raised the idea of 'forcing the left to defend their most ludicrous fringe ideals' in the context of that bill, and that is the context of the question. For some reason, instead of explaining what ludicrous fringe ideal the Democrats were supposedly defending when they opposed this bill, you choose to talk about something else. Must have just been an oversight on your part.

Not that they are claiming that - they oppose border ID, ICE and back sancuary cities - but NOT OPEN BORDERS.

Guess what? It looks a lot like open borders, no matter what their moderates really want.

What does 'oppose border ID' mean? Are you claiming that the Democratic Party advocates dispensing with paperwork at US borders? That's a novel claim, and I'd be interested in seeing evidence supporting it.

ICE has shown itself to be a problematic agency. I've seen proposals by Democrats that would disband ICE and revert the tasks it has been handling back to the agencies that handled them previously. Despite the implications of the right-wing talking point 'THEY WANT TO DISBAND ICE!!!!' it is not a Democratic policy to no longer enforce US immigration and customs law. But you already knew that.

Supporting sanctuary cities is not an open borders policy. There are very good reasons why cities refuse to be subject to enforcing federal immigration law. Most prominently, the cities want the people living there to be willing to report crimes, take care of themselves and use health services, and enroll their children in school. If people in the city are unwilling to do these things, the city suffers, and the people suffer. It's a practical decision on the part of the cities and has nothing to do with advocating for open borders.

I think you already knew that as well, but you do love singing the old songs, don't you? I suppose in your fond memory, it went so well for you before when you claimed that the Democrats were an open borders party that you can't resist another chorus, hearkening back to past glories. Sadly, instead of the pure clear tones of the original you've faltered and the tune is marred by the admission that they aren't as a party advocating for open borders.

Just find me some who are advocating for improved border security or immigration enforcement, and which candidates are standing behind it. (we KNOW some of them do, but they have to stick to the fringe 'open borders' policy)

Sorry, you already admitted that they're not advocating for open borders. Your claim that as a sort of subtext, they're supporting open borders is unsupported. Why not do some of your own research? I know that the Democratic candidates for president have each put a declaration of their position on the questions of immigration and border control on the internet. You would be able to make informed critiques of those positions instead of resorting to tired old goat-bait.

Now, about that ludicrous fringe ideal the Democrats were defending when they opposed the Republican bill. Anything?

[Cunt]

I meant 'voter ID' not 'border ID' mistype.

But it isn't that Dems want open borders, it is that Republicans push them to defend that 'extreme' position.

Then ridicule them for being in favour of open borders with snippets.

I don't expect you to look at that, though. It's better to think Dems are smart as heck, and have nothing to worry about from their only opponents.

Where they oppose voter ID laws, or try to defend 'sanctuary cities', they can be easily made to look like they support open borders.

Not to someone as smart as you, of course, but to the voters who matter most to them.

[L'Emmerdeur]

I meant 'voter ID' not 'border ID' mistype.

Voter ID laws have nothing to do with border policy. I don't know if it's possible to put it in meme form, but as simply as possible, voter ID laws are intended to suppress the vote turnout. Repeated analyses have shown that voter fraud, the putative justification for voter ID, is practically nonexistent. On the other hand, it is known that voter ID laws suppress voter turnout. Low turnout elections favour Republicans. Policies that suppress voter turnout are antidemocratic as well as harming the prospects of Democratic candidates. That's why Democrats generally oppose voter ID laws. Opposition to voter ID laws is not a fringe leftist position.

But it isn't that Dems want open borders, it is that Republicans push them to defend that 'extreme' position.

Then ridicule them for being in favour of open borders with snippets.

I don't expect you to look at that, though. It's better to think Dems are smart as heck, and have nothing to worry about from their only opponents.

You haven't presented any substance to 'look at'. Rather it appears that you've got a general impression of what some half-smart pundit pulled out of their arse, and decided to bring it here so that we might marvel at your characterisation of its colouration and aroma.

I suppose that's something. Meanwhile it looks like you've got nothing at all to support your claim about the Republican bill that we were originally discussing. Par for the course.

[JimC]

Rather it appears that you've got a general impression of what some half-smart pundit pulled out of their arse, and decided to bring it here so that we might marvel at your characterisation of its colouration and aroma.

[Cunt]

I suppose that's something. Meanwhile it looks like you've got nothing at all to support your claim about the Republican bill that we were originally discussing. Par for the course.

It started because I claimed that the dems were crowded into defending their fringe ideas. You asked me, I thought this 'open borders' thing was one.

I'm wrong - ok.

What are the lefts radical fringe ideas?

[L'Emmerdeur]

I suppose that's something. Meanwhile it looks like you've got nothing at all to support your claim about the Republican bill that we were originally discussing. Par for the course.

It started because I claimed that the dems were crowded into defending their fringe ideas. You asked me, I thought this 'open borders' thing was one.

I'm wrong - ok.

What are the lefts radical fringe ideas?

This is evidence that your short-term memory may be deficient. Let your mind drift back to the hoary ages of yesteryore, back to Wed Feb 26, 2020. We see a jolly fellow from Canada posting the following:

Dem's just blocked the 'born alive' bill. It's uncanny how often the same tactic is used against them - push them to align with the furthest-left fringe of their party, then criticize them for being fringe.

In discussion of this post, I asked you 'what is the 'ludicrous fringe ideal' that Democrats are supposedly being forced to defend.' The question referred to the Republican bill, as I've clarified for you more than once. I'm inclined to think at this point that you didn't actually have anything in mind and the second sentence had no connection with the first.