>What would you accept as evidence? If I bring First party quotes of democrats in position of power saying explicitly that their goal is to reduce the number and the proportion of whites in a given region would you accept that as evidence? Still waiting. Surely he will deliver. Surely.
> I'm simply questioning why this type of political startegy would be preferrable to endorsing a better qualified Speaker I am putting forward the theory that there is no qualified Speaker in the whole democrat field. You disagree, obviously, but you refuse to mention one. To recap, The answer to your > why would Trump entertain the idea of a Pelosi speakership question is > for political advantage which you seems to accept but reject because > country over party, Trump should help a better democrat to which people say > there is none, mention one
And here we are, waiting for you to mention one.
>>realclearpolitics >Fake news source >>would you accept that as evidence >Yes I would. Ok, I'll follow up with another question: > which source would you accept for my first party quote of democrats in power saying they want to reduce white people in numbers, proportion and influence in a white majority area?
I ask that because you rejected RCP as fake news out of the bat
Josiah Bennett
Fucking loser lmao
CHECKED
Jayden Campbell
that was such a bro moment
Connor Long
>when Jeb! Walked passed him and tried to look cool and pat trump like they were boys in the locker room >and then when it totally did the opposite and the now-President and Sexretary respectively looked badass while Jeb! was a mess
>Name one I don't know enough about the Democrats to honestly answer that question. Surely there must be someone better than Pelosi, though? Even if I accept your premise that everyone is bad, it seems Pelosi is the most incompetent one of all and the person most likely to fuck things up even more. The goal should be to limit the damage and if they're all bad in any case it works out politically anyway. >which source One that isn't fake news like Infowars or CNN. Come on now, you know which outlets and journalists are reputable. A primary or direct source, a YouTube video of the person saying they want to disenfranchise and replaces whites obviously works. I'm still waiting.
Adam Thompson
I'm entertaining the discussion and, at the same time, cutting his reflexive "fake news" claim by asking what evidence would be accepted ***before*** I present it
Thank God for Tom Cotton. I don't have a twitter account but, if I had, I would DM him suggesting he move to include Kate's law (one that already passed the house and that concerns to the same subject) into this bill to poison pill it.
To the best of my knowledge except for FL senate all other democrats conceded
Mason Phillips
GA governor called for R not sure when official certification
FL governor called for R certification Tuesday
FL senate hand recount results due today in 5(?) hours 99.99% chance of being called for R certification Tuesday
> There may not be much time for debate, since the bill’s ideologically eclectic array of champions hope to ram it through the lame-duck session of Congress
> For now, though, I want to focus on an absurd assertion the president made Wednesday afternoon, in remarks touting the proposal. > TRUMP stated that, among other things, FIRST STEP "rolls back some of the provisions of the Clinton crime law that disproportionately harmed the African-American community. And you all saw that and you all know that; everybody in this room knows that. It was very disproportionate and very unfair."
> It was not disproportionate or unfair. > The argument that it was, commonly made by race-obsessed Democrats, is rooted in the noxious “disparate impact” theory of racial discrimination and a misrepresentation of history. > At issue is the wide disparity between criminal penalties for crack cocaine and powder cocaine — known, respectively, in the ’80s and ’90s as “cocaine base” and “cocaine hydrochloride.”
> (By the way, you’ll be hearing more about “truth in sentencing” — its demise, that is — in connection with FIRST STEP. Proponents insist the bill is tough on crime, and to give that illusion, the proposal would return us to the fraudulent practice of having Congress enact hefty sentences that judges ostensibly impose in court — only to have prison authorities quietly slash them by half and more. FIRST STEP would pull this off through the application of “time credits” that prisoners earn by participation in “evidence-based recidivism reduction programming.”)
They were sent to you. Biden and Pelosi in said videos directly talk for a full minute uninterrupted about how they approve of and intend for the future America to consist primarily of non-whites. Or are they deep fakes?
53-47 is much better than 52-48. Real shame about AZ, and it seems that state will become D across the board, like NV before.
Colton Hughes
Checked, I hope someone tell the nigger of this so he chimp out.
Kayden Wood
> That said, it is specious for Trump to insinuate that the enforcement policies he wants to change were driven by racism, or should be thought racist because of their effects.
> The laws, of course, did not distinguish among defendants based on race. If you were a white or black offender, the law applied exactly the same way. A narrative developed that powder cocaine was the drug of well-to-do whites and crack the drug of inner-city blacks. > This was a gross exaggeration, but, more important, it had nothing to do with why the federal criminal law (and a good deal of state law) treated the two forms of cocaine differently > Rock coke was thought to be hyper-addictive and, therefore, more profitable to dealers, more dangerous to individual users, and more destabilizing to communities than powder coke. It wasn’t a race thing; it was a peril thing.
> African Americans were not disproportionately prosecuted for crack. The purported “disproportion” lay in the remorseless fact that, as a demographic group, African Americans (teenage boys and young men, in particular) violated the crack laws at higher rates than other groups. > Policymakers, Congress, prosecutors, police, and the laws targeted behavior, not race. Nor (if we must indulge such mumbo-jumbo) was this a matter of “subliminal racism” on the part of lawmakers and law-enforcers. > It was a response to determined law-breaking.
> Trump took unseemly satisfaction in observing that the “Clinton crime law” — presumably, the one in 1994 — “disproportionately harmed the African-American community,” and that “everybody” knows it was “very unfair.” > To be sure, Trump is on the receiving end of overheated racism rhetoric from Democrats. That doesn’t make his claim any less of a slander. > Clinton signed the crime bill at the behest of, among others, many leading members of the Congressional Black Caucus and African-American leaders who were alarmed at how crack trafficking was ravaging black neighborhoods
Gavin Watson
Link it again I must have missed it. I only saw an alt-right fake news link
Thomas Murphy
> If anything, the motivation behind those laws was to protect African-American communities from determined criminals. It remains to be seen whether those communities will be as safe once, thanks to the FIRST STEP bill, many of those criminals are more rapidly set free.
AZ was a shitshow ,but while there was fraud it wasn't the deciding factor. McSally was a bad candidate who's had a career of Roy Moore-tier performances. Montana and WV also could've been won with more campaigning and money. How do you fake a video clip of someone speaking uninterrupted?
Jace James
> A primary or direct source, a YouTube video of the person saying they want to disenfranchise and replaces whites obviously works. Can I use a national newspaper article quoting the person directly with their full agreement? Also: do you accept that "disenfranchisement" in this case means reducing their political influence of whites in a majority white area by deliberately bringing non whites from outside to influence the decision making?
I have it already, just cutting the usual escape routes people use when confronted by this particular information
> It seems Pelosi is the most incompetent one of all Not even close user.
> I don't know enough about the Democrats to honestly answer that question. That seems to be a problem if you really want to continue debating this.
> Surely there must be someone better than Pelosi, though? None that could get 218 votes among the democrats, it seems
Nolan Hill
Which McCarthy? Future minority leader?
Nicholas Phillips
How many cuckservatives and RINOs will be in the senate out of the 53m
Mccarthy is going to kill it or at least poisonpill it? The blue dogs have it rough now with many RINOs out of the GOP and if only the fat niece of Romney gets thrown out too
Lincoln Martinez
> Real shame about AZ, and it seems that state will become D across the board, like NV before. This election was special in the sense "country over party" republicans led by Flake (and McCain) rhetoric decided to "keep Trump in check" by voting for the democrat candidate. McSally would have no trouble getting elected under president Jeb
Aaron Cox
>I have it already Go ahead, still waiting. The fact that you have to make sure I'll accept the source beforehand tells you it's most likely some fake news outlet like Breitbart or something. You obviously have no confidence in your sources.
> fake news outlet like Breitbart Nice choice of fake news outlet > Infowars > Breitbart You even tackled a "CNN" to look bipartisan. It is a nationally syndicated newspaper. All quotes were provided by the very people saying them. Is that acceptable?
David Miller
Murkowski is worse than R-Money. Mitt can at least be relied upon to vote for True Conservative (TM) points, Murkowski is effectively a democrat.
Juan Wright
That's not what "Reddit spacing" is at all user. You are trying too hard to fit in.
Jaxson Hernandez
and Collins.
Jason Richardson
>Trump is dicking around with a prison bill instead of making birthright citizenship EOs or shutting down the govt for wall funding
No more 4d chess excuses, this is fucking unacceptable
53 severely limits the damage tho. I am pretty convinced that, in the event of a 50-50 Murkowski would switch her party affiliation to democrat and flip the senate, and even in case of 51-49 Collins could follow suit and do likewise (being the one still standing republican federal government representative from New England)
Jack Perry
It also isn't helpful, there is no 4D chess explanation for this.
Will only lose him support.
Andrew Miller
No argument here by a large part of this audience.
Alexander Baker
>Plebbit spaces >That's not Plebbit spacing ur from Plebbit! Sad. Back to The Donald faggot go Awoo over there
Cameron Fisher
birthright citizenship is written into the constitution. It would be challenged in the courts and he would lose.
Christian Rogers
It's an own goal done for no reason but appeasing the Kochs and hoping that this time BASED blacks will vote GOP. Complete retardation and the only hope is Mitch killing it.
he should be working on taking part of the defense spending and spend it on a border wall, and say it's cheaper than a constant troop deployment.
Jonathan Hernandez
>The DOG accused of a hate crime after fouling outside a home in just one of 2,500 cases probed over two years
>Police notes said, dog fouled and 'victim perceived this to be a racial incident' >Tory MP David Davies said people must think 'more carefully' before calling 999 >Another hate incident involved 'suspect's dog barking at victim' >Other examples included, disputed call in a tennis match and dead rat in garden
Guys is politics real or is it like in victoria 2, where those in power decide to change policies/population/ideology of the mass just to change certain laws and do certain stuff/reforms
Jaxon Cooper
needs more drunkards at the sidelines to be Helsinki; Kamppi area is fucking littered with them every evening and police do fucking nothing.
People in power decided there would be a food shortage in the middle east after crops failure in India and Russia. Thus the arab spring happened. For some reason most shipments to Egypt dropped out, but other parts of the world were fine. Funny how that works.
Damn she's ugly but I would love to have a postworkout slag to shag in the gym's bathroom
Easton Sanders
hi kevin
Caleb Green
Ok user, I'll post anyway and wait for you to dismiss it somehow. Here is a group of democrats debating what would be the best strategy to bring more non whites from out of state wth the express purpose of disenfranchise the local whites.
> New Hampshire, 94 Percent White, Asks: How Do You Diversify a Whole State? [1]
Here is a selected quote > New Hampshire, like its neighbors Vermont and Maine, is nearly all white. This has posed an array of problems for new arrivals, who often find themselves isolated and alone, without the comfort and support of a built-in community. > ... > The issue prompted about 100 business leaders, government officials and members of nonprofit organizations to meet Thursday to search for ways that New Hampshire — which is 94 percent white — might lure other racial and ethnic groups, as well as younger people. > Will Arvelo, New Hampshire’s director of economic development, said the gathering appeared to be the first broad-based effort in New England, if not the country, to focus on how to diversify an entire state.
And here is the punchline, the evidence you requested > The project grew out of informal talks over the last few years among a racially diverse coalition of people, including Mrs. Celentano, who say they want to change New Hampshire’s demographics.
Is that acceptable for you as evidence that there is a concerted effort to do just that, disenfranchise whites and reduce their numbers, their proportion and their political say in places that are predominantly white?
You don't have to look at her back. Just look at the ceiling stained with shit while thrusting your dong into her, smash her head on the lockers and snif the fear induced braaps she lets go for massive test gainz
Juan James
Obviously the New York Times is a good source, it's the most reputable outlet out there. Anyway, that article does not mention disenfrancisement nor does it quote top Democrat leaders talking about it. It clearly states that the goal is to help cater a state to a nationally changing demographic: >With nonwhites poised to make up a majority of the American population in the next three decades, he said, diversity has become a bottom-line imperative for companies competing for talent, especially for workers who can speak other languages. While also improving business: >“We truly believe that this effort will be hugely beneficial to our business operations,” >“It’s not just the social justice groups that are doing this, it’s the businesses,” she said. “We’re talking about the economic engine of our state, and we can’t move forward without them.” This has nothing do to with disenfranchising whites, or "replacement" , or top Dems wanting to bring in more migrants to do so. Your reading comprehension is fucking shit but no surprise there seeing as you're from Reddit.
Jackson Watson
how can someone from new hampshire see shit like this and not feel revulsion, even unconsciously
>oh, honey, if it weren't for Ellis Island dagos we would have that little place in Wherever that serves those delicious Whatevers. Let em in.
Cameron Ortiz
Most people there probably haven't seen the article. Additionally, a White person living in a state that is 94% White is going to have a vastly different opinion of niggers/illegals than someone living in the South. It is only when crime starts rising or one of their friends/family get murdered do they begin to think about doing something.
Nathaniel Thompson
Not even then. That dude who's daughter was murdered by illegals still talked about how much he loved tacos so we should keep open borders. Ditto with that EU politician who's daughter was killed by a tanned German. These people are completely subverted.
Connor Gray
> This has nothing do to with disenfranchising whites, or "replacement" user, they are literally talking about bringing more non whites from out of state to increase their numbers and their proportion and their influence in states that are 90%+ white. That is literally replacement in the most basic meaning of the word. > that the goal is to help cater a state to a nationally changing demographic Seems like you agree with my assessment then that they are planning ethnic replacement > other states have more minorities > our state should too > let's bring more in
I am not even addressing the merits of doing so (like you did), only showing evidence that diluting the political power of whites in a majority white area with the deliberate introduction of non whites from outside that area is not only a goal for certain segments but a very express, explicit and not hidden one. Your rebuttal seems to be all over the place > they are, but these are not TOP democrats > they are, but replacement is not the GOAL, only a side effect > they are, but that's a good thing for the economy
Also, please drop the kayfabe. Your imitation of what you believe to be the behavior of the good people in this thread and board is actually sad.
>These people are completely subverted. Or maybe... just maybe... they're good, empathetic people who haven't been brainwashed by a bunch of racist Neo-Nazi propaganda infographics on Jow Forums.
Angel Jones
Oh yea I remember that. >Daughter gets raped and murdered by illegal >Muh Food They're not even human anymore.
