No, nor should they try, nor should they stick with their current seemingly nonsensical policy ideas about guns.
I can’t decide if I’m amazed, impressed, or utterly disgusted that the “stick to their guns” play on words was right there and you didn’t go for it.
I think you’d be more wrong than you think. As they say, “If you go far enough left you get your guns back.”
Not to mention moderates of both parties who are gun owners in suburban and rural areas of many of the battleground states he so desperately needs.
Lemmy doesn’t want to hear it, but you’re correct.
Democrats want Biden to drop out because they don’t believe he can beat Trump.
To this point: for those who think that, do they think anyone else realistically could, at this point, other than Biden?
While I’m not thrilled with his chances, I will say that if he wasn’t to be the nominee, that decision needed to happen in 2021. At this point, I do believe that statistically, he’s got better odds than anyone else, so regardless of his debate or mental state, he’s our guy.
Just have one officially killed.
Then signal to the rest that you’d like them to review this latest decision while you’re deciding on your nominee to fill the vacancy.
And literally hours after McConnell says it’s too close to an election to have a confirmation, have him killed too.
Then ask his replacement (Cornyn? Graham? Hawley?) to pretty please hold a confirmation vote before your special ops team has a chance to get a few hours of sleep and a hot meal and they’re ready to roll again.
You’re getting downvoted because Lemmy, but that’s more or less how I read the ruling as well. They ruled very specifically in a way that let them punt on all the other questions these trials have created.
I’d hoped for better, but not realistically.
Wouldn’t the combo of the first amendment and the supremacy clause pretty neatly dismantle the new Louisiana law?
But let’s say you could also make that living wage just by existing. In a world where you wake up each day and a day’s worth of your living wage was automatically deposited into your account whether you worked a job you liked or even if you went out for a walk in the park…would you still choose to work every day?
Right?
“Nobody wants to work anymore!”
Like no shit man.
News Flash: nobody has wanted to work ever. They work because the compensation lets them live the lives they want outside of work. If nobody wants to work for you, it’s because you either aren’t willing to compensate them enough to do that, or your job makes them so miserable that it’s not worth it for them to trade away that much happiness for the compensation.
Or both. In lots of cases it’s both.
You mean the insurgency that eventually achieved all of its goals and reclaimed it’s power and control after the most powerful military in the world gave up and went home?
Or did you mean it’s not the 1970s where that insurgency also did it to the second most powerful military…while a different insurgency did it to the one from the first example?
You’re absolutely right that in a straight up fight no individual stands a chance against the US military (and I also tend to agree that the military would be the best friend of the people in that awful scenario) but there’s two or three points that muddy the waters here a bit: it’s not going to be just one, it’s not going to be a straight up fight, and if the population were somehow disarmed, there wouldn’t even be any struggle at all.
I’m not saying I’d fight off a battalion from my front porch wearing my Crocs, but a) anything is preferable to being herded to my fate, and b) it’s not about one armed individual, it’s more about the unappetizing proposition of subduing an armed populace.