General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 134

that's not how mass shootings are defined. you also included shootings with less than ten dead.

 

Well forget the label of 'mass shooting' then. That was a list in which a gun was involved in 10+ casualties. And I included the last two since they were major news stories and i admittedly just wanted to push the 'stop islamaphobia' agenda.

 

mass shooting is defined as 4 or more people killed, including the gunman(men)

 

Yeah, I agree that we're ultimately in a pretty toxic place at the moment politically, for many reasons, regardless of the details of what happened.

I think the crux of this article rings true, even if it turns out it doesn't apply to this specific case

 

The last few pages of thread are horrible.

 

Subjective.

 

I'm just waiting for the reveal that K Gibbz and the Doc are the same account.

 

Differing opinions, man. God forbid that not everyone thinks like you.

 

Bernie Sanders is streaming a live speech to his followers tonight at 830pm.

The Political Revolution Continues
"Stay tuned to see what's next for our movement"

The campaign has stated they are not pursuing superdelegates at this time and will not do so in the future. I'm interested to see what he says tonight. My guess is he will admit that he will not be the nominee but that his supporters need to continue fighting for all the things Bernie has been addressing and to continue to try and reform the democratic party

 

I'm still holding hope that he drops out to announce he's running with Stein on the Green ticket, however unlikely.

 

Bernie sent a very simple, but great tweet:

"One hateful person committed the atrocity in Orlando, not an entire people or an entire religion."

 

A recap to those who didn't watch Bernie's speech:

Basically he recapped how far his campaign has come and all they have achieved, stated that he will continue to transform the country and looks forward to working with Hillary in the future to ensure the democratic party passes the most progressive agenda in history. He then went on to say that "We must start engaging at the local and state level in an unprecedented way" and that we need as many people involved as possible.

His final statement was that he hopes that when future historians discuss how we reversed the drift toward oligarchy and moved forward to creating a government that works for all, that they will note that "to a significant degree, that effort began with the political revolution of 2016".

 

It is more likely, in fact, that we look back and think "what a grand opportunity it was that was stolen from us."

 

Working with Hillary and the democrats is a surefire way to squash any political revolution

 

I'm sure @Jason Tate can check for us.

 

Kimmy is probably bird man lol

 

Today was exhausting. It was, for the most part, a great discussion. Looking forward to continuing it tomorrow!

 

Good night birdman

 

"go home, Kimmy."

 

I am the user formerly known as Birdman

 

Man, I'd rather have Birdman back then some of the awful accounts that have posted in here and I never thought I'd ever say that.

 

Unrelated to the gun discussion (I'm purposely trying to derail that trainwreck):

Given Trump's "outsider" support plus his own wealth, does he actually need the RNC approval to get on the general election ballot? I'm naive to how the system works, but couldn't he run as an independent or something if the RNC refuses to nominate him?

 

i don't know the answer to this, but i am interested in this info.

If Trump would run as an independent (which i remember months ago he said he would if needed), does the RNC get someone else, so late in the game? or are they simply out of it?

 

Not if he also works to help get progressive nominated and elected downticket