637
If Trump wins the election, US cities are at risk of military takeovers and mass deportations
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
637 points (97.9% liked)
politics
19104 readers
2522 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
39% support among Democrats. Not all Democrats, not a plurality, and not even a majority.
Two of those fucking links went to the same stupid bill from 1994 that a handful of people put forward as an alternative to the assault weapons ban, and one of them is goddamn sticker on Amazon. You really are grasping at straws here.
I can understand the appeal for repealing the 2nd amendment, since a lot of people consider it too vague to have any real meaning, and the conservative loaded SC has determined that "well regulated militia" extends to groups of racist hilljacks in a pickup shooting unarmed black men.
That being said though... 39% of Dems oppose it, which means that the Democratic party as a whole is 61% in favor of keeping it.
So, are you gonna take the L and delete your comment, or are you gonna post another wall of bullshit that you didn't even bother to read before calling it gospel and spreading it over the fediverse?
So those %39 aren't really Democrats? Got it...
Lol no they're not, and the Amazon link is for a book from a Democrat....but ok...
Yea no... it's only people who are antigun that find it vague... it's got commas and states two things. The people should be able to bear arms and that the militia should exist... because at that time both sides considered a standing army to be a no go...so history tells us it's not vague... just antigun groups do.
Lol...yea cause 39% is so little.
You mean are you going to keep whining because you don't know history and think dems are pro2a?
Strawman argument. My counter-point as a whole was not that everyone wants to keep the 2nd Amendment, but that Democrats do not want to repeal the 2nd amendment. It has less than 50% support in the party. To further express why you are attacking a strawman...
So those %8 aren't really Republicans? Got it...
I think the only people who find it straight-forward believe that any number of mass shootings, school shootings and random shootings is acceptable, as long as there are no more restrictions of any kind on their ability to purchase, sell, and use any weapon.
Also, most constitutional law scholars who had fucking doctorates in this shit find it vague.
Still <50%... Lol?
Are you acting like you do know the history of 2A movents in the US? Don't make me laugh.
Anymore bullshit opinions pieces and Amazon links you want to spam here as "evidence"?
That's not what a strawman argument is, the original user stated that no dems want to ban the 2nd, I have clearly provided sources that state this is bullshit.
This is a strawman, as it's not part of the original argument.
Hey... another strawman....
Yea no they don't, unless they're antigun, then it magically becomes vague.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Here there is an entire section dor scholarly comments.
Lol yea cause 1/3rd is a tiny amount.....also straw man.
Lol sure thing, I don't know what I'm talking about.
Ah left leaning sources that disagree with you are now ...bullshit...damn
Woooo boy. I really don't need to say anything here. Your previous comment pretty much cements you as a conservative troll, and anyone that makes it this far down is clearly going to see it.
Yea...not a conservative or a troll....but I guess that's what I get from arguing with people who can't back their shit up...you going to call me a nazi fascist next as well?
Says the guy posting Amazon links and duplicates of the same old failed bill from 30 years ago as evidence for their claims that the current Democratic party wants to eliminate the second amendment.
Says the guy who thinks that 39% of a group holds more sway over policy than the remaining 61%
Says the guy who literally tried to build a no-true-scotsman strawman 2 posts ago, and then just did DARVO shit when they got called on it.
There's only 2 options here. Either you're a conservative troll...Or, you are using conservative troll fallacies to "back up" conservative troll propaganda, and you just can't recognize it.
So what's it gonna be?
Yea a book and bills from Democrats...but it doesnt count.
Lol head in sand
Rofl yea sure thing, it's sad that any criticism of the left, is met by the same "nuh uh" response as the right wing idiots. Also you're the one doing the no-true-scotsman by suggesting all of my links are not democrats...
I'm not either, but you really should look in the mirror and ask yourself why your rebuttal is literally the same shit the idiots on the red team do.
It's gonna be, I'm getting tired of the deflection and you putting fingers in your ears... you're boring me now.
Quote me, jackass.
https://lemmy.world/comment/12954770
Lol literally you saying none of my links count, and that 39% doesn't count...fuck outta here with your double speak bullshit.
Also find it hilarious you're at the name calling rebuttal lol
Look at that, you can't quote me, because I didn't fucking say it.
As for the name calling, you're the one lobbing false accusations at me, an insult beyond me calling you out for the stubborn donkey that you're acting like.
Lol sure thing kid. You're entire rebuttal was basically "those don't count"....so yes you absolutely did say it. Stop acting like you didn't.
No, my rebuttal was that you posted a bunch of bullshit opinions pieces, 30 year old theater bills and a fucking Amazon link as "evidence" that the Democratic party's platform wants to repeal the second amendment.
Your whole argument that I think those people don't count as Democrats (a no-true-scotsman) you invented in your 2nd comment to me. In case you fucking forgot, here it is.
This is literally you, building your own argument and attacking it instead of countering the argument that I put forward. Literally that is the definition of a strawman.
From Wikipedia :
Enough of this though, here is the DNC's platform for 2024
https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/
Feel free to look through it, and see what Democrats actually want to do, instead of believing bullshit republican propaganda about the Democrat platform.
Learn some shit, and then get lost. You're done here.
Lol yea....all my links and the poll was republican propaganda.
Lol ok kid
Your links are fucking laughable. No amount of Amazon shit, and opinions pieces are indicators of the platform for a political party. The most substantial thing was the 2 links to the same failed performance bill from 1994... Which was never intended to pass, it was intended to signal the alternative if we couldn't get an assault weapons ban.
You'd fucking know that if you were alive in the early 90's...like this "kid" was. You fucking lost, get over it.
Yea 39% isn't substantial. Got it.
Like 90s hahahah.
Listen to me... 39 Smaller than 61. Say it with me
39 is smaller than 61.
So let's get this straight, are you saying that the 39% are more substantial than the 61%?
My whole point is:
Democrats do not want to repeal the second amendment. It's not part of the platform, it's never been part of the platform in my entire life.
No, you can't just cherry pick a few opinion pieces and Amazon links as supporting "evidence" for your claim that Democrats want to repeal the 2nd amendment. A group of people is not a hive mind, it's a collection of individuals who have their own stances on every single issue presented. In the poll you posted, 8% of gun-loving Republicans wanted to repeal the 2nd amendment... Are they not Republicans because they disagree with the part on that issue? Do they matter? Of course they do, and it would be silly to deny it, but that minority does not determine policy positions for the party.
Democrats do not want to repeal the 2nd amendment, full stop.
If you said, "most of the people who want to repeal the second amendment are Democrats" I'd agree with you. If you said "more Democrats than Republicans want to repeal the second amendment" I'd agree with you, but saying that "The Democrats are hiding their desire to repeal the second amendment" is plainly false. It's not supported by the statistics, it's not supported by history. The only thing that supports it is a handful of opinion pieces and a few Amazon links.
Honestly, if you still can't understand this now, then you are either not representing yourself in good faith, or you are too far down the rabbit-hole to recognize logic or irony anymore. Either way, we should be done here. Unless you can come back with something substantial, like a recent (let's say, post 9-11) bill brought to the floor by a majority of Democrats in Congress, or a platform statement by Democrats setting a goal to repeal the 2nd amendment, or a poll showing more than 50% Democrat support for a 2A repeal, then your position, that Democrats want to repeal the second amendment, is not based in reality.