Replies

When enough people have had enough, change will be effected through the ballot box. Therefore, if you have enough disgruntled to carry through a revolution, then revolution is not necessary. Why talk of revolution when we cannot even win a presidential election? Just wait four years and then it will be voices in on the left talking about tevolution again.

With all due respect,you are ignoring some basic facts. Those facts make the rest of your post after what I bolded irrelevant.

The other side cheats, we don't. We won't fix elections by registering dead people and letting them vote; carting people to multiple polling places; etc...

We respect the process and believe it will work. (as, clearly, do you)

They know that their ideas are bankrupt and therefore do not respect the process, believing that "by any means necessary" applies to their politics and candidates.

Clearly you are ignoring those facts when you posit that utimately change will be effected at the ballot box. The constitutional positions and candidates will never win out when those very precepts prevent us from fighting fire with fire.

I'd rather fight a war and kill the socialists then stuff a ballot box and I bet you would too if those were the only two choices available to you.

They would rather stuff and ballot box to enslave me than to just kill me outright as they need my income to feed the worthless non-working whose votes they are purchasing.

That is why net tax receivers should not be voters. Those who pay the tab should set the rules.

"...I'd rather fight a war and kill the socialists then stuff a ballot box and I bet you would too if those were the only two choices available to you....

Count me in on that.

Is it time to dig up my guns?