“Many journalists have fallen for the conspiracy theory of government. I do assure you that they would produce more accurate work if they adhered to the cock-up theory.” --Sir Bernard Ingham

>>884
Find me another conclusion to draw from their actions.

As I see it, they are trying very hard to make the "liberal" side of the false dichotomy appear as a violent threat, and to cause a situation where police will fire on civillians. The resulting civil unrest will pit those who identify themselves with the false-dichotomy left against state authority, behind which those who identify themselves with the false-dichotomy right will rally.

This is not the 70s. This will escalate to mass murder. The Republican party will have the bigger numbers in the aftermath and, as usual, the Democratic party is pining for martyrdom.

The future of partisan politics will be a much smaller Democratic party that puports to always take the moral high ground against a much larger Republican party that purports to get the work done while dreamers dream. Neither will ever take responsibility for the people killed in the black-bloc "insurrection".

>>886
>Find me another conclusion to draw from their actions.
Easy: they're actually that stupid.

>>891
I believe it. At the very least, all of the rank and file members are this stupid. There might be some back-room organizers or sponsors who know what they are doing.

This is either a very simple ruse or just unfathomably stupid. Maybe it's a little of both. I can imagine someone had a plan at some point early on, but then they were overrun by idiocy.

>Trump told reporters, "I just hope there won't be violence."
So when there is violence, it's going to look like Trump and the Christian right have denounced it in advance.
They expect it to happen, they want it to happen.
Antifa attacking the polls would be the perfect thing to galvanize the Christian vote for the Republican Party, despite its morally bankrupt leadership.

>>902
I wonder if he'll pull a Reichstag Fire, hire some alt-right shitheads to attack some polls, and then declare martial law?

>>903
This is what I am thinking.
They will be wearing Antifa gear.

File 153642113049.png - (42.07KB , 613x308 , Face.png )

>>886
>This is not the 70s
And a damn good thing that is, in the 70s we had armed rebellions going on across the entire country.

>much larger Republican party
Yeah, no, that's just a wet dream.

Since 2016 the GOP has been bleeding voters as it turns into the Grand Old Trump Party. All the traditional conservatives are aghast at what the GOP has been doing and are leaving in droves. Just look at the 2018 primaries, they were significantly smaller than 2014.

What we're looking at now is the death rattle of the GOP as a significant force, soon the only ones left in it will be angry old white racists and angry young white basement dwelling racists.

They're not fiscally conservative. They're not morally conservative.

>>908
>All the traditional conservatives are aghast at what the GOP has been doing
Then why the fuck don't they do anything about it? Not voting isn't solving the problem, it just leaves their party in the hands of Trump's soft-brained drones.

There's a serious sickness among American people--the system is cultivating a silent majority. This is why things look so divided when they really aren't: actual moderates do not vote. At the very least, if you can't trust either party, vote for a third party.

If the entire silent majority were mobilized behind a party that represented their interests, rather than giving up at the prospect of having to choose between the two major parties that are both shit, the entire political system of the united states could be overturned.

>angry old white racists and angry young white basement dwelling racists
As long as no one stops them, they're still a significant force. The Democratic Party's losing streak is far from over; the Republicans who don't like Trump aren't doing shit. This is who runs the country now, angry white racist geezers and children--led by an angry white racist geezer with a child's brain.

>>910
It's nearly impossible to win an argument with an idiot. They bring you down to their level then beat you with experience.

File 153691023068.jpg - (89.88KB , 640x611 , 1OfTheseThingsIsNotLikeTheOther.jpg )

>>910
Because all the ones who've done so have ended up being primaried out of their house seat. Trump voters are REALLY good at going to primaries when someone is in their district who doesn't properly fellate the cheeto commander.

What's left to see in a couple months is if the rabidly extreme nutjobs they put on the ticket can actually win in an election that's virtually guaranteed to have a higher democratic turnout than republican turnout.

The opposing party .almost always does better in the midterms. That's why the Democrats swept Republicans from power in 2006 and Republicans swept them out in 2010.

>>919
>Because all the ones who've done so have ended up being primaried out of their house seat.

That feel when in-party primaries are more relevant than actual elections.

Partisan politics are the cancer killing the earth.

>>929
Well, they do decide who gets to be on the ballot.

What happens when one party puts an extremist on the ticket though is that the majority of voters, who aren't extremists, end up voting for the other guy. The one who doesn't believe that women can't get pregnant when they're raped, for example.

The problem is that most people can't be bothered to vote in primaries the same way that most people can't be bothered to vote. If they participated then the extremists would be shot down due to lack of support and common sense would rule the day instead of idiocy.

File 153794121791.png - (837.83KB , 1270x1350 , DId Not Vote.png )

>>945
Relevant pic is relevant.

>>958
The reason we can't have nice things.

>>961
Thanks to stepped up efforts to stop citizens from exercising their right to vote, don't be surprised if that map has no red or blue by 2018 or 2020.

The question then becomes when do people throw off the shackles of the .1%? It won't be a pretty response.

I'm honestly not sure if the people stripping citizens of their constitutional rights have actually thought that far ahead. Being born into more wealth than one could actually spend in one's lifetime doesn't make someone intelligent.

File 153983886313.jpg - (6.07KB , 239x211 , TuckingItBack.jpg )

>>1044
>Being born into more wealth than one could actually spend in one's lifetime doesn't make someone intelligent.
Case in point.