Bernie Sanders thinks convicted terrorists should vote

[TexasRules]

Yes. The way you're framing your response is deliberately, wildly inflammatory.



Because you're saying things I did not say, and lying about some of it to boot. For instance;



That right there is another inflammatory lie.

You don't get your own personal facts. The facts are the facts, for all of us. You don't get to make up horseshit like that and not get called out for it.

Are you saying that you can say anything you want about transgender subjects in Canada? I am sure you will close the thread now because the mere utterance of transgender sends you in to a tizzy.

And you repeatedly said your principles are that anyone should be allowed to vote. It's not a lie by restating this. And it's not inflammatory to keep pointing out the Presidential assassin allowed to vote because it can actually happen, and I want to make sure everyone knows how a Canadian feels that no crime is above reproach in denying voting rights, even if it means trying to silence the guy you will vote against.

[gobio]

I don't understand.

It is not a slope of any kind if you don't do anything, its literally just flat...
If criminals right now can vote, and republicans want to stop it, and Bernie Sanders want to keep criminal's right to vote, THEN the slope argument is legit in favor of Bernie. On the other hand, if criminal right now cannot vote, and Bernie wants to CHANGE that, then Benie Sander IS responsible for the slope (upward or downward, slippery or not)...

Also, how exactly does that criminal voting things work in details? What can the criminal actually vote for? POTUS? GOVERNOR? LOCAL TOWN COUNCIL? MAYOR IF APPLICABLE? And what district do the criminal represent? Their home district, what if the criminal said the prison is his home and the prison is located in a small town with fully democratically elected city council / mayor. You don't see problem in that?????

[Machismo]

Well, currently we allow a lot of unconvicted felons vote (current Republican party), so why not convicted felons too?

The Democrats have their fair share of corrupt assholes.

As for voting, my entire goal is more people voting, not less. I don't want it to be an exclusive club, and the more people we try and prevent from voting, the less free of a society we are.

[Endus]

Are you saying that you can say anything you want about transgender subjects in Canada? I am sure you will close the thread now because the mere utterance of transgender sends you in to a tizzy.

You pretty much can, yes, in terms of legal consequences at least. Congrats on not having a sweet clue what Canadian law is.

But then, you think I'm going to "close this thread", so seeing the plain facts in front of your face clearly isn't your thing.

[Donatello Trumpi]

You misunderstand. I said that you can have principles. I also stated that there are limits to what people will take. You combined the 2 as a point whereas I think they are separate. I am glad you are sticking by your principle to allow silencers of freedom to vote against the people they try to murder, most people will never see eye to eye with you--especially in a patriotic country like America. People tend to look less favorably when you try to kill the leader of their country, but it's good to know you think their position is wrong and the assassin deserves to rally against them, even from prison. Denying people who chose to be separated from society does not mean as much to me as it does to you and Sanders.

I previously stated when released from prison, I would have no problem restoring rites. But you are wrong on this front also, their is never anything automatic where the law is concerned.

you know whats funny? The left wants convicted felons, murderers etc. to be allowed to vote because denying them that would lead to some dangerous "precedents" or some bullshit...

yet

it is them who quickly label voices that are not extremist, but merely uncomfortable to them as racist-sexist-whatever-ist and advocate for massive censorship.
Talking about dangerous precedents when denying criminals rights, yet deep throating authoritarianism to censor opposing voices, that's the modern left.

[Endus]

you know whats funny? The left wants convicted felons, murderers etc. to be allowed to vote because denying them that would lead to some dangerous "precedencts" or some bullshit...

yet

it is them who quickly label voices that are not extremist, but merely uncomfortable to them as racist-sexist-whatever-ist and advocate for massive censorship.
Talking about dangerous precedents when denying criminals rights, yet deep throating authoritarianism to censor opposing voices, that's the modern left.

You're contrasting two completely different things.

The first is about the government restricting or removing people's basic civil rights.

The second is about private citizens being free to not associate with other private citizens.

There is no government censorship occurring. Private citizens thinking you're a terrible person and not doing business with you any more is not "censorship" in any meaningful sense. And that's all that's happening.

[rootfifth]

"You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities," Ehrlichman said. "We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."

This was said by a Nixon official about the war on drugs. Not allowing people to vote for any reason whatsoever gives politicians an incentive to abuse their powers and destroy human rights in order to essentially pick and choose who gets to vote. Just look at USA vs China, a population three times our size that is often viewed as a police state and authoritarian has just over half our prison population. That should speak volumes to how bad it has gotten in America.

So yes, Bernie absolutely is right, the slippery slope has already occurred and denying prisoners and convicted felons the right to vote should be seen as a humans rights violation and ended immediately.

[Donatello Trumpi]

You're contrasting two completely different things.

The first is about the government restricting or removing people's basic civil rights.

This is necessary when dealing with convicted felons in a civilized society. Imprisoning convicts and upholding the freedom of movement rights are not compatible for instance.

The second is about private citizens being free to not associate with other private citizens.

There is no government censorship occurring. Private citizens thinking you're a terrible person and not doing business with you any more is not "censorship" in any meaningful sense. And that's all that's happening.

Since I am talking to an obvious leftist, I will state some things that are fairly obvious to some others

Corporations are not citizens.

And the corporations, with a leftist bias are often direcly influenced by democrat politicians,


* hide conservative topics from trending (facebook)
* manipulate viewcount, upvote count, subscriber count of conservative topics (on reddit for instance)
* favour democrats in search results (google)
* The proven aimed shadowbanning of conservatives on twitter (project veritas). Also "Twitter attempted to manipulate election-related tweets using the hashtags “#PodestaEmails” and “#DNCLeak (2016)"


So yes, this is censoring conservative views while also displaying heavy bias towards leftist politics from companies who claim to be apolitical and neutral.

[Deletedaccount1]

I don't understand.

It is not a slope of any kind if you don't do anything, its literally just flat...
If criminals right now can vote, and republicans want to stop it, and Bernie Sanders want to keep criminal's right to vote, THEN the slope argument is legit in favor of Bernie. On the other hand, if criminal right now cannot vote, and Bernie wants to CHANGE that, then Benie Sander IS responsible for the slope (upward or downward, slippery or not)...

Also, how exactly does that criminal voting things work in details? What can the criminal actually vote for? POTUS? GOVERNOR? LOCAL TOWN COUNCIL? MAYOR IF APPLICABLE? And what district do the criminal represent? Their home district, what if the criminal said the prison is his home and the prison is located in a small town with fully democratically elected city council / mayor. You don't see problem in that?????

Leftists have a tendency to get emotionally charged and then not think things through.

[Machismo]

This is necessary when dealing with convicted felons in a civilized society. Imprisoning convicts and upholding the freedom of movement rights are not compatible for instance.


Since I am talking to an obvious leftist, I will state some things that are fairly obvious to some others

Corporations are not citizens.

And the corporations, with a leftist bias are often direcly influenced by democrat politicians,


* hide conservative topics from trending (facebook)
* manipulate viewcount, upvocte count, subscriber count of conservative topics (on reddit for instance)
* favour democrats in search results (google)
* The proven aimed shadowbanning of conservatives on twitter (project veritas). Also "Twitter attempted to manipulate election-related tweets using the hashtags “#PodestaEmails” and “#DNCLeak (2016)"


So yes, this is censoring conservative views while also displaying heavy bias towards leftist politics from companies who claim to be apolitical and neutral.

You are literally whining about capitalism and freedom.

[Endus]

This is necessary when dealing with convicted felons in a civilized society. Imprisoning convicts and upholding the freedom of movement rights are not compatible for instance.

One of the very few instances where a temporary suspension of a civil right occurs.

Denying them the vote on release is egregious.

Since I am talking to an obvious leftist, I will state some things that are fairly obvious to some others

Corporations are not citizens.

This is a completely useless point.

It doesn't matter if "Twitter" bans people, or "Jack Dorsey", as CEO of Twitter, bans people (or has employees do so pursuant to his policies). Corporate personhood is a legal convenience, nothing more. If you want to bitch about granting corporations special privileges that private citizens don't share, such as with lobbying or political donations, that's an entirely separate issue.

And the corporations, with a leftist bias are often direcly influenced by democrat politicians,

This is literally a conspiracy theory.

In that you've got a wild and utterly baseless theory about a grand and secret conspiracy. Textbook bullshit.

* hide conservative topics from trending (facebook)
* manipulate viewcount, upvote count, subscriber count of conservative topics (on reddit for instance)
* favour democrats in search results (google)
* The proven aimed shadowbanning of conservatives on twitter (project veritas). Also "Twitter attempted to manipulate election-related tweets using the hashtags “#PodestaEmails” and “#DNCLeak (2016)"

Completely unsourced and unproven bullshit claims to back up said conspiracy theory.

You may as well be posting pictures of ice shelves and claiming they're the ice wall surrounding the flat Earth.

[Sky High]

I don't understand.

It is not a slope of any kind if you don't do anything, its literally just flat...
If criminals right now can vote, and republicans want to stop it, and Bernie Sanders want to keep criminal's right to vote, THEN the slope argument is legit in favor of Bernie. On the other hand, if criminal right now cannot vote, and Bernie wants to CHANGE that, then Benie Sander IS responsible for the slope (upward or downward, slippery or not)...

Also, how exactly does that criminal voting things work in details? What can the criminal actually vote for? POTUS? GOVERNOR? LOCAL TOWN COUNCIL? MAYOR IF APPLICABLE? And what district do the criminal represent? Their home district, what if the criminal said the prison is his home and the prison is located in a small town with fully democratically elected city council / mayor. You don't see problem in that?????

how do you register to vote in the first place? It's not like we have a system in place already or anything...

[Donatello Trumpi]

One of the very few instances where a temporary suspension of a civil right occurs.

Denying them the vote on release is egregious.

People who cause great societal harm, rapists and murderer for instance, forfeit the rights to contribute politically to said society. Makes sense to me. Nothing egregious about it.

This is literally a conspiracy theory.

In that you've got a wild and utterly baseless theory about a grand and secret conspiracy. Textbook bullshit.


Completely unsourced and unproven bullshit claims to back up said conspiracy theory.

You may as well be posting pictures of ice shelves and claiming they're the ice wall surrounding the flat Earth.

You can plug your ears and keep screeching "conspiracy theory!" everytime corruption of your neoliberal overlords is exposed all you want, you being willfully ignorant towards common sense realities doesnt matter to me, as no amount of truth will shift your paradigm.

[Machismo]

People who cause great societal harm, rapists and murderer for instance, forfeit the rights to contribute politically to said society. Makes sense to me. Nothing egregious about it.





You can plug your ears and keep screeching "conspiracy theory!" everytime corruption of your neoliberal overlords is exposed all you want, you being willfully ignorant towards common sense realities doesnt matter to me, as no amount of truth will shift your paradigm.

You literally posted a fake news source... how ironic.

"It's not a conspiracy theory, so here's this conspiracy site to show it's not a conspiracy."

It's a shame you hate freedom so damn much.

[Donatello Trumpi]

You literally posted a fake news source... how ironic.

"It's not a conspiracy theory, so here's this conspiracy site to show it's not a conspiracy."

It's a shame you hate freedom so damn much.

What part of it was fake? Please enlighten me.

If I wanted to post fake news and crazy flat-earth-esque conspiracy shit, I'd post "muh russian collusion" videos, lol.

[Edge-]

You can plug your ears and keep screeching "conspiracy theory!" everytime corruption of your neoliberal overlords is exposed all you want, you being willfully ignorant towards common sense realities doesnt matter to me, as no amount of truth will shift your paradigm.

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Project_Veritas

Your source is literally fake news, and they've been caught repeatedly doing it.

Why is it that many of the folks who whinge so endlessly about "FAKE NEWS" seem to be the very ones to literally post "FAKE NEWS"?

[Sky High]

What part of it was fake? Please enlighten me.

If I wanted to post fake news, I'd post "muh russian collusion" videos, lol.

I mean you're the one linking project Vertias vids as if that says anything besides how laughable of a person you really are.

[Machismo]

What part of it was fake? Please enlighten me.

If I wanted to post fake news, I'd post "muh russian collusion" videos, lol.

It's Project Veritas, they are literal fake news, and got in trouble for it.

[Endus]

You can plug your ears and keep screeching "conspiracy theory!" everytime corruption of your neoliberal overlords is exposed all you want, you being willfully ignorant towards common sense realities doesnt matter to me, as no amount of truth will shift your paradigm.

You can't seriously link Project fucking Veritas and expect me to take you seriously.

They literally make up horseshit propaganda and manipulate evidence to misrepresent the truth; that is their intent and purpose.

You are citing a propagandist to support your claims of conspiracy. Hell, you use terms like "neoliberal overlords" as if that doesn't make you a caricature of a human being.

[Easo]

It IS the basis of democracy. We do not have to like the terrorists. And it is not like they have any kind of numbers to be important in voting.

Bernie wants the rapists to have a vote in deciding women's rights. LMAO.

Bernie wants pot smokers to have a vote in deciding women's rights.
See, I can do this too. You really think you can define the line where the cutoff point should be? Based on what?