Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[lockybalboa]

You can hate racists, and still support racists having liberty.

Why do you hate the First Amendment? I'm a hypocrite for hating racists? Or, am I a hypocrite for supporting the First Amendment? Which is it?

What? I see no mention of the First Amendment in the original quote? Why mention it now?

Yes, I think a company should be legally allowed to refuse to serve black people. It would make them racist shitbags, but they should be free to be racist shitbags. And yes, they would be racist, and they should be free to be racist.

Nope.

Are you trying to use the Amendment as shield now to hide your guilt for your support for the implementation for racist policies? I do not hate the first Amendment. But you are in favor of It being abused like this to promote racist policies like this. So you are ok with the First Amendment being misused like this to promote discriminatory practices? Boy, you remind me of someone again.

[Machismo]

What? I see no mention of the First Amendment in the original quote? Why mention it now?



Nope.

Are you trying to use the Amendment as shield now to hide your guilt for your support for the implementation for racist policies? I do not hate the first Amendment. But you are in favor of It being abused like this to promote racist policies like this. So you are ok with the First Amendment being misused like this to promote discriminatory practices? Boy, you remind me of someone again.

Nope, I clearly hate racists. Sorry that words are hard for you.

You seem to be projecting and building straw men, in an attempt to whine about the First Amendment. Sorry, it's not working, you lose... again.

Thanks for admitting you hate the First Amendment.

Lying on multiple accounts is embarrassing, and against the forum rules.

You are ok with black people being excluded and discriminated from services. Black and white. You did not state other races at that post. Now you are adding words that never existed in that post to make you seem not guilty. Very dishonest.

[Felya]

I believe them; I'm familiar with that part of the left's media environment. There can be a lack of patience and a lack of pragmatism, but I wouldn't say a lack of honesty.

It’s not the same people making the case, so a brush across them all is simply unfair. Some of them are liars, while some are genuine.

To try and sum up the perspective with an analogy: We're stuck waist-deep in the mud. One party is actively slathering more mud over themselves and everybody else, and the other party is saying "what if we were only knee-deep instead of waist-deep." Now obviously, being only knee-deep is a better situation, and indeed a prerequisite to actually getting out of the mud, but from that perspective, the primary issue is that neither party seems to actually admit that being stuck in mud is a problem. I think that, in a nutshell, is the source of the "both-sides"-ism- the sense that neither party really "gets" it.

But, that’s a dated argument, that is simply getting copied over from 2016. Trump isn’t a Bush or Romney or Dole or McCain... those who were extremely close. Trump is an extreme of previous GOP candidates, Biden is not and no one other than Trump, is arguing as an extreme liberal. Biden is a lot like Bush or Romney or Dole or McCain... he isn’t like Trump.

Here is an example of me trying to explain it, when one of them was faking wanting a discussion:

Biden is corporatist, but Trump is a corporation.
Biden is in bought by special interest, but Trump is the one doing the buying.

It was a reasonable argument, before Trump. Right now we have a corporation without any public service experience. His sole job has been ripping off people, as a corporation.

This is directed to @cubby too. I think there are a number of completely valid criticisms of the "Won't Vote For Biden Leftist" position, but I don't think dishonesty is one of them.

It simply is... From Trump him self urging his supporters to do it, to alt right media actively pushing and celebrating the dishonesty. This isn’t an assumption...

[lockybalboa]

Nope, I clearly hate racists. Sorry that words are hard for you.

You seem to be projecting and building straw men, in an attempt to whine about the First Amendment. Sorry, it's not working, you lose... again.

Thanks for admitting you hate the First Amendment.

Lying on multiple accounts is embarrassing, and against the forum rules.

Kek just because you say you hate racists does not mean you really do. Hell I can say I am ultraman and anpanman too. If you really hate racists you wouldn't be in favor of such racist BS practices being allowed in the first place. And once again why was there no mention of the first amendment in that original quote? Even using the amendment as a shield does not hide you from being the closet racist that you are. And even better, we now know that you are someone who has no objections about the Amendment being abused to promote practices that encourages racism and exclusionism.

[cubby]

I believe them; I'm familiar with that part of the left's media environment. There can be a lack of patience and a lack of pragmatism, but I wouldn't say a lack of honesty.

To try and sum up the perspective with an analogy: We're stuck waist-deep in the mud. One party is actively slathering more mud over themselves and everybody else, and the other party is saying "what if we were only knee-deep instead of waist-deep." Now obviously, being only knee-deep is a better situation, and indeed a prerequisite to actually getting out of the mud, but from that perspective, the primary issue is that neither party seems to actually admit that being stuck in mud is a problem. I think that, in a nutshell, is the source of the "both-sides"-ism- the sense that neither party really "gets" it.

I think that what your getting at has some real merit - it's the deep conversation about the real issues with our current corrupt version of a Democratic Republic. And I like the analogy you put forth, but I won't carry it forward - I think it paints the right picture for the major concerns we are facing - no one will admit that we are all still in the mud, and that needs to fundamentally change.

I find that the democratic/liberal side always has a very tough time making the argument, because our side can't be explained with one-liners and talking points. It takes a real conversation - which our society is moving farther and farther away from.

This is directed to @cubby too. I think there are a number of completely valid criticisms of the "Won't Vote For Biden Leftist" position, but I don't think dishonesty is one of them.

It might not be deliberate dishonesty, but fundamentally, if the Left, in this current environment and with Trump as the opponent, is arguing not to vote for Biden in November, then it's a unconscious dishonesty - because if you're not voting for Biden, then you're allowing Trump to win, which is the same as voting for him.

[Kaleredar]

I believe them; I'm familiar with that part of the left's media environment. There can be a lack of patience and a lack of pragmatism, but I wouldn't say a lack of honesty.

To try and sum up the perspective with an analogy: We're stuck waist-deep in the mud. One party is actively slathering more mud over themselves and everybody else, and the other party is saying "what if we were only knee-deep instead of waist-deep." Now obviously, being only knee-deep is a better situation, and indeed a prerequisite to actually getting out of the mud, but from that perspective, the primary issue is that neither party seems to actually admit that being stuck in mud is a problem. I think that, in a nutshell, is the source of the "both-sides"-ism- the sense that neither party really "gets" it.

Unfortunately, they seem to see an imaginary third option of simply not being stuck in the mud, and confuse the "wouldn't it be better if we were just kneedeep in mud instead of waist deep and actively buried" as "being stuck in the mud is great! We should always be stuck!"

Not being stuck in the mud isn't an option at this time. And it's quite self-defeating to say "Well if I can't be free from the mud, then being waist-deep and actively buried might as well be as good as being knee-deep!"

People can rant and rave about how it's so unfair that not being in the mud isn't an option. But whining doesn't change the reality of the situation. And, most importantly, refusing to vote for either level of mud-entombment doesn't mean you wont continue to be stuck in mud. It just means that you did nothing to be less buried.

[Machismo]

Kek just because you say you hate racists does not mean you really do. Hell I can say I am ultraman and anpanman too. If you really hate racists you wouldn't be in favor of such racist BS practices being allowed in the first place. And once again why was there no mention of the first amendment in that original quote? Even using the amendment as a shield does not hide you from being the closet racist that you are. And even better, we now know that you are someone who has no objections about the Amendment being abused to promote practices that encourages racism and exclusionism.

Your own quote shows it, you made my case for me. You made my case for me on your burner accounts, old and new.

You are ok with black people being excluded and discriminated from services. Black and white. You did not state other races at that post. Now you are adding words that never existed in that post to make you seem not guilty. Very dishonest.

Maybe you should actually see what thread that is in... it's literally i a thread about speech and businesses refusing to serve racist shitballs. You still suck at lying.

Here's my first post in that thread:

It sounds like you don't support freedom of speech.

Holy shit, look at how fucking consistent I am. Look how foolish you are. I accept your apology.

Shall we continue?

PragerU is a hypocritical place where fools think they are gaining useful knowledge.

YouTube is not a monopoly, and they should be free to do business with whomever they choose, just like the homophobic bakers.

Damn, freedom of association... more First Amendment.

But they don't "own the public square," it's still right outside your door. Not only that, just about anyone can make their own website, and speak whatever nonsense they like.

SO, unless you are going to say that a restaurant cannot kick out a drunken customer who is yelling racist shit at other customers, or that a Christian site must advertise gay porn... then you are simply being inconsistent.

Holy shit, more First Amendment.

So, start a right-wing competitor, and beat them.

I love when all you people call for stifling capitalism and free speech.

- - - Updated - - -



Who says they don't?

- - - Updated - - -



No, they don't need to be clear and up front about their political beliefs, that's bullshit. They can simply opt to not do business. If you can prove they are breaking a legal contract, fight them in court. PragerU tried... and lost.

How much did YouTube charge PragerU? Did they take their money?

Holy shit, more First Amendment and support of capitalism.

And yet, all those people can still create their own websites, you can watch them there.

Freedom of speech and capitalism... again.

Except they are not a monopoly, as has been shown. They can simply use a different platform, or even run their own website. If YouTube won't host your videos, then find another video hosting site.

Yes, PragerU is filled with fucking hypocrites.

Man, I'm looking very very consistent.

PragerU is not close to being libertarian. They are straight GOP shills and nationalists.

As for what you are calling for... that sounds rather authoritarian. Luckily, we have the First Amendment in my country.

- - - Updated - - -



Can any of those conservatives start their own website, or use a different platform?

Yup.

Still very consistent.

That's not absolute free speech, as you are denying those platforms of their free speech. That's like saying a restaurant should be force to allow a customer to piss on the floor, and shout racist shit at other customers, or that a Christian website must be required to advertise gay porn.

"And the thought of seeing twitter and facebook and other media being stomped on the neck and forced to modify ToS to allow most forms of speech is incredibly juicy to me."

You are not supporting free speech, you are fiercely opposing it. What's sad, is that you are too fucking blind to even see it.

More love of the First Amendment, how very amazingly consistent of me.

No you don't, you are calling for a huge amount of authoritarianism, by your own assertion... that's not anarchist at all. It's literally the opposite.

As far as a person being in a restaurant and shouting racist shit, that should be at the discretion of the owner of the establishment. Your desire to deflect is meaningless.

You are all over the fucking map, and are simply deluded in your crusade against freedom of speech. You are pretending to be anarchistic, and yet, your last sentence proves you to be a complete liar and fraud. But hey, it's nice to know you would force a Christian website to advertise gay porn, and not allow a business owner to kick out unruly customers.

More support for the First Amendment.

So, we've clearly seen that you are wrong, and full of shit... on all of your accounts. I'll accept your apology now.

[snardtruth]

Nope, I clearly hate racists.

No, you clearly don't, you've been defending a segregationist for months.

Here's the news Jeb. Segregation is racist. So is Jim Crowe and lynchings.

[TexasRules]

Again, I don't do the dance that you may demand of me, I do the dance I want to dance.

Will Black Voters Still Love Biden When They Remember Who He Was?
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...explained.html

Joe Biden isn’t the only Democrat who has blamed black America for its problems
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...-its-problems/

How Did the Democrats End Up Here?
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...ts-end-up-here

Just some food for thought. I'd argue that the pressure from the more left leaning mentioned in these articles will now not be forthcoming, thanks to counter-scheduling. The left in the party has not only been marginalized, I think they may have abandoned ship. Maybe the Dems don't need those votes.

The question they will not answer is, why has it taken this long for Joe Biden to win a primary(which he still has yet to do) and what is going to change now that he would be President? What is he going to do that they could not do over the decades he has been "fighting" for people? He would be an elected puppet.

[Elegiac]

The question they will not answer is, why has it taken this long for Joe Biden to win a primary(which he still has yet to do)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus_disease_2019

There's a literal fuckin' plague on.

Also, the Democrats typically don't believe in outright cancelling primaries because we're uncertain the preferred candidate could survive a challenger. That's a Republican thing.

[Endus]

The question they will not answer is, why has it taken this long for Joe Biden to win a primary(which he still has yet to do)

Come the fuck on.

Biden has fuck-all to do with the timing and pace of a primary race. That's down to the DNC, who are making conscientious decisions because there's a fucking pandemic on.

Thinking that's some kind of referendum on Biden's electability is just wildly fucking dishonest.

and what is going to change now that he would be President? What is he going to do that they could not do over the decades he has been "fighting" for people? He would be an elected puppet.

Feel free to read his platform literally whenever you like. https://joebiden.com/joes-vision/

It's fascinating that you've just admitted you never have, and yet still thought you could speak to what he stands for. Your stance is willful, deliberate ignorance, and somehow, you're proud of that.

[Machismo]

No, you clearly don't, you've been defending a segregationist for months.

Here's the news Jeb. Segregation is racist. So is Jim Crowe and lynchings.

Funny, you are the one spamming racist nonsense on burners, and lying about what I said.

[Louisa Bannon]

Lol... using the queen of the grifters as your source for information

I've seen that before, was one of the first things I learned about her. That's what almost all non-profits do, best you can do is hope for under 10-15% off the top. 33% is kinda crap. But hey, she's just a talking head now, what's the diff?

These rhetorical tactics are so transparent. Kill the messenger, tar the sources, etc.

It still holds, being asked to hold one's nose and vote for some horrifying POS or other is still the same experience.

Shoot me or stab me.

[kaelleria]

I've seen that before, was one of the first things I learned about her. That's what almost all non-profits do, best you can do is hope for under 10-15% off the top. 33% is kinda crap. But hey, she's just a talking head now, what's the diff?

These rhetorical tactics are so transparent. Kill the messenger, tar the sources, etc.

It still holds, being asked to hold one's nose and vote for some horrifying POS or other is still the same experience.

Shoot me or stab me.

You're doing a great job doing that to yourself.

[Edge-]

He would be an elected puppet.

[kaelleria]

https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...hback-1008189/

Biden Visits Protest Site While Trump Endorses Violent Pushback

Totally the fucking same

- - - Updated - - -

Trump and Biden called Floyd's brother. Hear the difference

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/...p-call-vpx.cnn

- - - Updated - - -

We are witnessing the abdication of leadership.

If you think you can make some equivalence between the two sides of this, you are an idiot.

[lockybalboa]

Your own quote shows it, you made my case for me. You made my case for me on your burner accounts, old and new.



Maybe you should actually see what thread that is in... it's literally i a thread about speech and businesses refusing to serve racist shitballs. You still suck at lying.

Here's my first post in that thread:



Holy shit, look at how fucking consistent I am. Look how foolish you are. I accept your apology.

Shall we continue?



Damn, freedom of association... more First Amendment.




Holy shit, more First Amendment.



Holy shit, more First Amendment and support of capitalism.



Freedom of speech and capitalism... again.




Man, I'm looking very very consistent.




Still very consistent.



More love of the First Amendment, how very amazingly consistent of me.



More support for the First Amendment.

So, we've clearly seen that you are wrong, and full of shit... on all of your accounts. I'll accept your apology now.

And yet, you got caught lying big time. That very quote exposes you as the big liar, hypocrite and closet racist that you are. You can give a 1000 quotes all you want but the fact remains the same that no true respecter of the Amendment would be approving about it being twisted and abused to support racist policies like that. How does that make you any different from Trump? And if you truly hate racists you wouldn't be in favor with disgusting racist policies like that in the first place.

[Machismo]

And yet, you got caught lying big time. That very quote exposes you as the big liar, hypocrite and closet racist that you are. You can give a 1000 quotes all you want but the fact remains the same that no true respecter of the Amendment would be approving about it being twisted and abused to support racist policies like that. How does that make you any different from Trump? And if you truly hate racists you wouldn't be in favor with disgusting racist policies like that in the first place.

Nope, you just tried to say it wasn't about the First Amendment. The evidence shows you are lying. Feel free to keep ignoring all the evidence, I expect nothing less from Trumpsters who spam burner accounts.

Just so everyone is clear, this is one of your burner accounts, and we both know you have others.

You are ok with black people being excluded and discriminated from services. Black and white. You did not state other races at that post. Now you are adding words that never existed in that post to make you seem not guilty. Very dishonest.

Me still being consistent:

Oh, so you do support a business choosing to not platform someone... maybe you should be more consistent.

What "fake news ordeal" are you talking about? Are you talking about the one where all the ignorant Trumspters spread fake news on Facebook, or the one where the ignorant Trumspters whined that everything they didn't like was fake news?

Yes, your hypocrisy is showing.

- - - Updated - - -



Like I said, you would support Hitler, so long as his stated policy was something you agreed with, regardless of his past actions and beliefs (or his current ones).

"I mean, it's not cool that Hitler killed millions of people, but he says he wants to build a wall (or insert any other platform piece), so I'm going to vote for him."

- - - Updated - - -



Not really. Almost every monopoly that exists is a direct result of government intervention to protect that monopoly (utilities are a great example).

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/monopolistic

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/...h/monopolistic

Look at the damn roots, it's literally having to do with a monopoly. They are not a monopoly, because they have competition within the marketplace. They are easily replaceable, and literally a guy with four dollars can do it.

The First Amendment isn't being taken away from people, not unless people like you get your way. You are still free to speak your mind, some people are simply not being given a free megaphone in which to speak their minds. That's like whining you don't have a right to bear arms, unless Glock sends you a 9MM for your birthday.

Greta, then you are now arguing against yourself, as there is clearly an alternative solution.

So, you guys really hate your freedom of speech and freedom of association, don't you?

And calling someone a "white nigger" is still a knock against black people, as well.

I know I wouldn't want to do business with someone who says such things.

- - - Updated - - -



Maybe you should start one, and you can become a billionaire.

As for Peterson, he's just a foolish hypocrite.

Except we have seen EXACTLY what he said.

Combine that with his nationalistic push, and his decision to join UKIP, his stance is being made more clear every week. Yeah, I don't think I'd do business with someone who calls other people "niggers." I'm weird like that.

If you want to do business with him, send him your money.

“I just can’t be bothered with people who chose to treat me like this. It’s really annoying. Like, I — . You’re acting like a bunch of niggers, just so you know. You act like white niggers. Exactly how you describe black people acting is the impression I get dealing with the Alt Right. I’m really, I’m just not in the mood to deal with this kind of disrespect.”

“Look, you carry on, but don’t expect me to then have a debate with one of your faggots.…Like why would I bother?…Maybe you’re just acting like a nigger, mate? Have you considered that? Do you think white people act like this? White people are meant to be polite and respectful to one another, and you guys can’t even act like white people, it’s really amazing to me.”

Yep, that's what he said.

I feel like I'm selling steak knives. But wait, there's more!!!

“I just can’t be bothered with people who chose to treat me like this. It’s really annoying. Like, I — . You’re acting like a bunch of niggers, just so you know. You act like white niggers. Exactly how you describe black people acting is the impression I get dealing with the Alt Right. I’m really, I’m just not in the mood to deal with this kind of disrespect.”

“Look, you carry on, but don’t expect me to then have a debate with one of your faggots.…Like why would I bother?…Maybe you’re just acting like a nigger, mate? Have you considered that? Do you think white people act like this? White people are meant to be polite and respectful to one another, and you guys can’t even act like white people, it’s really amazing to me.”

That looks pretty fucking racist to me.

If he saw everyone as an individual, then he wouldn't be anti-immigrant. he wouldn't make it his job to whine about SJWs or the left...

Then you are pushing for absolute authoritarianism, so your stances are directly in conflict with one another. You sound a lot like the Bolsheviks, or even the early 1930's Nazis, so at least you have that going for you.

And we have what he said, he was being a racist d-bag. He gave the context, that's the point.

No, no I would not be cheering at those words.

If he were a libertarian, he would be pro-immigration, as that allows for individual liberty, limited government, and the free markets. He's full of shit. Period. He's a hypocrite and a liar.

- - - Updated - - -



And he's not acting in a movie, he's calling people "niggers" and "white niggers" for how they are acting. He's literally comparing them to black people, and saying they are acting like them.

Racist. As. Fuck.

Oh, I know exactly what you are. Your desire to be a hypocrite, calling for outright fascism, whilst pretending to be an anarchist says plenty. I know precisely who you are.

And he was being a racist douchebag, problem solved.

Why would you be upset at a company that doesn't want to do business with racist trash?

- - - Updated - - -



Well, he might be racist. I don't see many interviews of him in person.

Yes, libertarianism and nationalism have mutually-exclusive ideals. Libertarianism is based on things like individual liberty, limited government, and the free markets. Nationalism undermines all three of those principles.

As for your claims of always being against such people, that's rather strange.,.. considering you are a hypocritical immigrant who is an ethno-nationalist.

- - - Updated - - -



The substance is the person, and their lack of character.

And allowing a company to be able to refuse to platform someone IS SUPPORTING FREEDOM OF SPEECH as a concept. You seem to be ignoring the speech and freedom of assembly of those companies and business owners.

Oh, I'm listening just fine. You would be willing to support anyone, so long as their policy agenda fit yours. You have tried to rationalize the fucking Holocaust.

Sargon is a racist douchebag, said racist shit, and got de-platformed for it. Problem solved.

Once again, you have continuously defended ghastly behavior, all in the name of willful ignorance on your part. Your character, and the character of others like you is precisely what is being brought into the light.

And the explanation is that he's racist trash, and you love to defend terrible people.

So, you are saying a Christian website should have to advertise gay porn, right? Is it just as outrageous when a restaurant or bar kicks out an unruly customer?

They already have competitors. Heck, people can literally create their own website,s and host it themselves.

- - - Updated - - -



Except that neither of them is a monopoly.

And yet... you have consistently defended and rationalized his atrocious actions... go figure.

And yet, you refused to call the man evil, and tried to deflect for him. And let us not forget, that you said you would support anyone, regardless of their character and past actions, so long as their stated policy agreed with yours.

No, because I don't want the others regulated. I want government out of the marketplace, including the government helping ISPs to be monopolies in areas by forcefully stifling competition. I also want those ISPs to give back all the public welfare they have received over the years.

Luckily, they are not even close to a monopoly, and you can simply compete with them by starting your very own website.

Oh, so you do support a business choosing to not platform someone... maybe you should be more consistent.

What "fake news ordeal" are you talking about? Are you talking about the one where all the ignorant Trumspters spread fake news on Facebook, or the one where the ignorant Trumspters whined that everything they didn't like was fake news?

Yes, your hypocrisy is showing.

- - - Updated - - -



Like I said, you would support Hitler, so long as his stated policy was something you agreed with, regardless of his past actions and beliefs (or his current ones).

"I mean, it's not cool that Hitler killed millions of people, but he says he wants to build a wall (or insert any other platform piece), so I'm going to vote for him."

- - - Updated - - -



Not really. Almost every monopoly that exists is a direct result of government intervention to protect that monopoly (utilities are a great example).

It's amazing how goddamned consistent I truly am on the issue.


Class dismissed.

[Louisa Bannon]

It might not be deliberate dishonesty, but fundamentally, if the Left, in this current environment and with Trump as the opponent, is arguing not to vote for Biden in November, then it's a unconscious dishonesty - because if you're not voting for Biden, then you're allowing Trump to win, which is the same as voting for him.

You folks make these ludicrous statements as if they were in any way legitimate, and of course, they aren't.

Hypothetical: someone chooses not to vote for president at all. That person is not helping nor hurting either side, that person is simply abstaining from making a choice that is either too difficult or too trivial to them. In effect, it's like saying, "I don't care, let others decide this question."

I am very nearly there, but I will probably actually bother myself to vote third party in the hopes of giving them a boost for the future. For example, the Greens will have a candidate by mid summer or thereabouts and I'll probably vote for that candidate.

Yes, I don't care who wins between Trump or Biden. Sure, you can decide for me. I don't care about that either.

Dems don't get my vote because they don't want to earn it and I am not giving it away. I can choose to throw it away, or simply give that vote to someone else for literally any reason I choose.

I despise Biden in the exact same way I despise the Clintons, McConnell, Schumer, Graham, Pelosi, Emanuel, etc. All of them are career politician assholes: greedy, for sale, and corrupt as hell. I should probably make this even clearer, I don't actually like too many Democrats at this moment - they moved too far to the right for me. I'm not calling the two major parties GOP and GOP-Lite for nothing - I have real animosity toward both and need to be pointedly motivated to vote for anyone in the Dems circle. And I am not motivated. Every day I am shocked and annoyed by the corruption of both of our right-wing parties.

Some of you say that I should vote for the least evil of these choices, but I have tried to explain how I really don't see it that way.

For example, this absurd feint to Medicare for All / Public Option if the budget allows or whatever other obstacles Biden will eventually attach to its certain and eventually demise. I mean, y'all are kidding, right? Not only was I not born yesterday, but these exact same assholes have been playing Democrats that way for decades. So no, I don't believe it nor should anyone else.

And nobody gets the vote just as a matter of course, as if I owed it to them, or because where else am I going to with that vote, or whatever.

The answer is no.

[kaelleria]

Congrats, you're irrelevant and give no shits about the direction of your country, despite the constant stream of words against one man.

I'll let someone else explain the mechanics of what happens if someone that consistently votes Democrat decides not to do that.

Not worth the brainpower to even try.