1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

The closest you're advocating for is direct democracy, or mob rule, on every issue that 2 or more people could come up with.

"No government" does not and has not worked anywhere in history. People have to have some way to decide on issues.

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

OP would pretty much have to get it declared unconstitutional first.

Could be wrong but I don't think SCOTUS has seen a case about this

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

If he wants an investigation, he's already received word as to what it would reveal and that the information is gonna get out one way or another

3
neomt 3 points ago +3 / -0

If it were a vaccine, the CDC wouldn't have to change the definition of vaccine on their website.

If it provided immunity, the CDC wouldn't have to change the definition of immunity on their website.

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

"She'll" supply the penis

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

Most of it is a combination of the schools teaching solely to pass a state standardized test, coddling/catering to the slowest students, and poorly developed time/stimulus/environment management skills during formative years. Along with a handful of other minor factors.

Vast majority of friends whose kids have "adhd/add issues" are just bored out of their fucking minds in school, have nothing to fill that time, are told they can't have anything to do to fill that time, and haven't learned how to internally process that situation.

They can focus on a game/sport/hobby/puzzle for hours at a time just fine.

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

62% of the world is fully vaxxed if China's numbers can be believed.

It was their swing at commandment 1 of the guidestones.

3
neomt 3 points ago +3 / -0

Can't wait for a few years when they put out the recommendation that people who've received the vaccination should not have offspring due to the damage it caused to the parents.

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

Twitter was/is way overvalued in part BECAUSE they keep announcing massive monetizable daily/monthly active user numbers... and data/ads are basically their only 2 "products".

1.3B accounts 450M monthly active users 210+M daily active users

Bots are allowed on twitter. Back in 2017, CNET estimated 10-15% were bots. Twitter says 5% of bots are BAD spam/phishing/malicious bots

0
neomt 0 points ago +1 / -1

Couldn't be the 840k different reports with 3.6 MILLION symptoms reported... and 180+k reports of fatigue, tens of thousands of heart issues and different kinds of strokes reported on VAERS, and ~15k blood clotting issues. Which represent a small portion of actual events due to the fact that nobody's required to report - it's voluntary

Oh and 11k deaths.

Nah just gotta be someone's wet dream for fake internet points

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

Most EU countries limit on-demand abortion to some form of 3 months/12 weeks/90 days

Definitely not to where you can have it up to the moment of birth, or even after like dems want here.

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

Dave Ramsey exists solely for incredibly low financial-IQ individuals who literally have never been taught about finances. It's the most basic of the basic type of shit they SHOULD be teaching over multiple courses in middle/high school before they get into a mess.

The whole backbone is either common sense "if you don't spend money on frivolous shit while 50k in debt, you might be able to pay it off sooner"... or poor advise based on psychology "pay off smaller debts regardless of interest rate, so you feel good about having less loans in number".

If you're above this level of education, you need to be looking at different advice for financial planning.

As far as your situation, it's really impossible to give you sound advice without knowing the rest of your financial positions, needs, and what you're looking at. What kind of car do you want. What kind of car do you need. What kind of car can you get by with.

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

What's there to be proud of? Billions of women worldwide love cock, and they don't feel the need to cover themselves in dildos and expose themselves to children in parades.

2
neomt 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not to mention actually having to break out DiCaprio level acting skills and fort knox level of mental fortitude to be on said commission long enough to have the power to kick someone out.

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

Going to Cuba for abortions

Kek <------

Kek

Kek

Kek

2
neomt 2 points ago +2 / -0

Has anyone seen Murkowski and Mick Jagger in a room at the same time?

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

China ain't exactly friendly towards the gays either...

2
neomt 2 points ago +2 / -0

Greene's been in office for a year. Throwing her into a term limits discussion is setting up a straw man.

Should she, or anyone else currently, be in office in 2050? No.

5 Terms is enough for a House member, 2 for a Senator.

8
neomt 8 points ago +8 / -0

It's infinitely harder to get rid of a 40 year reelected feinstein or pelosi than to defeat their kid once as a non incumbent.

37
neomt 37 points ago +37 / -0

Now do term limits.

1
neomt 1 point ago +1 / -0

I have never seen a person in drag on any form of media that wasn't the IRL equivalent of a political cartoon aimed at making a mockery of women.

3
neomt 3 points ago +3 / -0

They have to put this out because fucking degenerates can't go 2 weeks without having a load blown in their ass while they have sores festering on their bodies.

2
neomt 2 points ago +2 / -0

These were primaries, so no there were no democrats vs republicans save from a single special election for a house seat in Texas. Which the republican won

Regarding primaries and elections in general:

It takes A LOT to unseat an incumbent. They've already been elected at least once, people have already voted for and heard of them. Also the longer they serve, the more/better committees they are on that they can brag about, and in theory use that position to better their district.

To unseat one, you need one or all of: a popular candidate with name recognition, preferably indorsements from other popular people/politicians, a well ran/great campaign, (usually a ton of) money, people with a reason to change their representative, probably a scandal or 2 for their opponents, and preferably success in business or politics.

If most of those aren't there and especially if any challengers don't poll well, they will just withdraw. There's no real reason to spend the time, money, and effort to run a campaign polling 60 points down.

view more: Next ›