You should be required to pass a basic civics test in order to vote.
I understand why people might find these tests a little questionable, but if you don't know--for example--what the Constitution is, then maybe you shouldn't be voting.
We undo it by shaming, ostracizing, and condemning these people, legally and without violence.
It’s pure evil, and there is no place in our society for people who would laugh at people being murdered in cold blood.
It doesn’t matter if you’re a Democrat, Republican, Liberal, Progressive, Conservative, Libertarian, Independent, moderate, radical, or anything else; if you watch an innocent person get murdered and that makes you happy, you deserve to have your life ruined.
I think that's because Fishback has a mind of his own, and he doesn't pander to the establishment or some sort of mainstream Republican or Conservative view.
I personally think that's much better than an establishment puppet, even if Fishback has some wonky views.
Or are you more concerned about his authenticity and truthfulness?
@remy104u@Benstl3@libsoftiktok I literally made a neutral statement, and everybody is so triggered.
Both sides gerrymander. Neither side should do it. There. Happy?
I was talking about how, as long as I've been in politics, I've never personally seen open gerrymandering (do you need to read that again?). For as long as I've followed politics, gerrymandering has been an open secret, not a practically admitted thing.
Obviously, there are states that have gerrymandered their districts for over a century, on both sides of the political spectrum.
I don't even know why I'm responding to you. There's no way you could've misunderstood my post that poorly. You're just a troll.
@RE_FIRE_RN@libsoftiktok I don't know if you're talking about me when you say crybaby, but I'm just saying that what I'm seeing is amusing.
Both sides do it.
@Benstl3@libsoftiktok Those districts were already there when I became involved in politics.
I'm talking about watching politicians openly push for obvious gerrymandering--I've never seen that.
I just find it a bit amusing.
@TheEconomist When I saw that you call your magazine "The Economist", I sort of expected it to be about everything economics.
Not... geopolitics and political opinions.
What' sad is that I'm not even surprised.
I don't necessarily consider this news.
The Democrats/Progressives are pro LGBTQ, pro-abortion, encourage people (particularly women) to delay having children for their careers, don't generally believe in God, and, by extension, they don't necessarily believe in family or the nuclear family.
It's kind of obvious.
The future looks conservative.
The assumption that birth rates are falling across society in general is not really true.
People who identify as conservative are having almost as many children as they were decades ago.
The decline is overwhelmingly among those on the progressive left.