Rasmussen Poll- 34% of Americans feel Civil War likely within 5 years

[Core781]

Not trying to be argumentative, but will YOU step up to be the first? Anything rushed to market, and the first appear to be likely the mRNA ones, isn't going into me. I will observe and see what happens to others before I ever consider it. Sorry (not!).

Sad part is I work in the medical field and they will no doubt try to ram it down our throats. I will drag my feet as long as possible and observe the guinea pigs.

How this "vaccine" is administered and the parameters surrounding it (i.e. will it be mandatory) will determine how free of a society we actually live in.

I'm a spatial scientist that works with doctors. My current research is tracking various illness in populations near real time.

That said I'm mostly liberal in my thinking: so I believe it should always be a choice by the individual and parents. (Nowadays we call this conservative logic) To me liberal thought is about freedom, so I find it ironic that the liberals resort to mob rule on these subjects: but yet demand freedom that they happily hand away. I have volunteered locally to get signatures to do away with the poorly passed legislation in my state making vaccines mandatory for school children. I also support vaccines for the most part: I understand they save millions from polio etc. I also understand the lack of effectiveness of many vaccines and the compounds within them that are suspect and the risk they pose to certain individuals. I am 100% against unethical harvesting of tissues and genetic materials also.

I'm against mob rule and fascism: and the mandatory vaxxers are in that category of forced compliance. I am okay personally with injecting an approved vaccine: I am not going to live forever I am okay with the risk. I have been taking risks since I was a teen, in the military, and now that I am getting borderline old I have lived a good life. The calculated risks I have taken have served my faith, self, family, and community. But that decision should be yours to make. You may be saving lives if you get vaccinated, and the life could be yours. You could also be increasing your risk for disease. It's YOUR call, weight the risk and reward, proof test your morals and make the decision.

[SomeOtherGuy]

Spicy time is coming? Leftist-oriented website to "out" Trump donors, presumably for post-election revenge:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...ist-targeting/

https://donaldtrump.watch/

I tried it out and it generates a lot of hits, some of which seem plausible. All returns are mapped. There might be plausible deniability on whether this invites violence, but it certainly does not invite civility.

[Scrubber3]

Spicy time is coming? Leftist-oriented website to "out" Trump donors, presumably for post-election revenge:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...ist-targeting/

https://donaldtrump.watch/

I tried it out and it generates a lot of hits, some of which seem plausible. All returns are mapped. There might be plausible deniability on whether this invites violence, but it certainly does not invite civility.

This is why I registered as unaffiliated and if I donate it's unanimous. The less that know, the better.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

[Esq.]

Spicy time is coming? Leftist-oriented website to "out" Trump donors, presumably for post-election revenge:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...ist-targeting/

https://donaldtrump.watch/

I tried it out and it generates a lot of hits, some of which seem plausible. All returns are mapped. There might be plausible deniability on whether this invites violence, but it certainly does not invite civility.

Ive told people for a long time that they are not prepared for whats coming unless they have good, local, personal accountability files. Do your homework, the window is closing...

[ndmiller]

Spicy time is coming? Leftist-oriented website to "out" Trump donors, presumably for post-election revenge:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...ist-targeting/

https://donaldtrump.watch/

I tried it out and it generates a lot of hits, some of which seem plausible. All returns are mapped. There might be plausible deniability on whether this invites violence, but it certainly does not invite civility.

Nothing new. All donor, pacs and their donors are on the FEC website. It's all public and has been since 1977. Been weaponized by both sides since at least 1977.

The Commission maintains a database of individuals who have made contributions to political committees. For 1977 to 1988, contributions of $500 or more were entered. For 1989 to the present, contributions of $200 or more are included. Data on individual contributors includes the following:
Name
Occupation or Employer
City
State
Date of transaction
Amount of contribution
Name of committee disclosing the contribution
The following are examples of the various types of contributor searches that may be conducted:

Search an individual contributor by their last and/or first name.
Search an individual contributor by their employer or occupation.
Search an individual contributor by their city, state and/or zip code.
Search by the date of the contribution or by the amount of the contribution.
Search for a contribution by the committee receiving the contribution.

Noah

[SomeOtherGuy]

Nothing new. All donor, pacs and their donors are on the FEC website. It's all public and has been since 1977. Been weaponized by both sides since at least 1977.

I'm aware that it's been public for a long time. When you say "weaponized" - has either side previously created a public "enemies list" and encouraged people to be hostile to donors to the other candidate?

[ndmiller]

I'm aware that it's been public for a long time. When you say "weaponized" - has either side previously created a public "enemies list" and encouraged people to be hostile to donors to the other candidate?

My first answer was like "Yeah DUH" but I'll rephrase.

While I don't know for sure, but I'd guess a resounding yes since each party has an enemies list and encourages hostility for everything else in the political landscape.

Or maybe I'm wrong and the parties just figured out in 2020 another huge opportunity to create yet another enemies list and be hostile to them for this particular reason.

Not sure why it's surprising or even news, each party already has a list of big donors that they are friendly to giving access, perks, decision making authority in government decisions over all of America. Why they wouldn't have an enemies list on the other parties donors makes no sense.

I don't believe for a second it's only one party though, I would be ignorant if I did.

[BoringGuy45]

This is why I registered as unaffiliated and if I donate it's unanimous. The less that know, the better.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

Yep. I'm staying undercover too.

Right now, I'm in a MSW program at a major state university (I'm planning on going into probation/parole). It's the 7th circle of leftist hell. But most of my classmates just assume that I am a liberal and I know it has to stay that way if I want to graduate. I'll state my opinion on things that we all pretty much can agree on from one point of view or another, and they just fill in the blanks and assume that the rest of my views fall in line with theirs. Nobody even suspects my conservative views...except one other student. We've learned that being conservative, or even moderate, in 2020 college is like being gay 50 years ago. We both suspected each other, and he "came out" as conservative to me, and I did the same . There's a few others I suspect hold at least some conservative views (mostly women who are pro-life).

[flenna]

My first answer was like "Yeah DUH" but I'll rephrase.

While I don't know for sure, but I'd guess a resounding yes since each party has an enemies list and encourages hostility for everything else in the political landscape.

Or maybe I'm wrong and the parties just figured out in 2020 another huge opportunity to create yet another enemies list and be hostile to them for this particular reason.

Not sure why it's surprising or even news, each party already has a list of big donors that they are friendly to giving access, perks, decision making authority in government decisions over all of America. Why they wouldn't have an enemies list on the other parties donors makes no sense.

I don't believe for a second it's only one party though, I would be ignorant if I did.

The difference is this is for targeting the average Joe who gave $100 to the Trump campaign. The BLM/Antifa terrorist organization has shown that they will physically attack a person for wearing a MAGA hat or having an opposing political view.

[SomeOtherGuy]

My first answer was like "Yeah DUH" but I'll rephrase.

Glad that we're still on m4c and not Yahoo comments or Fakebook.

While I don't know for sure, but I'd guess a resounding yes since each party has an enemies list and encourages hostility for everything else in the political landscape.

Or maybe I'm wrong and the parties just figured out in 2020 another huge opportunity to create yet another enemies list and be hostile to them for this particular reason.

Not sure why it's surprising or even news, each party already has a list of big donors that they are friendly to giving access, perks, decision making authority in government decisions over all of America. Why they wouldn't have an enemies list on the other parties donors makes no sense.

I don't believe for a second it's only one party though, I would be ignorant if I did.

I think there's a huge difference in scale and hostility here. Yeah, both parties undoubtedly use these lists to target advertising and fundraising campaigns. And despite government contracting rules, I'm sure both try to give gov contracts to their donors and not the other side's donors. Although many middle-income businesspeople give money to both sides precisely because of this issue.

But in all my life I don't remember either party ever saying anything close to "Here's a list and map of anyone who gave even $5 to Trump, go burn their house down on November 4." Now the linked website doesn't actually say to commit violence, but it does say:

Americans that Donated to a Vulgar, Lying, Draft Dodger and Tax Cheat
220,000 DEAD

and also has the quote:

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire

I'm sure the latter quote is meant, in echo-chamber logic, to be a harsh dig on Trump. But for many people, the side pushing BLM, ultra violent "antifa", and the destruction of our history with literal destruction of monuments, many of them to good people (like the Union-side anti-slavery crusader whose monument was torn down), those are the ones making people believe absurdities. And, therefore, promoting atrocities.

Believe what you like, but to me this is another sign of threatened violence, not business-as-usual.