Jump to content

drewpey

Supreme User
  • Content Count

    629
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

drewpey last won the day on November 7 2020

drewpey had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

349 Excellent

About drewpey

  • Rank
    Gray Beard

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    FS 245

Recent Profile Visitors

12,030 profile views
  1. This isn't remotely true though. The Democratic party tried to float several progressive candidates this past election and most of them failed miserably. Even now in this day in age the Democratic party remains fairly centrist. Yes it's a big tent and there are lots of folks across the spectrum on the left that want various things, and many of those things scare you, but idealogically the left hasn't moved much, as evidenced by just electing Biden our most oldest, whitest most milquetoast candidate and guys like Bernie Sanders are still outcasts within the DNC. If you see the Democrats
  2. It does, but when your keystone party policies are themselves homophobic, transphobic, sexist and racist the line often gets blurred. The democratic party isn't trying to force SJW justice down your throat in legislature. It may feel like it with a SJW brigade on twitter, but again as mentioned before just because someone has a lot of followers on twitter doesn't automatically make them the spokesperson for the entire Democratic party. I think that's exactly what the BLM protests were about. I think the messaging was hijacked by bad actors and the right to make them out to be
  3. So you argue that this is "mainstream", yet we "don't even know" what our side wants...? I'm not sure you understand mainstream. People with a book deal or twitter account does not translate to being the "thought leader". I'm sure we could drum up some terrifying examples of "thought leaders" for the right, but that doesn't do anyone any good. People can use whatever terminology they want, but we just want folks to be treated equally. That actually polls quite well, so the right has to highlight these caricatures of progressivists to terrify conservatives from approaching reasonable a
  4. Low effort screed. Why when someone of color is put into a position the assumption becomes that they do not meet the requisites for the job? Haven't the last 4 years shown that the bar for political offices are embarrassingly low anyways? Also, I'm glad the right has woken up and started actually examining qualifications of nominations now. We don't want any green judges to get lifetime appointments, or a defense contractor exec the SEFDEF. That would be pretty embarrassing.
  5. Also important to be able to identify true journalism and not junk entertainment.
  6. So now it's not about actual security, we are going to create more barriers to voting to make fragile voters feel better? If we want people to feel better about the security of their elections, we should do things that...get this...actually secure our elections. We can't pander to every fragile voter because they are sad about the way an election went and refuse to accept the evidence laid before them. Again there is a long list of things that will actually improve security, start with those otherwise people will just assume you are legislating in bad faith and trying to limit the v
  7. Well you demonstrated in your previous comment that you haven't been or known legitimately poor people or their way of life. Your only way to "relate" to the topic at hand was to tell us a story of how you hired some poor people once to work on your property, and they probably had licenses because they drove a car. It's an amazingly tone-deaf story. The fact of the matter is the republican party is dieing and the only way they can remain relevant is to gerrymander and raise barriers to voters to drive down participation. If you actually cared about securing our elections you would have
  8. Maybe, maybe not, but just because you have an extremely narrow worldview because "I hired poor people" doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist and enacting laws like this won't make the problem worse. Or perhaps its the hard bigotry of trying to enact laws to increasingly marginalize the poorest of our community? Again you are all trying to solve a problem you can't even prove exists. There should be few barriers to voting, particularly for those less fortunate. Rich peoples' interests are already overrepresented by congress, and the poorest amongst us on either side of t
  9. This issue is largely tied to poverty and those of all races who cannot afford the time cost involved with sitting at a DMV or equivalent service for a few hours and being told they have to come back with additional paperwork, etc. when they are already working two jobs to make ends meet. Minorities are disproportionately affected by poverty, but it's still low effort with the race baiting.
  10. If republicans were willing to make it automatic issuance, free, easy and quick to replace then I'd be more for it...but what will happen is they will underfund whatever departments give them so getting or replacing the ID will essentially be a poll tax on time(money) for largely democratic voters who will have to weigh getting food to the table or renewing their voter ID because they changed their haircut and are afraid of being turned back at the polls. Many studies have shown that it will disenfranchise largely democratic voters and drive down overall voter participation. How many is
  11. drewpey

    USAA

    I'll add my .02 for USAA homeowners... I was renting a FL home for a bit, and when I came back between renters I found my 15 year old roof had damage to it...mostly from being baked brittle in the FL sun for 15 years and going through some hurricanes. Called a few roofers out, and they him hawed about it, told me I needed to buy a new roof...until they heard I had USAA. They said USAA doesn't really put up a fight, whereas other insurance companies would require lots of documentation near the time of a recent hurricane along with justification...just too much work. USAA was no problem,
  12. I'm not so sure you have the pulse of your party. Two polls have shown 60%+ of republicans believe the election was rigged. As for silent...I'd beg to differ based off what I've seen in my environment. People scoffing at FoxNews, retreating to even safer safe-spaces of OANN and totallyrealnewsipromise.com websites, constant whinging and moaning about conspiracy theories at work. The monster you created has turned on itself and began to eat. That's why republican lawmakers are terrified to say Biden won in public because they will be targetted as a RINO by Cult45. Trying to distance yours
  13. Yes because moving to canada and starting a civil war are the same thing, and we should have the same response to both.
  14. Another win for states' rights! Wait...what team am I on again?
  15. I'm shocked that the party of personal responsibility refuses to accept personal responsibility for running a shitty campaign that only pandered to his base, and did nothing to win over the moderate US. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/23/us/politics/biden-inquiry-republicans-johnson.html It's almost as if years of yelling "Benghazi" and "Buttery males" desensitized the media to your ridiculous claims, and now require you to actually produce proof of wrongdoing. Does it get tiring playing the victim?
×
×
  • Create New...