[_8j50]

Ok, I was hoping you would explain why those votes are bad. I don't even vote anymore but when I did, I never voted any party's line, in general I wanted a moderate president, conservative senators, liberal prosecutors and house reps and very liberal judges with a mix of conservative vs moderate and liberal for the rest. The individuals also matter. But this was before trumpism, now as much as I want to, I don't care if they curr cancer, I can't support republicans after their decision to make a religion out of trump.

So when you say dems this and dems that, I mean a lot of dems downright suck, i can't believe they even let feinstein run! But if a person votes in oakland or anywhere else, is there a third option other than republicans and democrats? If not, it's either vote dem or don't vote. I choose not to vote because having only one option isn't voting and voting just to stop the other guy isn't a choice either.

To be very blunt, I hope republicans do get their fascist way, that way at least violence is on the menu again and there will be more options on both sides of left/right wing politics after that. I strongly believe ranked choice voting is the answer though (that I prefer), that and banning pacs and corporate political donations. That way conservatives who aren't absolute fascist nutjobd stand a chance and so would non-progressive and moderate liberals.

[the_third_wave]

> Ok, I was hoping you would explain why those votes are bad

It is not up to me to decide whether those votes are "bad" but what I can conclude is that it is not surprising that crime rates rise when people vote for a party whose members are engaged in fighting those who fight crime either directly - "defund the police" etc. - or indirectly - prosecutors who refuse to prosecute, judges with an activist bent who are intent on "emptying the prisons" no matter the consequences, AGs who change the rules so that it becomes close to risk-free to engage in "petty theft" (<$1000 stolen per occasion is a misdemeanour and prosecutors have already shown not to prosecute those, etc).

> To be very blunt, I hope republicans do get their fascist way

You are not blunt but polarising - apart from being incorrect. Not everything you do not like is "fascist" just like not everything a conservative dislikes is "communist". Those words have meanings, use them wisely or you run the risk of losing them altogether. This has already largely happened to the term 'racist' which' willy-nilly application means it no longer means much if anything to be labelled such.

Republicans are no more "fascist" than "Democrats" are "communist". There may be some who show "fascist tendencies" in both parties but that does not mean the term is applicable to the parties in general.

[_8j50]

>You are not blunt but polarising - apart from being incorrect. Not everything you do not like is "fascist" just like not everything a conservative dislikes is "communist". Those words have meanings, use them wisely or you run the risk of losing them altogether. This has already largely happened to the term 'racist' which' willy-nilly application means it no longer means much if anything to be labelled such.

Yeah, not willy nilly there bud. You have a literal russia controlled traitor who they support if he ate a baby on live tv, you have nationalistic propaganda (maga), overflowing xenophobia, multiple states teaching "slaves had it ok" and removing anything that paints the white race in a bad light from schools, multiple republican congress persons calling out for a civil war, what else missing? Mussolini rising from the grave?

> Republicans are no more "fascist" than "Democrats" are "communist".

No, democrats can be compared to socialism better? But even if you are right, you just made my point, who in their right mind other than a fascist would choose fascism over communism (and believe me, I abhor and am revolted by communism). Unless you are claiming a racial and nationalistic superiority centered element in the democrats you can't use fascism with respect to them. Don't get me started on "the great replacement" haha. Republicans always tolerated racists but now those people run the show. Funny thing is, republicans would run circles around democrats thanks to the growing immigrant and minority populations who are very socially conservative. It is their persitent clinging to racial and xenophopic hostility that gets in their own way.

Now democrats to me are intolerable for a whole host of different reasons. But if I were an oaklander, right out the gate republicans are not even an option because they are fighting against most oaklanders simply based on race and national origin alone (and it isn'r cheap to live in oakland anymore, most of them would be republicans if it was practical). Bush, Romney, McCain those people and their party had plenty of issues but they were not absolute nut jobs (and I voted for those republicans fyi) hell bent on destroying anything not like them. I mean even politics aside they had class, they don't brag about sexual assault, mock disabled people and veterans. I mean, "i like people who don't get caught" in reference to mccain being a PoW, and you are telling me GOP isn't a fascist cult?! An old white PoW GOP leader!

And as far as democrats' lenient prosecution, defund the police,etc... like I said before I prefer liberal judges for this reason. It is a fundamental principle of justice for "A thousand guilty men to go unpunished than one innocent person to be wrongly punished". Cops have gotten lazy because of a society that worships them and lets them do whatever they want without accountability and that in itself is a danger to society because in most big cities cops are just the cleanup crew. And they don't enforce laws they don't feel like enforcing or protect people if they get too scared (or just shoot random people/animals and hide behind their fear/cowardice). I don't agree with democrats' approach in the bay area but I do agree with their direction and hope they learn lessons and do better (e.g.: house arresr for under $1000 offenders instead of letting them go free, punish reoffenders normally but allow the convinction to be expunged if they commit no crime in 5 years,etc...).

Extremes are bad for everyone except the extremists.

[the_third_wave]

I can see that it does not make sense to appeal to moderation when phrases like "literal russia controlled traitor" and "removing anything that paints the white race in a bad light from schools" are used...

...but I'm stubborn.

When you write something do a quick check: drop all epithets - "Russia!" "Racist!" "Fascist!" "Mussolini!" and that is just the first line - and if you're left with nothing but an empty <textarea> it is probably better not to press that [reply] button.

Also, consider voting next time. If you can't find any good candidate just vote for your favourite band. Not voting does not solve anything as it just strengthens the votes of those who do vote - who could be exactly the people who you least agree with.