If the response is, "maybe not, but just in case let's avoid talking about subjects that could get people riled up", that isn't particularly good for the atmosphere of a higher learning institution. Particularly given the fact that... well, have you SEEN the kind of #### that goes on on American campuses? A large chunk of these kids come across like they have borderline personality disorder. The average prof is rationally fearful of expressing the wrong opinion whether there are guns around or not! This cannot help matters.
Do these people exercise the same amount of caution outside of their campus? Because there are people with CC everywhere outside of such places.
For some reason people can't pick up on the correlation between mass shootings and gun free zones.
What were these people doing before? Waving legislation in the face of those who wish to do them harm? That'll stop em.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamer
Even though he says he only wanted steak and potatoes, he was aware of all the rapes.
Do these people exercise the same amount of caution outside of their campus? Because there are people with CC everywhere outside of such places.
For some reason people can't pick up on the correlation between mass shootings and gun free zones.
What were these people doing before? Waving legislation in the face of those who wish to do them harm? That'll stop em.
Ironically, if that's the appropriate sentiment, you are statistically at greater risk of being shot in a school or college than on the street in a mass shooting
Ironically, if that's the appropriate sentiment, you are statistically at greater risk of being shot in a gun free zone than on the street in a mass shooting
Fixed that for you.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamer
Even though he says he only wanted steak and potatoes, he was aware of all the rapes.
Exit polls predicting a much murkier picture for the Republicans tonight, with Trump and Rubio near tied in Virginia, and Kasich (!) leading in Vermont. But of course, exit polls, yadayada, don't trust them.
Ironically, if that's the appropriate sentiment, you are statistically at greater risk of being shot in the United States than anywhere else on the planet not considered a war-zone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds
Fixed that for you.
Fixed your fix.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to Coach For This Useful Post:
Bernie getting crushed in Georgia and Virginia, but dominated Hillary in Vermont 90-10. So the narrarive Bernie and his supporters feared most, that Hillary had the minority vote on lockdown, appears to be the case. When the states aren't mostly made up of white liberal voters, Bernie has virtually no chance. I know he says he'll push far, even to a convention, but that would accomplish nothing but fracturing the Dems.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
Also, Georgia is flirting with the really crucial 50-20-20 threshold for Trump. If Trump finishes over 50, or both Rubio and Cruz finish under 20, he gets all the delegates. Otherwise, they're all divided up.
Also, Virginia's department of elections is kicking ass. Despite have a decently large population, they're already nearing 50% counted on both sides. Next closest is Georgia, with 3% counted.
Let's say that Hillary wins the Democratic nomination.
Let's also say that Trump wins the Republican nomination.
Given that young people typically don't turn out to vote, let's also say that 75% of Sanders' supporters---the "young, militant left, ultra progressives"--- decide to just stay home on election day.
Do you honestly think that, on election day, Hillary's supporters---the mostly older women and a few older men, and various minority groups---will outnumber those of Trump's?
I don't.
Because angry people are incentivized to vote. As are those who absolutely do not want the opponent to win. And both of those groups are tremendous populations that Hillary has to overcome in order to win.
Thats all fine with me. IMO Sanders would be an NDP in Alberta level disaster as POTUS. My order of preference would be Clinton > Any GOP nom > Sanders. The worst part about Sanders (other than his pie in the sky platform) is his supporters. They are perhaps the single most insufferable community on the internet right now. I think I lean a little bit left in general myself, but the people that are falling off the scale left are as bad or worse to me than the far right (yeah, Im an evil, terrible human being, I know). Im glad to see that, barring a minor miracle, it looks like Hillary might be pretty much in the clear after tonight.
Rubio may not even get that many 2nd place finishes tonight. Virginia looks solid but otherwise Cruz (or even Kasich in Vermont/Mass) looks like he'll take a lot of 2nds. A Cruz/Trump showdown? Talk about choosing between a an insufferable ####### and a gigantic #######.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
Rubio is right around 20% in some states that have that threshold... he probably ends up in 3rd in delegates after tonight, but a few percentage points in a few states could be the difference between close third or distant third.
Down to a 2% margin in Vermont with Trump still leading Kasich, about 37% in. (Rubio's sad narrative gets even worse if 3 other candidates win states tonight and he doesn't.)
Kasich may very well take Vermont, looks like it could be close. Even though a Kasich win is mostly meaningless, from a semantics view Rubio has to be done if we're sitting here at the end of the night and Trump, Cruz and Kasich have wins and he doesn't. Bernie wins Oklahoma but appears on his way to losing Massachusetts. Key for Bernie to get at least one state outside Vermont, but I'm guessing he'd prefer getting Mass to Okla.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
Looking like Trump could win everything but Texas and Hillary everything but Vermont. Not even remotely sure how Cruz or Bernie can justify going on when they can only win their home states. And yeah if Bernie can't win Massachusetts, how can he legitimately sell himself as a national candidate? Not gonna get much friendlier to him than Mass.
I think Sanders, even without winning the nomination, has been good for Hillary as a candidate. He forces her to talk more about plans, to push farther left than she normally would, rather than falling back on her experience and hoping it's enough.
I'd love to see Sanders win the nomination, but it's highly unlikely. But as a candidate against Hillary, he's done some very good things and forced her to talk about actual issues that progressives are concerned about. O'Malley did the same, bringing up gun control, which forced Hillary to deal with that as well.
The GOP half of the coin is still just such a clown show that I can't tolerate watching any of them speak. Even the so-called "moderate" of the group just defunded PP in his state. Horrifyingly enough, Trump may actually be the least awful of the GOP nominees. Cruz wants a Christian Theocracy, not a Democracy. Rubio has no idea what he's doing most of the time and rarely shows up for votes. Carson is just a flat out nutjob. Kasich plays the role of moderate when he's actually almost as extreme right as the others. At least with Trump, a lot of it feels like rhetoric and chest-beating without much conviction.
God, living in the US is just depressing right now.
The Following User Says Thank You to wittynickname For This Useful Post:
