Comments by "George Albany" (@Spartan322) on "Monsieur Z" channel.

@ImTitan16 No in a three way race, aggregate polls between Trump, Biden, and RFK gives Trump a wider victory, that suggests that social "liberals" prefer RFK to Biden overwhelmingly while nearly none of the Trump voters consider RFK a decent candidate.
68
@badart3204 Reasonable cause isn't the reason men follow orders.
4
Probably should keep in mind that organized cells don't make an organized faction, it probably be more comparable to the Spanish civil war of 36', where neither side had peace in their faction and at the drop of a hat, a break would take place that would divide the faction. The nationalists were on the edge of splitting into multiple factions before it ended and the republicans had already done so. The only real difference is that we'd see many more split factions, it be very likely for local warlords to rise up out of the chaos of the more successful regions and dominate localities in a civil war. The left wing politics arming themselves only further emphasizes this fact, so if anything Spain in 38-39 would be more comparable to the US then 1923's Russia. Of course that is to say the right ever does do something, to which generally they are too much of a bunch of pansies to do so, so what is more likely is factional disputes within the left wing, much similar to how China tends to split up on the lines of warlords every so many decades or centuries. (and it seems in fact to be happening again there too, they could very well collapse into communist warlord states before the population problem hits the economy)
2
Every single poll with RFK shows Trump further in the lead, taking votes away from Biden, kinda seems like you don't pay any attention to aggregate polls, most polls are already mostly democrat sided meaning that if Trump is ahead in the polls, he's probably twice as far ahead in votes, for the aggregate that probably puts him at least 1.6 times his lead on the election, negating cheating and manipulative methods, which MAGA folks are participating more in this time around, (more specifically things like ballot harvesting which aren't illegal but usually a violation of the spirit) as well every state with reinforced election laws, especially blue states, becomes a near red or hard red state. I don't see any argument for Trump losing, RFK is a poison pill for democrats, and electing Chase Oliver as the candidate turned almost the entire Libertarian Party to Trump, at best it'll only take democrat votes away and its going to be irrelevant, aggregate polling also showed this, Trump got an even bigger lead after that.
1
@Patson20 I doubt term limits on SCOTUS would be. I've never seen anyone actually argue for it.
1
@Patson20 The other issue is it degenerates the conservative nature of the court, every other branch already has an issue of anti-conservatism because of democracy issues, and it has already badly afflicted the courts with numerous judges now being opposed to any constitutionalist arguments, term limits on the court would turn it into a predictable puppet of the executive branch, as you'll always know when members of the court will be forced to resign and you'll be able to plan to replace them. Doesn't help the case that Trump happened to put in a bunch of younger justices which gives a higher chance for them to stick around beyond hypothetical term limit.
1
tbf, the term socialist already does not connotate anything similar to fascist, however the concept of socialism is abhorrent for most people, specifically for those who appreciate private property, and many folks who do tend to get labeled as socialist are in fact adhering to the concept of socialism by proclaiming the devolvement of private property in via the formation of public (or state) property. In many ways fascists were actually practical socialists because they too would often proclaim such ideals, in fact in Nazi Germany this was explicitly the case so long as you disagreed with the state. (in which case the most lenient manner to call Nazism is pseudo-socialism for every piece of private property wasn't actually under the rule of being owned as long as it contributed to the value of the nation state, threat of losing property if said property opposed the state doesn't really constitute a form of private property I do not think, it already was a supreme erasure of the concept of ownership)
1
@Luke Skywalker Nobody dogwhistles, those who claim people legit do that are retarded and without any education in anthropology. Then again only the socialists claim dogwhistling exists.
1