Hope you have a great weekend as well.

So you think this board dislikes all gay people?

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

I know you all think I'm hyper liberal, but i voted straight ticket republican for everything local and voted libertarian for president. Most gay men in this city are fed up and also voting conservative.

---

Good on you. In my mind, the proper political debate should be between libertarians and Republicans. It will be a cold day in hell before I ever vote for a Democrat.

Until the so-called oppressed classes wake up and realize they are being used to aquire political power, we aren't going to be in a good situation.

Sea Speed said:

---

So you think this board dislikes all gay people?

---

The entire board? Of course not.

TXAGFAN said:

---

Congrats on becoming an "acceptable F16 gay" with this thread by the way. Was on a ban when you first posted.

---

To a lot of us, liberals are unacceptable. Especially white ones. My few gay friends are all solidly conservative. Black, brown, gay, trans, whatever…if you are a patriotic conservative (whether you've ever been a lib or not), you're my brother or sister and welcome in my home. If you're a liberal, especially a white one who is devout, I want nothing to do with you. It's not rocket science…people respect and admire other people who share similar values interests and goals etc.

Boo Weekley said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

Congrats on becoming an "acceptable F16 gay" with this thread by the way. Was on a ban when you first posted.

---

To a lot of us, liberals are unacceptable. Especially white ones. My few gay friends are all solidly conservative. Black, brown, gay, trans, whatever…if you are a patriotic conservative (whether you've ever been a lib or not), you're my brother or sister and welcome in my home. If you're a liberal, especially a white one who is devout, I want nothing to do with you. It's not rocket science…people respect and admire other people who share similar values interests and goals etc.

---

Im hardly a liberal, most people who know me (like you know your friends) would probably assume I vote Republican (Gun guy, drive a truck, earn enough the dem tax plans would impact me, etc) . I don't talk politics in real life, but only around 20-25% of LGBT people vote Republican in last presidential election for a reason. Don't assume too much about your friends.

Boo Weekley said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

Congrats on becoming an "acceptable F16 gay" with this thread by the way. Was on a ban when you first posted.

---

To a lot of us, liberals are unacceptable. Especially white ones. My few gay friends are all solidly conservative. Black, brown, gay, trans, whatever…if you are a patriotic conservative (whether you've ever been a lib or not), you're my brother or sister and welcome in my home. If you're a liberal, especially a white one who is devout, I want nothing to do with you. It's not rocket science…people respect and admire other people who share similar values interests and goals etc.

---

Don't contradict him. He's the Lorax of the gays. What he says is gospel and we're all mean old conservatives sitting in our scary houses ignoring the plight of the gays and scheming as to how to oppress them and take away their "rights."

Or something like that.

TXAGFAN said:

---

Congrats on becoming an "acceptable F16 gay" with this thread by the way. Was on a ban when you first posted.

---

Congrats on being just like board 16 by defining us just by being gay.

Tanya 93 said:

---

Tom Doniphon said:

---

It doesn't matter if you have 15 parties when the electorate can't think critically beyond what they see on social media.

---

So that means we should only have two?

---

How would that work? If there is 20 parties does the elected official with the most votes win. Or do you drop the bottom 3 or 4 or for and repeat the election process in a runoff. If no one gets over 50% do you repeat the process again continually dropping the bottom 3 or 4?

Or just the top 2 or 3 get into the runoffs. Which could mean the bottom 6 or 7 or 10 parties would have elected the 5th place winner with over 50% of the total vote. Exactly how would this work for a Constructional Republican that uses the electoral college?

Or would it be each voter would list their top five candidates? Then someone decides based on the number of points accrued by a candidates eligible for a runoff election. This would be like the AP polls for the football playoffs, which are insane. Also, how many people can decide on a candidate based on their beliefs let alone rate the candidates? Would the government provide a ratings card for each candidate for their stances on political issues of the day. Who would decide which issues are the most important, the current pollsters or some mathematical algorithms with all the different pollsters data.

How much more money would be needed in any of the scenarios? How much longer would election take to conclusion,

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

Congrats on becoming an "acceptable F16 gay" with this thread by the way. Was on a ban when you first posted.

---

Congrats on being just like board 16 by defining us just by being gay.

---

This is a very important point. Single issue voters sometimes miss the trees for the forest.

It's hard for me to be empathetic. YOU VOTED FOR THAT ***** libertarian president? What a cop out.

You made your bed. Enjoy laying in it.

Ps - sorry that you had that experience. Sounds scary!

It's what happen when carrying firearm is restricted.

Nooooo thanks

TXAGFAN said:

---

Congrats on becoming an "acceptable F16 gay" with this thread by the way.

---

What a typical trash liberal response. On one hand, they criticize conservatives for supposedly not being inclusive and not reaching out to minorities. On the other hand, when a minority identifies as a conservative or Republican he's labeled as and Uncle Tom (Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice) or mocked for being an "acceptable F16 gay." E.g., Joe Biden saying that if you don't vote for him, then you're not black. So let's disincentivize minorities from associating with conservatives, and then blame conservatives for not having more minorities associate with them. That's a can't-lose position.

Its just like the "racism" argument. They formulate the argument so that they can't lose. There is, by their own definition, no reasoned position against CRT. If you are against CRT, it's because your are racist. Thus, CRT always wins.

It's intellectual dishonesty at its finest. Actually, I would applaud the creativity of it if it weren't destroying the country.