MAGAts have been pissed they lost the first one. What did the North do? Nothing to prosecute. Then they got even more pissed when a black man was voted as President… twice. Fuck them!
If they start a civil war, the left will finish it because there is no longer acceptance of tolerating intolerance.
Good luck with that, since we still have people bothsidering Republicans and Democrats to helpfully blunt any proper assignation of even the blame with the conservatives. There is a whole lotta “a pox on both their houses” kind of rhetoric. Often the online left helpfully joins in.
Not to mention a lot of the more vocal left calling everyone they don’t like a “shitlib” and spending lots of energy on useful things like oppression olympics and lectures on stuff like intersectionality.
The American right has the same problem that the American South had.
There’s a number of historical and contemporary parallels to draw against what would probably happen which have already been said elsewhere. The common thread is that a large number of people will die over a number of years (but not as many as in a proper war) and not much will be accomplished by either side.
The Troubles, American edition.
Yup.
There won’t be a front line or pitched battles like people are fantasizing about. Something will kick it off, maybe a riot, an assassination, or maybe an opposition leader gets life in prison or even executed on fabricated treason charges and people start shooting/bombing about it. Then there will be a round up of “terrorists” and probably some lynchings that go unpunished after all the current surveillance tech out there miraculously “fails”, all followed by a protracted insurgency as a response to these acts.
They, like their dear leader, massively overestimate their size and power, while underestimating their opponents’.
They often forget that plenty of left/liberal folks grew up with guns, and hunting.
Statistically not really. I’ve been part of liberal gun groups in the past and it was hard to get any traction. Many of the members were also extremely fuddy and mocked people for having “evil black rifles” rather than their preferred .38 cal revolver and 130 year old bolt action rifle.
Republicans own guns at nearly 3x the rate of Democrats, according to Pew, and only a portion of democrats would be considered “liberal” and even fewer leftist, while nearly all republicans would be considered conservative globally. I would wager a lot of money that the proportion is even more skewed if you were looking at just ARs and other types of guns that would be decently suited for combat rather than grandpappy’s hunting rifle or a rusty old revolver.
Having a lot of guns doesn’t mean shit when you can only use one gun at a time.
If 25 people are fighting 33 people, but that 25 people have 75 guns and the 33 people have 33 guns, it’s still an equitable fight.
The stats are on number of owners, not guns owned
My point is that people horde guns.
If you have 1 person who owns 25 guns and another who owns one. They are equal. Also, during an actual war, this would literally be a moot point as the state would be arming people.
Not really. The guy with 25 guns can arm 24 friends. The state would hardly be arming people, the military would be directly involved on one side or the other. A civil war between left and right would absolutely not work out well for the left.
24 friends who don’t want to fight?
You don’t think the liberal states wouldn’t arm their on fighting groups if open civil war happened? Cmon now.
You’re making a baseless assumption that the 24 friends wouldn’t want to fight. Doesn’t own a gun yet doesn’t mean won’t join the fight. Liberal states won’t arm citizens, that’s inconsistent with their core principles. Besides that, they’d end up arming conservatives too because we’d just fake being liberal to get a free gun. Already take advantage of liberal gun buy”back” programs by forcing you idiots to buy pipeguns and shitty broken guns to fund our ammo budget 😂
