1. The election outcome is disputed and SCOTUS refuses to intervene, deeming it a “political question” and basically telling congress and the executive to duke it out. The “establishment” (US House, media, big corps, deep state) lines up against trump. The senate sides with trump, along with most of the executive branch.

2. The election is disputed, SCOTUS sides with the Dems and declares Biden the winner, but Trump and the executive ignore the ruling and declare it invalid. The senate and some lower courts side with Trump.

How could it be disputed? One way is that in the days after Election Day, fOllowing credible allegations of voter fraud, GOP state legislatures change the state laws regarding the selection of electors and just pick them themselves. Democrats try to send their own elected to DC anyways. It’s a big shit show and the electoral college vote is called off, or multiple sets of electors hold multiple votes.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41235965)

If the senate were to support trump, that would simply mean that it would take the position that the military must continue to follow him. I could also see the senate starting to pass laws without the consent is the House and basically declare that the house is irrelevant.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41237294)

What's more, this had precedence because the Senate was made up of powerful families who all had military experience -- this is far less likely today given our current senate's dearth of experience leading soldiers. Logistics are too hard for them to manage today.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41237319)

CR on legitimacy though, which is closely related to why a civil war is likely at all -- neither side will accept the legitimacy of the other.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41237477)

https://nypost.com/2020/10/31/bill-maher-lets-not-have-a-civil-war-with-the-trumpers/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41235769)

people rooting for any sort of "civil war" are idiots.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41235991)

how the fuck do people think this isn't a rightwing blowout lmao

virtually all of the institutions the left owns only matter when violence is off the table

5th Gen warfare only works until it's countered by 3rd Gen Warfare -- bullets beat words every time

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41236003)

- Rex Sinquefield lives in Missouri

- Sheldon Adelson Lives in Vegas

- Timothy Mellon lives in Wyoming

- Warren Stephens lives in Arkansas

- Kelcy Warren lives in Texas

- Joe Ricketts lives in Nebraska

- Ron Cameron lives in Arkansas

- Walter Buckley lives in Pennsylvania

- Diane Hendricks lives in Wisconsin

- Steve Wynn lives in Vegas

- Fred Eshelman lives in North Carolina

- Foster Friess lives in Wyoming

If you mean take over by infiltration, that'll take a long time; if you mean take over at gunpoint, it's like you think they won't travel lol.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41236160)

I don't think that will prevent violence.

I think the fundamental disputes revolve around:

- the role the state should play in enforcing order (and what an acceptable definition of public order is)

- cultural differences between whites and blacks

- whether elites are responsible for poverty, what constitutes wealth [e.g. $300k in net worth or $300m], and how to address this

- acceptance or rejection of public degeneracy (e.g. child transsexualism, homosexual """marriage""")

- whether systematic oppression exists, and -- if so -- whether that confers obligations or privileges to classes of people

- who should have guns

- whether one side is being politically disenfranchised (e.g. electoral college v. popular vote, court composition)

I think many people have muddled positions on these things; I nonetheless think there will be plenty who are moved to violence on both sides if they think they are being fucked by the other side.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41236241)

EDIT: meant for the poster above you

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41236137)

EDIT: aha, now it makes sense

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41236173)

To put that 8 billion number in perspective, the entire U.S. military -- including training ammo -- used around 1.8 billion rounds in 2009, which was during heavy Iraq and Afghanistan deployment.

There's going to be plenty of ammo to get things going; sustaining years upon years of combat is another question.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41236309)

You're correct that soldiers regularly take 2-300 rounds on them, although most recent opinion from SOF guys is that this is heavier than necessary, and 5 mags is sufficient, especially for guerilla work.

did you mean to say libs or cons there? If the right has unlimited bullets, that's even less of a contest lol. If you meant the right, I do in fact think the can sustain themselves because they have a lot more food, and are generally much better prepared for warfare.

Again, I don't think it'll be a contest if it gets to that. The much better argument for libs is that it never will and no one will counter the information based 5th Gen Warfare with 3rd/4th Gen Warfare, because of lib societal control through institutional power. I've elsewhere on the bort explained why I think that's untenable, but it's far better than trying to say that the libs will own weapons companies lol. Do you know who owns the Olin Group and Vista Outdoor? Not likely to be libs lol.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41236564)

180^180 analysis. We're on the same side brother

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41237537)

no way things are bloodless if that happens.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41237389)

http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4664186&forum_id=2#41208627

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41237732)

Red Kingdom only need sneak attack MFH. Detonate bridges and tunnels, cut cables, poison water.

NYC falls, you’re halfway there. Coordinate a strike on SF and bingo

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41238287)

Major cities will be sieged and starved out

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41239567)

We aren't going to bus into inner city Chicago and wage urban conflict, just cut them off and let the Diversity start eating all the lib Whites until they are on our side.

Also, I am not cutting these fucking bitches any slack. I am for equality like a motherfucker. These whores can die too.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4668365&forum_id=2#41238659)