Having A Psychotic Boss Leads To The Assassination Of Charlie Kirk

I've been pondering this concept for a while and the shocking assassination of Charlie Kirk yesterday forced it to the surface.

What is the next logical step after this?

How about the radicalization of the Democrats?

The Democrats get a large percent of their money from small donors which means the base. As their popularity declines, so does their pool of donors. As their popularity declines, their base becomes more and more radical because the squishier ones leave. Their popularity is now at historic lows.

As their popularity decreases, they are forced to spiral in towards their far-left base which means their rhetoric has to become more and more frenzied and hateful to keep the money flowing. Hence "the end of Democracy" and "fascists" and all the rest.

If their starting point was that everyone who disagreed with them was a racist, a homophobe, a transphobe, a fascist and more, where else can they go as their base moves farther and farther left?

How do you appeal to psychotics?

Addendum

It is nearly impossible to be a conservative and not understand the left's positions because we marinate in them every day. They permeate our entertainment, schools and news media. We bathe in the water of the left.

It is very common for the progressives to have no idea why conservatives think like they do because people like Charlie Kirk have been edited out of their world. I can't tell you how many news sources and public figures described Charlie as "divisive" and then cherry-picked some of his positions, putting them in the worst light possible. They deliberately removed all neutral reference points. They wanted you to hate him.

As the left spirals down into their base, their base stays whipped into a frenzy of ignorant, self-reinforced hate. That's a recipe for more and more violence.

More than that, Charlie Kirk along with Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh and lots of other thought leaders on the right make it a habit to speak in large, public forums and then make sure the progressives in the audience get an unedited, uninterrupted chance to challenge them in the Q&A.

That dialog was precisely what Charlie was doing when they shot him. 

You punish the things you don't want repeated. If you're going to punish free and open conversations about politics, be prepared for the alternative.

One more thing. Ben Shapiro made a typically brilliant observation about Charlie's assassination. This spells the end of open-air presentations like this. From now on, the venues for these things will be enclosed, tightly controlled and necessarily smaller. If you saw photos of Charlie's event yesterday, you'll see why this is a bad thing for all Americans. That crowd was huge.