By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Why can't Dems presidential hopefuls pull this much people for any of their rallys? <20,000+

eva01beserk said:
MrWayne said:

Despite Bernie calling himself a democratic socialist, neither he nor the other democratic candidates actually stand for socialist policies.

So no they aren't running on socialism.

So I should not call a socialist the guy who calls himself a socialist. Gotcha. Venezuela here we come. 

No that's not what I said, of course you can call Bernie a Socialist but equating him with Maduro is quite dishonest, it's like equating Rosa Luxemburg with Stalin.
Also just because a politician or partie is called socialist does not mean it actually is socialist, for example many center left parties in europe have Socialism or even Komunism in their name but they aren't socialist at all. You have to look at the concret policies.



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Care to explain us why exactly?

The burden of having to deal with right wing nutjobs that were brought into the EU with the expansion to eastern Europe. Western Europe would be better off without jerks that understand the EU as an institution that provides numerous subsidies with no obligation to adhere to the values of the European Union.

You're right, I always thought that the integration of Austria into the Union was a big mistake.



sethnintendo said:
Azuren said:

The Democrats are going to have to stop being so divided if they hope to beat Trump in 2020. They're already moving in like vultures on their most popular candidate (Biden).

Yep that's the problem with us.  USA is void of any actual leaders and Democrats are barely any better than GOP.  If you ask me both parties suck.  Multiparty proportional representation all the way...  I was born in the wrong country obviously.

I just feel like there should be regulation passed that enforces no less than 4 speakers during all debates.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

It has been said before but I believe one of the major reasons republicans rallied behind Trump even though they might not like him was the entire supreme court debacle. McConnell's gambit of putting off any hearings to replace the vacant seat pulled off. Just insert fear of liberal court taking over or promise to end abortion and you'll see the christian collation get behind almost anyone the has an R after their name. If you ask me churches should lose their tax exempt status because they are obviously crossing the line and endorsing candidates. Goodbye to not paying taxes.



Azuren said:
sethnintendo said:

Yep that's the problem with us.  USA is void of any actual leaders and Democrats are barely any better than GOP.  If you ask me both parties suck.  Multiparty proportional representation all the way...  I was born in the wrong country obviously.

I just feel like there should be regulation passed that enforces no less than 4 speakers during all debates.

Yea it will be a mess for awhile till the ones that can't even pull in 5% of support start dropping out.  Should happen within a few months.  The field will be under 10 in a few months once the lesser candidates start running out of money or unable to generate enough to continue on.



Around the Network
MrWayne said:
eva01beserk said:

So I should not call a socialist the guy who calls himself a socialist. Gotcha. Venezuela here we come. 

No that's not what I said, of course you can call Bernie a Socialist but equating him with Maduro is quite dishonest, it's like equating Rosa Luxemburg with Stalin.
Also just because a politician or partie is called socialist does not mean it actually is socialist, for example many center left parties in europe have Socialism or even Komunism in their name but they aren't socialist at all. You have to look at the concret policies.

Im not equating him to maduro, Im equating to chavez, the one who started it all. Like all socialism its all great and dandy in the beginning, as things start going south they slowly start taking from the rich then the middle class then when there is no one else to take from you get what was promised, no wealth inequality as everybody is poor now. Maduro already had a turd on his hand when it was handed to him.

The only thing missing for berni to be full socialist is the state appropriation of businesses. But like all socialism that is a last resort that inevitably end up resorting to, cuz guess what after a million examples, socialism does not work. 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

sethnintendo said:
KLAMarine said:

Oh! I guess you can compare yourself to someone who actually lived through that time and place then.

What is your fucking point?  You have none.  He is a piece of shit and anyone with right mind can see that.

You stated previously that you "haven't seen such fanatical support since a politician named Hitler." It's bull: Hitler took control of mass media, Trump has no such control as demonstrated by the regular slamming he gets from many media outlets. Trump Hitler outlawed all parties but the Nazi Party, other parties beside the Republican party still exist under Trump. Hitler was leader for life, the presidency only allows for two terms.

The two aren't comparable...

Last edited by KLAMarine - on 24 June 2019

KLAMarine said:
sethnintendo said:

What is your fucking point?  You have none.  He is a piece of shit and anyone with right mind can see that.

You stated previously that you "haven't seen such fanatical support since a politician named Hitler." It's bull: Hitler took control of mass media, Trump has no such control as demonstrated by the regular slamming he gets from many media outlets. Trump outlawed all parties but the Nazi Party, other parties beside the Republican party still exist under Trump. Hitler was leader for life, the presidency only allows for two terms.

The two aren't comparable...

I was talking about support from his fan base.  No matter what he does he will always have that 35 to 40 percent.  He even said he could shoot someone and still not lose support from his fans.  



vivster said:
eva01beserk said:
@vivster
You do know a lot of the dems are running on socialism?

Dems run on social programs, which isn't the same as full on socialism. If what the dems are fighting for is Socialism then Germany is a fully socialist country. Even if Bernie had all of his wishes they'd still be merely catching up with other developed western countries. What Americans call "Socialism", every other developed nation calls "human decency" or "common sense".

I don't know what that has to do with anything though. All democratic candidates want the same thing. And even if some don't agree, the policies that are being pushed need approval from the whole party to get through, so it's not like that a radical Democrat would be able to push all of his radical agendas. That's how democracy works.

I think the best example that I could show you is California. You cant tell me that they are nt trying their best to as you call it"catch up to the EU". Its the worst ranking state in the US and before the insanity they where the best. Now the have the highest wealth inequality. The middle class shrinks every day. Homelessness as far as the eye can see. Rich neighborhoods gated. Thats what to many "social programs" do to an economy. The state has not yet taken the resources of the big corporations like google there cuz they know they will just flee to either another state, or out the country if need be.  Radical leftist have full reign in California and nobody stops they crazzy policies they put up and look what they have. 

Look, social programs are not a bad thing, dont get me wrong. But you have to realize that good intentions is not all takes to lead a nation. Inequality is a law of nature as all people are inherently different and as such different outcomes will result from it. Sadly because of it, some will end rich some poor. But its impossible to completely fix that gap that nature made. If all needs for the poor where met, like guaranteed housing, health care and food and education, they would not need to even get off the bed in the mourning. The more the needs are met, the less people will work to improve themselves. I say we do have to help the most needed out of some hardships, but never completely remove all hardships from them. 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

eva01beserk said:
vivster said:

Dems run on social programs, which isn't the same as full on socialism. If what the dems are fighting for is Socialism then Germany is a fully socialist country. Even if Bernie had all of his wishes they'd still be merely catching up with other developed western countries. What Americans call "Socialism", every other developed nation calls "human decency" or "common sense".

I don't know what that has to do with anything though. All democratic candidates want the same thing. And even if some don't agree, the policies that are being pushed need approval from the whole party to get through, so it's not like that a radical Democrat would be able to push all of his radical agendas. That's how democracy works.

I think the best example that I could show you is California. You cant tell me that they are nt trying their best to as you call it"catch up to the EU". Its the worst ranking state in the US and before the insanity they where the best. Now the have the highest wealth inequality. The middle class shrinks every day. Homelessness as far as the eye can see. Rich neighborhoods gated. Thats what to many "social programs" do to an economy. The state has not yet taken the resources of the big corporations like google there cuz they know they will just flee to either another state, or out the country if need be.  Radical leftist have full reign in California and nobody stops they crazzy policies they put up and look what they have. 

Look, social programs are not a bad thing, dont get me wrong. But you have to realize that good intentions is not all takes to lead a nation. Inequality is a law of nature as all people are inherently different and as such different outcomes will result from it. Sadly because of it, some will end rich some poor. But its impossible to completely fix that gap that nature made. If all needs for the poor where met, like guaranteed housing, health care and food and education, they would not need to even get off the bed in the mourning. The more the needs are met, the less people will work to improve themselves. I say we do have to help the most needed out of some hardships, but never completely remove all hardships from them. 

In what ranking is California the worst and they were the best? 



...