"We live in a post-factual world."

[DonFerrari]

BMaker11 said:

DonFerrari said:
Funny people here criticizing he was upholding both Clinton before but now criticizes them. Yes, that is a complain most democrats did, so Trump is viewed as much more as a Democrat highjack than a true Republican.

And on scietinfic disbelief... leftwing push the "gender ideology" that is completely bogus but get applause, they deny economic knowledge and push for socialism and that is humanitarian, they go against freedoms but that is ok because they want our good.

I feel like you're talking about me but didn't feel the need to quote me, as if I wouldn't see this comment. Since I'm the only one in this thread mocking Trump for supporting the Clintons and then flip flopping on how he said Bill was a great president and Hillary was a great senator in order to get in the good graces of Republican voters. Also on left wing "denial" of science.

So, first off, do you have nothing to say about his flip flopping on Bill? He's always said that the economy was great under Clinton and that his presidency was a good one. Did 1992-2000 change once Trump was a Republican candidate, so now all those years are terrible? What made him change his years long stance other than to get Republicans to pick him? 

Trump lies and say what he need to get the votes, that is no news, and so did Hillary. Wasn't that quite the agreement here?

Secondly, "gender dysphoria" is an actual thing. It's scientifically studied. I, personally, don't "get it". But just because I don't get it doesn't mean it's "bogus". You're perpetuating the right wing "denial of science" when you say it's "bogus" even though the evidence is clear that it is a condition. So, try again on left wingers "denying science and evidence". 

No man, don't confuse transgender/genderbend with social construction of gender. I don't (and even science have a consensus) on why and how transex, gays and etc happens but they do and is undeniable. What I'm talking about is a woman not being a woman, but becoming a woman because of cultural oppresion and social construction. That is bullshit and tries to deny genes.

Lastly, "denying economic knowledge and push for socialism"? Is that a bad thing? First off, the US is already socialist. The police that protect you? That's a socialist program as it uses money from the collective to be used for public/common good or service. Those roads you drive on that are maintained throughout the year and the interstate that you hop on to get from A to B? That's a socialist program via DPWs and DOTs, which use money from the collective to be used for a public/common good or service. The majority of kids being able to get an affordable primary education instead of having to go to $15,000 year private schools? That's a socialist program via public education, which uses money from the collective to be used for a public/common good or service. That's all socialism is. But you're probably one of those people who get McCarthy era triggered by the S-word and think socialism is the government taking over everything......which is actually communism. Big difference. The kind of person that says the phrase "socialist communist" to describe someone who wants universal healthcare. 

Sure is, socialism and comunism is a bad thing and government overpowering and intervening is quite bad. And only if you are anarchocapitalist you would consider border safety, state police a form of socialism, but ok if you do. Yes I know the infraestructure is seldoomly used to be maintained by the government and usually with less efficiency than by private organizations (in Brazil you have quite the discrepancy between roads maintained by both). Public education could be a lot better by being offered through private schools, and if you decide to go on "they can't afford" I recommend you look at the voucher concept. I'm not even American or over 40 to be a McCarthy era person.

But more importantly, every industrialized western civilization is socialist. At least, the kind of "socialist" that you're afraid of. And, ironically enough, you talk about "going against freedoms", but many of those other countries have higher GPDs per capita than the US, many of them rank higher in the World Happiness Report than the US, many of them rank higher in the Heritage Economic Freedom Index than the US, many of them rank higher in the Cato Institute's Human Freedom Index than the US, etc. 

So Cuba, China, Venezuela, Laos, Camdodja, Half of Africa are top rankers? Or you are going for the fallacia that Sweden is socialist? Nope, they have free market, although very high taxes and looking at very deep problems at the moment.

Denying universal health care and basically telling people that if you're sick (something that happens naturally the majority of the time), you better be rich, otherwise you're doomed to either die or live in insurmountable debt......that is more "against freedom" than paying a little more in taxes so everybody has a better quality of life. In fact, you don't even have to increase taxes; just reprioritize them. But if you say "hey, maybe our military budget doesn't need to be bigger than the next 10 countries combined, most of which are allies" or "hey, maybe we shouldn't be sending out all this foreign aid to countries that do nothing for us", and instead want that money to be used to invest in the American people; then you're a lazy "socialist" who just wants a handout. As if such an important investment like as an education (which gives you better chance to be more financially stable) is a "handout". Like it's on par with an Xbox or cell phone or something.

You are making so much assumptions that it isn't even fun. One of the biggest reasons for healthcare being so expensive in USA is on government involvement that raise the price of the service because they will be paid anyway.

But if you want you can live in your world of assumptions and denying of economics and believe that it's all for the greater good.