By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
EricHiggin said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Yeah, like increasing spending everywhere except where it could actually benefit the people.

He spends billions on that wall, has raised military expenses and subsidies for inefficient, outdated companies, while having cut them for efficient ones, any healthcare and welfare that ain't aimed at billionaires or companies. Please explain to me where the more reasonable doses are here.

Just for your information, Trump has vastly expanded Government expenses, more so than Obama did before him. Explain to me how that is against big government?

Well it's hard to do that until after the swamp is drained.

Care to explain me how the swamp can drain the swamp?

Just look up what Trump did even before he became president. Trump is the embodiment of the swamp. I still have trouble believing that people actually fell for that.



Around the Network
Snoopy said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

I just fixed your message and gave you the answer along with it

So how do you prevent the people in government from getting corrupt? There are thousands of members in the government and it will be impossible to keep them in check. Now we want to make it bigger? LOL 

You can look at all the politicians who point their fingers at the corrupt government and yet they engage in corruption themselves.

I will also note that in addition to the things others have said, Democrats who support "big government" policies often also support various anti-corruption policies like getting money out of politics, increasing transparency and supporting our systems of checks and balances.

I will also add that the corruption that many on the left speak about is largely the corruption of the decision making process, not corruption within the maintenance of systems. As such, many of the "big government" policies are about shifting government responsibility from the decision making process to the system maintenance process. That isn't to say there is no corruption within these maintenance processes, but I think it is the type of corruption that is easier to hold accountable because it often eliminates much of the gray area, like "is it technically corruption if a PAC funded by pharma companies supports a candidate, and then that candidate coincidentally announces his opposition to measures aimed at combating pricing issues with pharmaceuticals, or is that just normal?"



Bofferbrauer2 said:
EricHiggin said:

Well it's hard to do that until after the swamp is drained.

Care to explain me how the swamp can drain the swamp?

Just look up what Trump did even before he became president. Trump is the embodiment of the swamp. I still have trouble believing that people actually fell for that.

Depends on how you view Trump, and the swamp.

If I don't view them the same way you do, how am I supposed to explain your point of view?



EricHiggin said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Care to explain me how the swamp can drain the swamp?

Just look up what Trump did even before he became president. Trump is the embodiment of the swamp. I still have trouble believing that people actually fell for that.

Depends on how you view Trump, and the swamp.

If I don't view them the same way you do, how am I supposed to explain your point of view?

Dear god, man. Just say what you fucking mean. Your metaphors suck, your analogies suck, and based on what I can decipher your opinions probably suck too but they're wrapped in so many layers of fortune cookie nonsense that I can't be certain. 

Last edited by Torillian - on 02 March 2020

...

Torillian said:
EricHiggin said:

Depends on how you view Trump, and the swamp.

If I don't view them the same way you do, how am I supposed to explain your point of view?

Dear god, man. Just say what you fucking mean. Your metaphors suck, your analogies suck, and based on what I can decipher your opinions probably suck too but their wrapped in so many layers of fortune cookie nonsense that I can't be certain. 

Can you ban someone for being shit at debate? 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
Snoopy said:

So how do you prevent the people in government from getting corrupt? There are thousands of members in the government and it will be impossible to keep them in check. Now we want to make it bigger? LOL 

You can look at all the politicians who point their fingers at the corrupt government and yet they engage in corruption themselves.

Kicking Trump out would be a good start. That guy is pretty much corruption incorporated.

It's not the size that matters. Besides, by that analogy, the US would need to drastically reduce military spending, as they are the biggest part of government, so deeply corrupt by your own admission now and thus need to be cut down.

How is Trump corrupt?  He acts like a buffoon sometimes (on purpose), but he is probably the least corrupt president we had in the last 20 years. Military members make up less than 1% of United States and I agree some of the Military spending is a waste of money, but overall Military does keep us protected and lead to a lot of innovation such as GPS, Internet, commercial airlines, x rays and much more.



SpokenTruth said:
Snoopy said:

How is Trump corrupt?  He acts like a buffoon sometimes (on purpose), but he is probably the least corrupt president we had in the last 20 years. Military members make up less than 1% of United States and I agree some of the Military spending is a waste of money, but overall Military does keep us protected and lead to a lot of innovation such as GPS, Internet, commercial airlines, x rays and much more.

Military spending is ~17% of the budget, not 1%.  $764 billion on a $4.5 trillion budget. 

I'm not even going to address corruption with you.  That's pointless.

I never said budget makes up 1%



SpokenTruth said:
Snoopy said:

How is Trump corrupt?  He acts like a buffoon sometimes (on purpose), but he is probably the least corrupt president we had in the last 20 years. Military members make up less than 1% of United States and I agree some of the Military spending is a waste of money, but overall Military does keep us protected and lead to a lot of innovation such as GPS, Internet, commercial airlines, x rays and much more.

Military spending is ~17% of the budget, not 1%.  $764 billion on a $4.5 trillion budget. 

I'm not even going to address corruption with you.  That's pointless.

True. I could have spend an entire day writing a several page long reply since there's just so much material to show, but with that mentality even the perfect proof would fall on deaf ears and not be worth it.



Snoopy said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Kicking Trump out would be a good start. That guy is pretty much corruption incorporated.

It's not the size that matters. Besides, by that analogy, the US would need to drastically reduce military spending, as they are the biggest part of government, so deeply corrupt by your own admission now and thus need to be cut down.

How is Trump corrupt?  He acts like a buffoon sometimes (on purpose), but he is probably the least corrupt president we had in the last 20 years.

Please define corruption for me. I cannot fathom a single definition with which what you just said is true...



Bofferbrauer2 said:
EricHiggin said:

Well it's hard to do that until after the swamp is drained.

Care to explain me how the swamp can drain the swamp?

Just look up what Trump did even before he became president. Trump is the embodiment of the swamp. I still have trouble believing that people actually fell for that.

Torillian said:
EricHiggin said:

Depends on how you view Trump, and the swamp.

If I don't view them the same way you do, how am I supposed to explain your point of view?

Dear god, man. Just say what you fucking mean. Your metaphors suck, your analogies suck, and based on what I can decipher your opinions probably suck too but they're wrapped in so many layers of fortune cookie nonsense that I can't be certain. 

What I mean is, it depends on how you view Trump and the 'swamp'. What follows this seemed common sense to me and not some riddle based on my next line of, "if I don't view them the same way you do, how am I supposed to explain your point of view?"

If you hate Trump and think the 'swamp' (Gov) is great, then you will obviously see things more so one way. If you like Trump and think the 'swamp' (Gov) is corrupt, then you will obviously see it more so the opposite. You also could hate Trump and hate the 'swamp', or you could like Trump and like the 'swamp', but that would seem less likely, yet possible.

The gifs can be taken in different ways, depending on how you view them, and that's the point, visually. I'm pointing out you don't have to see things one specific way, politically, and it's not expected you see them the same way as someone else, which shouldn't be a ban worthy offense, for example. You'd think anyway.

Considering you're uncertain, automatically assuming I suck period, seems overly negative and one sided. It depends on how you view me and my posts though, yet you're free to your opinion of them regardless, whether you decide to post them, or not. Not everyone's "do not cross" line is the same however.