ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
I decided to stay away from a message board because my arch nemesis now had access to all of my personal information. After seeing the name that must not be mentioned was no longer posting, it was safe to return.
Is that true though? I don't think mods have access to our names and credit card numbers - if they do, Rivals would be under some serious legal liability if something bad went down.
 
Political thread get linked on rafters or something?

Pretty sure everyone in this thread knows how the political process works in this country (except maybe fuzz who doesn't know anything), but thanks for dropping by.
 
Is that true though? I don't think mods have access to our names and credit card numbers - if they do, Rivals would be under some serious legal liability if something went down.

Bill Cosby,

This is a warning from the site staff and moderators regarding message (
POLITICAL THREAD).

No blacklist or ban has been issued at this time, but please keep all of your content and posts on the message board within the board rules. Your ideas and opinions are welcome but personal attacks and insults will not be tolerated.

If you have questions regarding this warning, please contact the site staff or moderators.


After that came to my personal email account, I decided to back off.

It may surprise some people, but my views and personality in real life aren't actually as extreme as they come across on an anonymous message board.
 
They (dems and repubs) need to feel like they have some tiny bit of influence and that their prejudices matter.......the fact that the people with REAL money in the country would have whomever becomes president do exactly what they're told to do is too much to handle.
Yeah and, it is a good thing people like you know the real deal so that you can teach the rest of us how it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jamo0001
Bill Cosby,

This is a warning from the site staff and moderators regarding message (
POLITICAL THREAD).

No blacklist or ban has been issued at this time, but please keep all of your content and posts on the message board within the board rules. Your ideas and opinions are welcome but personal attacks and insults will not be tolerated.

If you have questions regarding this warning, please contact the site staff or moderators.


After that came to my personal email account, I decided to back off.

It may surprise some people, but my views and personality in real life aren't actually as extreme as they come across on an anonymous message board.
I think the email address is the most info they have. Unless yours is myrealname@.... then there's probably no reason to believe you or anyone else would be outed
 
The Dems are keeping their powder dry on Trump and the only way you do that is because you are sure what you have is fatal. You never let your opponent define you before you respond. The Clintons perfected that. It was the Hallmark of all their James Carvelle campaigns. Really piques the interest to contemplate what they have on Trump that they are so confident in so as to endure all this without an overwhelming response.

Nah. They just realized every time you attack Trump, it makes him stronger. None of the other candidates found that out until too late.

If there is something there then the attack from the Clintons will be withering. Mark this down, they will not go gently into that good night. Look for the most savage attacks in history to be headed Trumps way come September. Brutal.

Oh I expect them to eventually come at him with full force. But they wont launch their attacks directly. Itll come from the MSM whos so gleefully ready to appease Hillary, as we saw in those emails.

Maybe I am giving him too much credit, but I just wonder if he is holding the tax return card until he is ready to use it as leverage to make Hilary release her Wall Street speech transcripts. Surely he would not run knowing that he has serious problems with his returns.

No way theres anything in there fatal, politically. Hed never get this deep knowing something was in there.

Now there may be items in there that may hurt him some other way (business, etc). But I think its just a ploy.

no, that kind of thing would have been a problem prior to now. going forward he could use such information to spin him as the bipartisan hand-across-the-aisle candidate to appeal to the independents. perfect pivot to the middle ammo.

for gods sake it was common reported knowledge that Trump gave frequently to democrat politicians, even HILLARY, and that didnt kill his nomination run

Exactly. I knew Trump was serious, serious contender when he handled the question in the first debate about his donations to the Clintons. That absolutely shouldve been fatal. But he took it and gave an incredible response. Basically, that was his launching point and theres been no stopping him since.
 
Bill Cosby,

This is a warning from the site staff and moderators regarding message (
POLITICAL THREAD).

No blacklist or ban has been issued at this time, but please keep all of your content and posts on the message board within the board rules. Your ideas and opinions are welcome but personal attacks and insults will not be tolerated.

If you have questions regarding this warning, please contact the site staff or moderators.


After that came to my personal email account, I decided to back off.

It may surprise some people, but my views and personality in real life aren't actually as extreme as they come across on an anonymous message board.
Correct. Pretty sure the majority of people here are good people.

They have your name. It is why I suggest creating and using an online alias. They also track your IP addresses you log on from.
 
Bill Cosby,

This is a warning from the site staff and moderators regarding message (
POLITICAL THREAD).

No blacklist or ban has been issued at this time, but please keep all of your content and posts on the message board within the board rules. Your ideas and opinions are welcome but personal attacks and insults will not be tolerated.

If you have questions regarding this warning, please contact the site staff or moderators.


After that came to my personal email account, I decided to back off.

It may surprise some people, but my views and personality in real life aren't actually as extreme as they come across on an anonymous message board.
Yeah, see that's the kind of stuff that pisses me off and causes me to go on a rant against the mods and get banned.
 
Trump had an opportunity to debate Sanders earlier this Spring. He chickened out and that's why we had another Bernie and Hillary "Town Hall Meeting". Trump would be unarmed in a battle of wits with Sanders.

Bernie appears to be honest about what he believes. For that, I applaud him.

However, he is pushing the idea of a Robin Hood government, that attempts to make everybody as near to equal as possible, resulting in laziness and enormous debt as a country.
 
Bernie appears to be honest about what he believes. For that, I applaud him.

However, he is pushing the idea of a Robin Hood government, that attempts to make everybody as near to equal as possible, resulting in laziness and enormous debt as a country.

Except that's not what actually happens in social democratic European governments and you already have plenty of that here as is which is more of the problem; the amount of derelicts you have and the very idea that you wouldn't work to better yourself if you didn't have to.

Not that I support his platform, but it's more something that won't work for cultural reasons than it is systematic failure (necessarily and generally imho)
 
I think I understand how the idea of socialism appeals to some. However, it seems to me it's a paper tiger. During the Russian revolution, the Menshiviks seemed to want the 'social democracy' you speak of. They lasted about 6 months, before the bolsheviks brought the fist. It's a Catch-22, IMO, once you give all the power to the government, and away from the individual. I personally don't believe in pure Capitalism either, but I think you have to lean that way.
 
Yeah but we don't have to look at the Russian revolution or anything of that sort, which really has way more to do with European feudalism than it does with modern economic theory. Social democracy does lean towards capitalism.
 
I think I understand how the idea of socialism appeals to some. However, it seems to me it's a paper tiger. During the Russian revolution, the Menshiviks seemed to want the 'social democracy' you speak of. They lasted about 6 months, before the bolsheviks brought the fist. It's a Catch-22, IMO, once you give all the power to the government, and away from the individual. I personally don't believe in pure Capitalism either, but I think you have to lean that way.
Maybe research the Nordic model first before going straight to the extreme example of the Soviet Union?
 
The American model really has failed. Probably should research the Nordic model.

Can we tell England the founders had their fingers crossed when they signed the DOI?

This embarrassing experiment known as America really needs to get scrapped. Can't believe we've made it 250 or whatever years without the radical lefties saving us from ourselves.
 
Trump had an opportunity to debate Sanders earlier this Spring. He chickened out and that's why we had another Bernie and Hillary "Town Hall Meeting". Trump would be unarmed in a battle of wits with Sanders.
hilarious. I appreciate Bernie kicking HillDog's ass from coast to coast, but stay in your lane thinking he is some brilliant political tactician or debater. His 30+ years in the House & Senate with empty accomplishments speaks for itself.
 
Ignoring theory for a moment, all one needs to do is look at the GDP, unemployment, and tax rates for western Europe vs the US to see which system is better... unless, of course, you're Barack Obama, and you think higher unemployment, lower GDP, and higher taxes rates are "better".
 
  • Like
Reactions: drawing_dead
Which Nordic model?

The one from roughly the 19th century-mid 20th century which was based on capitalism, free trade, low taxes, and non-interventionism and made Sweden and Denmark extremely wealthy?

The one from the 1970s-1990s that took all of the wealth built in the previous 100 years and started redistributing it to the detriment of their economy; having some of the slowest GDP growth on the entire continent for over a decade and lowering Sweden from the 4th wealthiest country to 14th?

Or the one since the 1990s that has slowly but surely stripped away the most intrusive aspects of the 1970s "reforms" leading to massive real wage increases as well as GDP growth?

Sweden has, in many respects, a much more robust free market than the US. They just have a massive social safety net. That is not "socialism." I know the Noam Chomsky crowd loves to crow about Scandinavia as an example of socialism working, but the closest those countries came to socialism was the period in which they wrecked their economies.


*Norway has a metric F ton of oil and a tiny population. Socialism "works" if you have few people and a lot of money! Except Venezuela. So, it's actually a crap shoot. yay socialism!
 
Last edited:
Trump had an opportunity to debate Sanders earlier this Spring. He chickened out and that's why we had another Bernie and Hillary "Town Hall Meeting". Trump would be unarmed in a battle of wits with Sanders.

You realize they're each just telling their supporters what they want to hear, right? It's not as if Bernie is some high level intellectual.

Except that's not what actually happens in social democratic European governments and you already have plenty of that here as is which is more of the problem; the amount of derelicts you have and the very idea that you wouldn't work to better yourself if you didn't have to.

Not that I support his platform, but it's more something that won't work for cultural reasons than it is systematic failure (necessarily and generally imho)

You can't legislate hard work. Once you remove the right to your own personal gain, then everything starts eroding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wkycatfan
Bernie appears to be honest about what he believes. For that, I applaud him.

However, he is pushing the idea of a Robin Hood government, that attempts to make everybody as near to equal as possible, resulting in laziness and enormous debt as a country.
Do you consider Canadians, Germans, French, British, Swiss et al to be lazy and in enormous debt?
None of those countries have the debt per capita or debt as a percentage of GDP equal to that of the US and they all do the things that Bernie has proposed. Hell, even Trump has said it needed to be done.
 
You socialists are going to get your wish in this country IMO. Hopefully you will like what you think you are getting. I'm betting that after a while, you won't.
 
Sweden has, in many respects, a much more robust free market than the US. They just have a massive social safety net. That is not "socialism."
It's not socialism?
So when Bernie proposes to do the same things that Sweden and the rest of the industrialized world already does...he is called a socialist. Yet you say it isn't socialism when Sweden does it...yet you go on and say..."closest those countries came to socialism was the period in which they wrecked their economies".
Sweden is no less socialist today than it was 10, 20, 30, 40...years ago.
So is Sweden socialist or not? If not, how is Bernie socialist?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Supreme Lord Z
The French and British are not great examples of economic strength, bub. Switzerland and German have economic policies that Bernie would call "neo-liberal", no doubt. Seriously, you consider Germany and Switzerland to be in line with what Bernie wants? I mean, of course you do, but still. Again, social safety net = Bernienomics. That is one aspect of it, but the way in which he proposes it be done is not even remotely the same way the Swiss or Germans do it.
 
You realize they're each just telling their supporters what they want to hear, right? It's not as if Bernie is some high level intellectual.



You can't legislate hard work. Once you remove the right to your own personal gain, then everything starts eroding.

We already have a mixed economy, the debate is how mixed should it be not McCarthyism vs Communism. I personally don't have a strong view on this matter either way, but the vast majority of the arguments I hear made on TV or radio then regurgitated (largely) on this thread simply don't hold water if you actually travel, live in those countries and spend time talking to people. I want whatever strengthens the American middle class, which has been steadily weakening more or less since its height in the 50's 60's or whatever andnow are left only with idealogues pointing fingers and a gullible voting population ready to latch on to poorly thought out solutions. If it takes a New York City megalomaniac or Vermont "socialist" to accomplish that then so be it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fuzz77
It's not socialism?

- So when Bernie proposes to do the same things that Sweden and the rest of the industrialized world already does...he is called a socialist. Yet you say it isn't socialism when Sweden does it...yet you go on and say..."closest those countries came to socialism was the period in which they wrecked their economies".

- Sweden is no less socialist today than it was 10, 20, 30, 40...years ago.
So is Sweden socialist or not? If not, how is Bernie socialist?

- Bernie proposes things that Sweden does, he then also proposes things they absolutely don't do like unrationed universal healthcare. But, I've actually said Bernie is NOT a Socialist

Bernie is a populist, not a socialist. Socialism at least requires a certain understanding of markets.

Bernie's platform is: give the government more money and power and the people in power will dole out free stuff, but they'll be like totally nice about it and stuff. O and it will be paid for because he has a Microsoft Publisher brochure that says so. That's not socialism, that's pandering and economic illiteracy.

He is a Marxist at heart (look at his unqualified support for Castro and the Sandinistas), but is either too stupid or inconsistent to propose truly marxist policies. Again, he simply wants to take money from some and give it to others. That's not socialism. Now Sweden actually did nationalize some industries in the 1970s as well as hike taxes and expand the welfare state. That is much closer to actual socialism.

- You are an idiot if you don't think Sweden hasn't liberalized its economy since the 1990s. It literally takes 5 seconds of Googling (or you could just have an interest in things like this and read multiple articles instead of making drive-by comments with no basis in fact) to see this. What you're saying is simply not true.

Now please educate yourself or stop inserting yourself in these things. Maybe both
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: WettCat
Ignoring theory for a moment, all one needs to do is look at the GDP, unemployment, and tax rates for western Europe vs the US to see which system is better... unless, of course, you're Barack Obama, and you think higher unemployment, lower GDP, and higher taxes rates are "better".
Their tax rates include their healthcare costs, long term care and college tuition. My healthcare costs alone are about the same as what I paid in taxes...let me amortize the cost of college tuition x4 into the equation and see what that does to my effective tax rate.

Unemployment...US 5%, Germany 4.2%, UK 5.1%

GDP...ours per capita is $54.6K, Switzerland's is $82.9K, Denmark's is $60.3K, Norway $101.3K, Sweden $59.6K

You were saying?
 
The one from roughly the 19th century-mid 20th century which was based on capitalism, free trade, low taxes, and non-interventionism and made Sweden and Denmark extremely wealthy?

The one from the 1970s-1990s that took all of the wealth built in the previous 100 years and started redistributing it to the detriment of their economy; having some of the slowest GDP growth on the entire continent for over a decade and lowering Sweden from the 4th wealthiest country to 14th?

Or the one since the 1990s that has slowly but surely stripped away the most intrusive aspects of the 1970s "reforms" leading to massive real wage increases as well as GDP growth?

Sweden has, in many respects, a much more robust free market than the US. They just have a massive social safety net. That is not "socialism." I know the Noam Chomsky crowd loves to crow about Scandinavia as an example of socialism working, but the closest those countries came to socialism was the period in which they wrecked their economies.


*Norway has a metric F ton of oil and a tiny population. Socialism "works" if you have few people and a lot of money! Except Venezuela. So, it's actually a crap shoot. yay socialism!
Geez, when you put it that way, it makes me doubt BO's aspirational thinking.....
 
Still laughing at "Sweden is no less socialist today than it was 10, 20, 30, 40...years ago"

How about this, RQfuzz, I'll put $1000 bet down that Sweden has demonstrably liberalized its economy starting in the 1990s. Just go ahead and put this one in the, "lost bets I won't pay" column
 
Anytime I see people claim socialism or communism is more desirable than capitalism, it says alot more about them than they realize.

For a perfect case study, look at East Berlin vs West Berlin. Both shared the same characteristics, with one exception: one was capitalistic and the other was not. One flourished, the other suffered. So much so, that armed guards had to be placed atop the wall to keep people from crossing over into the capitalistic economy.
 
I really wish the people who wish the US would be more like Europe would go ahead and just move to Europe. Stop trying to ruin America for us Americans who like the ideas it was founded upon.

Its incredible. Our forefathers fought and died to overcome great odds and win independence. All just to see millennials and lazies surrender it all back without even so much as the threat of force.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT