Rastapopoulos
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2008
- Messages
- 42,154
- Likes
- 26,525
- Points
- 113
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Let me tell you the Good NewsIs this your Bernie propaganda thread? lol.![]()
Yeah, maybe. But then again, he got way fewer votes in NH this time than he did last time, so maybe his numbers are trending toward zero.
If you only use two data points, you can prove almost anything.
barfo
Maybe because he really isn't a democrat. Why should he get money from the democrats when he is clearly an independent.
And every republican has been a Nazi since Eisenhower. That was certainly the opinion of liberals in each respective election.Cue conservatives saying that Gore, Kerry and Clinton were the most extreme liberal monsters history has ever known. That was certainly their opinion in each respective election.
And every republican has been a Nazi since Eisenhower. That was certainly the opinion of liberals in each respective election.
They hate him and they dislike him. I seriously question whether the DNC would rather have Bernie over Trump. At least with Trump the establishment folks could stick to their business-as-usual money making schemes and not have any pesky progressives to worry about.If he ran as an independent, that would be absolutely awful for Democrats. They should be really thankful he runs as a Democrat. Also, he caucuses with Democrats. So, for all political intents and purposes, he's a Democrat.
I don't think the Party hates him or even dislikes him. I think he just falls behind other people in the establishment hierarchy/seniority. Some probably also have (unjustified, IMO) electability concerns.
I don't think the older Bush was ever considered a Nazi. He wasn't super popular (except, I think, at the start of the Persian Gulf war), but he wasn't hated even by liberals.
Thats some real leaps they’re taking in logic there...
Thats some real leaps they’re taking in logic there...
Well for one its a strawman argument, very few people who are “against socialism”, are “for crony capitalism”. For two say in their made up scenario that those numbers are totally true, foodstamps are not the only “socialist”-type of expenditures that come out of people’s paycheck. So already they’re fighting a battle that isnt the argument that is normally espoused and they’re in my opinion using the tid bits of facts that tell the story they want to tell. Thirdly, its a leap to go from you support this and dont support that, you hate x. Like the only reason one may not like socialist programs is their personal hatred for, “poor people”. Thats a whole lot of assumptions being made about the reasons why people think the way they do about something.How so? They're comparing welfare for corporations to welfare for people.
Well for one its a strawman argument, very few people who are “against socialism”, are “for crony capitalism”.
For two say in their made up scenario that those numbers are totally true, foodstamps are not the only “socialist”-type of expenditures that come out of people’s paycheck. So already they’re fighting a battle that isnt the argument that is normally espoused and they’re in my opinion using the tid bits of facts that tell the story they want to tell.
Thirdly, its a leap to go from you support this and dont support that, you hate x. Like the only reason one may not like socialist programs is their personal hatred for, “poor people”. Thats a whole lot of assumptions being made about the reasons why people think the way they do about something.
Well some would argue that by helping “corporations” to succeed you are helping that target to have a chance to get out of poverty, with good paying jobs While government programs keep people in poverty. Im not necessarily making that argument because Im not a true believer in trickle down economics most of the money stays at the top of the corporations, but if that is what someone believes in, its not “hate” for that target demographic but a different approach for how they think to go about helping that target demographic. Overall the leap in logic to me is that when you start getting into people’s motivations for their beliefs and saying well you like this but not this so I know you’re feelings its very often not the case, because people have years of different experiences that go into their motivation, yes some may, “hate” poor people but to pretend thats the only logical conclusion seems counterproductive to real conversation on the subject.Perhaps not explicitly in all cases, but the vast majority of people who decry social programs are not spending a lot of time decrying the tax-payer money that's funneled to corporations. The tweet did say if this upsets you more than that...what you spend your time complaining about does tend to illustrate your priorities, i.e. what upsets you more.
That's fair but nitpicking a bit. Adding in other social programs still doesn't add up to the amount that goes to corporate subsidies, from what I've seen. So, yes, the raw dollar amount is distorted to create a larger contrast, which I'll grant you, but really doesn't change the point.
It's phrased provocatively, for sure, but whether or not "hate" is the appropriate word, when you focus on socialized costs that help impoverished rather than the socialized costs that help corporate entities, it's hard not to draw the inference that the target of the socialized cost is your real trigger.
yes some may, “hate” poor people but to pretend thats the only logical conclusion seems counterproductive to real conversation on the subject.
Well yeah, there's social security, Medicare and Medicaid but who's going to oppose those?Well for one its a strawman argument, very few people who are “against socialism”, are “for crony capitalism”. For two say in their made up scenario that those numbers are totally true, foodstamps are not the only “socialist”-type of expenditures that come out of people’s paycheck. So already they’re fighting a battle that isnt the argument that is normally espoused and they’re in my opinion using the tid bits of facts that tell the story they want to tell. Thirdly, its a leap to go from you support this and dont support that, you hate x. Like the only reason one may not like socialist programs is their personal hatred for, “poor people”. Thats a whole lot of assumptions being made about the reasons why people think the way they do about something.