Bernie Looks to have Won another California District (San Francisco) that Was originally called for Crooked Hillary (thought, democrat)

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by t206

Nope, thats where you are wrong, yet again. Regardless of what candidate I support, I would never support 100% full implementation of one particular brand of political philosophy, because none to your point have ever been 100% fully and successfully implemented. I support Johnson and the Libertarian platform because I find the whole religious extremism and overlooking equal rights for all by the Republicans distasteful, while I also REALLY have issues with most Democratic economic policies. I see the voice of the Libertarian party as being a good mix of what would help reign in those two extremes that I mention. I don't have grand illusions of Libertarian philosophy become the majority in thi sor any country,much like I know that wont happen with the social democratic policies which Bernie Sanders has already shown to be a failure as he couldn't even get a majority of the democratic party to vote for him. So at best MAYBE 1/4 of the country somewhat favors it, but I think they more favor the policy of "anyone but Trump or Clinton" much like many republicans support. Using this election to claim majority support for any party of philosophy is built on incredibly shaky logic.

So you want to unspend what we spent on the Iraq war? Did you get the receipt for that? I know I didn't but I'm pretty sure that we are past any refund period. Some of my issues with free tuition are similar to my issues with free healthcare. That being that the pricing structures are so screwed up and the pricing SO overly inflated that simply shifting it from the consumer to the tax payer doesn't fix the underlying problem of why its un-affordable. Shifting the cost to the tax payer just makes the same folks suffer, just over a longer period of time. MAYBE if we could get the pricing situation figured out I would feel better about some sort of government subsidy, but no way no how right now, its unsustainable.

Sorry if you think that my disagreeing with your political philosophy is "trolling" and "insulting" with "personal attacks" and no arguments, but that is just ridiculous.

But your libertarian agenda is a total joke compared to the social democratic agenda which was actually front and center of American politics from the 30s until the 70s with the most popular president in US history, FDR, being a staunch social democrat. So not only is pretty much every developed country in the world today a social democracy, except the US, but there are NONE that are libertarian and NONE that have ever fully implemented these far right extremist economic policies. So who is the dreamer?

[t206]

Originally Posted by PCALMike

But your libertarian agenda is a total joke compared to the social democratic agenda which was actually front and center of American politics from the 30s until the 70s with the most popular president in US history, FDR, being a staunch social democrat. So not only is pretty much every developed country in the world today a social democracy, except the US, but there are NONE that are libertarian and NONE that have ever fully implemented these far right extremist economic policies. So who is the dreamer?

Yeah, you pretty much didn't take into account anything I said. You just couldn't wait to launch into your FDR social democracy talking points. Its not "my Libertarian agenda" as I clearly stated, I value some of its theory, but find it more appealing in the sense that its a way to correct some of the over reaching on the Democratic far left economic policies and the Republican far right social policies. You cant even be bothered to comprehend and address that approach that I laid out yet you claim I'm the one that has nothing to stand behind and cant back up my arguments. I wish it was as easy as just copying and pasting talking points from some socialist website and using them as your argument like you seem to do.

You are no different than Trump and "Make America Great Again" you want to go back to a model that you claim worked from the 30s to the 70s?

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by t206

Yeah, you pretty much didn't take into account anything I said. You just couldn't wait to launch into your FDR social democracy talking points. Its not "my Libertarian agenda" as I clearly stated, I value some of its theory, but find it more appealing in the sense that its a way to correct some of the over reaching on the Democratic far left economic policies and the Republican far right social policies. You cant even be bothered to comprehend and address that approach that I laid out yet you claim I'm the one that has nothing to stand behind and cant back up my arguments. I wish it was as easy as just copying and pasting talking points from some socialist website and using them as your argument like you seem to do.

You are no different than Trump and "Make America Great Again" you want to go back to a model that you claim worked from the 30s to the 70s?

What do you expect, when you claim your political opponenents are "liars" because you claim nothing of it will ever happen (even though all of it is implemented in our closest allies)? Your candidate is apparently not a "liar" even though he espouses the most extreme right wing economic agenda that has never been implemented anywhere in the world. Its just a complete lack of logic.

[t206]

Originally Posted by PCALMike

What do you expect, when you claim your political opponenents are "liars" because you claim nothing of it will ever happen (even though all of it is implemented in our closest allies)? Your candidate is apparently not a "liar" even though he espouses the most extreme right wing economic agenda that has never been implemented anywhere in the world. Its just a complete lack of logic.

You still present no compelling argument as to your claims. Saying that our "closest allies" implement such things is nothing other than a strawman. These allies also rely heavily on us for military spending/protection and don't have the ridiculously high cost of health care and education that we do here. Again, our pricing model is a disaster, and its beyond over simplifying things to say "they did it why cant we?"

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by t206

You still present no compelling argument as to your claims. Saying that our "closest allies" implement such things is nothing other than a strawman. These allies also rely heavily on us for military spending/protection and don't have the ridiculously high cost of health care and education that we do here. Again, our pricing model is a disaster, and its beyond over simplifying things to say "they did it why cant we?"

When not a single country in the history of the world has implemented the far right extremist economic agenda of libertarians, perhaps it is you who are voting for a pipe dream?

US military spending is a big fat strawman. A national health care system is CHEAPER, not MORE expensive than the US system, and that is a main reason why our allies have implemented it. The libertarian agenda is a big fat lie, it would devastate the middle class and eliminate the underclass, and that is why it has supporters among the ultra rich which will not be affected by it except they would have to erect big walls around their compounds.

[t206]

Originally Posted by PCALMike

When not a single country in the history of the world has implemented the far right extremist economic agenda of libertarians, perhaps it is you who are voting for a pipe dream?

US military spending is a big fat strawman. A national health care system is CHEAPER, not MORE expensive than the US system, and that is a main reason why our allies have implemented it. The libertarian agenda is a big fat lie, it would devastate the middle class and eliminate the underclass, and that is why it has supporters among the ultra rich which will not be affected by it except they would have to erect big walls around their compounds.

More attacking against my position rather than explaining what I asked about your position, that seems to sum it up pretty nicely. Just keep repeating..."not a single country has implemented...blah blah blah" I've said to you countless times that is not what I'm looking for. Its like you are having an argument with yourself...or someone else, but certainly not me.


The bottom line is that not enough people wanted your brand of socialism, so thankfully Bernie was swiftly defeated. Now although I don't expect Johnson to get many votes, its kind of ironic that he will definitely get more than Sanders.

[Cheesesteak Cravings]

Originally Posted by t206

More attacking against my position rather than explaining what I asked about your position, that seems to sum it up pretty nicely. Just keep repeating..."not a single country has implemented...blah blah blah" I've said to you countless times that is not what I'm looking for. Its like you are having an argument with yourself...or someone else, but certainly not me.


The bottom line is that not enough people wanted your brand of socialism, so thankfully Bernie was swiftly defeated. Now although I don't expect Johnson to get many votes, its kind of ironic that he will definitely get more than Sanders.

If you think the establishment will let Johnson win you're delusional.

The system is rigged. A libertarian should know that better than anybody.

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by t206

More attacking against my position rather than explaining what I asked about your position, that seems to sum it up pretty nicely. Just keep repeating..."not a single country has implemented...blah blah blah" I've said to you countless times that is not what I'm looking for. Its like you are having an argument with yourself...or someone else, but certainly not me.


The bottom line is that not enough people wanted your brand of socialism, so thankfully Bernie was swiftly defeated. Now although I don't expect Johnson to get many votes, its kind of ironic that he will definitely get more than Sanders.

I think its very unlikely that Johnson will get more than 12 million votes in the general, like Sanders got in the primary.

You clearly dont know what "socialism" is by the way. It means "workers owning the means of production" and that has never been part of the debate in this election.

I think we can sum it up that you define your own candidate Johnson as a "liar" because he is espousing an agenda that will never happen and is deeply unpopular.

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Cravings

If you think the establishment will let Johnson win you're delusional.

The system is rigged. A libertarian should know that better than anybody.

He believes that it is not rigged and that if a candidate gets few votes, that political platform is deeply unpopular. The power of money and the media is non-existent according to this train of thought. This is in line with the libertarian thinking that money has no influence over who has the power in a democracy.

[t206]

Originally Posted by PCALMike

I think its very unlikely that Johnson will get more than 12 million votes in the general, like Sanders got in the primary.

You clearly dont know what "socialism" is by the way. It means "workers owning the means of production" and that has never been part of the debate in this election.

I think we can sum it up that you define your own candidate Johnson as a "liar" because he is espousing an agenda that will never happen and is deeply unpopular.

Again, all you seem to be able to do is make personal attacks telling me I don't know what I'm talking about and then bring my candidate into the conversation to try and attack me.

The primary means nothing at this point, Bernie has already lost. 12 million or 120 million, getting second place in the "semi-finals" doesn't accomplish anything. I'll consider it a victory if Johnson gets 5% popular vote so that they can get public funding gin 2012, and thats an actual accomplishment if it happens.