Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
you kidding right- LBGT rights- medical for all- give dreamers a chance, equal pay for women- MORE than those running who hate all that is not-----
You're a riot. Equal pay for women???LMAO, he pays them less just like all other Dems. **** the dreamers, they can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. Our kids which are CITIZENS are MUCH more important than those losers.
the problem is that we keep trying the hillary clinton types, have been since 1988. oh they use a different party affiliation, and they say different things, but in the end they are all the same essentially. be it either clinton, either bush, obama, mccain, romney, biden, even sanders. they are pretty much all interchangeable.
now here comes trump, fiorina, and carson. and what do they have in common? they are not politicians. and while they are near the top of the food chain, as it were, they are different from the status quo.
we have had politicians running this country since the early 1800s, and what has it gotten us? right now a huge mess. perhaps we need a businessman to come in and clean up this mess, or at least get us started down the path to cleaning up this mess.
That's some interesting analysis where Mitt Romney is "interchangeable with Bernie Sanders" but Trump is different from the status quo.
Like a lot of people outside that strange intellectual playpen and country club called Political Correctness, I'm "playing defense" at this point.
My personal values are grounded in a philosophy that everyone has a right to subscribe to his/her own beliefs, and to express them, so long as they do not infringe upon the identical rights granted to everyone else. That standard was the central tenet of what came to be called the Enlightenment -- until a supposedly more-enlightened few decided that they had all the answers, and determined to impose them on everyone else.
As an extension to that value system, I believe (in theory) that no one has the right to live at anyone else's expense, particularly when a supposedly-benevolent public sector (which never seems to stop growing) forces everyone else to pay the bill via confiscatory taxation.
But I acknowledge that we live in a complex post-industrial society, and bad things do still happen to responsible people, so I don't have a problem with a minimal "safety net", so long as it is locally-administered so as to exclude those who try to make their own irresponsibility into a career (And if any of you folks over in LeftyLand believe that such people are rare, I have some prime "bottom land" in Louisiana that might interest you.
I take a small amount of satisfaction from the phenomenon of Trump's emergence; I know that most of his ideas won't work in the real world, and I know why, but it's apparent that his stance serves to rattle the Leftist dreamers and ideologues, and demonstrates that a lot of us are wise to both their hypocrisy and their abuse of the raw power that is their only goal.
^^^ wow, very well said. Although you and me get it people on the left might have a problem understanding what you wrote.
Donald Trump's background has been pretty well examined, and what you see is pretty much what you get, so he isn't an unknown commodity at this point and we probably have seen most of his worst attributes already.
Similar things cannot be said about Hillary Clinton
Trump's business experience involves negotiations with business leaders and even governments around the world, and he likely has connections behind the scenes that surpass those of simply purely political candidates -- this gives him keen, realistic insights into economics in different parts of the world
Unlike OTHER Republican Hawks, Fiorina the angry faced troll said "Russia is a bad actor, we shouldn't be talking to Putin." Really? Nah, Hawks belong to the past and should stay there.
Trump has a confidence and powerful personality that, like it or not, tend to work well in politics.
Similar quality cannot be found in Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton.
Trump definitely supports free enterprise and favors less regulation of the market.
I heard Bernie Sanders say he wouldn't be against a 90% tax on the rich.. THEN WHAT IS THE MOTIVATION?!?!
What is the point of hard work, dedication, taking a risk, if you're going to be taxed 90% when you get to that level.
Now that is scary!
I'll bet the crowd cheered too LOL. He'd get very little to nothing. And is he talking Federal. So federal gets 90%, then states and local government will want their take.
The rich would close down businesses, they'd go on vacation. I wouldn't work either.
I heard Bernie Sanders say he wouldn't be against a 90% tax on the rich.. THEN WHAT IS THE MOTIVATION?!?!
What is the point of hard work, dedication, taking a risk, if you're going to be taxed 90% when you get to that level.
Now that is scary!
We have a progressive tax system, and this is what bernie was referring to. Returning the top tax level to the 90% range.
Before you start yelling about "what's the point, no one will work" we had a top tax rate of higher than 90% during the post WW2 boom- possibly the greatest period of american productivity in history.
Granted, loopholes and exemptions were a lot different, but it's not some crazy communist idea that has never been implemented.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd trick op
Like a lot of people outside that strange intellectual playpen and country club called Political Correctness, I'm "playing defense" at this point.
My personal values are grounded in a philosophy that everyone has a right to subscribe to his/her own beliefs, and to express them, so long as they do not infringe upon the identical rights granted to everyone else. That standard was the central tenet of what came to be called the Enlightenment -- until a supposedly more-enlightened few decided that they had all the answers, and determined to impose them on everyone else.
As an extension to that value system, I believe (in theory) that no one has the right to live at anyone else's expense, particularly when a supposedly-benevolent public sector (which never seems to stop growing) forces everyone else to pay the bill via confiscatory taxation.
But I acknowledge that we live in a complex post-industrial society, and bad things do still happen to responsible people, so I don't have a problem with a minimal "safety net", so long as it is locally-administered so as to exclude those who try to make their own irresponsibility into a career (And if any of you folks over in LeftyLand believe that such people are rare, I have some prime "bottom land" in Louisiana that might interest you.
I take a small amount of satisfaction from the phenomenon of Trump's emergence; I know that most of his ideas won't work in the real world, and I know why, but it's apparent that his stance serves to rattle the Leftist dreamers and ideologues, and demonstrates that a lot of us are wise to both their hypocrisy and their abuse of the raw power that is their only goal.
I agree with some and disagree with some of what you wrote, but I'm going to comment on the bolded.
It's not the "left" that's panicked and losing their **** over Trump's candidacy. It's the republican establishment that was throwing their money behind a Bush presidency, is seeing it absolutely implode and has no idea how to respond.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
