why is bernie surging?

StoneByStone said:
No they won't because many of them didn't vote for Hillary and that's why she lost. Like I said, the candidate with the more passionate base is always the one that wins. If a candidate's supporters are lukewarm about them, then many of those supporters won't bother showing up to vote. And many Leftists weren't even lukewarm about Hillary, they refused to even consider voting for her. With Biden, it would be the same thing.
Click to expand...

You seem to have forgotten that the millions upon millions more blacks that "coincidentally" happened to vote in 2008 and 2012, despite not having voted ever before although they could have, didn't vote in 2016.
 
StoneByStone said:
Did you earn the road you drive on? Part of living in a society is working together and providing services for the public. That includes services that you, personally, might not use. You still benefit from other people benefiting from those services.




We expect the rich to pay for it because they have money to spare. If one working-class person pays for the healthcare of another working-class person, we'd still have a person without money for healthcare. Taxing the rich more will also improve the economy because it will keep so much wealth from pooling.
Click to expand...

Yes.

What I find interesting about the statement of "part of living in society is working together and providing services for the public" is that you lefties admit there are people getting things yet not funding them while others that do fund them don't receive them. That's not working together. That's one group working without benefiting and another group getting something they didn't earn. What you're saying is that there are really two societies in existence. One that works for a living and one that votes for one.

You expect someone else to pay for it so you can feel good about yourself while having to do nothing toward what you claim you believe. That's the typical left wing mentality of 'I care so much for others I'm willing to let the government force someone I think has too much money pay for it so I can have a false sense of compassion'.

If those like you that claim to care pay for the healthcare of another, what's happening is those that make the claim back it up by doing what they say.

You don't get to determine whether or not someone else should spare what they have. If someone does something that pools wealth to a level you don't like, perhaps you should follow their lead instead of being jealous they did something you could never do.

Things don't get better by taking from those that earned it and giving it to someone that refuses to do so. If that was the case, the $22+ trillion spent on social welfare over the past 50+ years would have done what LBJ said it would do by eradicating poverty. All that money spent doing things the way you say and the percentage in poverty is roughly the same today as it was prior to wasting that money on freeloaders that have shown throughout history they aren't interested in bettering themselves and are only looking for a quick handout. Born beggars don't change no matter how much money you give them.

No matter how much you try to twist it, those of us that fund the services for the worthless freeloaders unwilling to do for themselves, we don't benefit from them getting something they didn't earn.
 
Last edited:
CFM said:
You seem to have forgotten that the millions upon millions more blacks that "coincidentally" happened to vote in 2008 and 2012, despite not having voted ever before although they could have, didn't vote in 2016.
Click to expand...

Yes, because they were passionate about Obama. They didn't care much about the 2016 candidates. This proves my point.
 
StoneByStone said:
Yes, because they were passionate about Obama. They didn't care much about the 2016 candidates. This proves my point.
Click to expand...

Since many could have voted prior to 2008 and the sames ones failed to show in 2016, seems their passion came only from skin color. That would make them racist. Since Democrats have failed blacks, it's also makes them stupid. At least now they have a white MAN improving things for them.

None of the candidates in 2016 was black.

You can't prove something you didn't make.
 
CFM said:
Since many could have voted prior to 2008 and the sames ones failed to show in 2016, seems their passion came only from skin color. That would make them racist. Since Democrats have failed blacks, it's also makes them stupid. At least now they have a white MAN improving things for them.

None of the candidates in 2016 was black.

You can't prove something you didn't make.
Click to expand...

My argument was that the candidate with the more passionate base always wins. You can try to change the subject all you want, but your point about Blacks and Obama only proves my point. Obama had the more passionate base than McCain and Romney, so he beat them both.
 
anatta said:
don;'t think so..I'm familiar with his trip to Russia of course. I think he's just a pacifist -but I could be wrong
Click to expand...

Pacifists don't openly support the USSR. There were legitimate WWII pacifists who weren't planning to vacation in Nazi Germany.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top