Isn't a Coronavirus Stimulus check a form of Socialism?

PoliTalker said:
Hello Tacomaman,



Yes. And I know that as a fellow liberal I am without fault, unable to make mistakes.

If that sounds a bit ridiculous it is because it is ridiculous. Nobody is without fault. Each side of politics actually depends on the other side to point out our faults. Neither side is perfect. The smart ones on each side recognize and benefit from apt criticism.

The trick is to unload all the bitter emotion from these discussions and get down to where they can make a positive contribution in our way of thinking.

It is true that stupidity is rampant on the conservative side. It is also quite well represented on the liberal side. Now is the time to repress short-sided thinking and realize we are all in this together, like it or not. We are suddenly in a world where we simply cannot go it alone. We have to depend on one another. We have got to find a way to work together toward the common goal of beating this bug. Tearing the other side down is not really helpful in that. It is politically opportunistic. With an air of reprehension, no doubt. Yes, I am as guilty of this as anyone else. Not proud of it, but awareness is the first step to improvement.
Click to expand...

I worked in the "swamp for years". Conservative Republicans were the worst hipocrits by far.
 
Hello Tacomaman,

Tacomaman said:
Have you noticed that the trumpanzees have resorted to altering quotes and other stunts to get attention to their posts? Could it be that tRump abysmal handling of CV is taking its toll on them?
Click to expand...

That dishonesty is not restricted to the right. Mature posters on both sides don't do that. Immature ones do.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

Dutch Uncle said:
The US uses an Electoral System. Trump won the majority of electoral votes.
Click to expand...

Right. The loser won. He lost the popular vote. There's just no way around that. And he tried to claim his inauguration was bigger. There's no lying your way out of a loss. That was just pathetic. I don't know of anyone, even on this chat board, who still tries to argue his inauguration was bigger.

Even during the impeachment hearings we heard the conned trying to argue that Democrats were violating 'the will of the voters' by unseating a duly elected president. Yes, he was duly elected, but no, it was not the will of the voters. It was the will of the electoral college, which differed from the will of the voters, as per the Constitution. I believe that is a problem which needs to be fixed.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

Dutch Uncle said:
Agreed. OTOH, RW nutjobs did not invent nor do they have a monopoly on hypocrisy. That's why Pelosi and Feinstein want to disarm Americans but retain their armed body guards.
Click to expand...

Feinstein was among those who sold a bunch of stock after she got the exclusive inside information briefing.
 
Bill said:
good choice...
Click to expand...

Do you also agree Nader was a good choice in 2000?

The Democrats whine constantly about Hillary's "3 million votes", but they are wimps because they are whining about something they can't change. Better, IMO, to either focus upon better candidates or, second, if they really want to change the Constitution, to allow ranking of candidates because there is nooooo fucking way that a majority of states will allow California, Texas and Florida to dictate to the other 47 states who shall lead them.

450px-Electoral_College_2016.svg.png
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Dutch Uncle,



Right. The loser won. He lost the popular vote. There's just no way around that. And he tried to claim his inauguration was bigger. There's no lying your way out of a loss. That was just pathetic. I don't know of anyone, even on this chat board, who still tries to argue his inauguration was bigger.

Even during the impeachment hearings we heard the conned trying to argue that Democrats were violating 'the will of the voters' by unseating a duly elected president. Yes, he was duly elected, but no, it was not the will of the voters. It was the will of the electoral college, which differed from the will of the voters, as per the Constitution. I believe that is a problem which needs to be fixed.
Click to expand...

Do you think that if Clinton had been convicted that Trump would have been too? Both being lying draft-dodging cowards and serial sexual predators, ya know.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Do you also agree Nader was a good choice in 2000?

The Democrats whine constantly about Hillary's "3 million votes", but they are wimps because they are whining about something they can't change. Better, IMO, to either focus upon better candidates or, second, if they really want to change the Constitution, to allow ranking of candidates because there is nooooo fucking way that a majority of states will allow California, Texas and Florida to dictate to the other 47 states who shall lead them.

450px-Electoral_College_2016.svg.png
Click to expand...

In hind sight, hell yea.......... Carrot Top would have been a better choice.............
 
Dutch Uncle said:
The Democrats whine constantly about Hillary's "3 million votes", but they are wimps because they are whining about something they can't change. Better, IMO, to either focus upon better candidates or, second, if they really want to change the Constitution, to allow ranking of candidates because there is nooooo fucking way that a majority of states will allow California, Texas and Florida to dictate to the other 47 states who shall lead them.

450px-Electoral_College_2016.svg.png
Click to expand...

OK, so they whine, if it would have been hillary that won, the other side would, only difference after each election is which side is gonna whine..:dunno:

It will happen I believe, if you, me like it or not.......

The reason this was set up was to appease the small shithole states afraid NY & Penn would be dominant....... Times they be a changin, just look the subservient south..........:thinking:

As more & more states rights are usurped by the ever expanding fed, the idea that this lines are somehow sovereign will fade. My belief anyway..
 
Bill said:
OK, so they whine, if it would have been hillary that won, the other side would, only difference after each election is which side is gonna whine..:dunno:

It will happen I believe, if you, me like it or not.......

The reason this was set up was to appease the small shithole states afraid NY & Penn would be dominant....... Times they be a changin, just look the subservient south..........:thinking:

As more & more states rights are usurped by the ever expanding fed, the idea that this lines are somehow sovereign will fade. My belief anyway..
Click to expand...
Agreed. FWIW, whining is lame and doesn't solve anything unless employed on the equally lame.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Agreed. FWIW, whining is lame and doesn't solve anything unless employed on the equally lame.
Click to expand...

yep, why I don't read 90% of it, & 100% of some posters=waste of time, bitching, moaning & blaming the back and fourth is totally interchangeable...Given time they will argue the exact opposite & somehow be clueless they are doing so in support of their team........ Go figure...
 
Bill said:
yep, why I don't read 90% of it, & 100% of some posters=waste of time, bitching, moaning & blaming the back and fourth is totally interchangeable...Given time they will argue the exact opposite & somehow be clueless they are doing so in support of their team........ Go figure...
Click to expand...

Good plan and agreed, all the whining bitching and moaning is a waste of time.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

Dutch Uncle said:
Do you also agree Nader was a good choice in 2000?

The Democrats whine constantly about Hillary's "3 million votes", but they are wimps because they are whining about something they can't change. Better, IMO, to either focus upon better candidates or, second, if they really want to change the Constitution, to allow ranking of candidates because there is nooooo fucking way that a majority of states will allow California, Texas and Florida to dictate to the other 47 states who shall lead them.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute. You expected to be able to say "a majority of Americans made Trump President,"

Dutch Uncle said:
A majority of Americans made Trump President.
Click to expand...

- and if there are objections/corrections that is "constant whining?"

Unreasonable. I call BS.

This ain't 2016. Democrats have shopped around for candidates and settled on Biden. This is not Hillary, not 2016. It's a new election with new circumstances and a new opponent with different baggage. Biden doesn't have the baggage that Hillary has. DT is trying to put him down but that carries no weight. He does that to everybody, so that's a wash. One thing that is clear in this election is that there are a lot of people ready to vote for any functioning adult over reelection.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

Dutch Uncle said:
Do you think that if Clinton had been convicted that Trump would have been too? Both being lying draft-dodging cowards and serial sexual predators, ya know.
Click to expand...

Clinton and DT were acquitted for very different reasons in very different cases and times. Such analogies as you mention really don't begin to equate the two events.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Dutch Uncle,
Wait a minute. You expected to be able to say "a majority of Americans made Trump President,"

- and if there are objections/corrections that is "constant whining?"

Unreasonable. I call BS....
Click to expand...
Go for it. Put me on ignore. The fact remains, regardless if your star Hillary won by 3 million votes or 30 million votes, she still lost fair and square per our Constitution. Don't like it? Change the Constitution. Oh, you can't do that because there's no fucking way 38 states will ratify eliminating the EC and have a pure popular vote
thus negating the votes of about 40 states? Awwwww, too fucking bad. So, you're just going to whine about it incessantly until a Democrat finally wins the election? Interesting.


PoliTalker said:
Hello Dutch Uncle,
Clinton and DT were acquitted for very different reasons in very different cases and times. Such analogies as you mention really don't begin to equate the two events.
Click to expand...
No shit. Still, both are lying draft-dodging cowards and serial sexual predators. I'd impeach them just for those reasons.


PoliTalker said:
Hello Dutch Uncle,
All of the legislators who sold big based on inside information should have their activities investigated.
Click to expand...
If there is any suspicion of a crime, abuse of office, malfeasance, etc. then most definitely.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

Dutch Uncle said:
Go for it. Put me on ignore. The fact remains, regardless if your star Hillary won by 3 million votes or 30 million votes, she still lost fair and square per our Constitution. Don't like it? Change the Constitution. Oh, you can't do that because there's no fucking way 38 states will ratify eliminating the EC and have a pure popular vote
thus negating the votes of about 40 states? Awwwww, too fucking bad. So, you're just going to whine about it incessantly until a Democrat finally wins the election? Interesting.


No shit. Still, both are lying draft-dodging cowards and serial sexual predators. I'd impeach them just for those reasons.



If there is any suspicion of a crime, abuse of office, malfeasance, etc. then most definitely.
Click to expand...

Why should I put you on Ignore? I only do that for people who disrespect me. Hillary is not my star. I voted against DT, not for her. For most Americans it was a lessor of two evils election. Correcting falsehoods is not whining any more than it is side-taking. It is an effort in the pursuit of truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top