Trump versus Clinton?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Well we're certainly not going to become Stalin's Russia by helping anyone, eh, lol?  That's just not something anyone is ever likely to hear;

"You know the problem with Russia under Stalin, too helpful"

Let's be fair, they were very helpful if you needed to be picked up. I mean, they'd send you a Black Maria and all.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Greece is not one of the countries Bernie Sanders listed when talking about what he plans to do economically. He mentions places like Denmark and Sweden.

He never mentions Venezuala or Cuba either.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/cuban-venezue...-socialism

Socialism works great if the nations natural resources can be shared with the population, for example oil in Norway, but as soon as everyone gets used to the freebies and the price drops, suddenly people start going hungry. There limited building business and innovating and it really hinders the entrepreneurial spirit and competition to keep prices low, because the state subsidizes state business, which keeps products low quality, and forces the people to buy from limited companies. Communism is really just sugar to get people to believe in the idea of utopia that everything will be fair, but it's always meant to be a lie, because the elite always take control and dominate the people. By the time communist ideologically supporters accept the promise, it's too late to reverse. This is why large banks support communism. It's a guaranteed loan that the people will work to pay off. They key is making people content with being poor, which is what all dictators strive for, and why in China they limit the information that can reach the people. The last thing they want is for people to wake up, because they have the numbers.

Still don't understand why so many atheists still believe in Marxism, when it's always proven to be a scam.

Do you campaign against the handouts in Alaska, where each resident got $1900 in 2014? Why are you posting online instead of protesting in the streets?

That's right, because you have the luxury and comfort to tell someone else that they don't need a helping hand. You have the luxury and comfort of not sleeping in the streets, not worrying where you'll get your next meal, not worrying if you're going to be ganked in the middle of the night because some other homeless asshole thinks you have three quarters in your pocket.

Sharing is not "Communism". Sharing is simple decency.

You don't want to partake of that sort of decency? Okay. Then stop driving on the roads -- because my tax dollars help finance those, and I don't want to share them with an asshole who won't return the thought. Stop using the running water in your house -- the piping bringing it there is run by your municipal government. Holy Lenin, Batman, that's Communism!1!!

[Thumpalumpacus]

Trump would win in a free and fair election but we have never had one.

I can't wait to see you crying on 9 November. I'll take a wild stab in the dark and bet you'll be whining about "November Criminals".

The good news is that I've got plenty of time to lay in popcorn for what is sure to be a hilarious meltdown.

[Brian37]

He never mentions Venezuala or Cuba either.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/cuban-venezue...-socialism

Socialism works great if the nations natural resources can be shared with the population, for example oil in Norway, but as soon as everyone gets used to the freebies and the price drops, suddenly people start going hungry. There limited building business and innovating and it really hinders the entrepreneurial spirit and competition to keep prices low, because the state subsidizes state business, which keeps products low quality, and forces the people to buy from limited companies. Communism is really just sugar to get people to believe in the idea of utopia that everything will be fair, but it's always meant to be a lie, because the elite always take control and dominate the people. By the time communist ideologically supporters accept the promise, it's too late to reverse. This is why large banks support communism. It's a guaranteed loan that the people will work to pay off. They key is making people content with being poor, which is what all dictators strive for, and why in China they limit the information that can reach the people. The last thing they want is for people to wake up, because they have the numbers.

Still don't understand why so many atheists still believe in Marxism, when it's always proven to be a scam.

Do you campaign against the handouts in Alaska, where each resident got $1900 in 2014? Why are you posting online instead of protesting in the streets?

That's right, because you have the luxury and comfort to tell someone else that they don't need a helping hand. You have the luxury and comfort of not sleeping in the streets, not worrying where you'll get your next meal, not worrying if you're going to be ganked in the middle of the night because some other homeless asshole thinks you have three quarters in your pocket.

Sharing is not "Communism". Sharing is simple decency.

You don't want to partake of that sort of decency? Okay.  Then stop driving on the roads -- because my tax dollars help finance those, and I don't want to share them with an asshole who won't return the thought. Stop using the running water in your house -- the piping bringing it there is run by your municipal government. Holy Lenin, Batman, that's Communism!1!!

It is disgusting and horrifying how successful the cold war demagoguery has been since Reagan started trickle up economics. The assholes who protect the rich, don't want to see, or ignore, are simply are too greedy to look at the INVESTMENT and high tax on the rich that created our economic boom after WW2.

It is utter bullshit to claim liberals want a Stalin like state. That fear mongering needs to stop. It is simply used by the rich to justify a race to the bottom to mimic China's authoritarian capitalism run on slave wages.

So let me make this clear. Liberals DO NOT want us to become Stalin's Russia or Cuba or North Korea. We simply want more economic stability. Now if things worked the way the right has been selling for the past 40 years, nobody would be complaining. Even the middle class and poor republican/libertarian voters are complaining. So the worst thing you can do to solve a problem is to repeat the same behavior and expect different results.

"Don't tax the rich" does not work. The job creators are the workers because they constitute the majority of the consumers, so the more they demand, the more business has to hire, thus more jobs. Livable wages and cheaper cost of living and cheaper health care and education, are the REAL stimulus we need. Protecting the plutocracy has not worked. IT IS THAT SIMPLE.

[ReptilianPeon]

I think Trump would win. The Clintons went to his wedding he can use events like that against her. But I will also say this: Only about half of the fifty-seven primaries have concluded: Things can still change majorly. It doesn't have to be Clinton VS Trump. Several huge states have yet to vote, e.g. California, New York, Pennsylvania.

[Brian37]

I think Trump would win. The Clintons went to his wedding he can use events like that against her. But I will also say this: Only about half of the fifty-seven primaries have concluded: Things can still change majorly. It doesn't have to be Clinton VS Trump. Several huge states have yet to vote, e.g. California, New York, Pennsylvania.

No it would not. It would council out or get even worse for him. The risk of trying to get swing voters, with that tactic would come at the cost of the establishment GOP voters who hate her. My mom is a long time GOP voter and she would NEVER vote for Hillary, so it would be stupid for Trump to claim they were/are friends.

That would be the stupidest tactic he could pull, the base would run ever further from him.

[KUSA]

My mom is a long time GOP voter and she would NEVER vote for Hillary

I can only imagine the hell you give her about this.

[ReptilianPeon]

I think Trump would win. The Clintons went to his wedding he can use events like that against her. But I will also say this: Only about half of the fifty-seven primaries have concluded: Things can still change majorly. It doesn't have to be Clinton VS Trump. Several huge states have yet to vote, e.g. California, New York, Pennsylvania.

No it would not. It would council out or get even worse for him. The risk of trying to get swing voters, with that tactic would come at the cost of the establishment GOP voters who hate her. My mom is a long time GOP voter and she would NEVER vote for Hillary, so it would be stupid for Trump to claim they were/are friends.

That would be the stupidest tactic he could pull, the base would run ever further from him.

I mainly was referring to the Democratic side. The states favour Senator Sanders from now. And we still don't have the Democrats Abroad results either. Democrats Abroad had their debate, via video, which Clinton was apparently too busy to go to because she was at a private fund raiser. She had two campaign representatives debate Sanders for her if I remember rightly. She is so smug and arrogant.

[Brian37]

My mom is a long time GOP voter and she would NEVER vote for Hillary

I can only imagine the hell you give her about this.

Oh we do talk about it and have raised our voices over it, but unlike the nuts I run into on the net, she doesn't see me, nor do I see her as "fight to the death" enemies. 

I don't blame her for her long term voting habits, I do blame the GOP and Farts News for scaring the crap out of her.

When we discuss social issues and economics, we agree. The only thing that causes our division is party label. She really is a democrat.

Me, "Mom, do you value pro choice?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, "Do you think workers don't make enough?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, " Do you think we don't do enough about gun death?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, "Do you think women deserve equal pay?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, "Do you think your rent is too high?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, "Then why do you vote for that party?"

Mom, "I don't want to talk about it".

That is literally how our conversations go. Now when I say she votes republican, she is more a centrist swing voter and to her credit LIKES Bernie. But she does not like Trump or Hillary. I don't know how she will vote if they go up against each other. But it pisses me off to no end to know mentally she agrees with me on everything, but is voting against her own self interests.

But, that is how fear in politics work. The powerful point down to the rest of society and say "You better watch out for the other guy" while they protect their own profits.

[scoobysnack]

I can only imagine the hell you give her about this.

Oh we do talk about it and have raised our voices over it, but unlike the nuts I run into on the net, she doesn't see me, nor do I see her as "fight to the death" enemies. 

I don't blame her for her long term voting habits, I do blame the GOP and Farts News for scaring the crap out of her.

When we discuss social issues and economics, we agree. The only thing that causes our division is party label. She really is a democrat.

Me, "Mom, do you value pro choice?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, "Do you think workers don't make enough?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, " Do you think we don't do enough about gun death?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, "Do you think women deserve equal pay?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, "Do you think your rent is too high?"

Mom, "Yes"

Me, "Then why do you vote for that party?"

Mom, "I don't want to talk about it".

That is literally how our conversations go. Now when I say she votes republican, she is more a centrist swing voter and to her credit LIKES Bernie. But she does not like Trump or Hillary. I don't know how she will vote if they go up against each other. But it pisses me off to no end to know mentally she agrees with me on everything, but is voting against her own self interests.

But, that is how fear in politics work. The powerful point down to the rest of society and say "You better watch out for the other guy" while they protect their own profits.

So what does she not like about the democratic party?