Why do people say Donald Trump is not a ''serious'' candidate?

[Adama]

Anyone who knows how to build a wall across Mexico US border, can deal with ISIS and Russia, and who can get US economy back on track

 

Lmao, yes because the guy who thinks he is going to get the rapist Mexicans to build OUR southern wall is really the kind of person who understands the intricacies of the modern economy. And I wonder if he could even find where ISIS is on a map.

[Braunsberg]

I am honestly not a fan of Hilary Clinton. We need a Democrat that isnt completely Left-Wing Agenda oriented.

If that's your opinion, you probably need to do more reading on Hillary Clinton. Of the major politicians she is one of the most moderate; to make an analogy, you could say she is to the Democrats what John McCain is to the Republicans. Her social policies are liberal - LGBT rights, gender equality, immigration, birth control, the like - but her economic policies are almost entirely center.

 

The one you wouldn't like is Bernie Sanders, whose agenda is basically equivalent to the governments of Sweden and Norway. His agenda is unusual because politicians usually do not step that far ahead of American politics - in the US, his views are seen as radical, while elsewhere they would be equivalent to an ordinary progressive - but there are plenty of people who appreciate his values thanks to the very solid success of left-wing policies in Scandinavia.

[WISD0MTREE]

Lmao, yes because the guy who thinks he is going to get the rapist Mexicans to build OUR southern wall is really the kind of person who understands the intricacies of the modern economy. And I wonder if he could even find where ISIS is on a map.

To be fair, Hillary couldn't even name one Nimitz class carrier. 

[Braunsberg]

To be fair, Hillary couldn't even name one Nimitz class carrier. 

When last I checked, naming military ships was not an accurate measure of one's political ability.

 

And besides, our good friend Sarah Palin said that Paul Revere rode through an American town to warn the British that the colonials were coming. And yet the Republicans take her very seriously.

[Nord lord]

Well, here's a list of reasons why:

 

He's a billionaire, and doesn't even need donors for his campaign.

He said that Mexican immigrants are drug dealers, rapists, and murderers.

He hasn't really discussed anything other than immigration.

He has called numerous news reporters losers for not supporting him.

He thinks it's poor people's fault if they live in poverty. 

And more, but I think I've made my points. 

I am just going to use this old post to enter my opinion into this conversation.

 

1. He's a billionaire, and doesn't even need donors for his campaign.

So what? People with money aren't allowed to run for president?

2. He said that Mexican immigrants are drug dealers, rapists, and murderers.

I will not set steryotypes, but nobody can deny that there is a decent portion of Mexican immigrants that are that, and an even larger amount that are here illegally. It is illegal, and it is good that he recognizes that rather than trying to be politically correct like the Democrats.

3. He hasn't really discussed anything other than immigration.

Likely because immigration is a big issue. I think he should discuss more, but it is not bad that he discusses that primarily. I understand this isn't a big thing anymore, but there used to be something called a platform; the main issue you use to propell yourself and your campaign. Nowadays as long as a person is black, gay, or a women and promises to keep the lazy people on the taxpayers' money for income (welfare) they'll win. Obviously Trump's platform is immigration. That's okay.

4. He has called numerous news reporters losers for not supporting him.

I don't have an arguement for this. Read below all of this for why.

5. He thinks it's poor people's fault if they live in poverty. 

For most of them, it is. They get addicted to drugs or cigarettes, or they spend all their money on a useless degree in college, it is in the majority of cases their fault. Some of them have disabilities and things such as that, and that doesn't mean it's their fault. Some might say: Well, my gardener came from Mexico and works extremely hard and is a nice guy and isn't addicted to anything, but doesn't get much money and is thus poor. Is that fair? My response is: Honestly, yes. In Capitalism, it is all about the demand. There isn't much demand or need for more lawn-people, because not only are there already plenty of them, but people can do it themselves.

 

I am a Steadfast Conservative. I have spent a very long time studying various social and economical systems and have found that Republicanism and Capitalism is where I stand. Not only that, but I believe in tradition. I believe that there should be no such thing as a politician. There should be representatives, following the ideals of Populism. America was founded on that. America was not founded on allowing lying, no good, stuck up morons to make millions off of "representing" the people. With that, I show support to people such as Trump and Dr. Benjamin Carson for stepping up as the head of the true people running for office. I also applaud Trump and Carson both for not focusing on political correctness. They don't suck up to the people, they say what they believe. Yet, I don't agree with everything Trump has to say, and don't think of him as a top candidate by any means. I am trying to keep my personal politics out of this, however I am making you aware of my views so you are aware. First off, here were my top candidates in 2012, not necessarily in this order:

 

Jon Huntsman

Mitt Romney

Ron Paul

Gary Johnson

 

And now, for 2016, once again, not necessarily in this order:

 

Dr. Ben Carson

Rand Paul

Ted Cruz

Scott Walker

 

And my big no-nos for 2016:

 

Bernie Sanders

Hillary Clinton

Jill Stein

 

Note that Mr. Trump is not on any of these lists. His lack of political correctness and his, basically, lack of any respect towards the unrespectable makes him considered NOT a serious candidate.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Nord Lord

[Saruman]

Bernie Sanders says what he believes. He supported gay rights in the 70s when hardly anybody else did. He is way ahead of our times, with socialism. It's a risk, most Americans are too traditional to accept, but he still did it. He doesn't kiss up to the press or the people

[Eric]

Huh? Elections?

 

Only thing I've heard about elections so far is that ad on the radio with the heart monitor beeping steadily and then the person dying and then it goes "The Harper Conservatives. They won't be there for you.".

 

Is that what we're talking about?

[Braunsberg]

I am just going to use this old post to enter my opinion into this conversation.

 

1. He's a billionaire, and doesn't even need donors for his campaign.

So what? People with money aren't allowed to run for president?

2. He said that Mexican immigrants are drug dealers, rapists, and murderers.

I will not set steryotypes, but nobody can deny that there is a decent portion of Mexican immigrants that are that, and an even larger amount that are here illegally. It is illegal, and it is good that he recognizes that rather than trying to be politically correct like the Democrats.

3. He hasn't really discussed anything other than immigration.

Likely because immigration is a big issue. I think he should discuss more, but it is not bad that he discusses that primarily. I understand this isn't a big thing anymore, but there used to be something called a platform; the main issue you use to propell yourself and your campaign. Nowadays as long as a person is black, gay, or a women and promises to keep the lazy people on the taxpayers' money for income (welfare) they'll win. Obviously Trump's platform is immigration. That's okay.

4. He has called numerous news reporters losers for not supporting him.

I don't have an arguement for this. Read below all of this for why.

5. He thinks it's poor people's fault if they live in poverty. 

For most of them, it is. They get addicted to drugs or cigarettes, or they spend all their money on a useless degree in college, it is in the majority of cases their fault. Some of them have disabilities and things such as that, and that doesn't mean it's their fault. Some might say: Well, my gardener came from Mexico and works extremely hard and is a nice guy and isn't addicted to anything, but doesn't get much money and is thus poor. Is that fair? My response is: Honestly, yes. In Capitalism, it is all about the demand. There isn't much demand or need for more lawn-people, because not only are there already plenty of them, but people can do it themselves.

 

I am a Steadfast Conservative. I have spent a very long time studying various social and economical systems and have found that Republicanism and Capitalism is where I stand. Not only that, but I believe in tradition. I believe that there should be no such thing as a politician. There should be representatives, following the ideals of Populism. America was founded on that. America was not founded on allowing lying, no good, stuck up morons to make millions off of "representing" the people. With that, I show support to people such as Trump and Dr. Benjamin Carson for stepping up as the head of the true people running for office. I also applaud Trump and Carson both for not focusing on political correctness. They don't suck up to the people, they say what they believe. Yet, I don't agree with everything Trump has to say, and don't think of him as a top candidate by any means. I am trying to keep my personal politics out of this, however I am making you aware of my views so you are aware. First off, here were my top candidates in 2012, not necessarily in this order:

 

Jon Huntsman

Mitt Romney

Ron Paul

Gary Johnson

 

And now, for 2016, once again, not necessarily in this order:

 

Dr. Ben Carson

Rand Paul

Ted Cruz

Scott Walker

 

And my big no-nos for 2016:

 

Bernie Sanders

Hillary Clinton

Jill Stein

 

Note that Mr. Trump is not on any of these lists. His lack of political correctness and his, basically, lack of any respect towards the unrespectable makes him considered NOT a serious candidate.

1) Billionaires, especially ones who have come to their wealth through rich families, do not always have the most open economic policies. But ignoring that, as it isn't much of a point, Donald Trump has had an abysmal record when it comes to running companies and handling money. The vast majority of his wealthy is inherited money. Someone with such irresponsible economic skills would not be a wise choice for the person who sits at the cockpit of the US economy, especially in the state it's in now.

 

2) Nobody is rejecting that such rapists, murderers, criminals, etc. exist in the pool of illegal immigrants that enter the country. The argument here is over how common they are; Trump's claims insinuate that many, if not the majority, of illegal immigrants are criminal people. In contrast, such criminals make up a small minority of the many Hispanic families that enter the US, both legally and illegally. Most of them are poor rural farmers who have no means of earning a living and do not live in areas suitable for cultivation. In addition, the Democrats aren't saying that illegal immigrants aren't illegal - their policies are aimed at helping these illegals become legitimate citizens. The majority of these immigrants occupy an important part of the workforce and do no harm to the communities in which they settle.

 

3) Immigration is a big issue, but part of the reason many Republicans aren't fully behind Trump is because they don't yet know what the rest of his platform is. It is important that he makes clear what his other opinions and values are in order for him to gain a more reasonable backing from the Republican electorate.

 

4) You didn't write anything about Hugo's statement that Trump insulted reporters that didn't back him, but to add onto it, he is attempting to use his resources to attack NBC and other companies that have taken action against him. I, and many, many other people, find that very disgraceful.

 

5) I would suggest you go around and actually meet communities of poor people, because generalizing them all as smokers, drugees and alcoholics and far from accurate (and especially that line about wasting their money on a useless degree in college - I don't think that really has anything to do with the poor population, and even if it did the education is a better investment than many other things). Most poor people have few ways of escaping their condition, because they can only qualify for minimum-wage jobs, which scarcely provide enough money to pay for housing and necessities and certainly not enough to invest in any sort of education to receive a better job. Given that most poor people reside either in inner city areas or remote rural communities, many of them also have no reasonable access to better jobs anyhow. That's why welfare is very important - it is used to help sustain a poor person or family so that other sources of income can be used to buy/invest in things that can give them access to education and higher-paying jobs.

 

As for the statement that capitalism is all about demand, that - or at the very least, the way you have applied it in your example - is not very accurate. To put it in perspective, there is a very low demand for historians in the United States, but there is a high demand for fast-food workers. By your logic, the fast-food workers would be paid much more because they are in higher demand; in contrast, fast-food workers are paid very little, while historians make professional wages. The factor behind wage gaps like that is not demand, but qualification; jobs that require no experience and thus have a greater supply of workers don't have to pay much, because there's usually someone desperate enough to accept the low wages. Jobs that require education, training or experience pay more, because there are far fewer people qualified for those jobs and thus wages have to be high enough to satisfy the available workers for that job.

 

To finish in a similar way that you did, I support Bernie Sanders. His policies are directed towards providing political power to the middle and lower classes, which make up the vast majority of the population, by removing the vast influence that money has on American policies. I believe that is very beneficial because it gives greater ability for people who understand working-class life and hardships to shape laws, and in a much more general sense, I believe it is the duty of the government to be compassionate to its people rather than catering to the interests of the powerful. Bernie Sanders' political values accomplish that in a number of ways - encouraging smaller businesses and more competition through socialist economics, directly assisting illegal immigrants by helping them to become US citizens, targeting the political power of Wall Street and super pacs, etc - and, for reasons that have already been mentioned in this thread, I think he is without question about everything you could possibly ask of a politician.

 

...My respect to your opinion, of course.

[Adama]

 

2. He said that Mexican immigrants are drug dealers, rapists, and murderers.

I will not set steryotypes, but nobody can deny that there is a decent portion of Mexican immigrants that are that, and an even larger amount that are here illegally. It is illegal, and it is good that he recognizes that rather than trying to be politically correct like the Democrats.

 

When Trump brought up the idea that most Mexican immigrants are rapists, the supposed support he was using to justify the claim was an article that stated the exact opposite of his claim. What it actually said was that women coming to the United States were the ones being raped, not the other way around. I just want to point this out because as much as you may like Trump, the dude is a total nitwit and doesn't seem to have a very good grip on whats actually going on in the world. He's not a smart person, he's just a guy that was handed 40 to 200 million dollars as inheritance and has filed for corporate bankruptcy four times since taking over his dad's fortune.

 

Trump is loud, but his words don't actually mean anything as almost none of what he says has any relevance to whats actually going on in reality. I'm not saying he's completely stupid because I doubt he is, but he is not an intelligent person when it comes to the issues he would need to deal with as president. You should never expect him to give a real plan to solve the problems we face, because he doesn't know what he's talking about. And that's why he isn't a serious candidate, because he doesn't actually know anything. He's just the loudest crayon in the room. An orange... crayon.

 

And maybe its not so much about being "politically correct" and instead trying to see human beings as... people? I'm not going to assume you are a Christian, though your rhetoric makes me think you probably are, and if you are you should probably re-think your position a little. 

 

http://www.openbible.info/topics/immigration

 

 

5. He thinks it's poor people's fault if they live in poverty. 

For most of them, it is. They get addicted to drugs or cigarettes, or they spend all their money on a useless degree in college, it is in the majority of cases their fault. Some of them have disabilities and things such as that, and that doesn't mean it's their fault. Some might say: Well, my gardener came from Mexico and works extremely hard and is a nice guy and isn't addicted to anything, but doesn't get much money and is thus poor. Is that fair? My response is: Honestly, yes. In Capitalism, it is all about the demand. There isn't much demand or need for more lawn-people, because not only are there already plenty of them, but people can do it themselves.

 

Everyone in life gets dealt a different hand, however the intended goal of America is to make it so that the hand you are dealt is blank so you can draw your own cards. Only problem is, its becoming increasingly impossible for people to do this as income inequality increases. People can't build proper lives when their wages stagnate, debt compiles and good jobs dry up. You can tell someone to go get a better job but the problem is our jobs are getting outsourced thanks to your Republican friends and their corporate allies in the Democratic party, you can blame people for getting bad degrees but how about we place some of the blame on for-profit-colleges that make it institutional to lie about the job outcomes for their degree holders. 

 

You think your ideas are American, but they aren't, America isn't just about luck or someones "worth" as an asset to someone else. America is about finding a way for us all to succeed through hard work, and not just the rent seekers at the top.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Adama

[Speaker Faris Wheeler]

Illegal Immigrants*

[Big Brother]

Illegal Immigrants*

 

You are the worst parts of your country.

[Warren Harding]

For me, especially since I agree with almost all his views, Bernie Sanders is everything you could ask for out of a politician. He's basically maintained the same views and policies for like 35 years, which is almost unheard of for any politician (most of whom show up with a different set of values every time elections roll around); he even supported gays' rights in like the mid-80s, when you were basically labeled a quack for being pro-LGBT. I also like that Bernie Sanders is unafraid of making some claims that are very far ahead of American politics; even most other Democrats would be reluctant to openly say things like "America should be more like Scandinavia" and openly support ideals like socialism, which currently have little to no influence on American economics and politics. I too am a socialist, by the way (do not confuse socialism with communism, they are extremely different). The only thing I have found thus far that I disagree with Sanders about is the policy on drugs/marijuana; my opinion is that recreational marijuana should not be legal and that medical marijuana should simply be chemically processed to extract pharmaceutical compounds, rather than just letting people smoke it. But I'm an odd-ball Democrat when it comes to that.

 

As for the 90% tax rate, you misunderstood what that article is saying. He's not saying he would tax all the rich people at 90%; he's saying he would set the MAXIMUM tax rate to 90%. Since income tax is graduated, that means only the tip-top richest people would have that high a tax, not just rich people in general. As the article mentions, President Eisenhower had the maximum tax rate at 92%, even higher, and during that time the US economy was booming, not withering away as you suggest.

 

Regarding slavery, I don't see anything wrong with making a formal apology. The Pope recently apologized for the atrocities committed against Native Americans in the name of Christianity, and that was even longer ago. Such an apology is just another way of recognizing that we as a people and nation have moved beyond inhumane practices like slavery.

I don't agree with Bernie Saunders on the issues. But, I do see him as the only honest candidate. He won't lie about his position on the issues to gain votes.

 

But back in Eisenhower's times, no one paid the maximum tax rate or anywhere near it. There were a lot more write-offs and deductions available back then. Many of those were eliminated as the tax rate fell.

[Nord lord]

1) Billionaires, especially ones who have come to their wealth through rich families, do not always have the most open economic policies. But ignoring that, as it isn't much of a point, Donald Trump has had an abysmal record when it comes to running companies and handling money. The vast majority of his wealthy is inherited money. Someone with such irresponsible economic skills would not be a wise choice for the person who sits at the cockpit of the US economy, especially in the state it's in now.

 

2) Nobody is rejecting that such rapists, murderers, criminals, etc. exist in the pool of illegal immigrants that enter the country. The argument here is over how common they are; Trump's claims insinuate that many, if not the majority, of illegal immigrants are criminal people. In contrast, such criminals make up a small minority of the many Hispanic families that enter the US, both legally and illegally. Most of them are poor rural farmers who have no means of earning a living and do not live in areas suitable for cultivation. In addition, the Democrats aren't saying that illegal immigrants aren't illegal - their policies are aimed at helping these illegals become legitimate citizens. The majority of these immigrants occupy an important part of the workforce and do no harm to the communities in which they settle.

 

3) Immigration is a big issue, but part of the reason many Republicans aren't fully behind Trump is because they don't yet know what the rest of his platform is. It is important that he makes clear what his other opinions and values are in order for him to gain a more reasonable backing from the Republican electorate.

 

4) You didn't write anything about Hugo's statement that Trump insulted reporters that didn't back him, but to add onto it, he is attempting to use his resources to attack NBC and other companies that have taken action against him. I, and many, many other people, find that very disgraceful.

 

5) I would suggest you go around and actually meet communities of poor people, because generalizing them all as smokers, drugees and alcoholics and far from accurate (and especially that line about wasting their money on a useless degree in college - I don't think that really has anything to do with the poor population, and even if it did the education is a better investment than many other things). Most poor people have few ways of escaping their condition, because they can only qualify for minimum-wage jobs, which scarcely provide enough money to pay for housing and necessities and certainly not enough to invest in any sort of education to receive a better job. Given that most poor people reside either in inner city areas or remote rural communities, many of them also have no reasonable access to better jobs anyhow. That's why welfare is very important - it is used to help sustain a poor person or family so that other sources of income can be used to buy/invest in things that can give them access to education and higher-paying jobs.

 

As for the statement that capitalism is all about demand, that - or at the very least, the way you have applied it in your example - is not very accurate. To put it in perspective, there is a very low demand for historians in the United States, but there is a high demand for fast-food workers. By your logic, the fast-food workers would be paid much more because they are in higher demand; in contrast, fast-food workers are paid very little, while historians make professional wages. The factor behind wage gaps like that is not demand, but qualification; jobs that require no experience and thus have a greater supply of workers don't have to pay much, because there's usually someone desperate enough to accept the low wages. Jobs that require education, training or experience pay more, because there are far fewer people qualified for those jobs and thus wages have to be high enough to satisfy the available workers for that job.

 

To finish in a similar way that you did, I support Bernie Sanders. His policies are directed towards providing political power to the middle and lower classes, which make up the vast majority of the population, by removing the vast influence that money has on American policies. I believe that is very beneficial because it gives greater ability for people who understand working-class life and hardships to shape laws, and in a much more general sense, I believe it is the duty of the government to be compassionate to its people rather than catering to the interests of the powerful. Bernie Sanders' political values accomplish that in a number of ways - encouraging smaller businesses and more competition through socialist economics, directly assisting illegal immigrants by helping them to become US citizens, targeting the political power of Wall Street and super pacs, etc - and, for reasons that have already been mentioned in this thread, I think he is without question about everything you could possibly ask of a politician.

 

...My respect to your opinion, of course.

I like your responses, and they are the many reasons why I do not support Donald Trump. As for the part on poor people, I apologize for not clarifying, but I was mostly referring to the homeless and people in those sorts of conditions. Of course, there is more to it than demand, especially when it comes to fast-food workers, because not only are fast food restaurants themselves very common, but the work is from my opinion not as difficult as a historians job. Using that as an example was a bad move on your part because historians have to spend a whole ton of money in college, especially since the majority of them are college professors, who need a Ph.d, and therefore need the money to pay off the college debt they likely have. No job requirements are really needed to work in a fast food restaurant, they screw up orders all of the time, and them they ask for extraordinarily high wages.

 

Honestly, I have a hard time understanding people who support Bernie Sanders. As someone from Vermont and the Vermont area, and who still has family there, Bernie Sanders wins elections there because the rural people of the state are uneducated and really don't get a ton of human contact. The only "city" in the state is Montpelier. Therefore, it is really easy to convince the people to vote for him. I know this as I, once again, have family in Vermont, my father used to live in Vermont, and I lived near Vermont. America is a defined Capitalist state run by a presidential republic. We were founded to have a small government, one that doesn't intervene with common life, one that allows anyone to do anything so long as it didn't infringe with someone else's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Do any drug on the face of the planet: you're only killing yourself. Be a major alcoholic. Are you hurting anyone else? I know plenty of people that were driven to quit these things because they were poor, they had a family, and they were ruining their life, and they just said no. If you are driven, you'll quit. The point is, Socialism is based on the idea of the government regulating the economy "for the rights of the people." Bernie Sanders won't win as long as we have America to stop him.

 

I had my short little Socialist moment, and I had my short little Marxism moment, but I found that America is where I lie. I do respect your opinion, nonetheless.

 

Now, I apologize for going a little bit off topic. Let's maybe head back that direction?

[Phaik]

I like your responses, and they are the many reasons why I do not support Donald Trump. As for the part on poor people, I apologize for not clarifying, but I was mostly referring to the homeless and people in those sorts of conditions. Of course, there is more to it than demand, especially when it comes to fast-food workers, because not only are fast food restaurants themselves very common, but the work is from my opinion not as difficult as a historians job. Using that as an example was a bad move on your part because historians have to spend a whole ton of money in college, especially since the majority of them are college professors, who need a Ph.d, and therefore need the money to pay off the college debt they likely have. No job requirements are really needed to work in a fast food restaurant, they screw up orders all of the time, and them they ask for extraordinarily high wages.

 

Honestly, I have a hard time understanding people who support Bernie Sanders. As someone from Vermont and the Vermont area, and who still has family there, Bernie Sanders wins elections there because the rural people of the state are uneducated and really don't get a ton of human contact. The only "city" in the state is Montpelier. Therefore, it is really easy to convince the people to vote for him. I know this as I, once again, have family in Vermont, my father used to live in Vermont, and I lived near Vermont. America is a defined Capitalist state run by a presidential republic. We were founded to have a small government, one that doesn't intervene with common life, one that allows anyone to do anything so long as it didn't infringe with someone else's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Do any drug on the face of the planet: you're only killing yourself. Be a major alcoholic. Are you hurting anyone else? I know plenty of people that were driven to quit these things because they were poor, they had a family, and they were ruining their life, and they just said no. If you are driven, you'll quit. The point is, Socialism is based on the idea of the government regulating the economy "for the rights of the people." Bernie Sanders won't win as long as we have America to stop him.

 

I had my short little Socialist moment, and I had my short little Marxism moment, but I found that America is where I lie. I do respect your opinion, nonetheless.

 

Now, I apologize for going a little bit off topic. Let's maybe head back that direction?

Okay, but it's usually the uneducated, rural people who form the base of, and vote for, the Republican party. So the fact he has them voting for him should be a testament to what he says and does for his constituents.

 

Also, when America was founded, it had 13 states and had between 2 and 3 million residents. The system designed to govern those people may not be sufficient to govern the 300+ million we have today.

 

And finally, change for the sake of change may not be a good thing. But that doesn't mean we should resist all change when change is needed.

[Adama]

 

 

Honestly, I have a hard time understanding people who support Bernie Sanders. As someone from Vermont and the Vermont area, and who still has family there, Bernie Sanders wins elections there because the rural people of the state are uneducated and really don't get a ton of human contact. The only "city" in the state is Montpelier. Therefore, it is really easy to convince the people to vote for him.

 

This statement is not only ridiculous, its completely factually incorrect. Vermont ranks as one of the most intelligent state in the Union, consistently ranking in the top 10 depending on what criteria you use. With very high highschool graduation rates, high rates of college degrees among its citizens and it scores good in math and reading. New Hampshire, also scores typically high which as it stands now has the highest support for Bernie in the early primary states. I don't know what America you think you are living in, but I don't think its the right one. If you want to talk about the voting records of rural people, try looking at the absolute lunatics and liars that the rural south elects, like Tom Cotton who is from my state.

 

 

Also, you poor baby, someone messed up your hamburger so it must mean they shouldn't live a dignified life or be able to feed their kids without government assistance. Do you need a hug?

[George W. Bush]

Tfw no one here is gonna vote for Vermin Supreme

[WISD0MTREE]

When last I checked, naming military ships was not an accurate measure of one's political ability.

Last I checked, the POTUS is in charge of the military. And we have Russia being Russia with Ukraine, ISIS beheading/burning/exploding people, and China claiming everything they can see in the sea. 

[Speaker Faris Wheeler]

 

15$ minimum wage? Bye bye middle class.

Free Univercity? Bye bye common sense and competition.

1 trillion in infra? Fix our !@#$ing debt first

Breaking Wall Street banks? Bye bye Economy

 

Donald trump:

He is a winner, doesn't beat around the bush and doesn't care what people say about him

He has the ability to fix the economy,

He will lower the national debt

He has had more public success than anyone running so far

He thinks big and has the ability to make big

Edited July 15, 2015 by Siebold Frashiere

[Braunsberg]

I don't agree with Bernie Saunders on the issues. But, I do see him as the only honest candidate. He won't lie about his position on the issues to gain votes.

 

But back in Eisenhower's times, no one paid the maximum tax rate or anywhere near it. There were a lot more write-offs and deductions available back then. Many of those were eliminated as the tax rate fell.

Yes, you are correct that virtually no one paid that maximum tax rate. And that is the exact point I was stressing, because today it would be no different - virtually no one, if anyone, would pay the maximum tax rate. This is partially due to the fact that scarcely anyone boasts a large enough income to qualify for that tax rate, and partially due to - as you mention - deductions and the like. Not to mention that many wealthy people don't mind using loopholes to cheat on their taxes; for example, our dear Mitt Romney and his offshore accounts.

 

 

I like your responses, and they are the many reasons why I do not support Donald Trump. As for the part on poor people, I apologize for not clarifying, but I was mostly referring to the homeless and people in those sorts of conditions. Of course, there is more to it than demand, especially when it comes to fast-food workers, because not only are fast food restaurants themselves very common, but the work is from my opinion not as difficult as a historians job. Using that as an example was a bad move on your part because historians have to spend a whole ton of money in college, especially since the majority of them are college professors, who need a Ph.d, and therefore need the money to pay off the college debt they likely have. No job requirements are really needed to work in a fast food restaurant, they screw up orders all of the time, and them they ask for extraordinarily high wages.

 

Honestly, I have a hard time understanding people who support Bernie Sanders. As someone from Vermont and the Vermont area, and who still has family there, Bernie Sanders wins elections there because the rural people of the state are uneducated and really don't get a ton of human contact. The only "city" in the state is Montpelier. Therefore, it is really easy to convince the people to vote for him. I know this as I, once again, have family in Vermont, my father used to live in Vermont, and I lived near Vermont. America is a defined Capitalist state run by a presidential republic. We were founded to have a small government, one that doesn't intervene with common life, one that allows anyone to do anything so long as it didn't infringe with someone else's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Do any drug on the face of the planet: you're only killing yourself. Be a major alcoholic. Are you hurting anyone else? I know plenty of people that were driven to quit these things because they were poor, they had a family, and they were ruining their life, and they just said no. If you are driven, you'll quit. The point is, Socialism is based on the idea of the government regulating the economy "for the rights of the people." Bernie Sanders won't win as long as we have America to stop him.

 

I had my short little Socialist moment, and I had my short little Marxism moment, but I found that America is where I lie. I do respect your opinion, nonetheless.

 

Now, I apologize for going a little bit off topic. Let's maybe head back that direction?

With regards to education, the fact that historians have to pay off college debt is not the reason they receive higher wages than fast-food workers. They receive higher wages because being a historian requires lots of knowledge and qualification; it has nothing to do with how much money they spend on college. It does have to do with the level of college education they have, but the reason they're getting paid higher is because they are educated, not because they're in debt. Otherwise, I could go to college for 8 years, rack up lots of debt, and a fast-food restaurant would pay me huge wages because I had lots of debt to get rid of. That's not how economics or capitalism works.

 

About Bernie Sanders, I think Adama summed it up well enough, but I think this needs to be reinforced.... Vermont is not at all an "uneducated" state. The northeastern states have, by far, the most educated population and the most qualified schools, both k-12 and college. And, if anything, this correlates with a very high rate of progressivism as well; this trend is seen the other way around in the southern states, where much poorer rates of education correlate with higher rates of conservatism. Especially when it comes to ideas such as socialism, the people who support it tend to be more educated because they are political ideas not commonly found in the United States. Since you mentioned you have family in Vermont, allow me to draw some conclusions the other way around; I live in rural Kentucky (although I'm from Columbus, Ohio - I can't stand KY), and most people here have little interest in education - and they are overwhelmingly Republican. (Also, just to show that progressives and socialists aren't uneducated people, I graduated May 29th as class valedictorian. Here's a picture for you: http://postimg.org/image/612mpiv9h/ )

 

You are indeed correct that America was originally founded to operate on small government. And you know what? That was called the Articles of Confederation, and they failed so miserably that the government didn't even last a decade. That's why the Constitution was written - to fix the errors of the Articles of Confederation by recognizing that a larger, centralized government was necessary to keep the United States a nation, rather than some loose alliance of separate states. Adding onto that, there is another thing you must realize: just because a nation is founded on certain principles does not inherently mean it's supposed to stay with them indefinitely. That's why the Constitution allows for amendments; our government and the nation's values can be changed to suit the views of the people. That is the central value that was intended to endure: the people would have the ultimate right to change the government and its values to keep in touch with changing times and people. That is why we no longer have slavery, we allow women to vote, African Americans don't count as 3/5 of a person, we use paper money, etc.

 

As for your "socialist moment," I had a much longer "moment" when I instinctively saw socialism as radical and unrealistic. That was back when I didn't really know what socialism actually stood for and how it worked, because I'd been raised to reject then as evil. But when I actually was brave enough to learn what socialism was, and recognize that its policies have recently produced the most advanced, compassionate, and stable nations in the world, I was surprised to discover that it is far from the unrealistic dream that all too many Americans are led to believe.

 

 

Last I checked, the POTUS is in charge of the military. And we have Russia being Russia with Ukraine, ISIS beheading/burning/exploding people, and China claiming everything they can see in the sea. 

Simply because the President has the greatest authority in the military does not mean he or she makes all the military decisions. The President has an important role in many, many things aside from the military, and therefore any good president will seek extensive help from officials that work more directly with the military.

 

That's why George W. Bush received so much criticism for ignoring countless military figures who assured him Iraq had no nuclear facilities, and went to war anyway. To find, lo and behold, no nuclear facilities.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Roma

[TheNG]

Donald trump:

He is a winner, doesn't beat around the bush and doesn't care what people say about him

He has the ability to fix the economy,

He will lower the national debt

He has had more public success than anyone running so far

He thinks big and has the ability to make big

 

I laughed a lot at that, actually. Thanks.

But while I'm at it, lets go through these a little.

He is a winner, doesn't beat around the bush and doesn't care what people say about him

Not caring about what people say about him is not a good thing when people are calling him an insensitive !@#$ for saying a majority of mexicans are rapists, murderers, and drug dealers.

 

He has the ability to fix the economy,

He will lower the national debt

Tell that to to his 4 filings for corporate bankruptcy.

 

He has had more public success than anyone running so far

Substitute "public infamy", "negative press", or "descent into self-parody" in place of "public success", and that statement is reasonably accurate.

 

 

He thinks big and has the ability to make big

So? That is a selling point? Anyone can think big. I can think I want a really awesome sandwich, go and make that sandwich, and lo and behold, I'm thinking big and making big. The only thing Donald Trump has made are buildings named after him, big whoop.

[Ogaden]

He doesn't seem any worse than any of the other Republican candidates

[Solomon]

He doesn't seem any worse than any of the other Republican candidates

He's a bit worse than some of them but it would be excellent entertainment if he got the Republican nomination.

[Saruman]

Me: Hey everybody, there's a new comedy on Fox coming up this August!

Audience: Cool, what's it called? 

Me: The GOP Presidential Debate

Audience: What's it about?

Me: It's a reality show where rich people pretend to be smart.

[Braunsberg]

Me: Hey everybody, there's a new comedy on Fox coming up this August!

Audience: Cool, what's it called? 

Me: The GOP Presidential Debate

Audience: What's it about?

Me: It's a reality show where rich people pretend to be smart.

Well heck, why wait for the debates? Everything else on Fox is comedy too.

[Adama]

Me: Hey everybody, there's a new comedy on Fox coming up this August!

Audience: Cool, what's it called? 

Me: The GOP Presidential Debate

Audience: What's it about?

Me: It's a reality show where rich people pretend to be smart.

 

Election season is my favorite time of the political calendar.