Apperantly, democrats represent the rich and the GOP represents the poor

Author: TheUnderdog

Posts

Total: 40
Topic's author
#1
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10

But if this is true, then it would make sense for the GOP to advocate for raising taxes on those blue democrat voters and fund the healthcare of the red voters.

But they won't do that because they call it socialist.

But if Trump endorsed socialism and called corporation and capitalism, "woke", and railed on that for a good month, then his idiot supporters (the majority of whom are idiots that aren't consistent with any of their claimed values and if they block me, then they don't believe in free speech like they claim to do), would become socialists in the name of fighting, "wokeness" (which they have defined as being pro cancel culture even though they block people they don't agree with, therefore vigilantically cancelling them; making them the woke ones).


#2
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
The less educated poor (because they are barely able toa ford it and Republican states are reluctant to remove absurd kids from parents) can oftentimes fall victims to the trickery of Right Wing propaganda.

This has always been true.

If they are very conservative in values they may have somevalidr reasoning for it, but the freedom loving right wing libertarian types whoa re alos poor are the greatest fools of all, voting hell upon themselves over and over or just not voting at all.
#3
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
It seems like blue cities such as Detroit were doing well under republicans but when it went blue it became a very poor and high crime area. It seems like democrat cities always go into the shitter this way and that perhaps their policies are the cause of this. 


#4
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,166
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@TheUnderdog
But if this is true, then it would make sense for the GOP to advocate for raising taxes on those blue democrat voters and fund the healthcare of the red voters.
Because the poor can only want to steal from the rich?
#5
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@WyIted
You basically looked to the single most crime ridden city in US to make your point as if that's a normal thing.
#6
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
Las Angelas, Chicago, Charlotte,  Wilmington Delaware Seattle

#7
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,625
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@RationalMadman
I am glad that you are back.
#8
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@WyIted
Show proof they were better under Republicans.
#9
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
RM,


Don't play stupid. You know that it is safer to live outside of blue cities than inside of them.


To sir there and pretend you don't know that wealthy well off communities have less crime than blue areas like skid row is retarded.
Topic's author
#10
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Because the poor can only want to steal from the rich?
The democrats want to steal the globalists to fund the healthcare of the people they deem to be American Patriots (defined as anyone living in the US and therefore has America as their favorite country to live in; otherwise they would live somewhere else, and this includes the undocumented).

I'm trying to be objective when I say this, but disagreeing with this is taking the pro globalist position.
#11
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
RM,

I showed you the economic freedom index which proves that red countries do better than blue countries.

I showed you stats to show you that red cities do better than blue cities. 

When are you going to apologize for advocating for the spread of crime, poverty and degeneracy and start working towards peace and prosperity which are best achieved through freedom?
#12
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
I literally procedure freedom was good and instead of just admitting it and advocating for freedom you are still like 

"Derp, the government should control every faccit of our lives and we should continue with economic interventionism, just because interventionism failed with, Mao, Stalin and Hitler doesn't mean it will fail this time".
Topic's author
#13
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
It seems like blue cities such as Detroit were doing well under republicans but when it went blue it became a very poor and high crime area. It seems like democrat cities always go into the shitter this way and that perhaps their policies are the cause of this. 
Poverty creates crime.  There are poor and high crime areas that are run by both democrats and republicans (and their margin of victories tend to be big and change very little).  Cities with close elections where the party label of the politician has little to do with whether or not they win and whether or not they win has much more to do with their performance has more scared politicians; politicians that have to earn the vote, and this makes better cities with a lower crime rate.

Harry Rilling is a democrat politician from Norwalk; Norwalk is a safe city.  It's also a rich city.

Blue cities can be safe or dangerous and the same is true for red cities.

But blue cities tend to be bigger, and therefore more famous (unless it's a battleground city that's red leaning).  There are poor small town hardcore republican areas with a lot of crime that don't get the headlines because they aren't famous areas.

But battleground areas tend to be the safest and richest.
#14
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
Finally a fucking person who actually knows how to debunk a point and make great observations. Please teach RM and and Roosevelt how to be smart like you and actually defeat an opponents arguments. 
Topic's author
#15
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
Finally a fucking person who actually knows how to debunk a point and make great observations. 
I'm glad I changed your mind.  It's why I'm on here.  Plus, I want to run for POTUS and this is practice.

Please teach RM and and Roosevelt how to be smart like you and actually defeat an opponents arguments. 
That would be good, to create a course called, "How to be a smarter debater".

What should the units be?  I'm a college student; so I'm used to learning things in semesters.
#16
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,594
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@WyIted

I showed you the economic freedom index which proves that red countries do better than blue countries.
LOL
#17
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@FLRW
https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
#18
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
I'm glad I changed your mind.  It's why I'm on here.  Plus, I want to run for POTUS and this is practice.
You didn't change my mind. I debunk half of my own arguments before I even make them, I just also acknowledge when somebody else has done the same. I am not Gere to spread a message or to impart my wisdom on the site. 

In fact I think people om this site are selling themselves short if they only debate what they believe, and yes that extends to tiny arguments in the forum section.  

I do think that they slow shift to the left has hurt cities like Detroit, however you just happen to be correct that single party rule and poverty are bigger impacts and more harmful. It's one of the reasons a lot of people thought the party realignment that focused on ideology was a mistake. 

Barry Goldwater headed the party realignment which turned from being largely non ideological to a conservative vs liberal bent.  Mitt Rodney's father was the loudest opponent of this party reallignment
Topic's author
#19
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
I can probably give good points to people to improve their debating quality.

Here's a tip:

Don't cite right wing cites and treat it like they are objective.

If RM cited Huffington post for one of his arguments, you would dismiss it as a left wing bias; if they cite FOX News, you would call FOX News RINO trash.  You can expect the equal and opposite reaction from RM or Roosevelt if you cite left or right wing sources as if they are factual an unbiased.

But I will probably create some suggestions that I think can make people smarter and produce better arguments.
#20
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@WyIted
Your enthusiasm leads to quirky errors.


Was Mitt, Rodney's father?

And are you saying that you are not Richard Gere after all.

And for sure, I often use Buddhist mantras when selling myself short.


Though I do agree that indeterminate topics require a flexible approach.


Have a nice day.
#21
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@WyIted
In fact I think people om this site are selling themselves short if they only debate what they believe, and yes that extends to tiny arguments in the forum section

My biggest pivot in my thinking was when I broke free from the GOP and realized the corruption in both major parties.
#22
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
My biggest pivot in my thinking was when I broke free from the GOP and realized the corruption in both major parties.
Ya, you are just a stalwart of good governance watching Jimmy Dore to get your news

#23
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
If RM cited Huffington post for one of his arguments, you would dismiss it as a left wing bias; if they cite FOX News, you would call FOX News RINO trash.  You can expect the equal and opposite reaction from RM or Roosevelt if you cite left or right wing sources as if they are factual an unbiased.

I don't do that. I think it's fine to cite a left wing newspaper or a leftwing think tank. 

Nearly every mainstream news organization for example correctly reported the fact that 9/11 did happen. I usually even take their word for the facts they present me unless I have reason to doubt it, and I will still give the benefit of the doubt. 

You will never see me dismiss outright a claim based on the source having a political bias. It doesn't mean the source is lying about th facts. 

#24
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@WyIted
When are you going to apologize for advocating for the spread of crime, poverty and degeneracy and start working towards peace and prosperity which are best achieved through freedom?
If you'd look away from America to the world to Africa, Asia, South America and Europe, you'd notice a trend:

The less regulation on the market, the more corrupt the nation unless it's the other extreme of absolute overregulation.

Idk how you can avoid degeneracy if you're pro-freedom it's one or the other.

I don't have to apologise for anything you're putting words in my mouth, you're the one priding yourself regularly in chats to be about being a manwhore, assuming I'm an incel constantly and telling everyone how you pride yourself on the knowledge gained by being a degenerate that fucked a lot and hated oppression, embracing your poverty even and telling us homeless choose to stay that way.
#25
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,458
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
First off I called you a gymcel not an incel. Although yes I do assume being a spam makes it difficult to get laid. 

The corruption in 3rd world nations are due to a few things. 

. Countris where the average IQ is 70, which makes the population ungovernable as well as giving them an inability to govern. The a white nation going full communist would fair better than these countries being free.  These are also low trust societies. Give me a high trust society with high IQs as a baseline and then I am interested in discussing whether high regulation or freedom is preferable. 

It doesn't solve the problems these countries with bad demographics have. Those countries can only be fixed with a strong religious majority, preferably chriatian but even then sometimes they can get some pretty weird denominations of Christianity and. Church leaders who essentially create cults. So they probably need catholicism so there is some central figure to temper their nature. 

Idk how you can avoid degeneracy if you're pro-freedom it's one or the other.
That is a fair statement. Its one I am torn on. I do believe tha people should be allowed to do meth if they want or to cut their dick off and have a tail surgically atta he'd to them.  So yes I would leave a lot of room in the laws for degeneracy.  I do object to individuals not use legal social pressures to punish corporations who spread degeneracy by not buying from them. I also would oppose children being given meth or transitioned or taught degeneracy in public school. That isn't freedom that is indoctrination.

I support th legal right of people to be degenerates. I strongly oppose society not applying social pressures to those individuals who choose that ort of lifestyle though. 

I would rather live in a degenerate nation than one where the government atte.pts to regulate what you do with your body (except when it comes to abortion)   

I think strong immigration policies and churches having a strong influence on individuals is the best way to keep the country from sliding into some sort of communist/fascist hellhole. 

I think ideally the political parties should not be left vs right but fundamentalists bs libertarians who would balance each other out. 
#26
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,166
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@TheUnderdog
Because the poor can only want to steal from the rich?
The democrats want to steal the globalists to fund the healthcare of the people they deem to be American Patriots (defined as anyone living in the US and therefore has America as their favorite country to live in; otherwise they would live somewhere else, and this includes the undocumented).
That does not answer the question, and it is wrong on many levels.


The democrats want to steal the globalists to fund the healthcare of the people they deem to be American Patriots
The globalist movement is powered by delusional people who think they can run healthcare systems with stolen money and not have it become expensive and subpar (among many other futurist delusions).


American Patriots (defined as anyone living in the US and therefore has America as their favorite country to live in; otherwise they would live somewhere else, and this includes the undocumented).
That is not the definition of a patriot. Being born doesn't prove patriotism, nor does it prove preference. Failing to flee at the first opportunity doesn't prove patriotism, nor preference.
Topic's author
#27
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
That does not answer the question, and it is wrong on many levels.
It did.

The democrats want to steal the globalists to fund the healthcare of the people they deem to be American Patriots
The globalist movement is powered by delusional people who think they can run healthcare systems with stolen money and not have it become expensive and subpar (among many other futurist delusions).
Globalist and billionaire I believe are synonymous terms.

That is not the definition of a patriot. Being born doesn't prove patriotism, nor does it prove preference. Failing to flee at the first opportunity doesn't prove patriotism, nor preference.
If you move to the US from a foreign country, then you love America and therefore are a Patriot.
#28
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,166
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@TheUnderdog
Globalist and billionaire I believe are synonymous terms.
Even if they were, why do the billionaires donate to democrats?


If you move to the US from a foreign country, then you love America and therefore are a Patriot.
The vikings moved from Norway/Denmark to Scotland/England/France. It wasn't love of the local culture and people that brought them.
#29
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Even if they were, why do the billionaires donate to democrats?
The standard answer to keep the radical left-tribe propaganda digestible and palatable is to claim every Democrat Billionaire believes very strongly in government-managed charity. That notion fails under the most cursory examinations of any Democrat Billionaire's dealings with the IRS.
Topic's author
#30
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Even if they were, why do the billionaires donate to democrats?
Because the billionaires agree with the dems who want to raise taxes on them (because some billionaires want to be taxed more).   Bernie Sanders got plenty of large donations too.

The vikings moved from Norway/Denmark to Scotland/England/France. It wasn't love of the local culture and people that brought them.
They were soliders.  Migrants are not soliders; they are civilians.