Your Top Presidential Candidate?

[dbHunterNY]

sooo... the quiz is good.  my wife and I have slightly differing views when it comes to handouts but guns, immigration, etc. we're very similar.  Both of us got Rubio for top spot... me at 82%.  I was surprised.

 

Here's my order based on the quiz and stance on issues....

 

Rubio

Santorum

Huckabee

Cruz

Bush

Carson

Perry

Walker

Paul

Jindal

(Below 70%)

Kasich

Trump

Graham

Christie

Fiorina

Sanders

Clinton

O'Malley

[philoshop]

Btw. I was just curious and not trying to stir the pot. If he isnt bought, then why run as a democrat? Why not run as a third party?

 

No one is allowed to become president if they're not affiliated with one of the two major parties. Those two parties are basically one and the same now, because they get their marching orders from the same powers-that-be.

Thinking and acting "outside the box" in US politics today is simply not allowed.

[ants]

No one is allowed to become president if they're not affiliated with one of the two major parties. Those two parties are basically one and the same now, because they get their marching orders from the same powers-that-be.

Thinking and acting "outside the box" in US politics today is simply not allowed.

So if a person came out and flat out ran as a Socialist, would they  not have a chance because they are not affiliated  with one of the major parties, or because the vast majority of Americans are anti Socialist??

[Huntscreek]

If the GOP was smart about winning put up a Minority or African American women as the 1st Women POTUS in History. Also would be the 1st African American President or Latino. Why does Hilary fear Rubio? he is Latino. Imagine a women Rubio, Hilary would shit herself. I see many on the GOP running to lose, Rubio or Fiorina maybe have a chance.

[philoshop]

So if a person came out and flat out ran as a Socialist, would they  not have a chance because they are not affiliated  with one of the major parties, or because the vast majority of Americans are anti Socialist??

 

I'd like to think the latter, but the fact is that few voters in the US know enough to make the distinction between choice, and consent.

 

Without a huge, sustainable. grass-roots effort there will never be an alternative in this country to 'what the curtain-twitchers' want: two parties, either of which will do their bidding. Most folks don't even know (or care) that they're being manipulated.

[diplomat019]

Philo. I agree with u. Just stating that there is a sentiment that bernie isnt a sellout like the rest of the players. But if he is running as a dem, when he affiliates with the socialist party, why doesnt he just run as a socialist if thats his ideology. Makes u wonder if he isnt his own man and is part of the "team" now.

If hes a socialist then im all for him running as one and letting the voters have their say.

[philoshop]

Philo. I agree with u. Just stating that there is a sentiment that bernie isnt a sellout like the rest of the players. But if he is running as a dem, when he affiliates with the socialist party, why doesnt he just run as a socialist if thats his ideology. Makes u wonder if he isnt his own man and is part of the "team" now.

If hes a socialist then im all for him running as one and letting the voters have their say.

 

Absolutely. A head to head showdown without party affiliation: Sanders vs Trump with both as independents? Let the citizens decide which extreme they'd prefer.

But, the entire system has been set up to prevent anything like that.

We'll end up with two choices in the end, and once elected they'll both act the same way.

[wildcat junkie]

Btw. I was just curious and not trying to stir the pot. If he isnt bought, then why run as a democrat? Why not run as a third party?

No time for a detailed response to the other matters but this is a simple question to answer.

 

Running as a 3rd party candidate will hand the election over to the Republicans. Unlike most of the other candidates in this race, Bernie isn't runinng to stoke his ego. Whether you agree with his ideas or not he is really trying to help the WORKING class.

Edited August 10, 2015 by wildcat junkie

[wildcat junkie]

At least Bernie openly calls himself a Socialist. I'll give him that. Others of his ilk hide behind the label of Democrat, which they were somehow able to co-opt for their own devices in the early to mid 20th century.

 

Many seem to forget that Capitalism and the concept of free-market enterprise is precisely why we're not all still riding horses and using an abacus under the glow of an oil lamp today.

 

The US was founded as the home of the free...free to think, free to innovate, free to produce. Put that freedom under the control of a central government and there will be little or no thinking, innovating, or producing. And there will absolutely be no personal liberty as we've come to know it.

That's not how our government is supposed to work.

Bernie's agenda is to work within a capitalist economy with social programs that benefit the WORKING class, not the rich. We have socialism in the way the NFL is subsidized with tax payer built stadiums & yet given "non profit" status. We have socialism when profitable corporations receive tax payer subsidies yet pay lower taxes than ever. Then some, like Walmart establish sham operations in other countries to further avoid taxes.

 

Like it or not, the US economy worked under socialized capitalism from the mid 1930s until the 1970s. That is when this country thrived for the WORKING middle class.

Edited August 10, 2015 by wildcat junkie

[wildcat junkie]

Going camping for several days as well as working a large R/C aircraft. I'll let Mr Ants have it when I have time tothoroughly spell out his tunnel vision.

[ants]

Going camping for several days as well as working a large R/C aircraft. I'll let Mr Ants have it when I have time tothoroughly spell out his tunnel vision.

In the course of an hour and a half, this morning you have posted up three times, but you still couldn't give at least one of your examples?? They must be pretty complicated to explain.

Edited August 10, 2015 by ants

[wildcat junkie]

In the course of an hour and a half, this morning you have posted up three times, but you still couldn't give at least one of your examples?? They must be pretty complicated to explain.

To a person with normal or above average intelligence it would be quite simple to explain. Considering it's you, it tends to get a lot more complicated. For instance since I posted 3 times over 1 1/2 hours between chores, you seem to automatically ASS-ume that I was sitting on my ass in front of my laptop for 1 1/2 hours.

 

Luckily for you I am willing to go to the extremes necessary to perhaps clear things up for the average dullard. Whether or not you will be able to grasp an explanation that even a simpleton can understand remains to be seen

 

In the mean time, perhaps if you study my previous post hard enough, it might turn on the lights for you, but perhaps not.

 

Bernie's agenda is to work within a capitalist economy with social programs that benefit the WORKING class, not the rich. We have socialism in the way the NFL is subsidized with tax payer built stadiums & yet given "non profit" status. We have socialism when profitable corporations receive tax payer subsidies yet pay lower taxes than ever. Then some, like Walmart establish sham operations in other countries to further avoid taxes.

 

Like it or not, the US economy worked under socialized capitalism from the mid 1930s until the 1970s. That is when this country thrived for the WORKING middle class.

 

Edited August 10, 2015 by wildcat junkie

[Trial153]

[wildcat junkie]

Bernie was at the top with 91% yet Trump topped my list of Republican @46% lust a few points behind O'Malley. How's that for irony?

Edited August 10, 2015 by wildcat junkie

[philoshop]

Bernie's agenda is to work within a capitalist economy with social programs that benefit the WORKING class, not the rich. We have socialism in the way the NFL is subsidized with tax payer built stadiums & yet given "non profit" status. We have socialism when profitable corporations receive tax payer subsidies yet pay lower taxes than ever. Then some, like Walmart establish sham operations in other countries to further avoid taxes.

 

Like it or not, the US economy worked under socialized capitalism from the mid 1930s until the 1970s. That is when this country thrived for the WORKING middle class.

 

What you're describing is Fascism, not Socialism. And you're right, it's been in place since the 1930's.

 

Fascism involves private ownership of business, but with government control. The ever-increasing power of the regulatory agencies are shifting that concept of 'ownership' toward the government.

 

Socialism involves government ownership of business with some semblance of private control (an absurd notion to anyone capable of thought),but basically, a business owner has the right to do what the government/owner tells them to do.

 

The federal government today runs this country. That's not how it's supposed to work, and I'm not going to vote for anyone who thinks this is a good thing.

[Fantail]

Saw a bumper sticker that sums up the upcomming race;

Weiner/Holder '16

[ants]

To a person with normal or above average intelligence it would be quite simple to explain. Considering it's you, it tends to get a lot more complicated. For instance since I posted 3 times over 1 1/2 hours between chores, you seem to automatically ASS-ume that I was sitting on my ass in front of my laptop for 1 1/2 hours.

 

Luckily for you I am willing to go to the extremes necessary to perhaps clear things up for the average dullard. Whether or not you will be able to grasp an explanation that even a simpleton can understand remains to be seen

 

In the mean time, perhaps if you study my previous post hard enough, it might turn on the lights for you, but perhaps not.

 

Funny how you instantly attack people who don't agree with you,. You ASS-ume some superior intellect by name calling. Smart...but then you are a Socialist. 

 

And I got you previous post the first time. It gave examples of Socialism..So? 

[Mr VJP]

Bernie just announced he wants to work with the "Black Lives Matter" criminals, to reinvent policing in America.  How's that for demonstrating leadership?  People revolt and you reward them to buy their votes.  I do not think American Police organizations will be endorsing Bernie.  BTW, those cops are part of the working class and belong to unions.  The very base Bernie says supports him.

 

I can only imagine how he will deal with terrorists.

 

 

[wildcat junkie]

Funny how you instantly attack people who don't agree with you,. You ASS-ume some superior intellect by name calling. Smart...but then you are a Socialist. 

 

And I got you previous post the first time. It gave examples of Socialism..So? 

Instantly? Seems you poked the hornet's nest at least 2 times. You like to dish it out but just like a typical conserve-a-turd, as soon as the hornets start stinging you, you scream personal attacks & persecution.

[wildcat junkie]

What you're describing is Fascism, not Socialism. And you're right, it's been in place since the 1930's.

 

Fascism involves private ownership of business, but with government control. The ever-increasing power of the regulatory agencies are shifting that concept of 'ownership' toward the government.

 

Socialism involves government ownership of business with some semblance of private control (an absurd notion to anyone capable of thought),but basically, a business owner has the right to do what the government/owner tells them to do.

 

The federal government today runs this country. That's not how it's supposed to work, and I'm not going to vote for anyone who thinks this is a good thing.

Eisenhower was a fascist? That's funny, Joe McCarthy thought he was a communist.

[philoshop]

The Fascist economic system was put in place years before Eisenhower became president, and it's still in place today.

[wildcat junkie]

What you're describing is Fascism, not Socialism. And you're right, it's been in place since the 1930's.

 

Fascism involves private ownership of business, but with government control. The ever-increasing power of the regulatory agencies are shifting that concept of 'ownership' toward the government.

 

Socialism involves government ownership of business with some semblance of private control (an absurd notion to anyone capable of thought),but basically, a business owner has the right to do what the government/owner tells them to do.

.

So what do you call it when the corporations own the government?  That is where we are headed right now if the Republicans and the Koch brothers have their way.

Edited August 11, 2015 by wildcat junkie

[philoshop]

So what do you call it when the corporations own the government?  That is where we are headed right now if the Republicans and the Koch brothers have their way.

 

You're arguing both sides of the same coin here.

There are just as many Progressive/Socialist corporations who 'own the government' as there are others. Think Facebook, Google, Apple, Ebay and many other corporate entities that have learned how the system is played today. It's the system that's screwed up, not the ones who've learned how to make it work to their advantage.

 

The system is Fascist at it's very roots: private ownership with government control. The government likes that and the business-people have learned how to deal with it by buying politicians and influencing the regulations the government constantly puts in place. Political alliance has nothing to with the realities of economics. People who own businesses know that. Put the grease where it's needed.

 

Advancing the powers of the regulatory agencies in this country ( a progressive/socialist phenomenon for the most part) has all but cemented that system in place, except the government wants more and would like to have ownership as well as control. This would be Socialism. 

 

If you see a bright side to this concept, I'd sure like to hear it.

[ants]

Instantly? Seems you poked the hornet's nest at least 2 times. You like to dish it out but just like a typical conserve-a-turd, as soon as the hornets start stinging you, you scream personal attacks & persecution.

Instantly.YES .I say you're a socialist…which you no doubt are, and you instantly break out the socialist handbook and name call. Is socialist some kind of slur  in your book?  Seems I paid you a complement. Even in your above statement you can't help but name call….Its not like I called you a social-scizz.

[Mr VJP]

Some people are very angry with America, feeling they've gotten a raw deal in life.  They want an evil enemy to blame for their troubles and economic status.  These people are very susceptible to the propaganda from Leftist Socialists because they believe their plans will make life better for them.  They are swallowing the lies with gusto because they want to believe them.  God forbid, their hopes for socialism in America are ever realized.  They will not like what they asked for and will not be able to rescind the decision once it takes hold.  Anyone who really thinks it's a better system should move to a country that suffers under that system and live it for at least a year.  They will learn more in one year than any college could teach them in four.