Are the Democrats back on track?

Please oh please let this happen!!

 

Yes, he was. A real socialist, unlike social democrats Bernie and Alexandria.

 

6

And Augusto Pinochet was a capitalist, as I’ve said before you need to stop thinking in absolutist terms, so that you think any person with left wing views must think exactly like Hugo Chavez or Joseph Stalin.

Any way you said you couldn’t address your critics because “my life threw me a very unexpected obstacle for the worst” and so you were “going to take a long hiatus from subjects like politics for a while until I get things straightened out”

Yet you still seem to be posting - is the problem solved and if so can you begin address the many outstanding criticisms of your views?

 

This is the association fallacy: If one member of a class or category has a certain trait. all members must have it. Association fallacy - RationalWiki
That's a non-sequitor e.g., Milo is AltLite, Milo is a dickhead. Therefore, all members of the AltLite are dickheads. (Then again, maybe that's a bad example, because he is and they are).
.

 

And yet... The same exact tactic will be used again. By the same person. In the same subject.

I think they call that vincible ignorance.

Or dishonesty.

Maybe both.

 

Indeed I said that.

For now, until I get my personal and financial life straightened out, I’m limiting my posting to just giving my 2 cents here and there, rather than investing much time in real debate.

It’s a lot more difficult to just cut oneself off from current events and news than I thought.

 

I feel like as the midterms approach, there is more ground behind us than before us, so I guess I feel like we're on track for a big win. I just can't wait to put all of this Trump madness behind us. He tries to tarnish the image of Democrats unsuccessfully, but I dislike hearing about my party in a negative light and I don't think I'm alone there. He isn't making any friends across the aisle.

I believe in Americans; even if the flag-waving ones are misguided at the moment. It pisses me off every time I see one on a car; at least if the sticker is reasonably new it does... You know what they must be on about. Well, I take that back... you don't know but you are left to guess at what the fuck they mean because the only thing patriotic right now is putting this presidency behind us.

I have high hopes for the midterm elections. If the house is taken back, as i'm told it could be, then there is a chance for better policies. And even if they never get signed, I think it puts the party in a better light. But then I sit befuddled... That is what we're on track for? It's all but pointless with such a bad President.

 

AKA known as the fallacy of repitition or argumentum ad nauseam.

(also known as: argument from nagging, proof by assertion)

Description: Repeating an argument or a premise over and over again in place of better supporting evidence.
Argument by Repetition

 

Why bother speaking to those who are uninterested in what you have to say? The one constant among conservatives is their ability to

Didn't know there was a name for that. Describes conservative thinking and debate to a T. It's exhausting, and it's hard to respect someone who does it.

 

A lot of their predicament has to do with sanctions being placed on the country. I believe in free market competition, because it forces business to innovate to find the best solutions. What we have now in the U.S. is monopoly capitalism where big companies get taxed less than small businesses and the working poor need to be subsidized, because wages are too low. Eventually it will all end on it's own as limits in government debt are reached.

 

All black guys drive welfare Cadillacs...

 

Ohhh boy...

 

I notice you quoted the earlier uncensored version of my post, before the better angles prevailed. I must admit I got carried away. My bad.

 

The problem is that ‘free market’ ideologies always result in the dominance of wealth, huge inequality, monopoly capitalism and the exploitation of workers.

I mean all the things that ‘free’ marketeers ask for always seem to increase the power and influence of wealth (tax cuts, deregulation, privatisation, etc) and they use that increased influence to promote their own interests and if left unchecked forms a tyranny of the wealthy.

This is why there never has been and never will be a ‘free market’

Anyway this is how wealth can become a vampire sucking the life out of a country and its society.

What wealth means by ‘small government’ is a government they can control and manipulate and exploit to their own advantage.

They use the extra power and influence the move to a ‘free market’ economy gives them to lobby (and buy) so they can for example deregulate in areas that advantage them while regulating to curtail their competition although they only shout about the deregulations.

They also push relentlessly for tax cuts even when they are obviously having a detrimental effect on the host they are feeding on.

They say that an economy must be ‘competitive’ meaning that a US worker should have lower wages so they can ‘compete’ with the lowest paid worker on the planet.

I could go on

But basically the whole ‘free market’ razzmatazz is a scam, an illusion to bamboozle the unwary.

Markets have to be managed and the power of wealth curtailed so both can contribute to society not just work for themselves in their own self-interests. That includes the protection of small businesses from predatory larger ones and economic policies based on real investment not speculation.

 

Here is something I posted here a few years ago -

It seems to me that the political history of the 20th century (in the industrialised nations) has been to one degree or another about the curtailment of the adverse effects of 19th century exploitative capitalism (some call classical liberalism).

People in many nations fought for voting rights, social benefits, safer working conditions, progressive taxation, and decent living wages. The result of that movement was that the economic benefits of production were much more distributed. Many people saw their wages grow and in the period between the end of WWII and 1970 many in Europe and the US gain middle class status.

But from the 70’s onward a new idea was promoted in some of these nations (often referred to as neo-liberalism) it was in many ways opposed to the ‘distributive’ system that had developed. One thing it promoted was economic globalisation, which basically allowed back some aspects of exploitative capitalism by promoting the moving of production to nations that had not developed the more distributive systems away from those nations that had.

In this way the long fought for distributive system has been undermined in those places where it had developed. Neo-liberals argue that to ‘compete’ in the global market the elements of the distributive system need to be dismantled what is needed they say is deregulation, the cutting of welfare, tax cuts that benefit the rich, lower wages, weak government oversight etc etc.

 

I thought you were just invoking sarcasm and humor jointly?

 

During that same period of time people in many third world nations were still attempting to rid their countries of colonialism.

 

Challenging a female politician to a debate is the same level as "cat calling" and harassment.

This is the world we now live in.

Ocasio-Cortez dismisses Ben Shapiro's debate offer, compares to 'catcalling'

 

She should have known better than to use figurative language in a literal world, for sure

 

The point she makes is perfectly valid.

But we're not interested in context. We're interested in extracting tid bits to fit a narrative. Amirite? Eh?? *nudge nudge*