America faces a terrible choice between Sanders and Trump

Watch
DSilva
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 month ago
#21
(Original post by Napp)
It seems The Economist has hit the nail on the head here. With America potentially facing a choice between an odious weasel like Trump and a quasi stalinist like Sanders.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/20...anders-nominee
You'd rather lose with Biden than win with Sanders wouldn't you?
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#22
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#22
(Original post by DSilva)
You'd rather lose with Biden than win with Sanders wouldn't you?
Considering i don't see Sanders having a hope in hell of beating Trump... But yes, it's called principle. Why would I support the left wing version of Trump simply for a marginally better chance of possibly beating him? Nah.
0
reply
Ascend
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 month ago
#23
(Original post by Aayush :))
Sanders would be firmly centrist of left of centre in almost ANY EU country.
You might benefit from actually reading the OP article.

What he's proposing for universal healthcare is more socialist than any EU country.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 month ago
#24
(Original post by QE2)
:toofunny:Quasi Stalinist :toofunny:
It's hilarious to watch people who identify as liberals or centrists avoid admitting that they're just bog standard conservatives isn't it? Like Sanders is in no way a Stalinist, he's a social democrat at best
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 month ago
#25
(Original post by Napp)
Considering i don't see Sanders having a hope in hell of beating Trump... But yes, it's called principle. Why would I support the left wing version of Trump simply for a marginally better chance of possibly beating him? Nah.
This guy who wants universal healthcare and the abolishment of ICE is exactly the same as the guy who keeps kids in cages. I am very smart.

****ing libs man, hilarious how cold their takes are
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#26
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#26
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
It's hilarious to watch people who identify as liberals or centrists avoid admitting that they're just bog standard conservatives isn't it? Like Sanders is in no way a Stalinist, he's a social democrat at best
Did you even bother reading my comment before running your word hole? It might save you a little embarrassment next time :rolleyes:
Equally where have i labelled myself as either a liberal, centrist or conservative? :lol:
He's an out and out socialist, self described no less.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 month ago
#27
(Original post by Napp)
Considering i don't see Sanders having a hope in hell of beating Trump... But yes, it's called principle. Why would I support the left wing version of Trump simply for a marginally better chance of possibly beating him? Nah.
Left wing version of trump? Give your head a wobble. Stalinist? Ah yes, I guess supporting universal health care does make one a stalinist...

I'd long suspected that the Democrats would rather lose to Trump than have a president who supported universal healthcare and here you are, proving that to be true.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 month ago
#28
(Original post by Napp)
Did you even bother reading my comment before running your word hole? It might save you a little embarrassment next time :rolleyes:
Equally where have i labelled myself as either a liberal, centrist or conservative? :lol:
He's an out and out socialist, self described no less.
So wanting an increase in public spending andfor certain public services to be socialised makes you a stalinist? You're pretty much doing Trump's job for him here.

In the UK and most of Europe Sanders would be considered centre left.
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#29
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#29
(Original post by DSilva)
So wanting an increase in public spending andfor certain public services to be socialised makes you a stalinist? You're pretty much doing Trump's job for him here.
Remind me how $50+ trillion in additional spending is at all sane?
Yeah, totally :rolleyes:
In the UK and most of Europe Sanders would be considered centre left.
Considering the man makes Corbyn look middle of the road... you're wrong.
(Original post by DSilva)
Left wing version of trump? Give your head a wobble. Stalinist? Ah yes, I guess supporting universal health care does make one a stalinist...
You can read, right? The quasi was added to that insult for a good reason. At any rate if the entire basis for you getting upset with my comment is due to my loose language, well, it doesnt bode overly well for your point does it.
Equally where did i make mention of his only defining trait being his supposed support for universal healthcare? The dishonest with which you speak is shocking.
I'd long suspected that the Democrats would rather lose to Trump than have a president who supported universal healthcare and here you are, proving that to be true.
Who said I was democrat? I'm not even American dear :lol:
At any rate, seeing as Sanders will not beat Trump - and isnt even a democrat - you really don't have a leg to stand on.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 month ago
#30
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
This guy who wants universal healthcare and the abolishment of ICE is exactly the same as the guy who keeps kids in cages. I am very smart.

****ing libs man, hilarious how cold their takes are
What you come to realise is that 'centrists' and 'Libs' don't actually oppose Trump's agenda, they just oppose his character.

They want Trump's agenda, just with a Democrat in charge.
0
reply
Occitanie
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 month ago
#31
If Boris vs Corbyn is any indication of how the general population in the UK decides between a neo-Con and a Socialist.

Trump vs Sanders can only go one way if you ask me: Trump.
1
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 month ago
#32
(Original post by DSilva)
What you come to realise is that 'centrists' and 'Libs' don't actually oppose Trump's agenda, they just oppose his character.

They want Trump's agenda, just with a Democrat in charge.
I'm not certain that's quite true, I think it's more that libs don't actually believe in anything, let alone human dignity - just the status quo. They don't want to improve anything, but they resist change from all directions and act like any change is the same.

On character though definitely - like being invested in queer liberation I see it clearly with the debate over trans lives but it occurs throughout any sort of progressive politics. Napp and people like him invariably oppose trans rights in part because the idea of improving the lot of one group means changing the status quo and that can't be tolerated, but also because they are entirely focused on style and care not for substance. Like reasonable people see transphobic groups advocating for a complete roll back of queer rights, tantamount to a genocide and obviously oppose it. Liberals though see that desire for a queer genocide presented without raising a voice and then people (rightfully) shouting it down, and being incapable of assessing the substance of an argument believe that the argument presented in a 'reasonable' tone is reasonable even if the substance of that argument is clearly not reasonable. They don't like Trumps agenda in part because it means some change, but even more so because he's loud and angry. They then don't like people like Corbyn or Sanders, and more over see them as the same as Trump, because Corbyn and Sanders are also loud and angry, and being entirely about aesthetic and lacking substance, they are not capable of understanding the righteousness that anger can hold.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 month ago
#33
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
I'm not certain that's quite true, I think it's more that libs don't actually believe in anything, let alone human dignity - just the status quo. They don't want to improve anything, but they resist change from all directions and act like any change is the same.

On character though definitely - like being invested in queer liberation I see it clearly with the debate over trans lives but it occurs throughout any sort of progressive politics. Napp and people like him invariably oppose trans rights in part because the idea of improving the lot of one group means changing the status quo and that can't be tolerated, but also because they are entirely focused on style and care not for substance. Like reasonable people see transphobic groups advocating for a complete roll back of queer rights, tantamount to a genocide and obviously oppose it. Liberals though see that desire for a queer genocide presented without raising a voice and then people (rightfully) shouting it down, and being incapable of assessing the substance of an argument believe that the argument presented in a 'reasonable' tone is reasonable even if the substance of that argument is clearly not reasonable. They don't like Trumps agenda in part because it means some change, but even more so because he's loud and angry. They then don't like people like Corbyn or Sanders, and more over see them as the same as Trump, because Corbyn and Sanders are also loud and angry, and being entirely about aesthetic and lacking substance, they are not capable of understanding the righteousness that anger can hold.
Also note how Napp is angry at Sanders for taking a holiday... or something, yet he supports Bloomberg who implemented stop and frisk...
0
reply
watershower
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 month ago
#34
This will just become a Clinton-Trump situation and people will vote for the ‘lesser of two evils’ because let’s be honest, they both suck. The last paragraph in the article sums it up well. I mean, why would someone want to ban private healthcare? That’s one step way too far.

It’s like an automatic reaction is when you have someone like Trump in power, the best thing is to put forward the opposite. It’s going to backfire terribly
1
reply
DSilva
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 month ago
#35
(Original post by watershower)
This will just become a Clinton-Trump situation and people will vote for the ‘lesser of two evils’ because let’s be honest, they both suck. The last paragraph in the article sums it up well. I mean, why would someone want to ban private healthcare? That’s one step way too far.

It’s like an automatic reaction is when you have someone like Trump in power, the best thing is to put forward the opposite. It’s going to backfire terribly
Because choosing Clinton worked out so well for the Dems.
1
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 month ago
#36
(Original post by DSilva)
Also note how Napp is angry at Sanders for taking a holiday... or something, yet he supports Bloomberg who implemented stop and frisk...
He literally said he wants Bloomberg to win so he can watch a billionaire make fun of another billionaire for not being as much of a billionaire as him. "But yes, it's called principle"...
1
reply
Ascend
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 month ago
#37
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
****ing libs man, hilarious how cold their takes are
(Original post by DSilva)
What you come to realise is that 'centrists' and 'Libs' don't actually oppose Trump's agenda, they just oppose his character.

They want Trump's agenda, just with a Democrat in charge.
Please do enlighten us on how liberals don't oppose Trump's agenda?

Trumpism is about as far removed from a liberal democratic agenda (both domestic re: institutions/rule of law and foreign re: isolationism vs internationalism) than any major political movement the US has seen. The divide goes right at the heart of America's founding by those old bloody libs and their hilariously cold French takes.
0
reply
HurtOnAllLevels
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 month ago
#38
(Original post by Ascend)
Please do enlighten us on how liberals don't oppose Trump's agenda?

Trumpism is about as far removed from a liberal democratic agenda (both domestic re: institutions/rule of law and foreign re: isolationism vs internationalism) than any major political movement the US has seen. The divide goes right at the heart of America's founding by those old bloody libs and their hilariously cold French takes.
America’s founders were emphatically not liberals. They were slave owners for a start.
0
reply
NotNotBatman
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 month ago
#39
(Original post by HurtOnAllLevels)
America’s founders were emphatically not liberals. They were slave owners for a start.
America was founded on liberalism, which is why they talk about freedom so much a word which has been twisted by the evangelical types. John Adams is an example.
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#40
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#40
(Original post by DSilva)
Also note how Napp is angry at Sanders for taking a holiday... or something, yet he supports Bloomberg who implemented stop and frisk...
What on earth are you babbling about? I havent said a single word here on a holiday? Nor have i made any comment on Bloomberg or his policies.
Is this really the best your ilk can do? Lie repeatedly and slander anyone who points out your idiotic points?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What factors affect your mental health the most right now? (select all that apply)

Lack of purpose or routine (276)
15.51%
Uncertainty around my education (279)
15.67%
Uncertainty around my future career prospects (177)
9.94%
Isolating with family (126)
7.08%
Lack of support system (eg. Teachers, counsellors) (79)
4.44%
Lack of exercise/ability to be outside (149)
8.37%
Loneliness (175)
9.83%
Financial worries (72)
4.04%
Concern about myself or my loved ones getting ill (163)
9.16%
Exposure to negative news/social media (126)
7.08%
Lack of real life entertainment (eg. cinema, gigs, restaurants) (158)
8.88%

Watched Threads

View All