Politics - If you vote democrat you're simply wrong.

[Future]

Hey guys, since this community loves politics so much I've decided to make a thread where we can all peacefully debate politics.
Let me start this off: Who plans on voting (or wants to) for Bernie Sanders/Hillary Clinton, if you do this I think you're 100% wrong. Why would you want everyone to be equal in money, why would you want to government to control the free market?
The only things I can agree with a liberal are gay marriage and abortions (if the person is underage or a rape victim)
Feel free to post below!

 

[15568]

lol, everybody has different views, they're going to vote for whoever the hell they want. Just stop making dumb ass political threads.

 

[Future]

lol, everybody has different views, they're going to vote for whoever the hell they want. Just stop making dumb ass political threads.

DEBATE ME

 

[Wut]

Hey guys, since this community loves politics so much I've decided to make a thread where we can all peacefully debate politics.
Let me start this off: Who plans on voting (or wants to) for Bernie Sanders/Hillary Clinton, if you do this I think you're 100% wrong. Why would you want everyone to be equal in money, why would you want to government to control the free market?
The only things I can agree with a liberal are gay marriage and abortions (if the person is underage or a rape victim)
Feel free to post below!

Well, you're incorrect about democrats wanting equal money. What democrats and liberals are wanting, as well as republicans, is a fairer, more equally distributed wealth. The only difference is that the two parties have different strategies in achieving that.

Democrats want to take money from the rich and give it to the poor, which is a little bit optimistic. As Margaret Thatcher said, "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money". The more reasonable approach is to tax less on the rich, as is what happened under Reagan. If you incentivize the rich to make money, the economy will only be healthier for it, and that's where the republican strategy takes place. They want to EQUALLY tax everyone, or at least most of them do. The tithing principal is a popular one, and would see every citizen above a certain poverty line pay exactly the same percentage of their income to the government. Nothing is fairer than that, and no rich person will pay less than a poor, and no poor will pay less than the rich.

As the system stands, the richest of the country are supporting everyone else, which is wholly unsustainable. As we see less and less of these high earners, the ENTIRE tax base is gone. Similarly to what happened in Detroit. Earlier, the richest people in Detroit were paying to support the welfare of the poor, but, with the crash of the economy, the rich simply left. Now who's going to support the poor? They have nobody to pay for it! They all left! So with nobody left paying taxes, detroit went RIP.

 

[Future]

Well, you're incorrect about democrats wanting equal money. What democrats and liberals are wanting, as well as republicans, is a fairer, more equally distributed wealth. The only difference is that the two parties have different strategies in achieving that.

Democrats want to take money from the rich and give it to the poor, which is a little bit optimistic. As Margaret Thatcher said, "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money". The more reasonable approach is to tax less on the rich, as is what happened under Reagan. If you incentivize the rich to make money, the economy will only be healthier for it, and that's where the republican strategy takes place. They want to EQUALLY tax everyone, or at least most of them do. The tithing principal is a popular one, and would see every citizen above a certain poverty line pay exactly the same percentage of their income to the government. Nothing is fairer than that, and no rich person will pay less than a poor, and no poor will pay less than the rich.

As the system stands, the richest of the country are supporting everyone else, which is wholly unsustainable. As we see less and less of these high earners, the ENTIRE tax base is gone. Similarly to what happened in Detroit. Earlier, the richest people in Detroit were paying to support the welfare of the poor, but, with the crash of the economy, the rich simply left. Now who's going to support the poor? They have nobody to pay for it! They all left! So with nobody left paying taxes, detroit went RIP.

Nice response, corporate taxes should be lowered and poor people should have to pay just as much as anyone else, but government spending is ridiculous in general. Where do you stand on immigration and refugees?

 

[Wut]

Nice response, corporate taxes should be lowered and poor people should have to pay just as much as anyone else, but government spending is ridiculous in general. Where do you stand on immigration and refugees?

Thanks.

I think social issues are a little bit less debatable, as you're going to have a difficult time persuading someone to like gay marriage, or whatever. We should obviously tighten border security, and pay more attention to people that are visiting. Deport illegals that we catch, but don't actively hunt for them, it's impossible. Bringing in refugees is risky, as despite whatever anyone can "promise", it's impossible to guarantee that we aren't bringing in terrorists.

 

[Future]

Thanks.

I think social issues are a little bit less debatable, as you're going to have a difficult time persuading someone to like gay marriage, or whatever. We should obviously tighten border security, and pay more attention to people that are visiting. Deport illegals that we catch, but don't actively hunt for them, it's impossible. Bringing in refugees is risky, as despite whatever anyone can "promise", it's impossible to guarantee that we aren't bringing in terrorists.

So who do you plan on voting for if you can vote?

 

[Wut]

So who do you plan on voting for if you can vote?

I call myself a centrist, a slightly libertarian one at that. But I think voting libertarian is just splitting the republican vote at this point, so i'll just be going for whoever ends up the GOP nominee. You?

 

[Future]

I call myself a centrist, a slightly libertarian one at that. But I think voting libertarian is just splitting the republican vote at this point, so i'll just be going for whoever ends up the GOP nominee. You?

Yeah I'll vote for whoever is on the GOP nominee, I just hope it's not Jeb Bush.

 

[Wut]

Yeah I'll vote for whoever is on the GOP nominee, I just hope it's not Jeb Bush.

It won't be. It'll either be Trump or Rubio.