Al Queda Threats, Sequester, And Obammy Golfs
-
The reason he won is because the Republican's that ran against him sucked
-
So its everyone else's fault? It is the part of the population you don't like, their fault.
Not the Republican party? Not the candidates for having too conservative of a stance on certain issues?
Sounds like a sore loser to me
-
actually woody its real simple. You are correct the world is changing. Those who preach self reliance and so forth will probably be left in the past.
But as society becomes more and more socialistic people will probably have a hard time voting against free stuff. And I don't mean just welfare.
Still as you correctly pointed out those are the changes that are being implemented with every passing generation. And it doesn't really matter if it's good for us or if I like it or if some party called Republican or Democrat prospers it is what it is sir.
WSS
-
Yeah yeah, "They just promise free stuff for votes". I've heard that from you plenty of times.
You really think it was just based completely on the "free stuff" angle? Nothing at all about the candidates or any other of their policy views?
-
Well I don't think anything is based solely on any one factor. But yes I do think that's a major part of it. Republican or Democrat people will vote for the person they think will facilitate them and getting a better deal. Free school loans will appeal to students. free healthcare appeals to anyone who doesn't want to pay insurance premiums. Food stamps even if you don't really need them are a nice little bonus. Boost Social Security? Seniors are on your side. Strong military benefits folks in states with military contracts and or bases. I just think that when given the choice voting for something that benefits us personally or our sub group personally will almost always trump the minor issues we delight in fighting about.gay marriage civil rightsschool prayer displaying the Ten Commandments in the lobby, all of that will take a back seat to your own pocket book.
and it's not like one candidate sucks and one candidate rules. These guys are pretty much the same.
maybe if we really did have Hitler running against St Francis but...
WSS
-
Military benefits and ss are earned, though.
Well, except for the disabled, and the fakers who pretend to be disabled.
The disabled deserve those benefits, need em.
There is no free stuff community with leaders like Sharpton, jackson, Sheila lee, etc etc etc etc etc...
like the black community. Blacks revere MLK, but I never even heard Frederick Douglas's story.
He is the key to bringing Americans together, and uplifting the minorities and influencing them
a better direction than the false promises and dependency on the dems.
-
I didn't mention military benefits. I mentioned contract and bases which bring economic profit. But I would object to Social Security being earned.
When the Ponzi scheme gets too top heavy it flips over. When we start paying out more often we take in its welfare.
If it was strictly earned then once the benefits exceeded what you had put in that would be the end of the line for the individual.
One could also argue that public employees unions benefits are earned as well. But even if you took that side you have to face the fact that it's quite possible the benefits will eventually become too much for society to pay.
Just bear in mind that when that point arrives those who receive those benefits will probably vote to keep them. And those who are forced to pay them will probably balk.
WSS
-
And you don't win elections by bringing people together. Maybe in the few months after an enemy attack but that's about it. The key to success lately has been divide and conquer.
I think we should remember that while we morally agree that disabled people deserve some benefit ask yourself how the vote would go if one side proposed linking say, drug testing to disability benefits? Or one side proposed stricter testing to see if the recipients actually were disabled? How do you think that vote would go?
WSS
-
My SS benefits are damn sure earned. I've been paying into it since I was 16, so over 43 years. Not my problem that the government stole the money for other programs.
-
1. You posted "Strong military benefits folks in states with military contracts". That is mentioning "military benefits". If I wrote a search
algorithm for "military benefits" it would be found in your post, dangit.
2. SS is calculated based on one's earned income over the work lifetime to retirement date. That is earned. The right
to receive it is earned. Now, if you live to be 95 whatever, and your SS supercedes what you earned, it's still an earned benefit.
You earned the right to receive that benefit for the rest of your days.
3.I wonder how a black repub candidate would do in a pres election. I'd vote for K. Carl Smith over most candidates in the field.
But would the black community avoid him, because of his Frederick Douglas stances? Mostly? Partly? Eventually, we
have to get past the racial divide in politics. But that requires the part of the black community that lives in total dependency
on the free stuff from dems, to get on the Frederick Douglas train as the most important start towards self sufficiency.
4. For now ,that is a good point. The rolls of welfare dived with the attempted work requirement. They skyrocketed
when that requirement was shelved by you know who. Drug testing? Yes. But they say "no". And there are a
lot of them.
-
Well Steve, its not like ONLY the group receiving benefits is voting. I'm sure there'd be a group that agrees with drug testing as well.
-
Benefits is used as a verb.......
WSS
-
I would vote for drug testing people on welfare.
-
Benefits is used as a verb.......
WSS***************
Well.... I kinda almost knew that. @@
-
Benefits is used as a verb.......
WSS***************
Well.... I kinda almost knew that. @@
-
Well Steve, its not like ONLY the group receiving benefits is voting. I'm sure there'd be a group that agrees with drug testing as well.
Yes of course there will always be some voters on the other side. But when most of the population is getting some free stuff, whatever it may be, they will usually outnumber the providers and those who don't want free stuff. Or more specifically don't want to pay for the free stuff. I don't have a link or a study but I would guess there are more cockroaches in the world then there are Border Collies.Well Steve, its not like ONLY the group receiving benefits is voting. I'm sure there'd be a group that agrees with drug testing as well.
WSS
-
I was going to ask a question, but you said you don't have a link or a study, so nevermind.
-
I was going to ask a question, but you said you don't have a link or a study, so nevermind.
Fair enough.I was going to ask a question, but you said you don't have a link or a study, so nevermind.
If you think there are more border collies than cockroaches...
Actually many many things should just be self evident and often its hard to find an exact set off graphs or charts on the net. But we are grown ups here and you are always free to say that you honestly don't believe something.
Unless I'm just being facetious anything I say is something I believe to be true whether or not I can give chapter and verse of where I read or saw it.
WSS
-
I like to stand by beliefs that can be proven or at least have facts and science on their side (hence the religion thing). Instead of just anecdotal evidence or beliefs that have been passed down and unchallenged or whatever.
I'm just saying that you think you can just go "free stuff" and win an election. Like you said, people do enjoy free stuff, but not everyone will blindly take it because they realize its not actually free. Between those people and the people against free stuff because they aren't getting any I would think the opposition would be pretty decent.
But I also don't have any charts on me right now. If I can poke holes in your side easily enough though, and its the same old thing you've been saying since it was clear Obama would win, I don't see a reason to agree without any facts to support it. Plus, I'd think you have the burden of proof here.
-
Of course while you may like to think of yourself as being very analytical the great bulk of your posts never exceed the intellectual limit of calling somebody idiot or old. Just saying. But if you think I'm saying something that's wrong rather that bitch that I haven't provided you with a satisfactory graph feel free to post one that proves me wrong. That's what you did when we were discussing whether or not Mexico is a third world shit hole. I believe you ended up incorrect in that particular instance but it was well done that you found something that contradicted what I said. I then pointed out that there was a new chart updated in 2013. But point taken. If the battle cry is for more programs and benefits that should be paid for by taxing the rich I would say that there are lots more what programs and benefits than rich people. If you think that's incorrect feel free to find me a graph that shows most people in America are considered rich. If not then you might want to spin it some other way.
WSS
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login