• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

"Why America is Moving Left" - The Atlantic

Status
Not open for further replies.
I imagine many of those younger, more liberal Republicans would probably align themselves with the Democrats if they took the time to think about their positions relative to each party, and their party identification is just voting what their parents think.
 

damisa

Member
Thats the problem. People look towards these corporations and say, "Wow, they make x billions and are world leaders! America, hell yeah!", not realizing we pay less taxes then they do that they keep out of our economy(Apple) and purposely dont pay a living wage(Walmart) letting the taxpayer foot the bill through public welfare and healthcare.

CRITIQUING corporate structure is not being anti-corporation(Which Bernie wants). Just because a business is doing awesome and employees people doesnt mean its a force for good, take a look at any sweatshop.

- Bernie's literal words are that "Wall street's business model is fraud" He doesn't limit it to just improved regulations. He literally calls them criminals

"SANDERS: With all due respect to the secretary, Wall Street play by the rules? Who are we kidding? The business model of Wall Street is fraud. That's what it is. Let me make this promise. Whether it's Republican administrations or Democratic administrations, we have seen Wall Street and Goldman Sachs dominate administrations. Here's my promise: Wall Street representatives will not be in my cabinet."

-You can support changing the taxes on corporations and increasing the minimum wage without calling Wall Street criminals whose business models are built on fraud.

is this ridiculous exaggeration really much different than the stuff Trump says? How long until we get the far left saying that the families of Wall Street people who commit fraud should also be jailed?
 

Chmpocalypse

Blizzard
Smaller businesses are fine. They are completely separate from huge multinational corporate entities who control how everything is run according to their own profit and power motive usually at the detriment of the worker and consumer alike. Like energy, like the media, like healthcare, like war profiteering.

Don't act like this garbage "job creators" nonsense makes any sense, its indefensible. Democrats should not act like conservative corporate shills with some lame ass "corporations are just well meaning business partners!"

Most social justice starts to begin with railing against "business" treating their underlings like shit.



And your and Hillary's solution is apparently to simply create another Iraq where we fight two sides and get them to gang up on us, hence creating another quagmire that we self injected ourselves in and a recipe for further destabilization. Great plan.

If we're fighting ISIS, we take out ISIS and leave the chips how they fall. I don't want to hear any terrible defense of Bush's strategy coming from someone who calls themselves a smart thinker, much less someone who voted for both the Iraq war and the Patriot act. Hawks make me sick. Especially people no better than Cheney.



We've already done studies on the impact of universal healthcare. The increase of taxes is offset completely by the services and impact of the free nature of everything else. Your paying slightly more taxes without having to break your wallet paying for insurance like you are now. That's money back in the hands of the people.

And drug prices are fixed in America, that's a fact. Why are drugs lower in other countries? Because in America, Big Pharma can get away with charging whatever they want. That's not a 'fiscal reality' that's a gaming of the system that needs to be fixed in of itself.



Even you have to understand that such an argument is completely ridiculous.

"We don't believe in public healthcare or right to paid family in medical leave or reining i in wallstreet abuses and speculation! Hurray more corporate power and corporate solvency!"

Hillary Clinton is winning nationally because she's a better known face, and easily marketable by those forces who see her as the one who will do their bidding. I'm pretty sure Bernie taking in 37% when he was not even known nationally a year ago, with Hillary at 50% with 20 years of public grand standing is a statement in of itself.

This is inspite of having been on the board of directors for Wallmart, having a husband largely responsible for deregulating financial excess in the financial sector, having a daughter who is married to a Goldeman sachs hedge-fund manager, who also had a father who was arrested and charged for 31 counts of financial fraud and abuse.

Yeah, but everything is just fine. I think that speaks more to the ignorance of the greater public than anything about social liberalism being more palatable than it was 10 years ago.
[/QUOTE]

Great rebuttal. You nailed it.
 

FStubbs

Member
Why are we so certain Trump will lose?

He's excited a base that doesn't normally vote but could turn out in droves now that they have a candidate that excites them.
 

Future

Member
I imagine many of those younger, more liberal Republicans would probably align themselves with the Democrats if they took the time to think about their positions relative to each party, and their party identification is just voting what their parents think.

Anecdotal, but the few young republicans I know are republican due to 1-2 hot button issues. They don't agree on most republican points, but they want their guns or they don't want to support abortions (in my example). That alone guarantees republican vote from them. Even if it's trump
 

krazen

Member
- Bernie's literal words are that "Wall street's business model is fraud" He doesn't limit it to just improved regulations. He literally calls them criminals

"SANDERS: With all due respect to the secretary, Wall Street play by the rules? Who are we kidding? The business model of Wall Street is fraud. That's what it is. Let me make this promise. Whether it's Republican administrations or Democratic administrations, we have seen Wall Street and Goldman Sachs dominate administrations. Here's my promise: Wall Street representatives will not be in my cabinet."

-You can support changing the taxes on corporations and increasing the minimum wage without calling Wall Street criminals whose business models are built on fraud.

is this ridiculous exaggeration really much different than the stuff Trump says? How long until we get the far left saying that the families of Wall Street people who commit fraud should also be jailed?

I disagee actually. While it is hyperbole, Wall Street is poorly regulated and most people give a *kanye shrug* response to the rampant rule breaking in it, even post crash.

And I say this as someone who's been in Investment Banking for ten years in NYC proper.

There's a disconnect that America has between the "thug" that breaks into houses and the guy in a suit who's shenanigans breaks ends up affecting hundreds if not thousands of people's pensions where they seem different..they are not. And its rampant. If it requires saying mean words to people making more then alot of people in the country (me included) for people to take notice, so be it, lol. I can take it.
 

JustenP88

I earned 100 Gamerscore™ for collecting 300 widgets and thereby created Trump's America
The danger now with the Dems/left side in the US is falling into the trap of the '60/'70s that the GOP is currently dealing with- you can't let the far flank take over, or you just lose all the elections.

We are one office away from the right controlling every level of government in this country.

Lol. GOP wins plenty of elections.
 
Anecdotal, but the few young republicans I know are republican due to 1-2 hot button issues. They don't agree on most republican points, but they want their guns or they don't want to support abortions (in my example). That alone guarantees republican vote from them. Even if it's trump
Oh I'm sure this is the case, too. Largely because younger kids can't be assed to understand economics, but tell them that Obama wants to kill babies or take your guns and that forms the entire basis of their political ideology. I remember people at my high school saying their families didn't support Obama because they're Catholic as if those explicitly contradict each other, even though Obama won Catholics twice. He'll Biden is Catholic.
 

bengraven

Member
Maybe. Probably.

But I have noticed a lot of kids, even with liberal parents, who are leaning right just to rebel. I can see being anti-PC is the next big "rebel" fad.
 
Maybe. Probably.

But I have noticed a lot of kids, even with liberal parents, who are leaning right just to rebel. I can see being anti-PC is the next big "rebel" fad.
I mean, yes, as much as an entire political movement can be sustained on the principle of being an asshole.
 

ATF487

Member
Just read the article, I agree that America is moving to the left on social issues but I think that this election will be the first time to really test if we're moving left on economic ones. I know this is only anecdotal, but I know a lot of people my age that base their party choice based on social issues, essentially whoever will uphold the legalization of gay marriage, and whoever has a better chance of allowing legalized marijuana. Are they fully open to real universal health care, larger rights for workers, a revised tax code, increased gas taxes, further reductions in military spending, etc? That sentiment is growing in the democratic party for sure, but I'm curious as to whether or not this can penetrate centrist/independent voters.
 

Future

Member
Oh I'm sure this is the case, too. Largely because younger kids can't be assed to understand economics, but tell them that Obama wants to kill babies or take your guns and that forms the entire basis of their political ideology. I remember people at my high school saying their families didn't support Obama because they're Catholic as if those explicitly contradict each other, even though Obama won Catholics twice. He'll Biden is Catholic.

Yeah. The abortion thing in particular paints democrats as uncatholic. I do feel like we need a democrat that can help mend that philosophy. Offering people choice doesn't not equal loving killing babies and anti religion, but that's how republicans depict democrats and it fucking works
 

Foffy

Banned
I want to believe that eventually truth, common sense and the common good will all win in the end ... something the Right seems to want to always fight against ...

There must always be a battle between a perceived good and evil for there to be a victor. ;)

Just read the article, I agree that America is moving to the left on social issues but I think that this election will be the first time to really test if we're moving left on economic ones. I know this is only anecdotal, but I know a lot of people my age that base their party choice based on social issues, essentially whoever will uphold the legalization of gay marriage, and whoever has a better chance of allowing legalized marijuana. Are they fully open to real universal health care, larger rights for workers, a revised tax code, increased gas taxes, further reductions in military spending, etc? That sentiment is growing in the democratic party for sure, but I'm curious as to whether or not this can penetrate centrist/independent voters.


Left on economic issues would be basic income. I would rather imagine God being real long before our culture accepts that approach to poverty and basic living being cared for. We're a long way from that, even with the genuine dangers we face.
 

bengraven

Member
I mean, yes, as much as an entire political movement can be sustained on the principle of being an asshole.

Counter-culture can be assholes occasionally. I guess it fits that we have an evolutionary scale like this.

1950s-greasers-06.jpg


d833f3bbd77cab6df0f72f22436ce0fd.jpg


attachment.php


and now

Abernathy2
 

tokkun

Member
Just read the article, I agree that America is moving to the left on social issues but I think that this election will be the first time to really test if we're moving left on economic ones. I know this is only anecdotal, but I know a lot of people my age that base their party choice based on social issues, essentially whoever will uphold the legalization of gay marriage, and whoever has a better chance of allowing legalized marijuana. Are they fully open to real universal health care, larger rights for workers, a revised tax code, increased gas taxes, further reductions in military spending, etc? That sentiment is growing in the democratic party for sure, but I'm curious as to whether or not this can penetrate centrist/independent voters.

I feel relatively confident that both parties' candidates will not push universal healthcare, will advocate a revised tax code, will not support increased gas taxes (or at least not campaign on it), and will not campaign on reduced military spending.
 

DOWN

Banned
Isn't america always moving left basically? Things have been steadily more left since the early 1900s right?

Edit(Oh recently nvm)
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
Left on economic issues would be basic income. I would rather imagine God being real long before our culture accepts that approach to poverty and basic living being cared for. We're a long way from that, even with the genuine dangers we face.

WHich is scary. All we can say for America is that we are fucked. The crossroads for us to act will have passed long before we ever collectively get our asses together for real and vote, let alone act for our interests on a national and global level.

Hell, its coming up very soon.
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
I feel relatively confident that both parties' candidates will not push universal healthcare, will advocate a revised tax code, will not support increased gas taxes (or at least not campaign on it), and will not campaign on reduced military spending.

Bernie campaigns on and has pushed for universal healthcare, revised tax codes, gas and oil taxes and reduced military spending.

His energy policy is far to the left of Hillary. Cutting gas and oil emissions by 80% by 2050. You can't go much further than that outside of banning all oil companies from existing.
 
Hillary Clinton is going to be the most rightfully liberal president in 40 years. Yeah, the writing is on the wall for the religious right. I dont see an immediate defeat of the right in economic issues, though.
 
.

BS "conservative" beliefs may be the primary enemy of progress but lazy Dems are a close second. Go vote. It's not like you work anyway.
Go vote.

The party knows it has an attendance problem. This is reoccurring, becomes more severe as the party maintains a lock on the presidency, and will most likely rear its head again in 2018 and 2022.

Given that, one should not blame the voters. They are legion. You will have a very hard time trying to change them. One should, instead, blame the party, for it knows that the problem is coming and does absolutely fucking nothing different to tackle it.

There's only hundreds of politicians. Far easier to change the approach of hundreds than the approach of millions. Find a way to appeal to them. Find a way to get them to the poll. You want to be elected and know that apathy is the name of the game. It is up to you to tackle it.

Or just keep bitching and hope that they magically turn up. Do what you always do and fail like you always fail.
 
Yeah. The abortion thing in particular paints democrats as uncatholic. I do feel like we need a democrat that can help mend that philosophy. Offering people choice doesn't not equal loving killing babies and anti religion, but that's how republicans depict democrats and it fucking works
Pro-life is simple, black and white, good and evil. Pro-choice requires nuance and making uncomfortable decisions and realizations.

Of course it draws certain people.
 

Drifters

Junior Member
I would say I could care less about social issues the government weighs in on and that work hard on equality to all men and women regardless. That may come in the form of rights, taxes, businesses or other categories. I'm stunned that the federal government has somehow thought they need to be our caretakers when they come onto us like a creepy uncle at a Christmas party.
 

Lkr

Member
Yep

Lazy asses.
You wanna know why I don't bother in midterms? A democrat doesn't even run in my district. I voted in this last election because Rick Scott needs to be removed from office, but who else am I supposed to vote for?
 

Averon

Member
The party knows it has an attendance problem. This is reoccurring, becomes more severe as the party maintains a lock on the presidency, and will most likely rear its head again in 2018 and 2022.

Given that, one should not blame the voters. They are legion. You will have a very hard time trying to change them. One should, instead, blame the party, for it knows that the problem is coming and does absolutely fucking nothing different to tackle it.

There's only hundreds of politicians. Far easier to change the approach of hundreds than the approach of millions. Find a way to appeal to them. Find a way to get them to the poll. You want to be elected and know that apathy is the name of the game. It is up to you to tackle it.

Or just keep bitching and hope that they magically turn up. Do what you always do and fail like you always fail.


The Democrats gives no reason for their voters to come out to vote in mid-team elections. Instead, they run away from their accomplishments, run as diet-Republicans in some fool's errand to grab more conservative voters (why vote for a "sort of" Republican when you can get the real deal?), and completely buy into Republican talking points. The Dems ran away from Obama in 2010, and it ended in disaster. They tried the same strategy again in 2014, and it ended in disaster again.

I would think they will not repeat this again in 2018, but I'm not at all confident about that.
 

dabig2

Member
Hillary Clinton is going to be the most rightfully liberal president in 40 years. Yeah, the writing is on the wall for the religious right. I dont see an immediate defeat of the right in economic issues, though.

We'll see. I'm still hoping that she can be pushed to the left quite a bit more once she secures the Presidency. She absolutely needs to track the opposite direction on Israel/Palestine, Syria and her warmongering in general, and single payer healthcare. Those are important issues where she leans decidedly right on.
 

sphagnum

Banned
There's nothing wrong with supporting both businesses and workers. I don't understand why Bernie and his supporters keep demonizing businesses and "Wall Street".

Maybe he should expand his positions beyond just demonizing Wall Street and whining about millionaires and billionaires

Despite what he calls himself, Bernie Sanders is a social democrat, not a socialist. But socialists oppose private control of the means of production.

This is the basic element of socialism.
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
Despite what he calls himself, Bernie Sanders is a social democrat, not a socialist. But socialists oppose private control of the means of production.

This is the basic element of socialism.

A social democrat and a democratic socialist(not even a Stalin socialist) in many ways are similar, but i guess he gets his terms confused.

Hillary Clinton is going to be the most rightfully liberal president in 40 years. Yeah, the writing is on the wall for the religious right. I dont see an immediate defeat of the right in economic issues, though.

??? No more liberal than her husband was. And to the right of even him on certain issues. We're talking 20 years of regression
 
Young Democrats may be more liberal than their elders, but so are young Republicans. According to Pew, a clear majority of young Republicans say immigrants strengthen America, half say corporate profits are too high, and almost half say stricter environmental laws are worth the cost—answers that sharply distinguish them from older members of the GOP. Young Republicans are more likely to favor legalizing marijuana than the oldest Democrats, and almost as likely to support gay marriage. Asked how they categorize themselves ideologically, more than two-thirds of Republican Millennials call themselves either “liberal” or “mixed,” while fewer than one-third call themselves “conservative.”

Then why the fuck are they voting Republican. Fucking idiots
 

dabig2

Member
??? No more liberal than her husband was. And to the right of even him on certain issues. We're talking 20 years of regression

Maybe I'm misreading, but I interpreted his statement as saying she'd be the most right-leaning liberal elected to President in 40 years (so more right-leaning than Obama, Bill, and Jimmy Carter), meaning he agrees with you.
 

sphagnum

Banned
A social democrat and a democratic socialist(not even a Stalin socialist) in many ways are similar, but i guess he gets his terms confused.

They can be, but democratic socialist is a much more vague term than social democrat. A social democrat is basically a liberal who supports the welfare state and wants to reform capitalism, maaaaaybe try to get rid of private control of the means of production through reformism but most likely not. A "democratic socialist" can be anything from anarchism to market socialism to parecon depending on who's using the term. It really just means "not Marxist-Leninist/Maoist/Stalinist/Hoxhaist/state socialist!"
 
The Atlantic needs to chill with all these articles worth reading before I run the risk of getting hopeful for the future

As a 40 something now, I've found it interesting how the more I understand issues the more my political opinions drift in various different directions across the map to the point I may be more of a pragmatic centrist than I ever was in my youth, but I'm also mature enough now to realize I'm vastly farther left socially now than I ever was as an insecure teen.
 

MisterNoisy

Member
In what universe is America moving left? Outside of the ridiculously vocal identity politics crowd, this country is more absurdly right-wing than ever.
 

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
I imagine many of those younger, more liberal Republicans would probably align themselves with the Democrats if they took the time to think about their positions relative to each party, and their party identification is just voting what their parents think.

A lot of young Republicans are more libertarian minded. Libertarians still identify with Republicans more than Democrats. I think Libertarians would sooner wait for a change in the Republican party than vote Democrat.
 
Polls, at this point, are incredibly misleading. Support for Hillary is not likely to change between now and next fall, because she's such a known quantity, whereas Bernie still has that "new candidate smell" but will fall precipitously because he's too liberal for the great mass of centrists that Democrats have to court in order to get anywhere. He'll get hammered for being a socialist, hammered for being too far left in his rhetoric, hammered for "pie in the sky" idealism, etc. He's not an exciting, charismatic candidate in the way Obama was, and he doesn't have the brilliant campaign infrastructure and smart strategizing that propelled Obama above Hillary 8 years ago. He doesn't have as much name recognition or appeal among people of color, hasn't been putting in the work to give interviews on Spanish-language television like Hillary has, hasn't done anything to try to gain any credible governing experience, etc. He's also not as comfortable in front of a camera, and while a more substantive thinker, is worse at the intangible aspects of debating and would likely look quite weak against a Trump or a Rubio, whereas Hillary, whatever her faults, has shown an ability to stand up to pressure that is admirable. I like Bernie quite a bit more than Hillary and would eagerly vote for him, but the enthusiasm and knowledge gap will hit him harder than it hit Hillary, easily. Bernie would be the modern McGovern, more than likely.

This is more or less true. As the article states Sanders is more of the beginning of something, which is the rebuilding of the liberal wing in the Democratic party, rather than the end result.

All I see is more demonizing from Bernie Sanders supporters against businesses. Don't give me that lame small business excuse. Big corporations like Microsoft, Apple, and even Walmart create massive amounts of employment and help America be better off.
Yes big companies like to make profits, oh the horror, but so do small companies.

Small businesses don't have a death grip on politics. Small businesses aren't resulting in hording billions upon billions of dollars and dodging untold amount of money in tax loopholes. The situation isn't remotely comparable. Nobody is saying go full communist, but there is an in between of what we have no and turning America to the next Cuba. Some people simply think Hillary isn't the correct in between.

Left on economic issues would be basic income. I would rather imagine God being real long before our culture accepts that approach to poverty and basic living being cared for. We're a long way from that, even with the genuine dangers we face.

Base income is like one of the furthest left things you can do. While I agree this article might be overblown on someways, especially economically, just because the nation doesn't support the most extreme proposals doesn't mean it is not moving left on other issues.

Still reading but had to take a nice pause to reflect after this bit.

There's a ton to unpack here and in those events, but I think they highlight the dangers of dogmatic approaches. A big problem with the Republican message is that its treated as gospel - no matter what the situation, tax cuts, military buildup, tax cuts, deregulation, tax cuts. There is absolutely a time and place for all of those things in proper measure, but that time isn't all times, and that place isn't all places.

Thanks for sharing this OP.

It was a dark time when the Republican party was seen as the "smart" party. Even today this is still true to the point. Look at how "The Economist" is supported and read by many Democrats.

Hillary Clinton is going to be the most rightfully liberal president in 40 years. Yeah, the writing is on the wall for the religious right. I dont see an immediate defeat of the right in economic issues, though.

Are you serious? You can maybe argue that she is more to the right than Obama but certainly not her husband.

Then why the fuck are they voting Republican. Fucking idiots

A lot of them aren't. The Millennial shift to the Democratic party isn't just because of centrists changing their mind.
 
A lot of young Republicans are more libertarian minded. Libertarians still identify with Republicans more than Democrats. I think Libertarians would sooner wait for a change in the Republican party than vote Democrat.
Anecdotally a lot of people I know who say "I'm a libertarian!" only really use it to distance themselves from the two parties. Just because a lot of them seem to support Bernie Sanders.
 

Foffy

Banned
WHich is scary. All we can say for America is that we are fucked. The crossroads for us to act will have passed long before we ever collectively get our asses together for real and vote, let alone act for our interests on a national and global level.

Hell, its coming up very soon.

True, but I imagine it is because those who get it at present - those at least involved in an aspect of status to talk about it - are high-level intellectuals.

The change we need here happens when it is all encompassing, not left to economists at Citi Group or machine learners or Stephen Hawking. And I unfortunately think it will only play a mainstream role when we see the disruption of the social ideas to life - one must have a job, you are worth what you work - seen as irrelevant and ultimately superseded by technology.

Horses didn't get new jobs when cars came, so to assume everyone displaced can just get up and do something else in a society with very little safety nets as is can only be justified as sadism. That reality will first have to be acknowledged from stem to stern before we can even get close to acting on it, even if those looking at it from that higher-level perspective very adamantly argue this is where we're going, and this is what needs to be done in an age of transitioning.

The biggest obstacle is thought. Regressives who argue against the climate are, for lack of a better word, doomed to reason with on this issue. It very easily uproots their conditioned values of work, labor, worthiness, and what constitutes being a "parasite." Our obstacle, as it usually is when trying to make prosperity for ourselves and others, is usually found as the enemy of reason. America in particular has a whole culture that emphasizes reason as secondary. The love of learning is a fluke today; you learn now to get a job or career, for that's all that matters. Shit like this is abound.

Base income is like one of the furthest left things you can do. While I agree this article might be overblown on someways, especially economically, just because the nation doesn't support the most extreme proposals doesn't mean it is not moving left on other issues.

I never once said America is not moving left. They are not moving left economically, and that is plain as day. In an age where developed worlds are at least talking about it on a main stage, America is profoundly absent. Nobody in the political world dares even mention the trends here.

Canada, Finland, and Switzerland are perhaps the leaders in this discussion. Is America even at the table? No, only outliers to the political spectrum dare talk about it. No American think tanks say we need it, even if a bastion of intellectualism in the UK like the RSA says it should be a social goal of society to do such a thing.
 
I never once said America is not moving left. They are not moving left economically, and that is plain as day. In an age where developed worlds are at least talking about it on a main stage, America is profoundly absent. Nobody in the political world dares even mention the trends here.

Canada, Finland, and Switzerland are perhaps the leaders in this discussion. Is America even at the table? No, only outliers to the political spectrum dare talk about it. No American think tanks say we need it, even if a bastion of intellectualism in the UK like the RSA says it should be a social goal of society to do such a thing.

Again just because American's don't talk about basic income doesn't mean the country isn't moving left economically. More Americans say that inequality is a problem and are more comfortable with government intervention int he economy. Most Millennials are comfortable with Socialism. Things have changed.
 
The party knows it has an attendance problem. This is reoccurring, becomes more severe as the party maintains a lock on the presidency, and will most likely rear its head again in 2018 and 2022.

Given that, one should not blame the voters. They are legion. You will have a very hard time trying to change them. One should, instead, blame the party, for it knows that the problem is coming and does absolutely fucking nothing different to tackle it.

There's only hundreds of politicians. Far easier to change the approach of hundreds than the approach of millions. Find a way to appeal to them. Find a way to get them to the poll. You want to be elected and know that apathy is the name of the game. It is up to you to tackle it.

Or just keep bitching and hope that they magically turn up. Do what you always do and fail like you always fail.

I believe that in general Dems do everything within their power to try to up turnout. Repubs of course try to make it more difficult to vote which is shameful. But I don't believe that Dems aren't trying hard enough or aren't trying to come up with fresh ideas, it's just that you can't force people to do stuff they don't want to do ( or is very inconvenient for them to do).
 

rjinaz

Member
Why are we so certain Trump will lose?

He's excited a base that doesn't normally vote but could turn out in droves now that they have a candidate that excites them.

that works both ways. There are only so many white racists (sorrynotsorry) and plenty of minorities that will do what they can to ensure he's not the president
 

ZZMitch

Member
America is so far right that it makes the Conservative Party of Canada look like commies

As someone who is a dual citizen and votes in both U.S and Canadian elections this is totally not true. The Conservative Party of Canada is significantly right of the U.S Democratic Party.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom