Trump's Red Wave

Google: Is Medicare a form of socialized medicine...

Well? We're waiting. Did you get a response? I'll bet it went something like:

Medicare isn't socialism. It's a program developed under the socialist political theory that if the State takes money from everyone, it can pay a little bit of that money to a few and everyone will be happy about it while those in power get richer and richer.
 
Google: Is Medicare a form of socialized medicine...

It is 'socialized' because it levies taxes and collectively provides a public service.

This is in line with social liberalism...tax to provide public service equally available to all. Capitalism, private property, individual rights and inequity still all around because you need capitalism/hierarchy/individualism on some level to organize and pay for the public services.

Which is different than socialism, which is a government takeover or nationalization of the industry and it's associated markets, no private property, forced equity almost always at the end of a gun barrel.

Public services =/= socialism. Go back to school.
 
Last edited:
Well? We're waiting. Did you get a response? I'll bet it went something like:

Medicare isn't socialism. It's a program developed under the socialist political theory that if the State takes money from everyone, it can pay a little bit of that money to a few and everyone will be happy about it while those in power get richer and richer.

Actually it goes more like: Medicare is a publicly funded form of health care, which fits the looser form of socialized medicine. The reason it only loosely fits, is because the full definition covers all citizens. But facts never applies to some people...does it?
 
Well it has been fun watching our friends try to spin this. Enjoy your weekend.
 
Actually it goes more like: Medicare is a publicly funded form of health care, which fits the looser form of socialized medicine. The reason it only loosely fits, is because the full definition covers all citizens. But facts never applies to some people...does it?

So, by your own definition Medicare ISN'T "socialism" now is it. Changing the words from "socialism" to "socialized medicine" sort of tells everyone that you like moving the goalposts when you're losing the argument.
 
So, by your own definition Medicare ISN'T "socialism" now is it. Changing the words from "socialism" to "socialized medicine" sort of tells everyone that you like moving the goalposts when you're losing the argument.

God damn those dictionaries and encyclopedias. :D
 
God damn those dictionaries and encyclopedias. :D

I think it's more like they shoot off their damn mouths without knowing of what they speak, then have to hustle to try and cover it up while hoping no one notices.

Yet for some reason they can spot a typo a mile and a half away. Unless it's one of theirs. :)
 
Well? We're waiting. Did you get a response? I'll bet it went something like:

Medicare isn't socialism. It's a program developed under the socialist political theory that if the State takes money from everyone, it can pay a little bit of that money to a few and everyone will be happy about it while those in power get richer and richer.

If you mean elected officials, they don't get richer until after they leave office.
 
I think it's more like they shoot off their damn mouths without knowing of what they speak, then have to hustle to try and cover it up while hoping no one notices.

Yet for some reason they can spot a typo a mile and a half away. Unless it's one of theirs. :)

Yeaaaaaa.

Some of us took civics/economics/poli-sci....others got "social studies" .....the former can spot and fuck with the latter. :D

If you mean elected officials, they don't get richer until after they leave office.

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How much pcp do you put on your breakfast every day?

I mean, are you trying to lie to other people or yourself? Because only the most clueless people don't see elected stains getting WAY richer WAY faster than should be possible. That's why one of the few things R's and D's agree on (at the grassroots level) is getting the money out of politics.
 
Last edited:
I mean, are you trying to lie to other people or yourself? Because only the most clueless people don't see elected stains getting WAY richer WAY faster than should be possible. That's why one of the few things R's and D's agree on (at the grassroots level) is getting the money out of politics.

The money they're talking about is not going to officials, it is going to TV stations.
 
The money they're talking about is not going to officials, it is going to TV stations.

You are fucking HIGH bro.

LOL

You don't go to DC making a couple hundo a year + bennies worth 200k and come out 6 years later worth 14 million without skimming some fuckin' cream.

It's done indirectly, like 750,000 "speaking fees" to stop by and do brunch with Goldman Sachs. There are many other ways to move money around, it's not hard and they don't really try to hide it because legal.

But it's bribery, taking advantage of insider knowledge, no-bid contracts and on and on and on shit ain't new. That's how a public servant who's paid 180k a year manages to magically, somehow, bring home a few mil a year.
 
Because of R gerrymandering.

Votewise Ds were 7 million more than then Rs. They don't win as many seats because Rs are cheaters.

Nevertheless, they still kicked R ass and took back the House.

Rs have had total control for two years, and all they had to show for it was a "Tax Cut" they couldn't run on because everyone hates it. Instead they had to lie their asses off and pretend they "really" support Obamacare. Just flat out blatant lying. Still didn't work.

Also: Obama's picks won way more than the Orange Fuckwad's picks

How's that CARAVAN?


But didn't even come close to the +53 seat net gain of the R's in 1994.
 
Spin, baby, spin!

It matters because the "blue wave", wasn't; it was approx the statistical average. It's not spin either. You can't tout the election results as anything other than the typical midterm changing of the guard. And even at that, it's a failure on the part of the D's because they only took the majority in the House rather than both houses of Congress.

And, in order to barely do that, the D's had to mobilize their turnout to historical, or in some cases record-breaking, highs. So, I wouldn't crow too much about busting your asses to achieve "average" results.
 
Because of R gerrymandering.

Votewise Ds were 7 million more than then Rs. They don't win as many seats because Rs are cheaters.

Nevertheless, they still kicked R ass and took back the House.

Rs have had total control for two years, and all they had to show for it was a "Tax Cut" they couldn't run on because everyone hates it. Instead they had to lie their asses off and pretend they "really" support Obamacare. Just flat out blatant lying. Still didn't work.

Also: Obama's picks won way more than the Orange Fuckwad's picks

How's that CARAVAN?


LOL, "cheaters". That's rich.
 
It matters because the "blue wave", wasn't; it was approx the statistical average. It's not spin either. You can't tout the election results as anything other than the typical midterm changing of the guard. And even at that, it's a failure on the part of the D's because they only took the majority in the House rather than both houses of Congress.

And, in order to barely do that, the D's had to mobilize their turnout to historical, or in some cases record-breaking, highs. So, I wouldn't crow too much about busting your asses to achieve "average" results.

So what? They have the majority and can stop BigCheeto’s lousy ideas in their tracks. (And your obsession with Democrats is quite amusing.)
 
Democrats will have won nearly 40 House seats, kept losses in the Senate to a minimum despite a highly unfavorable map, flipped more than 300 state legislative seats, taken back some governorships, and won a majority of attorneys general positions.

And, in order to barely do that, the D's had to mobilize their turnout to historical, or in some cases record-breaking, highs.

I agree!
 

And STILL didn't do as well as the R's in 1994. Not to mention they don't control Congress and cannot "undo" anything Trump has done since he was inaugurated or stop his political appointees from being confirmed. They also cannot legislate any referendums or new legislation because the Senate is under no obligation to timely take up whatever bills they pass or to vote on them as written.

The D's had major record-breaking turnout for the midterms and all they got was the ribbon for the second prize. Not much to gloat about.
 
Back
Top