• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If Sanders is the nominee, will you vote?

That's great for WinCo employees, but it doesn't make Hitler a socialist. Hitler privatized state industries.

He put party stooges in charge who did what the party wanted. It was a charade to garner support from businessmen. Meanwhile in fascist Italy, Mussolini by 1939 had the second highest rate of state ownership in the world (the first was the USSR). You know why? Because fascism is just branch of socialism.

And he certainly didn't give ownership to the working class.

Neither did any socialist who ever lived.
 
Correct, and a lot more nerve than you ever had. Wrong, but you are free to cite any posts where you think I've falsely accused you.

One good thing. You appear to see Democrats as low down dirty dogs. I may be wrong there.
 
He put party stooges in charge who did what the party wanted. It was a charade to garner support from businessmen. Meanwhile in fascist Italy, Mussolini by 1939 had the second highest rate of state ownership in the world (the first was the USSR). You know why? Because fascism is just branch of socialism.



Neither did any socialist who ever lived.

Fascism is not a branch of socialism. Fascism is not a branch of economic theory at all. It is a political and national philosophy.
 
Why do you defend Hitler? No, you did not correct. Apparently you do not accept the real Hitler. I spent time in war torn Germany post WW2. I know what my own eyes saw and listened to Germans who lived under Hitler. I do not get my knowledge from a Democrats text book.

Here is some factual information showing how the present Democrat party is very akin to the Nazi party.

The Economic Policy of the Nazis - Foundation for Economic Education

This is script that America's Democrats follow like a religion.

1. Capitalism is an unfair system of exploitation. It injures the immense majority for the benefit of a small minority. Private ownership of the means of production hinders the full utilization of natural resources and of technical improvements. Profits and interest are tributes which the masses are forced to pay to a class of idle parasites. Capitalism is the cause of poverty and must result in war.

2. It is therefore the foremost duty of popular government to substitute government control of business for the management of capitalists and entrepreneurs.

3. Price ceilings and minimum wage rates, whether directly enforced by the administration or indirectly by giving a free hand to trade-unions, are an adequate means for improving the lot of the consumers and permanently raising the standard of living of all wage earners. They are steps on the way toward entirely emancipating the masses (by the final establishment of socialism) from the yoke of capital. (We may note incidentally that Marx in his later years violently opposed these propositions. Present-day Marxism, however, endorses them fully.)

4. Easy money policy, i.e., credit expansion, is a useful method of lightening the burdens imposed by capital upon the masses and making a country more prosperous. It has nothing to do with the periodical recurrence of economic depression. Economic crises are an evil inherent in unhampered capitalism.

5. All those who deny the foregoing statements and assert that capitalism best serves the masses and that the only effective method of permanently improving the economic conditions of all strata of society is progressive accumulation of new capital are ill-intentioned and narrow-minded apologists of the selfish class interests of the exploiters. A return to laissez faire, free trade, the gold standard, and economic freedom is out of the question. Mankind will fortunately never go back to the ideas and policies of the nineteenth century and the Victorian age. (Let us note incidentally that both both Marxism and trade-unionism have the fairest claim to the epithets “nineteenth-century” and “Victorian.”)

Except, this isn't the economic policy of the Nazis, because Hitler banned trade unions, and hated Marxism.
 
If Sanders Is The Nominee, Will You Vote?

This question doesn't apply to those solidly in the Trump or Sanders camp. Most of you will be voting. I'm asking those, like me, who see Sanders' flaws as potentially prohibitive of casting a vote in his name.

I've never been good at holding my nose and voting. I've never done it. I've never had to. We have "none of the above" here, and I've selected it three times: 2000, 2004 and 2016.

Those choices were easy to make. This year, I'd vote for an indicted ham sandwich over Trump. I just don't know if I can vote for Bernie. If I allow myself to vote for someone I find seriously flawed, for the sole purpose of defeating the opponent, then I become part of the problem. I don't believe I can do that.

My question revolves around turnout. If Sanders isn't the nominee, we can expect some Bernie supporters won't be voting. If Sanders is the nominee, how will that effect turnout among moderates who aren't voting for Trump? Will they hold their noses or stay home?

I'm most likely voting for Trump again, especially if Sanders gets the nomination.

He's already spurned more than a few of his old supporters in the past three years and even now he's doing more to just keep chasing other voters away.

Sanders is no longer the candidate that I once supported.
 
If Bernie Sanders is not the nominee, I shall not vote for any Presidential candidate in 2020, just as I refused to do in 2016.

If Bernie Sanders is the nominee, I shall vote for Donald Trump.

My leadership litmus test values integrity. Therefore I find it impossible to vote for Trump.
 
Bernie Sanders is to the Democratic Party what a scab is to a union.

Sander's already is vowing to destroy the Democratic Party on behalf of Trump if he doesn't get the nomination. Sanders openly stated he can't stand liberals and is the anti-Democrat.

I pretty much agree with this. Don't know if I'd call Sanders a scab, but he's not a big union supporter, IMO. And I don't know if he's vowed to destroy the party, but his nomination may just do that.

My concern is more for the nation than the party. I want unity.
 
I don't think you understand what socialism is...

Socialism means working class ownership of the means of production. It gives power to the unions. It doesn't ban them.

Unions and their members are capitalists. They bargain for wages and benefits, just like suppliers bargain for price and delivery time. Workers don't need socialism. They need protection.
 
Good question. For years I did just that; then realized how badly I was screwing myself over and also...learning that if you choose not to vote, you really don't have a right to complain about what happens afterwards.

Might I suggest that you accept a Trump victory by not voting for the DNC candidate and do a legitimate write-in vote for president (a real, viable person, not Mickey Mouse) and then focus on any local election candidates as they will certainly have a more immediate impact on you and/or and referendums or local spending bills or laws. It's rare that a ballot will only have the presidential election on it and nothing else. And if it does, and you vote for a real person that you legitimately could stomach...at least you have the right to b!tch afterwards.

Ultimately, it will depend on if you want Trump to win if there no candidate for you. By not voting, you will have helped Trump to win and not have made any impact on local issues and/or candidates.

I wasn't overly specific in the OP. I do vote for down ballot candidates. I have considered write ins for president (would have been Kasich or Biden in 2016), but I like our "none of the above" option. It does make a statement. We had a small local election some years back where "none of the above" won. It's not binding, but sends one hell of a message.

As far as complaining goes, I think it's silly to say your right to bitch is tied to your vote. Nonsense. First of all, by staying home or choosing "none of the above," I'm already complaining. Regardless of who wins, I will continue to complain because of the choices presented. Sometimes people surprise me. W Bush did this after 9/11. then squandered my support in Iraq.

I think it's dangerous to find ourselves constantly voting for the lesser of two evils. It's time to start nominating candidates we can vote for, not simply as a placeholder to vote against an opponent.
 
Neither, I am merely correcting your inaccurate characterization of both. Hitler was not a socialist. He was, however, a populist.

Agreed. Socialists ended up in concentration camps in Hitler's Germany. Hitler was not a socialist.
 
If Sanders wins, I'll look long and hard at the third party candidate.

I'm beginning to see I'm not alone. Those of you who seem to agree with me self-identify as moderate or independent.

I believe we moderates/independents still outnumber the partisans on either side, and it appears a Sanders candidacy will result in many of us staying home (or the equivalent)
 
FDR was no conservsative but he backed Hitler. His economy and Hitlers were darned near mirror images.

Really? Of all the bone-headed responses I've read on here yours is in the top ten. Give us a link to your statement.
 
If and democrat doesn't vote for bernie if he is the nominee, that's two votes for trump, the vote you didn't cast and the vote a republican will cast.

Any democrat who sits home might as well just vote for trump. All the people who couldn't possibly vote for hillary helped trump win last time. Are these folks really going to do that again with trump showing his authoritarian tendencies every day?
 
If and democrat doesn't vote for bernie if he is the nominee, that's two votes for trump, the vote you didn't cast and the vote a republican will cast.

Any democrat who sits home might as well just vote for trump. All the people who couldn't possibly vote for hillary helped trump win last time. Are these folks really going to do that again with trump showing his authoritarian tendencies every day?

We each have tolerance for who we will support. To make my point I'll present an extreme.

If the choice is between Hitler and Stalin, I won't vote. My tolerance comes into play where Hitler's opponent passes from Christlike to Stalinlike.

I have to vote for somebody. I have difficulty voting against someone. There are many like me, and all the cries of "You're guaranteeing four more years of Trump" will not change this
 
We each have tolerance for who we will support. To make my point I'll present an extreme.

If the choice is between Hitler and Stalin, I won't vote. My tolerance comes into play where Hitler's opponent passes from Christlike to Stalinlike.

I have to vote for somebody. I have difficulty voting against someone. There are many like me, and all the cries of "You're guaranteeing four more years of Trump" will not change this

So if hitler and stalin were running and you didn't vote, guess what, one will still be elected.

Since neither hitler or stalin are running that's not a choice anyone has to make. However, trump is running and if democrats don't go out and vote, guess what, he'll win again. I have my preferences of who I would like to see win the democratic nomination. Should my choices not be the nominee. You can bet your bottom dollar I will be voting for whoever the nominee ends up being. Trump is making a mockery of not only the oval office but all of america and its institutions. If I can't vote for who I want because they weren't the nominee, I will vote against trump. No problem.
 
So if hitler and stalin were running and you didn't vote, guess what, one will still be elected.

Since neither hitler or stalin are running that's not a choice anyone has to make. However, trump is running and if democrats don't go out and vote, guess what, he'll win again. I have my preferences of who I would like to see win the democratic nomination. Should my choices not be the nominee. You can bet your bottom dollar I will be voting for whoever the nominee ends up being. Trump is making a mockery of not only the oval office but all of america and its institutions. If I can't vote for who I want because they weren't the nominee, I will vote against trump. No problem.

That's your choice. I respect it, but I think it's troublesome that we're finding ourselves in the same position as four years ago. IMO, it's worse than four years ago.

That a severely flawed candidate is leading in delegates indicates a societal/systemic problem in this country. There are several Democrats who would be better choices, as there were Republicans in 2016. That we as a people are choosing the most flawed candidates as nominees is a cause for concern, IMO.
 
Except, this isn't the economic policy of the Nazis, because Hitler banned trade unions, and hated Marxism.

He hated Marxism, not socialism. Marxism and fascism are branches of socialism. Hitler hated Marxism because so many Jews were Marxists, including Marx himself. In case you didn't know, Hitler didn't like Jews very much.

this isn't the economic policy of the Nazis,

Nazism is a branch of fascism. If you look at the economics of fascism in Italy, it was a modern progressives wet dream. That's one of the reasons progressive hero FDR had a man-crush on Mussolini.
 
If Sanders Is The Nominee, Will You Vote?

This question doesn't apply to those solidly in the Trump or Sanders camp. Most of you will be voting. I'm asking those, like me, who see Sanders' flaws as potentially prohibitive of casting a vote in his name.

I've never been good at holding my nose and voting. I've never done it. I've never had to. We have "none of the above" here, and I've selected it three times: 2000, 2004 and 2016.

Those choices were easy to make. This year, I'd vote for an indicted ham sandwich over Trump. I just don't know if I can vote for Bernie. If I allow myself to vote for someone I find seriously flawed, for the sole purpose of defeating the opponent, then I become part of the problem. I don't believe I can do that.

My question revolves around turnout. If Sanders isn't the nominee, we can expect some Bernie supporters won't be voting. If Sanders is the nominee, how will that effect turnout among moderates who aren't voting for Trump? Will they hold their noses or stay home?

Sanders is not my top choice. He is a little kooky, uncompromising, and hotheaded for my taste. But given the choice between Trump and him, I would vote for Sanders. Trump is just batguano crazy.
 
One good thing. You appear to see Democrats as low down dirty dogs. I may be wrong there.

I've always appreciated the Yin-Yang aspect of the two-party system; the Father-Mother traits of the traditional parties. What we have now is a highly dysfunctional system where the Mother (Democrats) have turned into Mommie Dearest and Father is a wife-beating alcoholic drunk on power. Have no respect for either party but had hoped the Republicans would man up, do their f***ing jobs and save our nation. Instead, they've joined a cult and are selling off the house to support that cult. This will get worse before it gets better.
 
He hated Marxism, not socialism. Marxism and fascism are branches of socialism. Hitler hated Marxism because so many Jews were Marxists, including Marx himself. In case you didn't know, Hitler didn't like Jews very much.



Nazism is a branch of fascism. If you look at the economics of fascism in Italy, it was a modern progressives wet dream. That's one of the reasons progressive hero FDR had a man-crush on Mussolini.

So why is it that all the Nazis today love Trump so much?

Hail Trump!!!

 
That's your choice. I respect it, but I think it's troublesome that we're finding ourselves in the same position as four years ago. IMO, it's worse than four years ago.

That a severely flawed candidate is leading in delegates indicates a societal/systemic problem in this country. There are several Democrats who would be better choices, as there were Republicans in 2016. That we as a people are choosing the most flawed candidates as nominees is a cause for concern, IMO.

I don't consider bernie severely flawed, so that's your opinion. As a matter of fact, I intend to vote for him tomorrow in my early voting primary. Again.

As my mom used to tell me, that's why there is chocolate AND vanilla. Everyone doesn't like the same things.
 
FDR was no conservsative but he backed Hitler. His economy and Hitlers were darned near mirror images.

Not even close. FDR didnt legalize slave labor nor did he prohibit unionization.
 
He hated Marxism, not socialism. Marxism and fascism are branches of socialism. Hitler hated Marxism because so many Jews were Marxists, including Marx himself. In case you didn't know, Hitler didn't like Jews very much.



Nazism is a branch of fascism. If you look at the economics of fascism in Italy, it was a modern progressives wet dream. That's one of the reasons progressive hero FDR had a man-crush on Mussolini.

He hated socialism... its why he had socialists slaughtered en masse and killed off the “socialist” branch of his party. The socialist George Orwell fought in a bloody war against the fascists in spain.
 
Some of you voters will have that same feeling as the Kobe Bryant pilot of the helicopter that flew into the hill felt at his final moment. What the hell was I thinking. I could have voted for Trump but let derangement get the best of me.


What?.........
 
Back
Top Bottom