Jump to content

Strootman

Member
  • Content count

    102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Strootman

Profile Information

  • Location
    Italy

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:
    No Party/Other
  1. The PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE

    Not only the past was not perfect, but it was usually far from it. Racial problems are just one small side: the past brings with it a great number of human faults derived from the Dark Ages. There is a reason why they call them DARK. Through my life I've learned that if anything is made in a certain way because of tradition, then it's safe to assume that particular thing is wrong and there are a hundred of ways to do it better. US is one of the countries with less spending in social welfare (link). You spend, on average, 5% more of its GDP in health care compared to the other western countries. This in turn means that reforming its sanitary system US would be able to save almost ONE TRILLION dollars per year. Let's say that the government will reallocate only half of it to alleviate debt (which would mean the US would be the western countries spending the least on welfare), that would still mean more than 400 billions per year to other welfare voices. True... this is an old question that has no easy solution other than enforcing the education of young generations. It will take time, but in the end it will work. Of course it isn't. There is a clear correlation between high income inequality and lack of democracy. Anyone supporting high income inequality is not a democrat.
  2. Why we have Trump

    Simply perfect.
  3. Why we have Trump

    And again, more bubbling of the same slogans. You have no arguments, and like any typical conservative with no argument, you keep shouting the same mantras, usually learned from some specialized propaganda site. You're a conservative, there is nothing necessarily bad in this until you keep your ideas away from extremism. Just deal with it.
  4. Why we have Trump

    You know what, I am tired of this. I tried to reason with you by logic, numbers and reason. The only response was the repetition of your illogical and idiotic mantra. I am pretty sure you're a conservative masking himself as a liberal, seeing that your trolling behavior overlaps almost perfectly with that of many right wingers in NHB. Just like them your only line of discussion is shouting the same false slogans and calling names. When confronted with facts and logic you carefully avoid the topic and go back to your beloved (as well as absurd) slogan. Actually I hope that you're a conservative, I would even respect that to a certain degree. You being a liberal scares me much more, because I though these kind of 'liberals' would only exist as politicians working for the Democratic Party. They may not give a shit about liberalism, but at least they are paid in the millions.
  5. Why we have Trump

    Actually my logic holds up fine, because primaries are one thing, presidential quite another. Just look at the numbers: people voting in democratic primaries, roughly 30 millions, people voting in the presidential, roughly 130 millions. Thus the primaries are not at all representative of the electors that show up in November. It's also a known fact that the presidential elections are determined by votes from undecided and independents, which are not a factor during the primaries. And Bernie Sanders was way stronger than Hillary Clinton among these categories (link). So I stand my position, HC was by far a worse candidate than BS, particularly in these elections and particularly against Trump. Yes, a lot of people stayed home, because Democrat, both electors, but mostly DNC, chose the wrong candidate, a candidate that nobody liked outside the Democratic Party, and many did not like even inside of it. This is the only reason that decided these elections and should also be the starting point for the Democrats to understand why and how they got to this point. It shouldn't be forgotten that the presidential elections are only the last of a series of humiliating defeats for the Democratic Party during the latest years. The Republicans have now the highest number of governors and congress seats of the past century. A concentration of power almost never seen before, dangerous per se and way more dangerous when referred to a party that has gone so much to the right that now borders theocracy and fascism. Is this also Sander's fault? Or it's maybe, just maybe, the democratic party that has almost completely lost an electorate disgusted by its wicked continuous flirting with the worst lobbies and corporations and the subsequent inevitable erosion of middle class and the increase of income inequality?
  6. And I guess most of them are pro death penalty. Which, on the other hand, is perfectly consistent with their religion. The same religion that did not mention anything about abortion as an informed personal choice in its scriptures, simply because, being extremely ignorant, they were completely unaware of such a possibility.
  7. Why we have Trump

    And you keep ignoring the much more important fact that HC lost to the worst candidate in American history. Which makes DJT the second worst, and her the first. So instead of blaming those who voted for Sanders in the primaries, maybe you should blame those who voted for such a faulty candidate and did not let the best one get his chance to run for presidency with a very good chance of succeeding, or at least better than HC. I almost enjoy your fiction about Sanders damaging HC, while it's very probably the opposite, seeing how strongly he supported her presidential campaign after conceding defeat (which is more than 3 months....), bringing a lot of people, that would have probably stayed home, to vote for her. Not enough though, because, as said and demonstrated by history, she was a very bad presidential candidate and lost despite all possible endorsement from Sanders, Obama, all cinema and music stars and every chief of state of every democratic country on Earth. I guess if JFK appeared on November 7th on national TV asking to vote for her, she would have lost anyway. But it's Sanders fault, never her fault, never DNC fault. Keep thinking this way and the Republicans will rule US for decades. Good job.
  8. Why we have Trump

    I am sorry, are you blaming me for Trump victory? I have already wrote TWICE that I would have rushed to vote for HC on November 8. But again, this said, after all that's happened, if the only political approach of the democratic party is blaming those that did now want to vote for HC is politically insane and a idiotic suicide. It's like if Nike blames the people for not buying their new shoes and just keeps producing the same models and shapes hoping that their competitors will present even worse models. I guess Nike administrators wouldn't last 30 minutes with such choices. Democratic party has to deal with the fact that a lot of people do not like the direction they have taken. Either this or commit political suicide. That's it, they'd rather lose the next 10 elections than stopping pursuing their idiotic agenda. How can you blame the people and not the party it's a mystery to me.
  9. Why we have Trump

    I am not arguing Hillary Clinton here, I am arguing the democratic party as a whole. The President is tied hands and feet to his party... Whatever the intentions of HC as president, she would still respond to the congress. Let's assume for a moment that the dems had the majority in the congress, and let's assume Clinton would have pursued a very aggressive liberal and progressive agenda... how many Democrats would have followed her? Not many I guess, and she would compromise a lot without obtaining much, just like Obama, even in the first two years of his mandate, when he had the majority on his side.
  10. Why we have Trump

    As i wrote somewhere else, the choice between the risk of a Trump presidency and Hillary Clinton, for as much as I could despise her, would have been an easy one for me. This said, it's certainly not Bernie Sanders or his supporters that made HC lose, but that same poor choice by the Dems. And if the democratic party, as I am witnessing in this same topic, thinks that pursuing the same conservative agenda of the last decades, on the basis that all progressive voters will chose them, despite being a right-wing party, just because on the other side there is a pseudo-fascist quasi-theological party is very very wrong, as recently proven. Either the Democratic stops pursuing this agenda and reverts back to being a progressive party, or he this will be just the beginning of a long streak of defeats. And possibly the worst chapter of US history.
  11. Why we have Trump

    Votes in the bible belt: HC 719 BS 382 Votes outside bible belt: HC 1501 BS 1449 As you can see HC got almost all the decisive votes in the bible belt. Which makes sense, considering that he is theoretically a jew, most probably an agnostic and doesn't care much about religion, like every decent politician should do. Add to that the fact that Fox News probably pictured him as a communist and the picture is drawn. What is most striking is the map of the results of primaries by district: http://rynerohla.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2016-Democratic-Primaries.png With 75% of US map green, it shows that, outside the bible belt, Bernies Sanders was the preferred candidate almost everywhere, except some major cities. Saying that Sanders supporters are a "little minority" and that he got "blown out" is just false, again. Based on what? You clearly do not understand mathematics, no reason to debate further. This is true, in the end HC won also the popular vote. She did that also thanks to a lot of support from the party that Sanders did not have, but yes, she won. The problem is that her choice was a very very bad mistake, as history told us. She lost right all those swing states where she also lost badly to Sanders, because people in those states have lost faith in classical corporatist democrats. Sanders was clearly a better choice, he was loved by people. It stroke me before the election and still continues to strike the fact that in every TV show he's invited, he's acclaimed by the audience like no one. Add a reference or we are discussing on nothing. Oh sure, just like the DNC was partying at least a dozen of times during the presidential campaign, because of how bad Trump biography is and how bad he performed during that period. I saw how he lost badly yes. Maybe in your bubble world, where Sanders is a communist and communism is the greatest danger to peace and prosperity in the world, he would have lost. In the real world, where communism is long dead, fascism is on the rise and what angers people most is losing jobs, losing wealth and blatant income inequality, Sanders was a great presidential candidate, especially against Trump. Come on get a grip on reality. The democratic candidate was a very bad one, possibly one of the worst ever given the times. I think she would have easily won in 2008, but in 2016 she was the wrong choice. She lost to Donald J. Trump, arguably one of the worst republican candidates ever, not easy. First of all, it looks like you are spreading quite a lot of lies and personal attacks, a typical behavior of conservatives. It's funny how you try to picture everyone who support Sanders as a 'leftist', a term you seem to use as derogatory and indicating some form of extremism. The truth is that Sanders is simply a center-left politician, not some left extremist, which would bring back the Democratic Party to its original standing, away from the conservative positions that has taken in the last decades. Don't blame others for lies, because from what I read, it looks like you are spreading quite a lot of lies and personal attacks, a typical behavior of conservatives. It's funny how you try to picture everyone who support Sanders as a 'leftist', a term you seem to use as derogatory and indicating some form of extremism. The truth is that Sanders is simply a center-left politician, not some left extremist, which would bring back the Democratic Party to its original standing, away from the conservative positions that has taken in the last decades and that you seem to like a lot. In most successful western countries, Bernie Sanders would be considered having centristic positions, centre-left at most. Last summer I was speaking with a guy from Norway that told me Sandesr would be considered centre-right in his country. But I guess Norway in your view is a communist country, right? Well maybe communism works then, considering that they're the happiest country in the world (recently published research). Concerning the supposed 'plans', I'll tell you a secret: ALL politician, none excluded, campaigns with slogans. I doubt even one political leader in history has ever had a perfect plan in his head before being elected. The way it works is that politic leaders give directions to their technicians which will write plans in their names AFTER they are elected.
  12. Something that never gets discussed

    I agree, in the case of researching and producing medications, capitalism is a good thing. It doesn't work in handling healthcare though, US proved this flawlessly.
  13. Why we have Trump

    This is false, Sanders could have won mathematically up to the last day, if it wasn't for the DNC superdelegates voting almost entirely for HC despite the popular vote. It's important to note that the decisive votes for HC victory on primaries came from the bible belt, while Sanders performed better, on average, on liberal and swing states. This is probably because the dumbs from Alabama, Texas, Mississipi and so, think Sanders as a communist, while in the states where there is at least a minimal level of education, people know that accusing politicians like Sanders of being communist is ridiculous. I am sure that DNC analyzed this vote and knew that Sanders, given this data, had much more possibilities of becoming president than HC, considering that she (as well and Sanders) would have lost badly anyway in those states, while Sanders had much better possibilities in swing states, and, most importantly, had much more attractive for independent voters, for whom HC represented the usual horrible corrupted system. Despite this, they supported HC both against the popular vote (591 to 48 was clearly unjust against Sanders, moreover switching this votes, Bernie would have won) and common sense. It's hard not to conclude that they did this because she was a candidate they could control and manipulate. With "they" I mean the big corps that are clearly in almost total control of Democratic Party. They chose to take the risk of losing the election to a madman, giving full power to the republicans for at least 2 years (and the complete control of Supreme Court for decades) rather than presenting a candidate they could not control. This is how corrupt the democratic party is now. Regarding the fact that he is not a 'true' democrat, I agree, he is not, he doesn't represent the interests of big corps like they do, he seems to prefer representing the people. I wrote 'seems' because we will never know, as he couldn't be put to the test, at least at national level, because of idiotic political choices of DNC. And no, he couldn't have run by himself, because american system does not permit third parties or candidates to compete with a minimal chance of success, so the only way to do it is to run for either Democratics of Republicans. If you don't want people like Sanders not being in the democratic party, then you should change your electoral system so as to permit the existence of other parties (to a practical level, not only to a theoretical level) All this said, if I were an american citizen, I would have rushed to vote for HC on November 8, because anything, literally ANYTHING is better then Trump. Possibly Goebbels would have been a slightly better choice than Trump.
  14. Anti Trump Photos

    Try to use a classical image hosting tool, like imgur or similar.
×