Donald The Progressive

M

Michael

歌舞伎
Valued Senior Member
A few reasons on why Progressive Murikan's may want to consider voting for The Donald. He's positively a Statists, and a Progressive Social Fascist at that.

On guns?
Trump: “I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun”
- That seems reasonable? Pretty progressive if you think about it. You know, reaching across the isle. Making small but realistically doable change.

The Uber-Rich?
In order to reduce federal debt Trump said the federal government should directly take control of the bank accounts of some very rich private citizens and levy a “one-time tax”. By Trump's calculations, his proposed 14.25 percent levy on net worth above $10 million would raise $5.7 trillion and wipe out the debt in one full swoop (well, back in 1999). "No one has put forward a plan to make this country entirely debt free as we enter the next millenium. The plan I am proposing today does not involve smoke and mirrors, phony numbers, financial gimmicks, or the usual economic chicanery you usually find in Disneyland-on-the-Potomac," Trump said. "The other 99 percent of the people would get deep reductions in their federal income taxes," he said.

- Seems 'progressive' and 'socialistic', and IF elected, that would BE "The People's" mandate in our good Ole' Greatest Democracy on Earth......MooMurika. We'll probably have to lower that down to $2 million and up the tax to $25%. But, that's fine with the bottom 99%. Most of them don't even have $5000 worth of lifetime savings.

The Free-Market?
Um, The Donald doesn't 'do' free-market. He's a pure Statist - through and through. The government MUST be used to prop up major US corporations (including banks) and he was a strong advocated for TARP. Of the Big Three auto companies? They should NEVER be allowed to fail. “You cannot lose the auto companies”.
- Seems to be looking out for the worker. How magnanimous.

Universal Healthcare?
Of course The Donald supports a total government takeover of healthcare and has done so since in the 1990s.
Trump: “We must have universal health care”
- Doesn't get much more Progressive than that.


So, there you have it. A few good reasons Progressive Statists, such as you may be, should consider voting Trump over Warmonger Hilary. Or not. It's not going to matter either way.
 
(LOL) Survey USA Poll: Trump beats Clinton head-to-head matchup

In an election for President of the United States, today, business provocateur Donald Trump narrowly defeats Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Al Gore, in head-to-head matchups, according to nationwide polling conducted by SurveyUSA.

Today it’s:

* Trump 45%, Clinton 40%. (There is a 20-point Gender Gap; Trump leads by 18 points among seniors.)
* Trump 44%, Sanders 40%. (Trump leads by 10 among independents and by 6 among moderates.)
* Trump 44%, Biden 42%. (Trump leads by 10 among the best educated; Biden leads by 17 among the least educated.)
* Trump 44%, Gore 41%. (Trump leads by 12 among men and by 18 among voters age 50+.)

Among a subset of registered voters who tell SurveyUSA that they pay “a lot” of attention to politics, the scale tilts to the right: Today it’s:

* Trump 54%, Clinton 36%.
* Trump 53%, Sanders 39%.
* Trump 53%, Biden 37%.
* Trump 54%, Gore 36%.

Voters were asked whether they support a given Democrat “enthusiastically,” “with reservations,” or, whether they are “holding their nose” voting for a particular candidate.

* 57% of Clinton voters say they are voting enthusiastically.
* 53% of Sanders voters say they are voting enthusiastically.
* 49% of Biden backers say they are voting enthusiastically.
* 45% of Gore voters say they are voting enthusiastically.

By contrast:

* 8% of Clinton supporters say they are holding their nose.
* 8% of Sanders voters say they are holding their nose.
* 9% of Biden voters say they are holding their nose.
* 12% of Gore voters say they are holding their nose.

Voters were asked, regardless of whether they were Democrats or Republicans, and regardless of whom they might vote for in a primary, who they thought would be the major party nominees. Today, Labor Day, voters handicap the primary contests this way:

* 44% say Clinton will be the Democratic Party nominee.
* 22% say Biden will be the nominee.
* 14% say Sanders will be the nominee.
* 3% say Gore.
* 9% say someone else.

* 30% say Trump will be the Republican party nominee.
* 20% say Jeb Bush will the the GOP nominee.
* 14% say Ben Carson will be the GOP nominee.
* 6% say Ted Cruz will be the nominee.
* 4% say Marco Rubio will be the nominee.
* 4% say John Kasich will be the nominee.
* 3% say Carly Fiorina will be the nominee.
* 2% say Scott Walker will be the nominee.
 
The Great Recovery (for the Oligarch).

sgs-emp.gif


Ahh..... "The" Great Recovery, next stop Demagogue and "The" Great Redistribution.
 
Curiously most presidential candidates speak as though they could control the tax codes.
However:
Officially called the Internal Revenue Code, the tax code is written by Congress and is currently more than 3.7 million words long [source:Olson]. Luckily, the tax code wasn't written all at once. Rather, it's a compilation of all tax laws written and passed by Congress since the ratification of the Constitution in 1788.

The Constitution gives Congress the power to levy taxes for the collection of revenue. Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution reads, "The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States." However, income tax as we know it didn't exist until the ratification of the 16th Amendment, in 1913.
Click to expand...

It seems that every 4 years we go through a massive delusional orgy of posturing insanity.

"If elected president, i will make it a federal crime to harvest green cheese from the moon." "Save the moon! Vote for me!"
 
sculptor said:
Curiously most presidential candidates speak as though they could control the tax codes.
However:


It seems that every 4 years we go through a massive delusional orgy of posturing insanity.

"If elected president, i will make it a federal crime to harvest green cheese from the moon." "Save the moon! Vote for me!"
Click to expand...
Although the tax code is a result of Congressional action, presidents can propose changes, which often get passed.
 
Michael said:
The Great Recovery (for the Oligarch).

sgs-emp.gif


Ahh..... "The" Great Recovery, next stop Demagogue and "The" Great Redistribution.
Click to expand...

Do you understand your graphic Michael? It clearly shows unemployment has fallen and fallen consistently since the end of The Great Recession. Further, you or the authors of your graphic are being dishonest when they associate Shadow Stats, a specious source which caters to conspiracy nuts, with the BLS. Shadow Stats isn't credible. The BLS is. That's why only the conspiracy nuts pay any attention to Shadow Stats. As has been endlessly pointed out to you, Shadow Stats counts employed people as unemployed are reports them as unemployed. The real unemployment numbers (the red line) shows unemployment has declined from 10 percent to 5 percent, for most folks that's a good thing.

The nearly 1 million people a month who were losing their jobs each month and now have jobs have jobs and they aren't losing jobs. Most folks consider that a good thing Michael.
 
Last edited:
Please do make derogatory comments about groups of people based on stereotypes without providing appropriate evidence.
A million people a month were losing their jobs thanks TO our central planners.

As for losing or not losing jobs, it all depends on the TYPE jobs.
* Millions of people 'lost their jobs' when Communism ended. Was ending Communism a good thing Joe?
* Millions of Americans 'lost their jobs' when Slavery ended. Was ending Slavery a good thing Joe? Even at the cost of all those "Jerbs".

Don't worry, Americans are too fat and stupid to do anything other than wave a flag for the next idiot who becomes POTUS. And who knows? Maybe that next person will be Trump. Maybe the functionally illiterate electorate will elect Trump? They elected that moron Bush II. They elected that moron Bill Clinton. If their TV tells them to elect Trump - that's who they'll elect. And, regardless of whomever is elected, they'll work much longer hours, see their family less often (if they can even afford to have a family, incidentally, the DoED now wants to create Government Run Boarding Schools - LOL, I suppose 1 in 5 functionally illiteracy is still too high for the Oligarchy) and they'll elect a real demagogue. Then we get The Great Redistribution. This is where the State takes whatever you have, and gives it to other people - for the Good of Society. Then you're given a Jerb doing something useful, like working on a collective farm or digging ditches or, as Warren Buffett resently opined: "You want everybody educated to their potential. You want people to reach their potential. That still won't work for some people in a highly developed market system. I mean if this were a sports-based system, you could give me a PhD in football, and I could practice eight hours a day, and I might be able to carry the water from, not onto the field, but from the locker room to the bench. There's just some people don't fit well into a highly skilled market-based economy. They're perfectly decent citizens. We'll send them off to Afghanistan, but they are not going to command a big price."

Yup, according to Buffett, functionally illiterate Government Schooled Americans are good for one thing: Cannon Fodder.

Welcome to Amerikkka
Land of the Fleeced
Home of the Slave
 
Michael said:
A few reasons on why Progressive Murikan's may want to consider voting for The Donald. He's positively a Statists, and a Progressive Social Fascist at that.

On guns?
Trump: “I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun”
- That seems reasonable? Pretty progressive if you think about it. You know, reaching across the isle. Making small but realistically doable change.

The Uber-Rich?
In order to reduce federal debt Trump said the federal government should directly take control of the bank accounts of some very rich private citizens and levy a “one-time tax”. By Trump's calculations, his proposed 14.25 percent levy on net worth above $10 million would raise $5.7 trillion and wipe out the debt in one full swoop (well, back in 1999). "No one has put forward a plan to make this country entirely debt free as we enter the next millenium. The plan I am proposing today does not involve smoke and mirrors, phony numbers, financial gimmicks, or the usual economic chicanery you usually find in Disneyland-on-the-Potomac," Trump said. "The other 99 percent of the people would get deep reductions in their federal income taxes," he said.

- Seems 'progressive' and 'socialistic', and IF elected, that would BE "The People's" mandate in our good Ole' Greatest Democracy on Earth......MooMurika. We'll probably have to lower that down to $2 million and up the tax to $25%. But, that's fine with the bottom 99%. Most of them don't even have $5000 worth of lifetime savings.

The Free-Market?
Um, The Donald doesn't 'do' free-market. He's a pure Statist - through and through. The government MUST be used to prop up major US corporations (including banks) and he was a strong advocated for TARP. Of the Big Three auto companies? They should NEVER be allowed to fail. “You cannot lose the auto companies”.
- Seems to be looking out for the worker. How magnanimous.

Universal Healthcare?
Of course The Donald supports a total government takeover of healthcare and has done so since in the 1990s.
Trump: “We must have universal health care”
- Doesn't get much more Progressive than that.


So, there you have it. A few good reasons Progressive Statists, such as you may be, should consider voting Trump over Warmonger Hilary. Or not. It's not going to matter either way.
Click to expand...
He doesn't hold these views now, unfortunately.
 
Michael said:
A million people a month were losing their jobs thanks TO our central planners.

As for losing or not losing jobs, it all depends on the TYPE jobs.
* Millions of people 'lost their jobs' when Communism ended. Was ending Communism a good thing Joe?
* Millions of Americans 'lost their jobs' when Slavery ended. Was ending Slavery a good thing Joe? Even at the cost of all those "Jerbs".
Click to expand...

Ah, no. As has been explained to you countless times, we don't have central planners. But that doesn't sound as scary. The truth doesn't work for you Michael. That is why you spend so much time making shit up. And no the job type doesn't matter. We were loosing nearly a million jobs a month more with each passing month. The economy was shrinking at an annualized rate of 10% and more with each passing month. All that is gone because the government intervened to counter the panic and break the death spiral.

The Great Recession wasn't in anyway similar to the fall of communism. Is there a point there somewhere? As for your slavery assertions, do you have any evidence to support your claims? And again, what is the point? How is it relevant? Slaves were freed, they could choose where they wanted to work. A good number worked for their former slave owners as freemen.

Michael said:
Don't worry, Americans are too fat and stupid to do anything other than wave a flag for the next idiot who becomes POTUS. And who knows? Maybe that next person will be Trump. Maybe the functionally illiterate electorate will elect Trump? They elected that moron Bush II. They elected that moron Bill Clinton. If their TV tells them to elect Trump - that's who they'll elect. And, regardless of whomever is elected, they'll work much longer hours, see their family less often (if they can even afford to have a family, incidentally, the DoED now wants to create Government Run Boarding Schools - LOL, I suppose 1 in 5 functionally illiteracy is still too high for the Oligarchy) and they'll elect a real demagogue. Then we get The Great Redistribution. This is where the State takes whatever you have, and gives it to other people - for the Good of Society. Then you're given a Jerb doing something useful, like working on a collective farm or digging ditches or, as Warren Buffett resently opined: "You want everybody educated to their potential. You want people to reach their potential. That still won't work for some people in a highly developed market system. I mean if this were a sports-based system, you could give me a PhD in football, and I could practice eight hours a day, and I might be able to carry the water from, not onto the field, but from the locker room to the bench. There's just some people don't fit well into a highly skilled market-based economy. They're perfectly decent citizens. We'll send them off to Afghanistan, but they are not going to command a big price."
Click to expand...

Feel better....? That's just another nonsensical tirade.

Michael said:
Yup, according to Buffett, functionally illiterate Government Schooled Americans are good for one thing: Cannon Fodder.
Click to expand...

That is another one of your many outright lies.
 
An interesting comment I read on ZeroHedge:

The world is becoming increasingly chaotic and the American people are seeking a leader who can bring order, make tough decisions, and capture the zeitgeist of this moment in history.​

While this is obviously just this person's opinion, I think it's at least somewhat correct. Particularly in the majority of American Citizens wanting a Leader. Not a political servant. Not for the Government to piss off and let them alone. Nope. They want a Leader.

Or, to put it another way, most Americans want a Ruler (thank you Government Schooling). Some want Bernie. Other's want Clinton. And still other's seem to be falling for Trump. Dear Leader will take care of everything. Of course, the Citizens need an effective Dear Leader - thus, Dear Leaders needs more centralized power. And, so, that's what we'll get.
 
"Some People Just Don't Fit In The Economy"
"We'll Send Them Off To Afghanistan"
- Warren Buffet, CNBC (2015)

If that's not the classical definition of Cannon Fodder then, I'm not quite sure what is. He's very specifically saying that "some people" in society do not have the necessary skills to be economically successful in a modern high-tech knowledge based economy. Therefor, according to Buffet, "We" (the State) will send "them" (the functionally illiterate economically poor) off to Afghanistan (one of the State's phony-baloney-never-ending-trillion-dollar-war-profiteering "Interventions") to die defending "The Roads".

That IS the definition of how the term "cannon fodder" is used Joe.
Anyway, argue with Buffet, not me.

*note: Thank the Gods we (the State/Central Bank) bailed out oligarchs like Buffet. Call it Karma.
 
Last edited:
Daecon said:
What are his views on things like gay marriage and abortion?
Click to expand...
As for gay marriage, I'd guess they (the founder's of ZeroHedge) don't believe the State has any role in determining who can or can not get married ('morality rules' like in KSA and Iran are not only immoral, but positively medieval IMO). And, they'd maybe say abortion is simply identity politics vote pandering. But, I personally do not know.
 
michael said:
If that's not the classical definition of Cannon Fodder then, I'm not quite sure what is. He's very specifically saying that "some people" in society do not have the necessary skills to be economically successful in a modern high-tech knowledge based economy. Therefor, according to Buffet, "We" (the State) will send "them" (the functionally illiterate economically poor) off to Afghanistan (one of the State's phony-baloney-never-ending-trillion-dollar-war-profiteering "Interventions") to die defending "The Roads".

That IS the definition of how the term "cannon fodder" is used Joe.
Anyway, argue with Buffet, not me.
Click to expand...
It's still sarcasm and irony and the like, even when the wingnuts don't get it.
 
Trump? Who knows? He'd say anything to get elected, just like Clinton, Sanders, Bush III, etc....
Click to expand...
This is not true. Sanders will not say "anything" to get elected, and not even Clinton will leave reality as far behind as anyone running on the Republican Party slate is forced to just in surviving the primary campaign.
 
Michael said:
An interesting comment I read on ZeroHedge:

The world is becoming increasingly chaotic and the American people are seeking a leader who can bring order, make tough decisions, and capture the zeitgeist of this moment in history.​

While this is obviously just this person's opinion, I think it's at least somewhat correct. Particularly in the majority of American Citizens wanting a Leader. Not a political servant. Not for the Government to piss off and let them alone. Nope. They want a Leader.

Or, to put it another way, most Americans want a Ruler (thank you Government Schooling). Some want Bernie. Other's want Clinton. And still other's seem to be falling for Trump. Dear Leader will take care of everything. Of course, the Citizens need an effective Dear Leader - thus, Dear Leaders needs more centralized power. And, so, that's what we'll get.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much the opposite of what Sanders says. He says it's not enough just to have a good president, we have to have congress too. It has to start at the roots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top