The 2020 Presidential Election

[Zeez]

People confuse the public ownership of industry and distribution with strong tax funded social programs. This misunderstanding comes from misuse of the term socialism largely by people who push to have industry own the government. These people prefer not to have "their" money (because they think all the marbles are theirs) pay for unnecessary tax funded social programs like medical and education. These people already do have most of the money.

 

[Cannavore]

Socialism vs Capitalism

https://youtu.be/YJQSuUZdcV4

The socialism part is argued by a marxist professor and he explains how socialism has changed into not so much a statist movement any longer but a movement to democratize the workplace and shit like that.

 

[h.h.]

The progressives are proposing social programs, not free money.

Social programs create well paying jobs.

Free healthcare and education doesn’t lead to not wanting to work. No healthcare and lack of education leads to inability to work.

 

[Zeez]

Having your tax dollars come back to you in the form of social programs is the reason you pay taxes. Schools, Fire Departments, Police, public golf clubs, These are not socialism. Why would some people like for you to think getting something for your tax money is evil?

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

Yes - a basic human right should be 'fair' healthcare - because if we can't look after each other when we are sick - then we have no right to call ourselves a 'civilization' - nothing civil about having millions of wounded people around you - and not wanting to fix them -

But - sadly - a whole industry wants to make maximum profit out of sick people in the USA - they have become dependant on the massive profits these corporate insurance companies reap - along with all the other services healthcare demands - all turning a very fat profit on keeping people well and alive -

If you take the profit out of medicine - and make it an essential un-taxed public service - a human right - is that such a bad thing?

To me - that's not socialism - that's just being humane - as a human - its natural to want to help others who are in desperate need - who might be less fortunate than yourself -

You put it into the community's. Healthcare. Schools. City gardens. Build infrastructure that helps poor areas access the same nice stuff well to do areas have. You put it everywhere it has been missing from.

 

[bigtacofarmer]

The most wealthy have convinced much of society that they are the job creators. And the are actually just economy manipulators. They are aware that it is the people's labor and and spending that gave them their wealth. The want people to believe that if they make less billions than the year before it will tank the economy. And they will manipulate markets so the can show you regionally how bad it will hurt if they have to move those jobs over seas to make more billions. They will tell you they need to destroy your water and air to stay in business. And even deny known science. It is all to keep everyone in need of them.

Well its over. Most people are beginning to see. We do not require them in our lives.

 

[Zeez]

In the US, we pay so much more and get so much less medical.

Keeping corporations out of government prevents things like this from happening. Maybe they would be more contrite if they paid taxes like we do.

 

[Microbeman]

Yes - a basic human right should be 'fair' healthcare - because if we can't look after each other when we are sick - then we have no right to call ourselves a 'civilization' - nothing civil about having millions of wounded people around you - and not wanting to fix them -

But - sadly - a whole industry wants to make maximum profit out of sick people in the USA - they have become dependant on the massive profits these corporate insurance companies reap - along with all the other services healthcare demands - all turning a very fat profit on keeping people well and alive -

If you take the profit out of medicine - and make it an essential un-taxed public service - a human right - is that such a bad thing?

To me - that's not socialism - that's just being humane - as a human - its natural to want to help others who are in desperate need - who might be less fortunate than yourself -

This is what 'right side' of politics advocates seem to fail to grasp.

Instead they seem to view this activity as taking away from them and giving to undeserving lazy people. They also seem to equate nonprofit to nonpayment which is completely incorrect. All I can think is that this has been drilled into them through repetitive false propaganda.

There is no reason why a blend of free market and social programs cannot function relatively smoothly.

There is also no reason I can see that fair distribution of wealth cannot occur through equal taxation. Others will argue against it but I believe this is attainable through a simple flat income tax combined with a sales tax on luxury items. People below a certain income level would pay nothing.

Ross Perot supported such a system. Justifiably he had his bad points but he was very astute when it came to economics IMO.

 

[Cannavore]

Yes - a basic human right should be 'fair' healthcare - because if we can't look after each other when we are sick - then we have no right to call ourselves a 'civilization' - nothing civil about having millions of wounded people around you - and not wanting to fix them -

But - sadly - a whole industry wants to make maximum profit out of sick people in the USA - they have become dependant on the massive profits these corporate insurance companies reap - along with all the other services healthcare demands - all turning a very fat profit on keeping people well and alive -

If you take the profit out of medicine - and make it an essential un-taxed public service - a human right - is that such a bad thing?

To me - that's not socialism - that's just being humane - as a human - its natural to want to help others who are in desperate need - who might be less fortunate than yourself -

True cost of US healthcare shocks the British public

[YOUTUBEIF]Kll-yYQwmuM[/YOUTUBEIF]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kll-yYQwmuM

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

For 10 years I was living in The Philippines - and had to pay for every birth of my kids - every pill and potion - set of rubber gloves, syringe - and my wife had to have a caesarean - because they were both big babies - and she's a smallish woman - I remember that the cost was around $1200 usd - for each baby - that was 11 and 9 years ago -

I wonder what that would have cost in the USA?

Now we have moved to the UK - and have the National Health Service - it takes a big weight off my head knowing that no matter what happens to the kids - they will get adequate medical care - and the family won't go bankrupt paying for it -

True cost of US healthcare shocks the British public

[YOUTUBEIF]Kll-yYQwmuM[/YOUTUBEIF]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kll-yYQwmuM

 

[MedFaced]

I wonder what that would have cost in the USA?

Now we have moved to the UK - and have the National Health Service - it takes a big weight off my head knowing that no matter what happens to the kids - they will get adequate medical care - and the family won't go bankrupt paying for it -

When my daughter was born 5 years ago the hospital billed our insurance company around $20k. I think we had to cover a $250 premium. That was a smooth “problem free” run. My insurance premiums went up with my other kids and the medical complications that came along but not dramatically considering the extra care.

I have family on public assistance. I’ve never asked what their out of pocket costs are, but there’s lots of young ones in the family and all the stuff that goes with it. They don’t have trouble seeing a doctor and no one has every had to do a go fund me type thing. However, I live in a very liberal state so I don’t know that our experience would match other parts of the country.

My mother in law did recently receive a letter from the Presidents office that stated she has to get an “evaluation” to keep receiving her assistance. They threaten to terminate her benefits if she fails to report. This is something new as she has been disabled for some time and we’ve never had to report to anyone as far as I know. She was on dialysis for like 8 years and received a kidney from UCLA while paying close to nothing.

 

[MtnGanj]

The progressives are proposing social programs, not free money.

Social programs create well paying jobs.

Free healthcare and education doesn’t lead to not wanting to work. No healthcare and lack of education leads to inability to work.

Ahmen!

 

[Tudo]

Trump drives massive turnout in primaries despite token opposition

Trump drives massive turnout in primaries despite token opposition

Trump drives massive turnout in primaries despite token opposition
President Donald Trump doesn’t have much of a primary fight on his hands — but Republican voters are nevertheless turning out in droves for him, a warning sign for Democrats in November.
The massive turnout is a reflection of organic enthusiasm among conservatives and a sophisticated effort by Trump's campaign to rev up its get-out-the-vote machine ahead of the general election. Trump and Vice President Mike Pence traveled to Iowa and New Hampshire ahead of voting, and the campaign flooded the two states with high-profile surrogates and launched a Facebook advertising blitz reminding supporters to cast ballots.
The efforts are paying off, with Republicans turning out in historic numbers. Trump received more than 31,000 votes in the Iowa caucus, surpassing the 25,000 Democrats who turned out during Barack Obama’s successful 2012 reelection bid. Trump’s share was more than four times the number of Republicans who caucused during George W. Bush’s 2004 reelection campaign.
The vote totals in New Hampshire were even starker. The president received 129,696 votes, more than doubling Obama and Bush's totals.
While it’s unclear what the figures might portend for the general election — the president's job approval numbers remain stuck in the mid-40s in most surveys — the results highlight the degree to which Trump’s base is energized. A little more than a year after the president’s party suffered sweeping losses in the midterm elections, Republicans are bent on ensuring that Trump wins a second term.
“There is a personal vote for Donald Trump that is unshakeable,” said John Couvillon, a Louisiana-based pollster who has been tracking the primary totals. “Republican voters are willing to go out" to vote for Trump even though he doesn't have a formidable primary challenge.
Couvillon has also been monitoring early totals in Tennessee, which holds its primary on March 3. Despite the lack of a serious contest, Republican turnout in the state is down only 3 percent from 2016, when the party was in the thick of a fiercely competitive primary.
Story continues
Republicans such as Ralph Reed, the founder and chairman of the Faith & Freedom Coalition, said Trump’s record on issues dear to conservatives drove turnout in the first two states. He and others said Democrats' recent impeachment push also motivated his supporters.
“Impeachment has lit a fire under the Trump base — and I anticipate it will burn until Election Day in November,” said former Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman, chairman of the pro-Trump Republican Jewish Coalition. “Voter intensity is a key element in electoral success.”
Jeff Link, a veteran Iowa-based Democratic strategist, said Trump's relentless focus on his conservative base — which he called the "George W. Bush strategy on steroids" — had bolstered his numbers.
Yet Trump's turnout is also by design. Hoping to drive up its numbers, drown out primary opposition, and send a message to Democrats, the Trump campaign dispatched hundreds of field staff to New Hampshire and set up an operation to reach out to supporters by phone. Trump's campaign treated Iowa and New Hampshire as a dry run for its general election turnout operation across battleground states.
The strategy has echoes of 2004 and 2012, when Bush and Obama built up massive organizations while the rival party fought among themselves in splintered primaries. Both presidents used the advantage of time to develop get-out-the-vote operations, raise money, and contact supporters well in advance of Election Day.
“This is the problem that every party finds itself in when it's running against an incumbent president,” said Scott Jennings, who served as a top political aide in the George. W. Bush White House. “Trump is going to be difficult to beat, just like Obama was difficult to beat and just like Bush was difficult to beat.”
The primaries have created some measure of consternation for the Trump team, which has been working to stave off the kind of embarrassment that incumbent George H.W. Bush faced in 1992 when he won New Hampshire by a closer-than-expected margin over primary challenger Pat Buchanan. The president's orbit took notice that Republican rival Bill Weld won a single delegate in Iowa, and Trump advisers were closely watching the New Hampshire totals.
Weld, the former governor of neighboring Massachusetts, ended up receiving just over 9 percent in New Hampshire. (Under Republican Party rules, the Iowa delegate won't end up casting a vote for Weld at the GOP convention unless he receives a plurality of delegates in at least five states, a highly unlikely scenario.)
The reelection campaign has yet to announce whether it will mount get-out-the-vote operations for the next set of Republican primary contests on Super Tuesday, March 3. Trump is slated to hold a rally in North Carolina on March 2 before the state votes the following day.
Democratic turnout in the first two states was more mixed by comparison. While Iowa Democrats narrowly surpassed the 171,000-vote total of 2016, the party fell far short of the 240,000 record it set in 2008. In New Hampshire, the outcome was more favorable: Over 300,000 voters cast ballots, breaking the party’s record from 2008.
Josh Schwerin, the senior strategist at the liberal Priorities USA super PAC, rejected the idea that Trump’s turnout is a red flag for Democrats. Trump had bolstered his totals with personal visits and advertising, he noted, and the voter influx isn't entirely organic.
“Turnout is going to be high on both sides,” Schwerin said, “and both sides will need to fight for an edge in November
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-drives-massive-turnout-primaries-120014482.html

 

[Tudo]

RAW VIDEO: Trump on Air Force One flies over Daytona 500

RAW VIDEO: Trump on Air Force One flies over Daytona 500

RAW VIDEO: Trump on Air Force One flies over Daytona 500
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLHz4xK4sHY






President Trump Taking A Lap At The Daytona 500
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6k1p9AynpE

 

[Tudo]

Daytona 500 :: President Trump & Thunderbirds :: 2020

Daytona 500 :: President Trump & Thunderbirds :: 2020

Daytona 500 :: President Trump & Thunderbirds :: 2020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UI-ESfttWF4

 

[Hammerhead]

Trumpturd posts the wrong Daytona picture. His dummies posted a pic from bushes visit to Daytona 16 years ago. Only the smartest people work for Trumpturd LMAO.

https://people.com/politics/trump-campaign-manager-tweets-wrong-air-force-one-daytona-photo/

True cost of US healthcare shocks the British public

[youtubeif]Kll-yYQwmuM[/youtubeif]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kll-yYQwmuM

Some People still think there's nothing wrong. We cant even call a ambulance knowing we cant afford it.

 

[Microbeman]

Single term presidents who lost campaigns for re-election since 2 party con in existence

Democrats 2
Republicans 5

However one of them Democrats, Cleveland did a come back to serve another single term.
The most revered of presidents FDR would have served 4 terms but for dying in office motivating the 22nd amendment.

It is not likely a modern day FDR could beat Trump. In all likelihood he would be labeled Rickety Roosevelt or Gimpy Limpy or Wheelchair Wonder (Freewheelin Franklin?) which would be joyously chanted by his mindless groupies.

 

[Zeez]

Single term presidents who lost campaigns for re-election since 2 party con in existence

Democrats 2
Republicans 5

However one of them Democrats, Cleveland did a come back to serve another single term.
The most revered of presidents FDR would have served 4 terms but for dying in office motivating the 22nd amendment.

It is not likely a modern day FDR could beat Trump. In all likelihood he would be labeled Rickety Roosevelt or Gimpy Limpy or Wheelchair Wonder (Freewheelin Franklin?) which would be joyously chanted by his mindless groupies.

FDR did do some good stuff. He made the rich pony up, New Deal, got us out of the depression, created social security. We do need someone to redirect us again with such a positive impact.

 

[Cannavore]

Bernard is the closest extension of FDR's New Deal & Economic Bill of Rights we got.

The Green New Deal is basically FDR's Economic/Second Bill of Rights fit for modern times + Climate change policy

 

[Gry]

Have an audio stream of Hartmann running currently.
Nice resource.