Lefty please explain

What policies?

The only policy proposal she has laid out in any detail is the tax on unrealized capital gains. Which has been tried before with disastrous results. Does that mean I can subtract unrealized capital losses from my taxable income?
Everything is just promising rainbows with warm and fuzzy statements.

"I will fight for all Americans" Every President since George Washington has made the same promise. How has that worked out?

"I will fix Social Security" Broken record. A 'permanent fix' for Social Security has been introduced in Congress every session since 1980.

"Hope and Change" Really? Can't you come up with new material instead of recycling the same democrat slogans from every campaign since 1990?

"End the tax on tips" The only concrete idea you have elucidated so far was stolen from Trump?

"Fix the border problem" The first President that promised to fix the border problem was Truman. Every candidate since has said the same.


I want to see the details of your proposals. How are you going to fix Social Security? How are you going to stem the flow of illegal aliens? How will you control rising food and housing costs -- price controls? Ask the USSR and Venezuela how well that worked. What is you policy on public lands? oh wait...you reversed your position on fracking, now you support it. Will you reverse again once elected?

I don't vote for a Sloganeer in Chief and I don't vote for a pig in a poke. Let us see some concrete policy positions.

OTOH, I don't vote for a toxic obnoxious blowhard either.

a reply to: dave5426
Well that Libertarian party needs votes. I am loaning mine to the blowhard. He actually works and I am shocked to say his ideas work.

a reply to: Justoneman

I actually agree with some of Trump's policies. If he wasn't such an offensive person I might consider voting for him.
It does leave me in a quandary who to vote for. Jill Stein is loonier than RFK was. Chase Oliver has nothing to attract my attention is running solely to stimulate local down-ballot races for the Libertarian Party. Randall Terry and Cornel West are nobodies.

originally posted by: RazorV66

originally posted by: berbofthegreen
So I spent yesterday reading up on your candidates. All I know is that Trump is evil, the DNC candidates aren't bad at all, in fact they like black people which is the best thing ever. And if you don't like the stuff they are really doing you are racist and sexist among other slurs and then of course there is the most wonderful thing ever; abortion.

So tell me how that is going to reduce costs, taxes, and military foreign engagement? Since those are the real problems...

Good luck getting a coherent answer.

Everything they do is by based on feelz, not facts.

Don't you mean alternate-facts?

originally posted by: AwakeNotWoke
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Have you seen my analogy?

Red car or blue car.

Blue car careening in a straight line toward a concrete wall at 200mph.

Red car taking a longer route and only 180mph to the same destination.

Which one you gonna ride in?

:

I'll walk, thanks.

originally posted by: ThinkinCap
a reply to: berbofthegreen

From what I know, being from California and New Zealand (basically another California in the middle of the ocean) --- the only thing people care about is not having women's rights taken away + gay rights being taken away. These two social issues have basically held everyone hostage to the DNC, most of which who will vote for Harris very reluctantly in order to prevent the Right from removing more freedoms. Project 2025 is a very big issue to them, they believe that when Trump is elected much of what the Heritage foundation wants will come to fruition. Ultimately, most people believe both parties are extremely corrupt and don't represent the people but instead large corporations and the military industrial complex. Some actually secretly like Trump and feel like he would do a better job, but once again cannot vote for a party that they believe will continue to erode women's rights / gay rights.

NZ is currently ruled by one centre-right party and two far-right parties in coalition. They are trying to undo the Treaty of Waitangi and cut Māori participation out of just about every government department or project.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: ThinkinCap
a reply to: Moon68

Hmm I'll help you out, specifically they are worried about 'Rights' being taken away such as abortion and gay marriage, contraception, etc - the obvious things.

Think back. Way back to about 2 or 3 years ago. Remember mandatory vaccines? Remember doctors, nurses, pilots, men and women in the military, and many, many others who lost their jobs because they didn't want to take a "safe and effective" drug that was later proven neither safe nor effective?

The Democrats position was summed up succinctly by Arnold Schwarzenegger, "To Hell with your rights. Take the damn shot."

And now Democrats are claiming they care about anyone's "right to choose"?

I'd have to call BS on that one.

Can you quote for me the clause of the US Constitution that grants the right to refuse public health initiatives?

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: ThinkinCap
a reply to: Moon68

Hmm I'll help you out, specifically they are worried about 'Rights' being taken away such as abortion and gay marriage, contraception, etc - the obvious things.

Think back. Way back to about 2 or 3 years ago. Remember mandatory vaccines? Remember doctors, nurses, pilots, men and women in the military, and many, many others who lost their jobs because they didn't want to take a "safe and effective" drug that was later proven neither safe nor effective?

The Democrats position was summed up succinctly by Arnold Schwarzenegger, "To Hell with your rights. Take the damn shot."

And now Democrats are claiming they care about anyone's "right to choose"?

I'd have to call BS on that one.

Can you quote for me the clause of the US Constitution that grants the right to refuse public health initiatives?

WTF? Can you quote from the constitution where it says I have no choice in regards to my healthcare and I have to inject whatever they want to inject into me?

You’re going full Orwellian nazi dude. Put down the booster shot and step away.
They’ve done a full on washing of you upstairs.

originally posted by: KrustyKrab

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: ThinkinCap
a reply to: Moon68

Hmm I'll help you out, specifically they are worried about 'Rights' being taken away such as abortion and gay marriage, contraception, etc - the obvious things.

Think back. Way back to about 2 or 3 years ago. Remember mandatory vaccines? Remember doctors, nurses, pilots, men and women in the military, and many, many others who lost their jobs because they didn't want to take a "safe and effective" drug that was later proven neither safe nor effective?

The Democrats position was summed up succinctly by Arnold Schwarzenegger, "To Hell with your rights. Take the damn shot."

And now Democrats are claiming they care about anyone's "right to choose"?

I'd have to call BS on that one.

Can you quote for me the clause of the US Constitution that grants the right to refuse public health initiatives?

WTF? Can you quote from the constitution where it says I have no choice in regards to my healthcare and I have to inject whatever they want to inject into me?

You’re going full Orwellian nazi dude. Put down the booster shot and step away.
They’ve done a full on washing of you upstairs.

I'm not saying that there is a legal right to any sort of medical intervention, or not, in the USA. There are no health related rights, positive or negative, for citizens in the USA, under the US Constitution. None.

If someone there were to enforce some sort of medical mandate, US citizens cannot claim a right for medical choice, because they have no such documented right. There are regional statutory laws that relate to healthcare best-effort and litigation protection, but these are not codified as rights and vary from state to state.

Under Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which just about the rest of the world except the USA has ratified, medical care is documented as a fundamental human right.

The US political and legal systems are oppressive and not protective in many things, in comparison with current world standards.

originally posted by: chr0naut

Can you quote for me the clause of the US Constitution that grants the right to refuse public health initiatives?

The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that any powers not given to the federal government, or withheld from the states, are reserved for the states or the people. It was ratified on December 15, 1791 and is considered the final amendment in the Bill of Rights.

The Constitution does not give the Federal government the legal authority to interfere with anyone's health care. While it could be argued that the States can usurp that authority, common sense would dictate that the right to make medical decisions for oneself should reside with the people.

That's my biggest heartburn with the whole false dichotomy of the abortion debate. One side argues it's a Federal issue, the other side says it's a State's issue. But both sides seem to agree that there should be some government interference. I say that medical decisions should be between a doctor and a patient. Government, and insurance companies, should have no say in the matter.

a reply to: chr0naut

That would be the SCOTUS Sebelius decision that said government cannot mandate participation, but a financial penalty for refusal was legal. Later, Congress gave up trying to enforce the penalty and is now moot.

There's really something off in the water in NZ, that's for sure....

a reply to: TinfoilTophat

Politics should be divorced from government.

Where one is, by definition, designed to achieve what no one man can accomplish alone, the other is to erode and divide that noble cause.

a reply to: UpIsNowDown2

originally posted by: berbofthegreen
So I spent yesterday reading up on your candidates. All I know is that Trump is evil, the DNC candidates aren't bad at all, in fact they like black people which is the best thing ever. And if you don't like the stuff they are really doing you are racist and sexist among other slurs and then of course there is the most wonderful thing ever; abortion.

So tell me how that is going to reduce costs, taxes, and military foreign engagement? Since those are the real problems...

Oh I see so you think BILLIONAIRE trump is here for you? Tell me how?

originally posted by: dave5426
a reply to: chr0naut

That would be the SCOTUS Sebelius decision that said government cannot mandate participation, but a financial penalty for refusal was legal. Later, Congress gave up trying to enforce the penalty and is now moot.

The SCOTUS Sebelius decision did not grant citizens the right of choice, and was not something in the US Bill of rights. On the contrary, it upheld Congress's power to force citizens to pay a penalty for forgoing health insurance, removing their liberty to choose to opt out of medical insurance, and showing that US citizens have no actual rights, in regard to Health. The beneficiaries of forced insurance payments are insurance companies.

Also, despite the fuzziness of official language use in the USA, insurance is not health-care. Insurance amounts to a wager that insurance companies have that, on average, citizens won't be sick.

Health care is what medical doctors, medical specialists, nurses and medical technicians do.

Insurance is what office workers, who rarely have any direct or physical contact with patients, do.

originally posted by: chris_stibrany
There's really something off in the water in NZ, that's for sure....

a reply to: TinfoilTophat

I believe the TinfoilTopHat is an American.

People from other nations do not vote in US elections, or for US politicians.

Also, 12 cities with the worst tap water in the US.

"There's a dangerous national pride embedded within the MAGA movement. It's that mentality and cult of personality that I will be voting against, not for any democratic policies. "

You seem to think that being ok with your country means that it is an automatic panzer run. And yet you seem to forget that for the last 50 or more years the "west" has been invading and invading and yet is never being invaded. We have been so good at it that our guilt has led us to allow a invasion via illegal immigration (as defined until about 1964 or so - thanks Theodore Kennedy) .I suppose that was nationalism?

No, the last 50 years have been at the behest of globalist garbage thinking. Funny how when a liberal controls military ambition it is perfectly wonderful. Isn't it?

originally posted by: Therealbeverage

originally posted by: berbofthegreen
So I spent yesterday reading up on your candidates. All I know is that Trump is evil, the DNC candidates aren't bad at all, in fact they like black people which is the best thing ever. And if you don't like the stuff they are really doing you are racist and sexist among other slurs and then of course there is the most wonderful thing ever; abortion.

So tell me how that is going to reduce costs, taxes, and military foreign engagement? Since those are the real problems...

Oh I see so you think BILLIONAIRE trump is here for you? Tell me how?

with policies that have helped us, and will again. You don't have to believe he's Christ reincarnate, or even a nice guy, but you do have a 4 year track record with accomplishments, and the results of those accomplishments.

For me personally, he's the right guy because he is ignorant as to how things really work. He hasn't been trained to NOT FIX ANYTHING, so it can be exploited and used for monetary gain for all family of politicians. He actually tries to fix things that need fixing. I am man enough to deal with his quirks and inadequacies. Are you?

a reply to: chr0naut

The Fourth Amendment.
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons...."

originally posted by: TheSemiskepticII
a reply to: chr0naut

The Fourth Amendment.
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons...."

Finish the clause. You can't pick out a few words out of a sentence and reinterpret them.

It's no wonder that some Americans believe the stuff they do about themselves if they can't even parse a sentence! But I suppose a right to education is also something absent from their Bill of Rights.

LOL.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

It clearly has nothing to do with a right of medical choice.