Thread has been deleted
Last comment
Biden is running
Other TheVyrox 
In case there havent already been 100 threads about it, Biden has announced that he is officially running for president 2020. Lets all agree to not vote for him, ok? ok.
2019-04-26 16:41
nt hilary
2019-04-26 16:42
#2
autist | 
CIS bjornzz 
why even vote for this grandpa lul, 76 years old he will probably die in few years RIP
2019-04-26 16:42
Every candidate could die of age, Look at them, 70+ Senior home
2019-04-26 16:43
Donald Trump 72. Bernie Sanders 77, Elizabeth Warren 69, Bill Weld 73.
2019-04-26 16:46
#8
autist | 
CIS bjornzz 
yeah true, their average age is actually quite high, I'm just not interested in politics so assumed he was the oldest candidate
2019-04-26 16:49
#18
Nero | 
China Aachen 
Mohamad 93 years old
2019-04-26 17:48
Pedophile
2019-04-26 18:38
Fuck this old creepy cunt. He's basically male Hillary.
2019-04-26 16:45
#5
 | 
Romania Anonym20 
+1
2019-04-26 16:46
ok
2019-04-26 16:47
#9
 | 
Israel Hezekiel_Keepo 
People are generally too stupid and should not be allowed to vote anyone. Democracy is dead because general public is not smart enough.
2019-04-26 16:51
I was thinking about this as well. One would need a system in which some form of democracy is combined with some form of geniocracy (in this case I just mean people who are very well informed about politics and economy) or a democracy where you are only allowed to vote if you pass a minimum-knowledge-test or so. Its still not perfect but it would probably be better than what is in for example the US.
2019-04-26 17:29
I have been thinking about this time to time. I think there should be some kind of test for people who apply for being elected. Test would be simple so that each candidate could easily pass it if they just studied the material. Topics would be general world politics, history, economics etc. So that those elected have at least some grasp of how the world works. Then the people who vote. Forcing people to pass some test would be against democracy, but still... maybe some kind of test which could make your vote count more. If you pass the test, your vote is x2. Something like that. Difficult question,
2019-04-26 17:47
This wouldn't be "a form of democracy", this would be a form of aristocracy
2019-04-26 18:07
Uhh, no. Aristocracy is when a small group of privileged people rule by heredity. It doesnt matter how informed or knowledgeable they are, they just rule by historical default. Thats nowhere near what I have proposed.
2019-04-26 18:08
>you are only allowed to vote if you pass a test >people who have this knowledge tend to be richer >rich people would decide who would be in the power >the economic elite would rule
2019-04-26 18:17
lol i understand why he didnt respond back to you.. this would only apply to 3rd world countries like yours, not in sweden, denmark, finland, germany or the rest of europe
2019-04-26 18:26
The percentage of people that would have the knowledge to pass in that test would definitely be higher in more developed countries, but the poorest part of the population would still be excluded from the political process, which is unacceptable
2019-04-26 18:32
But again, the Elite wouldnt rule alone. It would be geniocracy COMBINED with a democracy OR pure democracy with a minimal-knowledge-test that would only exclude lets say 5% of the population (or whatever I would have to think about this more). Also, it has nothing to do with heredity. If an old guy on the board of experts dies, the next person could be just as old or older or younger but completely unrelated. It could also be an expert from a poor background. There are many ways in which its not an oligarchy which is btw what you ACTUALLY meant.
2019-04-26 18:55
this man knows
2019-04-26 19:00
I agree with the geniocracy part, but taking away the right to vote from some people is absurd imo
2019-04-26 19:00
nvm
2019-04-26 19:05
they already rule
2019-04-26 20:00
you two just read a churchill quote and act enlightened now.
2019-04-26 18:58
Youre an idiot. As if we are the first and only ones to criticize democracy.
2019-04-26 19:29
democracy is not dead because of a stupid public, but because of a giant, venomous monster with spikes that corrupts everything it touches we didnt build a fence to keep it out
2019-04-26 20:01
Thats quite a rude way to describe Rupert Murdoch but I totally agree.
2019-04-26 20:03
Democracy is dead because medias focus on personalities instead of politics. It's not that people are stupid, they are simply not being informed about anything which remotely resembles the full picture.
2019-04-26 17:42
This is MUCH more extreme in the US than in other 1st world countries. Just saying.
2019-04-26 17:59
#38
 | 
Europe tweekzter 
well... they got FOX News for their consverative bs and they got all the others for their liberal bs... Europe only got the latter.
2019-04-26 18:08
Tbh politcal debates here in the NL are mostly superficial, only about 2-3 'big' themes with only one-liners. From what I've seen of American debates, it is WAY more technical, and local states are much more involved in their interests, even during primaries. In the NL a politician could visit your town, but only the 10 people who would 100% vote for him would go there and circlejerk their viewpoints in 'discussions' which are one-sided and pointless, and the rest of the town wouldn't even know they were there. Lack of some sort of primaries-system hurts the political system here, as it's some sort of gatekeeper to the actual national elections where candidates actually have to care for provinces or at least name their ideas/potential policies, rural and urban. NL parties give up their 'hard' views straight away; it's a job machine, parlement members make 120k a year but make a coalition with your most hated enemy party and you earn 250k as cabinet member, no wonder they are all so keen to forego their entire party-identity for personal gain. There's so much more in-depth discussions in US politics too imo, even during national debates trump and hillary are delving into stuff the general public in the NL would totally zone-out off, I'd say US politics have more engagement from the general public than here, where even in regular debates it's often about whose hairstyle sucked, or 1 moment of interruption done right which ppl totally focus on, whereas US candidates have to actually know facts. Comparing any televised debate in the NL pales in comparison to the US ones too, here it's some left parties all together versus the biggest right party, totally pointless too since you know they'll just form a cabinet together anyway and pass each other jobs. It's hopeless, at least in the US something changed with Trump vs Hillary choice, in the NL you have a fake choice, rip democracy.
2019-04-26 19:11
Very odd, I have totally different experiences from my country.
2019-04-26 19:30
I am danish, and have realized that hosts, during candidate meetups are always changing subject to personal stuff as soon as the candidates starts to talk seriously.
2019-04-27 01:08
#34
 | 
Europe tweekzter 
Democracy isn't Burger King - you can't have it your way...
2019-04-26 18:06
#11
 | 
Bulgaria squezzi 
Why not? He is the perfect Democratic candidate and the only one who can get a lot of Republican voters votes as well
2019-04-26 17:30
#15
 | 
United States AproximateCS 
The thing is alot of people dont want another moderate. They believe it will just keep things the same, along with the lack of many people getting ecstatic
2019-04-26 17:46
#20
 | 
Bulgaria squezzi 
But Bernie can get votes only from the Democratic party, he won't get as much as Biden from Republican voters while those who vote for Sanders will vote for Biden as well and he will get many more votes from Republican voters.
2019-04-26 17:49
#22
 | 
United States AproximateCS 
Bernie has some support from the republican party. Have you watched the town hall he did on fox news?
2019-04-26 17:51
#45
 | 
Europe tweekzter 
Biden would still get a lot more republican votes. Sanders is just too far left for most republican leaning voters.
2019-04-26 18:13
#47
 | 
United States AproximateCS 
Biden has more of an a chance of getting people who voted for trump. But Bernie would get more independents and Democrats
2019-04-26 18:15
#55
 | 
Europe tweekzter 
I think the hate on Trump is strong enough. No need for Sanders to mobilize democrats.
2019-04-26 18:26
#82
 | 
Poland Ryunar 
the hate on trump is artificial
2019-04-26 19:14
#83
 | 
Bulgaria squezzi 
Biden will get a lot more votes on the elections than Sanders, that must speak enough for who should run for a President from the Democratic party. I think this guy above is a die-hard fan of Bernie and doesn't see obvious things or just doesn't want to see those things.
2019-04-26 19:29
Biden won't get more than 10%, once his past comes to the forefront his numbers will start dropping. Sanders will run all over him. It will be Sanders vs Harris in the end. Sanders takes it and beats Trump.
2019-04-27 06:21
#97
 | 
United States AproximateCS 
Who knows, they let trump beat Hillary ( Though no one liked her)
2019-04-26 19:51
#49
 | 
United States AproximateCS 
But they are the only real candidates. Never heard of most of the rest before this
2019-04-26 18:16
Conservatives usually don't take too kindly to pedophiles. Doubt he'd get many votes from either party regardless
2019-04-26 17:55
#33
AZR | 
Australia Mortein 
That's funny. The conservatives are the ones defending catholic pedophiles because muh religion. The rights were the ones defending george pell.
2019-04-26 18:06
You've very educated on the political spectrum
2019-04-26 18:08
Coz he is the status quo. And thats fucked.
2019-04-26 18:01
fr this guy stupid
2019-04-26 17:31
I am highly convinced it has little to no influence who becomes president of USA. They all bow to the free market, which has a very firm grip upon USA as I see it.
2019-04-26 17:31
The heavy protectionist is monopolized free market?
2019-04-26 17:48
English please?
2019-04-26 17:50
Couldn't edit comment on shit phone
2019-04-27 00:12
sanders will win anyways
2019-04-26 17:49
#26
 | 
Mexico <3 Zetas 
Bernie Sanders for president? You frickin’ kidding me? He’s a commie
2019-04-26 17:54
you are speaking about trump
2019-04-26 18:04
No he's speaking about the guy that wants to steal money from people and redistribute it.
2019-04-26 18:10
yh you mean slightly increase taxes of upper class to create healthcare as a right, yes indeed
2019-04-26 18:20
No, I mean steal money from people who worked hard to make it.
2019-04-26 18:22
Yh, just remind me which class did 70% of the trumps tax cuts benefit? Why did trump outsource more jobs than obama ever did ? How many people got kicked out of there health insurance since trump is president? How much money did trump waste (more) on the military to finance wars he wanted to leave ? By how many percentage did the wealth inequality increase since trump is president ? Why did the amount of concerns paying 0 taxes double since trump is president ? Why is Trump wasting billions on a wall that wont solve any problems? Why does trump provide general motors with orders? Why have the students debts increased even more than under obama Should I go on? The list is endless. Fucking elect a left president so your country gets something done!
2019-04-26 18:32
All of these are irrelevant to Bernie Sanders stealing money from people. Also are you serious? Walls do nothing? Should we remove all the walls from prisons? I mean they're useless after all right? Isreal put up a wall and stopped 99% of illegal immigration.
2019-04-26 18:35
#65
allu | 
Sweden Dguyg 
That worked because Israel is a much tinier country than the US is. Building an effective wall in the US would cost tremendous amounts of money. Also, even if you were to up an effective wall it does not really matter. Most illegals get into the US legally and then they overstay their visas.
2019-04-26 18:42
2 things that are not true here. 20 billion is the estimate for what it would cost, I'm not sure what Sweden's GDP is but in the US 20 billion is a drop in the bucket. Also, Visa overstays only make up about 45% so that is less than half, or in other words, not most.
2019-04-26 18:45
u know that sweden is richer than the us by far ? (people ofc)
2019-04-26 18:55
You keep bringing up stuff we are not talking about. I'm done responding to you, you obviously have no idea what is going on. Also, you are wrong again, the average income in the US is higher than in Sweden.
2019-04-26 18:57
so delusional
2019-04-26 18:58
"All of these are irrelevant to Bernie Sanders stealing money from people." Great argument uve got there! Can u like explain it ?
2019-04-26 18:54
brainlet
2019-04-26 18:59
dont bother, the brainlet cant answer complicated questions.
2019-04-26 18:59
That argument reminds me of people complaining that there are laws in place in a civilized society "because they rob you of your freedom". You can either work with a society where "but u cant teyk muh money" is in place and see that it doesnt work or you can look at countries where the taxes are used for infrastructure and it works out just fine. One of the candidates is working towards the working option, the other one shovels more money to himself and his friends. And btw, one great thing, if it isnt supposed to be capital tax would be a huge inheritance tax. If done very smartly, it would force the top x.x percent to either bring the money back into the economy themselves or bring it into the economy by getting taxed. And the argument "oh so hard earned money" doesnt work here because it would otherwise just go to the children that havent "worked hard" for that money but only had the luck to be the children of that particular rich person.
2019-04-26 19:41
Even if that money wasn't earned by the children, someone still worked hard for that money and it is not up to you to decide if it's okay to rob someone. The estate tax is completely immoral and makes no sense. It is a tax on money that is already taxed.
2019-04-26 20:06
That person is dead, they wont be crying anymore if someone took their money. You are probably another one of those "organ donor only if opt-in"-idealists. No, FUCK that shit. Better work to create a better place for the people who really need it instead of clinging on to literally useless ideals.
2019-04-26 20:08
I don't really have a view on organ donors, I haven't given it any thought. The only thing I can think of right now would if it were to be against their religion. If that is the case then I wouldn't support it. Can you make a good argument for why stealing someone's property is moral?
2019-04-26 20:12
I would put it as the price to be allowed to live in a functioning civilized society. Or one could argue that it is less moral to let unused billions just sit there while millions of poor kids (and adults) suffer and have barely enough to eat. Its again where idealism (never allowed to take anyones property for any reason whatsoever) or realism meet. And religion can go fuck itself if a person dies because they cant get that organ.
2019-04-26 20:17
I think we can both agree that it would be better if rich people were to donate more to charities or to people who need help. The point where we disagree is that you think it is okay to point a gun at them and force them to do that, I do not. Which is essentially what we are talking about here. If it is a government measure that is telling them to give up their money then it must be compelled by force/at point of gun.
2019-04-26 20:18
Not sure if that would solve the problem of the state still needing money to run schools, hospitals, police, fire departments, build streets and keep all of that in good condition. Charity-type institutions are only one part. And we would still have to incentivize those top-people to give their money away. How would we do it? Waiting for their own altruism is definitely NOT an option.
2019-04-26 20:28
I'm not sure who you incentivize that is is a tricky subject, but all I know is that I do not support forcing something to give up their property, so long as it was obtained lawfully.
2019-04-26 20:31
Well, if there was no way to incentivize them without force, I would have no problem with forced taxation for the reasons laid out in #113. I find the non-usage of billions for decades in spite of the falling-apart of society much more immoral than breaking the idealistic rule that you mean.
2019-04-26 21:00
I would disagree. Forcefully taking from someone is theft. There is no way to get around it. You can try to tip toe around it all you want but what you are advocating for is theft.
2019-04-26 22:56
And leaving starvation and healthcare be unadressed is indirect denial of assistance. We can put these labels on these things, but again. Id rather live in a society full of realists where we know that we all have to give to society in order to receive from society, instead of some holy land of ideals where shit is constantly hitting the fan because some smug elitist legislators desperately cling to their moral standards while letting 75% of the country suffer because of exactly that. I think the organ-donor argument is a very good one because it serves as a very fitting analogy. Unless you can truly rationalize why we should not be allowed to take the organs from donors in the face of imminent death of a person otherwise perfectly capable of living, you should kinda also agree on the tax thing (at least on unused capital, maybe not so much on income). I think we have reached the point where unless one of us comes up with an incredible revelative argument, the discussion will just go in circles.
2019-04-26 23:12
#58
 | 
Europe tweekzter 
aka make the rich move themselves and their money abroad? Yeah, he can probably do that.
2019-04-26 18:29
Its not like there are ways to punish that.
2019-04-26 19:32
#88
 | 
Europe tweekzter 
It's always about punishing instead of rewarding.
2019-04-26 19:34
Reply needs to have actual content.
2019-04-26 19:35
Cool bro I won't vote for biden In fact I won't vote at all because luckily an not merican
2019-04-26 17:51
#24
 | 
Mexico <3 Zetas 
The Democrats have become socialists. KAG2020
2019-04-26 17:52
#64
allu | 
Sweden Dguyg 
Biden Socialist Pick one
2019-04-26 18:38
#25
s1mple | 
Germany NatsuS 
Is Biden the gay guy who kiss women at the backhead and let touch himself by Trump?
2019-04-26 17:54
yes he's a pedophile
2019-04-26 18:02
trump should win again for the memes and crying libtards
2019-04-26 18:00
Thats without a doubt the by far worst, most dipshit and retarded argument for Trump I have had to read over the last 3 years. And im a Trump voter.
2019-04-26 18:11
trump should hang and you along with him
2019-04-26 19:00
creepy guy, doubtful this guy would ever win Dolan Drumpf
2019-04-26 18:07
#40
 | 
Germany ToiletShitter 
He’s running but he can’t make people run.
2019-04-26 18:09
#41
 | 
Canada suzi 
Trump 2020
2019-04-26 18:10
#44
 | 
United States kami917 
Biden is just another corporate democrat trash. Most of the “progressive” candidates are running on Bernie’s ideas from the 2016 election cycle. Biden can’t beat Trump, Bernie can.
2019-04-26 18:12
#54
 | 
United States AproximateCS 
+1
2019-04-26 18:25
#93
 | 
Bulgaria squezzi 
Don't get fooled by the Internet. Once the campaign starts, the Republican owned media and the Trump trolls will destroy Bernie. They will create articles about how Bernie is a communist and Americans fought 40 years against Communism and how Communism is totally the opposite of what the Founding Fathers thought America would be and should be. Politics is a game and the parties elect a President who can win and not the one who deserves the most. Biden is the perfect candidate to beat Trump, Bernie isn't.
2019-04-26 19:38
#94
 | 
United States kami917 
But the only people who will fully buy into the propaganda is the core of trump’s voter base, if it’s trump vs Bernie in the pres election people will see in the debates that Bernie’s ideas aren’t so radical.
2019-04-26 19:42
#95
 | 
Bulgaria squezzi 
But do Trump voters have the brain capacity to realize that?
2019-04-26 19:49
#99
 | 
United States kami917 
Some of them definitely will, there was a fair amount of people who voted for trump because it was Hilary against him and not Bernie. I mean we’ll see what happens, the DNC could easily rig the primaries against Bernie like they did in 2016
2019-04-26 19:53
Afaik, the DNC has been stripped of some competences that they used to have. Plus, this time the DNC is surely being watched with an eagles eye by everyone who isnt establishment or naive as fuck.
2019-04-26 20:00
#106
 | 
United States kami917 
I don’t think it will stop them from rigging the primary, it’s all about the blackmail and money, and just like Hilary I’d be willing to bet Biden has dirt on a lot of high ranking dnc officials and money to burn
2019-04-26 20:04
Oh absolutely, Biden is Obama/Clinton, just not black and female.
2019-04-26 20:05
#110
 | 
United States kami917 
+1
2019-04-26 20:09
#46
 | 
Europe tweekzter 
no touchy touchy !!
2019-04-26 18:14
#48
 | 
Norway PeteZz 
His weakness is his voting record on foreign policy (was against 1st gulf war, voted for the 2nd, lul). strength is his popularity in the rust belt. He would probably smash Trump in debates though. But not sure he can win the primary. Hoping for someone like yang or buttigieaheiah. Some young Mofosz
2019-04-26 18:15
#53
 | 
United States kami917 
Yang could never gain any traction with republicans, and Pete isn’t favorable with progressives due to some of his ideologies. As a Bernie guy I wouldn’t mind Pete, best candidate besides the Bern.
2019-04-26 18:23
#57
 | 
Europe EneXus 
Trump 2020 <3
2019-04-26 18:27
#62
allu | 
Sweden Dguyg 
Vote Bernie!
2019-04-26 18:37
why murica votes for old fags who have the brain capacity of a 5 years old?
2019-04-26 18:43
elections in america are bought. whoever benefits the wealthiest corps first will win the election. bernie will never win.
2019-04-26 19:01
Two questions related to this : 1) Who else is going to candidate in 2020 for presidency? 2) Isn't Trump supposed to be president until 2021 ? (4 years basically just for the 1st term only)
2019-04-26 19:33
1. all kinds of people, just look it up on wikipedia 2. Yes? But you gotta start your participation in the race soon to get momentum and do the rallies in the states and convince people. Starting 1 month before election will get you maybe 0.1% of the votes.
2019-04-26 19:37
#91
 | 
Germany RDNHT 
Biden is probably running forward as he saw another potential woman he can harass sexually
2019-04-26 19:36
#96
 | 
Nepal bbxovsky 
Isnt he like 100 years old?
2019-04-26 19:50
#YangGang2020
2019-04-26 19:53
Biden is the best way to make Trump re elected (2nd behind Clinton rerun in fact). Great move Democrats.
2019-04-26 20:02
#104
 | 
Other kaiske 
biden = zionist criminal bernie = zionist retard YANG best tulsi is okay too
2019-04-26 20:02
Biden is another old boring white man in a suit ... "presidential material". He would be a complete waste. Bernie is even older, but at least he has a brain and some ideas. They are both too old, but could come in handy as secretaries in one area or another. I think a female president without skeletons in the closet would be best. Trump was the oldest president to take office, at almost 71 years, beating Reagan by a year. Biden and Bernie would be much older.
2019-04-26 20:13
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.