Thread has been deleted
Last comment
Lets talk US 2020 elections
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Its way too early to talk about them now but eh might as well do it, lets talk about the 2020 elections like on who can win etc fellow Americans. As of now Trump has a 100% chance of winning 2020, the outrage towards him and most of the 2020 candidates are only amplifying this. But can he still lose despite that? Yes he can actually, but thats only if the Dems nominate none of the establishment rats like Biden, Harris, or Warren. Now for how can the Dems win, its simple actually: Win over the Rust Belt. That region alone will decide who wins in 2020. How can they do so? Simple, you have to talk about their issues and solutions, not continue the pathetic outrage towards Trump or that'll increase the chances of the Rust Belt of voting for Trump. Reason why Trump won in 2016 wasnt due to racism and all that bullshit, it was because of people wanting change and to be heard along with how he campaigned which was related to jobs which struck gold for voters especially in the states of the Rust Belt. If the Dems drop the bullshit (which I doubt) and actually talk about their issues, they'll easily win 2020 but they're only chasing away the RB with their identity politics. Want to debate or talk about what I just said? Just comment.
2019-07-23 20:01
#1
 | 
Canada ProvexPyker 
Can someone explain this politics in simple terms? Like why even is there so many candidates?
2019-07-23 20:04
It's like in Canada where they need to nominate somebody as a candidate, but there just happens to be a ton of candidates for this year's democratic nomination.
2019-07-23 20:09
#13
 | 
Canada ProvexPyker 
Okay thanks, but I don't get how Canadian politics works either so I'm still confused
2019-07-23 20:48
Basically, a bunch of people vote to select the candidate for the Democrats through the primary and caucuses system (they're different, but it's basically just a normal election). Then, in November, the Democratic candidate runs against the Republican candidate, who is currently the incumbent Donald Trump.
2019-07-23 23:01
#28
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
The unfortunate part is that the 2020 US election basically determines our future. Do we stick with Trump and still have important issues unresolved despite some of the many good things he actually did? Or do we try to nominate and elect a Democrat (NONE of the establishment) that can actually try to do more and perhaps do what Trump couldnt do? Guess time will tell.
2019-07-23 23:48
I'm legitimately asking, what is it you think he's done well? For me the only things are bump stock bans and nafta renegotiation and i guess the first step act.
2019-07-24 09:14
My opinion is that leaders like Trump causes a lot of controversy and extremist thinking, people are either totally with or against, and that is not good in the long run. I think US deserves a well educated charismatic leader who could bring people together even if they disagree on some issues. Not sure if dem's have that candidate in 2020 either, but Trump definitely is not that.
2019-07-24 17:52
Dems do have candidates like that right now actually in the form of Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard, but the problem is that they're being treated like they dont exist. I already lost hope for this country a long time ago, if an establishment trashbag gets nominated, its Trump2020 automatically. If AY or TG actually somehow get nominated, perhaps we can have actual hope and make reforms that can help this country truly prosper since unfortunately because we're part of what I call The Three Kings (consisting of USA, Russia, and China), what we do actually matters.
2019-07-24 18:02
Yea, most presidents gets the second term, you really need to fuck up to not get elected. :[ But it would be interesting if Dem's would select some wild card.
2019-07-24 18:42
It can be a real game changer if the Dems can nominate one of the longshots but I sadly doubt it considering they rigged 2016 for Hillary and havent seem to have learned their lesson.
2019-07-24 19:02
Yea, even sanders would be interesting. That Hillary nomination with the super delegates was disgusting.
2019-07-24 19:29
Good riddance she didnt win. But it doesnt seem that wasnt enough. Maybe losing 2020 will.
2019-07-24 19:33
#6
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Nearly of the candidates are only running just to get rid of Trump solely. No policies, nothing.
2019-07-23 20:13
#17
 | 
Canada ProvexPyker 
So wouldn't it be bad for there to be many candidates, because it's like the votes needed to outvote Trump is used on some other candidate or something?
2019-07-23 20:45
#21
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Forgot to out "all" there whoops. Whoever gets nominated, supporters of the ones that failed will very likely either vote for Trump or vote for the nominee just to try to get rid of Trump.
2019-07-23 20:55
#38
 | 
United States HLTV_Jew 
That's why we need a primary victory for Bernie
2019-07-24 00:21
#43
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Im not interested in having Bernie, his stance on healthcare and how companies like Amazon need to pay up are absolutely in the right direction in this country but he doesn’t understand the consequences and issues of his other policies like a $15 minimum wage. Also he sucks at economics.
2019-07-24 00:23
#47
 | 
United States HLTV_Jew 
15$ minimum wage we should already have, wages have been stagnant for decades now. As value of currency increases (inflation) wages should also naturally increase aswell but in ratio they have not.
2019-07-24 00:27
No, wages should only increase for the top 1%. Don't you understand economics?
2019-07-24 08:02
#193
REZ | 
Sweden katt1n 
You are not entitled to anything.
2019-07-24 15:28
#200
 | 
United States HLTV_Jew 
bro bro I dont think you understand economics bro wages only should increase for the top .1% get it right nerd
2019-07-24 17:35
If your only problem is the 15$ minimum wage what’s the problem? There’s no way he’d put it in right away and kill private business in America. Do you know how hard the big corporations will protest something like this anyway?
2019-07-24 19:38
ok
2019-07-23 20:05
Yeah, definitely. In general, a lot of people in the Rust Belt still like Trump. What the Dems need to do is figure out a way to get a higher turnout. There are still tons of Dems left in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, but a lot of them feel a general apathy towards the Democratic establishment (and especially to Hillary last year).
2019-07-23 20:06
#5
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
The entire Rust Belt (with the exception of Indiana) all usually lean democratic which is why I said they need to be a main focus. Win them over and you automatically win 2020. Talk about their problems and how you can solve them which the main issue for them is Job Loss.
2019-07-23 20:12
#50
 | 
United States HLTV_Jew 
The Rust Belt really doesn't care for right wing politics but when you sugar coat it with fancy lies like promising jobs and building infrastructure it becomes alluring. Dem's lost the Rust Belt because Hillary didn't visit the Rust Belt and the policy side of 2016's agenda was weak. The 2016 goals of Hillary were so far apart from the desires of the working class dominated voting block in the Rust Belt they felt alienated enough to vote for Trump. I can't necessarily blame them.
2019-07-24 00:29
#141
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
I live in PA. We don’t have a lot of Democrats here we have Philadelphia. That city alone can carry the whole state. I live in a small town and work in the entire area which is all small cities/town. It’s 100% Trump country out here. So many people have Trump flags banners signs stickers all saying Trump2020 MAGA etc. And when Trump has a rally in the area it’s INSANE
2019-07-24 12:51
Pennsylvania is basically the true definition of a swing state along with Florida and some others and will be one of the states that’ll determine who wins 2020. Like I said in previous comments, the Rust Belt will decide who wins 2020. Pennsylvania may have strong republican support but is also strong in democrat support so the state is just a hit or miss in my POV just like Florida, only PA leans more democratic than Florida. Main reason why he won the Rust Belt was because he struck gold there with how he campaigned which was related to jobs.
2019-07-24 12:59
#148
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
Which is always scary for republicans. Lose one and it could be over. But like I said philly is what swings PA
2019-07-24 13:01
The only way Democrats can even win the Rust Belt is basically do what Trump did: Strike gold in the region and actually talk about their issues and how they can solve them and not continue fueling Trump’s chances of winning 2020 with outrage and identity politics. If they shed that crap or nominate a longshot candidate its an easy 2020 for them but yet they would rather amplify his chances instead of their own.
2019-07-24 13:11
#202
 | 
United States HLTV_Jew 
Does it matter if one city swings the state? The people who live in that city are just as much as a Pennsylvanian as you. You make the same argument everyone in Upstate New York makes about how the cities like Buffalo and NYC push New York Dem.
2019-07-24 17:38
Well yes cities can swing over states. You can take Texas as an example, despite the state being heavily republican territory, its cities lean more democratic like Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio (well technically nearly all of Texas' cities lean democratic now), its mainly due to demographic changes but urbanization also plays a factor.
2019-07-24 17:50
#210
 | 
United States HLTV_Jew 
Territory doesn't matter if its less populated.
2019-07-24 17:53
#7
tarik | 
Netherlands Most! 
No one cares lmao y'all dumbass burgers gonna vote for some edgy dude that talk shit all day, shit on mexicans deny climate change and want to nuke Iran.
2019-07-23 20:17
#8
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Too bad for you, alot of people will actually care on who will win the 2020 US elections. What we do actually matters unlike others.
2019-07-23 20:19
wtf mens)))
2019-07-23 20:23
+1
2019-07-23 20:26
Then we have people like you. increasing his chances of winning.
2019-07-24 02:11
#10
 | 
United States kami917 
No
2019-07-23 20:24
#12
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
No u.
2019-07-23 20:40
#14
 | 
United States kami917 
How dare u rekt me like that
2019-07-23 20:42
#52
 | 
Palestine Baitor69 
holy shit that's some next level rekting
2019-07-24 00:30
#95
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
yes men)
2019-07-24 03:06
#15
 | 
Romania kr1tex 
Hope Trump wins
2019-07-23 20:43
#19
 | 
Canada ProvexPyker 
Reported :(
2019-07-23 20:46
#53
 | 
Palestine Baitor69 
wat men))
2019-07-24 00:31
Trump 2020 Nationalism over Globalism. Women are women men are men. It's okay to be white
2019-07-23 20:43
Always knew you were fake flagging 😎
2019-07-23 20:55
im not tho
2019-07-23 20:56
Dipshit 2020 Doesnt seem to prove itself economically Strawman Strawman
2019-07-24 00:49
#87
 | 
Australia t0rrent 
I don't think you know what a strawman is
2019-07-24 02:05
#111
 | 
Europe xrnavkha 
fr lmao neither of those were strawman, in fact thevyrox himself did strawman
2019-07-24 07:47
#129
2019-07-24 10:48
Oh I do know, its the absurd, simplified and far weaker representation of the actual position of an entity (in this case "the left") to make it easier to attack. Pretending that the opponents of Trump overwhelmingly hate cisgender people/dont think that women or men exist/could exist and think that it isnt ok to be white is bullshit. Thats the super small radical SJW minority, yet it constantly gets represented as the defining majority group of the left.
2019-07-24 10:48
#245
 | 
Australia t0rrent 
Lol he never referenced SJWs or the left stupid idiot
2019-07-25 06:30
If you had any capacity to actually think about #16, you wouldnt write such a dumb comment.
2019-07-25 13:44
#250
 | 
Australia t0rrent 
Say, nice straw man you just made there
2019-07-25 16:30
Oh really? What argument of yours did I represent in a weaker form?
2019-07-25 16:38
not a strawman as the left hate white people and do believe that chromosomes (man and women) are social constructs
2019-07-24 19:24
"Thats the super small radical SJW minority, yet it constantly gets represented as the defining majority group of the left."
2019-07-24 21:50
Nice try at a bait buddy
2019-07-24 19:42
Depends on who the Dems nominate. If they nominate Harris or Biden, it's over for them. They will lose the Rust Belt again and fuck themselves over.
2019-07-23 20:46
#20
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
The only Dems im willing to give a chance are Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard since they're actually sane and talk about policies and dont play identity politics. And yeah if they nominate Harris, Biden or any other establishment rat, its game over.
2019-07-23 20:57
+1
2019-07-24 07:37
> As of now Trump has a 100% chance of winning 2020 It's actually 47.8%: electionbettingodds.com/
2019-07-23 20:59
#25
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Odds dont matter. Unless none of the establishment gets nominated, its an automatic 2020 win for Trump, like it or not.
2019-07-23 21:00
I wouldent be so sure about that. Demographics are changing in alot of the southern states like Texas etc. Heavilily i Democrats favor (Hispanic voters). Trump would have lost 2016 if he had lost Texas (not 100% sure) and Ted Cruz had a hard time beating Beto in 2018 Senate race. I think Texas 2020 will be a swing state
2019-07-24 17:32
Yeah then theres Texas who over the years has been becoming more of a swing state due to mainly demographic changes but still leans republican despite that. Unless the nominee can appeal to Texas then its an automatic red for 2020, but the problem doing that is because its actually expensive to campaign in Texas. Also Ted Cruz is one of the most hated Republicans in modern politics here even by conservatives so its not a surprise that he nearly lost. Despite things, its the Rust Belt that will absolutely determine who wins 2020, Trump can easily win Texas and Florida but winning those states wouldnt matter if you cant win over the Rust Belt.
2019-07-24 17:39
Im pretty sure Trumps gonna win most of the Rust belt. I think Florida and Texas are slightly in Trumps favor, but States like Ohio and Pensylvania will be very intereesting states. I still think Biden has a shot at winning those states in a general election, even though hes a botch machine. As for Harris and Warren i would strongly favor Trump in a general election as those candidates only appeal to states who are already heavily democratic.
2019-07-24 17:50
The most important states that absolutely must be won are Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin out of the entire Rust Belt. Florida is the true definition of a swing state and Texas is still a republican state although most of its large cities are democratic like El Paso, Austin, and Dallas. If GOP loses Texas in 2020, its basically over since they just lost their most important state, but thats only if the Democrat nominee can actually appeal to the state which just about none of the candidates can, except for perhaps Yang and Tulsi but unfortunately they're just getting ignored so we cant even tell. Biden is actually dropping despite what you say so I doubt he'll last long.
2019-07-24 17:56
I remember the day before the election 1% chance Trump winning on "polls" LOL
2019-07-24 02:08
#143
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
+1 99% 90% 84% 70% 55% The odds Just kept falling and falling.
2019-07-24 12:54
#26
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
bump.
2019-07-23 21:56
Bump again.
2019-07-24 17:25
#29
 | 
United States Acehavok 
You basically just described Bernie Sanders sooooooo
2019-07-23 23:49
#30
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
im not interested in having him as POTUS. His stance on healthcare is what this country absolutely needs and his views on companies like Amazon, they need to pay up. However some of his other policies are idiotic and he doesnt seem to understand their consequences and issues like the 15$ minimum wage. And to me hes not very bright on economics.
2019-07-23 23:52
#32
 | 
United States Acehavok 
As long as a higher $15 minimum wage is introduced gradually it does not create more unemployment, that’s been shown time and time again in other nations. You’re effectively helping the poorest people without giving them an actual hand out from the tax payer. Latest numbers I could find is 2.2 million Americans make $7.25/hr, 23 million make between $7.25-$11/hr, and 42.4% of Americans make less than $15 an hour. Assuming prices increase by 5% (it’s expected to be lower than that.) You’re looking at a gigantic bump in buying power for low wage workers. Poor people spend their money, thus stimulating the economy, which leads to a more and more prosperous nation. All without the help of taxpayers.
2019-07-24 00:11
#34
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Thats not the issue. Workers should be paid more but the problem isnt towards them, its the small businesses. Small businesses cant normally afford that. It can potentially cause millions of jobs to be lost just because small businesses cant afford it. I care about the workers but I care just as much for small businesses and their owners.
2019-07-24 00:18
#44
 | 
United States Acehavok 
That’s why you increase gradually, Walmart could handle a shock of going from $7.25 to $15, but a local bakery cannot. They will increase prices like everyone else will, they will also have more customers due to more people being pulled out of poverty. IMO the biggest problem for small businesses is insurance, it makes it hard/more complicated to start a business and puts horrible strain on the business as prices continue to climb. Wage increases that the employee could be getting is put into their increasing insurance costs. My favorite bakery closed due to not being able to afford their health insurance, sucked ass no one makes anything close to what they did.
2019-07-24 00:24
#72
 | 
United States Acehavok 
Who do you actually like on the Democratic side?
2019-07-24 00:55
#73
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard since they both talk about policy and dont play identity politics and also dont demonize conservatives and rather are trying to win them over. The rest are simply establishment no chancer rats to me.
2019-07-24 00:57
#74
 | 
United States Acehavok 
I like both, but you realize Tulsi is pretty damn close to Bernie economically on the major points. Her focus is anti-war obviously but the other policy is still there. Bernie’s not establishment, he doesn’t subscribe to the same mentality as the rest of the Dems nor has he taken any corporate money his whole career, he’s always been fighting for the little guy. That’s why I like him, he’s got a consistent 30 year voting record and an even longer record on policy ideas. My picks: 1. Bernie 2. Tulsi 3. YangGang Distant 4. Warren Everyone else idc about.
2019-07-24 01:08
#75
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
My go to is basically this: 1) Andrew Yang 2) Tulsi Gabbard 3) Bernie Sanders Rest are garbage. Also Tulsi may be similar but she’s actually an anti-establishment candidate like Yang. Bernie is considered establishment now despite that unfortunately but i can still go with him. I just rather have Yang or Tulsi since they’re both still very young and have more potential to me. If none of them get nominated and instead an establishment rat gets the nomination, I’d rather just go with Trump2020.
2019-07-24 01:17
#76
 | 
United States Acehavok 
Yeah if it doesn’t end up being one of my 4 I’ll either skip the presidential part of the ballot (like I did in 2016) or I’ll vote for Trump to send a message that we don’t want corrupted corporate moderates who cannot win going forward.
2019-07-24 01:28
#82
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
yeah, I’d rather just have Trump2020 if none of the 3 I mentioned get nominated. Perhaps that’ll tell MSM and friends that their bullshit isnt going work anymore and that people had enough.
2019-07-24 01:37
#84
 | 
United States Acehavok 
Hopefully, I mean last time it kind of worked, a lot of Bernie’s ideas are now mainstream and the party realizes they need to cater more to their base. I watch MSNBC roughly once a week with my family for an hour or 2 and I can tell the difference between 2015-2016 MSNBC and 2017-present MSNBC. Their stances on issues has changed, probably just to follow the establishment, but still.
2019-07-24 01:51
#86
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
MSNBC is the last news network I would ever fucking watch or use as a news source. I dare say, is even more biased than fucking Fox News and CNN combined.
2019-07-24 01:57
#90
 | 
United States Acehavok 
I don’t use it for a main source at all. I watch Secular Talk for 85% of my political video content and another 10% from other YouTubers. But there’s no way MSNBC is worse than Fox, I watch Fox for shits and giggles and Secular Talk covers a lot of Fox segments, they just straight up lie half the time. If they’re not lying they’re deceiving. The only good glimpses I’ve seen recently is Tucker Carlson being kind of anti-war and him shitting on big businesses abusing employees. CNN just annoys me because they never pick a side even if one side is blatantly correct. In general they pander to the establishment of both parties. So they effectively suck both parties’ cocks which means negatives don’t get exposed as often. There’s a reason they have the lowest viewership of the 3. MSNBC really gets stuck on the Russia thing though, that drives me nuts whenever I watch it. Like there’s more shit to cover than just Robert Mueller and immigrants.
2019-07-24 02:07
#91
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
I would rather watch CNN than MSNBC and I also hate CNN due to extreme bias as well, and yes only Tucker Carlson is worth watching on Fox News.
2019-07-24 02:10
#125
REZ | 
Sweden jackir 
how is bernie establishment?
2019-07-24 09:22
Yes small business can. Because better wage allow people to buy more goods, meaning more customers for small businesses meaning more profit, meaning they can actually give that raise to people. The only issue with salaries raise is exportation. And small businesses are not impacted much by that : either they export in a niche sector, meaning a little increase of their price won't change anything, or either they don't export at all (so not concerned).
2019-07-24 12:58
No, they cant. Not in USA. Most small businesses are in the South or Midwest which fyi are also the poorest regions in this country, they’ll just go broke if they had to be forced to pay a 15$ USD or higher minimum wage. All the states in the West Coast, Northeast, Florida, Texas, Georgia, and Virginia, can afford it, no problem but not the fucking rest.
2019-07-24 13:02
That exactly my point : the poorest regions will see an increase of their people purchasing power if their people get paid more, meaning small businesses will have more customers. USA is not some place in space time were standard rules doesn't apply, including economic ones. But well, I guess if people earning 50k/month told you at TV such policies would be wrong for poor people. It must be true since they must have cared for these people their whole life to end with their confortable position. Oh wait.
2019-07-24 13:08
I think the problem is more in the welfare program. There is basically no way for the average lower classmen to rise up due to the amount of ceiings there.
2019-07-24 03:48
what ceilings are you talking about? Its very possible to move up from lower class to middle class in the US. There are tons of entry jobs available in many states except the west coast (surprise!). You don't even need to go to college for these positions and if you work in it long enough you can gain experience and move up either in another company or in the same place. Making your money work for you is also something that they can do. It just takes some risk and a nice idea.
2019-07-24 04:03
There are a lot of them. Welfare in the US is just a bunch of ceilings. Yes there are those jobs, but the difficult part is the middle bit when your welfare drops off before you get enough pay, and end up with less spending power than you have. (A video source on this was from 2012, so I don't know if anything has changed since) People don't really have very much motivation to power through these ceilings since they don't know how long they will spend at a certain job without being promoted.
2019-07-24 04:23
You aren't doing a very good job explaining because I have no idea what you are actually trying to say. I don't see the issue you are trying to indicate here or who it matters to the most. You aren't really showing me there is "basically no way" for average lower classmen to rise up.
2019-07-24 06:08
What I'm trying to say is that it's too difficult for the lower classmen to rise up because the higher paying jobs aren't higher paying high enough to combat welfare programs falling off.
2019-07-24 07:27
Welfare programs are meant to keep you alive until you find a job that goes above the poverty line. You will disqualify from welfare usually in 5 years if you just never find a job (which means you are doing something very wrong). The scenario you are speaking of would only occur at at the $30K/$40k mark at which point only one promotion would literally mean you are middle class (moving up). The job is meant to replace welfare not vice versa. If you get a job that is 150%+ above the poverty line, then the welfare program has done its job. If you are not motivated to work hard, its not really anyone's problem but yours. It is not difficult to move up at all. If you cannot afford a living at $30k salary (on your own btw), you are also doing something very fucking wrong. You are either living in a very expensive location or just making dumb financial decisions.
2019-07-24 08:25
My information on this may not be the most accurate, but I just don't think that what you're saying is true. People in the upper lower class can move up easily, I'll admit that. But there are more welfare programs than the one you're pointing out, and it's a lot harder for people who don't have no money at all, and who are renting out homes from slumlords. Yes, there are people in poverty who don't work very hard, but I think that the current welfare programs encourage people to be lazy. Maybe you think that these people don't deserve to be in the middle class, but I think that if there were less of these ceilings, you would find poor people working harder.
2019-07-24 16:45
Obviously it is harder to move up classes the lower you are in class. Thanks for mentioning... The myth is that it is impossible even though there is so much you can be provided while also having a minimum wage job. Even you agree that upper lower class can move up easily but the original argument I was replying to was saying that when you have a higher low end job that the disqualification of welfare has a larger affect than having a decent $30K salary job. While it might, it doesn't make the task impossible. I am aware of the many welfare programs we have and I agree we need something else to solve homelessness outside of welfare.
2019-07-24 18:24
The original thing I said was wrong, I’ll admit, but I still think that there’s much less class mobility than you’re making it out to be. This is probably different than what I claimed before, but I think that welfare ceilings cause this laziness in poor people. Even if it isn’t impossible for them to move up, it’s way too hard, and I would say it’s basically impossible for people who have children or other things which take up their time. TLDR, I’ll admit that I was wrong before, but these lazy people are lazy because of a reason.
2019-07-24 18:37
Well you are bringing other problems into the equation now. If you have children and aren't financially ready to raise it, it is your problem. We cannot have poor people make children and be given the kind of welfare to be able to raise it properly. People would make children solely to leave poverty. A motivation for the kind of person you are speaking of is located in the movie "The Pursuit of Happyness."
2019-07-24 18:43
#221
 | 
United States Acehavok 
He’s saying the income caps on welfare are too low. You may make $17,000 a year and get $8,000 in welfare benefits. You get a raise and now make $20,000 a year, you get bumped off all your benefits because of the cap, now you’re net losing $5,000. That demotivates some people to move up the economic ladder.
2019-07-24 19:28
Thats just the system we have. Sure its demotivating but welfare shouldn't be something you depend on when you make such amount of money. Welfare gives alot and more than it should. I remember seeing something like all the benefits value you in the top 20% of the US.
2019-07-24 22:34
#124
REZ | 
Sweden jackir 
you do realise jeff bezos and other such billionaires over companies such as walmart could pay their employes 15$/h and that would be their revenue for 1 or 2 days? not a big thing...
2019-07-24 09:22
The issue is the small businesses not Amazon. Amazon already gives min $15/h (min wage is $7.25) where I live and even more in a lot of other positions.
2019-07-24 09:34
This is completely false according to economic principle and historical exemples : there is no problem with that for small businesses.
2019-07-24 13:01
lol so you can just raise minimum wage and expect no consequences? Small businesses won't: - lay off workers? - raise prices? Thereby: - Increasing unemployment - Weakening the lower class with amount of jobs (min wage doesn't affect middle class) while also reducing the opportunity to gain experience in lower end jobs to move up to higher ones. - Increasing inflation
2019-07-24 17:39
- yes, as there is lay off every day already. - yes, it will. But that's not a problem for those low paid job. As if their salaries get multiplied by X, they are winning since the price raise will not increase by the same amount but much less (as salaries are just a part of the price). - no, the opposite actually - no, the opposite actually - yes, it will but again it is not a problem for low paid jobs as explained above. Furthermore you can reduce or even negate inflation with monetary policies (which is the exact mission of the FED). Unlike what people against it wrote all over this thread. The downside of it is not for small businesses. The only group of interest to suffer from a minimum wage raise is the shareholders of big companies, that will see their dividends get reduced for quite some time.
2019-07-24 17:49
To be fair, statistics do not show a conclusive trend with unemployment and minimum wage correlation. Sometimes unemployment increases, sometimes it decreases, sometimes nothing happens. What is conclusive is that less jobs are created when increasing minimum wage: bls.gov/opub/mlr/2014/beyond-bls/determi.. This would mostly affect young and less skilled workers like teenagers and college students. These people don't qualify for unemployment and therefore would never increase the rate.
2019-07-24 18:12
The main issue is small businesses. Big corporations can easily afford it and wouldnt mind since it’ll eliminate competition, but it would eradicate literally thousands of small businesses, leading to millions of jobs lost.
2019-07-24 11:53
#194
REZ | 
Sweden katt1n 
Why are you entitled to the fruit of other peoples labor? You dont have a right to health care. The only thing you have a right to is your own body, your own property and free speech.
2019-07-24 15:30
democrats will lose. Trump is living rent free in the medias head. democrats want open borders and limitless abortion. gg
2019-07-23 23:59
#35
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
They can still win this IF they dont nominate any of the establishment.
2019-07-24 00:18
If biden gets elected trump win 100% biden has such low energy and probs got 1-2 years left in life. Trump would make biden look like joke
2019-07-24 00:20
#39
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Not just Biden. Warren, Harris, or any of the establishment get nominated, its over. DNC needs to go with a longshot candidate or its game over for them.
2019-07-24 00:21
Who cares, the winner will fuck Turkey anyway ;-;
2019-07-24 00:12
#36
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
sorry men( but Turkey’s been getting fucked for years now. Erdogan wins again in 2023, that’s practically game over for Turkey.
2019-07-24 00:19
Nope he can’t. He made a big mistake (actually more than thousands). Just check out new Istanbul Election“s“.
2019-07-24 12:30
I have, been following Turkish politics for a while.
2019-07-24 12:35
Well, okay Then you realize that the old and conservative people love money, and because of the economic difficulties, they are deprived of it and can't get everything the way they used to. They made meat, potatoes and onions especially the big issue, so complain about Tayyip, whom they call a "world leader." Another issue is Syrian, Afghan and Pakistani refugees. Obviously, this situation bothers not only tayyip supporters but the whole country. 5 million registered refugees (that's the number of Syrians alone) have entered the country. They only gave birth last year by more than half a million, plus the state doesn't tax them or even give them money. Many rapes, rapes, murders (did I mention that they'd rather be beheaded than stabbing people?) the case and also some of our cities are living more refugees than Turks. Despite all this, of course, the ruling party has indicated it will feed them. This led them to lose in the Istanbul elections (and in their other stronghold provinces). There are many things I can't write here right now, but I assure you that unless there is a miracle, our sultan will be off the throne.
2019-07-24 13:29
I really do hope Turkey can pull it off. The country has great potential and can for once actually normalize relations with others like Greece but instead erdogan and friends are just making idiotic decisions domestically and idiot decisions in foreign policy that are almost seem criminal. Unless he goes along with AKP for good, I dont see Turkey having a proper future it deserves but rather a dystopian one.
2019-07-24 13:38
Yeah, agree with that. Hopefully we'll beat him one more time. We are very dissociated. According to my mother, People didn't use to be treated as Kurds, Turks, Laz, Circassians and Armenians etc. But now we see that there is an unnecessary racism involved. As long as we Turks are not one, nothing will be OK. Whatever it is, my relative in America says there's been a mix-up there because of Trump, but it seems Trump is going to win again, as you said. I think. the heads of the century take Cercei as an example...
2019-07-24 14:01
As I know, Erdogan can't be candidate in 2023 elections according to laws but he is known for changing the laws if the law doesn't work for him. Edit: There are also rumors about a new party that will have seats from Erdogan's party. I'm not so hopeful about that party but Turkish rightists believe that they can crush Erdogan's government.
2019-07-24 12:49
prob wont be any different. would be the same old islam fanatics that are slowly destroying what could’ve been a prosperous country that can have normal relations without feuds with others like Greece.
2019-07-24 12:53
I think that new party can't play for the government, Turkish right only wants them to destroy Erdogan anyway.
2019-07-24 12:54
Can you tell me how is Turkey getting fkd? Not some media shit, I'm talking about real things that impact Turks daily lives, TL keeps going down? Honest question, I just wanna know.
2019-07-24 07:48
We are going economically downhill since 80s because president back then(Turgut Özal, if you want to search) followed full liberal economic plan but that plan was fucked up. Instead of promoting Turkish companies to the world and treating all companies equally, he pushed people to buy from global companies(coca-cola, starbucks, nestle etc.) so Turkey lose money to USA. Now Erdogan follows the same plan, prices are not the worst but still fucked up for retired people or people with low salary. He can't manage economy for sure so he uses Islam or the roads that he ordered to built(but those roads were built by our taxes and built by non-Turkish engineers so we lost money again).
2019-07-24 12:45
Thanks for your answer.
2019-07-24 14:24
#195
REZ | 
Sweden katt1n 
Stop fucking Cyprus and i might feel bad for you.
2019-07-24 15:30
That drill incident? Or entirely North Cyprus?
2019-07-24 20:51
#252
REZ | 
Sweden katt1n 
Your invasion of Cyprus.
2019-07-25 18:03
USA needs a president that doesn't split the society even more. Trump has to go, the boy is no good.
2019-07-24 00:22
#51
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
The only Democrats (aka opposition) that Im willing to give a chance are Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard since they both actually take about policy and play no identity politics, basically what this country desperately needs. The rest are all garbage rats that are all bark but no bite.
2019-07-24 00:30
#56
 | 
United States gtmaniacmda 
I can imagine a candidate existing that won't split people, the political divide just continues to grow, no matter who becomes president, nearly 50% of people will be unhappy.
2019-07-24 00:36
#61
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
The only candidates Im willing to give a chance are Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard. The rest are just rats that are all bark but no bite with horseshit or no policies at all. And the bad part is that the 2020 election will basically determine our future. Do we try to nominate and elect someone that’ll actually make this country prosper for the future? or do we elect an establishment rat or Trump into an eventual dystopia of dilemma?
2019-07-24 00:40
Tulsi and Yang have about 0.0% chance of winning the Primaries. Tulsi has been given the RonPaul Treatment. Yang doesnt really appeal to minorities and thats a must for any democratic candidate.
2019-07-24 17:39
Yang actually does but tends to want to also appeal to everyone rather than one group which to me is more important. Only time will tell. If neither win the primaries, might as well stick to Trump2020 cause I've had enough establishment rats on the Dem side that are only running to beat Trump and thats it.
2019-07-24 17:44
hope trump wins again
2019-07-24 00:22
#71
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
oh he’ll win alright, and by a larger margin. UNLESS, the opposition aka Democrats nominate a longshot candidate and none of the establishment rats like Harris, Warren, and Biden.
2019-07-24 00:53
Tldr?
2019-07-24 00:22
#46
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
then leave. No one needs those with lazy eyes here.
2019-07-24 00:26
#45
 | 
Switzerland Sylleo 
i hope he faces warren, just for the pocahontas memes
2019-07-24 00:24
#48
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
That stunt she did basically cost her greatly, she’s not even that popular in my state of Massachusetts which also happens to be her home turf. Besides she wouldnt beat Trump anyway.
2019-07-24 00:27
lobbyists will make sure people choose the candidate who will benefit big corporations the most, which most likely is trump. its not like it really makes a huge difference whether your president is from right wing or centre-right anyway
2019-07-24 00:28
#54
 | 
Poland Franpol1080 
I think Yang could beat Trump, but I dont think he will get the nomination, probably gonna end up with like 10% amongst democrats and they will just pick Biden who will lose just like Clinton did. Yang is one of few dem candidates that can appeal to more right leaning voters with his stance on automation, freedom of speech, veterans
2019-07-24 00:32
#57
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Yeah, only Yang and actually Tulsi can truly beat Trump and both candidates are Dems conservatives can actually get behind since Yang doesnt demonize them and has policies that actually can appeal to them like his stance on veterans, automation, and the fact that he has a policy for the Southern border where he wants to invest in shit like radio towers and increase funding for ICE specifically their human trafficking divisions, and Tulsi’s foreign policy automatically strikes gold with them, and yeah the real challenge is getting the nomination unfortunately.
2019-07-24 00:37
#55
 | 
Russia cuba_libre10 
Trump wins No good democrat candidates
2019-07-24 00:34
#58
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
nah theres actually two that can actually beat Trump and can get his supporters and other conservatives behind.
2019-07-24 00:37
#60
 | 
Russia cuba_libre10 
will be interesting to see if america is tired of this guy or if he'll win by a even greater margin this time. It was definitely an interesting 4 years that changed America imo
2019-07-24 00:39
#63
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
He basically has a 100% chance of winning 2020, and it’ll definitely be by a large margin or even landslide. IF any of the establishment rats get nominated that is.
2019-07-24 00:42
#59
 | 
United Kingdom SLurSs 
YANG 2020
2019-07-24 00:39
#62
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
yes men)
2019-07-24 00:41
TRUMP 2020 #KEEPAMERICAGREAT #RIGHTCHOICE
2019-07-24 00:43
Trump will win because the USA isnt smart.
2019-07-24 00:43
if u think trump has 100% chance rn u delusional. the guy wont even release his tax returns cus he knows they are such bs
2019-07-24 00:43
#68
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Nope Im not delusional, he legit has a 100% chance of winning 2020 as of now. Any of the establishment rats like Warren, Biden, and Harris get nominated, its game over.
2019-07-24 00:45
do you know what 100% chance means? it means that there is no possibility of anything else happening....
2019-07-24 00:47
Here, ill gonna redpill you: youtube.com/watch?v=rNvgl38TLvI&feature=..
2019-07-24 03:40
Apparently using hyperboles is illegal now
2019-07-24 03:51
#67
tabseN | 
Germany AangTLA 
Trump 2020
2019-07-24 00:44
AOC 2020
2019-07-24 01:29
#78
kaas | 
Netherlands BigMarvin 
Didn't read but YANG 2020 MOTHERFUCKERS FREE MONEY NOW!
2019-07-24 01:31
#79
 | 
Germany EssenEsser 
andrew yang is the best democratic candidate this is a fact
2019-07-24 01:32
#81
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard are the only Dems that can truly beat Trump and get conservatives behind. The rest are just establishment rats that are only amplifying Trump’s chances of victory in 2020 (except maybe Bernie but he’ll never get conservatives let alone Moderates behind him which btw are extremely important here)
2019-07-24 01:35
#83
 | 
Germany EssenEsser 
+1 very strong agree, cant speak for Gabbard but i've read a lot of stuff about yang and he is very policy focused, not trying to play identity politics and is laying out actual plans to improve quality of life for americans.
2019-07-24 01:39
If you are interested more in Yang, he recently made an AMA on reddit so I definitely recommend you to check it out.
2019-07-27 18:27
#263
 | 
Germany EssenEsser 
Very cool I will check that out, thank you
2019-07-27 20:30
#80
 | 
Brazil Beckermonster 
us elections are strange, trump doesn't won the last but because only city he won
2019-07-24 01:32
He didn't win the cities tho?
2019-07-24 03:51
You win states not cities
2019-07-24 04:21
#88
 | 
Brazil EMAIBIAR 
I hope Trump wins again
2019-07-24 02:06
#93
 | 
United States PsychoLogical 
he’ll win, and by a large margin. Unless the Dems actually nominate none of the establishment and nominate a longshot.
2019-07-24 02:11
tl;dr -Trump doesn't need to win if the Democrats keep losing the election
2019-07-24 02:10
#96
 | 
United States Nohj_ 
+1 yang2020 btw
2019-07-24 03:31
+1
2019-07-27 18:26
Easy win for dems? hahaha, you are retarded and you should feel bad for youself if you actually think dems have or had any chance at 2016. Here, i'll give you an insight: youtube.com/watch?v=rNvgl38TLvI&feature=..
2019-07-24 03:34
Breitbart ahahahaha
2019-07-24 03:52
What's with breitbart?
2019-07-24 03:56
wtf is with chinese yekindar fans, r u creating multiple accs or fakeflagging?
2019-07-24 07:55
linking breitbart already discredits your opinion.
2019-07-24 11:50
Its nearly impossible for dems to win this one. Trump has such a strong hold on the E college
2019-07-24 04:05
All Democrats have to do is appeal to the Rust Belt and talk about how they’ll fix their problems and not continue bullshit like identity politics. But instead they’re just amplifying Trump’s chances of winning 2020 with outrage reactions.
2019-07-24 11:47
That's a lot of things that have to go right.
2019-07-24 15:05
obviously.
2019-07-24 15:10
There's a high chance to see Trump winning again, but like Obama a lot less changed and will change that what people was hoping for. Politics are too slow for the 4 years cycle we have.
2019-07-24 08:11
None of the democrats would ever win if what mattered was the rust belt , all of U.S , but specially the Rust Belt and the farmers , need to go back to the values for which U.S stood pre-20th century. They need massive economic freedom and little to no government , to have little to no taxes nor regulations , the mere fact that middle class citizens have to pay a federal income tax in the U.S is about as anti-U.S American as it gets. You can have full free trade with the entire world if you're U.S , but if you want to revive the industry you have to seriously straight up erase and reduce every single tax that there is and in order to do that , you have to cut government expenditure , NO POLITICIAN OF ANY OF THE 2 BIGGEST PARTIES WANTS TO DO THAT , NONE. This is all common sense and how math works , but since i know you dems are fond to deny that 2+2 is 4 , i'll simply explain to you why dems wont ever win the rust belt : If Democrats want to get off the orange-man-evil bandwagon , they will have to actually explain extensively what their economic and fiscal policies will be , that will drive them against the corner in which they decided to go when backing up AOC , which is radical pro-enviromental policies , the rust belt wants the INDUSTRY to come back , the Democrats would have to go all out green for the 2020 campaign....in what UNIVERSE are these 2 compatible??? even if they did the scummy practice of subsidizing the rust belt , then they'd lose all of their pro-green voting base , i'll never understand the thought process of leftists man....yall just got shit inside ur skull.
2019-07-24 08:38
what you are writing is so utterly braindead, not only for the situation of an average american but for the future with climate change threatening billions of refugees towards the next century
2019-07-24 14:00
Im STUNNED by your Arguments , lets make government much bigger now and go all in for social justice and equality , you really sold me in bud.
2019-07-24 15:06
your grandchildren won't have a world to live in otherwise if thats what u want
2019-07-27 18:16
well you've got me figured completly wrong.
2019-07-27 18:22
I did not assume u are not believing that this could and probably will happen, you just made the wrong conclusion, making the government bigger is the only way to stop climate change. And if it is a decent left government (like sanders could be in the us or labour in the uk) it would benefit the many and not the top 1% and could potentially benefit fighting against climate change.
2019-07-27 18:32
Of course not , making government bigger might stop climate change , but at the cost of everything else besides enviromental health and that's a big IF , why would you do this??? you want to empose an authoritarian regime THIS TIME IS DIFFERENT THOUGH , look guys THIS authoritarian regime is in name of the enviroment :D so now its okay??? maaaan why dont you all leftist go fuckyourselves , honestly bunch of fucking idiotic cowards , spoiled snowflakes you disgust me. You could easily incentivize corporations to move towards much healthier enviromental solutions by the way by enforcing tax breaks to the healthiest , example : you make it so that if a car company quits building oil cars and goes for all electrical , their federal income tax will be halved , if you have a fucking BRAIN , you'll know what this will cause , and all of this could be done without expanding the public sector by even 1 worker/paper bs. Also NO ONE from the left is decent , but if you think that BERNIE FUCKING SANDERS is it , then you're an absolute fucking moron without a chance of ever making his neurons do synapses , unless you're around 13-19 years old , which at this point , im suspecting you might be.
2019-07-27 18:38
#127
 | 
Sweden crindz 
the democrats gotta nominate someone who doesnt want to split up the country even more. and whoever they pick gotta talk about real issues and solutions, not about how cruel Trump is, etc. but i doubt they'll have a chance of winning the 2020 election.
2019-07-24 10:09
They actually do have a chance if they dont nominate any of the establishment. But considering how they treated the only anti-establishment candidates, I doubt it as well and are genuinely trying to have Trump2020.
2019-07-24 11:45
#137
 | 
Sweden crindz 
yeah, i think they will do the same mistakes they did in the 2016 election. and trump is probably a better option if they do. i think it's a shame that you have so few options to choose from though.
2019-07-24 12:45
I just hope they can snap out of it and nominate none of the establishment. If not then I’d rather have Trump2020.
2019-07-24 12:50
#152
 | 
Sweden crindz 
+1 i totally understand that
2019-07-24 13:03
Trump made AMERICA GREAT AGAIN even in the HLTV ranking USA is #1 USA will dominate the world, Trump will be our leader FOREVER
2019-07-24 10:13
#145
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
LETS GO LIQUID LETS GO TRUMP
2019-07-24 12:55
lets go a team with 40% immigrants is not exactly in accordance with Trump mate.
2019-07-24 13:03
ofc as long as they are working 16h/day for 5$ !
2019-07-24 13:58
No, that's the democrat's way. Not Trump's
2019-07-24 14:16
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA trump was always against minimum wage you braindead moron
2019-07-24 14:49
Never said otherwise, he was against immigrant also. Meanwhile democrats argument in favor of immigrant are them working in low paid job US citizen don't want to do, such as in farm.
2019-07-24 14:50
That is accurate. That is the only reason democratic establishment wants immigrants, and the only reason former republican govs allowed it
2019-07-27 18:18
#196
REZ | 
Sweden katt1n 
Minimum wage is theft. Its not my fault that you are unemployable.
2019-07-24 15:32
If Democrats don't pick Sanders, Trump will be re-elected 100%
2019-07-24 13:02
Only Andrew Yang, Tulsi Gabbard, and maybe Bernie can win 2020 for the Democrats. But instead they’re getting smeared or ignored and are trying to nominate the establishment trash like Harris, Warren, and Biden. How sad.
2019-07-24 13:07
The two first are not known enough to have any chance I'm afraid.
2019-07-24 13:10
Andrew Yang is rising tho so he has a chance if he can keep up that momentum. He did say he’ll be in the race the whole time until nomination day so he’s got time.
2019-07-24 13:11
Can you tell me, without searching, what candidate were running in 2016 primaries except Trump, Clinton and Sanders?
2019-07-24 13:12
Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich. All are republicans fyi.
2019-07-24 13:14
As I said, small candidate are not known enough.
2019-07-24 13:18
only time can tell. Trump was polling at 2% and was considered a longshot candidate and the results? He beat all odds and surged to the top.
2019-07-24 13:19
Trump was nationally known before even running
2019-07-24 13:20
#235
 | 
United States FarCentrist 
+1
2019-07-24 22:06
I dont see a way that he wins any primary, I do think that the sanders base is too strong even if he is on the rise, like there are a certain amount of people voting establishment and a certain amount of people voting with a brain, and there arent enough for yang if bernie remains where he is ... and frankly I think sanders is the better candidate.
2019-07-24 13:57
Warren establishment ?????????????? brain.exe stopped working ??????? Though I agree (except for warren ofc)
2019-07-24 13:55
she is part of the establishment. And she already damaged herself with the Native American stunt so she’s done for along with other factors.
2019-07-24 14:01
yaaaaaaaahhh I know some great doctors, they certainly help u!
2019-07-24 14:10
i think you need a reality check. Also shes a no chancer. She wont beat Trump.
2019-07-24 14:15
ofc she wont beat trump, bernie will
2019-07-27 18:16
why would anyone in their right mind think bernie even has a chance? he wont even get past the first hurdle, he’s a socialist, and that not happening in america. the dude even went to the soviet union for his honeymoon, absolute madman.
2019-07-24 14:06
According to your logic, any american that visited a poor country wish to live in a poor america.
2019-07-24 14:17
i dont see your point. what im reaching for is that he visited, and spoke warmly about visiting a totalitarian socialist dictatorship. it does not per se have to do with poverty- but all to do with ideology. the ideology that he is adherent to is too far from the american mindset and ideology. putting it in terms for you, a french idelogy would arguably be ”egalité, fraternité, liberté”, and this mindset did play a role in marine le pen not getting elected against macron.
2019-07-24 14:24
"There are some things that [the Soviet Union does] better than we do and which were, in fact, quite impressive. Subway systems in in Moscow costs 5 kopecs — or 7 cents. Faster, cleaner, more attractive and more efficient than any in the U.S. — and cheap," an official statement from the Burlington's office reads. "The train trip that we took from Leningrad to Moscow — for Soviet citizens — was very cheap." Sanders then went on to praise "programs for youth and workers" that he saw during the trip." That's all I found about "spoke warmly" about USSR. And it was true as far as I can tell. Also no, I don't think his "ideology" is too far from US one. Perhaps you forgot, but for most of its history, USA was not the imperialist country they are today, they were quite autarkic. Meaning : they were not sending troops overseas all years long. So his program in favor of ending US wars tend to be more conform to US core than what others candidate want. Including Trump. The same way as USA core is working hard to reach the american dream. Which is not the capitalism core : owning things get you richer.
2019-07-24 14:41
that is not the entire statement of bernie, dont try me- bevause ive read it. if you identify the core values of bernie sanders as wanting to stop interventionalism, i think you still miss my point, as well as some basic political theory. im very glad you bring up the topic of what you call ”autarkic”, however it is completly wrong. autarky is an economical doctrine- used in for instance Franco-spain, north korea and nazi germany that aims to make the country entirely self-sufficent and isolated in order to not have to trade with ANYONE, so that no economical ties will impact war effort and governing. does that sound like the US ever in its history to you? please tell me when. what you are trying to claim is the foreign policy of ”America first”, practiced ww1 to ww2. if you like that kind of policy, trump is your best bet- since a very similar policy, going by the same name, is the main foreign policy of his administration. he declared it during his inauguration.
2019-07-24 15:15
Then give me a link to his entire statement. You know, facts all that. I don't know what is "franco-spain". Also North Korea is under international embargo so it is not really their choice. And Nazi germany never been autarkic as far as I can tell. Also, when I talk about "most of US history" you talk about a 20 years period (during the two ww, period, should I remind you during which USA suffered from their worst crisis ever : 1929) go figure. But if that period is the core of US to you, then let me give you a link about what was their political will by then : - Social Security Act, 1935 - Emergency Banking Act, 1933 - National Labor Relations Act, 1935 Etc.. Which are the exact opposite direction of Trump.
2019-07-24 15:26
His stance on healthcare and how companies like Amazon need to pay up are absolutely what this country needs but everything else is wack. He wont get support from conservatives and wont get support from most moderates which fyi are extremely important here.
2019-07-24 14:19
im arguing that what a country needs can be nullified based on ideological means of satisfying these needs. and as you put it, conservatives and moderates would never support these ideological means- meaning the socialist does not stand a chance in america. (as of now) also fyi, what an american calls a moderate is regarded as a strict conservative where i am from- since my country has been ruled by social democrats for a century, thus impacting swedish core values and ideology.
2019-07-24 14:29
Thanks for postinf your 200 words school essay on HLTV
2019-07-24 14:25
cool story bro, now get lost.
2019-07-24 14:35
#182
 | 
China askaiusaxn 
OMFG why are you guys even talking about this Trump is making US great again
2019-07-24 14:27
I like Bernie and Yang
2019-07-24 18:42
Bernard 2020
2019-07-24 19:30
Tulsi could beat trump as she is anti interventionist which is probably the most important issue. (alot of trump voters would vote for her top punish trump if he does not keep his promises which he isn't/ hasn't) Even though like all democrats she wants to take away a persons right to self defense, among a few other things.
2019-07-24 19:33
the only Dems conservatives would even get behind or at least give a chance are Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard and thats it, just because both dont demonize them and are actually trying to win their support.
2019-07-24 21:03
#229
 | 
United States JustBitsy 
If somehow the democrat policy was less about ridding the white house of Trump and more about actual policy than they would stand a chance. They repeated the same thing that lost them 2016 for the 2020 election. They literally chose Biden as their candidate and said no to any other. If Biden does not win the democratic primary I will actually be amazed but I sincerely doubt it. Biden has the smallest chance of winning out of any Dem candidate because he does not have the vote from the youngins like the other candidates do. Democrats need to learn that the biggest vote they could get is the younger generations and to get them they need to actually care about great policy and not just "yeeting Trump out the white house". If they got their act together they could do it but for being a liberal party they are really stuck in their ways...
2019-07-24 21:00
What Democrats really need to do is shake off the outrage and focus on policy. Sure its fine that you want to beat Trump but only running just for that reason alone will lose you 2020. Also they need to realize that they have to win over Moderates and at a certain extent Conservatives since they’re very important. And they also need to NOT nominate any of the establishment rats, They have to go with a longshot candidate. In addition they have to win over one region that’ll definitely decide who wins 2020: The Rust Belt. Win them over, you will win 2020. Trump won not because of racism or that Russiagate bullshit (well maybe at a certain extent) , it was mainly due to people wanting change and to be heard along with how Trump basically struck gold in the Rust Belt: he actually talked about problems they’re having which the main one being Job Loss.
2019-07-24 21:10
#232
 | 
United States JustBitsy 
The problem with the Dems is that you can scream that at them until you are blue in the face but they really don't wanna hear it. They will double down on their current platform because they believe it is a solid strategy. All they have had to do for the past however long is "look at how bad this guy is" and EVERY one in the party was like YEAH. The young ones are not sold on that alone, they just aren't.
2019-07-24 21:14
Then I can only hope Trump wins in 2020, perhaps that’ll make them snap out of it and realize what they’ve done. The only candidates Im legit willing to give a chance are Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard since both actually sane and talk about policy instead of playing identity politics and fueling the outrage unlike their establishment counterparts, in addition they actually make sense. The only sad part is that they’re getting treated like they dont exist.
2019-07-24 21:20
#236
 | 
United States FarCentrist 
trump vs biden = I vote biden trump vs any other dem candidate = I vote trump.
2019-07-24 22:09
Voting for any of the establishment is a mistake.
2019-07-25 00:33
#240
 | 
United States FarCentrist 
Biden is a centrist who pretends to be a progressive. Il take him over andrew yang who spouts the exact same recited points on every late night host he begs to be on. We just had a black president, I dont want a chinese one now.
2019-07-25 01:47
I’ve had enough establishment trash like Biden as president. Im not interested in having another thats all bark and no bite.
2019-07-25 01:49
#242
 | 
United States FarCentrist 
He's trash. But there isnt another dem candidate I would vote for. Their all radicals. Biden is the least radical even though he pretends to be one to exploit retards for votes.
2019-07-25 01:53
#260
 | 
United States YANGGANG2020 
if dems nominate biden theyre making the same mistake in 2016 with hillary no proof to back this up and i rly dont need any cuz its hltv but i think only candidate who can beat trump is warren
2019-07-27 18:27
Bolsonaro 2020
2019-07-25 01:58
Keep America Great Trump2020
2019-07-25 02:03
#246
 | 
Denmark Xipingu 
Trump second term, no way it will be a new one. Lmao
2019-07-25 06:37
Trump is definitely getting reelected sadly. The democrats are creating a crazy political polarization situation, let alone some of the preposterous ideas that they propose; sadly, they have great ideas just that...it's tainted by some extreme things that just don't make sense. All the Democrats had to do was depolarize things and they fuck it up. Glorious
2019-07-25 06:49
I hope Trump wins he is hilarious
2019-07-25 13:47
Andrew Yang seems like a solid democratic candidate
2019-07-27 18:24
Rating-o-meter
NEXT MATCH
0.77
Help GTR perform and have a chance to win a package for your team
Boost his rating with
Runtime Nutrition
20% on everything at
Click here to have a chance to win
BOOST
BOOST
BOOST
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.