Quote:
Originally Posted by Cotton Hill
Warren is a lot like Ron Paul, a very vocal but ultimate tiny following, with no actual chance of getting anywhere nationally.
That's a terrible comparison. Do you think Ron Paul could ever get in the US Senate, even in TX? Perhaps you're not familiar with his crazier views, like wanting to abolish most departments of the government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RowCoach
I disagree, I think she's pretty radical but knows how to appear low key. I think she's really dangerous.
Name some of her positions that are "radical", hopefully with some polling to show how unpopular they are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
That doesn't make the argument you think it does. If someone is less "radical" than a major party candidate in the last 45 years they're not really radical at all.
Also, this is saying she is more liberal than nearly anyone in the US Senate. The US Senate does not represent the views of the American people very well. Same question I put to row coach, show some polling that shows her views are "radical".
Quote:
Originally Posted by neg3sd
There's no such thing as a "moderate social democrat". You're either a socialist or you're not.
Under Obama the top 1% has thrived. The middle 60% has fallen behind. Under socialism the middle 60% will fall more. The top 1% does well under any system.
1. That's just not true.There's a whole spectrum of left-wing political views from moderate social democrat to strong social democrat to democratic socialist to revolutionary socialists (all you're assorted trotskyist and leninist cults). I'm not engaging any further on that point because only morons disagree with it.
2. I agree about Obama. However I don't think the 1% did great in the October Revolution, or Chinese revolution for that matter.