Ok folks who are you voting for next year?

ok folks who are you voting for next year?

Attached: 51515.jpg (1533x852, 190K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=G5odA8Gsmzs
thehill.com/policy/finance/446372-net-worth-of-americans-aged-18-to-35-has-dropped-34-percent-since-1996-study
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

not Trump

not voting

I'm voting for whoever the Dem nominee is.
Real tired of their slow erosion of liberty and America.
I want to hit rock bottom so we can reset this stupid mess called liberalism and "progress".

Attached: 1465862870878.jpg (592x591, 134K)

which dem nominee are you hoping gets it?

>not the same girl
Nice attempt, fuckface.

Attached: 1525745465063.jpg (750x712, 23K)

They're all fascists. I don't think it really matters. Can you tell one from the other on paper? Bernie's the only one that stands out as a complete communist.

q

Bernie ez

help me out here
what is the difference between socialism and communism
i thought he was a socialist?

He claims to be a National Socialist (Nazi). Socialism is when they take your property and redistribute it.
Fascism is where you get to keep your property but they tell you how to use it.
Communism is after that, take what else you have to others can have enough,and when there's no more to steal so they force you to work on "their" property, usually at the end of a gun, although that happens with all these lefty regimes at some point.

Attached: Bernie_Sanders_Difference_Socialist.jpg (600x552, 79K)

>different hair
>different eyes
>different mouth
>different nose
You get this from CNN?

Attached: 1496593900458.jpg (600x600, 18K)

well being poor that sounds pretty great to me

>that sounds pretty great to me
Sure it does. That's what they're banking on; greedy brainlets. It's at the expense of your neighbors and family, and any hopes you have of not being poor, or even the hopes of buying things like food. How would it sound when every single person is poor? And I don't mean poor like you have a Visio TV instead of a Samsung, I mean like you all sleep in the same bed because you have no heat. You are the reason for that, user.

>having my property seized
>that sounds pretty great to me

Attached: 1490572478068.jpg (403x433, 34K)

Yang >tulsi>drumpft

Trump

when you have no property to begin with...
it puts me in a better situation than just living off of food stamps and basic internet

Go move to Venezuela or Argentina and tell us if your life is better lmao

>no property to begin with
And apparently no aspirations of ever having any.
>just living off of food stamps
Lift yourself up nigger! Food stamps weren't even a thing a few decades ago. Min wage is huge and you can't bus some tables? You're just a party tool to put the entire population in your situation. When socialists/fascists/communists say "equality", they mean "equally poor".
>and basic internet
LMFAO you think you'll have internet? Look what Obama did with that: 128k microwave for residents, racks of servers for schools that threw them away. It will only get worse under you plan.

You don't even know what you're wishing for.

Attached: 1531878263363.png (500x500, 516K)

>when you have no property to begin with
No one has property to begin with, idiot.
Why are you playing such the victim?

>it puts me in a better situation
>still poor
>but now everyone else is too
You're problem is envy you fucking piece of shit.

Sanders of course. He will crush Trump.

look, im not saying im voting for the guy
im just saying that what hes promising sounds good to someone in my situation

I'm glad retards don't actually know what socialism is.
Could you imagine if we lived in a world where trumptard idiots could seize control of the companies they work for? A true nightmare.
I would say America's propaganda is quite effective at keeping people in line, as long as they have their tendies and bud light.

Attached: 1586864839151.jpg (251x251, 5K)

We could have a democratic socialist president for 24 years and probably barely get back to the 1950s level of social safety nets. By that time the trickle down nonsense might be eradicated and start to see some real flow of wealth away from the top to the bottom.

>what hes promising
Spending trillions of dollars?
>sounds good to someone in my situation
Like you won't have higher taxes later?

Here's how much they want to spend, and it's outdated a little.
youtube.com/watch?v=G5odA8Gsmzs

Everything they spend today is what you will be paying back with interest in the future.

>democratic socialist president for 24 years and probably barely get back to the 1950s level of social safety nets
How is that when all they want is more of them? Socialists and fewer social programs is an oxymoron.
>trickle down nonsense
this was proven to actually happen, user. Some have shown that parts have carried through to today.

>Spending trillions of dollars?
We do that already. The only difference is that instead of food stamps, education, healthcare, and living wages...
We get what? Tanks? You know what, you are onto something. Send me one of those surplus M1 rifles and I will be just fine.

>We do that already
Yeah, I fucking know. It's gross.
>We get what? Tanks?
No, we get pensions, education, and healthcare. All shitty of course.

Attached: Tax Spending.png (602x618, 116K)

>Send me one of those surplus M1 rifles
Bill Clinton banned surplus military.

Trump all the way.

Send me some money on paypall, idc how much

paypal: [email protected]

>we already spend too much
>let's spend s'more
is this how you run your household?

you are fucking dumb

Attached: 1504741248114.jpg (500x265, 11K)

Send me some money on paypall, idc how much

paypal: [email protected]

I was referring to the expansion of social safety nets that we seen generally from the 30s to the late 60s.

Wealth owned by the newer generation has dropped significantly in the last 24 years...

thehill.com/policy/finance/446372-net-worth-of-americans-aged-18-to-35-has-dropped-34-percent-since-1996-study

go hit up bernie, loser.

You shouldn't argue with a person who believes a rich person pissing on them will make them better off.

>the expansion of social safety nets
lol There were far fewer than we have today by far.
>Wealth owned by the newer generation has dropped
That stat has been passed around so many times and has been thoroughly debunked. One of those "the middle class is disappearing" myths. Turns out the lower class is shrinking and the middle class class is disappearing to the upper class.

>a rich person pissing on them
Who's that? Are you rich?

>You shouldn't argue with a person who believes a rich dem nominee pissing on them will make them better off.
ok kiddo

Trump 2020 babbbbyyyy Making America great again 1 year at a time. 4 more years of this great by far the greatest president in the history of the United States of America

hot, I'd love to get a blowjob from that whore

>>Turns out the lower class is shrinking and the middle class class is disappearing to the upper class.

Rofl. Bullshit. The source linked is based on age, not class.

Alright, I'll check out your retarded thehill article. I made an assumption from the URL of that stupid thehill link.

Y r trump voters such cucKKKs?

Trump. Fuck the commie left.

Alright, just as I thought. Fucking bullshit.
>thehill passing along a wapo article
Why do they do this shit?
>previous generation, since 1996
>a decade ago
>a decade ago
>a decade ago
>60 years ago
WTF is the study actually about? And then I tried to find this Deloitte study. Can't find it.
And the blame is on rising costs of healthcare and student loans. Hmmm, wonder why that is. Its not like the private sector suddenly decided to jack those up for no reason. Oh yeah, it was lib programs that hiked those up!

Fuck your article. If that's where you're getting your information, you're fucked.

meant for

That logic makes Stalin out to be a neocon. Retard

lol those niggas dick are small as fuck

Explain. I'm also not sure what the current definition of what a neocon is other than what progs call actual (what they think are) conservatives.

Just think Reagan and Bush, Just like neolibs would be Clinton and Obama

What? Bush and Reagan are neocons? I can't argue, it's become a term like "racist". I also don't recognize any term as "neolib". There's libs and moderates. The Dems are libs now and are extremists. Neocons... I don't place them anywhere in the conservative column. Maybe Reagan by some. Real Conservatives are soooo far right from what you think they are that I don't think you know your "enemy" at all. You probably think Republicans are Conservatives.

Protip: Conservatives think Rs and Ds are both different shades of lefty.

>Conservatives think Rs and Ds are both different shades of lefty.
Libs think Ds and Rs are both different shades of righty as well. Kinda explains why Bernie and Donny were so popular back in '16, despite Hillary trying (and unfortunately succeeding) to engineer that year's Dem primaries in her favor

>different shades
So let's define what right, left, conservative, and lib mean. Here's my take...

(of course modern US terms)
Right and Left: The wings of the house. The Ds and Rs, in general terms.

The Dems: Used to put up competition even a few years ago (pre-Obama). I could agree with much of their platform. The problem used to be spending and social programs. Now both sides do it. Lots of feels, zero science. Lots of division and racism that still exists today.

The Pubs: I don't know. They were like the Dems but they preached "freedoms" and similar. They were always soft used-car salesmen. In my life I don't feel like they've had a solid platform, or at least they didn't communicate it well. God was always a thing with them. I'm atheist and always thought it was cringy. Generally a spineless, useless bunch.

Libs: This is where the blue-hairs come in; butt-hurt about everything. I wouldn't have called them left but the Dems have sort of latched on to them.

Cons: Conserve the constitution, liberty, and country. Conserve individual freedom and property rights. I don't want to say much to avoid bias.

I think I may be borderline ancap these days. I say I'm conservative: I want zero crony-corps, no activism (except maybe at the rep level), a massive reduction in regulation (light bulbs, toilets, cars, paint, etc). I want everyone to do what they want - including drugs and sex - as long as it doesn't get in anyone's way. If you're in the way of someone doing what they want, you move aside (within reason).

Every political compass test I've taken has placed me as a social libertarian, as in, slightly left of center, leaning anti-authoritarian. I don't like a good number of regulations, but I understand why they need to exist; I don't trust corporations to build our infrastructure, therefore the oh-so-loathed taxes are necessary

I'll add... the Conservative group is what it is. If someone says they are a Con but say "I'll vote straight R ticket" then I know they're not a Con. Someone says "We need to fund more infrastructure", not a Con. Republicans want more government even if they don't know it. They say, "They shouldn't build more houses there", and I say, "Why not? This is America". NIMBY is a lefty and partial-righty trait.

Right, but those terms don't fully apply to retarded US terms. Left and right are completely misconstrued. More importantly, what is their criteria for a dictator, et. al?

You have the link to that test?

I found it.

Attached: chart.png (480x400, 17K)

8Values also places me in the same place as the Political Compass test

Pepe and Q+

Attached: pepe q.png (333x333, 122K)