US election 2020: Could it be Bernie Sanders v Donald Trump?

[Yankee-stani]

No you haven't because had you, then you would know this:







According to Engels, he did and was in favor of Capitalism as he viewed Liberalism on the same side as Socialism and Communism in terms of revolution against the old order:

"To him [Marx], Free Trade is the normal condition of modern capitalist production. Only under Free Trade can the immense productive powers of steam, of electricity, of machinery, be full developed; and the quicker the pace of this development, the sooner and the more fully will be realized its inevitable results; society splits up into two classes, capitalists here, wage-labourers there; hereditary wealth on one side, hereditary poverty on the other; supply outstripping demand, the markets being unable to absorb the ever growing mass of the production of industry; an ever recurring cycle of prosperity, glut, crisis, panic, chronic depression, and gradual revival of trade, the harbinger not of permanent improvement but of renewed overproduction and crisis; in short, productive forces expanding to such a degree that they rebel, as against unbearable fetters, against the social institutions under which they are put in motion; the only possible solution: a social revolution, freeing the social productive forces from the fetters of an antiquated social order, and the actual producers, the great mass of the people, from wage slavery. And because Free Trade is the natural, the normal atmosphere for this historical evolution, the economic medium in which the conditions for the inevitable social revolution will be the soonest created – for this reason, and for this alone, did Marx declare in favour of Free Trade."- F. Engels, Preface to Marx, On the Question of Free Trade (1888).

Also, some more from Marx himself where he favors overthrowing the aristocracy and praised capitalism as the mechanism of this overthrow:

"By Free Trade they mean the unfettered movement of capital, freed from all political, national and religious shackles. The soil is to be a marketable commodity, and the exploitation of the soil is to be carried on according to the common commercial laws. There are to be manufacturers of food as well as manufacturers of twist and cottons, but no longer any lords of the land. There are, in short, NOT to be tolerated any political or social restrictions, regulations or monopolies, unless they proceed from ‘the eternal laws of political economy’, that is, from the conditions under which Capital produces and distributes. The struggle of this party against the old English institutions, products of a superannuated, an evanescent stage of social development, is resumed in the watchword: Produce as cheap as you can, and do away with all the faux frais of production (with all superfluous, unnecessary expenses in production). And this watchword is addressed not only to the private individual, but to the nation at large principally’."- Karl Marx, ‘Free Trade and the Chartists’, New-York Daily Tribune, August 25, 1852.



So, again, Capitalism/Liberalism are as left wing as Karl Marx and Occasio Cortex and LGBTQ and Donald Trump, what do you know?





@WebMaster @waz @The Eagle @Irfan Baloch

Is profane language and emotionally charged personal attacks and slander allowed on this forum?



Anyhow, my work here is done. Cant debate with someone resorting to personal attacks and slander because he's lost the argument

@OsmanAli98 @Omar Al-Deek

Marx idea was to use Capitalism as staging point to get to Socialism and Communism tho

 

[That Guy]

No you haven't because had you, then you would know this:







According to Engels, he did and was in favor of Capitalism as he viewed Liberalism on the same side as Socialism and Communism in terms of revolution against the old order:

"To him [Marx], Free Trade is the normal condition of modern capitalist production. Only under Free Trade can the immense productive powers of steam, of electricity, of machinery, be full developed; and the quicker the pace of this development, the sooner and the more fully will be realized its inevitable results; society splits up into two classes, capitalists here, wage-labourers there; hereditary wealth on one side, hereditary poverty on the other; supply outstripping demand, the markets being unable to absorb the ever growing mass of the production of industry; an ever recurring cycle of prosperity, glut, crisis, panic, chronic depression, and gradual revival of trade, the harbinger not of permanent improvement but of renewed overproduction and crisis; in short, productive forces expanding to such a degree that they rebel, as against unbearable fetters, against the social institutions under which they are put in motion; the only possible solution: a social revolution, freeing the social productive forces from the fetters of an antiquated social order, and the actual producers, the great mass of the people, from wage slavery. And because Free Trade is the natural, the normal atmosphere for this historical evolution, the economic medium in which the conditions for the inevitable social revolution will be the soonest created – for this reason, and for this alone, did Marx declare in favour of Free Trade."- F. Engels, Preface to Marx, On the Question of Free Trade (1888).

Also, some more from Marx himself where he favors overthrowing the aristocracy and praised capitalism as the mechanism of this overthrow:

"By Free Trade they mean the unfettered movement of capital, freed from all political, national and religious shackles. The soil is to be a marketable commodity, and the exploitation of the soil is to be carried on according to the common commercial laws. There are to be manufacturers of food as well as manufacturers of twist and cottons, but no longer any lords of the land. There are, in short, NOT to be tolerated any political or social restrictions, regulations or monopolies, unless they proceed from ‘the eternal laws of political economy’, that is, from the conditions under which Capital produces and distributes. The struggle of this party against the old English institutions, products of a superannuated, an evanescent stage of social development, is resumed in the watchword: Produce as cheap as you can, and do away with all the faux frais of production (with all superfluous, unnecessary expenses in production). And this watchword is addressed not only to the private individual, but to the nation at large principally’."- Karl Marx, ‘Free Trade and the Chartists’, New-York Daily Tribune, August 25, 1852.

How about you actually READ your own post...

To him [Marx], Free Trade is the normal condition of modern capitalist production. Only under Free Trade can the immense productive powers of steam, of electricity, of machinery, be full developed; and the quicker the pace of this development, the sooner and the more fully will be realized its inevitable results; society splits up into two classes, capitalists here, wage-labourers there; hereditary wealth on one side, hereditary poverty on the other; supply outstripping demand, the markets being unable to absorb the ever growing mass of the production of industry; an ever recurring cycle of prosperity, glut, crisis, panic, chronic depression, and gradual revival of trade, the harbinger not of permanent improvement but of renewed overproduction and crisis; in short, productive forces expanding to such a degree that they rebel, as against unbearable fetters, against the social institutions under which they are put in motion; the only possible solution: a social revolution, freeing the social productive forces from the fetters of an antiquated social order, and the actual producers, the great mass of the people, from wage slavery. And because Free Trade is the natural, the normal atmosphere for this historical evolution, the economic medium in which the conditions for the inevitable social revolution will be the soonest created – for this reason, and for this alone, did Marx declare in favour of Free Trade."- F. Engels, Preface to Marx, On the Question of Free Trade (1888).

All you did was copy past a quick google search.


Marx isn't praising Capitalism, he's praising the fact that capitalism is self-defeating.

"By Free Trade they mean the unfettered movement of capital, freed from all political, national and religious shackles. The soil is to be a marketable commodity, and the exploitation of the soil is to be carried on according to the common commercial laws. There are to be manufacturers of food as well as manufacturers of twist and cottons, but no longer any lords of the land. There are, in short, NOT to be tolerated any political or social restrictions, regulations or monopolies, unless they proceed from ‘the eternal laws of political economy’, that is, from the conditions under which Capital produces and distributes. The struggle of this party against the old English institutions, products of a superannuated, an evanescent stage of social development, is resumed in the watchword: Produce as cheap as you can, and do away with all the faux frais of production (with all superfluous, unnecessary expenses in production). And this watchword is addressed not only to the private individual, but to the nation at large principally’."- Karl Marx, ‘Free Trade and the Chartists’, New-York Daily Tribune, August 25, 1852.

He's not praising capitalism in this second except either, he's explain how capitalism works. There is no praise or condemnation here.

YOU LITERALLY JUST GOOGLED, AND COPY PASTED WITHOUT ACTUALLY READING THE POSTS.

So, again, Capitalism/Liberalism are as left wing as Karl Marx and Occasio Cortex and LGBTQ and Donald Trump, what do you know?

NO ITS NOT, YOU KEEP REPEATING THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN, BUT ITS NOT TRUE.

ACTUALLY READ YOUR OWN DAMN POSTS BEFORE COMMENTING!

Marx idea was to use Capitalism as staging point to get to Socialism and Communism tho

That's exactly it.

His idea was that capitalism was ultimately self defeating, and that to implement it was the only way to get the working class to realize that capitalism doesn't work, and communism is the only option that works for society.

His strategy was basically to shock and awe society to get communism to be the dominant economic ideology.

Thus, capitalism leads to communism. Trial and error, essentially, but on an extreme scale.

@WebMaster @waz @The Eagle @Irfan Baloch

Is profane language and emotionally charged personal attacks and slander allowed on this forum?

I called your comment stupid, not you. Also, are you really gonna complain, when you admitted to calling me a racial slur?

Anyway, I've already contacted the mods @Dubious @Irfan Baloch @Horus @WebMaster @waz @The Eagle @Irfan Baloch

I don't know if you guys can check deleted comments, but considering he's complaining about me calling his comments stupid, and saying the word "shit". You should know he literally called me a racial slur. If you can check deleted comments, because go back and check.

Anyhow, my work here is done. Cant debate with someone resorting to personal attacks and slander he's lost the argument

@OsmanAli98 @Omar Al-Deek

You never even started.

You used strawman arguments, posted a few excerpts you didn't even bother to read before hand, misinterpreted Marx's words, and presented false claims.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

How about you actually READ your own post...

To him [Marx], Free Trade is the normal condition of modern capitalist production. Only under Free Trade can the immense productive powers of steam, of electricity, of machinery, be full developed; and the quicker the pace of this development, the sooner and the more fully will be realized its inevitable results; society splits up into two classes, capitalists here, wage-labourers there; hereditary wealth on one side, hereditary poverty on the other; supply outstripping demand, the markets being unable to absorb the ever growing mass of the production of industry; an ever recurring cycle of prosperity, glut, crisis, panic, chronic depression, and gradual revival of trade, the harbinger not of permanent improvement but of renewed overproduction and crisis; in short, productive forces expanding to such a degree that they rebel, as against unbearable fetters, against the social institutions under which they are put in motion; the only possible solution: a social revolution, freeing the social productive forces from the fetters of an antiquated social order, and the actual producers, the great mass of the people, from wage slavery. And because Free Trade is the natural, the normal atmosphere for this historical evolution, the economic medium in which the conditions for the inevitable social revolution will be the soonest created – for this reason, and for this alone, did Marx declare in favour of Free Trade."- F. Engels, Preface to Marx, On the Question of Free Trade (1888).

All you did was copy past a quick google search.


Marx isn't praising Capitalism, he's praising the fact that capitalism is self-defeating.

"By Free Trade they mean the unfettered movement of capital, freed from all political, national and religious shackles. The soil is to be a marketable commodity, and the exploitation of the soil is to be carried on according to the common commercial laws. There are to be manufacturers of food as well as manufacturers of twist and cottons, but no longer any lords of the land. There are, in short, NOT to be tolerated any political or social restrictions, regulations or monopolies, unless they proceed from ‘the eternal laws of political economy’, that is, from the conditions under which Capital produces and distributes. The struggle of this party against the old English institutions, products of a superannuated, an evanescent stage of social development, is resumed in the watchword: Produce as cheap as you can, and do away with all the faux frais of production (with all superfluous, unnecessary expenses in production). And this watchword is addressed not only to the private individual, but to the nation at large principally’."- Karl Marx, ‘Free Trade and the Chartists’, New-York Daily Tribune, August 25, 1852.

He's not praising capitalism in this second except either, he's explain how capitalism works. There is no praise or condemnation here.

YOU LITERALLY JUST GOOGLED, AND COPY PASTED WITHOUT ACTUALLY READING THE POSTS.




NO ITS NOT, YOU KEEP REPEATING THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN, BUT ITS NOT TRUE.

ACTUALLY READ YOUR OWN DAMN POSTS BEFORE COMMENTING!


That's exactly it.

His idea was that capitalism was ultimately self defeating, and that to implement it was the only way to get the working class to realize that capitalism doesn't work, and communism is the only option that works for society.

His strategy was basically to shock and awe society to get communism to be the dominant economic ideology.

Thus, capitalism leads to communism. Trial and error, essentially, but on an extreme scale.



I called your comment stupid, not you. Also, are you really gonna complain, when you admitted to calling me a racial slur?

Anyway, I've already contacted the mods @Dubious @Irfan Baloch @Horus @WebMaster @waz @The Eagle @Irfan Baloch

I don't know if you guys can check deleted comments, but considering he's complaining about me calling his comments stupid, and saying the word "shit". You should know he literally called me a racial slur. If you can check deleted comments, because go back and check.


You never even started.

You used strawman arguments, posted a few excerpts you didn't even bother to read before hand, misinterpreted Marx's words, and presented false claims.

cool it dear

No you haven't because had you, then you would know this:







According to Engels, he did and was in favor of Capitalism as he viewed Liberalism on the same side as Socialism and Communism in terms of revolution against the old order:

"To him [Marx], Free Trade is the normal condition of modern capitalist production. Only under Free Trade can the immense productive powers of steam, of electricity, of machinery, be full developed; and the quicker the pace of this development, the sooner and the more fully will be realized its inevitable results; society splits up into two classes, capitalists here, wage-labourers there; hereditary wealth on one side, hereditary poverty on the other; supply outstripping demand, the markets being unable to absorb the ever growing mass of the production of industry; an ever recurring cycle of prosperity, glut, crisis, panic, chronic depression, and gradual revival of trade, the harbinger not of permanent improvement but of renewed overproduction and crisis; in short, productive forces expanding to such a degree that they rebel, as against unbearable fetters, against the social institutions under which they are put in motion; the only possible solution: a social revolution, freeing the social productive forces from the fetters of an antiquated social order, and the actual producers, the great mass of the people, from wage slavery. And because Free Trade is the natural, the normal atmosphere for this historical evolution, the economic medium in which the conditions for the inevitable social revolution will be the soonest created – for this reason, and for this alone, did Marx declare in favour of Free Trade."- F. Engels, Preface to Marx, On the Question of Free Trade (1888).

Also, some more from Marx himself where he favors overthrowing the aristocracy and praised capitalism as the mechanism of this overthrow:

"By Free Trade they mean the unfettered movement of capital, freed from all political, national and religious shackles. The soil is to be a marketable commodity, and the exploitation of the soil is to be carried on according to the common commercial laws. There are to be manufacturers of food as well as manufacturers of twist and cottons, but no longer any lords of the land. There are, in short, NOT to be tolerated any political or social restrictions, regulations or monopolies, unless they proceed from ‘the eternal laws of political economy’, that is, from the conditions under which Capital produces and distributes. The struggle of this party against the old English institutions, products of a superannuated, an evanescent stage of social development, is resumed in the watchword: Produce as cheap as you can, and do away with all the faux frais of production (with all superfluous, unnecessary expenses in production). And this watchword is addressed not only to the private individual, but to the nation at large principally’."- Karl Marx, ‘Free Trade and the Chartists’, New-York Daily Tribune, August 25, 1852.



So, again, Capitalism/Liberalism are as left wing as Karl Marx and Occasio Cortex and LGBTQ and Donald Trump, what do you know?





@WebMaster @waz @The Eagle @Irfan Baloch

Is profane language and emotionally charged personal attacks and slander allowed on this forum?



Anyhow, my work here is done. Cant debate with someone resorting to personal attacks and slander because he's lost the argument

@OsmanAli98 @Omar Al-Deek

easy now

lets agree to disagree
passions are high with my two comrades
stay blessed both of you.
guy guys have difference of opinion

 

[That Guy]

cool it dear

I'm trying, but when the conversation starts out with a racial slur thrown at me, it's clear why I'm upset.

And then he goes on to pretend he's the victim in all this.

You're right though, I'll stop here. Thanks for at least answering my call.

 

[Desert Fox]

Marx idea was to use Capitalism as staging point to get to Socialism and Communism tho

Exactly!

Marx was willing to make millions of workers suffer and die in the cogs of Capitalist machinery in order to fulfill his fantasy of a worldly Communist utopia.

He opposed genuine adversaries of Capitalism/Liberalism.

Marx had no sympathy for the workers, he only viewed them as tools for his own ends. He himself was from the bourgeoisie and never worked a working class job, let alone an actual job.

Don't be fooled by Marx and his current successors, ie Bernie Sanders (owns two homes worth more than $600,000 in the Whitest state in America, Vermont) and Occasio Cortez.

Occasio Cortez, Bernie and Trump have more in common than they don't. At the end of the day all three want to manipulate the masses and lie and deceive. Though I'll give it to Trump at least he's honest about it and speaks his mind.

 

[Humble Analyst]

Bernie Sanders is firmly the front-runner in the race to become the Democratic challenger to Republican President Donald Trump, fresh from a victory this week in the second state-by-state contest. His support is fervent but is his party, let alone the country, ready to embrace such an unusual candidate?

Bernie Sanders likes to call his presidential campaign a revolution, but these days it feels more like a touring rock concert.

The Vermont senator may seem like an unlikely front-man for bands like Vampire Weekend and The Strokes, but both have served as his warm-up acts, playing at recent campaign rallies.

But the thousands of fans in packed arenas reserve their loudest cheers for the scruffy-haired 78-year-old candidate with a clipped Brooklyn accent.

After nearly a year-long marathon of rallies, meetings, debates and ground-laying, the Sanders campaign is now entering a sprint of near-nonstop activity that will carry it through dozens of states across the country - an impressive test of endurance for a man who just months ago was hospitalised for a heart attack.

"Bernie Sanders is the only candidate that has given me the courage to believe that we cannot only demand bold, radical change, but that it's actually very attainable," said Aletha Shapiro, who travelled to New Hampshire from Long Island, New York, to help the Sanders campaign.

"If the people stick together, we can actually put power back in the hands of the people."

The end result of all this effort was a split decision in Iowa, as former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg claimed the most delegates to the Democratic National Convention even though Sanders won a few thousand more votes.

In New Hampshire, Sanders finished narrowly ahead of Buttigieg again, with the two tied in the state's delegate count.

That didn't stop Sanders from claiming victory both in Iowa and New Hampshire on Tuesday night, however, and looking ahead to a showdown with Trump in November.

• A simple guide to US primaries and caucuses
• How Bernie Sanders always beats the odds

"The reason we won tonight in New Hampshire, we won last week in Iowa, is because of the hard work of so many volunteers," he said. "Let me say tonight that this victory here is the beginning of the end for Donald Trump."

The crowd, packed into a college gymnasium, responded with deafening applause, as though the volume of their cheers could will their beloved candidate to more victories in the days ahead.

Image copyrightHANNAH LONG-HIGGINS

"It was electric," said Scott Sandvik, a music teacher from Boston. "I really think it was a release of tension after a nail-biter of an election."

If the Sanders "revolution" does take hold - an outsider campaign pitted as much against the Democratic Party's establishment as it is the incumbent president - New Hampshire could very well be seen as where it all began.

But the campaign still has a long road ahead.

Another shot at the prize
Four years ago, Sanders also followed a tight result in Iowa with a victory in New Hampshire. That contest was actually more decisive - a 20-point win over Hillary Clinton, who was considered the prohibitive favourite entering the race.

Sanders' 2016 New Hampshire triumph, however, was a springboard into an empty pool.

He followed his win in the overwhelmingly white New England state with a narrow loss in Nevada and a drubbing in South Carolina, where the Democratic voting population is majority black. Although there were a few bright spots after that - victories in Michigan and Wisconsin - Clinton spent the next few months pulling away from Sanders in the nomination race.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES

Now Sanders is back, hoping history doesn't repeat itself. Facing a more crowded field, he appears to be in a much better position, as the nomination fight becomes a state-by-state slog on a battleground that stretches the breadth of the nation.

There is no Clinton machine waiting to do battle against the Sanders insurgency this time around. Instead, the Vermont senator heads out of New Hampshire along with a ragtag mix of candidates all scrambling for a foothold.

Joe Biden, the apparent front-runner through much of 2019, is grievously wounded by poor showings in the first two contests. Elizabeth Warren, the other candidate appealing to the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, has finished behind Sanders twice now and shows no signs gaining any ground.

Meanwhile, the continued presence of Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar among the moderates of the party ensures middle-of-the road and establishment Democrats will remain divided.

Buttigieg has money, but a thin resume and doubts about his appeal to the more diverse rank-and-file of the Democratic Party. Klobuchar is counting on media coverage of her late surge in New Hampshire to make up for depleted campaign coffers and a virtually non-existent national organisation.

Who is Bernie Sanders?

• Sanders had his first political victory in Burlington, Vermont, where he toppled the reigning six-term Democrat in 1981 for the mayoral seat by a margin of just 10 votes
• Despite efforts by establishment Democrats to thwart his early career, Sanders served four terms as mayor before being elected to the US House of Representatives in 1990 - the first independent politician in four decades to do so
• He won his current senate seat in 2007 and is currently in his third term
• Sanders has an older brother, Larry, who lives in the UK and is currently the health and social care spokesman for the Green Party

The Sanders brothers: A tale of two underdogs

How Bernie Sanders always beat the odds

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES

Meanwhile, Sanders has risen in national polls as Biden has faltered. He boasts a veteran campaign structure that has basically been up and running since 2015, and a donor and volunteer network that spans the nation.

His $25m (£19m) fundraising haul in January alone will ensure he has more than enough resources to compete in every state on the crowded March primary calendar.

He has been officially or unofficially supported by figures from UK Labour MP Diane Abbott to YouTube star Joe Rogan. On Friday, he picked up another endorsement, from New York mayor and erstwhile 2020 candidate Bill de Blasio.

Sanders will loose very easily to Trump or any Republican

 

[Turingsage]

Sadly even though I support Bernie , I would not put Bernie up against the Trump machine. My vote would have gone to Elizabeth Warren. It would have been harder to demonise her but she too was in danger of being crushed under the Trump juggernaut
It is incumbent on everyone to put in a maximum effort to get Trump out.
SUPPORT ANYONE BUT TRUMP
Get this criminal out of the White House

 

[gangsta_rap]

marx and engels were right

 

[That Guy]

Sadly even though I support Bernie , I would not put Bernie up against the Trump machine. My vote would have gone to Elizabeth Warren. It would have been harder to demonise her but she too was in danger of being crushed under the Trump juggernaut
It is incumbent on everyone to put in a maximum effort to get Trump out.
SUPPORT ANYONE BUT TRUMP
Get this criminal out of the White House

I have this strange feeling that the dems will win the house and senate, but lose the presidency.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Sadly even though I support Bernie , I would not put Bernie up against the Trump machine. My vote would have gone to Elizabeth Warren. It would have been harder to demonise her but she too was in danger of being crushed under the Trump juggernaut
It is incumbent on everyone to put in a maximum effort to get Trump out.
SUPPORT ANYONE BUT TRUMP
Get this criminal out of the White House

As somebody who usually leans Democrat I have to say Trump is doing a good job keeping the Democrats who voted for him happier than any of the Left Liberal idiot candidates the Democrats keep digging up.

If they want to win the Democratic Party has to start seeing reality instead of the haze whiney Hillary fans like to see.

 

[Nasr]

Bernie Sanders is firmly the front-runner in the race to become the Democratic challenger to Republican President Donald Trump, fresh from a victory this week in the second state-by-state contest. His support is fervent but is his party, let alone the country, ready to embrace such an unusual candidate?

Anyone who thinks that Bernie Sanders has any chance of winning the Presidential Elections, is living in a fool's paradise. All you have to do is study the Democratic Primaries of 2016 to know that Bernie Sanders doesn't have a chance in hell to win, either the primaries or the presidential elections. The DNC made sure they didn't allow Sanders to get the nomination in 2016, since they wanted Hillary Clinton to win. But whichever way you want to look at it, there is no chance for anyone to win except Trump. The one major reason why, is who is backing Trump.

Donald Trump is neck deep in Zionists. His son-in-law, Jared Kushner is a Zionist-Jew. Mnuchin is another Zionist-Jew in his administration. Israel backs Trump 100% and it is Israel and it's Zionist Power-Players in Washington DC, that had Trump elected in 2016. And so again, in 2020, Trump is fully back by Israel. The reason? Through Trump, Israel hopes to completely annex the West Bank and take all of Jerusalem to make it their Capital.

The first foreign policy Trump enacted in the Middle East was moving the American Embassy from Tell Aviv, to Jerusalem. There never was any Russia Collusion, in reality there was the "Israeli Collusion." Idiots still proliferate in large numbers in America and around the world, who are blind as bats, not to see the real colluder. America is a "Republic" not a democracy, yet it thumps it's chest as being the champion of democracy. Just like Britain is a "Monarchy" not a democracy, yet Britain proclaims to be more democratic than anyone. America, Britain and France are countries which have been under total ownership and control of the Zionist-Swines. There never was anything remotely democratic in existence, anywhere in the world. Yet the entire world rants and whines of democracy.

Trump will win 2020, hands down. The drama running up to his victory, is just for public consumption, because America is, as well ought to know, a nation of j@ck@$$e$!

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Anyone who thinks that Bernie Sanders has any chance of winning the Presidential Elections, is living in a fool's paradise. All you

Donald Trump is neck deep in Zionists. !

Bernie Sanders is Jewish and I'm sure a "sleeper" extreme Zionist. Not sure why you guys would ever risk wanting him in office. You guys are crazy. If you think Trump is bad wait until some sleeper gets into office.

Plus Hillary got 71% of the Jewish vote while Trump got only 24%. He didn't win because of the Jews that's for sure. They were the lowest support voter block.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/

 

[Nasr]

Bernie Sanders is Jewish and I'm sure a "sleeper" extreme Zionist.

I know Bernie Sanders is a Jew. However his stance on Israel prevents him from being backed by Zionists. Despite being a Jew, Bernie Sanders believes in a two-state solution, which every Zionist and Israeli are opposed to. Had Bernie Sanders been elected the 46th President of America, he would not have ever moved the U.S Embassy from Tell Aviv to Jerusalem.

Not sure why you guys would ever risk wanting him in office. You guys are crazy. If you think Trump is bad wait until some sleeper gets into office.

Trump is a nobody, he only got elected because of his son-in-laws (Zionist-Jew) connections in Washington DC. Trump's election came on the back of him promising to put the American Embassy in Jerusalem. When Trump gets reelected, he will then enact official American policy on Palestine, where the West Bank will be annexed by Israel, wholesale.

Plus Hillary got 71% of the Jewish vote while Trump got only 24%. He didn't win because of the Jews that's for sure. They were the lowest support voter block.

Jews are but a minority, drop in the bucket compared to the rest of the 300 million Americans. Zionists, not Jews, control all of America's wealth and power. Jews can't squat diddly when the Zionists use Judaism to legitimize their creation of the illegal and illegitimate state of israel. Besides, Trump got elected through the electoral college system, not popular vote. Also, if we were to go by popular vote, then Bernie Sanders would win by a landslide. His policies on the domestic front is what the American youngsters crave, but will never see come to fruition.

I personally give a hoot about who gets elected in Washington DC. The country is owned and controlled by Zionist-Swines. The presidential elections is nothing more than a televised circus to keep the retarded American nation, entertained.

 

[That Guy]

I have this strange feeling that the dems will win the house and senate, but lose the presidency.

I just want to add that, this actually might be preferable to the Democrats. The US is heading towards a recession, it's only a matter of when. A Republican president will end up taking all the blame, and if the dems control both the house and senate, they can then force the president out through impeachment, and hold the government hostage, until the next elections come and they inevitably win the presidency.