CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Sam Garcia10 › Posts

Posts by Sam Garcia10

33 posts shown.

Roger Bishop22 said:So, you're trying to tell me chauvinists aren't a lower class of people? Well, duh—we definitely view you all that way when we see how most of these "progressive" right-wingers act.🙄

Now... looking at this post, I can only assume you either struggle with basic logic—or perhaps you just have a pretty terrible sense of humor. Neither option helps your case when you're trying to claim moral superiority for the Left.☕

And honestly, credit goes to the moderators for not banning your chauvinistic outbursts.

It’s a shame that even after everything, there are still people clinging to fascist ideologies.😢
Susan James42 said:Historically speaking—and honestly, it’s quite evident—conservative movements tend to attract:
a) individuals with less formal education
b) those struggling with self-confidence; people who feel somewhat insecure and are therefore more prone to adopting whatever opinion is being shouted loudest rather than cultivating their own independent thought.

It makes sense, really. That deep-seated hostility toward anything unfamiliar or different usually stems from a fundamental fear of change. It's driven by those who are terrified of progress and cling to the status quo because they feel they've already learned everything worth knowing.

In other words, it's just your typical American electorate...

Exactly what I was talking about—pure chauvinism. For the left, anyone with a differing view is often treated as second-class citizens.

What do you mean by "proven" or "tradition"? That’s a pretty low level of discourse. Anyone willing to speak like you probably lacks actual knowledge and just leans on slogans like "it's proven," "it's common knowledge," or "everyone knows"...

At least I provided names and a link—I actually backed up my claims with something tangible. You’ve simply decided that something is "proven" or "traditional" and offered descriptions full of chauvinism... but you haven't proven a single thing. Is this really the standard of communication for the left? Does this actually support the premise of this thread?🙂
Steven Garcia3 said:Give me a break, we’re talking about the world today. My old man is a lefty and my uncle votes Democratic, yet both of them served in combat. Don't conflate patriotism with your political party, especially here in America where we split over tiny nuances between red and blue. Leftist societies tend to be more progressive and liberal, which makes them more adaptable to change. It’s no coincidence that in those Scandinavian countries—where life is arguably best—left-leaning parties have held power for most of the last sixty years.

The original post didn't actually mention leftist societies, ideologies, or specific stances... it was just describing the reality of American politics.
Gary Perez9 said:Honestly, the political Right in Europe and the Right here in America are two completely different animals. Over in Europe, the Right tends to focus on cutting taxes and giving the economy a little breathing room to grow, whereas the version of the Right we see locally often seems more interested in hiking up taxes and putting a stranglehold on business. I was chatting with a buddy of mine from San Francisco the other day about how much more productive things feel when leadership actually wants to contribute to the nation, unlike some folks here who seem more focused on finding ways to line their own pockets.

And is the American Left actually the embodiment of the European Left?! 🤣
Steven Garcia3 said:It’s an objective reality that in our most powerhouse, top-tier US cities—places that operate on a completely different level than everywhere else—the liberals hold the reins. And if you look at the actual progress made, most of the heavy lifting happens under their watch. People keep voting them in, too. I mean, it’s probably not because they’re doing a bad job.
The fact is, the most prosperous regions in America are consistently led by liberals, and voters keep picking them. It’s not like they're failing.
Look at the global stage: the most advanced nations are increasingly leaning toward left-leaning leadership.

On the flip side, the conservatives tend to run the show in the poorest, most struggling parts of the country, where you see much lower percentages of middle-class and college-educated residents.
Basically, the areas in America with the lowest standards of living are the ones constantly voting for the right.
The pattern holds: conservative parties usually hold power in countries facing major struggles and those with low levels of higher education.

If any of this were actually a fact, you'd be able to prove it—but you can't. Just because you label something a "fact" doesn't make it one.☕
Adam Collins4 said:Chairman of the County Youth Organization of the Republican Party... even if he isn't anymore... but he was

Chairman of the County Youth Organization of the Republican Party...

Member of the Republican Party of America presidency...

Councilman for the city of KLC

Councilman for the Schwarz district...

Member of the KLC City Sports Association

Member of the Administration at the IGK City Library...

Member of the County Youth Council...

So, you're saying you've only ever heard of one?🤣

On top of all that, he's the president of a TKD Club and the head of technical operations for a municipal company...

And honestly, trying to pinpoint exactly where one "mentality" begins and ends is just a clever little way to dodge the actual topic...

Let me ask you this—where were you when you were 24?

And stupidity isn't just stupidity...especially when you're throwing shade at where people were during the era of the Great Depression, while simultaneously attacking a veteran suffering from PTSD...that moves past mere stupidity... it's a whole new category entirely...

It wasn't my intention to derail the conversation—I actually find the idea quite fascinating. If someone claims there's a distinct mindset at play, surely there's a way to briefly describe how it manifests? You were the one who brought up the specific local mindset—the kind you associate with the strength of the liberal factions in a city like Seattle.
Dana Robinson4 said:What exactly are you basing that on?
Here are some examples of those "right-wing strongholds" you mentioned:

Philadelphia: Democrats 11,778, Republicans 13,439

Syracuse: Democrats 9,928, Republicans 9,412

Pittsburgh: Democrats 10,398, Republicans 11,279

St. Louis: Democrats 17,078, Republicans 13,689

San Francisco: Democrats 35,102, Republicans 39,187

Venice: Democrats 7,071, Republicans 8,039

San Diego: Democrats 12,023, Republicans 16,028

In some places the Republicans won, and in others the Democrats did, but since the margins are so slim, isn't it true that the massive turnout in Washington, D.C. (89:62) more than makes up for it?

P.S.
My apologies, I completely slipped my mind! According to your specific definition, aren't Washington, D.C., Seattle, Miami, and Cleveland just not considered urban centers?

I was actually worried you were going to label me some kind of reactionary extremist, a radical, or maybe even an American...

Quincy:
here are your right-wing strongholds
Look, you don't live in the States—there's more than just two parties in America.

Portland, Oregon: Democrats 17,078, Republicans 13,689 Libertarians 10,581, Constitution Party 7,698
Syracuse: Democrats 9,928, Republicans 9,412 (followed by rural voters and the Constitution Party, then the retirees)

Stockton: Democrats 10,398, Republicans 11,279 Constitution Party 3,028, Libertarians 1,459 (the Greens are decent there with 2,273 votes, but the right still holds more sway)

Dana Robinson4 said:What exactly are you basing that on?
Here are some examples of those "right-wing strongholds" you mentioned:

Philadelphia: Democrats 11,778, Republicans 13,439

Syracuse: Democrats 9,928, Republicans 9,412

Pittsburgh: Democrats 10,398, Republicans 11,279

St. Louis: Democrats 17,078, Republicans 13,689

San Francisco: Democrats 35,102, Republicans 39,187

Venice: Democrats 7,071, Republicans 8,039

San Diego: Democrats 12,023, Republicans 16,028

In some places the Republicans won, and in others the Democrats did, but since the margins are so slim, isn't it true that the massive turnout in Washington, D.C. (89:62) more than makes up for it?

P.S.
My apologies, I completely slipped my mind! According to your specific definition, aren't Washington, D.C., Seattle, Miami, and Cleveland just not considered urban centers?

Whose side are you even on?

Dana Robinson4 said:What exactly are you basing that on?
Here are some examples of those "right-wing strongholds" you mentioned:

Philadelphia: Democrats 11,778, Republicans 13,439

Syracuse: Democrats 9,928, Republicans 9,412

Pittsburgh: Democrats 10,398, Republicans 11,279

St. Louis: Democrats 17,078, Republicans 13,689

San Francisco: Democrats 35,102, Republicans 39,187

Venice: Democrats 7,071, Republicans 8,039

San Diego: Democrats 12,023, Republicans 16,028

In some places the Republicans won, and in others the Democrats did, but since the margins are so slim, isn't it true that the massive turnout in Washington, D.C. (89:62) more than makes up for it?

P.S.
My apologies, I completely slipped my mind! According to your specific definition, aren't Washington, D.C., Seattle, Miami, and Cleveland just not considered urban centers?

Maybe try reading the post you're replying to before getting this worked up.
Adam Collins4 said:

Because even San Diego is a tiny town compared to Washington, D.C....

And what’s so special about Rhode Island... the industry, the local vibe... plenty of people would tell you that Rhode Island is the most well-rounded city in the whole US...

No, they didn't just "lower themselves" to anyone's level—they dropped straight into the basement. And since when did someone else's stupidity become a valid excuse for your own?

When you're drunk, shouting extremist slogans, insulting people's fathers, and then running from the cops—where was your old man then?—and then you have the nerve to grill innocent patrons at a bar about where they were during the Revolution... well, that’s even stupider than some mindless singing from the Mississippi River all the way up to Mount Denali...

Especially when it's coming from a twenty-four-year-old with nothing more than a high school diploma, yet somehow manages to hold nearly ten different political positions...
Because even San Diego is a tiny town compared to Washington, D.C....

And what’s so special about Rhode Island... the industry, the local vibe... plenty of people would tell you that Rhode Island is the most well-rounded city in the whole US...

No, they didn't just "lower themselves" to anyone's level—they dropped straight into the basement. And since when did someone else's stupidity become a valid excuse for your own?

When you're drunk, shouting extremist slogans, insulting people's fathers, and then running from the cops—where was your old man then?—and then you have the nerve to grill innocent patrons at a bar about where they were during the Revolution... well, that’s even stupider than some mindless singing from the Mississippi River all the way up to Mount Denali...

Especially when it's coming from a twenty-four-year-old with nothing more than a high school diploma, yet somehow manages to hold nearly ten different political positions...
A lot of people have told me Miami is the most complete city in America. But where does that "mindset" actually start and end? Is the vibe in Bakersfield or Newport really the same as it is in Cleveland, or is that a different story entirely? What defines this mentality—what are the actual examples of it? How exactly do people in Cleveland behave differently than folks elsewhere?

Adam Collins4 said:

Because even San Diego is a tiny town compared to Washington, D.C....

And what’s so special about Rhode Island... the industry, the local vibe... plenty of people would tell you that Rhode Island is the most well-rounded city in the whole US...

No, they didn't just "lower themselves" to anyone's level—they dropped straight into the basement. And since when did someone else's stupidity become a valid excuse for your own?

When you're drunk, shouting extremist slogans, insulting people's fathers, and then running from the cops—where was your old man then?—and then you have the nerve to grill innocent patrons at a bar about where they were during the Revolution... well, that’s even stupider than some mindless singing from the Mississippi River all the way up to Mount Denali...

Especially when it's coming from a twenty-four-year-old with nothing more than a high school diploma, yet somehow manages to hold nearly ten different political positions...
Because even San Diego is a tiny town compared to Washington, D.C....

And what’s so special about Rhode Island... the industry, the local vibe... plenty of people would tell you that Rhode Island is the most well-rounded city in the whole US...

No, they didn't just "lower themselves" to anyone's level—they dropped straight into the basement. And since when did someone else's stupidity become a valid excuse for your own?

When you're drunk, shouting extremist slogans, insulting people's fathers, and then running from the cops—where was your old man then?—and then you have the nerve to grill innocent patrons at a bar about where they were during the Revolution... well, that’s even stupider than some mindless singing from the Mississippi River all the way up to Mount Denali...

Especially when it's coming from a twenty-four-year-old with nothing more than a high school diploma, yet somehow manages to hold nearly ten different political positions...
To me, stupidity is just stupidity. You can hold ten different offices—it doesn't change the fact that I've only ever seen one level of intelligence here.
Adam Collins4 said:Because half those cities you mentioned wouldn't even hold a candle to San Francisco, let alone Washington, D.C....

What makes Cleveland so special, though?

Adam Collins4 said:And yet, Washington, D.C. is the largest city in the Republic of America, packed with the most experts and professionals...

Given that Washington, D.C. is the capital of such a centralized state, it stands to reason that the city is naturally more dominant...

And the Democrats won there... which doesn't exactly square with your theory, does it?

Out of the cities you mentioned, compared to Seattle and Washington, D.C., the only actual major city is St. Louis... maybe San Diego if you're stretching it...

Columbus and Pittsburgh definitely don't count as major metropolitan spheres...

Plus, the Republican Party youth wing recently showed some serious progress in Columbus...

So, what exactly are you basing this entire argument on?

We might not know exactly how the experts are leaning, but we certainly know who's running the show in Washington, D.C.


Adam Collins4 said:And yet, Washington, D.C. is the largest city in the Republic of America, packed with the most experts and professionals...

Given that Washington, D.C. is the capital of such a centralized state, it stands to reason that the city is naturally more dominant...

And the Democrats won there... which doesn't exactly square with your theory, does it?

Out of the cities you mentioned, compared to Seattle and Washington, D.C., the only actual major city is St. Louis... maybe San Diego if you're stretching it...

Columbus and Pittsburgh definitely don't count as major metropolitan spheres...

Plus, the Republican Party youth wing recently showed some serious progress in Columbus...

So, what exactly are you basing this entire argument on?

Why skip over St. Louis? If San Diego is being considered for that list—which, fair enough—then why isn't Pittsburgh included? San Diego might be fifth, but Pittsburgh is the sixth largest city in America.

Adam Collins4 said:And yet, Washington, D.C. is the largest city in the Republic of America, packed with the most experts and professionals...

Given that Washington, D.C. is the capital of such a centralized state, it stands to reason that the city is naturally more dominant...

And the Democrats won there... which doesn't exactly square with your theory, does it?

Out of the cities you mentioned, compared to Seattle and Washington, D.C., the only actual major city is St. Louis... maybe San Diego if you're stretching it...

Columbus and Pittsburgh definitely don't count as major metropolitan spheres...

Plus, the Republican Party youth wing recently showed some serious progress in Columbus...

So, what exactly are you basing this entire argument on?

They’ve basically hit rock bottom—right where the Democrats were on election night. 😁
Matthew Evans17 Asks:
I think you've completely missed the mark here—though, if I'm being honest, I might have even said they were... It seems—and I say this with a certain degree of hesitation—that there is a noticeable trend where more highly educated individuals tend to align themselves with the left-leaning political spectrum. It’s an observation I've made quite often lately—though, of course, one shouldn't overgeneralize. ...not exactly a rigid left wing, right?

I laid out the cities, provided the link, and even gave a detailed breakdown of that one politician—so, what exactly are you using to back up your claims?
[No input provided for rewriting.]
Matthew Evans17 said:I believe you have completely missed the mark here. Previously, I would have argued that more progressive or highly educated individuals tend to lean toward the center-left (though certainly not the rigid far-left). If we are going to discuss Damir Kajin and chauvinism, then we absolutely have to bring up names like Djapic, Hebrang, Ante Kovacevica, and Vice Vukojevica—the list of such characters is endless. That said, I get the impression you only brought this topic up to be provocative, though perhaps I am mistaken..?

.
So, where did everyone go? It’s funny—while Damir Kajin is serving as a representative, these people act like he's some kind of president—even though they’re really just on the fringes. And what exactly was the chauvinistic comment Hebrang made?
Matthew Evans17 said:I believe you have completely missed the mark here. Previously, I would have argued that more progressive or highly educated individuals tend to lean toward the center-left (though certainly not the rigid far-left). If we are going to discuss Damir Kajin and chauvinism, then we absolutely have to bring up names like Djapic, Hebrang, Ante Kovacevica, and Vice Vukojevica—the list of such characters is endless. That said, I get the impression you only brought this topic up to be provocative, though perhaps I am mistaken..?

The title is definitely provocative—I’ve noticed quite a few people making those kinds of claims.It seems that highly educated individuals tend to gravitate toward the left—a trend we see quite often in the US. And so on—honestly, I just didn't see the logic in any of it—which is exactly why I decided to start this thread.
Here is the reality—leftist parties just can't seem to win in major urban hubs like San Francisco, Charleston, San Diego, Indianapolis, Columbus, or Pittsburgh... those areas are essentially strongholds for the American right. Meanwhile, cities like Seattle and Washington, D.C. remain firmly under Democratic control.

One of the most prominent leftist politicians in America is also arguably the biggest populist in the country—and he frequently leans into chauvinism—Damir Kajin. Populism is defined by building a cult around "the people" while hunting for enemies to blame, which is exactly how Kajin operates. Between his rhetoric regarding "New York City" and his comments about how certain regions aren't quite like California, Sinji, or Canada—it borders on chauvinism.

And this is how the Democrats search for enemies too—by targeting "corrupt Republican strongholds," their "200 families," or their "fake defenders." Here is an excellent example of populist rhetoric. Their arguments against political rivals usually boil down to phrases like "200 families," "gerrymandered districts," "a stolen nation," "orchestrated wars," or "international isolation"—all empty slogans. They conveniently—whether by design or accident—ignore the corruption within the leftist parties themselves. Why is that?
Investigative propaganda in Close to Politics ·
fadedangler is clearly too green to string two coherent thoughts together.