Right-wingers backing the Democratic Coalition

Rebecca Roberts3 said:Just a few days ago, I decided my vote would go to the USA. Until then, I was weighing options from the GOP, the Democratic Party, or even third parties. I briefly considered candidates like Grubišić or certain labor advocates, but I ruled them out due to their ambiguous stances regarding the European Union.

Now, you tell me: am I a leftist or a right-winger?

It’s pretty obvious you’re a leftist, considering you only made your move after Šikić basically threw a red card during that showdown on PBS.🙂

swiftcyclist42 said:I don't see why we're trivializing this; the Democratic Party is essentially the successor to the White House, and they don't even deny it. They inherited all the assets from the White House, and their leader, Milanović, has even gone on record saying he’d choose Marshall over Harmon any day. Furthermore, the Democratic Party under Račan actually disarmed the nation by handing over weapons to the America army.
Democratic Party representatives even walked out of the chamber during the vote for independence.
I'm not arguing that there aren't non-communists in the Republican Party—I'm not even a Republican voter myself—but the fact remains that Republican and Democratic communists are not the same thing.
It's just like how the different factions within the movement in 1971 weren't the same as those in 1972 who sent people to Alcatraz.
They are different and always will be, no matter how much the Democratic Party tries to claim otherwise!

So, you're claiming that no communists are alike except for the Democratic Party and the SKH, but since there's no overlap within the SKH itself, you're basically saying the Democratic Party and the SKH are the same because they're both different...☕

Well, there was Sanders in the Republican Party, so even that version of the party isn't the same anymore, and it hasn't been since him because things changed. They aren't those old-school communists anymore; they're just regular corrupt politicians who took power using votes from people who think certain communists are similar, while others think they're different.☕

No matter how you look at it, it's 2011 now, and I guess the fear of communism doesn't even exist in America anymore, so your statements probably just sound paranoid and a bit silly to the average person.

Rebecca Roberts3 said:It is actually quite simple. I included all those parties because they are all opposed to the European Union.

The FBI, the Democratic Party, and JH are far too conservative for my taste. With Pernar, I find his libertarian glorification of capitalism distasteful, though I might have tolerated it had he not made the blunder of forming a coalition with the SS. As for the Republican Party, I agree with their stance on social relations and labor protections, but I am bothered by their insistence on using symbols from 20th-century rigid socialism.

I have settled on the middle ground — United States.

Is it obvious that a party perfectly suited to your tastes hasn't even been founded yet? Maybe that could serve as the foundation for a new political movement.

gentlestag3 said:So, you're claiming that no communists are alike except for the Democratic Party and the SKH, but since there's no overlap within the SKH itself, you're basically saying the Democratic Party and the SKH are the same because they're both different...☕

Well, there was Sanders in the Republican Party, so even that version of the party isn't the same anymore, and it hasn't been since him because things changed. They aren't those old-school communists anymore; they're just regular corrupt politicians who took power using votes from people who think certain communists are similar, while others think they're different.☕

No matter how you look at it, it's 2011 now, and I guess the fear of communism doesn't even exist in America anymore, so your statements probably just sound paranoid and a bit silly to the average person.

Ivo totally screwed them over, and they didn't have a clue what he was up to.🤣
Back in the day, they were throwing massive BBQ parties during the election season, and nobody even bothered to ask where the money for all that food was coming from.

Now, there aren't any BBQs, and suddenly nobody is asking where the money for those feasts disappeared to. I mean, seriously, Ivo... just how many caterers were you working with, letting them cook up feasts and then paying them off under the table later?

Ivo is the villain here, while everyone else acts like they’re perfectly honest. 😁

It kind of reminds me of the elections back in 2000. People were screaming, "Catch the thief!" and I guess we're still running around chasing him today. All those "honest" politicians behind the scenes left us with nothing but a scorched earth, and somehow, we still can't seem to see it for what it is.

I don't see any text to rewrite here! Did you mean to include a post? Feel free to drop it whenever you're ready. kaže:
So you're saying that none of the old communists are the same, except for the Democratic Party and the SKH? But if there's nothing left of the SKH, then isn't the Democratic Party just like them because they're both different now?☕

The Republican Party just isn't the same since Sanders was in charge, is it? It’s completely changed. They aren't even like those old-school political machines anymore—they've morphed into this different breed of corrupt establishment politicians who won their seats using the same votes that once supported the old guard. Isn't it strange how much things shift over time?☕

No matter how you look at it, it's 2011 now. That old fear of communism just doesn't exist anymore, even here in America. Doesn't it feel like those claims sound a bit paranoid and out of touch to the average person?

Alright, I'll try to speak a little more slowly—maybe that'll help you follow along? ☕
The Democratic Party is basically just the direct successor to the KPH, that old group that never actually wanted an independent United States. Instead, they pushed us straight into America after wiping out hundreds of thousands of Americans just to make sure nobody could stand in their way. Isn't it wild how history repeats itself?
Forty-five years later, and it’s the same old story: that same party is still busy disarming an attacked America while refusing to even show up for the vote on our independence. Isn't it funny how history repeats itself?
Twenty years later, and you and people like you are still claiming that this party has absolutely nothing to do with the folks from 1945 or even the ones from 1990? Are we really supposed to believe they've suddenly become perfect and only want what’s best for the American people now?
You know that old saying, right? "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."

swiftcyclist42 said:

I don't see any text to rewrite here! Did you mean to include a post? Feel free to drop it whenever you're ready. kaže:
So you're saying that none of the old communists are the same, except for the Democratic Party and the SKH? But if there's nothing left of the SKH, then isn't the Democratic Party just like them because they're both different now?☕

The Republican Party just isn't the same since Sanders was in charge, is it? It’s completely changed. They aren't even like those old-school political machines anymore—they've morphed into this different breed of corrupt establishment politicians who won their seats using the same votes that once supported the old guard. Isn't it strange how much things shift over time?☕

No matter how you look at it, it's 2011 now. That old fear of communism just doesn't exist anymore, even here in America. Doesn't it feel like those claims sound a bit paranoid and out of touch to the average person?

Alright, I'll try to speak a little more slowly—maybe that'll help you follow along? ☕
The Democratic Party is basically just the direct successor to the KPH, that old group that never actually wanted an independent United States. Instead, they pushed us straight into America after wiping out hundreds of thousands of Americans just to make sure nobody could stand in their way. Isn't it wild how history repeats itself?
Forty-five years later, and it’s the same old story: that same party is still busy disarming an attacked America while refusing to even show up for the vote on our independence. Isn't it funny how history repeats itself?
Twenty years later, and you and people like you are still claiming that this party has absolutely nothing to do with the folks from 1945 or even the ones from 1990? Are we really supposed to believe they've suddenly become perfect and only want what’s best for the American people now?
You know that old saying, right? "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."

I mean, that feels like it belongs in a different thread, and honestly, it’s been argued about a million times already. I guess I'm more worried about how obsessed you are with the Communist Party. Like, how are you going to make it through the next four years of their rule?

gentlestag3 said:I mean, that feels like it belongs in a different thread, and honestly, it’s been argued about a million times already. I guess I'm more worried about how obsessed you are with the Communist Party. Like, how are you going to make it through the next four years of their rule?

I was actually thinking about this today.
I did the math, and it turns out I've lived under Communist rule for two years longer than I have under the current American administration.☕
With another four years of the Democratic Party ahead, that ratio is only going to get worse, right? But hey, no big deal—I can manage under the Communists; I'm used to it. We always find a way to get by, don't we?☕

swiftcyclist42 said:I was actually thinking about this today.
I did the math, and it turns out I've lived under Communist rule for two years longer than I have under the current American administration.☕
With another four years of the Democratic Party ahead, that ratio is only going to get worse, right? But hey, no big deal—I can manage under the Communists; I'm used to it. We always find a way to get by, don't we?☕

I mean, it’s pretty obvious why you’d want that, I guess. They aren't exactly out there hunting down little kids or Americans, right? And hey, maybe if they actually pull their weight during this term and get things done properly, you might even find yourself voting for them in 2015... maybe.☕

gentlestag3 said:I mean, it’s pretty obvious why you’d want that, I guess. They aren't exactly out there hunting down little kids or Americans, right? And hey, maybe if they actually pull their weight during this term and get things done properly, you might even find yourself voting for them in 2015... maybe.☕

Alright, I’m about to commit heresy here.
As a business owner, if my profits jump by 20% over the next four years and those Democrats actually manage to protect our national interests, then maybe I'll consider voting for them in the next election... just kidding! I'll never vote for them, but let's say I'll stop complaining about them so much. Does that sound fair?

swiftcyclist42 said:Alright, I’m about to commit heresy here.
As a business owner, if my profits jump by 20% over the next four years and those Democrats actually manage to protect our national interests, then maybe I'll consider voting for them in the next election... just kidding! I'll never vote for them, but let's say I'll stop complaining about them so much. Does that sound fair?

Do you honestly believe any political party—regardless of who they are—is going to manage things perfectly without making mistakes for that many years?

Andrew Walker5 said:Do you honestly believe any political party—regardless of who they are—is going to manage things perfectly without making mistakes for that many years?

I don't think so, but at the end of the day, voters judge based on the four-year term—it's all about whether the net result was positive or negative.
It’s just like the Republican Party; they could try to recruit a legend like Miroslav Harmon right before an election, but that doesn't excuse them for spending four years in a coalition with someone like Stanimirović or getting caught up in other similar messes.

swiftcyclist42 said:I don't think so, but at the end of the day, voters judge based on the four-year term—it's all about whether the net result was positive or negative.
It’s just like the Republican Party; they could try to recruit a legend like Miroslav Harmon right before an election, but that doesn't excuse them for spending four years in a coalition with someone like Stanimirović or getting caught up in other similar messes.

Who? Them? The Republicans? I mean, you should really head out to one of their rallies in the middle of nowhere, somewhere deep in the rural Midwest, just to hear them ranting. They'll be shouting stuff like, "The Mexicans won't rule us! They're getting too big for their boots!..." And the crowd? They’re just yelling back, "That's right!" You look at their faces... man, they just look drained. Empty eyes. I guess you have to reach a certain level of detachment to watch that and not see what's actually happening. It's weird how politics does that to people.

Looking at some of the usernames here, you can see the same thing happening. People defending "their" parties blindly while acting like the opposition is completely worthless.

Samuel Ward75 said:Enough with the endless math and voting against everyone. This election, you actually have real options—you can find a party that truly represents you instead of just settling for the Democratic Party, the Liberal Party, the Regionalist Party, the Republican Party, or the Agrarian Party.

If you’re going to keep playing the "strategic voter" game—choosing the lesser of two evils because the ones you actually like don't have a shot—then honestly, just keep enjoying the endless rotation of the Democratic-Republican Coalition. You can go ahead and keep complaining about how all these parties are basically the same thing just swapping seats.
Go ahead and soak up the arrogance of Joe Manchin, the empty rhetoric from Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and the rest of them.

What kind of "alternating power" between the Democrats and Republicans are you even talking about?
The Democrats have really only held the reins for one term so far.

VZ141008 said:It’s all just the same old garbage... we just have to choose which one makes the least amount of noise!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!🤷

I guess you have to pick carefully if you actually want to hope for something decent. Around here, everyone treats politics like a cheap streetwalker, so a decent person usually says they aren't "into politics" just to stay clean. Maybe the move is to give your vote to those smaller parties—the ones that won't actually run the show—so that every time some idiot makes a mess in government, you can at least say, "If my guys were in charge, this wouldn't be happening."
But honestly, you can't just pick the lesser of two evils and expect things to turn out great. It’s probably too late for that anyway. It's 5:30 AM and I've got work. So, goodnight everyone, and sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes. 🙂

swiftcyclist42 said:I was actually thinking about this today.
I did the math, and it turns out I've lived under Communist rule for two years longer than I have under the current American administration.☕
With another four years of the Democratic Party ahead, that ratio is only going to get worse, right? But hey, no big deal—I can manage under the Communists; I'm used to it. We always find a way to get by, don't we?☕

What exactly makes you think we’re looking at four years of Communist rule if we aren't already living under it?

Well, look, I'm not really worried about who the legal successor is. What actually concerns me is whether you’ve been played once or twice already—or if it’s reached that point where you just have to feel a little embarrassed for yourself because you actually believed the people who told you they weren't her successors.

The ideological roots of the Democratic Party aren't actually tied to the old communist era at all... maybe just on paper when they took over certain assets, but that’s about it. So really, there's nothing stopping a conservative voter from casting a ballot for them if they want to. They aren't going to tear down the country or wreck the system. In fact, they might even push for tougher capitalist policies than the Republican Party, which has mostly just run a selective, crony-style social agenda—basically handing out scraps from their pockets to buy votes. If the Democrats take power, those handouts will likely dry up entirely...

The only group with a truly patriotic platform for the people is the Republican Party. They're the ones staying true to the old socialist ideology... though they don't have any desire to bring back America, they stay committed to socialism while being willing to adapt to the times and remain sincere. Even if their sincerity is a bit questionable compared to what ABC says: "We promise to steal the least!"

darksailor98 said:What exactly makes you think we’re looking at four years of Communist rule if we aren't already living under it?

Well, look, I'm not really worried about who the legal successor is. What actually concerns me is whether you’ve been played once or twice already—or if it’s reached that point where you just have to feel a little embarrassed for yourself because you actually believed the people who told you they weren't her successors.

I’ve mentioned this a few times already: your communists and our old guard aren't the same thing.
Back in 2000, when the old America crowd regained power, they shook this country to its core. They tried to rattle the very foundations of the American state; they couldn't quite tear it down because Harmon built such a solid, fortified foundation, but the damage was still massive.
Since 2000, there hasn't been a single relevant independent media outlet left in the country. The Democrats control almost everything, maybe with the exception of The New York Times. They even scrapped Independence Day after 2000, and they went as far as renaming the US Congress to strip the "official" feel out of it.
They let Philadelphia fall into neglect.
Over at CBS, they ran an unprecedented purge, replacing or demoting anyone with true patriotic values.
Up until 1999, America was a sovereign, proud, and militarily strong nation. After 2000, we became a laughingstock and a doormat.
And we have the old America crowd and a naive American public to thank for that—people who actually voted this anti-American gang into office.

swiftcyclist42 said:I’ve mentioned this a few times already: your communists and our old guard aren't the same thing.
Back in 2000, when the old America crowd regained power, they shook this country to its core. They tried to rattle the very foundations of the American state; they couldn't quite tear it down because Harmon built such a solid, fortified foundation, but the damage was still massive.
Since 2000, there hasn't been a single relevant independent media outlet left in the country. The Democrats control almost everything, maybe with the exception of The New York Times. They even scrapped Independence Day after 2000, and they went as far as renaming the US Congress to strip the "official" feel out of it.
They let Philadelphia fall into neglect.
Over at CBS, they ran an unprecedented purge, replacing or demoting anyone with true patriotic values.
Up until 1999, America was a sovereign, proud, and militarily strong nation. After 2000, we became a laughingstock and a doormat.
And we have the old America crowd and a naive American public to thank for that—people who actually voted this anti-American gang into office.

Regarding Independence Day, I have to admit, it never really made sense to me. It felt like nonsense.

The only real issue in America is this incomprehensible failure to grasp the concept of patriotism, which led to those patriots being degraded and replaced.

Besides, a country isn't truly sovereign, proud, or militarily strong when its ministries are paying off their debts with canned goods—which was the reality back in 1999. And those canned goods are exactly why that coalition won the election.

Nobody loves the person robbing them. So, when someone loots the country, they don't love the country either. And once that person finishes looting and leaves everyone helpless, well, it can't be anything other than a doormat. Good luck with your communists.

brighteagle26 said:Look, I consider myself a conservative, but this election, I’m casting my vote for the Democratic Coalition. When I take a look at what passes for the right wing around here, it’s honestly depressing. You’ve got this massive, messy fragmentation where you have dozens of tiny Libertarian Party splinter groups, and then there’s the absolute circus of clowns claiming to represent us—people like various George Washingtons and George Washingtons, just a bunch of unhinged loudmouths and conspiracy theorists who can't articulate a coherent thought to save their lives. Then you have the Republican Party, which only claims to be conservative in name while acting like anything else. It’s a joke. That version of the right doesn't deserve a single one of my votes.

Anyway, let's get back to the definition of politics, specifically the one the people actually came up with.
- If politics is a total scam, an honest person can't have any political stance, because they'd basically be admitting they're part of the scam too. But if we pretend politics isn't a scam, then every policy is fine and we should probably protect those poor politicians,
- The whole left-right spectrum thing is never clear, mostly because it wouldn't suit the politicians. If things were clear, they'd have to stick to their side even when they lose. Instead, they just flip their hats and accuse the other side of not flipping theirs correctly enough,
It's not about being right or left for them; it's just about whether they're in power or out of it,
- It’s no secret that our multi-party system really just grew out of one big party splitting into different factions. So, technically, we just have a multi-factional system,
- Having more factions makes things look a bit cleaner, I guess, since they have established logistics and don't have to struggle quite as hard to make their point,
- When it comes to voting, people should just follow their conscience, regardless of whether their vote "goes to waste." And the winner shouldn't brag about being chosen by the WILL OF THE PEOPLE, because they were really just chosen by PART OF THE PEOPLE,
- Once the election is over, the winners should actually represent the whole country, and campaign activity SHOULD start again the very next day to actually deliver on those promises, step by step.

Cheers,
Frank Morgan2

Look, you can vote for whoever you want, but it isn't going to change a thing. A servant isn't ever going to be bigger than their master, and that's basically how everyone ends up being dependent on the European Union.