Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Saucer

The Dems' Socialist Media Bubble: US Voters reject Socialism with only 19% approving and 53% disapproving of it

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, GeorgeW1000 said:

Doesn't prove that he was a socialist. Hint, Obama and FDR are not socialists. 

 

The only one socialist is Bernie Sanders.

Yeah it did.

 

Now show your evidence . or you've lost all three of your claims.

 

I'm still waiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GeorgeW1000 said:

I can't believe I'm wasting time arguing with a guy that links to politifact. 

Sorry........provide actual evidence.

 

Because politifact provided names, and dates, and sources.

 

You haven't.

 

You're currently losing. If you want to make your loss official, then slink away.

 

............like you always do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jehurey said:

Sorry........provide actual evidence.

 

Because politifact provided names, and dates, and sources.

 

You haven't.

 

You're currently losing. If you want to make your loss official, then slink away.

 

............like you always do.

I'd like to watch you cite politifact in a college paper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GeorgeW1000 said:

I'd like to watch you cite politifact in a college paper.

I'd like you to get back on the subject and provide your evidence.

 

Still waiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jehurey said:

I'd like you to get back on the subject and provide your evidence.

 

Still waiting.

Economists deal with theory, not evidence. It's like math, with proofs and theory. It's also like philosophy that dwells in theory. You aren't smart enough for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GeorgeW1000 said:

Economists deal with theory, not evidence. It's like math, with proofs and theory. It's also like philosophy that dwells in theory. You aren't smart enough for it. 

No...........you're not talking about economists, you're talking about labels and definitions.

 

Find the evidence that backs up your claims.

 

Or else you've lost.

 

Still waiting............its obvious that you're stalling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jehurey said:

No...........you're not talking about economists, you're talking about labels and definitions.

 

Find the evidence that backs up your claims.

 

Or else you've lost.

 

Still waiting............its obvious that you're stalling.

You posted an article about hearsay, claims that FDR and Obama were communist / socialist. That's not proof. You want me to counter-prove your claims with actual proof. Words can't express how stupid you are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GeorgeW1000 said:

You posted an article about hearsay, claims that FDR and Obama were communist / socialist. That's not proof. You want me to counter-prove your claims with actual proof. Words can't express how stupid you are. 

No it isn't.

 

Politifact literally posted the date and the newspaper where the quote came from.

 

The beginning of the article talked about how Obama brought up the subject.................Politifact found TWO OTHER SOURCES from the 1930's in which they specifically called FDR "socialist"

 

One of which was on the floor of Congress...........which is public record. And the other is a quote from a newspaper.

 

You're wrong.

 

And it looks like you can't find any evidence.

 

So it also looks like you lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, Politifact literally posted their sources at the bottom of their article if you clinked the link:

 

 

Quote

 

Our Sources

New York Times, Impeachment hint stirs house clash; Democratic Orators Spring to Roosevelt Defense , Charging 'Malice,' July 24, 1935

 

Chicago Tribune historical archives, "Socialism, Fess calls New Deal power program,"  Aug. 7, 1934, accessed via Newsbank

 

All but the People: Franklin D. Roosevelt and his Critics, 1933-1939, by George Wolfskill and John A. Hudson

William Randolph Hearst: The Later Years, 1911-1951, by Ben Procter.

 

Chicago Tribune historical archives, "Hearst replies to Roosevelt on 'Red-Backing',"  Sept. 21, 1936, accessed via Newsbank

 

And those WOULD BE acceptable citations on a college term paper :drake:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jehurey said:

No it isn't.

 

Politifact literally posted the date and the newspaper where the quote came from.

 

The beginning of the article talked about how Obama brought up the subject.................Politifact found TWO OTHER SOURCES from the 1930's in which they specifically called FDR "socialist"

 

One of which was on the floor of Congress...........which is public record. And the other is a quote from a newspaper.

 

You're wrong.

 

And it looks like you can't find any evidence.

 

So it also looks like you lost.

So someone calls me a socialist and suddenly I'm a socialist? Fool 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GeorgeW1000 said:

So someone calls me a socialist and suddenly I'm a socialist? Fool 

You just attempted to the same exact thing, but in the opposite direction.

 

Except I posted an article that explains the definition and how it meets the definition.

 

Sorry.................you still don't have anything.

 

Thanks for admitting you just lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jehurey said:

You just attempted to the same exact thing, but in the opposite direction.

 

Except I posted an article that explains the definition and how it meets the definition.

 

Sorry.................you still don't have anything.

 

Thanks for admitting you just lost.

Socialism doesn't have a definition. It's not defined. You don't even know that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GeorgeW1000 said:

Socialism doesn't have a definition. It's not defined. You don't even know that. 

Yes it does.

 

You even saw an article in which is clearly explained those definitions..........and you decided to not read it.

 

Which.................as I've mentioned before..............is not my responsibility OR my problem.

 

That's your problem. Let me know when you can overcome it.

 

Thanks for admitting that you don't have proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GeorgeW1000 said:

My new sig is rockin' 

Its also an attempt to run away from the argument(s) you just lost.

 

So its good to see another admission that you ran away.

 

Keep working on your sig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jehurey said:

Its also an attempt to run away from the argument(s) you just lost.

 

So its good to see another admission that you ran away.

 

Keep working on your sig.

You think you win every argument, but you're always wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GeorgeW1000 said:

You think you win every argument, but you're always wrong. 

No............I win every argument when I explain what I've done.......and what you haven't done.

 

Which is easy to point out.

 

I also say that I win the argument when I can clearly show you not arguing it anymore and running away.

 

Like what you are currently doing, right now.


Thanks for admitting it again. You literally demonstrated that you ran away to make a sig because you couldn't back up your side of the argument. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jehurey said:

No............I win every argument when I explain what I've done.......and what you haven't done.

 

Which is easy to point out.

 

I also say that I win the argument when I can clearly show you not arguing it anymore and running away.

 

Like what you are currently doing, right now.


Thanks for admitting it again. You literally demonstrated that you ran away to make a sig because you couldn't back up your side of the argument. lol

This is a good article. Educate yourself.

https://newrepublic.com/article/153141/socialism-lost-meaning-american-politics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×