ESOCommunity

deleted_user wrote:

thomasgreen6 wrote:@deleted_user4

What's up?

I summoned you to debate politics

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:Loads of illegals voted Trump, only to see themselves and/or family being deported.

[citation needed]

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m ... story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... 6af18258e8
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 70606.html

And the list goes on...

Snuden wrote:

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:Loads of illegals voted Trump, only to see themselves and/or family being deported.

[citation needed]

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m ... story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... 6af18258e8
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 70606.html

And the list goes on...

Two of those are about the same situation, and none include illegal immigrants voting. Try again.

"An undocumented immigrant whose wife voted for Donald Trump has been deported to Mexico amid the President's crackdown on people living in the US illegally."

Search for yourself dude.

Snuden wrote:"An undocumented immigrant whose wife voted for Donald Trump has been deported to Mexico amid the President's crackdown on people living in the US illegally."

Search for yourself dude.

Yeah the wife wasn't an illegal immigrant

Her family was... are you just trying to be an idiot now?
Go search, plenty of such cases.

Snuden wrote:Her family was... are you just trying to be an idiot now?
Go search, plenty of such cases.

You said "loads of illegals" voted, I'm wondering what evidence you have of that. What you presented was just someone making a dumb decision when voting.

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:Her family was... are you just trying to be an idiot now?
Go search, plenty of such cases.

You said "loads of illegals" voted, I'm wondering what evidence you have of that. What you presented was just someone making a dumb decision when voting.

For the third time... go search for it yourself if you don't believe me.

Snuden wrote:

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:Her family was... are you just trying to be an idiot now?
Go search, plenty of such cases.

You said "loads of illegals" voted, I'm wondering what evidence you have of that. What you presented was just someone making a dumb decision when voting.

For the third time... go search for it yourself if you don't believe me.

You cited sources for something that was irrelevant to your original claim, but now refuse to provide any? It's almost like you don't have sources!

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:

Show hidden quotes

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:Her family was... are you just trying to be an idiot now?
Go search, plenty of such cases.

You said "loads of illegals" voted, I'm wondering what evidence you have of that. What you presented was just someone making a dumb decision when voting.

For the third time... go search for it yourself if you don't believe me.

You cited sources for something that was irrelevant to your original claim, but now refuse to provide any? It's almost like you don't have sources!

It's almost like you are too dumb to read. I said that Trump voters either got deported OR had family deported.

Snuden wrote:

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Show hidden quotes

Snuden wrote:

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:Her family was... are you just trying to be an idiot now?
Go search, plenty of such cases.

You said "loads of illegals" voted, I'm wondering what evidence you have of that. What you presented was just someone making a dumb decision when voting.

For the third time... go search for it yourself if you don't believe me.

You cited sources for something that was irrelevant to your original claim, but now refuse to provide any? It's almost like you don't have sources!

It's almost like you are too dumb to read. I said that Trump voters either got deported OR had family deported.

I agree some had family deported. You said that "loads of illegals" voted though, which isn't true.

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:

Show hidden quotes

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:

fightinfrenchman wrote:

Snuden wrote:Her family was... are you just trying to be an idiot now?
Go search, plenty of such cases.

You said "loads of illegals" voted, I'm wondering what evidence you have of that. What you presented was just someone making a dumb decision when voting.

For the third time... go search for it yourself if you don't believe me.

You cited sources for something that was irrelevant to your original claim, but now refuse to provide any? It's almost like you don't have sources!

It's almost like you are too dumb to read. I said that Trump voters either got deported OR had family deported.

I agree some had family deported. You said that "loads of illegals" voted though, which isn't true.

Ok... zzzz

gibson wrote:

mmTakezo wrote:the big problem in usa and canada its political correctnes ,you tube is full with videos on this topic

FEMINIST & SJW OWNED COMPILATION 2017 #2 (Destroyed Edition)

exactly that's it

thomasgreen6 wrote:@deleted_user4

I don't think the OP knows what it's arguing.

Man OP doesn't cheat

Snuden wrote:

gibson wrote:

Show hidden quotes

forgrin wrote:

Amsel_ wrote: The second is in the United States where immigrants are supported mainly because they vote democrat.

That's putting chicken before the egg. Of course you're gonna vote for the party that's not actively trying to deport you and/or preventing your family from emigrating.

Yea was about to say this.

Thank yourself for not doing so as you would have been wrong.
Loads of illegals voted Trump, only to see themselves and/or family being deported.

There are exceptions to every rule. Most people who have immigrated to the US tend to vote left.

I think the problem is that in many countries 'left' has never even been a thing. Left or right are clear economical preferences. The 'implosion of left' is just a result of attributing other things to left people just like people associate 'conservative' with those incest farmer muricans.

Politically left is about economy. Generally left parties are less conservative, yet very right parties tend to prefer liberal points of view sometimes. That entire scale is fucked up and sometimes straight up hypocrite. If youre going to put any sort of political side in one edge of the scale its going to 'implode' because its just not well defined.

momuuu wrote:I think the problem is that in many countries 'left' has never even been a thing. Left or right are clear economical preferences. The 'implosion of left' is just a result of attributing other things to left people just like people associate 'conservative' with those incest farmer muricans.

Politically left is about economy. Generally left parties are less conservative, yet very right parties tend to prefer liberal points of view sometimes. That entire scale is fucked up and sometimes straight up hypocrite. If youre going to put any sort of political side in one edge of the scale its going to 'implode' because its just not well defined.

This may be true in Europe but is not true in North America. In Canada at least (and arguably the US) the economic views of the major parties don't differ much. The primary difference is in social policy (climate change, recognition of indigenous people, immigration, etc). For example, the green party in Canada which is very pro-environment is actually quite conservative in fiscal policy.

forgrin wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the problem is that in many countries 'left' has never even been a thing. Left or right are clear economical preferences. The 'implosion of left' is just a result of attributing other things to left people just like people associate 'conservative' with those incest farmer muricans.

Politically left is about economy. Generally left parties are less conservative, yet very right parties tend to prefer liberal points of view sometimes. That entire scale is fucked up and sometimes straight up hypocrite. If youre going to put any sort of political side in one edge of the scale its going to 'implode' because its just not well defined.

This may be true in Europe but is not true in North America. In Canada at least (and arguably the US) the economic views of the major parties don't differ much. The primary difference is in social policy (climate change, recognition of indigenous people, immigration, etc). For example, the green party in Canada which is very pro-environment is actually quite conservative in fiscal policy.

No. Those parties are progressive, not left. Left-right is an economical scale, if you think that being progressive is the same as being left then you will get confused and eventually start thinking the left imploded and shit.

deleted_user wrote:

thomasgreen6 wrote:@deleted_user4

I don't think the OP knows what it's arguing.

That's good enough reason for debate

momuuu wrote:

forgrin wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the problem is that in many countries 'left' has never even been a thing. Left or right are clear economical preferences. The 'implosion of left' is just a result of attributing other things to left people just like people associate 'conservative' with those incest farmer muricans.

Politically left is about economy. Generally left parties are less conservative, yet very right parties tend to prefer liberal points of view sometimes. That entire scale is fucked up and sometimes straight up hypocrite. If youre going to put any sort of political side in one edge of the scale its going to 'implode' because its just not well defined.

This may be true in Europe but is not true in North America. In Canada at least (and arguably the US) the economic views of the major parties don't differ much. The primary difference is in social policy (climate change, recognition of indigenous people, immigration, etc). For example, the green party in Canada which is very pro-environment is actually quite conservative in fiscal policy.

No. Those parties are progressive, not left. Left-right is an economical scale, if you think that being progressive is the same as being left then you will get confused and eventually start thinking the left imploded and shit.

Left-right is not purely economic. The term originates from early French republican politics and has always associated with "progressive" ideas vs stasis/order, regardless of whether that's economic ideas or social. You're getting left confused with liberal, which does refer more to a free-market heavy approach with some progressive social values thrown in.

I had this exact discussion with my parents. It's confusing because what we view as liberal, the free market spirit, is more like economically conservative on the other side of the atlantic. The term liberal is used far more broadly in the USA.

forgrin wrote:

momuuu wrote:

Show hidden quotes

forgrin wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the problem is that in many countries 'left' has never even been a thing. Left or right are clear economical preferences. The 'implosion of left' is just a result of attributing other things to left people just like people associate 'conservative' with those incest farmer muricans.

Politically left is about economy. Generally left parties are less conservative, yet very right parties tend to prefer liberal points of view sometimes. That entire scale is fucked up and sometimes straight up hypocrite. If youre going to put any sort of political side in one edge of the scale its going to 'implode' because its just not well defined.

This may be true in Europe but is not true in North America. In Canada at least (and arguably the US) the economic views of the major parties don't differ much. The primary difference is in social policy (climate change, recognition of indigenous people, immigration, etc). For example, the green party in Canada which is very pro-environment is actually quite conservative in fiscal policy.

No. Those parties are progressive, not left. Left-right is an economical scale, if you think that being progressive is the same as being left then you will get confused and eventually start thinking the left imploded and shit.

Left-right is not purely economic. The term originates from early French republican politics and has always associated with "progressive" ideas vs stasis/order, regardless of whether that's economic ideas or social. You're getting left confused with liberal, which does refer more to a free-market heavy approach with some progressive social values thrown in.

In common day usage the left-right mostly refers to the economical scale, while there is also the progressive vs conservative scale. Thats what any political test on the internet gives as result. In the USA I think slowly theyve just started to consider conservatives right and democrats left. In that case, left/right become ill defined meaningless terms.

That is the problem with this entire thread, it discusses the implosion of something that isnt and has never been clearly defined. If 'left' is simply the opinion of one of the two parties, the old left will implode and be replaced by the new left even though hardly anything happened.

The only modern defeat for left that I see is to populism. Unfortunately people vote with their own state in mind, and thus economical left aims at poor people. Those are the most susceptible to populism, so Id understand how a rise of populism and of relevance of related subjects (immigrants) could lead to a weakened left.

momuuu wrote:

forgrin wrote:

Show hidden quotes

momuuu wrote:

forgrin wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the problem is that in many countries 'left' has never even been a thing. Left or right are clear economical preferences. The 'implosion of left' is just a result of attributing other things to left people just like people associate 'conservative' with those incest farmer muricans.

Politically left is about economy. Generally left parties are less conservative, yet very right parties tend to prefer liberal points of view sometimes. That entire scale is fucked up and sometimes straight up hypocrite. If youre going to put any sort of political side in one edge of the scale its going to 'implode' because its just not well defined.

This may be true in Europe but is not true in North America. In Canada at least (and arguably the US) the economic views of the major parties don't differ much. The primary difference is in social policy (climate change, recognition of indigenous people, immigration, etc). For example, the green party in Canada which is very pro-environment is actually quite conservative in fiscal policy.

No. Those parties are progressive, not left. Left-right is an economical scale, if you think that being progressive is the same as being left then you will get confused and eventually start thinking the left imploded and shit.

Left-right is not purely economic. The term originates from early French republican politics and has always associated with "progressive" ideas vs stasis/order, regardless of whether that's economic ideas or social. You're getting left confused with liberal, which does refer more to a free-market heavy approach with some progressive social values thrown in.

In common day usage the left-right mostly refers to the economical scale, while there is also the progressive vs conservative scale. Thats what any political test on the internet gives as result. In the USA I think slowly theyve just started to consider conservatives right and democrats left. In that case, left/right become ill defined meaningless terms.

That is the problem with this entire thread, it discusses the implosion of something that isnt and has never been clearly defined. If 'left' is simply the opinion of one of the two parties, the old left will implode and be replaced by the new left even though hardly anything happened.

The only modern defeat for left that I see is to populism. Unfortunately people vote with their own state in mind, and thus economical left aims at poor people. Those are the most susceptible to populism, so Id understand how a rise of populism and of relevance of related subjects (immigrants) could lead to a weakened left.

So it starts as a term with a soft meaning, then according to you transforms into a term with a hard meaning (purely economic), and now is a soft meaning again because people are conflating conservatives with right and liberals with left?

Or, a simpler explanation; left-right always meant both social and economic leanings. In Canada and the US the weighting is arguably more on social than economic. I don't know what it's like in the Netherlands, but in North America the term is much more strongly conflated with social issues and has been ever since the civil rights movements. Maybe it's different in Europe, but as I clearly stated in my first post, this is how it is in North America.

Well EAR there was clearly substantial evidence of voter fraud causing millions of illegal votes to be cast for crooked Hillary in sad States like California. This is a fact routinely cited by Trump