so who is the party of the rich? democrats apparently

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Joshua G
    dumb libs love censorship
    • Jul 2008
    • 8198

    #1

    so who is the party of the rich? democrats apparently

    exhibit 1) 3 billionaires...bloomberg, cuban, buffet. all endorse hilary, with speeches & hugs & kisses. the silicon valley titans, hollywood, cock gobbling libs. it seems that in 2016, all the rich people are libs.

    exhibit 2) the flowers & lollipops DNC convention. few references to the problems of islamic terrorism growing on the liberal watch. hilary is running, not on the change theme, but 4 more years of the great obama economy! & its true. the clintons, the obamas, all got wealthy in the last 8 years. its great to be rich in the USA, the country looks great!

    exhibit 3) the liberal media, the hollywood liberals, are a bunch of rich people WHO LIVE INSIDE WALLS from the west of the 99%. try to visit lena dunhams house. oh wait, its behind a wall. This same nonsensical crew tells the USA that walls are wrong on the border, while they wall themselves off from the people they want to bring in.

    conclusion: the democrats are suffering from wealth bubble delusions with all these flowers & lollipops visions of the state of america.

  • Joshua G
    dumb libs love censorship
    • Jul 2008
    • 8198

    #2
    if your middle class, & you think hilary is going to make things better while she helped write TPP, i dont know what to tell you.

    your voting for more exporting jobs. voting against your own interests.

    Comment

    • Joshua G
      dumb libs love censorship
      • Jul 2008
      • 8198

      #3
      & if your OK that ISIS is attacking more frequently in europe & USA, then vote hilary.

      democrats dont care about terrorism, or the consequences of migrations of unskilled unvettable foreigners. why would they care, democrats just connect to other rich foreigners. they wall off everyone else. the rest of us can live with the consequences.

      Comment

      • Look Chang
        Voyeur
        • Sep 2010
        • 18255

        #4
        I guess it's more a matter of culture and IQ than wealth

        Comment

        • slapass
          Too lazy to set a custom title
          • Nov 2002
          • 14625

          #5
          It is hard to be wealthy and resistant to change.

          Comment

          • Joshua G
            dumb libs love censorship
            • Jul 2008
            • 8198

            #6
            Originally posted by slapass
            It is hard to be wealthy and resistant to change.
            the opposite is true. once you have created a wealth machine, you dont want anything to change.

            hence apple went from innovating smartphones, to now protecting turf with patents. got wealthy, stopped changing.

            obamas 8 years has been great for some americans. when you have 6 figures plus in the bank, america looks perfect. easier to draw peace symbols over paris than to actually do something about the problem.

            Comment

            • Paul Markham
              Too old to care
              • Jun 2001
              • 52942

              #7
              The chances of an American President getting elected without the funding of billionaires are slim.

              The chances of an American Politician getting elected without the funding of multi-millionaires are slimmer. Because Americans are more impressed by big spending political parties, they sold their democracy.

              The stupid thing is the GOP stealing the Bush Second Term, getting dumped twice to a Black Man. They put up more losers for this one. Trump got a free ride by appealing to the low educated, maybe his opponents were ordered to give him a soft ride.

              Who will the GOP put forward for 2020?



              Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
              PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

              Comment

              • _Richard_
                Too lazy to set a custom title
                • Oct 2006
                • 30991

                #8
                ahh, is one even able to call democrats liberals anymore? Discussion already on adult boards on whether or not they are centrist right

                Comment

                • noshit
                  Confirmed User
                  • Dec 2001
                  • 1582

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Joshua G
                  so who is the party of the rich? democrats apparently
                  Of Course they are, And they love to Spend Immeasurable Wealth to Deprive Americans of Their Rights

                  Because like i always say, 99.9% of Democrats are Authoritarians

                  .

                  Comment

                  • noshit
                    Confirmed User
                    • Dec 2001
                    • 1582

                    #10
                    Originally posted by _Richard_
                    ahh, is one even able to call democrats liberals anymore?
                    No.
                    The Democratic Liberal meaning today has been twisted into Authoritarianism

                    If they were true they would be Classical Liberals... i.e. George Washington was a Liberal; Hense a 'Classical Liberal'

                    .

                    Comment

                    Working...