Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Don’t forget “look at that Caravan over there headed toward the border”
-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
socialism
Started by mille125
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
Don’t forget “look at that Caravan over there headed toward the border”
Young people coming out of our "education" system will generally vote socialist. It's what they know.
Working together for the collective = good.
Going off on your own and abandoning the collective = bad.
Some people never grow past this and it becomes their identity. Others recognize that the real world is not a classroom and that socialism is nothing more than crony capitalism.
Its indisputable that over the past decade liberals are dramatically softer on the border then conservatives, 100% indisputable. If you claim otherwise, then no point in further discussion because I'm speaking with a crazy person.
I hop you meant to say the democratic party is moving to the left? Because again, it is 100% indisputable than the democratic party is much further to the left today, than it was 10 years ago. Fine to discuss specific things you disagree with about the liberals or the conservatives, but no way in hell is the democratic party more to the right now, than it was in 2016!
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Big screwup by Hegseth, no question about it.
AOC is one of the dumbest persons in government. Have you ever watched video interviews of her when the interviewer wasn't democrat just giving her easy questions? She flounders and can't make a coherent argument or debate anything, because she only knows how to regurgitate, not think.
You're saying that muslim communists (mandami/el syed) are better people than the entire republican party? If you believe that, you are a brainwashed m0r0n, and again I refer everyone else to the history of communism murdering over 100 million people.
Last edited:
Making a private home owner what to cap their rent at is socialism and one step from communism. I am sure you would not want anyone to cap what you can sell or make at your job?
you know why? because it clearly obvious that the videos are edited to make her appear incoherent or stammering.
with regards to your image #1 -
cuban - run by castro
russian - run by putin, and before him stalin then kruschev, then brezhnev.
venezuelans - run by maduro and chavez
cambodians - run by shihamoni
north koreans - run by kim jong ii then kim jong un
chinese - run by mao then hu jintao and xi jinping
laotians - run by
each of these are totalitarian dictatorships run by 1-2 men with total power, not pure communist states.
(redundancy on purpose because some might not understand big words)
You essentially are calling yourself a cult. FIFY
and.....
no one in the US is doing that.
thats not what rent stabilization is. it is for people who are renting out homes, not the private use of their homes. these landlords with multiple units can sell their property for whatever they can get from the market.
wow, you really dont understand the word "cult".
You are excellent at word games which lefties here are all excellent at. I own a rental Home and last year I rented it for $2k/mo. Now a new law passes/praised by lefties that codifies rent stabilization. I am a free American, own the home, have right to do what I want with my property. I decide to raise it to $10K/mo with the clear understanding that the renter my leave and I may not get another renter. But I have now been told by the lefty local gov that I can only increase it to $2100/mo, must rent to current guy, can't evict them unless I go through a year long process.
So you have essentially told me what I can rent my place for and in essence capped the market value of the home.
I do not understand why this is so hard to comprehend. Again, would you be ok if the government cap what you can make at your job? As a person whose sole income is renting out their property, you are essentially capping how much someone can make at their job.
Rent stabilization is a law that limits how much a landlord can raise rent for certain apartments, usually when a lease is renewed.
It generally provides tenants with:
- Limits on annual rent increases
- The right to renew the lease in most circumstances
- Protection from eviction without a legally permitted reason
- Rules governing security deposits and other charges
You are missing the point but I am not surprised. Good luck. Sometimes it is hard to see outside when you.
Johan321
Full Member
I am sorry but if you think that El Syed is a communist, then you have zero understanding of current politics besides Fox News talking points.
Two back to back republican presidents have now dragged us into the wars no one wanted (and the current one even explicitly ran on anti-war message). Look what it’s doing to our economy. He gutted scientific funding, and put vaccine-deniers as in charge of our health institutions. He is hostile to legal immigrants and international PhD students who are the backbone of scientific and entrepreneurial innovation (look at foreign-born CEOs and Nobel prize winners). His mindless tariff policies are worsening inflation for Americans and destroying the post- WW ll world order that made us the indisputable superpower.
Look I get it: MAGAs and groypers represent your values (and some others on here). You don’t see much fault with their conduct. But, your tribe only represents about 40% of the country. For rest of us 60%, we demand more competency and human decency from our politicians.
So, if you are terrified of Muslim communist takeover, then the solution is simple: elect BETTER republicans.
Full socialism always results in dictatorship because full socialism involved taking property owned and earned by individuals, and declaring it state property.
True socialism and democracy are incompatible.
And you're miss the point that SOCIALISM has failed every single time in every single country. Only someone is not intelligent or is just narcissistic, would believe "oh, they just didn't do socialism right" the other 7 times results in destruction of the economy of those countries and 100 million civilians dead.
as a leftie, i dont think anyone has accused me of favoring rent stabilization.
but, for arguments sake, i will respond.
i highlighted points in your statement that it seems you fail to see and its clear that you dont care what happens to the renter, even though you posted why rent stabilization is used.
the renter sees the rent going up exponentially at the arbitrary whim of the landlord and has no control, no ability to effect change other than to uproot their home, kids, stuff to move from ludicrous increases as the only option.
the market value is not capped. imo, the rent you can impose is not the market value of the house - it is money you can make while possessing the house. you can sell it for whatever you get for it. rent stabilization doesnt change that.
fwiw, the government does in a way cap what we can make.
imagine if there was no set medicare reimbursement on procedures. i, as a pain doc, decide that medicare should bill me $1000000000 for an epidural. thats okay, right?
and....
again, for the multiple of 100th time, noone here and none of hte major politicians are favoring full socialism. no one is favoring true socialism.
democratic socialism =/= true socialism.
democratic socialism =/- full socialism.
democratic socialism = capitalism with social constraints.
all first world countries have socialist restraints on capitalism.
every single one.
including the US.
the US just needs more, so we are more like denmark, or finland, or sweden, or even taiwan (if you need a non norwegian example)
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
All of this talk about socialism but when Trump decides that the government should own a percentage of private companies, you guys are silent on that. That is the definition of socialism, is it not?
I speak Russian fluently. At the university level I have extensively studied Russia's history and of other communist countries, and I lived in Moscow for six months and traveled extensively in eastern europe. I understand communism better than any of you here.
Ignorance is why millennials accept socialism.
I'm a registered Independent, not a Republican. I've voted for democrats before including Obama's first term. Unfortunately, both parties, and the two party system are not good. I disagree with much of what Trump has done including tariffs, worsening relations with many countries, mistreatment of staff, gerrymandering, starting the Iran war without a proper exit strategy, and I think the SAVE act goes too far.
However, at the moment, only Trump and the Republican party support with meaningful action, the following. Please try to prove otherwise vs the what democrats have done in the past decade.
1-real control of the border including deporting criminals who are illegals, and limiting fundamentalist (muslim) terrorists from entering the country
2- parental rights, including limiting state interference and/or hiding information from parents.
3- Meritocracy in higher education and employment, including stopping the ridiculous spread of DEI
4- Utilizing our natural resources of oil and gas, both to improve the US economy and so we are not dependent on unscrupulous counties for anything. I will add that the most ridiculous actions I've seen taken by the UK and EU is to stop producing their own energy and then end up buying energy from other countries at higher prices, and the counties from which they purchase their energy typically pollute the air and environment much more than if the western countries produced that energy themselves.
5-Cut jobs and waste in the US government. Not perfect to be sure, but much more of that has occurred in the last 2 years than in all of Biden's presidency
6- Protect biologic women from mentally ill men who want to compete in women's sports and spend time in women's restrooms and showers.
7- Protect children from doing irreversible harm to themselves via surgery, hormones, etc, at ages when a child cannot consent, and cannot understand.
8- Decrease regulation stifling business, home builders, and innovation in America.
9- Decrease government waste by requiring able bodied people who receive free federal healthcare, (medicaid) to work.
10-Protecting democratic elections by requiring government photo ID. (if you have to show ID at your doctor, airport, to buy beer, you can show it at the ballot box).
Last edited:
he is investing in those companies so government can encourage innovation and also never be subject to china's whims.
Daddy issues…. It’s all starting to make sense
But that is the definition of socialism, is it not?
The definition of socialism from Google is below for your reference.. Trump getting government control of these companies is socialism. It is not even a question. But you like him, so its okay, right?
Socialism is an economic and political system where the means of production—such as factories, tools, and raw materials—are owned or regulated by the community or the state rather than by private individuals
to protect our national security, no. And socialism would be taking over those companies 100%.
How about you have a crack at the 10 points I listed above, why America is a better place today than it was under Biden?
I will look at it fully when I am done working
On first glance I actually agree with you on some of it but most of it is just theater with no substance.
You can agree that you are giving it a pass for whatever reason (national security which is a favorite of the right) but it is 100% the definition of socialism (and you know that).
One thing that you will notice is that a lot of what this administration does is get us to divide our selves and alienate and disparage those that are traditionally marginalized or in the shadows. People like trans-folks, black folks, undocumented folks, disabled and homeless folks, etc. We should not be taking the lead from an administration and leader that claims to be Christian. Take lead from Christ himself. Let that govern your actions.
Zechariah 7: says "Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the foreigner or the poor."
Matthew 25 says "Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.
Also
The 82nd Psalm says "Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed."
Points 3 and 6
Concerning some of your points, you like many Republicans (you said you are an independent) are really focused on culture wars which in the grand scheme of things means very little for our country
Which has more impact on our society....tariff policy or trans woman in sports? For this reason your number 6 point is absolutely meaningless to me. Its not important.
Even if it is important for some (like you obviously), I ask you to produce one article or piece of data that says that cis woman are harmed by trans woman in sports. Newsflash....I checked.....It doesn't exist. Which means that this whole argument is pointless and just a distraction from the failures of this administration.
Meritocracy is a term that the right loves to use. Yet Hegseth blocks the promotions of six people all who were black or woman after they ha bdeen promoted by their leaders. Without ever even reviewing their record. Meritocracy you say. That is just pure racism and sexism. You should apply meritocracy to Hegseth himself who is the least qualified secretary of defense and whose purge of generals will take a whole generation to overcome. Generals are not just sitting there. He has hurt our country far more than many know.
Meritocracy....yeah lets look at RFK jr, Patel, Hegseth, Noem and the other clowns.
Johan321
Full Member
For someone supposedly “independent”, you sure know all the Fox talking points.
“stopping the ridiculous spread of DEI”
Entire Trump administration is nothing but a DEI for a certain demographic. I wouldn’t trust Pete Hegseth to mow my lawn properly, much less being in charge of the military.
“Utilizing our natural resources of oil and gas.”
U.S. crude oil production reached all-time record highs under President Joe Biden.
“Cut jobs and waste in the US government.”
Yeah I am not really sure how gutting NIH, NASA, IRS, National Park Services, CDC and several other revered institutions help serve Americans?
“Protecting democratic elections by requiring government photo ID”
Except republicans want to take it much further. They want people to show the proof of citizenship ie. passport which 50% of Americans don’t even have, to vote. And this claimed “voter fraud” conspiracy has been studied to death. Our elections are as secure as they can be, and this “fraud” has no impact on the election outcome. Example? President has repeatedly claimed that GA 2020 was stolen. All the ballots have been recounted three times (including by independent auditors) under republican state of secretary, and everytime Biden came out as the winner. Yet, this president refuses to believe any of that.
And what about Epstein files? And the blatant corruption? Don Jr’s wedding was paid for by Russian oligarch with ties to Putin; did you ever wonder why US under Trump completely gave up on Ukraine?? What about masked agents murdering US citizens? I wonder why your “independent” brain doesn’t question any of this?
Only good thing this administration has done is to secure the southern border. I don’t agree with progressive policies on transgender (particularly biological men playing women’s sports), but that issue impacts like 0.01% of the population. I think republicans have overplayed their hand with cultural wars, and now no one seems to care for it.
If there is a rise in socialism, that’s because MAGA has gone so far right, that they can’t even see a center with the telescope. Pendulum swing in other direction is inevitable.
Last edited:
point 1
Now we go to border crossings. Even a lot of Democrats say the Trump is solely responsible for decreased border crossings. Buried beneath that are the facts that first large spike in border crossings happened in 2018-2019. Yes there was an initial decline in 2017 but then their was a spike. There was also a huge decline in border crossings in 2024.....during Biden's administration before Trump was in office.
Dont believe me. Look at the graph. No matter what Trump tells you migration to the United States has a lot less to do with U.S. border policies than policymakers would have the public think. That truth hasn’t stopped the current administration from declaring a war on immigrants, a cruel war that doesn't fit with the Biblical quotes that I left you with earlier. . But cruel immigration policies don’t guarantee low border crossings. What will really benefit the country is having a constructive conversation on immigration policy instead of just settling for cheap political stunts.
Agree 100% with you but the Trump should not get as much credit as he get about the border. Here is the graph that I forgot to post in the previous post. Sure the border crossings have decreased but the biggest decrease was actually under Biden.
Sticking with the right wing themes of attacking marginalized groups like undocumented folks, trans folks, and others we now do to the poor. The Medicaid folks and welfare moms (ie the poor). I am not going to pretend that their isn't abuse in the system. However, it is quite interesting that the right loves to focus on this group but says nothing to corporate welfare. What do I mean by corporate welfare and how much are we talking in dollars? Here you go.. Staggering but no menton of this. Just the Medicaid folks. Jeff Bezos filing for, claiming, and receiving the child tax credit......nothing to see here.
| Type of Welfare | Estimated Annual Cost | Primary Beneficiaries / Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Federal Business Subsidies | $181 Billion | Cash handouts, grants, and low-interest loans to agriculture, technology, aerospace, and energy sectors. |
| State & Local Incentives | $80+ Billion | Property and sales tax abatements given to individual companies to build facilities (e.g., Amazon, Intel, Tesla). |
| Corporate Tax Loopholes | $154+ Billion | Narrow tax preferences, special manufacturing credits, and write-offs that dramatically reduce effective tax rates. |
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The transgender sports legislation thing seems especially dumb to me, whether it’s Democrats trying to require it or Republicans trying to ban it. There is no need for legislation. Every sport is controlled by leagues that can and should decide for themselves whether transgender individuals should participate in their chosen or at birth gender. Male to female transgender individual in women’s track and field? Probably not. Curling? Probably not a big deal. But it should be up to the individual league. Don’t like your league’s decision? Start your own.
I fully agree no legislation at the federal level.
But do you have a problem with Alabama legislating one way and Cali legislating another and letting the cards fall?
This is what I call "good chaos". I love how states have unique cultures and priorities.
Trump acquired Intel stock by converting already allocated grant money (Chips and Science Act) into equity stake. Biden/Congress were gonna give it away for nothing. It wasn't like Trump went on a mission to control the company. He saw an opportunity and America is better off for it.
Last edited:
Its quite clear that either you have no idea about the difference between socialism and free market capitalism OR you are just willing to look the other way because the person espousing previous left leaning socialist tendencies has an "R" around his name (whatever that means these days). I suspect the latter versus the former and that is really sad. I shines better on you to be ignorant instead of being a willing sycophant.
You may not like the facts but the facts do matter. Trump has taken it upon himself to entangle government with private enterprise, something that would have previously disgusted nearly all Republicans. With very few exceptions, right leaning folks (including the ones on this forum) have been largely silent about these actions. This makes one thing clear. There is a whole lot of socialism in today's Republican party which makes the criticism of Mamdani and the DSA by those on this forum so laughable and so hypocritical. This is illustrated not only with taking stakes in corporations but also Trump's love of tariffs which are also antithetical to free market principles. The GOP clearly has no interest in free markets. The US government investment in companies allows Trump to pressure the companies to act on government interests.
In addition to the Intel deal the government has a 15% stake in a rare earths company and a share of the US Steel sale. Trump has said that the government wont interfere in business practices but no one believes him. He has already called for the Intel CEO to resign.
I think that my point is punctuated by the fact the Bernie Sanders (who many of you attribute to being one of the most socialist Democrats) is absolutely praising all of these moves by Trump. That alone says more that all of my words.
I do think that most Republicans are still free marketers but you wouldn't know it by actions or words including those on this forum. By words the party has moved from a principled organization concerning free trade to just one the makes Trump into a deity and trusts Trump always. We continue to have nonstop complaining about Mamdani but if you are a true free marketer, I would argue that Trump's left wing policies should worry you more. Mamdani's "damage" if it occurs only affects New York. Trumps harm is on a national scale.
Even though I think that it is cowardly, I can at least understand why Republicans running for office may be afraid to oppose Trump. However, I have a hard time understanding why the people on this forum have such a hard time.
You don't have to like what I have said but I challenge any of you to refute it with logic. I would be pleasantly surprised if you attempt to do so but my expectation is that you will just change the subject.
You should also note that Trump has said that he plans to purchase shares in many other companies. This is not a limited exercise at least if he gets his way.
I appreciate the spirit of the second part of your post, but I'm agnostic.
The word marginalized is dramatically overused in America which is the land of opportunity and freedom. Most people who aren't doing well in America either have a truly serious mental disorder or are lazy/or a criminal, and over 90% are in the lazy and/or a criminal category.
Blacks are not marginalized in America in the 21st century. I'd much rather be a black man or particularly a black woman this century when applying to a university or for a job.
I have significant respect for the truly disabled people and they deserve our sympathy and support. However, as a physiatrist I am also very aware that that over 90% of "disabled" people in America are lazy and/or just gaming the system, their disabled status should be revoked, and they should not be supported by our taxes.
Last edited:
I agree tariffs are more important that transwomen in sports. But border security is more important than tariffs.
I don't love Hegseth and I agree someone more qualified should have been appointed as defense secretary.
I'm not sure when you asked about women being injured by male athletes who think they are women, but there is plenty of cases out there, if you don't just listen to left wing legacy media all day. I found the following in 10 seconds.
Injured volleyball player speaks out after alleged transgender opponent spiked ball at her
Trans Athlete Injures Multiple Girls, Forcing Team To Forfeit. Wither Thou, Feminism?
Shocking field hockey injury sparks fight over transgender athletes
How exactly do you know that Hegseth's team didn't review their records? Of course his staff reviewed them.
How do you know that those black and/women officer were not previously promoted due to DEI, rather than true merit over white male officers?
Regarding RFK jr, Kristy Noem, Kristi Gabbard. They all supported trump when it was very iffy he would win and they spent time and reputation to campaign for him, and RFK gave up his presidential campaign. Trump rewarded them with federal government posts, which has been done since the dawn of america by both parties, so don't pretend this is some new thing only done by republicans.
Last edited:
sorry but I don't buy either graph without seeing an unbiased source.
Here is another one showing the spike of crossings during Trump 1 and a massive decline during Biden's last year.
And there was a decline in crossings during the last 6 months of bidens time office because the democrats knew the ridiculously open border was going to hurt them in the November elections and so they changed everything they were doing at the border for over 3 straight years, for the last 6-8 months of his term.....just to win an election, not because they believe in a secure border.
Thankfully the american people were smart enough to see through that.
The graph shows what the graph shows. If you look at it, the spikes in border crossings started in 2018 (trump1) and didn't level off until 2024 (before Trump 2). There is further drop off under Trump 2 but it is from a very low starting point.
Instead of personal feelings, I invite you to provide some evidence that refutes this and evidence that Biden did something dramatic in 2024 to change what had happened previously. I do know that Biden had a comprehensive border bill that had bipartisan support in late 2023. That is...... it had bipartisan support until Trump told the Republicans to kill it solely for political reasons.
I hear you on the last paragraph but you cannot preach meritocracy and then select any of the names on that list. In any event, its not merit.
As said earlier, I think that this trans gender issue is a waste of time and the real reason that it comes up is to deny trans people public spaces like restrooms and to deny them equal treatment.
You like a lot of right wingers are dug in on one position. You provide these individual examples of cis woman saying that they were injured by trans athletes but you don't provide any studies that look at the issue more fully that support your stance (even though I invited you to do so). There are studies but they have found that there is no difference and of course that doesn't help your side.
There are a few things that you should keep in mind..
1) Just like cis gender women, trans gender women have a vast range of different capabilities and athleticism. I can easily find many cis women injured by other cis women (some of whom have more athletic ability than the average athlete). I know of two in my town who have been injured in volleyball. It is unfortunate if any athlete is injured but the current evidence does not support your stance.
2) You should note that the last video that you posted is actually a cis male competing against cis women in field hockey. There was no men's field hockey team so he was allowed to play with women. Not saying I agree with that decision but that should not be used in your argument.
3) You should ask what happens when a trans female takes puberty blockers as most do. Their muscles mass, testosterone, and estrogen actually approach that of cis women. This also does not support your stance.
Lastly concerning Hegseth he looked at some online searches looking for things like COVID vaccine advocacy and past diversity roles. He then used this sketchy information to overrule recommendations made by peer-review selection boards which is unprecedented. He fully admits this.
Ok....I will do some work for you.
There aren’t many long-term, sport-specific studies, so we can only rely on smaller, cross-sectional ones. While research is still limited, especially in elite athletes, we can draw some key conclusions from existing studies.
After 2 years of hormone therapy, trans women show little to no advantage over cis women in tests like running 1.5 miles or number of sit-ups.
By 4 years on hormone therapy, performance differences in studied metrics tend to disappear.
.In contrast, some areas suggest worse performance: lung function, efficiency of breathing, and fitness when normalized to body size.
In one study of national-level volleyball players, athletic trans women performed similarly to cis women (but below cis men) across multiple physical metrics.
In a UK study, athletic trans women (on hormones for 4–6 years) had worse performance in lung function, jump height,and relative VO₂ max (a measure of fitness) than cis women, but absolute grip strength was higher
.In short: any advantage that exists is likely to be small, context-specific, and not universal.
Yet.....the Republican party says what it does. I think we all know why.
There aren’t many long-term, sport-specific studies, so we can only rely on smaller, cross-sectional ones. While research is still limited, especially in elite athletes, we can draw some key conclusions from existing studies.
After 2 years of hormone therapy, trans women show little to no advantage over cis women in tests like running 1.5 miles or number of sit-ups.
By 4 years on hormone therapy, performance differences in studied metrics tend to disappear.
.In contrast, some areas suggest worse performance: lung function, efficiency of breathing, and fitness when normalized to body size.
In one study of national-level volleyball players, athletic trans women performed similarly to cis women (but below cis men) across multiple physical metrics.
In a UK study, athletic trans women (on hormones for 4–6 years) had worse performance in lung function, jump height,and relative VO₂ max (a measure of fitness) than cis women, but absolute grip strength was higher
.In short: any advantage that exists is likely to be small, context-specific, and not universal.
Yet.....the Republican party says what it does. I think we all know why.
I knew nothing about your religion or lack thereof prior to your post but that wasn't the point.
The point of my post is that the vast majority of right wingers strongly associate with Christian principles and say that this guides their life but their actual stance towards the poor, the undocumented, the LGBTQ community, and the traditional under respresented minorities does not align with what Jesus teaches us (or really what any major religion including Islam teaches).
I find it hard to believe that anyone who cheers things like the cruel and dehumanizing methods of treating the people that I mentioned previously coming out of this administration know anything about Jesus.
How does reading this strike you?
"Mr. El-Sayed, 41, earned a doctorate in public health from Oxford University and a medical degree from Columbia—though he didn’t complete an internship and isn’t licensed to practice medicine. Instead of caring for patients, he has spent his career nurturing ties to progressive groups. “My career has never been about trying to maximize on money, otherwise I would have just gone and been a surgeon,” he said in June.
Still, he hasn’t done too shabbily. He and his wife, Sarah Jukaku, earned $686,069 in income last year, according to a financial disclosure report he released last month. That would rank him among Michigan’s top 1% of earners."
"Mr. El-Sayed, 41, earned a doctorate in public health from Oxford University and a medical degree from Columbia—though he didn’t complete an internship and isn’t licensed to practice medicine. Instead of caring for patients, he has spent his career nurturing ties to progressive groups. “My career has never been about trying to maximize on money, otherwise I would have just gone and been a surgeon,” he said in June.
Still, he hasn’t done too shabbily. He and his wife, Sarah Jukaku, earned $686,069 in income last year, according to a financial disclosure report he released last month. That would rank him among Michigan’s top 1% of earners."
I have no opinion.
It is interesting thought that anyone who talks about a tax on the ultra wealthy is accused of wanting to "steal" their fortunes.
Johan321
Full Member
So? Has he ever disputed that?
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Quick google search says his wife is a practicing psychiatrist…
So this article is either ignorant or deliberately misleading.
It's pretty irritating. He's implying that his calling to progressive politics is honorable and wholesome but that of an actual doctor, who practices medicine, specifically surgery, is in it for the money.
Also, I really don't think people should be calling themselves "doctor", which he does regularly, unless they are practicing, or at least practiced medicine at some point.
I have a degree in physics. That doesn't make me a physicist.
If you're not willing to provide the source of your graph it is irrelevant.
Of course biden and the democrats tightened up border security to win the election. I agree trump told republicans to kill it on political reasons. And no I don't have to "prove" biden decided to tighten the border for political reasons....because the election was coming soon. It's common sense. The liberal left the border wide open in hopes of getting votes from illegal aliens. They only tightened when they perceived the threat to keeping the presidency.
You provide me with real evidence to the contrary, I don't have to prove common sense, such as the sky is blue or fat people eat too much.
If that is how you approach a debate, then not worth discussing much with you
Last edited:
dude, you lost that debate. I thoroughly beat you on all points in the previous post. Again, I'm not interested in debating anyone who can't admit when they were just clearly proven wrong. You're just brainwashed from from LGBQTQIA socialist local schoolteachers and left wing university professors, so maybe a hopeless cause.
Last edited:
You say that you are independent but you sure do follow the right wing playbook even down to the claims of victory in Iran.
Which debate do you claim that you won? The one on trans-athletes?
I asked you to produce one article supporting your stance. I am yet to see any. You posted three individual situations one of which involved a cis male instead of a trans woman and should be thrown out. I can post dozens of cis women injured by other cis woman so your posts are moot to this discussion. I actually posted summaries of most of the current data and unsurprisingly none of it supports the right wing stance.
To be clear I think that this whole debate is ridiculous and immaterial to the lives of most Americans. But I think that your side of it is equally ridiculous and has no evidence just feelings. If anything, the available evidence says the opposite.
If what you produced is winning a debate then what does losing look like?
Last edited:
