The Democratic Candidates
Comments
-
Well thanks for the clarification because I sure wasn't going to go back and see how this started. I logged on today, saw it said "80 new posts" for this thread, and skimmed through to see hardly any of them were about the candidates, but instead it was all about Sweden. And since I don't know anything about Sweden, I'll have to sit this one out.PJ_Soul said:
Policies and systems being endorsed by some of the Dem candidates can be compared to some of those in Sweden, among other countries, and a Swede member likes to remind us about it. Seems reasonable to me.Ledbetterman10 said:What the fuck is going on in this thread? What is the significance of Sweden?
2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com0 -
Pretty shocking that a thread got derailed. That never happens on the AMT.Ledbetterman10 said:
Well thanks for the clarification because I sure wasn't going to go back and see how this started. I logged on today, saw it said "80 new posts" for this thread, and skimmed through to see hardly any of them were about the candidates, but instead it was all about Sweden. And since I don't know anything about Sweden, I'll have to sit this one out.PJ_Soul said:
Policies and systems being endorsed by some of the Dem candidates can be compared to some of those in Sweden, among other countries, and a Swede member likes to remind us about it. Seems reasonable to me.Ledbetterman10 said:What the fuck is going on in this thread? What is the significance of Sweden?Give Peas A Chance…0 -
Well if you read some of the posts, you'd know something about Sweden, which could only be a good thing, right? Knowledge is power. And it is VERY useful and important, IMO, for Americans to learn about thing work in other countries, so they can understand what the other options are, besides what is already being done in America. Many of these candidates are indeed fashioning their platforms based on systems used successfully in other countries, Sweden being one of them. And one of the characteristics of Americans as perceived by pretty much everyone else in the world is that Americans are extremely ignorant about what happens outside of America, compared to how aware most others around the world are about countries other than their own, including America. It actually puts Americans at a disadvantage.Ledbetterman10 said:
Well thanks for the clarification because I sure wasn't going to go back and see how this started. I logged on today, saw it said "80 new posts" for this thread, and skimmed through to see hardly any of them were about the candidates, but instead it was all about Sweden. And since I don't know anything about Sweden, I'll have to sit this one out.PJ_Soul said:
Policies and systems being endorsed by some of the Dem candidates can be compared to some of those in Sweden, among other countries, and a Swede member likes to remind us about it. Seems reasonable to me.Ledbetterman10 said:What the fuck is going on in this thread? What is the significance of Sweden?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
While what you say is absolutely true, it's also clear to me that many people outside of the US have a very superficial understanding of how things work in the US, particularly policies that are controlled at the state level, and the corresponding second and third order effects. It's very difficult to make broad based statements because of the structure of our government(s).PJ_Soul said:
Well if you read some of the posts, you'd know something about Sweden, which could only be a good thing, right? Knowledge is power. And it is VERY useful and important, IMO, for Americans to learn about thing work in other countries, so they can understand what the other options are, besides what is already being done in America. Many of these candidates are indeed fashioning their platforms based on systems used successfully in other countries, Sweden being one of them. And one of the characteristics of Americans as perceived by pretty much everyone else in the world is that Americans are extremely ignorant about what happens outside of America, compared to how aware most others around the world are about countries other than their own, including America. It actually puts Americans at a disadvantage.Ledbetterman10 said:
Well thanks for the clarification because I sure wasn't going to go back and see how this started. I logged on today, saw it said "80 new posts" for this thread, and skimmed through to see hardly any of them were about the candidates, but instead it was all about Sweden. And since I don't know anything about Sweden, I'll have to sit this one out.PJ_Soul said:
Policies and systems being endorsed by some of the Dem candidates can be compared to some of those in Sweden, among other countries, and a Swede member likes to remind us about it. Seems reasonable to me.Ledbetterman10 said:What the fuck is going on in this thread? What is the significance of Sweden?0 -
If I was interested in learning about Sweden, this would be the last place I'd get my information on it from.PJ_Soul said:
Well if you read some of the posts, you'd know something about Sweden, which could only be a good thing, right? Knowledge is power.Ledbetterman10 said:
Well thanks for the clarification because I sure wasn't going to go back and see how this started. I logged on today, saw it said "80 new posts" for this thread, and skimmed through to see hardly any of them were about the candidates, but instead it was all about Sweden. And since I don't know anything about Sweden, I'll have to sit this one out.PJ_Soul said:
Policies and systems being endorsed by some of the Dem candidates can be compared to some of those in Sweden, among other countries, and a Swede member likes to remind us about it. Seems reasonable to me.Ledbetterman10 said:What the fuck is going on in this thread? What is the significance of Sweden?
Post edited by Ledbetterman10 on2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com0 -
Before the US worries about free education, how about they 1st get universal health care. Same as Canada...when we can provide true universal health care (prescription, dental, eye care) instead of the basics, then free education can be put on the table...Give Peas A Chance…0
-
I think there's a wiki page.Ledbetterman10 said:
If I was interested in learning about Sweden, this would be the last place I'd get my information on it from.PJ_Soul said:
Well if you read some of the posts, you'd know something about Sweden, which could only be a good thing, right? Knowledge is power.Ledbetterman10 said:
Well thanks for the clarification because I sure wasn't going to go back and see how this started. I logged on today, saw it said "80 new posts" for this thread, and skimmed through to see hardly any of them were about the candidates, but instead it was all about Sweden. And since I don't know anything about Sweden, I'll have to sit this one out.PJ_Soul said:
Policies and systems being endorsed by some of the Dem candidates can be compared to some of those in Sweden, among other countries, and a Swede member likes to remind us about it. Seems reasonable to me.Ledbetterman10 said:What the fuck is going on in this thread? What is the significance of Sweden?"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
Agreed.. human rights before nice to haves. I won't vote for the latter regardless, unless we are talking about some very specific things. That's something @cincybearcat and I had discussed several pages before. It's not my problem that a student wanted to go to a private liberal arts school three states away and now has 200k in debt. That's just bad decision making, enabled by bad parenting.Meltdown99 said:Before the US worries about free education, how about they 1st get universal health care. Same as Canada...when we can provide true universal health care (prescription, dental, eye care) instead of the basics, then free education can be put on the table...0 -
I read the conversation been you and cincy...very informative. As long as there are affordable options for education I'm good. I've already listed what I want in Canada...but that will never happen. As it is now we spend 15-20 billion more a year than we take in federal taxes...mrussel1 said:
Agreed.. human rights before nice to haves. I won't vote for the latter regardless, unless we are talking about some very specific things. That's something @cincybearcat and I had discussed several pages before. It's not my problem that a student wanted to go to a private liberal arts school three states away and now has 200k in debt. That's just bad decision making, enabled by bad parenting.Meltdown99 said:Before the US worries about free education, how about they 1st get universal health care. Same as Canada...when we can provide true universal health care (prescription, dental, eye care) instead of the basics, then free education can be put on the table...Give Peas A Chance…0 -
One party of the discussion choosing to use false information for their argumentation and to skew reality is obviously something to hang ones hat on. The fundamentals of a discussion is that you are not doing it in bad faith or presenting falsehoods. There is no discussion to be had, if you can't trust the other party to stick to the truth.mrussel1 said:
If that's all you have to hang your hat on with the discussion, I think you know what that means.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Why are you unable to answer? It's a simple question, based on you skewing facts to support your arguments.mrussel1 said:
/shush please. Your bold typing is giving me a headache. Please do some work on improving your homeland. The rest of us are busy with ours.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. You have a hard time understanding text (could be, with you claiming ignorance on my use use of "paywalling")mrussel1 said:Can you repeat the question? I don't think I read it.
or
2. You are arguing in bad faith and skewing data in your favor. Which is just shitty on the level of your dear president.
What is it?
I'm not the one arguing in bad faith - you are. And you seem to have a problem coming clean about this shitty tactic of yours? Going off on sarcastic remarks instead.
Another very Trump:ian trait. Could it be, like they say on the cable news shows - he isn't the problem in the US, he is merely a symptom?
You trying to skip past this very fundamental thing and go on and attacking Sweden instead of acknowledging you being caught - says everything about your intent.
You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.
Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
At first I thought you were anti-patriotism, but your refusal to recognize the inherent regressive tax system leads to me to believe that isn't true. You are very pro-Sweden, blindly so. Then I thought maybe you just are jealous of the US. While that still may be true, this latest astoundingly weak line of argument you've taken up confirms what I think many thought from the beginning. You're just a web troll. That's fine, at least I've got it crystallized for myself.Spiritual_Chaos said:
One party of the discussion choosing to use false information for their argumentation and to skew reality is obviously something to hang ones hat on. The fundamentals of a discussion is that you are not doing it in bad faith or presenting falsehoods. There is no discussion to be had, if you can't trust the other party to stick to the truth.mrussel1 said:
If that's all you have to hang your hat on with the discussion, I think you know what that means.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Why are you unable to answer? It's a simple question, based on you skewing facts to support your arguments.mrussel1 said:
/shush please. Your bold typing is giving me a headache. Please do some work on improving your homeland. The rest of us are busy with ours.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. You have a hard time understanding text (could be, with you claiming ignorance on my use use of "paywalling")mrussel1 said:Can you repeat the question? I don't think I read it.
or
2. You are arguing in bad faith and skewing data in your favor. Which is just shitty on the level of your dear president.
What is it?
I'm not the one arguing in bad faith - you are. And you seem to have a problem coming clean about this shitty tactic of yours? Going off on sarcastic remarks instead.
Another very Trump:ian trait. Could it be, like they say on the cable news shows - he isn't the problem in the US, he is merely a symptom?
You trying to skip past this very fundamental thing and go on and attacking Sweden instead of acknowledging you being caught - says everything about your intent.
You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.0 -
Still trying to steer the discussion away from your use of false information/lies to skew the argument? The one presenting lies Sandra Huckabee Sanders-style, would be the troll in this instance.mrussel1 said:
At first I thought you were anti-patriotism, but your refusal to recognize the inherent regressive tax system leads to me to believe that isn't true. You are very pro-Sweden, blindly so. Then I thought maybe you just are jealous of the US. While that still may be true, this latest astoundingly weak line of argument you've taken up confirms what I think many thought from the beginning. You're just a web troll. That's fine, at least I've got it crystallized for myself.Spiritual_Chaos said:
One party of the discussion choosing to use false information for their argumentation and to skew reality is obviously something to hang ones hat on. The fundamentals of a discussion is that you are not doing it in bad faith or presenting falsehoods. There is no discussion to be had, if you can't trust the other party to stick to the truth.mrussel1 said:
If that's all you have to hang your hat on with the discussion, I think you know what that means.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Why are you unable to answer? It's a simple question, based on you skewing facts to support your arguments.mrussel1 said:
/shush please. Your bold typing is giving me a headache. Please do some work on improving your homeland. The rest of us are busy with ours.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. You have a hard time understanding text (could be, with you claiming ignorance on my use use of "paywalling")mrussel1 said:Can you repeat the question? I don't think I read it.
or
2. You are arguing in bad faith and skewing data in your favor. Which is just shitty on the level of your dear president.
What is it?
I'm not the one arguing in bad faith - you are. And you seem to have a problem coming clean about this shitty tactic of yours? Going off on sarcastic remarks instead.
Another very Trump:ian trait. Could it be, like they say on the cable news shows - he isn't the problem in the US, he is merely a symptom?
You trying to skip past this very fundamental thing and go on and attacking Sweden instead of acknowledging you being caught - says everything about your intent.
You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.
As stated, You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
Posting the same thing over and over is the very definition of a troll.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Still trying to steer the discussion away from your use of false information/lies to skew the argument? The one presenting lies Sandra Huckabee Sanders-style, would be the troll in this instance.mrussel1 said:
At first I thought you were anti-patriotism, but your refusal to recognize the inherent regressive tax system leads to me to believe that isn't true. You are very pro-Sweden, blindly so. Then I thought maybe you just are jealous of the US. While that still may be true, this latest astoundingly weak line of argument you've taken up confirms what I think many thought from the beginning. You're just a web troll. That's fine, at least I've got it crystallized for myself.Spiritual_Chaos said:
One party of the discussion choosing to use false information for their argumentation and to skew reality is obviously something to hang ones hat on. The fundamentals of a discussion is that you are not doing it in bad faith or presenting falsehoods. There is no discussion to be had, if you can't trust the other party to stick to the truth.mrussel1 said:
If that's all you have to hang your hat on with the discussion, I think you know what that means.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Why are you unable to answer? It's a simple question, based on you skewing facts to support your arguments.mrussel1 said:
/shush please. Your bold typing is giving me a headache. Please do some work on improving your homeland. The rest of us are busy with ours.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. You have a hard time understanding text (could be, with you claiming ignorance on my use use of "paywalling")mrussel1 said:Can you repeat the question? I don't think I read it.
or
2. You are arguing in bad faith and skewing data in your favor. Which is just shitty on the level of your dear president.
What is it?
I'm not the one arguing in bad faith - you are. And you seem to have a problem coming clean about this shitty tactic of yours? Going off on sarcastic remarks instead.
Another very Trump:ian trait. Could it be, like they say on the cable news shows - he isn't the problem in the US, he is merely a symptom?
You trying to skip past this very fundamental thing and go on and attacking Sweden instead of acknowledging you being caught - says everything about your intent.
You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.
As stated, You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.0 -
What is not acknowledging presenting lies and skewing the truth to strengthen your argument?mrussel1 said:
Posting the same thing over and over is the very definition of a troll.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Still trying to steer the discussion away from your use of false information/lies to skew the argument? The one presenting lies Sandra Huckabee Sanders-style, would be the troll in this instance.mrussel1 said:
At first I thought you were anti-patriotism, but your refusal to recognize the inherent regressive tax system leads to me to believe that isn't true. You are very pro-Sweden, blindly so. Then I thought maybe you just are jealous of the US. While that still may be true, this latest astoundingly weak line of argument you've taken up confirms what I think many thought from the beginning. You're just a web troll. That's fine, at least I've got it crystallized for myself.Spiritual_Chaos said:
One party of the discussion choosing to use false information for their argumentation and to skew reality is obviously something to hang ones hat on. The fundamentals of a discussion is that you are not doing it in bad faith or presenting falsehoods. There is no discussion to be had, if you can't trust the other party to stick to the truth.mrussel1 said:
If that's all you have to hang your hat on with the discussion, I think you know what that means.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Why are you unable to answer? It's a simple question, based on you skewing facts to support your arguments.mrussel1 said:
/shush please. Your bold typing is giving me a headache. Please do some work on improving your homeland. The rest of us are busy with ours.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. You have a hard time understanding text (could be, with you claiming ignorance on my use use of "paywalling")mrussel1 said:Can you repeat the question? I don't think I read it.
or
2. You are arguing in bad faith and skewing data in your favor. Which is just shitty on the level of your dear president.
What is it?
I'm not the one arguing in bad faith - you are. And you seem to have a problem coming clean about this shitty tactic of yours? Going off on sarcastic remarks instead.
Another very Trump:ian trait. Could it be, like they say on the cable news shows - he isn't the problem in the US, he is merely a symptom?
You trying to skip past this very fundamental thing and go on and attacking Sweden instead of acknowledging you being caught - says everything about your intent.
You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.
As stated, You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar."Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
Is your country at 70% college attendance yet? Let me know when that happens, then you can speak about equality of opportunity in a country. Until then, focus on your own problems.Spiritual_Chaos said:
What is not acknowledging presenting lies and skewing the truth to strengthen your argument?mrussel1 said:
Posting the same thing over and over is the very definition of a troll.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Still trying to steer the discussion away from your use of false information/lies to skew the argument? The one presenting lies Sandra Huckabee Sanders-style, would be the troll in this instance.mrussel1 said:
At first I thought you were anti-patriotism, but your refusal to recognize the inherent regressive tax system leads to me to believe that isn't true. You are very pro-Sweden, blindly so. Then I thought maybe you just are jealous of the US. While that still may be true, this latest astoundingly weak line of argument you've taken up confirms what I think many thought from the beginning. You're just a web troll. That's fine, at least I've got it crystallized for myself.Spiritual_Chaos said:
One party of the discussion choosing to use false information for their argumentation and to skew reality is obviously something to hang ones hat on. The fundamentals of a discussion is that you are not doing it in bad faith or presenting falsehoods. There is no discussion to be had, if you can't trust the other party to stick to the truth.mrussel1 said:
If that's all you have to hang your hat on with the discussion, I think you know what that means.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Why are you unable to answer? It's a simple question, based on you skewing facts to support your arguments.mrussel1 said:
/shush please. Your bold typing is giving me a headache. Please do some work on improving your homeland. The rest of us are busy with ours.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. You have a hard time understanding text (could be, with you claiming ignorance on my use use of "paywalling")mrussel1 said:Can you repeat the question? I don't think I read it.
or
2. You are arguing in bad faith and skewing data in your favor. Which is just shitty on the level of your dear president.
What is it?
I'm not the one arguing in bad faith - you are. And you seem to have a problem coming clean about this shitty tactic of yours? Going off on sarcastic remarks instead.
Another very Trump:ian trait. Could it be, like they say on the cable news shows - he isn't the problem in the US, he is merely a symptom?
You trying to skip past this very fundamental thing and go on and attacking Sweden instead of acknowledging you being caught - says everything about your intent.
You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.
As stated, You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.0 -
I can hear my Mom, "Boys, BOYS!"
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
Still trying to steer the discussion away from having to acknowledge your use of false information/lies to skew your argument?mrussel1 said:
Is your country at 70% college attendance yet? Let me know when that happens, then you can speak about equality of opportunity in a country. Until then, focus on your own problems.Spiritual_Chaos said:
What is not acknowledging presenting lies and skewing the truth to strengthen your argument?mrussel1 said:
Posting the same thing over and over is the very definition of a troll.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Still trying to steer the discussion away from your use of false information/lies to skew the argument? The one presenting lies Sandra Huckabee Sanders-style, would be the troll in this instance.mrussel1 said:
At first I thought you were anti-patriotism, but your refusal to recognize the inherent regressive tax system leads to me to believe that isn't true. You are very pro-Sweden, blindly so. Then I thought maybe you just are jealous of the US. While that still may be true, this latest astoundingly weak line of argument you've taken up confirms what I think many thought from the beginning. You're just a web troll. That's fine, at least I've got it crystallized for myself.Spiritual_Chaos said:
One party of the discussion choosing to use false information for their argumentation and to skew reality is obviously something to hang ones hat on. The fundamentals of a discussion is that you are not doing it in bad faith or presenting falsehoods. There is no discussion to be had, if you can't trust the other party to stick to the truth.mrussel1 said:
If that's all you have to hang your hat on with the discussion, I think you know what that means.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Why are you unable to answer? It's a simple question, based on you skewing facts to support your arguments.mrussel1 said:
/shush please. Your bold typing is giving me a headache. Please do some work on improving your homeland. The rest of us are busy with ours.Spiritual_Chaos said:
1. You have a hard time understanding text (could be, with you claiming ignorance on my use use of "paywalling")mrussel1 said:Can you repeat the question? I don't think I read it.
or
2. You are arguing in bad faith and skewing data in your favor. Which is just shitty on the level of your dear president.
What is it?
I'm not the one arguing in bad faith - you are. And you seem to have a problem coming clean about this shitty tactic of yours? Going off on sarcastic remarks instead.
Another very Trump:ian trait. Could it be, like they say on the cable news shows - he isn't the problem in the US, he is merely a symptom?
You trying to skip past this very fundamental thing and go on and attacking Sweden instead of acknowledging you being caught - says everything about your intent.
You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.
As stated, You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar.
As stated, You have shown to act untrustworthy, dishonest and to be a liar."Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
I know.. I'm tired. I am interested in hearing what you think about my counter to the socialized education piece. Do you get where I'm coming from that debt forgiveness and free college benefits the upper class more than the lower in this country?brianlux said:I can hear my Mom, "Boys, BOYS!"0 -
And then if we still kept it up it was like...
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
I think abortion is going to be a big campaign issue now. People took it for granted.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help