The debate "Obama is a fascist president" was started by
May 19, 2019, 9:48 am.
24 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 47 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
killer posted 3 arguments, Hellow posted 17 arguments to the agreers part.
JDAWG9693 posted 1 argument, historybuff posted 8 arguments, Nemiroff posted 7 arguments to the disagreers part.
killer, Hellow, iqrakhan9121 and 21 visitors agree.
JDAWG9693, Nemiroff, lukeluckynuke123, historybuff, imjustheretommorow, wtann6979, Damian, DanielSays, sssk, bernie and 37 visitors disagree.
I am saying that an american citizen is more likely to commit a rape than an immigrant. That is 100% factually correct. I'm not calling you a rapist. Statistically you are most likely to going to die younger than I will. (life expectancy is 78 in US, 82 in canada) But i'm not saying that you specifically will die at 78. That is what "statistically" means.
You did argue they are sending their rapists. If that were true wouldn't immigrants be committing more crimes per capita than US citizens? I mean if they are sending their criminals, they should continue committing crimes. But that isn't what happens. They commit less crimes. Therefore your argument doesn't make much logical sense.
Also, no. Mexico isn't sending their problems to America. America is sending problems to them. Americans want drugs. They are willing to spend large amounts of money to get those drugs. The american government decided to ban those drugs, this pushed prices up further. This created a massively profitable underground market that criminals were going to fill.
The US government then decided that the best way to deal with what is essentially a health issue, was with a war. They decided to try fight addiction and economics with bullets. Creating instability in these countries as the drug cartels have more money than some countries.
1) the american population created a market for a product.
2) people started providing that product.
3) the US government started killing people for providing that product rather than dealing with the demand for the product.
4) Those providing the product starting heavily arming themselves
5) drug cartels now had more money and weapons than the local governments trying to stop them
6) chaos, death and dismemberment ensued.
So no. They didn't send their problems to you. You f**ked up their country. Add to that the CIA overthrowing countries and propping up dictators and you have a mess very much of america's making.
Your still saying are that I have higher chance then raping someone then a Mexican. Also bringing in statistically. That may not be what you mean, but it certainly sounds like it.
Now if you were to say. "There were more U.S citizens that have raped someone or a higher chance of rape then some of the Mexicans." Then that would be exceptable. Keep in mind, I wasn't arguing who commits more crimes.This has nothing to do with fear. Your right, you don't know anything about me.
When did I ever state no one of the categories that you brought up can't be criminals? Of course they can be criminals no one here is saying they can't. I never actually said that Mexicans were bad people. Sorry if it did come out that way, that's my fault probably. Mexico are bringing their problems to the U.S such as drugs, not just rapist. It's not only just Mexico it's also Latin America. Trump also stated that. "It might also be from the middle East. I wasn't emotional when he said that. Actually, 80percent of the woman that are crossing the border are raped by smugglers. I don't FEEL like it's true, No one FEELS like its true. Your now just calling me emotional. Not only that, they are taking are jobs and money, this isn't demonizing a group.
The full sentence is "A Mexican immigrant is less likely to rape someone than you are, statistically speaking."
That means that according to statistics, a US citizen is more likely to rape someone than an immigrant. I am not stating that you as a person is more likely to rape someone. I don't know anything about you. But migrants commit less crimes per capita that US citizens. And that is a fact.
Of course some of the migrants are going to be criminals. But that is true of literally any group you could name. Priests, Girl Scouts, Popes, white people, politicians, etc. Any group that exists, has criminals within it. Trying to demonize a group because it contains a small percentage of bad people is ridiculous. It is an attempt to make an issue emotional so that people won't look at it logically. it's like chanting "lock her up" at a political rally. The point isn't to say something that is true or even particularly grounded in reality. But if you can get people to "feel" like it is true, then you've won. Even if it isn't true.
Well when I go back and read it, it says. "A Mexican has a lower chance at raping then you." Just because I am an American doesn't mean I am going to commit a crime.
Some of the migrants are rapist. That's how the other migrants gotten pregnant.
your link is about migrants being rapped, not doing the raping... so are these rape victims being selected by the Mexican government and forced to migrant against their will?
and also, how does being raped make them rapists? what are you smoking?
he isnt claiming anything. he doesnt know anything about you. and *statistically speaking*, an American citizen, which if you are one includes you, are more likely to commit crimes, including rape, then immigrants, legal or illegal.
I sent you a URL, my goal isn't to spread fear.
are you claiming that I would rape someone? Are you actually thinking that I would rape someone.
I beg to differ dude.
so there is a government program where Mexico selects their criminals and forces them to migrate? can you show any evidence of this? has this even been suggested by someone?
The statistics say that immigrants commit less crimes per capital than American citizens. A Mexican immigrant is less likely to rape someone than you are, statistically speaking.
There is no evidence behind the claim that Mexico is sending rapists. It is just nonsense they made up. And given that it is coming from a man who has multiple sexual assault claims against him, it is especially ridiculous.
yes, Mexico is sending over their rapist in murders.
So you think I'm being emotional now? it's not. Your logic is saying that I'm trying to scare people. Keep in mind, you brought up Mexico. So be prepared for any backlash. If my goal was to spread fear, then I would say Mexico is going to come over and rape us all.
OK, if you don't like me saying Mexico are sending over they're rapist and murders that's fine. That doesn't make it any less true. No one said Mexicans are rapist and murders. You are misunderstand the concept of what o say and what he said. So that's a false analogy because we are talking about what Mexico is doing, not what they are.
the Mexican government is selecting people to send? or are they individuals who choose to come?
why would murderers and rapists who could prosper in the relatively weak government of Mexico come to the USA to spend their lives in jail?
once again, this is stupid fear mongering. based entirely in emotion and zero logic.
and I could argue Americans are all fat uneducated couch potatoes with a heart attack waiting to happen... their called stereotypes. I'm sure we can find anecdotal examples to confirm both of these stupid stereotypes, but we both know hundreds of millions of people wont be defined in a sentence or 2.
and to be fare, he said Mexico are sending over there rapist and murders.
I would also argue that they are. He also said that some were good people.
I do think its just him disagreeing with them.
did they call him racist simply for disagreeing with them?
or did they call him racist because he said racist things? like saying that most Mexicans are rapists and drug dealers
Trump is a big example of it. Also his supporters were called racist and Bigoted.
is it the government declaring them racist and bigots? or people?
who was declared racist or bigoted by any mainstream Democrat who wasnt actually a racist or bigot?
If someone tells you what you can and can't do. And says it's wrong because they say so is kinda like dictatorship. Dictator is 1 person that rule overall. Sure. I am going to say, this. Even though I never said they were. Dem are not dictators. You can't spell Dictator without the word dick.(if you remove the k) that's a fun joke I just made, doesn't even matter. Anyway; My point is that if you disagree with a dictator in Russia, you are wrong, get killed correct? Or thrown in prison IDK. Here, if you disagree with Democrat like ocasio Cortez or what ever, you are a racist and Bigoted. See were I am going with this?
Don't miss interpret my words, I am not saying they are communist. Otherwise why have the name Democrat. I believe they are similar.
I can't speak for your country. Glad that they are doing well under it
umm no. ordering people to do things isn't a dictatorship. It would depend very much on who is ordering and why. For example if a democratically elected body passes a law about those things and it does not violate the constitution, then it would be perfectly legitimate. But I mean, it would be unconstitutional to tell someone they can't have a child because of their financial status. I can't think of how it would come about for someone to tell you how many burgers you can have, that seems weird. And if someone calls you a racist and you aren't, then they are a dick, not a dictator.
Ok, it sounds like you understand at least part of what being communist is. But democrats want literally nothing of what you just described. So how are they a little communist?
And canada, much like most of the modern world, has government provided health care. America is one of the few western countries that doesn't.
I am not saying there is more then one dictator in a country. There can only be one, I know. But what asked preciously in the first paragraph. Do you think it's dictatorship if someone tells you. "You can't have a baby because your poor." do you think it's dictatorship if someone is telling you how many Hamburgers you can and can't eat. Do you think it's dictatorship if some calls you a racist just been you don't agree with them?
As for Communism. I think I have a pretty good idea on what it is. People that are equal with no hire class or lower. And also everyone is paid the same. (Just throwing that last part in their.) So they want ownership of everything. They want to control everything. Now I am not saying Dem want to control EVERYTHING! All I said was they are a bit like Communist.
Social Democracy provides health care for people. Well in the U.S, Health care was already being provided without Social added to it. Unless I missed something. If you know what I'm talking about. (Obama care.) What's not communist about it? You think communist don't care about the people ether? Anyone can demonstrate in front of Socialism. Socialism is still socialism, and Democrat is still Democrat. By the way, Canada are Democratic socialist?
Your last paragraph, please clarify.
I think I practically just said what Communism is. A country where it's everyone is equal. No hire class, no lower class. I will add the fact that
Again, you don't seem to understand the term you are using. None of what you are describing is a dictatorship. A dictatorship is a government run by a dictator. That means one person with total control. If there are 3 co-equal branches of government then it cannot be a dictatorship.
And again, I don't think you know what communism actually is. There are admittedly several branches of communism. But they all require the communal ownership of the means of production. There is literally no one calling for that.
And again, you don't seem to know what a social democrat is. A social democrat is basically like Canada or Sweden. Where the government provides services like heath care for their people. There is nothing communist about that. You would still have a capitalist financial system.
In Canada, no one dies because they can't afford a medical procedure. Americans cannot say the same. So yes it does help people and yes it does work.
Lets look up the definition of Dictatorship. "Governed by a dictator." My fundamental understanding isn't flawed. Democrats want the three branches to be co-equal? good for them. That Changes so much right. quick question. Do you think it's dictatorship when someone says. "You can't have baby cause your too poor." another question. Do you think that it's dictatorship if you tell someone how many burgers you can and can't eat. One more question. Do you think it's dictatorship if someone calls you a racist and a white supremest if they agree with you? Garnette you a lot of Democrats will say some of the things I just said.
Communism actually believes that everyone is equal. everyone gets the same. Democrats believes everyone is equal too. They want to take money from the rich by the way. They want to tax the rich.
What's the difference between Socialism and Democratic Socialism? How are they remotely different from another? You can't put Socialism behind Democrat and expect it to be better. from a logical view, Socialism will never work, no matter what you do with it. It never works.
Don't assume, I'm actually a liberal! I listen to Left and right! I am not rich, socialist policies arnt going going to make the world better? Tell me when has it actually worked? Not everyone wants those services, I am middle class actually. I am not rich. The reason why I am against Socialism because it stands against the morals I believe in. How is it going to help anybody? Socialism is not needed, its not going to work. it won't help anyone.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the terms you are using. A dictatorship means 1 person with total control. No democrats are in favor of that. they want the current system with 3 co-equal branches to balance each other out. As long as these divisions are in place then it doesn't matter how big the central government is, it cannot be a dictatorship. There is nothing dictatorial about wanted a central government that actually protects and provides services to it's people.
Communism requires central ownership of the means of production. There are no democrats calling for the nationalization of all factories. So no, they are not communists.
Many of them do advocate for Social Democracy though. It is in no way the same thing.
I'm guessing you read alot of right wing commentators opinions of socialism. Please keep in mind that they have a vested interest in those policies never being implemented. if you are already very rich then why would you want a government that provides services to people? You are rich enough that you don't need to use them. So they do whatever they can to keep the government small so that they can pay as little tax as possible. But you know who would benefit from those services? Everyone is isn't rich.
Democrats believe in Strong central government witch are hands on. They will try saying what you can and can't do. It kinda is like a dictator ship. Just in a more polite way. And they are actually becoming more dictator like. You know Communism is for socialist values right? Democrats are pushing for it. Is it a bad thing, in a logical view, yes it is bad.
They arnt communist, but they are like communist.
how is a strong federal government that is divided and composed of many people, including hundreds of local representatives dictatorial? dictatorship doesnt mean big government, it means small circle of unquestioned leaders.
also communism doesnt mean centralized government. its main 2 tennants are abolishing money and abolishing class.
if every strong central government was communist, then communism has existed for millenia is the root of European dominance. it isnt, your definitions are simply wrong.
opinions I mean.
actually they practically have similar options.
I wouldn't necessarily say their alike, they both have different opinions from another.
In other words, I believe Democrats to be like communist.
Well Democrats believe in a stronger federal government. Democrats are a bit like dictators.
In what way is this true?
You said it was for fun, to degree, I believe it's true.
I just made this for fun.
He was as middle of the road american as you are likely to find. The topic doesn't even make sense.
I just made this for fun. despite me trying to research some evidence though. I think all the sources were bias.
In what way?