Are you a democrat or a republican?

[subSTRATA]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

OP: are you Korean or Hawaiian?  You can only choose one.

I am a democrat because, democrats have feelings for the poor,
sick and unemployed. They are willing to help people in need.
Even many rich folks will come to the aid of those in trouble.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/naive

naive

adjective
2.
having or showing a lack of experience, judgment, or information; credulous:
She's so naive she believes everything she reads. He has a very naive attitude toward politics.

Democrats have zero intention of helping the needy; their only purpose is to make more needy people, which increases their power.  Whether this is done by crippling the young from being able to function properly in the market, to importing needy people from 3rd world countries into the nation, to paying people off to do nothing with their lives and live off the well being of others (which makes it harder for others to survive), all that matters is that everyone is helpless so that democrats (well, more like progressives I guess) are necessary to care for them.  If you truly want to help the needy, you would reject them, and encourage an environment where the needy can help themselves, which would mean lifting all the expensive restrictions on the poor which stops them from forming their own businesses, thereby becoming self-reliant.

Please, don't support an institution which seeks to turn the nation into the pets of the ruling classes.

You didn't have to shame him by calling him naive.

Be more polite when it comes to your opinions and beliefs, please

the world isnt a safe space for any snowflake out there, especially when it comes to politics. that being said, i agree with what mike christ said. naive is what the politicians want you to be; they like it when the population is full of sheep thatll readily eat up whatever propaganda or bs theyre spoon fed.

Well, let me ask you this:

I believe that the U.S. government spends *far* too much money (and that's basically a fact because our debt is out of control and our social programs heading towards bankruptcy despite record tax revenue). The Democrats want to waste even more money, and there is no chance of a third party candidate winning office.

Well.. that is the advantage you have, when your national currency is widely regarded as the reserve currency of the world. It is very easy to sell the 30-year or 20-year treasury bonds, at little or no interest. The Americans can accumulate as much debt as they want. There will always be people who are ready to purchase it. 

some debt is okay, it lets nations maintain friendly international relations. however, the scale of the debt the US has accumulated is insane; the debt is not decreasing by any substantial amount anymore, and no matter what, that debt is going to catch up sooner or later.

[bryant.coleman]

some debt is okay, it lets nations maintain friendly international relations. however, the scale of the debt the US has accumulated is insane; the debt is not decreasing by any substantial amount anymore, and no matter what, that debt is going to catch up sooner or later.

As long as the debt repayments (principal amount + interest) stays within tolerable limits (lets say 20% or 30% of the government revenues), then it should be OK. Japan is still going strong, despite more than 60% of the annual government revenue being spent on debt repayment. And in the case of the United States, the exact amount of repayment is relatively small (when compared to the massive debt) since the bonds are issued for long term, and due to the low interest rates.

[Razick]

Well, let me ask you this:

I believe that the U.S. government spends *far* too much money (and that's basically a fact because our debt is out of control and our social programs heading towards bankruptcy despite record tax revenue). The Democrats want to waste even more money, and there is no chance of a third party candidate winning office.

Well.. that is the advantage you have, when your national currency is widely regarded as the reserve currency of the world. It is very easy to sell the 30-year or 20-year treasury bonds, at little or no interest. The Americans can accumulate as much debt as they want. There will always be people who are ready to purchase it. 

Not necessarily forever though. And our debt is no longer growing linearly, it's nearly quadrupled since 2000.

Even if it never causes a crisis, interest will consume a larger and larger portion of revenue. Eventually, we'll be forced to raise taxes because at some point debt will become a problem at the very least (if it's not already). Also, since most U.S. debt is owned by the U.S. public, there is a negative economic effect called "crowding-out."

[bryant.coleman]

Not necessarily forever though. And our debt is no longer growing linearly, it's nearly quadrupled since 2000.

Even if it never causes a crisis, interest will consume a larger and larger portion of revenue. Eventually, we'll be forced to raise taxes because at some point debt will become a problem at the very least (if it's not already). Also, since most U.S. debt is owned by the U.S. public, there is a negative economic effect called "crowding-out."

I hope that as the federal debt ballons out of control, then people would protest against wasteful government spending, such as the forced regime changes ($2 trillion in Iraq) and useless defense projects (such as the $1.3 trillion F-35 program). If Trump become the POTUS in 2016, then he might try to reduce the federal debt. But if Hillary become the president, then hell will break lose.

[Razick]

Not necessarily forever though. And our debt is no longer growing linearly, it's nearly quadrupled since 2000.

Even if it never causes a crisis, interest will consume a larger and larger portion of revenue. Eventually, we'll be forced to raise taxes because at some point debt will become a problem at the very least (if it's not already). Also, since most U.S. debt is owned by the U.S. public, there is a negative economic effect called "crowding-out."

I hope that as the federal debt ballons out of control, then people would protest against wasteful government spending, such as the forced regime changes ($2 trillion in Iraq) and useless defense projects (such as the $1.3 trillion F-35 program). If Trump become the POTUS in 2016, then he might try to reduce the federal debt. But if Hillary become the president, then hell will break lose.

Well, it's been out of control for a long time. We had some momentum to reduce the deficit in 2010 but since then voters have shifted back towards voting themselves more free stuff. Just look at how well Sanders is doing. People are always happier with unlimited free stuff then with fiscal responsibility so we'll just keep kicking the can down the road and probably even making it much, much worse.

And that's why I'm Republican, but they probably won't fix it either. The GOP isn't the "party of no" wasteful government irresponsibility and waste, they are the party of "slightly less." Amazing what passes for "far right extremism" these days. You balance your own personal checkbook and the media practically lynches you for being a radical tea party extremist.

[designerusa]

as well as all americans who love their country, i am a republican.

[BADecker]

No. I'm an elector, not a voter.