I’ve said time and time again that very few people are keeping up with the actual facts surrounding each candidate, the details on their policies, their histories, etc.
As a result, some people believe that Sanders is a fan of Castro, and Obama is a Muslim.
If you believe that Trump is a fascist, no that’s actually true. It’s not a hit-job, it’s just Trump being an idiot. You arrive at that conclusion by doing basic research and reading his quotes.

You arrive at the conclusion that Obama is a Muslim by mindlessly absorbing the republican message on daily TV.
You arrive at the conclusion that Sanders loves the killer at Sandy Hook by mindlessly adsorbing the Hillary message in newspapers and other media.
You arrive at the idea that Hillary is a flip-flop who will shit 7 mothers of black teens out her ass when necessary simply by following her actions and messages.
You arrive at the idea that Cruz will turn the country into a Christian ISIS just by listening to his speeches.

I think it is easy to tell which side of the aisle you stand on. Your listed arguments are only in support of democrats, and the others are insults to republicans. You're not exactly analyzing and going through the facts like you state nobody else does, but apparently only you do. What you listed isn't exactly from an objective point of view. Lets be honest.

Edit: Only read the initial post before posting this. Afterwards read the rest. I am sorry for your current position, nobody wants to be somewhere like that and I hope things turn around for you.

I say objectivety over neutrality. Many Republican standpoints are not even objectivetly debatable. They are made debatable through a "neutral"-ity, when people act like all positions carry the same worth.

And same is to be said about some liberal arguments. I think we ought to look at the facts and not affiliate things too much with labels.

Some polls show that many Republicans (voters not politicians) are more liberal on some issues.

I'm just going to be here by the sideline, and commenting on that Gordon Gekko video. I actually found that video disturbing than enlightening.

Velocity of money. Why does that matter? The more money circulate hands, the more it's good for the economy. Corporations can report 'high earnings' that 'beat estimates'. Stock market is going up due to 'better than expected' performance. However, this is what I find disturbing:

Did you not hear from Gordon himself that lower income people spend more than they earn? If a low income family spends 100% of its income (or 110%!) which means all those money are back to the market rather than saved. Good for the economy, sure, but this will increase the income gap among the poor and the rich! Guess where all that money is going to? Back to Gordon's pocket, so he can stash more to his offshore accounts. How is this a solution?

Sanders also propose higher tax across all income levels to support his universal health care, means less money to people's pocket. $15/hour? More money to the low income earners, more money to be spent, will increase inflation, but also encourages corporations to replace labors with robots and automation. In 5-10 years, I won't be surprised if we are ordering from machines at the McD, and have self-driving taxis, and an increase in unemployment. It's coming.

That's my take on that video. I am even more surprised that the commentators are just focusing on the 'velocity of money' and not reading between the lines. Ooh, Gordon is feeling the bern, suddenly his opinion is agreeable. If he had supported Trump, we would call him that white rich Wall-Street bastard.

All of these 'solutions' might sound good at first. $15/hour why not? Universal health care? Why not. But they will snap back and hit you in the face just like the real estate bubble.

Respectable Judge Jeanine Pirro about Lying, Crooked Hillary Clinton:

Respectable Judge Jeanine Pirro about Lying, Crooked Hillary Clinton:

Crooked Hillary is a Trump word, but it is one of the few things he gets right. :p

hahahaha