Democrats Are For The Rich

[Caine]

You are right about blacks block-voting for Democrats like sheep-somewhere in the 90%+ range in EVERY election.

But blacks only make up around 12% of the population. 92% of the million-dollar+ checks go to Democrats. This can't be explained away by pointing out a small minority of people ALSO voting for Democrats.

And yes, this entire thread operates on the notion that who gives you money indicates who you represent, which I don't find the least bit controversial.

This is why in the Senate today the Democrats were defending "middle america" because there are cuts in the deficit reduction spending bill which are cutting medicaid/medicare benefits, cutting spending that makes a College Education more accesible for those who aren't spoon fed by Daddy and Mommy. Of course, all the Republicans wanted to "reduce the deficit" but at the same time cut taxes (mostly for the rich.. hrmmm..) which ended up at a negative balance. So all thier deficit reduction meant nothing because the proposed tax cuts eat away at those savings and beyond.

 

[Caine]

You are right about blacks block-voting for Democrats like sheep-somewhere in the 90%+ range in EVERY election.

But blacks only make up around 12% of the population. 92% of the million-dollar+ checks go to Democrats. This can't be explained away by pointing out a small minority of people ALSO voting for Democrats.

And yes, this entire thread operates on the notion that who gives you money indicates who you represent, which I don't find the least bit controversial.

Also, by this accusation you are saying that poor people are represented by nobody because they can't afford to donate money, they are too busy living paycheck to paycheck.
I disagree with you.

 

[crasster]

There is only one major party in the United States

Repbulicrats

All these issues distract all you people so that you can't see the truth.

The issue is our last election was rigged. Both John F. Kerry and George w. Bush were members of Skull and Bones. 650 living members at any given time.

Out of 290,000,000 Americans our candidates were from a group of 650 men.

Just look it up, I'm serious.


At the top of politics exists a small group of owners.


So Democrats are for the rich... Yes. Republicans for the Rich yes.

But the points are that the elite of the world can get richer off of you.

All are controlled by rich powerful corporate entities who work with each other.

www.theyrule.net - Damn scary site.

 

[aquapub]

Also, by this accusation you are saying that poor people are represented by nobody because they can't afford to donate money, they are too busy living paycheck to paycheck.
I disagree with you.

I am not talking about the poorest of the poor. I am talking about middle America. The numbers clearly indicate that the middle class is represented by Republicans, and that the filthy rich are represented by Democrats.

And yes, the poorest of the poor ARE represented by nobody. They don't pay taxes and they don't vote so no one tends to genuinely care about their (usually self-created) plight.

 

[Comrade Brian]

Oh, please. We're not going to start this pathetic arguement again.

 

[Engimo]

I am not talking about the poorest of the poor. I am talking about middle America. The numbers clearly indicate that the middle class is represented by Republicans, and that the filthy rich are represented by Democrats.

And yes, the poorest of the poor ARE represented by nobody. They don't pay taxes and they don't vote so no one tends to genuinely care about their (usually self-created) plight.

And these numbers are....?

A source, please.

 

[Caine]

I am not talking about the poorest of the poor. I am talking about middle America. The numbers clearly indicate that the middle class is represented by Republicans, and that the filthy rich are represented by Democrats.

And yes, the poorest of the poor ARE represented by nobody. They don't pay taxes and they don't vote so no one tends to genuinely care about their (usually self-created) plight.

Ummm.....
How do people who live paycheck to paycheck NOT pay taxes????

Im confused. Your twisting what I said again. As usual.

 

[George_Washington]

Ummm.....
How do people who live paycheck to paycheck NOT pay taxes????

Im confused. Your twisting what I said again. As usual.

He most likely is referring to the absolute poorest people, the ones who are unemployed, unskilled, and border line homeless. These people don't pay taxes just because they aren't employed to pay taxes.

 

[alphieb]

This is why in the Senate today the Democrats were defending "middle america" because there are cuts in the deficit reduction spending bill which are cutting medicaid/medicare benefits, cutting spending that makes a College Education more accesible for those who aren't spoon fed by Daddy and Mommy. Of course, all the Republicans wanted to "reduce the deficit" but at the same time cut taxes (mostly for the rich.. hrmmm..) which ended up at a negative balance. So all thier deficit reduction meant nothing because the proposed tax cuts eat away at those savings and beyond.

Thank you Caine, I could not have articulated it better. This is sooooo true.

 

[aquapub]

Ummm.....
How do people who live paycheck to paycheck NOT pay taxes????

Im confused. Your twisting what I said again. As usual.

The poorest of the poor pay no taxes. That is a fact. It is why there was that whole debate about whether the poorest of the poor should be included in Bush's tax cuts. Bush hadn't included them-because they don't pay taxes-and some people raised the issue that it was unfair to not include these welfare recipients and such.

Since the idea had no logical basis, it was ignored, but the argument illustrates that the very poor DON'T pay taxes.


So, actually Alphieb, it is soooo false. :mrgreen:


And people who make less than $20,000/year get nearly every cent back, so....the poorest of the poor PAY NO TAXES.

 

[Axismaster]

The poorest of the poor pay no taxes. That is a fact. It is why there was that whole debate about whether the poorest of the poor should be included in Bush's tax cuts. Bush hadn't included them-because they don't pay taxes-and some people raised the issue that it was unfair to not include these welfare recipients and such.

Since the idea had no logical basis, it was ignored, but the argument illustrates that the very poor DON'T pay taxes.


So, actually Alphieb, it is soooo false. :mrgreen:

Don't even start on Bush's "tax cuts." Those were about the lamest excuses of tax cuts I have heard of in American history. A real tax cut would be abolishing the income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax.

 

[Caine]

The poorest of the poor pay no taxes. That is a fact. It is why there was that whole debate about whether the poorest of the poor should be included in Bush's tax cuts. Bush hadn't included them-because they don't pay taxes-and some people raised the issue that it was unfair to not include these welfare recipients and such.

Since the idea had no logical basis, it was ignored, but the argument illustrates that the very poor DON'T pay taxes.


So, actually Alphieb, it is soooo false. :mrgreen:

I never mentioned Welfare Recipients when you had responded to me.
I mentioned people who live paycheck and paycheck.

So, either you are lacking logic in two ways.

1. You think that only people living on Welfare are living paycheck to paycheck.

2. You think poor people with jobs don't pay taxes.

I never mentioned WELFARE. I mentioned people who live paycheck to paycheck.
I know people who have two jobs and have to spend most all of thier money on bills/food/gas, and by the time those are taken out, they have, maybe 10 bucks to spend on themselves. Then they have to turn around and do it all over again the next time they are paid, and on and on and on.

 

[Engimo]

I am not talking about the poorest of the poor. I am talking about middle America. The numbers clearly indicate that the middle class is represented by Republicans, and that the filthy rich are represented by Democrats.

And yes, the poorest of the poor ARE represented by nobody. They don't pay taxes and they don't vote so no one tends to genuinely care about their (usually self-created) plight.

Still looking for those numbers and a source, aquapub.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Another piece of evidence that Democrats truly represent the wealthy, elitist snobs of the world is the fundraising data from the 2004 Presidential election cited in Byron York's, "The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy" in the 3rd chapter called, Shell Game.

64% of donations that were under $200 went to Republicans, while only 35% went to Democrats. 92% of the checks that were over $1 million went to Democrats.

The notion that Democrats represent the average Joe is nothing short of an astonishingly successful lie.

Because you nut job, working people usually don't have a couple of hundred dollars laying around to give to a politician. Republicans raise their money via pioneers. You know those one hundred or so people who each said they were worth 100,000 in donations to Republicans in 2004. Otherwise, people who have enough power and influence to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for guys like Bush. Democrats usually depend on those who are wealthy, but who are not greedy. The exeception being Howard Dean who out raised every other candidate in the 2004 primaries, yet did so via donations that averaged less than 50 dollars each.

Ask yourself, why do you vote Republican? Probably for yourself. You want a tax cut. Or you want gays not to get married. Or you want to use government as a vehicle to promote your religious beliefs or cultural bias.

Now, why would a milionare contribute to the Democratic Party? What does he or she stand to gain? It is certain that they wont get a tax cut for the top bracket out of it. So why would they contribute to Democrats? Probably because they believe in a more equal and just society where you have a responsibility to each other as well as yourself.

 

[Navy Pride]

Whats ironic is democrats like to say they are for the poor....They love to spend money on failed programs for the poor as long as its not there money and the taxpayers........

 

[Engimo]

Whats ironic is democrats like to say they are for the poor....They love to spend money on failed programs for the poor as long as its not there money and the taxpayers........

Er... Democrats don't pay taxes? Most people do, so wouldn't that make it their money too?

 

[Navy Pride]

Er... Democrats don't pay taxes? Most people do, so wouldn't that make it their money too?

Well I could care less if it makes you feel good to spend their money on failed programs but I don't want you to spend mine..........

 

[Engimo]

Well I could care less if it makes you feel good to spend their money on failed programs but I don't want you to spend mine..........

You're telling me, bud.

 

[Navy Pride]

You're telling me, bud.

A lot of dems voted for thar program my friend..........

 

[Caine]

A lot of dems voted for thar program my friend..........

Hrmm..... So absolutely NO Social Economic programs have ever recieved a Republican vote? EVER?

Thats what you seem to be saying by pointing the finger of hypocracy at the Democrats without looking at your own party, the Republican party.

 

[Navy Pride]

Hrmm..... So absolutely NO Social Economic programs have ever recieved a Republican vote? EVER?

Thats what you seem to be saying by pointing the finger of hypocracy at the Democrats without looking at your own party, the Republican party.

Of course they have been a few like Snow and Chaffee but very few.....

 

[Caine]

Of course they have been a few like Snow and Chaffee but very few.....

So, the plans like social security and welfare were origionally passed with only a "few" Republican votes?

Sounds weird to me... not sure if I believe it, maybe I'll look it up.

But Mr. Wizard here says so, and we know that he was right about Monica Lewinsky being young enough to be Clinton's Granddaughter.

 

[Engimo]

So, the plans like social security and welfare were origionally passed with only a "few" Republican votes?

Sounds weird to me... not sure if I believe it, maybe I'll look it up.

But Mr. Wizard here says so, and we know that he was right about Monica Lewinsky being young enough to be Clinton's Granddaughter.

rof Well, you have to remember that at the time of the original creation of Welfare and Social Security, the Republicans were much more like the Democrats of today - there was a switch in the mid 20th century during the Civil Rights Movement.

Regardless, Social Security and Welfare were largely bipartisan initiatives that came out of the economic disaster that was the Great Depression.

 

[Caine]

Regardless, Social Security and Welfare were largely bipartisan initiatives that came out of the economic disaster that was the Great Depression.

Thats the point I was going to get to, I was tempted to actually attempt to look up some sort of voting record, although I don't know if its out there.

Mr. Pride thinks that Republicans have rarely voted in favor of these programs.

 

[Engimo]

Thats the point I was going to get to, I was tempted to actually attempt to look up some sort of voting record, although I don't know if its out there.

Mr. Pride thinks that Republicans have rarely voted in favor of these programs.

http://www.ssa.gov/history/tally.html

If you scroll down, you can see that the Social Security Act was passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.