|
Then why would you bring up flat taxes and free education? What in the world does that have to do with? Because you thought of it? No one is talking about flat taxes. It's not relevant. You were on the topic of Bernie and included flat taxes in the same paragraph and you don't expect me to misinterpret that?
Why am I always the one reading too much into what you say? Like on the million dollar thread, you seemed to be the only one to make up metaphorical situations, and when I countered yours you made the excuse that it was metaphorical and I'm reading too far into it. Of course I'm going to analyze this because it's straight up bull****. Your aloud to say whatever you want, but if I call you out on something it's my fault.
Trump is an asshole who wants to **** the country and you want to give an asshole the benefit of the doubt, while claiming that Bernie is nice, but you don't want to vote for him in the primaries. If you can't see how that doesn't make any sense then you're a lost cause. Why can't you give someone like Bernie benefit of the doubt. He has actually contributed to movements of this country.
I never said they didn't need to put effort into it. I just said they shouldn't exclude someone because they aren't as capable. Everyone should have the right to it. Just because it's a right doesn't mean it's handed to everyone on a silver platter.
|
I mentioned flat tax because I was talking about gov. programs/laws applying to "everyone" and I had just talked about Ben Carson wanting flat tax 2 minutes before in the previous post. I usually never even divide my responses into multiple paragraphs. I just recently started striving to do that, but it's just not how I write. Every single belief of mine is its own individual belief and may vary well change in another context. I never "countered" by making an excuse that you read too far. If you start implying opinions of mine based on something else I said, that is your own fault. Situations as complex as the ones in politicans cannot be defined with blanket statements. Each statement of mine applies to that given situation only. If you would like clarification on anything, I'd be happy to provide it, but it's not my fault if you infer things I never imply in my statements. I already voted in the Primaries and voted for Trump. I'm a "lost cause" because I voted for Trump (whom I like) rather than Bernie (whom I also like)? That doesn't make much sense. I'm perfectly capabale of liking more than one candidate. I've provided my reasoning for my favoring Trump plenty of times in my posts to you, so you should be able to go back and find why I like Trump. You keep saying that Trump will do nothing but Bernie will do everything he says. You don't know that, nor do I. Neither of them could end up fulfilling their promises. Please don't act like Sanders is a 100% actionable candidate when we won't know truly know until he's President. I get you're biased toward Trump so you continuously attack him, but I don't have bias towards any candidate when I look into them. I told you I'm all for government assistance, even to the point of full payment. I just believe it should be based on need, and there should be minimum requirements that are set to a high standard (my college requires a 2.0 GPA for most minimum standards, which honestly is a joke). I brought up minimum requirements because the gov. is notorious for handing out silver platters. Hence why I brought up Welfare. See, I get going on this stuff and I don't separate different topics. This is why you can't infer that one sentence is linked to another.
Also I basically have also given Bernie Sanders the benefit of the doubt because I said he would most likely get my vote if he won the nomination and Trump didn't. Just because I decided that I wanted to vote for Trump over Sanders doesn't mean I don't give Sanders the benefit of the doubt, or that I don't support him.