Bull Moose Party

[S019]

Pieman, I think he's after something more specific than "Everything" but two issues.

Labor, trade, foreign policy/war, welfare, I think healthcare, anti-corporatism, crime, need I go on?

Well trade and foreign policy don't operate on a left-right basis. Ultimately, to be isolationist in a global economy is economic and geopolitical suicide, thus trade and foreign policy operate on a smart and dumb axis. As for "anti-corporatism" what do you even mean? No one actually openly supports big business, what they do support is making it so that the cost for big business to invest in the economy is not too high, so that they actually contribute to the economy and we don't end up with economic stagnation. The rest have some logic behind them, even if I disagree on some of them, but there's really no excuse for trade and foreign policy, if you want to be a functioning country. I mean just look at my own country, we pulled out of TPP, and destroyed our chances to create a competing trade bloc to China. The politicians told us that we'd benefit from leaving TPP, but no, we got screwed over and China had the last laugh.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Pieman, I think he's after something more specific than "Everything" but two issues.

Labor, trade, foreign policy/war, welfare, I think healthcare, anti-corporatism, crime, need I go on?

Well trade and foreign policy don't operate on a left-right basis. Ultimately, to be isolationist in a global economy is economic and geopolitical suicide, thus trade and foreign policy operate on a smart and dumb axis. As for "anti-corporatism" what do you even mean? No one actually openly supports big business, what they do support is making it so that the cost for big business to invest in the economy is not too high, so that they actually contribute to the economy and we don't end up with economic stagnation. The rest have some logic behind them, even if I disagree on some of them, but there's really no excuse for trade and foreign policy, if you want to be a functioning country. I mean just look at my own country, we pulled out of TPP, and destroyed our chances to create a competing trade bloc to China. The politicians told us that we'd benefit from leaving TPP, but no, we got screwed over and China had the last laugh.

On the "smart and dumb" axis you are a dumb extremist. You support the Patriot Act and you support fighting in Middle Eastern warzones for 200 years.

[S019]

Pieman, I think he's after something more specific than "Everything" but two issues.

Labor, trade, foreign policy/war, welfare, I think healthcare, anti-corporatism, crime, need I go on?

Well trade and foreign policy don't operate on a left-right basis. Ultimately, to be isolationist in a global economy is economic and geopolitical suicide, thus trade and foreign policy operate on a smart and dumb axis. As for "anti-corporatism" what do you even mean? No one actually openly supports big business, what they do support is making it so that the cost for big business to invest in the economy is not too high, so that they actually contribute to the economy and we don't end up with economic stagnation. The rest have some logic behind them, even if I disagree on some of them, but there's really no excuse for trade and foreign policy, if you want to be a functioning country. I mean just look at my own country, we pulled out of TPP, and destroyed our chances to create a competing trade bloc to China. The politicians told us that we'd benefit from leaving TPP, but no, we got screwed over and China had the last laugh.

On the "smart and dumb" axis you are a dumb extremist. You support the Patriot Act and you support fighting in Middle Eastern warzones for 200 years.

Well the PATRIOT Act keeps us safe from terrorist threats, we are better off with it. You are 14, so I don't exactly expect you to understand this. As for fighting for 200 years, that is a comical strawman. The goal should've been to stay in Afghanistan for as long as was needed to ensure a transition to democracy. Abandoning the country is just morally bankrupt. Meanwhile, in other parts of the Middle East, we brought democracy to the nation of Iraq. Does anyone really think Iraq was better off under Saddam than now or that Afghanistan is better off now than it was under Hamid Karzai? This is a lot more complicated than "mUh I Am A PoPuLiSt, UsA BaD." Never mind that populism has never been an ideology, but a rhetorical strategy. The most classist person on Earth could be a "populist" if they pick their words wisely enough.

[Dr. MB]

Would the Bull Moose Party consider running some candidates in the April elections?

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Pieman, I think he's after something more specific than "Everything" but two issues.

Labor, trade, foreign policy/war, welfare, I think healthcare, anti-corporatism, crime, need I go on?

Well trade and foreign policy don't operate on a left-right basis. Ultimately, to be isolationist in a global economy is economic and geopolitical suicide, thus trade and foreign policy operate on a smart and dumb axis. As for "anti-corporatism" what do you even mean? No one actually openly supports big business, what they do support is making it so that the cost for big business to invest in the economy is not too high, so that they actually contribute to the economy and we don't end up with economic stagnation. The rest have some logic behind them, even if I disagree on some of them, but there's really no excuse for trade and foreign policy, if you want to be a functioning country. I mean just look at my own country, we pulled out of TPP, and destroyed our chances to create a competing trade bloc to China. The politicians told us that we'd benefit from leaving TPP, but no, we got screwed over and China had the last laugh.

On the "smart and dumb" axis you are a dumb extremist. You support the Patriot Act and you support fighting in Middle Eastern warzones for 200 years.

Well the PATRIOT Act keeps us safe from terrorist threats, we are better off with it. You are 14, so I don't exactly expect you to understand this. As for fighting for 200 years, that is a comical strawman. The goal should've been to stay in Afghanistan for as long as was needed to ensure a transition to democracy. Abandoning the country is just morally bankrupt. Meanwhile, in other parts of the Middle East, we brought democracy to the nation of Iraq. Does anyone really think Iraq was better off under Saddam than now or that Afghanistan is better off now than it was under Hamid Karzai? This is a lot more complicated than "mUh I Am A PoPuLiSt, UsA BaD." Never mind that populism has never been an ideology, but a rhetorical strategy. The most classist person on Earth could be a "populist" if they pick their words wisely enough.

How is what I said a strawman if you literally said what I said you said?

A C, he has definitely handled the Ukraine crisis well, but his bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal as well as the decision to leave at all were particularly awful.

Yes, instead we should've stayed there for twenty more years, lost thousands more people, and wasted trillions more dollars...

"wasted trillions of dollars," because providing foreign and humanitarian aid and building a nation is apparently a waste. This type of selfish attitude is exactly why we are seeing the world move away from humanitarianism and turn its back on human rights issues across the world, of course, it seems that you don't care for that. Anyways we should've stayed as long as was needed to turn Afghanistan into a flourishing nation with a stable democracy, I don't care if that takes 10 years, 20 years, 100 years, or 200 years.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Pieman, I think he's after something more specific than "Everything" but two issues.

Labor, trade, foreign policy/war, welfare, I think healthcare, anti-corporatism, crime, need I go on?

Do you even know my record on these issues to say that you're to the left of me? Healthcare is basically settled, so is crime, foreign affairs are very different than OTL, I literally started NAFTA renegotiation but that was thrown by the wayside, etc.

Anyway, I'm not responding to all the drivel and arguing above. I have nothing personal against you or the other members of this party but I had a slightly different vision in mind when I started it and the fact is none of the members other than myself really have much of a history or relationship with the left in-game. I got recruited into Old Labor to see what they have planned for the election and in light of the Kansas clusterf#ck.

[S019]

Pieman, I think he's after something more specific than "Everything" but two issues.

Labor, trade, foreign policy/war, welfare, I think healthcare, anti-corporatism, crime, need I go on?

Well trade and foreign policy don't operate on a left-right basis. Ultimately, to be isolationist in a global economy is economic and geopolitical suicide, thus trade and foreign policy operate on a smart and dumb axis. As for "anti-corporatism" what do you even mean? No one actually openly supports big business, what they do support is making it so that the cost for big business to invest in the economy is not too high, so that they actually contribute to the economy and we don't end up with economic stagnation. The rest have some logic behind them, even if I disagree on some of them, but there's really no excuse for trade and foreign policy, if you want to be a functioning country. I mean just look at my own country, we pulled out of TPP, and destroyed our chances to create a competing trade bloc to China. The politicians told us that we'd benefit from leaving TPP, but no, we got screwed over and China had the last laugh.

On the "smart and dumb" axis you are a dumb extremist. You support the Patriot Act and you support fighting in Middle Eastern warzones for 200 years.

Well the PATRIOT Act keeps us safe from terrorist threats, we are better off with it. You are 14, so I don't exactly expect you to understand this. As for fighting for 200 years, that is a comical strawman. The goal should've been to stay in Afghanistan for as long as was needed to ensure a transition to democracy. Abandoning the country is just morally bankrupt. Meanwhile, in other parts of the Middle East, we brought democracy to the nation of Iraq. Does anyone really think Iraq was better off under Saddam than now or that Afghanistan is better off now than it was under Hamid Karzai? This is a lot more complicated than "mUh I Am A PoPuLiSt, UsA BaD." Never mind that populism has never been an ideology, but a rhetorical strategy. The most classist person on Earth could be a "populist" if they pick their words wisely enough.

How is what I said a strawman if you literally said what I said you said?

A C, he has definitely handled the Ukraine crisis well, but his bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal as well as the decision to leave at all were particularly awful.

Yes, instead we should've stayed there for twenty more years, lost thousands more people, and wasted trillions more dollars...

"wasted trillions of dollars," because providing foreign and humanitarian aid and building a nation is apparently a waste. This type of selfish attitude is exactly why we are seeing the world move away from humanitarianism and turn its back on human rights issues across the world, of course, it seems that you don't care for that. Anyways we should've stayed as long as was needed to turn Afghanistan into a flourishing nation with a stable democracy, I don't care if that takes 10 years, 20 years, 100 years, or 200 years.

It's a rhetorical technique called hyperbole. To begin with we wouldn't even be there anywhere near 200 years, because a military presence anywhere near that long would wipe out basically any threats in the area.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Pieman, I think he's after something more specific than "Everything" but two issues.

Labor, trade, foreign policy/war, welfare, I think healthcare, anti-corporatism, crime, need I go on?

Well trade and foreign policy don't operate on a left-right basis. Ultimately, to be isolationist in a global economy is economic and geopolitical suicide, thus trade and foreign policy operate on a smart and dumb axis. As for "anti-corporatism" what do you even mean? No one actually openly supports big business, what they do support is making it so that the cost for big business to invest in the economy is not too high, so that they actually contribute to the economy and we don't end up with economic stagnation. The rest have some logic behind them, even if I disagree on some of them, but there's really no excuse for trade and foreign policy, if you want to be a functioning country. I mean just look at my own country, we pulled out of TPP, and destroyed our chances to create a competing trade bloc to China. The politicians told us that we'd benefit from leaving TPP, but no, we got screwed over and China had the last laugh.

On the "smart and dumb" axis you are a dumb extremist. You support the Patriot Act and you support fighting in Middle Eastern warzones for 200 years.

Well the PATRIOT Act keeps us safe from terrorist threats, we are better off with it. You are 14, so I don't exactly expect you to understand this. As for fighting for 200 years, that is a comical strawman. The goal should've been to stay in Afghanistan for as long as was needed to ensure a transition to democracy. Abandoning the country is just morally bankrupt. Meanwhile, in other parts of the Middle East, we brought democracy to the nation of Iraq. Does anyone really think Iraq was better off under Saddam than now or that Afghanistan is better off now than it was under Hamid Karzai? This is a lot more complicated than "mUh I Am A PoPuLiSt, UsA BaD." Never mind that populism has never been an ideology, but a rhetorical strategy. The most classist person on Earth could be a "populist" if they pick their words wisely enough.

How is what I said a strawman if you literally said what I said you said?

A C, he has definitely handled the Ukraine crisis well, but his bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal as well as the decision to leave at all were particularly awful.

Yes, instead we should've stayed there for twenty more years, lost thousands more people, and wasted trillions more dollars...

"wasted trillions of dollars," because providing foreign and humanitarian aid and building a nation is apparently a waste. This type of selfish attitude is exactly why we are seeing the world move away from humanitarianism and turn its back on human rights issues across the world, of course, it seems that you don't care for that. Anyways we should've stayed as long as was needed to turn Afghanistan into a flourishing nation with a stable democracy, I don't care if that takes 10 years, 20 years, 100 years, or 200 years.

It's a rhetorical technique called hyperbole. To begin with we wouldn't even be there anywhere near 200 years, because a military presence anywhere near that long would wipe out basically any threats in the area.

Lmao ok mr 17.6% approval

[West_Midlander]

I should have polled presidential candidates' approval ratings also...if anyone wants to do that, please feel free.