If republicans claim to be so opposed to socialism, why is it that they are so content with...

[Harry Dresden]

If you were to actually speak or actually listen to a conservative, they would tell you that, first and foremost, the duty of the government is to protect its citizens.

So they will always push for as much military spending as possible. Try to get them to take a dollar out of the military budget and you'll have a big ol' fight, unfortunately.

I'm pretty sure that anyone who isn't crazed by their partisan ideology knows this.

I wonder why it's so important for you to be a troll. You try so dang hard.

.

What is a troll to you? Is PoliticalChic a troll?

Sure. People who are more interested in flinging poo than in civil discourse.

I don't know what you think you're accomplishing. Surely you can't be attempting to stimulate civil discourse with your behavior, so it must be the poo thing.

It's probably safe to surmise, then, that you'd prefer to make divisions even worse, and I wonder why.

Your call, I was just curious. I'm fascinated by the behavior of hardcore partisan ideologues.

.

I'm asking legitimate questions. I target republicans because, to me, they are the greater of two evils by far.

Wake up! They are both evil.

Your premise that Rs are the greater evil is foolish, when your realize the Ds control much of the media and all of Hollywood and academia.

Dems are evil but they at least push policies that make sense. Sure they are corrupt and hypocritical, but I can at least agree with them.

here it is again.....no problems backing lowlife corrupt crooks....but if some righty says the same thing about Republicans.....there is something wrong with that....you aint no moderate Billy.....you are fairly far left.....pretty soon you and dean will be stuck in the same corner.....

 

[frigidweirdo]

No.

He was hammered by the right because his pull out failed to maintain 'gains' in Iraq and led to essentially another civil war.

The details of that can fill a book and there have been many threads devoted to should have/shouldn't have/never should have etc so that discussion really does not belong here but boiling it down to what you just did is rather dishonest.

But then the same people who will criticise Obama, probably won't criticise Bush for causing the major problems in the first place. A decent policy would have meant that the post war period would have been less harsh and less long for it to lead to something resembling normality.

Obama didn't have much choice in pulling out.

Of course he had a choice. I will put the responsibility for Obama's decisions and actions with Obama and the responsibility for Bush's decisions and actions with Bush. Stating that others might not do so is no excuse to do the same.

The fact is that Obama screwed up in Iraq. There is no way around that. Bush screwed up majorly by going there in the first place and that has earned him enough ire as to be called one of the worst presidents ever by a LOT of people. I think that may very well flush out as well - all this war America is embroiled in is largely a result of Bush policies. Obama, however, took on that responsibility when he took office and I don't see where he has made any real improvements.

What choice did he have? Turn around to the Iraq govt and say "fuck you, we're America and we do what the hell we like and that agreement we had, ha, we don't care, we're America, we don't have to give a damn"?

You know there's a reason why Obama is far more popular internationally than Bush right?

Has Obama made improvements? To a certain extent. The chart above shows where Obama put his cards, more in cooperation with other nations rather than just being gung ho and not giving a damn about anyone else. That counts for a lot. The president is far stronger in international affairs than domestic. Bush was a domestic president with some wars. Obama is more an international president coping with the effects of Bush's wars and being less domestic.

 

[Avatar4321]

Defense spending is socialism? Where do you even begin addressing such an ignorant argument?

 

[Billy000]

...spending trillions on defense each year?

Oh it's because they are hypocritical scumbags.

If you were to actually speak or actually listen to a conservative, they would tell you that, first and foremost, the duty of the government is to protect its citizens.

So they will always push for as much military spending as possible. Try to get them to take a dollar out of the military budget and you'll have a big ol' fight, unfortunately.

I'm pretty sure that anyone who isn't crazed by their partisan ideology knows this.

I wonder why it's so important for you to be a troll. You try so dang hard.

.

What is a troll to you? Is PoliticalChic a troll?

Sure. People who are more interested in flinging poo than in civil discourse.

I don't know what you think you're accomplishing. Surely you can't be attempting to stimulate civil discourse with your behavior, so it must be the poo thing.

It's probably safe to surmise, then, that you'd prefer to make divisions even worse, and I wonder why.

Your call, I was just curious. I'm fascinated by the behavior of hardcore partisan ideologues.

.

I'm asking legitimate questions. I target republicans because, to me, they are the greater of two evils by far.

i asked you a legitimate question too Billy in your other thread.....look at the answer i got from you.....remember when you called Democrats "corrupt but hypercritical assholes"?......and all i did was ask how you could back people like that when you admit they are assholes just like the other guys....MOST people,except,the farther right and left.....would have a problem with backing someone like that.....you kinda got pissed at me billy....and ignored me the rest of the thread.......must have hit one of them "far" left nerves.....the audacity of me......

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand? I support raising the minimum wage, not cutting food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits. So what if they happen to be corrupt?

Don't you see how insane your reasoning on my politics are? In your perfect world one can only Either be a centrist or a radical. I am moderate liberal. Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left.

 

[Harry Dresden]

If you were to actually speak or actually listen to a conservative, they would tell you that, first and foremost, the duty of the government is to protect its citizens.

So they will always push for as much military spending as possible. Try to get them to take a dollar out of the military budget and you'll have a big ol' fight, unfortunately.

I'm pretty sure that anyone who isn't crazed by their partisan ideology knows this.

I wonder why it's so important for you to be a troll. You try so dang hard.

.

What is a troll to you? Is PoliticalChic a troll?

Sure. People who are more interested in flinging poo than in civil discourse.

I don't know what you think you're accomplishing. Surely you can't be attempting to stimulate civil discourse with your behavior, so it must be the poo thing.

It's probably safe to surmise, then, that you'd prefer to make divisions even worse, and I wonder why.

Your call, I was just curious. I'm fascinated by the behavior of hardcore partisan ideologues.

.

I'm asking legitimate questions. I target republicans because, to me, they are the greater of two evils by far.

i asked you a legitimate question too Billy in your other thread.....look at the answer i got from you.....remember when you called Democrats "corrupt but hypercritical assholes"?......and all i did was ask how you could back people like that when you admit they are assholes just like the other guys....MOST people,except,the farther right and left.....would have a problem with backing someone like that.....you kinda got pissed at me billy....and ignored me the rest of the thread.......must have hit one of them "far" left nerves.....the audacity of me......

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand? I support raising the minimum wage, not cutting food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits. So what if they happen to be corrupt?

Don't you see how insane your reasoning on my politics are? In your perfect world one can only Either be a centrist or a radical. I am moderate liberal. Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left.

I back their policies. Not them
if you back their policies you back them billy....and your buddy dean will tell you that....he has said that to me about the other party more than once
So what if they happen to be corrupt?
so what?........you are empowering these corrupt guys by saying you agree with them....so you dont care about their character as long as they put forth a policy you like?.....thats also insane billy....." i wont say anything about their corruptness because i agree with a few of their policies".....what about those their corruptness affects?...do they matter?.....

 

[Staidhup]

...spending trillions on defense each year?

Oh it's because they are hypocritical scumbags.

If you cant figure that our your as stupid as Gruber proclaimed.

 

[Billy000]

What is a troll to you? Is PoliticalChic a troll?

Sure. People who are more interested in flinging poo than in civil discourse.

I don't know what you think you're accomplishing. Surely you can't be attempting to stimulate civil discourse with your behavior, so it must be the poo thing.

It's probably safe to surmise, then, that you'd prefer to make divisions even worse, and I wonder why.

Your call, I was just curious. I'm fascinated by the behavior of hardcore partisan ideologues.

.

I'm asking legitimate questions. I target republicans because, to me, they are the greater of two evils by far.

i asked you a legitimate question too Billy in your other thread.....look at the answer i got from you.....remember when you called Democrats "corrupt but hypercritical assholes"?......and all i did was ask how you could back people like that when you admit they are assholes just like the other guys....MOST people,except,the farther right and left.....would have a problem with backing someone like that.....you kinda got pissed at me billy....and ignored me the rest of the thread.......must have hit one of them "far" left nerves.....the audacity of me......

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand? I support raising the minimum wage, not cutting food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits. So what if they happen to be corrupt?

Don't you see how insane your reasoning on my politics are? In your perfect world one can only Either be a centrist or a radical. I am moderate liberal. Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left.

I back their policies. Not them
if you back their policies you back them billy....and your buddy dean will tell you that....he has said that to me about the other party more than once
So what if they happen to be corrupt?
so what?........you are empowering these corrupt guys by saying you agree with them....so you dont care about their character as long as they put forth a policy you like?.....thats also insane billy....." i wont say anything about their corruptness because i agree with a few of their policies".....what about those their corruptness affects?...do they matter?.....

You're missing the point. I am not defending them being corrupt when I say "so what". I am saying the fact that they are corrupt is irrelevant if all I support are some of their policies. Not all their policies. Some of them. The people themselves are douche bags but I like some of the stuff they put forth. That is what makes them the LESSER OF TWO EVILS.

 

[Londoner]

...spending trillions on defense each year?

Oh it's because they are hypocritical scumbags.

Republicans singlehandedly added bailout insurance for the banks to the latest spending bill. They have always supported policies that socialize the cost/risk of business. Try asking a Republican about the subsidy and bailout system that has been in place since Reagan, and you will get a blank stare. [Republicans have never understood the Lobbying Industrial Complex, and the degree to which our wealthiest corporations own government. They've been told that government persecutes business. Fucking morons! They don't understand that our politicians work for the corporate wealth that funds their elections.] Try asking a Republican about how lobbying works, and the number of subsidies that are handed out to big business - and you will get a blank stare. Big Government has always propped up and supported the largest profit makers. Why do you think the largest pharmaceutical and oil companies pour trillions of dollars into getting Republicans elected?

Republican politicians have always supported corporate welfare at the level of policy - but you never hear about this on FOX News, which takes advantage of morons who don't have the time, intelligence or patience to study actually policy. This is why most Republican voters have no idea that their party put a provision in the latest spending bill to put the taxpayers on the hook for the mistakes of the large banks. How is it possible that Republicans don't know that their leadership gave the banks bailout insurance? You'd think they'd question their information sources, but they never do.

Do you know how much our country has been damaged because Republicans have no idea what their party is actually doing . . . ?

 

[Billy000]

...spending trillions on defense each year?

Oh it's because they are hypocritical scumbags.

Republicans singlehandedly added bailout insurance for the banks to the latest spending bill. They have always supported policies that socialize the cost/risk of business. Try asking a Republican about the subsidy and bailout system that has been in place since Reagan, and you will get a blank stare. [Republicans have never understood the Lobbying Industrial Complex, and the degree to which our wealthiest corporations own government. They've been told that government persecutes business. Fucking morons! They don't understand that our politicians work for the corporate wealth that funds their elections.] Try asking a Republican about how lobbying works, and the number of subsidies that are handed out to big business - and you will get a blank stare. Big Government has always propped up and supported the largest profit makers. Why do you think the largest pharmaceutical and oil companies pour trillions of dollars into getting Republicans elected?

Republican politicians have always supported corporate welfare at the level of policy - but you never hear about this on FOX News, which takes advantage of morons who don't have the time, intelligence or patience to study actually policy. This is why most Republican voters have no idea that their party put a provision in the latest spending bill to put the taxpayers on the hook for the mistakes of the large banks. How is it possible that Republicans don't know that their leadership gave the banks bailout insurance? You'd think they'd question their information sources, but they never do.

Do you know how much our country has been damaged because Republicans have no idea what their party is actually doing . . . ?

Spot on. It is not at all hyperbole to say republican officials exist because most of their voters are low informed idiots. Dumb/average intelligent people outnumber smart people. That is why Fox News is so popular.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Sure. People who are more interested in flinging poo than in civil discourse.

I don't know what you think you're accomplishing. Surely you can't be attempting to stimulate civil discourse with your behavior, so it must be the poo thing.

It's probably safe to surmise, then, that you'd prefer to make divisions even worse, and I wonder why.

Your call, I was just curious. I'm fascinated by the behavior of hardcore partisan ideologues.

.

I'm asking legitimate questions. I target republicans because, to me, they are the greater of two evils by far.

i asked you a legitimate question too Billy in your other thread.....look at the answer i got from you.....remember when you called Democrats "corrupt but hypercritical assholes"?......and all i did was ask how you could back people like that when you admit they are assholes just like the other guys....MOST people,except,the farther right and left.....would have a problem with backing someone like that.....you kinda got pissed at me billy....and ignored me the rest of the thread.......must have hit one of them "far" left nerves.....the audacity of me......

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand? I support raising the minimum wage, not cutting food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits. So what if they happen to be corrupt?

Don't you see how insane your reasoning on my politics are? In your perfect world one can only Either be a centrist or a radical. I am moderate liberal. Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left.

I back their policies. Not them
if you back their policies you back them billy....and your buddy dean will tell you that....he has said that to me about the other party more than once
So what if they happen to be corrupt?
so what?........you are empowering these corrupt guys by saying you agree with them....so you dont care about their character as long as they put forth a policy you like?.....thats also insane billy....." i wont say anything about their corruptness because i agree with a few of their policies".....what about those their corruptness affects?...do they matter?.....

You're missing the point. I am not defending them being corrupt when I say "so what". I am saying the fact that they are corrupt is irrelevant if all I support are some of their policies. Not all their policies. Some of them. The people themselves are douche bags but I like some of the stuff they put forth. That is what makes them the LESSER OF TWO EVILS.

Billy if your Senator is a corrupt politician and you know this,but you vote for the guy anyway because you like some of his policies,are you not supporting the guy as well?........its the same way with the party.....if you say they are corrupt hypercritical basterds but like some of their policies do you not have to vote for them to get those policies? .....if yes you are supporting those same corrupt people.....to say their corruptness is irrelevant does not say much for you.....if you knew your Senator or Rep was a pedophile but you liked his policies, would you still vote for the guy?.....would him being a pedophile be irrelevant?......

 

[Harry Dresden]

...spending trillions on defense each year?

Oh it's because they are hypocritical scumbags.

Republicans singlehandedly added bailout insurance for the banks to the latest spending bill. They have always supported policies that socialize the cost/risk of business. Try asking a Republican about the subsidy and bailout system that has been in place since Reagan, and you will get a blank stare. [Republicans have never understood the Lobbying Industrial Complex, and the degree to which our wealthiest corporations own government. They've been told that government persecutes business. Fucking morons! They don't understand that our politicians work for the corporate wealth that funds their elections.] Try asking a Republican about how lobbying works, and the number of subsidies that are handed out to big business - and you will get a blank stare. Big Government has always propped up and supported the largest profit makers. Why do you think the largest pharmaceutical and oil companies pour trillions of dollars into getting Republicans elected?

Republican politicians have always supported corporate welfare at the level of policy - but you never hear about this on FOX News, which takes advantage of morons who don't have the time, intelligence or patience to study actually policy. This is why most Republican voters have no idea that their party put a provision in the latest spending bill to put the taxpayers on the hook for the mistakes of the large banks. How is it possible that Republicans don't know that their leadership gave the banks bailout insurance? You'd think they'd question their information sources, but they never do.

Do you know how much our country has been damaged because Republicans have no idea what their party is actually doing . . . ?

Spot on. It is not at all hyperbole to say republican officials exist because most of their voters are low informed idiots. Dumb/average intelligent people outnumber smart people. That is why Fox News is so popular.

someone who supports corrupt politicians can be said to be an idiot too.....and a smart person with integrity would not knowingly vote for those he/she considers corrupt.....in spite of their policies.....

 

[Billy000]

I'm asking legitimate questions. I target republicans because, to me, they are the greater of two evils by far.

i asked you a legitimate question too Billy in your other thread.....look at the answer i got from you.....remember when you called Democrats "corrupt but hypercritical assholes"?......and all i did was ask how you could back people like that when you admit they are assholes just like the other guys....MOST people,except,the farther right and left.....would have a problem with backing someone like that.....you kinda got pissed at me billy....and ignored me the rest of the thread.......must have hit one of them "far" left nerves.....the audacity of me......

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand? I support raising the minimum wage, not cutting food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits. So what if they happen to be corrupt?

Don't you see how insane your reasoning on my politics are? In your perfect world one can only Either be a centrist or a radical. I am moderate liberal. Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left.

I back their policies. Not them
if you back their policies you back them billy....and your buddy dean will tell you that....he has said that to me about the other party more than once
So what if they happen to be corrupt?
so what?........you are empowering these corrupt guys by saying you agree with them....so you dont care about their character as long as they put forth a policy you like?.....thats also insane billy....." i wont say anything about their corruptness because i agree with a few of their policies".....what about those their corruptness affects?...do they matter?.....

You're missing the point. I am not defending them being corrupt when I say "so what". I am saying the fact that they are corrupt is irrelevant if all I support are some of their policies. Not all their policies. Some of them. The people themselves are douche bags but I like some of the stuff they put forth. That is what makes them the LESSER OF TWO EVILS.

Billy if your Senator is a corrupt politician and you know this,but you vote for the guy anyway because you like some of his policies,are you not supporting the guy as well?........its the same way with the party.....if you say they are corrupt hypercritical basterds but like some of their policies do you not have to vote for them to get those policies? .....if yes you are supporting those same corrupt people.....to say their corruptness is irrelevant does not say much for you.....if you knew your Senator or Rep was a pedophile but you liked his policies, would you still vote for the guy?.....would him being a pedophile be irrelevant?......

See now you're making the false accusation that I vote for corrupt democrats.

 

[gipper]

...spending trillions on defense each year?

Oh it's because they are hypocritical scumbags.

Republicans singlehandedly added bailout insurance for the banks to the latest spending bill. They have always supported policies that socialize the cost/risk of business. Try asking a Republican about the subsidy and bailout system that has been in place since Reagan, and you will get a blank stare. [Republicans have never understood the Lobbying Industrial Complex, and the degree to which our wealthiest corporations own government. They've been told that government persecutes business. Fucking morons! They don't understand that our politicians work for the corporate wealth that funds their elections.] Try asking a Republican about how lobbying works, and the number of subsidies that are handed out to big business - and you will get a blank stare. Big Government has always propped up and supported the largest profit makers. Why do you think the largest pharmaceutical and oil companies pour trillions of dollars into getting Republicans elected?

Republican politicians have always supported corporate welfare at the level of policy - but you never hear about this on FOX News, which takes advantage of morons who don't have the time, intelligence or patience to study actually policy. This is why most Republican voters have no idea that their party put a provision in the latest spending bill to put the taxpayers on the hook for the mistakes of the large banks. How is it possible that Republicans don't know that their leadership gave the banks bailout insurance? You'd think they'd question their information sources, but they never do.

Do you know how much our country has been damaged because Republicans have no idea what their party is actually doing . . . ?

You could state the EXACT same points about the Ds. Most D pols are just as corrupt as R pols and most of their voters are just as uninformed.

 

[ninja007]

Military is the responsibility of any gov. you nitwit. That and A FEW other things like roads and hospitals and the like.

 

[ninja007]

i asked you a legitimate question too Billy in your other thread.....look at the answer i got from you.....remember when you called Democrats "corrupt but hypercritical assholes"?......and all i did was ask how you could back people like that when you admit they are assholes just like the other guys....MOST people,except,the farther right and left.....would have a problem with backing someone like that.....you kinda got pissed at me billy....and ignored me the rest of the thread.......must have hit one of them "far" left nerves.....the audacity of me......

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand? I support raising the minimum wage, not cutting food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits. So what if they happen to be corrupt?

Don't you see how insane your reasoning on my politics are? In your perfect world one can only Either be a centrist or a radical. I am moderate liberal. Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left.

I back their policies. Not them
if you back their policies you back them billy....and your buddy dean will tell you that....he has said that to me about the other party more than once
So what if they happen to be corrupt?
so what?........you are empowering these corrupt guys by saying you agree with them....so you dont care about their character as long as they put forth a policy you like?.....thats also insane billy....." i wont say anything about their corruptness because i agree with a few of their policies".....what about those their corruptness affects?...do they matter?.....

You're missing the point. I am not defending them being corrupt when I say "so what". I am saying the fact that they are corrupt is irrelevant if all I support are some of their policies. Not all their policies. Some of them. The people themselves are douche bags but I like some of the stuff they put forth. That is what makes them the LESSER OF TWO EVILS.

Billy if your Senator is a corrupt politician and you know this,but you vote for the guy anyway because you like some of his policies,are you not supporting the guy as well?........its the same way with the party.....if you say they are corrupt hypercritical basterds but like some of their policies do you not have to vote for them to get those policies? .....if yes you are supporting those same corrupt people.....to say their corruptness is irrelevant does not say much for you.....if you knew your Senator or Rep was a pedophile but you liked his policies, would you still vote for the guy?.....would him being a pedophile be irrelevant?......

See now you're making the false accusation that I vote for corrupt democrats.

The bolded is like saying wet rain.

 

[FA_Q2]

No.

He was hammered by the right because his pull out failed to maintain 'gains' in Iraq and led to essentially another civil war.

The details of that can fill a book and there have been many threads devoted to should have/shouldn't have/never should have etc so that discussion really does not belong here but boiling it down to what you just did is rather dishonest.

But then the same people who will criticise Obama, probably won't criticise Bush for causing the major problems in the first place. A decent policy would have meant that the post war period would have been less harsh and less long for it to lead to something resembling normality.

Obama didn't have much choice in pulling out.

Of course he had a choice. I will put the responsibility for Obama's decisions and actions with Obama and the responsibility for Bush's decisions and actions with Bush. Stating that others might not do so is no excuse to do the same.

The fact is that Obama screwed up in Iraq. There is no way around that. Bush screwed up majorly by going there in the first place and that has earned him enough ire as to be called one of the worst presidents ever by a LOT of people. I think that may very well flush out as well - all this war America is embroiled in is largely a result of Bush policies. Obama, however, took on that responsibility when he took office and I don't see where he has made any real improvements.

What choice did he have? Turn around to the Iraq govt and say "fuck you, we're America and we do what the hell we like and that agreement we had, ha, we don't care, we're America, we don't have to give a damn"?

You know there's a reason why Obama is far more popular internationally than Bush right?

Has Obama made improvements? To a certain extent. The chart above shows where Obama put his cards, more in cooperation with other nations rather than just being gung ho and not giving a damn about anyone else. That counts for a lot. The president is far stronger in international affairs than domestic. Bush was a domestic president with some wars. Obama is more an international president coping with the effects of Bush's wars and being less domestic.

No. He could have worked a deal out but he was not interested because he wanted to pull out.

Obama is more popular than Bush (both internationally and here at home) because a burning turd on your porch is more popular than bush. Many republicans outright disavowed the party because of him and most still refuse to say much about bush because they know how unpopular he is and was. Popularity, however, is utterly meaningless. I would bet that
Jennifer Lawrence is pretty popular right now all over the place. That doesn't really mean jack.

I am not going to evaluate the president, his actions or how I vote/support politicians based off how many idiots they can get to like them. Particularly those in other nations who are not concerned about the general welfare of America but more concerned with their own nations (as they should be).

 

[Wildman]

...spending trillions on defense each year?

Oh it's because they are hypocritical scumbags.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
the only hypocritical scumbags are you traitorous fucking liberscum

do you even have any concept of what "DEFENSE" is ?

i thought not

 

[Wildman]

...spending trillions on defense each year?

Oh it's because they are hypocritical scumbags.

Or it is because it is their constitutional obligation to provide for defense.

That said you could have a done a lot better, but you're a tier 11 intellectual so you're forgiven. Carry on with your 'tardation.

It's in the constitution to spend near 2 trillion a year?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
what is in the Constitution is to do what is needed, if it's $13,874.13 or $1,673,902,813,437.99 we do what ever is NEEDED !! got it now ?

i doubt it because you, billy zero, zero, zero are a brain dead wilting vegetable. tripple ZEROS is a very apt title for you. .....

 

[Wildman]

That covers a huge range of programs. Food stamps is only 68 billion.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

only 68 billion......?

ONLY ??

for craps sake it should be ONLY $.000001

 

[Wildman]

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand? I support raising the minimum wage, not cutting food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits. So what if they happen to be corrupt?

Don't you see how insane your reasoning on my politics are? In your perfect world one can only Either be a centrist or a radical. I am moderate liberal. Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand?

Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left