Rallies for Bernie Sanders aint free? WTF

[TNHarley]

Shouldn't he be buying the tickets for everyone? Why should they pay to see him when he wants to take so much of peoples money?
Doesn't the left say "practice what you preach" about the right? Shouldn't they be looking at this in disdain?

 

[Pogo]

only the Same Old Thing is free.

Want a "free" trip to Disney? Sure, just go along on our time-share sales pitch.

 

[Iceweasel]

It's better than making us pay for it.

 

[TNHarley]

It's better than making us pay for it.

well yea but that's not the point.

 

[TNHarley]

you have to pay to listen to him promise free shit

 

[Iceweasel]

It's better than making us pay for it.

well yea but that's not the point.

It will be if they get their way.

 

[Eaglewings]

All of these events have senior / student discounts except for the republican debates.

They feel if you can't afford to come, then they don't want you..

 

[Iceweasel]

All of these events have senior / student discounts except for the republican debates.

They feel if you can't afford to come, then they don't want you..

I would support that. No non property owners should be voting. That would clear up a lot of bullshit.

 

[mdk]

All of these events have senior / student discounts except for the republican debates.

They feel if you can't afford to come, then they don't want you..

I would support that. No non property owners should be voting. That would clear up a lot of bullshit.

How so? Does owning property somehow make one more qualified to vote? Not hardly.

 

[Iceweasel]

All of these events have senior / student discounts except for the republican debates.

They feel if you can't afford to come, then they don't want you..

I would support that. No non property owners should be voting. That would clear up a lot of bullshit.

How so? Does owning property somehow make one more qualified to vote? Not hardly.

Yes it does. It means you have skin in the game, as opposed to voting for government gifts payed for by others.

 

[TheOldSchool]

 

[mdk]

All of these events have senior / student discounts except for the republican debates.

They feel if you can't afford to come, then they don't want you..

I would support that. No non property owners should be voting. That would clear up a lot of bullshit.

How so? Does owning property somehow make one more qualified to vote? Not hardly.

Yes it does. It means you have skin in the game, as opposed to voting for government gifts payed for by others.

People that live in apartments their entire lives also pay taxes and have skin in the game. What about the elderly now living in group homes? Do they lose the right to vote since they do not own property anymore? The whole idea is silly and luckily is never going to come to pass.

 

[Eaglewings]

All of these events have senior / student discounts except for the republican debates.

They feel if you can't afford to come, then they don't want you..

I would support that. No non property owners should be voting. That would clear up a lot of bullshit.

How so? Does owning property somehow make one more qualified to vote? Not hardly.

Yes it does. It means you have skin in the game, as opposed to voting for government gifts payed for by others.

People that live in apartments their entire lives also pay taxes and have skin in the game. What about the elderly now living in group homes? Do they lose the right to vote since they do not own property anymore? The whole idea is silly and luckily is never going to come to pass.

I don't even know if they give or don't give senior / student discounts...lol I made it up...

 

[Iceweasel]

All of these events have senior / student discounts except for the republican debates.

They feel if you can't afford to come, then they don't want you..

I would support that. No non property owners should be voting. That would clear up a lot of bullshit.

How so? Does owning property somehow make one more qualified to vote? Not hardly.

Yes it does. It means you have skin in the game, as opposed to voting for government gifts payed for by others.

People that live in apartments their entire lives also pay taxes and have skin in the game. What about the elderly now living in group homes? Do they lose the right to vote since they do not own property anymore? The whole idea is silly and luckily is never going to come to pass.

If you own the apartment you are paying property taxes and know exactly what it's costing you. If you are renting you aren't involved directly, not paying for upkeep directly or know really what anything costs but rent and utilities. So you will be inclined to vote for benefits where a property owner will be inclined to vote to provide for less. As far as the elderly, if they owned for a while, but sold to retire I think they should still be able to vote.

 

[mdk]

All of these events have senior / student discounts except for the republican debates.

They feel if you can't afford to come, then they don't want you..

I would support that. No non property owners should be voting. That would clear up a lot of bullshit.

How so? Does owning property somehow make one more qualified to vote? Not hardly.

Yes it does. It means you have skin in the game, as opposed to voting for government gifts payed for by others.

People that live in apartments their entire lives also pay taxes and have skin in the game. What about the elderly now living in group homes? Do they lose the right to vote since they do not own property anymore? The whole idea is silly and luckily is never going to come to pass.

If you own the apartment you are paying property taxes and know exactly what it's costing you. If you are renting you aren't involved directly, not paying for upkeep directly or know really what anything costs but rent and utilities. So you will be inclined to vote for benefits where a property owner will be inclined to vote to provide for less. As far as the elderly, if they owned for a while, but sold to retire I think they should still be able to vote.

That though process doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. Paying rent on an apartment is paying for the upkeep of the property. They are also paying state and federal income taxes. Taxation without representation was a major gripe of ours when we decide to tell King George III to pound sand.

Why do the elderly get a pass if the don't own property anymore? Do you not think they use the power of their vote to ensure their Medicare benefits remain strong and enact? Of course they do. This is why this idea of property ownership as a prerequisite to vote is patently silly.

 

[Iceweasel]

I would support that. No non property owners should be voting. That would clear up a lot of bullshit.

How so? Does owning property somehow make one more qualified to vote? Not hardly.

Yes it does. It means you have skin in the game, as opposed to voting for government gifts payed for by others.

People that live in apartments their entire lives also pay taxes and have skin in the game. What about the elderly now living in group homes? Do they lose the right to vote since they do not own property anymore? The whole idea is silly and luckily is never going to come to pass.

If you own the apartment you are paying property taxes and know exactly what it's costing you. If you are renting you aren't involved directly, not paying for upkeep directly or know really what anything costs but rent and utilities. So you will be inclined to vote for benefits where a property owner will be inclined to vote to provide for less. As far as the elderly, if they owned for a while, but sold to retire I think they should still be able to vote.

That though process doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. Paying rent on an apartment is paying for the upkeep of the property. They are also paying state and federal income taxes. Taxation without representation was a major gripe of ours when we decide to tell King George III to pound sand.

Why do the elderly get a pass if the don't own property anymore? Do you not think they use the power of their vote to ensure their Medicare benefits remain strong and enact? Of course they do. This is why this idea of property ownership as a prerequisite to vote is patently silly.

It isn't the money, read it again, the point was knowing how things work and how much you are actually paying out to government. As a renter, you don't know. Or worse, don't care.

 

[mdk]

How so? Does owning property somehow make one more qualified to vote? Not hardly.

Yes it does. It means you have skin in the game, as opposed to voting for government gifts payed for by others.

People that live in apartments their entire lives also pay taxes and have skin in the game. What about the elderly now living in group homes? Do they lose the right to vote since they do not own property anymore? The whole idea is silly and luckily is never going to come to pass.

If you own the apartment you are paying property taxes and know exactly what it's costing you. If you are renting you aren't involved directly, not paying for upkeep directly or know really what anything costs but rent and utilities. So you will be inclined to vote for benefits where a property owner will be inclined to vote to provide for less. As far as the elderly, if they owned for a while, but sold to retire I think they should still be able to vote.

That though process doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. Paying rent on an apartment is paying for the upkeep of the property. They are also paying state and federal income taxes. Taxation without representation was a major gripe of ours when we decide to tell King George III to pound sand.

Why do the elderly get a pass if the don't own property anymore? Do you not think they use the power of their vote to ensure their Medicare benefits remain strong and enact? Of course they do. This is why this idea of property ownership as a prerequisite to vote is patently silly.

It isn't the money, read it again, the point was knowing how things work and how much you are actually paying out to government. As a renter, you don't know. Or worse, don't care.

No, I read your post and it is still patently silly. As if somehow not owning a home makes one unaware of how things work. I am not a cardiologist but I still know that the heart pumps blood. lol.

Who said I am a renter? I've owned by home for the last 8 years. I rented an apartment beforehand though.

Does this property requirement of yours also apply to members of the military that do not own property or live on the base? I bet it doesn't.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes it does. It means you have skin in the game, as opposed to voting for government gifts payed for by others.

People that live in apartments their entire lives also pay taxes and have skin in the game. What about the elderly now living in group homes? Do they lose the right to vote since they do not own property anymore? The whole idea is silly and luckily is never going to come to pass.

If you own the apartment you are paying property taxes and know exactly what it's costing you. If you are renting you aren't involved directly, not paying for upkeep directly or know really what anything costs but rent and utilities. So you will be inclined to vote for benefits where a property owner will be inclined to vote to provide for less. As far as the elderly, if they owned for a while, but sold to retire I think they should still be able to vote.

That though process doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. Paying rent on an apartment is paying for the upkeep of the property. They are also paying state and federal income taxes. Taxation without representation was a major gripe of ours when we decide to tell King George III to pound sand.

Why do the elderly get a pass if the don't own property anymore? Do you not think they use the power of their vote to ensure their Medicare benefits remain strong and enact? Of course they do. This is why this idea of property ownership as a prerequisite to vote is patently silly.

It isn't the money, read it again, the point was knowing how things work and how much you are actually paying out to government. As a renter, you don't know. Or worse, don't care.

No, I read your post and it is still patently silly. As if somehow not owning a home makes one unaware of how things work. I am not a cardiologist but I still know that the heart pumps blood. lol.

Who said I am a renter? I've owned by home for the last 8 years. I rented an apartment beforehand though.

Does this property requirement of yours also apply to members of the military that do not own property or live on the base? I bet it doesn't.

I wasn't saying you as in you personally. Military has the most skin in the game, of course they should vote. Knowing the heart pumps blood puts you on par with most American voters, 1 in 10 college graduates think Judge Judy is a Supreme Court justice. So age and maturity comes into play as well.

If the Donald gets elected I'm going to propose the idea (although he's probably thought of it). I'm also going to suggest he call it the Iceweasel Doctrine.

 

[mdk]

People that live in apartments their entire lives also pay taxes and have skin in the game. What about the elderly now living in group homes? Do they lose the right to vote since they do not own property anymore? The whole idea is silly and luckily is never going to come to pass.

If you own the apartment you are paying property taxes and know exactly what it's costing you. If you are renting you aren't involved directly, not paying for upkeep directly or know really what anything costs but rent and utilities. So you will be inclined to vote for benefits where a property owner will be inclined to vote to provide for less. As far as the elderly, if they owned for a while, but sold to retire I think they should still be able to vote.

That though process doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. Paying rent on an apartment is paying for the upkeep of the property. They are also paying state and federal income taxes. Taxation without representation was a major gripe of ours when we decide to tell King George III to pound sand.

Why do the elderly get a pass if the don't own property anymore? Do you not think they use the power of their vote to ensure their Medicare benefits remain strong and enact? Of course they do. This is why this idea of property ownership as a prerequisite to vote is patently silly.

It isn't the money, read it again, the point was knowing how things work and how much you are actually paying out to government. As a renter, you don't know. Or worse, don't care.

No, I read your post and it is still patently silly. As if somehow not owning a home makes one unaware of how things work. I am not a cardiologist but I still know that the heart pumps blood. lol.

Who said I am a renter? I've owned by home for the last 8 years. I rented an apartment beforehand though.

Does this property requirement of yours also apply to members of the military that do not own property or live on the base? I bet it doesn't.

I wasn't saying you as in you personally. Military has the most skin in the game, of course they should vote. Knowing the heart pumps blood puts you on par with most American voters, 1 in 10 college graduates think Judge Judy is a Supreme Court justice. So age and maturity comes into play as well.

If the Donald gets elected I'm going to propose the idea (although he's probably thought of it). I'm also going to suggest he call it the Iceweasel Doctrine.

I thoroughly, but respectfully, disagree with this plan of yours. Fun topic of discussion though. Cheers!