A nice start would be a forum that encouraged honest, respectful discussion among aggies with different opinions, rather then someone asks a question and the first 20 responses are people saying how stupid and evil the other party is. This is just useless spinning of wheels that drives the wedge deeper and deeper between Americans.

Fenrir said:

---

Yup, sounds like a resounding success. Only millions of people dead or paralyzed in the time it took to produce a vaccine. Meanwhile we have privately funded companies revolutionizing medicine over the decades to the point we have a vaccine for a virus in 12 months from initial discovery. Really hate those for profit companies racing to discover medical breakthroughs meanwhile other nations with socialized medicine are busy sitting with their thumbs up their asses.

---

Free market is the most efficient way for the economy to run, but what if a government 10 years ago said make a vaccine for SARS, make it easily modifiable to new coronaviruses, we don't care what it costs? (Yes I realize there was already research on these new rna vaccines)

That's literally a lie.

utopia and a pet unicorn named sparkles or glitter

MuckRaker96 said:

---

A nice start would be a forum that encouraged honest, respectful discussion among aggies with different opinions, rather then someone asks a question and the first 20 responses are people saying how stupid and evil the other party is. This is just useless spinning of wheels that drives the wedge deeper and deeper between Americans.

---

AgBMF42 said:

---

Free market is the most efficient way for the economy to run, but what if a government 10 years ago said make a vaccine for SARS, make it easily modifiable to new coronaviruses, we don't care what it costs? (Yes I realize there was already research on these new rna vaccines)

---

Profit motive


There is literally no end to what one might research with unlimited funds that has potential to impact people for the better

I'm sure there have been people and research involved with SARS related virology since it first reared its head

It can't all be done, people make choices on what they think is likely and what has the potential to return profit. That's why a lot of drugs and therapies are so expensive starting out, they are trying to recoup some of the enormous research and development cost. Do some continue to profit after their investment has paid off? Sure, but why shouldn't they?

MuckRaker96 said:

---

A nice start would be a forum that encouraged honest, respectful discussion among aggies with different opinions, rather then someone asks a question and the first 20 responses are people saying how stupid and evil the other party is. This is just useless spinning of wheels that drives the wedge deeper and deeper between Americans.

---

While I agree with the spirit of your post, it should be pretty easy for a Democrat to shut the crowd up if they could logically defend their stances. They rarely even try, and most that do fall back on emotional arguments.

96AgGrad said:

---

MuckRaker96 said:

---

A nice start would be a forum that encouraged honest, respectful discussion among aggies with different opinions, rather then someone asks a question and the first 20 responses are people saying how stupid and evil the other party is. This is just useless spinning of wheels that drives the wedge deeper and deeper between Americans.

---

While I agree with the spirit of your post, it should be pretty easy for a Democrat to shut the crowd up if they could logically defend their stances. They rarely even try, and most that do fall back on emotional arguments.

---

That places a huge burden on anyone who has different ideas. It isn't easy to describe and explain complex topics in a way that makes sense to people who aren't invested in learning about them. So why should I bother if I am not first proffered the most basic level of respect and interest.

Your entire "emotional arguments" idea is just a red herring that allows the echo chamber to fester.

For example, someone earlier in the thread expressed that single payer healthcare has already been implemented and worked well in almost every major country. That's a perfectly logical and provable argument. Then the trolls swarmed in bleating about free market in short sentences, and you are here talking about Democrats not arguing in good faith. I believe it's quite the opposite.

Txag12345 said:

---

96AgGrad said:

---

MuckRaker96 said:

---

A nice start would be a forum that encouraged honest, respectful discussion among aggies with different opinions, rather then someone asks a question and the first 20 responses are people saying how stupid and evil the other party is. This is just useless spinning of wheels that drives the wedge deeper and deeper between Americans.

---

While I agree with the spirit of your post, it should be pretty easy for a Democrat to shut the crowd up if they could logically defend their stances. They rarely even try, and most that do fall back on emotional arguments.

---

That places a huge burden on anyone who has different ideas. It isn't easy to describe and explain complex topics in a way that makes sense to people who aren't invested in learning about them. So why should I bother if I am not first proffered the most basic level of respect and interest.

Your entire "emotional arguments" idea is just a red herring that allows the echo chamber to fester.

For example, someone earlier in the thread expressed that single payer healthcare has already been implemented and worked well in almost every major country. That's a perfectly logical and provable argument. Then the trolls swarmed in bleating about free market in short sentences, and you are here talking about Democrats not arguing in good faith. I believe it's quite the opposite.

---

A throwaway claim isn't an argument. If it's provable, prove it. If it's not, stay away from that scary F16 group.

Edit: I understand that logical discussions can devolve into nuances about what is effective and what is not. We rarely even get to that point.

StingLikeABee said:

---

hawk1689 said:

---

StingLikeABee said:

---

Reload8098 said:

---

I'd like to know what outcome Aggie Democrats desire/believe in.
Socialism?
GND (eliminate fossil fuels)?
One party rule?
Government healthcare?
Use of violence to control those who speak out against you?
Desire to destroy a Republic or at least what's left of it?
Compromise is out the window if it doesn't meet your agenda?
Reparations?
Free college education?

I'd really like to know what you believe in.

---

Libertarian here, although I'm sure to most of y'all I will be labeled liberal. It's ok.

I want a lot of things that won't happen. So realistically, I just want to go back to normal. Bring back Bush. Bring back Clinton. Hell, stick Pence in there. I don't give a flying Fk. I just want a normal, boring 4 years where I'm not reminded of the dumpster fire that is the Trump presidency.

---

Nothing in your statements even remotely reflects the values of the Libertarian Party.

---

That's how bad Donald Trump is. He can make a Ron Paul voter cast a ballot for Biden. Trump is the antithesis of a pro-liberty president. his strategy and method for attaining power is as far from the libertarian ideal as we've seen. To me, this is the ultimate lesser of two evils.

---

Calling you out StingABee. I challenge you to name 3 things *supported by facts* that make Donald Trump "bad". Baseless allegations will not count.

Wearamaskaggie said:

---

Idk man, when you put it that way. I guess all of them?

---

You believe in socialism?

Holy ****, that's pathetic.

It also tells me you don't really understand what socialism is.

MuckRaker96 said:

---

A nice start would be a forum that encouraged honest, respectful discussion among aggies with different opinions, rather then someone asks a question and the first 20 responses are people saying how stupid and evil the other party is. This is just useless spinning of wheels that drives the wedge deeper and deeper between Americans.

---

Oh you mean like the entire media and the Democrats and the Liberals telling us for four years what an idiot Trump is and how horrible we are for supporting him and that we're basically white supremacists and racist and horrible people and now should be punished?

You mean like that?

Isn't the government the middleman in your example?

96AgGrad said:

---

Txag12345 said:

---

96AgGrad said:

---

MuckRaker96 said:

---

A nice start would be a forum that encouraged honest, respectful discussion among aggies with different opinions, rather then someone asks a question and the first 20 responses are people saying how stupid and evil the other party is. This is just useless spinning of wheels that drives the wedge deeper and deeper between Americans.

---

While I agree with the spirit of your post, it should be pretty easy for a Democrat to shut the crowd up if they could logically defend their stances. They rarely even try, and most that do fall back on emotional arguments.

---

That places a huge burden on anyone who has different ideas. It isn't easy to describe and explain complex topics in a way that makes sense to people who aren't invested in learning about them. So why should I bother if I am not first proffered the most basic level of respect and interest.

Your entire "emotional arguments" idea is just a red herring that allows the echo chamber to fester.

For example, someone earlier in the thread expressed that single payer healthcare has already been implemented and worked well in almost every major country. That's a perfectly logical and provable argument. Then the trolls swarmed in bleating about free market in short sentences, and you are here talking about Democrats not arguing in good faith. I believe it's quite the opposite.

---

A throwaway claim isn't an argument. If it's provable, prove it. If it's not, stay away from that scary F16 group.

Edit: I understand that logical discussions can devolve into nuances about what is effective and what is not. We rarely even get to that point.

---

Do you see how your response was much easier to write than mine? "If it's probable, prove it" doesn't amount to much, and you can easily google it yourself.

Further, it's not even my claim and you're trying to act like what I said doesn't have bearing on this discussion. You didn't address my point at all, you just threw it aside and created your own narrative about all democrats being afraid of discussion.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

e=mc2 said:

---

Anyone asking liberals a question and expecting honesty is a fool. They are all liars.

---

This type of post should not be allowed. At best it's trolling and worst it's hyper negative and hateful. There are plenty of folks that are Democrats that are good people, honest people, and people of character. They disagree with your politics and you treat them like dirt. It's almost like this place is a kindergarten playground.

---

You are one to criticize! That is their opinion. I don't agree with the "They are all liars" part, but it is still their opinion. It appears your view is that because you are obviously offended by that comment it must be censored. What a sad, sad world we live in. Grow up!

No, i mean the people this forum who went to the same university and who i fervently hope can rise above name calling and shaming. I realize that is not really how most of this functions, and i dont identify as a democrat, but is it so necessary to transfer your passion for or against certain candidates, idealolgies, and policies into belittling and attempting to humiliate other posters? What is to be gained there?

A non-profiting middle man, yes.

There are occasional threads that are started, often directly calling out a poster in the title, that can be decent for a page or two

But recently, everything that has potential devolves into those who attack someone for not being pro-life or that women should not be allowed to vote.

There is no real discussion. It is just pontificating to see who can get the most blue stars with the best post excoriating liberals and letting them know how classless, degenerate, and evil they are.

For all the screaming and pontificating posters on here say about liberals doing everything based on feels, being told I support pedophilia is really enlightening of the mindset of a few dozen posters.

There is rarely discussion to be had with this batch of people who showed up when Trump became President

Txag12345 said:

---

96AgGrad said:

---

Txag12345 said:

---

96AgGrad said:

---

MuckRaker96 said:

---

A nice start would be a forum that encouraged honest, respectful discussion among aggies with different opinions, rather then someone asks a question and the first 20 responses are people saying how stupid and evil the other party is. This is just useless spinning of wheels that drives the wedge deeper and deeper between Americans.

---

While I agree with the spirit of your post, it should be pretty easy for a Democrat to shut the crowd up if they could logically defend their stances. They rarely even try, and most that do fall back on emotional arguments.

---

That places a huge burden on anyone who has different ideas. It isn't easy to describe and explain complex topics in a way that makes sense to people who aren't invested in learning about them. So why should I bother if I am not first proffered the most basic level of respect and interest.

Your entire "emotional arguments" idea is just a red herring that allows the echo chamber to fester.

For example, someone earlier in the thread expressed that single payer healthcare has already been implemented and worked well in almost every major country. That's a perfectly logical and provable argument. Then the trolls swarmed in bleating about free market in short sentences, and you are here talking about Democrats not arguing in good faith. I believe it's quite the opposite.

---

A throwaway claim isn't an argument. If it's provable, prove it. If it's not, stay away from that scary F16 group.

Edit: I understand that logical discussions can devolve into nuances about what is effective and what is not. We rarely even get to that point.

---

Do you see how your response was much easier to write than mine? "If it's probable, prove it" doesn't amount to much, and you can easily google it yourself.

Further, it's not even my claim and you're trying to act like what I said doesn't have bearing on this discussion. You didn't address my point at all, you just threw it aside and created your own narrative about all democrats being afraid of discussion.

---

A) I never said it was your claim
B) You sound like you are more worried about hurt feelings than getting to the meat of the discussion. I am open-minded about anyone's opinion if they can produce facts and data to support it.
C) "Google it yourself" is not a terribly persuasive method, if someone's goal is to educate others about a better way

MuckRaker96 said:

---

No, i mean the people this forum who went to the same university and who i fervently hope can rise above name calling and shaming. I realize that is not really how most of this functions, and i dont identify as a democrat, but is it so necessary to transfer your passion for or against certain candidates, idealolgies, and policies into belittling and attempting to humiliate other posters? What is to be gained there?

---

Oh you mean those on here calling us Trumpsters. Trumpkins, pathetic for supporting Orangeman bad? Like that?

annie88 said:

---

MuckRaker96 said:

---

No, i mean the people this forum who went to the same university and who i fervently hope can rise above name calling and shaming. I realize that is not really how most of this functions, and i dont identify as a democrat, but is it so necessary to transfer your passion for or against certain candidates, idealolgies, and policies into belittling and attempting to humiliate other posters? What is to be gained there?

---

Oh you mean those on here calling us Trumpsters. Trumpkins, pathetic for supporting Orangeman bad? Like that?

---

Im talking about everyone and each person as an individual.. each person accountable for what they themselves do in this forum, without pointing a finger at what "they" are doing.

MuckRaker96 said:

---

annie88 said:

---

MuckRaker96 said:

---

No, i mean the people this forum who went to the same university and who i fervently hope can rise above name calling and shaming. I realize that is not really how most of this functions, and i dont identify as a democrat, but is it so necessary to transfer your passion for or against certain candidates, idealolgies, and policies into belittling and attempting to humiliate other posters? What is to be gained there?

---

Oh you mean those on here calling us Trumpsters. Trumpkins, pathetic for supporting Orangeman bad? Like that?

---

Im talking about everyone and each person as an individual.. each person accountable for what they themselves do in this forum, without pointing a finger at what "they" are doing.

---

Like you?

96AgGrad said:

---

A) I never said it was your claim
B) You sound like you are more worried about hurt feelings than getting to the meat of the discussion. I am open-minded about anyone's opinion if they can produce facts and data to support it.
C) "Google it yourself" is not a terribly persuasive method, if someone's goal is to educate others about a better way

---

You clearly are not open-minded, because you can't take it upon yourself to consider someone else's opinion unless they write a research paper about it. We live in a world where almost any information is just one click away, and most of the time you can find out if a claim is credible or not very quickly.

In a reasonable discussion on an online forum generally devoid of experts on this kind of subject matter, you should try to share the burden of relevant information wherever you can. Else it becomes apparent that your goal is not actually reasonable discussion.

Whatever. If you didn't want a serious discussion you could have just said so up front.

96AgGrad said:

---

Whatever. If you didn't want a serious discussion you could have just said so up front.

---

What serious discussion is to be had when I am told I am a liar on page one?

Txag12345 said:

---

96AgGrad said:

---

A) I never said it was your claim
B) You sound like you are more worried about hurt feelings than getting to the meat of the discussion. I am open-minded about anyone's opinion if they can produce facts and data to support it.
C) "Google it yourself" is not a terribly persuasive method, if someone's goal is to educate others about a better way

---

You clearly are not open-minded, because you can't take it upon yourself to consider someone else's opinion unless they write a research paper about it. We live in a world where almost any information is just one click away, and most of the time you can find out if a claim is credible or not very quickly.

In a reasonable discussion on an online forum generally devoid of experts on this kind of subject matter, you should try to share the burden of relevant information wherever you can. Else it becomes apparent that your goal is not actually reasonable discussion.

---

Way too many words.

Not an Aggie.

annie88 said:

---

MuckRaker96 said:

---

annie88 said:

---

MuckRaker96 said:

---

No, i mean the people this forum who went to the same university and who i fervently hope can rise above name calling and shaming. I realize that is not really how most of this functions, and i dont identify as a democrat, but is it so necessary to transfer your passion for or against certain candidates, idealolgies, and policies into belittling and attempting to humiliate other posters? What is to be gained there?

---

Oh you mean those on here calling us Trumpsters. Trumpkins, pathetic for supporting Orangeman bad? Like that?

---

Im talking about everyone and each person as an individual.. each person accountable for what they themselves do in this forum, without pointing a finger at what "they" are doing.

---

Like you?

---

Absolutely like me. I'm just as guilty as belittling comments and intentionally criticizing someone's viewpoints as anyone else here.

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/12/10/1958372/0/en/Canada-s-health-care-wait-times-eclipsed-20-weeks-in-2019-second-longest-wait-ever-recorded.html

https://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2019/04/01/britains-version-of-medicare-for-all-is-collapsing/amp/

https://www.aihw.gov.au/news-media/media-releases/2019/december/more-patients-longer-waiting-times-for-both-electi

https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/600x383/

"When it comes to treating sick patients, it's clear that the American health care system outperforms single-payer systems. "

96AgGrad said:

---

Whatever. If you didn't want a serious discussion you could have just said so up front.

---

Literally the OP.

Reload8098 said:

---

I'd really like to know what you believe in.

---

annie88 said:

---

Wearamaskaggie said:

---

Idk man, when you put it that way. I guess all of them?

---

You believe in socialism?

Holy ****, that's pathetic.

It also tells me you don't really understand what socialism is.

---

I don't think you know what it is

https://globalnews.ca/news/3339881/long-wait-times-for-surgery-depends-on-where-you-live/

Quote:

---

Last month, Nova Scotia auditor general Michael Pickup sounded an alarm over the wait times. People in the province needing a hip replacement can expect to wait 750 days while a knee replacement can take 800 days, a number far above the national average of 182 days.

"Knees and hips are a huge, huge area impacting so many people and the quality of life," said Pickup.

"There are people behind these numbers, they aren't just numbers."

TWEET THIS
Brett Skinner, founder of the Canadian Health Policy Institute, agrees.

"The report emphasizes how well our system is doing in reaching certain benchmarks for various procedures," said Skinner.

"We see figures like knee replacement 73 per cent of patients (nationally) are within the benchmark period what's the flipside of that? That 27 per cent of patients are not within the benchmark."


Considering there's an average of 60,000 knee replacements annually in Canada, that means more than 15,000 Canadians had to wait more than the benchmark 182 days.

---

6 months for joint replacement is the benchmark in Canada and they can't even do that 27% of the time.

No thanks.

e=mc2 said:

---

Anyone asking liberals a question and expecting honesty is a fool. They are all liars.

---

This.

Wearamaskaggie said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Wearamaskaggie said:

---

Idk man, when you put it that way. I guess all of them?

---

You believe in socialism?

Holy ****, that's pathetic.

It also tells me you don't really understand what socialism is.

---

I don't think you know what it is

---

Oh I do and anyone who would ever support socialism knows nothing of history.

Reload8098 said:

---

I'd like to know what outcome Aggie Democrats desire/believe in.
Socialism?
GND (eliminate fossil fuels)?
One party rule?
Government healthcare?
Use of violence to control those who speak out against you?
Desire to destroy a Republic or at least what's left of it?
Compromise is out the window if it doesn't meet your agenda?
Reparations?
Free college education?

I'd really like to know what you believe in.

---

They do not what they believe in.

annie88 said:

---

Wearamaskaggie said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Wearamaskaggie said:

---

Idk man, when you put it that way. I guess all of them?

---

You believe in socialism?

Holy ****, that's pathetic.

It also tells me you don't really understand what socialism is.

---

I don't think you know what it is

---

Oh I do and anyone who would ever support socialism knows nothing of history.

---

I think when most democrats say "socialism" what they really mean is Norway or Switzerland which are free-market capitalist who have generous welfare programs, but there's a lot of key differences between the US and Nordic countries that have to be considered.