I prefer Joe Biden over Donald Trump

@iHEART Welp, I didn't watch it but it really come as no surprise.

no real surprise as to the preferred candidate on this forum :/

LOLLL. the last debate was hilarious... What a comedy show

@KaithlynMoore: Trump delievered what he promised??? LOL

@tuan_jinn dont expect the majority of football fans to understand this or even have legitimate arguments. Plus that might've been a bot created just because the word trump or biden was used.

That's the problem with the discourse. Everyone thinks that the opposing side uses bots whenever their ideas get contradicted. This is why the debate is broken and so polarized. Trump is a result of that, but populism and lack of democratic discourse had been rising before he came to power

lmao I said it for one person who conveniently made a new account just for this one discussion, didn't put in any real valuable information in the comment. Does that just seem a little weird to you? You must know we get a lot of spammers and bots on footyroom, have you not seen the random "VIAGRA PILLS BLAH BLAH BLAH" forum posts?

your reaction to me suggesting that it "might've been a bot" says a lot about your sensitivity to this issue. In reality you are right it is a result of a lot of actions & inactions that have led us to this point. Listening to experts, quite a few are using the argument that a lot of our policies and strategies of dealing with authoritarian governments have been misguided and poor. Like most western countries acted in the belief that if we traded and opened economic treaties with them then that would make them more democratic. Also I've heard the view that because democratic countries take for granted that we will always be democratic it has led to inaction and the perception of weakness which is especially bad when convincing other country's citizens that it's better to be a democratic country than authoritarian.

Honestly I can't be bothered discussing this shit on Footyroom, football fans are football fans. I've been involved in football my entire life from 6 years old. I know the types of people you find in the footballing world. I am of course speaking generally but its a stereotype I'm happy to stand by. Football fans aren't the most perceptive and emotional responses clouds any chance of a proper discussion. I'm not saying this about everybody but its definitely not worth anyone's time. This long post is an exception as there is an exception to every rule.

This election doesn't matter. There is one party with two faces; one red, one blue. The only difference is which group of corporations will bankroll their campaigns and demand policies to suit them. Everything else is a farce.

Bernie Sanders was the only candidate which could actually help the US. Socialism is not what most Americans think it is, and in fact is a bedrock component of the modern mixed economy. Every modern nation, from the UK to Germany, from Australia to the US, all employ a mixture of capitalist freedoms with socialist responsibilities. Every government program, from the military to the postal service, are all socialistic constructs.

To understand socialism, you have to understand where it came from. When British economic philosophers like Smith and Locke were busy inventing capitalism by advancing Dutch mercantilism, the world was still run by imperial regimes. Aristocracies and monarchies were the standard all across the world, Europe included, but in the case of the English we had been breaking the power of crowns since the 12th Century, and by the 19th Century the industrial revolution changed the paradigm of economics all across Europe. Whereas the old system had masters and serfs, the new system was owned by the capitalists and tycoons who were becoming fabulously rich with this explosion of technology and monetary systems. These capitalists are known as the bourgeoisie, and while the old aristocracies still held de facto power, de jure power was really held by these new, rich industrialists who had become wealthier than the old aristos had ever been.

But, there was a problem. Under the old system, the aristocracy owed serfs certain things, such as upkeep. Serfs were provided for by their masters, precisely because they had nothing to support themselves with. However, with the new capitalist system, every single person was considered their own master, and so when the poor were exploited into workhouses there was zero obligation for these employers to provide for their workers in the way that land-owners had supported their tenants. This created a new level of mass-poverty that was even worse than the drudgery of serfdom, at least in terms of life expectancy and quality of life for the poor.

As a result, all across Europe economists started coming up with ideas to attempt to redress this balance, and make sure that the poor masses are actually take care of. By the late 19th Century, in Germany the socialistic movement had become so influential that Bismarck enacted a series of policies intended to mollify (and fool) the electorate, who were in serious danger of electing a fully socialist leader. The backlash against the exploitation of the poor was immense, and ultimately is the reason why the First World War was the end of the imperial age. Across the Atlantic, over in the US, socialist policies were already taking root with figures like Teddy Roosevelt, who championed anti-trust laws to break up the monopolies of the day, and end the misery of the robber baron age (go look it up). That's what the Progressive party actually was, and in FDR we saw the New Deal and Social Security invented to attempt to repair the damage of the Great Depression (another financial crisis caused by banks and stockbrokers, go figure...).

Following the First World War, the majority of Europe and the First World (which is ultimately the former British Empire + friends) embraced universal suffrage, finally and fully replacing their imperial or elite leaders with those elected by the ENTIRE country, and even this was an expression of socialism, since for the first time all the poor folks actually had a say in the laws which govern their lives. This is how we actually seized the means of production, to quote Karl Marx, who is the bogeyman that conservatives always scream about whenever they want to discredit socialism, and following the Second World War, and the creation of the UN, every single peaceful, democratic economy in the world utilizes socialism in one form or another to protect its citizens from the ravages of the wealthy elites.

Karl Marx died in 1883, long before this came to pass. He lived still within the imperial age, even with the rise of the bourgeoisie, and therefore thought that his ideas could only come to pass with violent overthrow of the system. He didn't live to see the imperial system crash and fall apart in WW1, and the world embrace suffrage and 'people power'. We did. We live in a day and age where we get to direct the means of production through laws which protect the worker and the citizen. We have anti-trust, food and health regulations, minimum wage, taxes upon the wealthy to pay for welfare, unemployment services and so much more, all of which are democratic expressions of socialism. You know, democratic socialism, or social democracy. It's all the same.

The trouble is that ever since the 80s, with Reagan and Thatcher, the economics of the West turned sharply to the right. We slashed taxes on the rich, we removed all barriers between corporations and our politics, we globalized to exploit poor workers in other countries, and in doing so utterly screwed over all the poor workers in our own countries, who now have no jobs since their companies exported these jobs to countries where they can treat workers like shit and roll back all the gains that socialism and democracy have earned for people over here. They have bought up every media company to shill for them, and you, the voter, the citizen, the worker, the person, you don't matter to them.

Trump is just the Wall Street-friendly one, whom the left hates because he doesn't give a shit about being PC. Biden is the Google and Amazon-friendly one, working for the party who care more about winning votes than helping anyone. They're all just running the country for their own gain, and until we have a president who doesn't work for corporate America (like Sanders would have been), then all this will only continue to get worse and worse.

This election is a joke, either way. Nothing will change, and we will be fighting about the same problems in 4 years time, no matter who wins.

Joe Biden

Doesn’t matter who wins. USA will still continue bomb with drones around the world make saudi arabia biggest spender on weapons in the world.

Trueeeeee

Well, I think it's time for us to get back on this. Biden's winning so far with 264 votes to 214 Trumpers. Look how the tables turned on a lot of you's, lol.

@Lodatz
That's a full fledged economic history.. I thought I was reading an academic book. Appreciate the content

Hahaha magatards

bench press

They did say that if Biden didn't win by an huge margin, there would be debate about the results. Which is exactly what happened. Polls were kinda wrong once again, what with them giving Biden the win with an huge advance. Anyway, I really hope they will manage to solve this with the less chaos involved and hopefully once everything is done, there won't be unnecessary violence.

No matter how big or small the victory would have been for Biden, Trump would not concede and fight it. Everything is a fraud or conspiracy to him which is funny considering the conspiracy for him to win office in the first place.

He is the "take my ball and go home" type person and he will push as far as he can until practically, maybe even forcibly, removed from office.

No matter how big or small the victory would have been for Biden, Trump would not concede and fight it.

True, though I think its easier for him to do so if the results are closer. What I mean is that right now, they are people who are backing him but if Biden had won by a much larger margin, then it might have been tougher to do so and keep their credibility.

Honestly, I'm more worried to hear about so many americain blindly believing what Trump say and write about the election and postal ballot being a fraud.

I mean... it really feel like there is a mentality pf winning at all cost among the Trump supporter sand I find this a bit worrying.

Its also a shame to see the USA so divided. :(

@emo

Did you worry about millions of Americans that Russians helped Trump become president 4 years ago?

How was that plausible but this, mail fraud, isn’t?

Did you worry about millions of Americans that Russians helped Trump become president 4 years ago?

Did I really say that? Anyway, I informed myself a bit about the topic and now I don't believe Russian actually used fraud or hacking to elect Trump four year ago. I do think they could have influenced the information however to make Trump look especially good and Hillary especially bad. And seeing how many people decide to believe lie and fake news especially in the state, I do feel this could have make a difference.

As for mail fraud, I don't think its impossible but I strongly doubt that it would influence the results that much that it would mean that Trump would win.

Also, canceling every mail vote because there could be fraud instead of making an in depth inspection and removing only those that look fishy sound like a bigger fraud to me.

Honestly, if there is gonna a question of who would be more likely to use fraud and immoral means to be elected, I can tell that personally, I wouldn't trust the Trump camp at all.