Election of 1912 vs. 2012

[auditor0007]

In 1912 the socialist party captured 6% of the popular vote, by comparison...

100 years later they captured 51% of the vote. How do we account for the United States becoming so radicalized in a scant 100 years?

Are you fuckin' stupid?

The Socialist candidate in 2012 was Stewart Alexander, who got 4430 votes. I had to look that up, being as how that represents somewhere around one-third of one hundredth of one percent. Or about eighteen hundred times less than Debs got in 1912.

The party you have there in blue is called the "Democratic Party", and the two figures are 41.8% and 51%. Not at all significant.

Nope. The Socialist candidate was Barack Obama.

Again, you are and idiot as most far right wing loons who believe Obama is a socialist. BTW, that free trade agreement being pushed by Obama is really socialist in nature. What a dumb fuck you are.

 

[IsaacNewton]

for hopstick and G

your messiah obozo the great is really a marxist collectivist.

please define those terms and explain why you think obozo does not fit that definition. Before doing so, please read his books, the books of his mentors, and his early speeches.

The president's net worth is 12 million dollars and is president of the United States, twice elected. Earned the hard way in a capitalist system. A socialist? LOL

I think this is what gauls many cons, this guy worked his ass off and accomplished what all of them combined never will, and he's wealthy.

Relax, this is America where if you work hard you can succeed, just like the President. All you people have to do is work harder and smarter and stop spending your time online.

Its called work.

What "work" has obozo ever done? Rabble rousing in Chitown? Taking bribes? Being a do-nothing senator? being the worst president in history? you call that work? They guy hasn't done an honest day's work in his miserable life.

and remember, the Clintons were "broke" when they left the whitehouse. and you probably believe that too.

Easy, just show where someone handed them money. People are only paid for a value they provide to others.

You can't provide that value so you aren't wealthy. They worked hard and provided value and capitalism rewarded them.

do you think that getting paid 100K for a 20 minute speech is "earning" money? What value did she provide to the boys and girls club for the 100K that they paid her to speak?

don't be a loon, its legal bribery, plain and simple.

So you are the arbitrator on what you can earn money on and what you can't? LOL

The value to the people paying 100K for a speech obviously think it is money well spent.

Why are you such a socialist?

 

[IsaacNewton]

In 1912 the socialist party captured 6% of the popular vote, by comparison...

100 years later they captured 51% of the vote. How do we account for the United States becoming so radicalized in a scant 100 years?

Are you fuckin' stupid?

The Socialist candidate in 2012 was Stewart Alexander, who got 4430 votes. I had to look that up, being as how that represents somewhere around one-third of one hundredth of one percent. Or about eighteen hundred times less than Debs got in 1912.

The party you have there in blue is called the "Democratic Party", and the two figures are 41.8% and 51%. Not at all significant.

Nope. The Socialist candidate was Barack Obama.

Again, you are and idiot as most far right wing loons who believe Obama is a socialist. BTW, that free trade agreement being pushed by Obama is really socialist in nature. What a dumb fuck you are.

Then every Republican in Congress is a socialist because they are all falling all over themselves to support it.