Larry's Debate

[Glitchy Bowser Jr.]

Probably Bernie, he seems to be the most reasonable choice. Just anyone but Trump please.

 

[Magikrazy]

Gary Johnson

Say what you will about much of a waste it is, I'd rather vote for him than these democrat or republican clowns.

 

[Walkazo]

As a Democrat, I support Sanders (in fact, I'm going to the Portland rally tomorrow).

Ooh, so then you got to see the cute lil' sparrow land on his podium in person, right?

 

[PrinceLarryKoopa88]

As a Democrat, I support Sanders (in fact, I'm going to the Portland rally tomorrow).

Ooh, so then you got to see the cute lil' sparrow land on his podium in person, right?

Yes, I saw the cute bird (are you sure it was a sparrow?)! It was a wonderful rally, I'm glad I chose to go.

 

[Walkazo]

As a Democrat, I support Sanders (in fact, I'm going to the Portland rally tomorrow).

Ooh, so then you got to see the cute lil' sparrow land on his podium in person, right?

Yes, I saw the cute bird (are you sure it was a sparrow?)! It was a wonderful rally, I'm glad I chose to go.

Actually, now that I've seen a photo from the side instead of just a blurry video from the back, it's a female House Finch: overall the same colour as a House Sparrow, but the streaks on the breast and the grey beak reveal its true identity.

Glad it was a good rally. As a Canadian, I don't get a say in the election at all, but Bernie seems like a cool dude.

 

[Specific Neptune]

i voted for alec baldwin

 

[Ray Trace]

As a Democrat, I support Sanders (in fact, I'm going to the Portland rally tomorrow).

Ooh, so then you got to see the cute lil' sparrow land on his podium in person, right?

Yes, I saw the cute bird (are you sure it was a sparrow?)! It was a wonderful rally, I'm glad I chose to go.

Actually, now that I've seen a photo from the side instead of just a blurry video from the back, it's a female House Finch: overall the same colour as a House Sparrow, but the streaks on the breast and the grey beak reveal its true identity.

Glad it was a good rally. As a Canadian, I don't get a say in the election at all, but Bernie seems like a cool dude.

Too bad it wasn't a male House Finch, those birds have very pretty red heads.

 

[Walkazo]

But red is Republican, right? So it's probably better that it was a neutral brown colour.


Fun fact: in Canada, it's reversed, with our right-wingers being blue, and the center/left party being red.

 

[PrinceLarryKoopa88]

But red is Republican, right? So it's probably better that it was a neutral brown colour.


Fun fact: in Canada, it's reversed, with our right-wingers being blue, and the center/left party being red.

Berry Berry Interesting Indeed

 

[Stargatedalek]

To me, Trump and Sanders are the same populist garbage proposing things that will never be viable.

Relevant: (I was gonna post excerpts but they are all worth reading and they're not that long)
http://www.dailywire.com/news/3280/sanders-and-trump-are-same-totalitarian-candidate-ben-shapiro
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/11/trump-sanders-more-alike-than-you-think-commentary.html
http://www.npr.org/2016/02/08/465974199/what-do-sanders-and-trump-have-in-common-more-than-you-think

Actually Sanders proposals are completely viable. Looking at countries that are already using policies that he based his on like Iceland, Norway, or Canada, I can't help but notice they are working really well. The reason they have similar opinions is because Donald Trump secretly has good opinions, he just hides his good opinions behind really bad opinions to help win the republican vote because he knows he can win over hordes of hillbillies by pretending to be an extremist.

Kasich is the only decent republican still in the race but he frankly has no chance of winning.

Cruz is the zodiac killer is a religious extremist who's a threat to human rights and dignity.

Trump is a wildcard basically. He has some really high points like his stance on women's rights and planned parenthood, or his stance on gay marriage (note that he was pro gay marriage back when Clinton wasn't). But he also has some really low points, like misreading a passage about illegal immigration and rape and then aligning his campaign to cover it up, or suggesting not accepting Muslim refugees (note, Cruz suggested not accepting any non-Christian refugees and no one noticed). His statements constantly contradict himself and in interviews years ago Trump was pretty adamant about roasting republicans calling them stupid and easily manipulated, so there is hope that this is just a tactic and he won't actually make good on his bullshit.

Sanders is the only choice who would be elected in a democratic country where Donald Trump didn't have hordes of hillbillies to manipulate and Hillary Clinton didn't have corporations to suck-up to. Essentially he's the only good choice and frankly his very existence is a breath of fresh air for American politics every time he speaks, the man is a model citizen on top of being a politician and you just don't see that anymore. Unfortunately... -

- Clinton exists and she's taking all the votes. I can't understand why she is though, she was partially responsible for the extent of the current wealth gap, she's sexist ("women should vote for me because I'm a woman"), she sabotaged her own campaign for free health care for money and then called out Sanders a few weeks for "not being there to support her campaign" (when in reality he actually was, literally, standing behind her), she made up a fake story about someone trying to assassinate her (remember that FOX reporter who did the same thing and got booed out of existence?), and her opinions flip flop just as much if not more-so than Trumps (she used to be avid homophobe and now she "has always been pro-gay").

TLR the choices are:
Kasich -not going to win
Cruz -zodiac killer
Trump -huge risk huge reward
Sanders -best option
Clinton -more of the same corporate bullshit

If Sanders doesn't win the democratic nomination I would vote Trump over Clinton. I'd rather take a risk of Trump doing a bad job but maybe a good job over the guarantee of Clinton doing a sub-par job.

 

[Magikrazy]

I think you mean Trump is YUUGE risk, YUUGE reward.

 

[PrinceLarryKoopa88]

Debate #2
Should healthcare be a right?
Is money worth more than living things?

 

[Stargazing]

healthcare is always a right

 

[Kerrigan]

Healthcare shouldn't be forced.

Not by any means.

 

[Stargazing]

Healthcare shouldn't be forced.

Not by any means.

i don't believe the implication is for it to be forced. i believe the right for healthcare is saying "it's here if you need it, but there's no rush/pressure and we're not forcing you to have it"

 

[Kerrigan]

Healthcare shouldn't be forced.

Not by any means.

i don't believe the implication is for it to be forced. i believe the right for healthcare is saying "it's here if you need it, but there's no rush/pressure and we're not forcing you to have it"

It's forced in Massachusetts.

 

[Ray Trace]

Debate #2
Should healthcare be a right?

Yes, healthcare is a right, and it's one of the reasons Europe and Canada are far smarter than the US.

Is money worth more than living things?

This is a false dichotomy. Money is certainly worth more than the goddang mosquitoes and crickets I kill, and money is like a billion times more valuable than the mosquitoes that spread deadly viruses and bacteria, but I value human life and pet life more than money.

 

[Stargatedalek]

Money is certainly worth more than the goddang mosquitoes and crickets I kill, and money is like a billion times more valuable than the mosquitoes that spread deadly viruses and bacteria, but I value human life and pet life more than money.

My pet crickets are offended.

Philosophically speaking I can't think of a good reason why any life should be worth more than another, or less or more than money. Say you're a hitman and you kill one person to earn 1 million dollars but you then spend that money on a new hospital and save countless lives, was that money worth more than that life? And before you warp the example no, that person was not killed to build the hospital, they were killed for the money, what you planned to use that money for was irrelevant at the time.

But I'm not one for letting such fickle things as philosophy run my life, so scientifically speaking, the only reason some lives ought to be worth more than others is their intelligence. Animals with complex social structures and cultures such as humans, crows, apes, and parrots are going to far more impacted by mistreatment, and are going to mourn their dead. Whereas animals like insects, dogs, or guinea pigs may miss deceased members of their social unit, but it simply won't affect them nearly as much. Does this equate to their lives being worth more in dollar value? No because people are biased, but it is the only non-economic way to measure the value of a life.

Versus economically speaking, lives can in fact be quantified in dollar value. If I own a zoo and a homeless man breaks in and falls into the alligator pit his life was worth some bad press, if a costumer falls in their life was probably worth a few thousand dollars plus some apparently needed repairs on my gator pit. But heaven forbid a rich or famous person falls in, then I'm out of business.

Does the theoretical value of a life make it worth more or less than the amount of money it's technically worth? Morally you can weigh the ethics all you want, but in the eye of the world as it functions they are worth exactly as much money as they are worth. So from a broad perspective, yes, money can be worth more than lives, but a life can also be worth more than money, depends how much money and what life.



Also free health care is a basic human right of course it should be free. As a great Canadian once said "Tommy Douglas fought the federal government for free refills on coffee."

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Healthcare shouldn't be forced.

Not by any means.

i don't believe the implication is for it to be forced. i believe the right for healthcare is saying "it's here if you need it, but there's no rush/pressure and we're not forcing you to have it"

It's forced in Massachusetts.

Do you even know how ridiculous you sound? What exactly is universal healthcare forcing? Forcing poor people from dying from preventable diseases?

Debate #2
Is money worth more than living things?

Yes, money is worth more than living things. I'd rather have money than rinderpest and mosquito *bleep*s that spread West Nile virus.

semi-sarc

The framing of this question is terrible, by the way.

 

[Specific Neptune]

Debate #2

right come on, lay it on me baby, i'm ready

Should healthcare be a right?

if it isn't already, it should be a right
if you mean that health care should be free, i agree, it should always be free
you can't expect someone to go to hospital, get surgery for a life threatening injury, and then be given a bill for 5000 and something dollars after such a traumatic situation

it's just not right

Is money worth more than living things?

let's just say that if you paid me a million bucks to kill a random stranger, and there would be no consequences, i would not do it, i just couldn't

i think living beings are worth so much more than money

of course it really depends

if it was a bug, then i'd take the million

if it was a rabbit or a dog or something, that's where i draw the line

i'd still feel sad about the bug, but they live for about ten seconds anyway so whatever

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

i think living beings are worth so much more than money

of course it really depends

if it was a bug, then i'd take the million

if it was a rabbit or a dog or something, that's where i draw the line

i'd still feel sad about the bug, but they live for about ten seconds anyway so whatever

I don't know, don't you have to kill and consume living things (unless they're grown in a lab) to survive, which would actually make living things more valuable than money without question? Plants and fungi are living things too. Unfortunately, living things also encompass the ugly things too like cancer cells, infections, e-coli, superbugs, specific mosquito species that have little known ecological role aside from spreading diseases, and even viruses if you count that.

 

[Stargazing]

It's forced in Massachusetts.

define that for me, please. i'm quite curious

 

[Kerrigan]

It's forced in Massachusetts.

define that for me, please. i'm quite curious

I believe if you don't have healthcare, you pay some fine. I could be misremembering, but that's what I thought. It's pretty much a law that you have to have healthcare.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Well, that's a push for coverage. And honestly, everyone should be covered as most as they can. But no one is forced to buy things beyond affordability. Also, people earning less than $16,345 a year are exempt from this penalty. Overall, I think this had improved quality of life in Massachusetts, since more people are insured over there and it's less crazy than our current healthcare system, on a national scale at least.

 

[Kerrigan]

Well, that's a push for coverage. And honestly, everyone should be covered as most as they can. But no one is forced to buy things beyond affordability. Also, people earning less than $16,345 a year are exempt from this penalty. Overall, I think this had improved quality of life in Massachusetts, since more people are insured over there and it's less crazy than our current healthcare system, on a national scale at least.

The problem is that our healthcare is a pain to deal with. It's also pretty expensive iirc.