Which one of the candidates corresponds with Jim Jones?

Hahaha….both

Trump would fit since he is an isolationist and self proclaim messiah. Only differences is Jones actually was ok with different races and he was crazy because he was hooked on LSD. Trump is just nuts and probably has started down the path of dementia / Alzheimer’s Disease like his father.

Trump.

Sanders. Hands down.

Drink deep, or taste not, the “Everything’s Free” doctrine.

You will feel a sensation in your throat afterwards.

It is known as The Bern.

(Rare edit) Actually clicked on the Wikki link:

“Peer pressure” it states. Now I’m even more convinced Sanders is the correct answer.

^^^^ It wouldn’t have been “free.” Taxes would have gone up substantially, and I was OK with that.

^ And I’m perfectly fine with that.

Because your voting up taxes won’t effect mine at all.

So beneficent you are, with others’ money.

Seriously, wouldn’t it be simpler to just relocate to a nation that already has near full on wealth redistribution already in place?

@SecondHandStoke proved me wrong, it’s not even name brand fucking kool-aid….Totally Sanders.

Sanders and the people who supported them were not saying “everything’s free” – that’s what condescending people who didn’t support him said, to try to sow doubt and undermine the support of others. Ironic, since mainstream party politics in the USA is all a corrupt pro-corporate distraction.

Jill Stein is closest to Jim Jones- “follow me as i say, I am a doctor so I am against vaccinations! I have never done anything truly meaningful, so make me President!”

@zenvelo Jill Stein is not against vaccinations. You have fallen for a smear campaign—which is to say, you have been drinking Hillary’s Kool-Aid. Besides, she knows she can’t win. She’s not asking for the presidency, she’s asking for your vote. She, like other third party candidates, is primarily interested in breaking the illegitimate stranglehold of the two-party system. One doesn’t have to be qualified to be president to fight that battle.

A vote for Jill Stein = a vote probably taken from Hillary = more votes for Trump, less votes for Hillary.

@JeSuisRickSpringfield Jill Stein has done nothing to earn my vote. She has no party to speak of, she has no structure to pass legislation or to work with Congress.

And, please don’t tell me I “have been drinking Hillary’s Kool-Aid.” Jill Stein deleted her tweets this week that were anti-vaccination. And, she promotes homeopathy, a false “science”. I don’t get my info on autism from the Democrats, I get it from the Autism community, of which I know quite a few.

I agree with the person who said ‘sanders’ – I don’t think HE is the Jim Jones type, but I think his followers act that way.

But you could also call the Stein supporters in the same way – being led to a promised land that simply doesn’t exist.

To a lesser degree, both Clinton and Trump have their acolytes.

@Pandora and @Dutchess_III are saying the sky is blue and 1+1=2….
The rest of you are In The Nile.

…. @Zaku, sorry you’re not among In The Nile group.

As far as I’m concerned accusing someone else of “drinking the kool-aid” pretty much nullifies anything else you say. It’s lazy rhetoric thrown around in lieu of an argument.

@zenvelo I see you’ve been drinking Dan Savage’s Kool-Aid, too. Anyways, I’m not saying that she has done anything to earn your personal vote. I think you should vote for whomever you like best. And if that’s not Stein, I’m okay with that. Different people have different standards for when someone has earned their vote, and I haven’t made any suggestion that you should vote for Stein. All I’ve pointed out is that the claim she is against vaccines is false.

The claim that she deleted anti-vaccine tweets is also false. She—or whoever is in charge of social media for her campaign—sent out a pro-vaccine tweet, deleted it, and then sent out another pro-vaccine tweet. Nor has she ever promoted homeopathy. In fact, she has explicitly stated that she disagrees with the pro-homeopathy section of the Green Party’s platform. So I think your outrage is really just a cover for your fear that Hillary hasn’t earned enough votes to beat Trump in the states where it really matters. But outrage has never changed a swing voter’s mind.

It’s also a bit rich for Hillary supporters to claim the moral high ground in this election when they feel compelled to tell flagrant lies about a third party candidate who poses no real threat to them. The number of Green Party voters who would be willing to vote for Clinton if Stein wasn’t running is dwarfed by the number of Democrats who will be staying home or voting for Trump. If Hillary is really the best candidate, her campaign shouldn’t need to spread falsehoods about her rivals. But she would do well to guard her left flank from Trump rather than taking liberal votes for granted when running against a populist.