Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Now the Democrats have to prove they’re not socialists


Recommended Posts

Now the Democrats have to prove they’re not socialists

It wasn’t a blue wave, but the 2020 elections gave the Democratic Party unified control of the White House and both chambers of Congress. To keep that control, they have to convince voters they’re not the radicals many believe them to be.

During the 2020 campaign, President Trump lampooned Joe Biden as a “socialist” and “radical leftist” who would defund the police and abolish the suburbs. Biden actually won the Democratic presidential nomination by running as a moderate and rejecting the soak-the-rich policies of liberals like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. And he beat Trump not with radical ideas but with promises of calm and competent leadership.

Still, Trump’s socialist labeling damaged the Democratic party in some ways and will remain a problem if Biden doesn’t vanquish it. Some analysts think Trump won Florida because Hispanic voters familiar with socialist failures in Venezuela and Cuba bought Trump’s mischaracterization of Biden, who did little to refute it. Democrats lost seats in the House and did worse than expected in the Senate, signs that voters trust the party less than they trust Biden. Many moderate Democrats blamed the party’s progressive wing for touting ideas like a government takeover of the health care and energy sectors and damaging the party’s prospects with mainstream voters.

The Democratic party does have a socialist streak. Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez—darlings of the party’s liberal wing—both identify as a “democratic socialist.” In a 2020 Gallup survey, 76% of Democrats said they’d be willing to vote for a presidential candidate who happened to be a socialist, while only 45% of all voters said the same. So Democrats generally support a political philosophy that a majority of Americans don’t.

**********************************************

So far they are behaving like socialists, cutting jobs and lying about the vaccine distribution. They plan to spend trillions of dollars on socialist projects that will do nothing for the economy, just like Obama did with his stimulus plan. To top that off, they will waste an entire month trying to impeach someone who is already out of office.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

HEY! I know I've been a little scared about this sort'a thing myself lately, and after I read on that QAnon website that among those busts of people that Biden replaced Chuchill's with was THIS one....

  il_794xN.1177570861_jx3x.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

Americans are too stupid to even know what socialism is. 

Here is one definition I found;  A  political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

I bolded the word "regulated" because that is the core of the political debate here in the USA.    The progressive \ A.O.C. branch of the Dem party clearly wishes to increase regulation of many, if not all,  aspects of the economy.    E.g.  CNN today has an article about proposed regulation that would prevent evictions for the inability to pay.     The law would apply to any landlord that was making enough-of-a-profit.    Landlords that were also struggling financially would be able to pay less state and local taxes  (E.g. their property tax).   

At least the sponsors were clear:  People that lose their job or encounter additional expenses,  shouldn't have to pay rent until they get back on their feet.

Yea,   capitalism is tough.   One has to plan (e.g.  have in savings enough to cover 6 months worth of monthly expenses).     But since the modern service economy is based on spending, each month,  everything one earns,  as well as using credit for almost everything and especially non-essential good and services,       I guess most folks are just doing what the economy requires in order to keep unemployment at a reasonable level.    

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw here MM, and re THIS section of your standard little (and usually off-base) little "summation"...

Quote

So far they are behaving like socialists, cutting jobs and lying about the vaccine distribution. They plan to spend trillions of dollars on socialist projects that will do nothing for the economy, just like Obama did with his stimulus plan. To top that off, they will waste an entire month trying to impeach someone who is already out of office.

First, how about attempting to enlighten yourself to the truth in regard to this and by reading the following link which I've supplied you here. Warning though:  It DOES contain a whole lot of FACTS and FIGURES, and so you might find this read a bit challenging:

Obama Economic Stimulus Package: How ARRA Worked (thebalance.com)

And then secondly, IF you DO get through all that, THEN you finally MIGHT begin to understand why so many of us who were never taken in by one of Fat Boy's many claims and lies that HE and he ALONE "was responsible" for the American Economy's rebounding from what is called "The Great Recession" before this damn panademic hit us all, were and are really just that...LIES!

(...aaah, but I have another one of those feelings that all my keystrokes here have yet again been in vain, and 'cause it'll be a cold day in you-know-where when YOU will actually sit down and contemplate thoughts and ideas which might dare contradict those closely-held ones you already have)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Here is one definition I found;  A  political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

I bolded the word "regulated" because that is the core of the political debate here in the USA.    The progressive \ A.O.C. branch of the Dem party clearly wishes to increase regulation of many, if not all,  aspects of the economy.    E.g.  CNN today has an article about proposed regulation that would prevent evictions for the inability to pay.     The law would apply to any landlord that was making enough-of-a-profit.    Landlords that were also struggling financially would be able to pay less state and local taxes  (E.g. their property tax).   

At least the sponsors were clear:  People that lose their job or encounter additional expenses,  shouldn't have to pay rent until they get back on their feet.

Yea,   capitalism is tough.   One has to plan (e.g.  have in savings enough to cover 6 months worth of monthly expenses).     But since the modern service economy is based on spending, each month,  everything one earns,  as well as using credit for almost everything and especially non-essential good and services,       I guess most folks are just doing what the economy requires in order to keep unemployment at a reasonable level.    

I would add or the government, as it's hard to see how the community as a whole could own or regulate anything

of a nation-state size, but that's a minor quibble. Of course there is more to basic socialism than just regulation,

there is ownership. Debating whether those who cannot afford their rent will get relief, if their landlords will get

relief, and this only due to a dire emergency situation, seems more of a specific problem than a move toward

socialism. I like to use the old-fashioned term mixed economy to describe the U.S. economic system. Basically

capitalist with a certain amount of gov't regulation and programs. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food

stamps would really have no place in a strictly capitalist system. Yes, capitalism is tough. It's not the feel good

system that some folks, mostly conservatives, tout it as. Many of the workers in the low-end portions of the

service economy likely find it difficult to save much after they meet their basic monthly needs. Other folks,

with higher incomes, probably can save money. Whether they want to save it or spend it is their decision. 

In any case, you've got to look out for yourself in this system, no doubt about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

Debating whether those who cannot afford their rent will get relief, if their landlords will get

relief, and this only due to a dire emergency situation, seems more of a specific problem than a move toward

socialism.

I see where my post could be misunderstood:  The bill that became law was put in place because of the pandemic.   

Now some progressive Dem pols are saying that the bill should continue AFTER the pandemic.   Therefore the new bill being proposed doesn't require the renter to have any dire emergency (unless one believes losing one's job or having their hours cut are dire-emergencies).

Also  I didn't say or even imply such a bill would be a move-toward-socialism (because I understood that we were NOT going to play what I find to be the silly game of trying to define socialism,  and then trying to say what-is-or-is-not-socialism).    This is why I focused on regulation.     (since such a law would be regulation). 

My overall point was that such a government imposed regulation on landlords would be very unique and not the type of capitalism the USA has had since our beginnings. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I see where my post could be misunderstood:  The bill that became law was put in place because of the pandemic.   

Now some progressive Dem pols are saying that the bill should continue AFTER the pandemic.   Therefore the new bill being proposed doesn't require the renter to have any dire emergency (unless one believes losing one's job or having their hours cut are dire-emergencies).

Also  I didn't say or even imply such a bill would be a move-toward-socialism (because I understood that we were NOT going to play what I find to be the silly game of trying to define socialism,  and then trying to say what-is-or-is-not-socialism).    This is why I focused on regulation.     (since such a law would be regulation). 

My overall point was that such a government imposed regulation on landlords would be very unique and not the type of capitalism the USA has had since our beginnings. 

 

 

 

I very much doubt that there will be any program for rent payment by the government after the

pandemic is over. It will  an emergency measure only.  If one stays with a very basic definition of

socialism--government or community control of the means of production--there's not much to

argue about. It's when one starts to bring in all the variants on the definition that things can

get confused. But whatever the right wingers think, there will be no socialism in America, though

they're too ignorant to figure that out though it does make a good talking point, however grossly

mistaken it is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would the Dems have to prove this or prove anything to the other side?

Some Dems ARE socialists and proud to be socialists.

I'm a socialist. There's nothing wrong with being a socialist in America.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Vautrin said:

Americans are too stupid to even know what socialism is. 

I agree. We see this time and again especially among the uneducated (or under educated) Republicans. When their "knowledge" about socialism doesn't impress, then they start lobbying claims of communism. In their minds the words are synonymous which shows they probably don't know what either word means.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

I agree. We see this time and again especially among the uneducated (or under educated) Republicans. When their "knowledge" about socialism doesn't impress, then they start lobbying claims of communism. In their minds the words are synonymous which shows they probably don't know what either word means.

True, and evidenced by the fact that so many of them attempted to label Barack Obama as a "socialist" or even in some cases as a "communist" from the very start of his first campaign for the presidency, however with the guy being about as centrist a president as we've ever had.

And so this being yet another instance of The Right being either clueless or more likely still,  using fear as their prime political strategy.

(...and which I see is now starting ALL over again as a strategy against Joe Biden)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there's the issue of "regulation".  Not all regulation is a bad thing when it comes to business, either corporate or retail.  Look for example, at Reagan's "deregulation" of the airline industry;

On one hand, it did help drive ticket prices down so more and more people could travel by air,  but on the other hand, it relaxed maintenence  standards to where shortly after the regulations were diminished, the rare instances of major airplane crashes got to where they practically started falling out of the sky.  I believe there were more major airliner crashes in the first year after deregulation than in the previous 20 years of air travel. 

And for corporations, deregulation meant they could quit "wasting money" on providing safe and healthy workplaces that provided their employees  with employment that didn't endanger their health and lives.  

Sepiatone

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Dargo said:

True, and evidenced by the fact that so many of them attempted to label Barack Obama as a "socialist" or even in some cases as a "communist" from the very start of his first campaign for the presidency, however with the guy being about as centrist a president as we've ever had.

And so this being yet another instance of The Right being either clueless or more likely still,  using fear as their prime political strategy.

(...and which I see is now starting ALL over again as a strategy against Joe Biden)

Exactly. They use fear as a strategy. Most of what they say is outlandish/nonsense. Proving over and over how uninformed they are about nearly everything.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Vautrin said:

I very much doubt that there will be any program for rent payment by the government after the

pandemic is over.

Such a bill is likely to become law,  after the pandemic is over,   in cities like Portland and Seattle.   The same places that were the first to establish a $15 an hour min-wage and other programs.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Vautrin said:

I very much doubt that there will be any program for rent payment by the government after the

pandemic is over.

The government already has a nation-wide system of rent payment.  It's called public housing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TopBilled said:

I agree. We see this time and again especially among the uneducated (or under educated) Republicans. When their "knowledge" about socialism doesn't impress, then they start lobbying claims of communism. In their minds the words are synonymous which shows they probably don't know what either word means.

I'm sure Republican politicians are educated enough to know what socialism is; they just use the word as an

all purpose club to beat Democrats with. Many everyday GOP voters likely don't know that much about it, but

they fall for it when the GOP pols call something socialism. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Such a bill is likely to become law,  after the pandemic is over,   in cities like Portland and Seattle.   The same places that were the first to establish a $15 an hour min-wage and other programs.

 

In some blue municipalities that is likely, but not by the federal gov't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ElCid said:

The government already has a nation-wide system of rent payment.  It's called public housing.

True, but that is not a universal program. One has to meet certain eligibility requirements to get

into public housing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Vautrin said:

In some blue municipalities that is likely, but not by the federal gov't. 

Of course not by the Feds,  which is why I never said that would be the case.

While progressive like A.O.C. would like to pass such a law and have the Feds impose it on all the states,   the progressive have little to no power in DC.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

I'm sure Republican politicians are educated enough to know what socialism is; they just use the word as an

all purpose club to beat Democrats with. Many everyday GOP voters likely don't know that much about it, but

they fall for it when the GOP pols call something socialism. 

True. But do you consider someone like Trump to be very educated? Certainly he wasn't too scholarly. He'd probably flunk a political science course at a junior college!

My point is not to bash Trumpers but to say that not all politicians are equally educated or equally intelligent. I would say Trump demonstrated other intelligences, and we do possess multiple intelligences.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Of course not by the Feds,  which is why I never said that would be the case.

While progressive like A.O.C. would like to pass such a law and have the Feds impose it on all the states,   the progressive have little to no power in DC.

 

That's what makes all the talk among Republicans about socialism so silly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

Then there's the issue of "regulation".  Not all regulation is a bad thing when it comes to business, either corporate or retail.  Look for example, at Reagan's "deregulation" of the airline industry;

On one hand, it did help drive ticket prices down so more and more people could travel by air,  but on the other hand, it relaxed maintenence  standards to where shortly after the regulations were diminished, the rare instances of major airplane crashes got to where they practically started falling out of the sky.  I believe there were more major airliner crashes in the first year after deregulation than in the previous 20 years of air travel. 

And for corporations, deregulation meant they could quit "wasting money" on providing safe and healthy workplaces that provided their employees  with employment that didn't endanger their health and lives.  

Sepiatone

Actually here Sepia, The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was signed into law by Ronnie's predecessor in the White House...a certain peanut farmer from Plains, GA.

Yep, it was little ol' Jimmy who deregulated this industry that I spent 35 years in, and which I was able to retire from in 2007 and after deregulation had turned the once "glamorous" industry into the "bus lines in the sky".

But hey, sure, while the whole air travel experience sucks now days,  at least it's a lot cheaper to travel by air than it was back then anyway. And besides, who cares if you can't recline your seat back anymore without hittin' the knees of the guy behind you, are only offered a measily little packet of trail mix instead of a full meal, AND generally have a lot less service provided you than back then?!

Yep, the American people got what they evidently wanted, which was cheaper fares and to the exclusion of good service.

(...or in other words, even the Walmart crowd can afford to park, or should I say "wedge", THEIR fat butts into airline seats now days...say, maybe you've noticed this TOO the last time you entered an airport or boarded an airliner?!)  ;)

LOL 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TopBilled said:

True. But do you consider someone like Trump to be very educated? Certainly he wasn't too scholarly. He'd probably flunk a political science course at a junior college!

My point is not to bash Trumpers but to say that not all politicians are equally educated or equally intelligent. I would say Trump demonstrated other intelligences, and we do possess multiple intelligences.

On paper he seems educated. Over the last four years he sounds like he barely got out of high school.

Most pols at the higher levels are well-educated, even if that sometimes seems not to be true. I think

Trump's greatest skill is as a manipulator and conman, a skill he has displayed in both the business and

political worlds.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...