Fri Aug 28, 2015, 10:56 PM

Would America elect a socialist to be President ?

Um, no. Why do you ask?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/183713/socialist-presidential-candidates-least-appealing.aspx

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/17/could-a-socialist-actually-be-elected-president/

141 replies, 17512 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

141 replies	Author	Time	Post
Would America elect a socialist to be President ? (Original post)	PosterChild	Aug 2015	OP
Good thing there's no socialist running for the job.	beam me up scottie	Aug 2015	#1
Um huh, right...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#2
No worries, good buddy. We got this.	HappyPlace	Aug 2015	#4
Hum,.. cognitive dissonance ? nt	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#7
Hum....self diagnosis?	daleanime	Aug 2015	#17
Oh snap!	HappyPlace	Aug 2015	#24
Nice!	beam me up scottie	Aug 2015	#19
Read the wapo article about ...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#25
Thank you for your concern.	beam me up scottie	Aug 2015	#42
Didn't you know?	Le Taz Hot	Aug 2015	#60
Last time I checked, they allow a Republican to run as well...	brooklynite	Aug 2015	#101
He heh, yes they sure did!	HappyPlace	Aug 2015	#102
Most people seem to understand that. I am surprised you don't. nt	Live and Learn	Aug 2015	#69
So, "labels" trump "policy" for you?	NorthCarolina	Aug 2015	#86
Enough with the trump already!	redwitch	Aug 2015	#91
Lables are important to people . ..	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#93
Message auto-removed	Name removed	Aug 2015	#119
Labels that are applied by others . ..	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#122
Message auto-removed	Name removed	Aug 2015	#124
In the case of sanders . ...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#125
It was also assumed America wouldn't elect a black guy.	The Velveteen Ocelot	Aug 2015	#3
Not true . ..	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#6
Depends on the socialist	Armstead	Aug 2015	#5
Don't think so...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#9
Did you read what I said?	Armstead	Aug 2015	#15
There us a difference . ..	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#30
The GOP routinely calls Hillary a socialist	DJ13	Aug 2015	#56
Sure, but bernie...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#95
Obama is the most frightful socialist of all time. He's still in office.	Ed Suspicious	Aug 2015	#67
but it didn't and doesn't stick	ericson00	Aug 2015	#10
The way you describe Presient Obama he sounds like a conservative	Armstead	Aug 2015	#12
was my statement inaccurate?	ericson00	Aug 2015	#14
Conservative means a lot more than that	Armstead	Aug 2015	#18
Spoken like a true conservadem.	Ed Suspicious	Aug 2015	#70
RE and doesn't call himself a socialist	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#16
What do you mean when you use the word "socialist"?	JDPriestly	Aug 2015	#28
What does the words mean...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#43
Bernie thinks it means Sweden or Norway. I think it means Germany or Austria or France.	JDPriestly	Aug 2015	#51
Great! We will have a gop candidate ...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#88
Bernie is simply the smartest guy in the room.	JDPriestly	Aug 2015	#97
Bernie may be the smartest man* in the room...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#112
I don't mind witty retorts. Most DUers know I am a woman.	JDPriestly	Aug 2015	#117
+100 ! (Nm)	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#121
I know a whole lot of young people	OnionPatch	Aug 2015	#99
Because electing people owned by corporations has worked out so well for us.	onecaliberal	Aug 2015	#8
No, because ..	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#11
I guess you should stop using the socialist roads	onecaliberal	Aug 2015	#13
Yes, the roads...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#20
And schools, and various agencies that keep our water and food and medications safe.	JDPriestly	Aug 2015	#131
You are right, We have nothing to fear. ....	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#137
Wbetber that happens or no depends on whether droves of Democrats stay home as they did	JDPriestly	Aug 2015	#138
The roads that were mostly built by private companies, right?	FrodosPet	Aug 2015	#80
Oh good Christ...That's a right wing talking point if ever I heard one	Armstead	Aug 2015	#21
I'm going to stop feeding it.	onecaliberal	Aug 2015	#27
I think you're rght. I'll just cross the bridge.	Armstead	Aug 2015	#31
Ditto.	onecaliberal	Aug 2015	#32
Stale, reheated John Bircher paranoia, right here on DU.	arcane1	Aug 2015	#37
No, simply a concern for the electability . ..	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#48
Post removed	Post removed	Aug 2015	#23
Thus us an over the top slur...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#33
Nothing over the top	PowerToThePeople	Aug 2015	#38
LOL. A real fail ( nt)	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#45
It's not true.. and, says everything about you and absolutely nothing about your target.	Cha	Aug 2015	#77
Turns out you were wrong. I seriously wonder if you know what "fascism" is.	George II	Aug 2015	#87
That's why I call it corporatist.	arcane1	Aug 2015	#40
Results.	hrmjustin	Aug 2015	#53
Ha! Good.. throwing around that word "fascism" as if he knew what it meant. Just bc BS is	Cha	Aug 2015	#78
It's only August 2015 - what will the rhetoric be early next year? They'll be throwing around...	George II	Aug 2015	#89
And, all in BS's name.. doesn't do their candidate any favors.	Cha	Aug 2015	#109
And here I thought Joseph McCarthy was dead	PowerToThePeople	Aug 2015	#22
If you ask peple in the abstract whether they willl vote for a socialist, they will say no.	JDPriestly	Aug 2015	#26
Actually , the label matters . .	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#34
We shall see. I'm volunteering for Bernie.	JDPriestly	Aug 2015	#54
Nope	MohRokTah	Aug 2015	#29
+100 ! (Nm)	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#35
Then you need not waste one more precious moment of your life mentioning him.	arcane1	Aug 2015	#36
I believe..	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#39
Cool story n/t	arcane1	Aug 2015	#44
Not only cool,	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#46
55% thought Obama was a socialist	jfern	Aug 2015	#41
Think if he came out . ,,	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#47
We're all essentially socialists.	Garrett78	Aug 2015	#75
The ignorant massess are actually right....	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#83
Socialism is all around us and we'd be screwed without it.	Garrett78	Aug 2015	#90
Why yes	jfern	Aug 2015	#130
Pointless shite	whatchamacallit	Aug 2015	#49
Funny when the Bernie haters can't even get information correct...	SoapBox	Aug 2015	#50
Um....no...he has called himself a socialist....	revmclaren	Aug 2015	#57
"Bernie haters..".. right.. 'cause there are no "Hillary haters".. BS supporters are pure and would	Cha	Aug 2015	#79
The average voter . ..	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#110
Is a Socialist running?	Le Taz Hot	Aug 2015	#52
Yes...	revmclaren	Aug 2015	#58
You're new.	Le Taz Hot	Aug 2015	#59
Sorry, wrong again... Here since 2012	revmclaren	Aug 2015	#62
2012! Oooooh!	Le Taz Hot	Aug 2015	#65
I know...think of all the missed recs!!!	revmclaren	Aug 2015	#68
Whatever we say in arguing about what Bernie should or should not be called,	PatrickforO	Aug 2015	#55
The MSM and the repubs will eat him alive	revmclaren	Aug 2015	#61
You are so right.	moobu2	Aug 2015	#63
Yep /nt/	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#84
Well off to bed...	revmclaren	Aug 2015	#64
I think so, yes.	lovemydog	Aug 2015	#66
"Bernie's not a 'socialist'"....	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#139
I hope we find out.	Tierra_y_Libertad	Aug 2015	#71
I'm a Hillary supporter, but I don't think slamming socialism is really a winning tactic.	Starry Messenger	Aug 2015	#72
"Preserve the reforms of the Obama administration"...	AOR	Aug 2015	#73
I'm sure all four of you left at the Bell are going to	Starry Messenger	Aug 2015	#82
So you're bashing the Bell now also... ?	AOR	Aug 2015	#98
Haha.	Starry Messenger	Aug 2015	#100
Is "be the change you wish to see"...	AOR	Aug 2015	#104
You guys wrote your own pamphlet years ago.	Starry Messenger	Aug 2015	#106
Wow...I think I will take the last word...	AOR	Aug 2015	#108
still not sold on Bernie	MFM008	Aug 2015	#74
Were there similar articles 8 years ago?	left-of-center2012	Aug 2015	#76
Eight years ago? Heck...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#136
Socialist!:	beam me up scottie	Aug 2015	#81
Message auto-removed	Name removed	Aug 2015	#85
Who asked?	George II	Aug 2015	#92
FDR x3	Motown_Johnny	Aug 2015	#94
Yes.	LWolf	Aug 2015	#96
I would rather be thanked . ...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#113
It's getting desperate. Voting for criminal capitalists hasn't served the public's interest.	NCjack	Aug 2015	#103
People are learning the difference between "socialist" & "democratic socialist."	senz	Aug 2015	#105
You can run a serious campaign for president,....	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#115
My Democratic Party Chair was attacked as a socialist for merely attending Sanders event	Gothmog	Aug 2015	#107
FDR got elected 4 times	RobertEarl	Aug 2015	#111
Was FDR a...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#114
Well, sure. He proved it too.	RobertEarl	Aug 2015	#116
I didn't ask...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#118
I don't buy it.	Chan790	Aug 2015	#120
Trendsetter? Or ...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#123
We don't have any socialists running at the moment	Hydra	Aug 2015	#126
I find the favorability of ratings of "socialism" to be strikingly high.	David__77	Aug 2015	#127
We have socialism in the United States	Rosa Luxemburg	Aug 2015	#128
Yes, it's right up there...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#133
What is so frightening about it?	Rosa Luxemburg	Aug 2015	#129
Nothing is frightening, unless...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#135
Last time I looked, I am part of America, and I will vote for a Democratic Socialist.	djean111	Aug 2015	#132
And as a liberal individualist...	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#134
I vote for Democrats, not socialists	ericson00	Aug 2015	#140
+100 ! (Nm)	PosterChild	Aug 2015	#141

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 10:57 PM

beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)

1. Good thing there's no socialist running for the job.

Nice try but we already heard this talking point a brazillion times.

Keep up.

Reply to this post

Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #1)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 10:59 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

2. Um huh, right...

...good luck with that.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #2)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:01 PM

HappyPlace (568 posts)

4. No worries, good buddy. We got this.

Reply to this post

Response to HappyPlace (Reply #4)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:06 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

7. Hum,.. cognitive dissonance ? nt

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #7)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:13 PM

daleanime (17,796 posts)

17. Hum....self diagnosis?

Reply to this post

Response to daleanime (Reply #17)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:18 PM

HappyPlace (568 posts)

24. Oh snap!

Reply to this post

Response to HappyPlace (Reply #4)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:15 PM

beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)

19. Nice!

The intercept will be every bit as awesome as it was in 2008!

Thanks!

Reply to this post

Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #19)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:20 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

25. Read the wapo article about ...

... the impotance of electability an how it's importance increases as the process proceeds .

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #25)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:47 PM

beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)

42. Thank you for your concern.

Reply to this post

Response to HappyPlace (Reply #4)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:01 AM

Le Taz Hot (22,271 posts)

60. Didn't you know?

Perception only counts with the word "socialism" but not with the word "emails." Ya gotta keep up with these things, HP.

Reply to this post

Response to HappyPlace (Reply #4)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 05:26 PM

brooklynite (86,866 posts)

101. Last time I checked, they allow a Republican to run as well...

Reply to this post

Response to brooklynite (Reply #101)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 05:31 PM

HappyPlace (568 posts)

102. He heh, yes they sure did!

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #2)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:14 AM

Live and Learn (12,769 posts)

69. Most people seem to understand that. I am surprised you don't. nt

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #2)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:29 AM

NorthCarolina (11,197 posts)

86. So, "labels" trump "policy" for you?

If Bernie is a socialist, then fuck it, I guess I'm a socialist too. I could care less if he called himself a pig-fucker....he'd still have my vote. I vote policy and record over silly "labels".

Reply to this post

Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #86)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:39 AM

redwitch (14,792 posts)

91. Enough with the trump already!

Reply to this post

Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #86)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:40 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

93. Lables are important to people . ..

.... because they are predictive of direction, intent and future policy decisions. Current policy positions on specific issues are important but incomplete. It is reasonable and entirely rational to judge a candidate on her idelogical tendencies, which are indicated by idelogical labels.

In fact, it would be unreasonable to ignore them. Especially pig-fucker.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #93)

Name removed Message auto-removed

Response to Name removed (Reply #119)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 11:37 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

122. Labels that are applied by others . ..

.... are less important than labels applied to one's self. Bernie is a self professed socialist , and presumably he means to say something meaningful about himself to others by so doing. That's why the label is important.

Setting that aside, labels applied to others, even though they may be smears, are important also. They are assertions about the intentions and future direction a candidate might take. That is a legitimate concern, perhaps more of a concern than specific policy positions on current issues. Labels are the linguistic vehicle we use to discuss these concerns.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #93)

Name removed Message auto-removed

Response to Name removed (Reply #124)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 12:14 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

125. In the case of sanders . ...

.. no one is demeaning him by placing a label upon him. He calls himself a socialist. It is entirely proper to refer to bernie as a socialist, since that is how he characterizes himself.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:00 PM

The Velveteen Ocelot (108,751 posts)

3. It was also assumed America wouldn't elect a black guy.

Reply to this post

Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #3)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:05 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

6. Not true . ..

... "black" now polls at 92 - don't known what it was back 8 years ago, but I bet it was better than the "socialist " category .

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:03 PM

Armstead (47,803 posts)

5. Depends on the socialist

And the GOP portray President Obama and most otehr Dems as socialists anyway

Reply to this post

Response to Armstead (Reply #5)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:08 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

9. Don't think so...

.... the whole idea of idelogical labels is that it DOESN'T depend on their individual .

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #9)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:12 PM

Armstead (47,803 posts)

15. Did you read what I said?

The GOP applies that ideological label on all individuals who happen to be Democrats.

Doesn't scare away people in droves, Only those who would not vote for a Dem anyway.

Reply to this post

Response to Armstead (Reply #15)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:25 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

30. There us a difference . ..

....between a slur and a label. In this case it is the candidate who is calling him self a socialist . It will be taken serriously.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #30)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:41 AM

DJ13 (23,671 posts)

56. The GOP routinely calls Hillary a socialist

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/222433/hillary-clinton-socialist-still-deroy-murdock

http://www.wealthdaily.com/articles/hillary-clinton-the-great-socialist-warmonger/5962

http://capitalismmagazine.com/2015/04/hillary-clinton-crony-socialist-for-president/

http://newsl.org/2015/07/wealth-for-all-hillary-the-socialist-clinton-proposes-tax-cuts-for-profit-sharing/

Reply to this post

Response to DJ13 (Reply #56)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:50 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

95. Sure, but bernie...

....calls himself a socialist. People understand that the gop is sluring dems and discount it. They won't discount it when the candidate brags about it himself.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #30)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:13 AM

Ed Suspicious (8,879 posts)

67. Obama is the most frightful socialist of all time. He's still in office.

Reply to this post

Response to Armstead (Reply #5)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:08 PM

ericson00 (2,707 posts)

10. but it didn't and doesn't stick

and doesn't for good reason: not only does Obama not actually practice socialism, but he doesn't use the kind of Occupy rhetoric Bernie uses, he is not for gutting welfare reform, helped out our financial institutions, and doesn't call himself a socialist, nor did he. In 2008 it didn't stick not only because of most of the reasons I mentioned, but Wall Street didn't mind him.

Reply to this post

Response to ericson00 (Reply #10)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:10 PM

Armstead (47,803 posts)

12. The way you describe Presient Obama he sounds like a conservative

Reply to this post

Response to Armstead (Reply #12)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:11 PM

ericson00 (2,707 posts)

14. was my statement inaccurate?

I don't think so. Doesn't mean he was a conservative. A conservative thinks fetuses are alive and taxes on the rich should be lower to trickle down. Obama didn't.

Reply to this post

Response to ericson00 (Reply #14)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:13 PM

Armstead (47,803 posts)

18. Conservative means a lot more than that

Reply to this post

Response to ericson00 (Reply #14)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:15 AM

Ed Suspicious (8,879 posts)

70. Spoken like a true conservadem.

Reply to this post

Response to ericson00 (Reply #10)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:13 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

16. RE and doesn't call himself a socialist

No worries well have a candidate who does. The oposition won't even have to try,

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #16)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:22 PM

JDPriestly (57,936 posts)

28. What do you mean when you use the word "socialist"?

What does that word mean to you?

And have you heard any of Bernie's speeches?

Reply to this post

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #28)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:47 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

43. What does the words mean...

...to them voting public ? My guessing is, "Venezuela". Or "North Korea".

In any case, you can run for presentation , or you can run to teach them true meaning if socialism . But you can't do both.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #43)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:29 AM

JDPriestly (57,936 posts)

51. Bernie thinks it means Sweden or Norway. I think it means Germany or Austria or France.

Bernie makes very clear the ISSUES he is running on. Free college education (post-secondary state schools), single payer health care as in Western European countries (that I lived in), government investment in safer and better infrastructure, breaking up the too big to fail banks, a strong defense, but an audit of the military expenditures, etc. You can listen to his speeches and visit FeeltheBern.com to read about all his proposals.

I hope you do.

He is not pointing to Venezuela or North Korea.

When Americans hear what Bernie has to say, they agree with him.

Reply to this post

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #51)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:31 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

88. Great! We will have a gop candidate ...

... who says Make America Great, and a Dem who says Make America France. Game over.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #88)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 10:09 AM

JDPriestly (57,936 posts)

97. Bernie is simply the smartest guy in the room.

No matter the label he carries or that the media attaches to him.

See this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251555615

That links you to an article discussing Bernie's uncanny ability to foresee disasters before they occur.

The must-read article on his track record of prescience:

http://stupidpartymathvmyth.com/1/post/2015/06/bernard-bernie-sanders-the-political-foresight-champion.html

Bernie warning about entering into the Iraq War.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/video/flashback-rep-bernie-sanders-opposes-iraq-war

Proven right.

Bernie warning about the gambling on Wall Street and the crisis it would and did lead to:

http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4537613/bernie-sanders-predicts-wall-st-collapse

Note that this c-span video is dated 1998!

A couple of times in a century, we get the opportunity to elect a true leader, one who has the judgment and wisdom to excite us with new vision and guide us with wise caution. Bernie is that opportunity.

When Abraham Lincoln was elected president, the country was divided. As I understand it, although he did not favor slavery, he never intended to force slave states to abolish it. The argument was about the ability of slaveholders to pursue and capture slaves in the North. That is my understanding.

But the remarkable thing about Lincoln was that he had the moral courage and the intuition and the foresight to see that protecting the Union was our foremost priority and that slavery as an institution was too great a danger to our Union and to the rights of man and of the slaves to tolerate.

He was a leader, a wise man, a courageous man.

But to much of the country, his ideas were horrifying. To be an abolitionist was in the South akin to being a Communist in the US.

Bernie is not a Communist. He is a Democratic Socialist. There is a huge difference. Western Europe even when conservatives are in charge as in Germany, still provide free college tuition and single-payer healthcare to their people. They do not entangle their military in crazy adventures without thinking about how they will govern the countries after they have ventured into them.

Sanders is that kind of cautious Democratic Socialist. A lot of Americans will like his ideas.

He is 73 years old, an age at which even Jeb Bush thinks he is entitled to retire and enjoy his life. But he is willing to go on and serve his country and the American people. He has great wisdom, years of experience and a powerful bunch of courage and energy, and I sure do hope for the sake of our country, that we elect him in 2016.

He is the first and only presidential candidate who has inspired me to this degree in my life, and I myself am 72. I have never seen a candidate of the quality of Bernie Sanders.

We will be so lucky if we can elect him.

He is fiscally somewhat conservative in my view. He has served on the Budget Committee. He may be the ranking member. He said in his speech to the DLC that one of his first goals will be to order an audit of the military.

If you have ever talked with someone who handled military contracts or did military work, you will understand why that is a good idea. The process encourages spendthrift use of tax money. It is very likely that we can have the same or a better defense than we now have for less money. Bernie is not a spendthrift foolish person.

I think that electing him is the chance of the century for America.

Reply to this post

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #97)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:41 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

112. Bernie may be the smartest man* in the room...

....but he sure made a bone-headed move by adopting and keeping the socialist label.

* With reference to "man", you left your self open to quite a few "witty retorts". Just saying

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #112)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 10:52 PM

JDPriestly (57,936 posts)

117. I don't mind witty retorts. Most DUers know I am a woman.

One of my pet peeves with the English language is our failure to use terms, maybe even to have modern terms that are gender neutral.

Man, which is related to the word "mankind" and is similar to the word "Mann" in German which IS gender neutral. I could have used the word "person," but it seemed too unspecific, too general and impersonal to express my point.

I enjoy discussion and civil argument, so it is rather difficult to get me riled. So if someone wants to make a witty retort, I will probably laugh along.

Hey. No problem.

Reply to this post

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #117)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 11:22 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

121. +100 ! (Nm)

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #88)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 04:34 PM

OnionPatch (6,169 posts)

99. I know a whole lot of young people

who would love America to be more like France or other countries in Europe. It may not be enough for this election but the old zenophobes are dying off.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:06 PM

onecaliberal (29,916 posts)

8. Because electing people owned by corporations has worked out so well for us.

Reply to this post

Response to onecaliberal (Reply #8)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:10 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

11. No, because ..

... the American people don't like socialism. For goods reason.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #11)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:11 PM

onecaliberal (29,916 posts)

13. I guess you should stop using the socialist roads

Power grid. Basically all public infrastructure. I'm never going to agree with you. Ta ta...

Reply to this post

Response to onecaliberal (Reply #13)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:16 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

20. Yes, the roads...

Last edited Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:01 AM - Edit history (3)

....we can't forget the roads!

Heck, the Roman Empire was socialist !! What with the roads and aqueducts they basically invented socialism !!

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #20)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 02:52 AM

JDPriestly (57,936 posts)

131. And schools, and various agencies that keep our water and food and medications safe.

And then there are agricultural subsidies and flood insurance and public transportation. Hey, the railroads that were built across the country on land granted by the federal government. Then there are the dams and the parks, and the list goes on and on.

When we citizens work together to improve our country and help provide for each other's needs, it's a good thing.

The things we do as individuals are also good, like starting families, working, starting and running businesses, organizing clubs, churches, charities. They are all good.

It isn't either or. It is a matter of the best way to organize a particular part of our lives at a particular time.

You need not fear. The Constitution protects our rights to private property and requires that the government pay just compensation if it takes property that belongs to us.

We have more to fear form the civil forfeiture laws and incursions on our civil rights, many of which are condoned by the courts or even passed into law by our legislatures than we do from the proposals that Bernie Sanders is recommending.

Socialism covers a lot of territory, and it is probably impossible to have government without having some very popular, beloved programs that could be defined as socialist.

It's really not an important issue.

Reply to this post

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #131)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 10:13 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

137. You are right, We have nothing to fear. ....

.,,, other than, perhaps, a gop president.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #137)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 11:08 AM

JDPriestly (57,936 posts)

138. Wbetber that happens or no depends on whether droves of Democrats stay home as they did

in 2014 in races with Blue Dog and other conservative Democrats or whether we not only get Democrats to the polls but add new votes to the numbers that support Democrats.

When I go to Bernie meetings, I see new faces, people who have never been active in politics, maybe not even voted, as well as a few who have worked on a campaign before.

Bernie is attracting new voters. I'm not even sure that the polls at this time are reflecting these potential voters who have previously shunned the Democratic Party.

If I recall, the candidates in 2014 who won, who excited voters enough to get out and vote were considered more to the left in great part. Al Franken kept his Senate seat. Others who strongly stand for traditional FDR policies, did better than those of the right, those who were too ready to compromise Democratic ideas with the Republican ones.

That can be interpreted two ways -- either that the electorate really leaned to the right or that the candidates on the "left" inspired voters to get to the polls because they felt that their vote could make a difference in Congress and their own lives.

I think the explanation is the latter. And when I meet with other Bernie supporters, I get the sense that they have decided that Bernie's ideas will improve their lives.

It's about time we catch up with other parts of the world on issues like family leave and universal health insurance and debtless post-secondary education, etc.

We are so far behind other countries.

Call is socialism. Call it common sense. What is in a name?

This is the age of computers. Computers do jobs we used to do. They do them for us, all of us. Why shouldn't we all benefit from the time saved, the money earned, when computers work instead of us?

Or should those who "own" the computers earn all the wages from these senseless automatons? It's a real question?

Because conservatives cannot on the one hand require women to birth as many babies as possible and on the other, replace the work the babies might one day do with machinery that costs very little to maintain and thereby force the moms and babies to live on less than it takes to just have a roof over their heads, food on their plates and the basic necessities of life. That is not going to work very long.

An ever growing human population, less work, and all the profits going to a relatively small group of people? Meanwhile those who earn the least are taxed at one of the highest rates when you consider total income?

That equation just does not work. And that is what conservatives, and to a lesser degree even Hillary are offering us.

Do you think the word "socialism" is really appropriate when you are talking about the world we have today in which corporations operate on the international level while working people are constrained to try to make a living in the confines of a nation?

I think the application of socialism as a theory traditionally was thought of as "nationalizing" production. That was the old idea. That is virtually impossible today because production is multi-national. The wheel is made in Mexico, the chassis in South Korea, the gears someplace else. How would anyone nationalize that production even if they wanted to.

Socialism today in my definition (since the traditional one would never work in today's economy) means sharing wealth so through taxation and the funding of government programs benefits everyone, keeps people alive, prepares them to contribute to society. That's what it means to me. And that is how it works in European and some other countries.

I might improve my definition in the future because I am thinking of it as I write it, but I do not think that anyone who uses the word socialism is thinking of the socialism of Marx or Lenin. The modern economy is not compatible with any such idea, and people have evolved beyond the limitations of communication and understanding of the world of the times those thinkers lived in.

Reply to this post

Response to onecaliberal (Reply #13)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 07:50 AM

FrodosPet (5,169 posts)

80. The roads that were mostly built by private companies, right?

The ones paid for by taxing the fuel sold at privately owned gas stations, used mostly for the vehicles of privately owned companies of all types (as well as by the individuals receiving profits, paychecks, or pensions from these companies)?

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #11)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:17 PM

Armstead (47,803 posts)

21. Oh good Christ...That's a right wing talking point if ever I heard one

Ooooooo, don't trust those Scary Socialists.....oooooooo, they're going to steal out babies oooooo

That's Red Scare crap from the 50's. Most people, except hard core conservatives, are more receptive to a mild socialist -- actually an FDR Liberal -- like Sanders once they hear him speak. The rest are unwinnable anyway.

The public would never support Gay Marriage either.

Reply to this post

Response to Armstead (Reply #21)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:21 PM

onecaliberal (29,916 posts)

27. I'm going to stop feeding it.

Reply to this post

Response to onecaliberal (Reply #27)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:26 PM

Armstead (47,803 posts)

31. I think you're rght. I'll just cross the bridge.

Reply to this post

Response to Armstead (Reply #31)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:26 PM

onecaliberal (29,916 posts)

32. Ditto.

Reply to this post

Response to Armstead (Reply #21)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:38 PM

arcane1 (38,613 posts)

37. Stale, reheated John Bircher paranoia, right here on DU.

I'm actually very encouraged to see it here. It means his campaign is having an impact

Reply to this post

Response to arcane1 (Reply #37)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:04 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

48. No, simply a concern for the electability . ..

.... of tge democratic candidate. What us paranoid about that? Let alone "bircher".

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #11)

Post removed

Response to Post removed (Reply #23)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:28 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

33. Thus us an over the top slur...

Being a Hillary supporter and pointing out electability issues does not make one a fascist . This is an over the top slur.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #33)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:39 PM

PowerToThePeople (9,610 posts)

38. Nothing over the top

If you support the current status quo, you support fascism.

Sanders is against the status quo and therefore against fascism. He has my vote.

Reply to this post

Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #38)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:49 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

45. LOL. A real fail ( nt)

Reply to this post

Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #38)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 06:35 AM

Cha (286,374 posts)

77. It's not true.. and, says everything about you and absolutely nothing about your target.

Reply to this post

Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #38)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:30 AM

George II (67,782 posts)

87. Turns out you were wrong. I seriously wonder if you know what "fascism" is.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #33)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:40 PM

arcane1 (38,613 posts)

40. That's why I call it corporatist.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #33)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:33 AM

hrmjustin (71,265 posts)

53. Results.

On Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:28 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Posterchild for fascism. n/t
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=554863

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Being a Hillary supporter and pointing out electability issues does not make one a fascist . This is an over the top slur.

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:42 PM, and the Jury voted 6-1 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Please make your point another way than calling another poster a poster child for fascism.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Slur.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Response to hrmjustin (Reply #53)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 06:37 AM

Cha (286,374 posts)

78. Ha! Good.. throwing around that word "fascism" as if he knew what it meant. Just bc BS is

a "Socialist".. does not mean everyone else is a fascist.

Reply to this post

Response to Cha (Reply #78)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:33 AM

George II (67,782 posts)

89. It's only August 2015 - what will the rhetoric be early next year? They'll be throwing around...

...."fascism", "communism", and every other "ism" they can come up with in a few months.

Reply to this post

Response to George II (Reply #89)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 07:56 PM

Cha (286,374 posts)

109. And, all in BS's name.. doesn't do their candidate any favors.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:17 PM

PowerToThePeople (9,610 posts)

22. And here I thought Joseph McCarthy was dead

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:20 PM

JDPriestly (57,936 posts)

26. If you ask peple in the abstract whether they willl vote for a socialist, they will say no.

If they listen to Bernie and you ask them whether they want what he wants, they will say yes.

Socialism is a word. It's like Christianity. It means different things to different people.

Bernie's platform which he states in every speech is what Americans want.

That's what matters, not what label he uses for himself.

Reply to this post

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #26)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:32 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

34. Actually , the label matters . .

.... more than you think. In fact it will ensure that most people will not even bother to understand his platform. The label tells them enough.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #34)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:34 AM

JDPriestly (57,936 posts)

54. We shall see. I'm volunteering for Bernie.

A lot of professional people are. The middle class is in decline, and Bernie is the only one who is really responding to that concern or is believable when he talks about that problem.

CItizens United and the overbearing role of big money and corporations in the political process is a greater concern to Americans today, especially young Americans, than socialism.

China is a Communist country with a Communist government, but we trade with it all the time, and in spite of the Communist label, our billionaires invest a lot of their money and make a lot of their products there.

I don't think the socialist label is nearly the problem for Bernie that you would think that the Communist label and reality is for China.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:23 PM

MohRokTah (15,429 posts)

29. Nope

Which is why nominating Sanders is political suicide for the party.

Reply to this post

Response to MohRokTah (Reply #29)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:33 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

35. +100 ! (Nm)

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:33 PM

arcane1 (38,613 posts)

36. Then you need not waste one more precious moment of your life mentioning him.

You don't get that time back, after all, and the outcome is the same even if you do nothing.

Reply to this post

Response to arcane1 (Reply #36)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:39 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

39. I believe..

.... in helping others to increase their understanding and in educating them. And in learning , understanding and being educated myself . So I don't consider this to be a waste of time.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #39)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:48 PM

arcane1 (38,613 posts)

44. Cool story n/t

Reply to this post

Response to arcane1 (Reply #44)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:53 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

46. Not only cool,

But TRUE too.

Doesn't get any better than that.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:43 PM

jfern (5,204 posts)

41. 55% thought Obama was a socialist

Reply to this post

Response to jfern (Reply #41)

Fri Aug 28, 2015, 11:54 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

47. Think if he came out . ,,

... and agreed with them.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #47)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 05:24 AM

Garrett78 (10,721 posts)

75. We're all essentially socialists.

We'd be in a lot of trouble without socialism.

Of course, try explaining that to the ignorant masses.

Reply to this post

Response to Garrett78 (Reply #75)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:21 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

83. The ignorant massess are actually right....

For instance, vegetables are all essentially vegetables, but broccoli is just not the same as avocados.

Humans are social animals and to survive and thrive we do have to cooperate and work together. As you sugest, all socio-economic systems are social in nature.

That, however, does not make them all socialist. Socialism is a distinct socioeconomic system that has characteristics and consequences different from other competing ideologies. It is entirely proper to distinguish it from the alternatives and towards judge it on it's merits in contrast to the alternatives.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #83)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:34 AM

Garrett78 (10,721 posts)

90. Socialism is all around us and we'd be screwed without it.

The ignorant masses couldn't tell you what socialism is, so they sure as hell aren't in position to speak one way or the other about it.

As the Wikipedia pages reads, "Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy." Or, as the International Encyclopedia of Political Science puts it, "Socialist systems are those regimes based on the economic and political theory of socialism, which advocates public ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources."

The US isn't purely one -ism or another, but it's foolish to deny the great extent to which it is a socialist system.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #47)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 01:48 AM

jfern (5,204 posts)

130. Why yes

I support public schools, public roads, public sidewalks, and public parks.

There goes that argument.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:06 AM

whatchamacallit (15,558 posts)

49. Pointless shite

I'm American and I'm voting for Sanders.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:26 AM

SoapBox (18,791 posts)

50. Funny when the Bernie haters can't even get information correct...

DEMOCRATIC Socialist.

Not Socialist.

At least provide honest information.

Reply to this post

Response to SoapBox (Reply #50)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:52 AM

revmclaren (1,952 posts)

57. Um....no...he has called himself a socialist....

5. In a speech he gave at the National Committee for Independent Political Action in New York City on June 22, 1989, reprinted in the December 1989 issue of the socialist publication Monthly Review: “In Vermont, everybody knows that I am a socialist and that many people in our movement, not all, are socialists. And as often as not — and this is an interesting point that is the honest-to-God truth — what people will say is, ‘I don’t really know what socialism is, but if you’re not a Democrat or a Republican, you’re OK with me.’ That’s true. And I think there has been too much of a reluctance on the part of progressives and radicals to use the word ‘socialism.’”

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/14-things-bernie-sanders-has-said-about-socialism-120265#ixzz3kAy40T4x

Damn easy-to-use Google!!!!

Reply to this post

Response to SoapBox (Reply #50)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 06:41 AM

Cha (286,374 posts)

79. "Bernie haters..".. right.. 'cause there are no "Hillary haters".. BS supporters are pure and would

not entertain such thoughts.

Reply to this post

Response to SoapBox (Reply #50)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:26 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

110. The average voter . ..

Last edited Sat Aug 29, 2015, 10:00 PM - Edit history (1)

.... doesn't know or care what the difference between a "socialist" and a "democratic socialist" is. They aren't going to bother to find out and any attempt to explain it will just reinforce the message that he is a socialist.

And after reading the wiki article on "socialism" I've come to the conclusion that socialists don't know what the difference is either.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:30 AM

Le Taz Hot (22,271 posts)

52. Is a Socialist running?

Reply to this post

Response to Le Taz Hot (Reply #52)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:54 AM

revmclaren (1,952 posts)

58. Yes...

See my post with linky things above...

Reply to this post

Response to revmclaren (Reply #58)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:58 AM

Le Taz Hot (22,271 posts)

59. You're new.

I'll be a good girl and leave you alone. This time.

Reply to this post

Response to Le Taz Hot (Reply #59)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:05 AM

revmclaren (1,952 posts)

62. Sorry, wrong again... Here since 2012

Part time poster...full time lurker.

But I'll forgive you for your mistake...this time!

But please... Discredit sanders own words....

Reply to this post

Response to revmclaren (Reply #62)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:11 AM

Le Taz Hot (22,271 posts)

65. 2012! Oooooh!

Reply to this post

Response to Le Taz Hot (Reply #65)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:14 AM

revmclaren (1,952 posts)

68. I know...think of all the missed recs!!!

Was too busy in the real world ... The Obama campaign and all..

Night night...

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 12:39 AM

PatrickforO (14,002 posts)

55. Whatever we say in arguing about what Bernie should or should not be called,

his speech to the DNC today was RIGHT ON, and the points he makes are things most Americans agree with. Bernie is elevating the dialog, and I believe he can win, which is why I'm supporting him.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:02 AM

revmclaren (1,952 posts)

61. The MSM and the repubs will eat him alive

Just for the one statement He made...HE MADE...and i found in 30 seconds of google search.

Imagine what they will find. If they have a real reason to fear him politically.

Just my opinion and his own statement forever on the Internet.

Reply to this post

Response to revmclaren (Reply #61)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:07 AM

moobu2 (4,822 posts)

63. You are so right.

They haven't even started

Reply to this post

Response to revmclaren (Reply #61)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:27 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

84. Yep /nt/

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:10 AM

revmclaren (1,952 posts)

64. Well off to bed...

We 'newbies' have to get a lot of rest or our fragile little fingers may get tired...

Oh, and Hillary 2016 and all that...

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:12 AM

lovemydog (11,833 posts)

66. I think so, yes.

If Sanders wins the democratic nomination I believe he will win the Presidency. When democrats enthusiastically vote in general elections we win.

Bernie's not a 'socialist' like some outdated stereotype of Boris Badinov & Natasha. He's a democratic socialist who caucuses with the democratic party. He's proposing a massive jobs program (paid for by a tax on Wall Street speculation), strengthening & expanding social security, publicly funded elections and health care for all.

He's calling for a grass roots movement to create a more participatory democracy. That's as American as apple pie.

Reply to this post

Response to lovemydog (Reply #66)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 12:48 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

139. "Bernie's not a 'socialist'"....

..... then he shouldn't claim to be one. But I guess it's too late now . Oh well.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:16 AM

Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)

71. I hope we find out.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:18 AM

Starry Messenger (32,336 posts)

72. I'm a Hillary supporter, but I don't think slamming socialism is really a winning tactic.

Lots of people like socialist programs and progressive policies. Maybe there will be a socialist President some day. Probably not this year though. We will be lucky if we can preserve the reforms of the Obama administration in the face of the right-wing assault.

Reply to this post

Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #72)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:40 AM

AOR (692 posts)

73. "Preserve the reforms of the Obama administration"...

and stumping for Hillary Clinton...yeah that's a real winning leftist platform and class analysis going on in that post Starry Messenger. I'm sure Bill Foster would be proud. It's amazing how "communists" don't consider the Neoliberal policies of Clinton and Obama as part of the right-wing assault on the working class. Opportunism and identity politics abound for the new breed of liberal "communists." Lmao

Reply to this post

Response to AOR (Reply #73)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 08:22 AM

Starry Messenger (32,336 posts)

82. I'm sure all four of you left at the Bell are going to

start the revolution any day now. If you get any more leftist, you might be able to winnow it down to two. Kisses!

Reply to this post

Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #82)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 01:59 PM

AOR (692 posts)

98. So you're bashing the Bell now also... ?

very interesting considering how much time you spent there espousing leftist credentials. I'm not a member of the Bell. I followed the writers there - including you - for many years though. Asked TA and Anax and a few others for permission to use some of their writing because it's that good and presents clarity. Probably the best forum on the net for leftist analysis in my opinion. Mileage may vary I guess. Maybe next you will tell me that the Bell is a right-wing front group posing as leftists. Heard that before many times from the people in your little DU circle of "Neoliberal radicals" that you are fully on board with.

As an observer I must admit that something was never quite right about the supposed "leftist activism" in some of your posts, because it wasn't leftist in any way, shape, or form. It was reactionary, "New Left", identity politics horseshit to the core and now you reveal in full glory where you actually stand. You've lost your way and it's very sad. Own it.

Reply to this post

Response to AOR (Reply #98)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 05:24 PM

Starry Messenger (32,336 posts)

100. Haha.

Did more for socialism in the past week than you guys will do in the next decade. Please, take your confused myopia to someone else. I have no time for bitter sectarians.

Reply to this post

Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #100)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 06:27 PM

AOR (692 posts)

104. Is "be the change you wish to see"...

the new rallying cry of the CPUSA Starry Messenger...? "New-Age communism" and identity politics as a political movement built around support of the savage Neoliberal policies of Barack Obama and the Clintons will build solidarity and free the struggling workers from savage economic exploitation and oppression...who knew ? Will there be a pamphlet available for the "bitter sectarians" so we can learn how it's done ?

Reply to this post

Response to AOR (Reply #104)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 06:42 PM

Starry Messenger (32,336 posts)

106. You guys wrote your own pamphlet years ago.

Arrogant white boy "leftists" are as common as grains of sand. Saddest thing is that you think your opinion is in any way original, or that sniping is "leftist analysis." I will leave the rest for the short-sighted barrel of straw that it is. You can have the last word if it makes you feel better.

Reply to this post

Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #106)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 07:40 PM

AOR (692 posts)

108. Wow...I think I will take the last word...

Arrogant "white boy leftists"...that is unbelievable that you would bring race into this. Truly pathetic on your part as there are no more fierce defenders of racial equality than many of the writers at the Bell. That is beyond all words that you would sink to that. Who the hell goes investigating on who is white and who is black or whatever at the Bell while taking in the analysis. Do you know who is white or who is a person of color there unless it's mentioned ? How does it fucking matter ? Unbelievable that you would go there. Talk about short-sighted bullshit. Your whole political world revolves around personal identities. How fucking sad is that Starry Messenger.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 02:33 AM

MFM008 (19,705 posts)

74. still not sold on Bernie

we shall see.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 05:26 AM

left-of-center2012 (34,195 posts)

76. Were there similar articles 8 years ago?

Were there similar articles 8 years ago:
Would America elect an African-American to be President ?

Reply to this post

Response to left-of-center2012 (Reply #76)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 10:04 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

136. Eight years ago? Heck...

....There have been socialist candidates running for president continously since before the turn of the 20th century. Well over a hundred years. And believe me, they've seen better days.

This isn't a new thing.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 08:03 AM

beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)

81. Socialist!:

https://m.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Name removed Message auto-removed

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:40 AM

George II (67,782 posts)

92. Who asked?

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:46 AM

Motown_Johnny (22,308 posts)

94. FDR x3

The GOP will call anyone who wins the nominee a "Socialist". We may as well have a nominee who knows how to own it.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/22/barack-obama/obama-roosevelt-socialist-communist/

^snip^

"FDR was called a socialist and a communist."
— Barack Obama on Monday, September 21st, 2009 in interview on "Late Night with David Letterman"

The president was accused of being "a socialist, not a Democrat." His plan was described as "undisguised state socialism." One critic, who controlled some powerful media outlets, suggested that communists had infiltrated the president's administration.

Those are some of the attacks that Franklin Delano Roosevelt faced in the 1930s — attacks cited recently by President Barack Obama to emphasize that he's not unique.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:52 AM

LWolf (46,179 posts)

96. Yes.

Thanks for bringing this right-wing talking point to DU. It's not like anyone else has thought to do so.

Bernie attracts a broad spectrum of voters. It's one of his strengths as a candidate. He's polling well against the republican candidates. But thanks for your concern.

Reply to this post

Response to LWolf (Reply #96)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:55 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

113. I would rather be thanked . ...

... for my concern than for bringing up "right wing talking points ". My concern is the electability of the Democratic candidate . That's a legitimate concern , not a "right wing talking point".

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 05:49 PM

NCjack (10,164 posts)

103. It's getting desperate. Voting for criminal capitalists hasn't served the public's interest.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 06:33 PM

senz (11,945 posts)

105. People are learning the difference between "socialist" & "democratic socialist."

Bet you'd like to keep 'em in the dark on that.

Sure you would.

Reply to this post

Response to senz (Reply #105)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 10:07 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

115. You can run a serious campaign for president,....

.... or you can teach them the differences between "socialism " and "democratic socialism ". But you can't do both .

In all honesty you can't do the latter at all because no one is really interested .

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 07:31 PM

Gothmog (130,044 posts)

107. My Democratic Party Chair was attacked as a socialist for merely attending Sanders event

http://www.democraticunderground.com/107827740

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:30 PM

RobertEarl (13,685 posts)

111. FDR got elected 4 times

So, yeah.

Kinda not too smart of a question, eh, PosterChild?

You probably should hurry up and delete it before you become too famous?

Reply to this post

Response to RobertEarl (Reply #111)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 09:57 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

114. Was FDR a...

.... self proclaimed socialist ? I think not.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Reply #114)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 10:08 PM

RobertEarl (13,685 posts)

116. Well, sure. He proved it too.

What seems to go right over your head is the fact that the best things our government does are socialist things. To be in denial of that is really kinda weird. Thinkaboutit.

Reply to this post

Response to RobertEarl (Reply #116)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 10:53 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

118. I didn't ask...

... was FDR a socialist, I asked if he was a self-proclaimed socialist. Was he?

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 11:17 PM

Chan790 (20,176 posts)

120. I don't buy it.

I feel compelled to point out that as late as early 2007, more than 80% of poll respondents said they'd never see a black president in their lifetimes and a majority (I think it was 53%) said they would not vote for a black candidate. We see similar data as recently as 2010 for women.

Trendsetters always poll worse than they perform in the ballot box down the road.

Really though, that's an interesting one...if the GOP clown car is really out-of-gas and a majority of Americans won't vote for a woman or a socialist...then who exactly is going to get elected out of a race comprised only of candidates that people won't vote for?

A lot of people that say they wouldn't vote for a woman or a socialist are going to vote for a woman or a socialist if they're the Democratic nominee...just like they voted for a black man with a foreign-sounding name.

Reply to this post

Response to Chan790 (Reply #120)

Sat Aug 29, 2015, 11:50 PM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

123. Trendsetter? Or ...

.... washed up ideological dead end? Face it, socialist parties and candidates have been a round for a long, long, long time. Like, since the 19th century. This isn't anything new. If people had any inclination towards a socialist president we would have had one well before now.

By my count, FDR ran against four different socialist candidates . We know who won.

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 12:33 AM

Hydra (14,459 posts)

126. We don't have any socialists running at the moment

But funny enough, people are asking questions...are their other religions than Capitalism? Are they more merciful?

The red scarers should be VERY nervous about that development...

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 01:19 AM

David__77 (21,519 posts)

127. I find the favorability of ratings of "socialism" to be strikingly high.

A slight majority of Democrats respondents rated "socialism" favorably.

I would be among those, while at the same time, I have no useful definition of socialism. I understand it and "humanism"to be interchangeable. I do not think that the word "socialist" or "socialism" has too much usefulness. Some people said a lot about Obama being a socialist, FDR being a socialist, etc.

I don't see an issue here - not one for me. The idea of electing all sorts of "types" appears to be problematic in some respect. I'll vote for who I support.

Reply to this post

Response to David__77 (Reply #127)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 01:43 AM

Rosa Luxemburg (28,627 posts)

128. We have socialism in the United States

Reply to this post

Response to David__77 (Reply #127)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 09:42 AM

PosterChild (1,307 posts)

133. Yes, it's right up there...

.... with "athiest" - just 4 points behind! Practically within the margin of error! With great ratings like that, maybe we should run a socialistic atheist! We'd sweep the election!

Reply to this post

Response to PosterChild (Original post)

Sun Aug 30, 2015, 01:44 AM

Rosa Luxemburg (28,627 posts)