POLL: The GOP and "Socialism"

[Mac1958]

Don't try to tell other people what benefits them. That's incredibly condescending.

Isn't that what Trump and his supporters are doing right now?

He's playing to his base like no President before him. Surely he and they must think they know what's best for the rest of us.
.

And where the fck is he saying that his policies are meant to benefit say... the illegals? Obviously they aren't... the policies punish those people harshly. Exactly as designed.

No benefits for those wanting to illegally immigrate.

So no, you are plain wrong.

Nowhere did I say this was about illegals.

Yikes.
.

Trump's policies overwhelmingly benefit his base. Maybe not everyone, but definitely the overwhelming majority. I don't see what this deflection has to do with my point.

How do you know they will definitely benefit the overwhelming majority?

And speaking of defection, none of this has anything to do with my OP.
.

 

[Mac1958]

You JUST said that socialist policies benefit everyone.
And now you are saying no policy benefits everyone?
Wah??

I did?

Where?
.

 

[there4eyeM]

The only needed "ism" is eclecticism.

 

[JoeB131]

Isn't it funny how we always seem to be involved?

No, not funny at all, pal. We fought a war in that region that was pointless, killed a lot more people than Pol Pot did, and we still whine like we were the victims.

"You have made a desert and called it peace"

 

[forkup]

It makes it so much easier to distinguish between the two major political parties when the crazy democrat left finally quits the smoke and mirrors and comes out of the socialist political closet. Live with it and embrace it while you can lefties because the democrat party ain't likely to be around much longer at this rate.

If you think the Democrats are socialist you're fucking nuts. The Democrats would be right wing in most European countries.

Don't tell me, tell it to hyphen Cortez and Bernie Sanders and the angry crazy democrat leadership who are starting to make the European liberals look sane.

As a European liberal I can say your full of it. Bernie is slightly more to the right of the general Western European citizen. Still waiting for him to say for instance that Election Campaigns should be funded by the government. A perfectly normal and non-controversial thing here. Not only that, look at the better life index. You will find that the US is behind a lot of, so called socialist countries, as they are referred to by the right. What does that tell you?OECD Better Life Index

 

[JoeB131]

Pol Pot was an engineering student in Paris when he was taught Marxist philosophy. The French did this stuff.

Are you claiming that Pol Pot killed those 1 million people himself.

You see, this is the problem with demonizing a dictator... dictators only kind of reflect the moods of their people. Dictators only work because lot of people are ready, willing and able to follow their orders.

In thecase of Cambodia, after we overthrew the monarchy of Noradom Sihanouk, put in a puppet government and proceeded to terrorize the country by illegally carpet bombing it trying to disrupt the Ho Chi Mihn Trail, we radicalized the people to the point of "Let's kill anyone who supported the Americans" kind of seemed like a good idea.

 

[Norman]

There are ideas and elements of socialism that can happily coexist with our capitalism and make things better for everybody.

Yep. I would think that a reasonable person would understand that this all lies along a continuum, that you're not either "socialist" or "not socialist". But it sure does seem like there are a lot of people who can't seem to grasp that.
.

Here Mac... You replied "yes", which implies you agree.

 

[Doc1]

Isn't it funny how we always seem to be involved?

No, not funny at all, pal. We fought a war in that region that was pointless, killed a lot more people than Pol Pot did, and we still whine like we were the victims.

"You have made a desert and called it peace"

We were the victims of McNamara and LBJ and the stupid idea of Rules of Engagement. We should have never been there but since were they should have let them fight. The longer the war the more money they make, it's just THAT simple.

 

[Camp]

Receiving what one pays in back is not socialism.
Popular to some. Others with any financial investing knowledge, not so much.

I agree completely, but ss is socialist only to those that didn’t pay into it. We that worked, paid for it, and our payments are based on what we were forced to pay into it.

Social security is not socialism. It is our own money we are forced to pay in, rather than invest and make more for ourselves.

How many of those old white conservatives use social security? We already have socialist programs, and they do what they're supposed to. We have to stop using the word socialism. People are too dumb to get over the stigma that has been attached to it by the propaganda machine. It's a buzzword that automatically shuts down the conversation. They hear it and their brains turn off.

It's a socialist program. Socialist programs are the only thing the left is trying to see implemented.

Right, well, either way it's a successful and popular socialist program. Same goes for medicaid/medicare. There are ideas and elements of socialism that can happily coexist with our capitalism and make things better for everybody.

Social Security is not an investment program and the money you receive if you live long enough to collect SS is not "your" money.

 

[Mac1958]

There are ideas and elements of socialism that can happily coexist with our capitalism and make things better for everybody.

Yep. I would think that a reasonable person would understand that this all lies along a continuum, that you're not either "socialist" or "not socialist". But it sure does seem like there are a lot of people who can't seem to grasp that.
.

Here Mac... You replied "yes", which implies you agree.

Look at what I quoted. The word "can" is known as a "qualifier". My point was that this stuff exists on a continuum.

Do you agree with that?
.

 

[Mac1958]

We appear to be a little light on the "Mango screw yourself" response.

 

[Norman]

It's funny that whenever socialism is brought up, social security is also brought up as a glorious example.

Yet, this program is over 20 trillions in debt, because of the Ponzi scheme financing.

And pays much less than you would get in the free market. Glorious success indeed. In fact, it's one of the worst ideas I have ever seen. This just shows that the "socialists" here have no idea what they are talking about.

 

[Doc1]

Pol Pot was an engineering student in Paris when he was taught Marxist philosophy. The French did this stuff.

Are you claiming that Pol Pot killed those 1 million people himself.

You see, this is the problem with demonizing a dictator... dictators only kind of reflect the moods of their people. Dictators only work because lot of people are ready, willing and able to follow their orders.

In thecase of Cambodia, after we overthrew the monarchy of Noradom Sihanouk, put in a puppet government and proceeded to terrorize the country by illegally carpet bombing it trying to disrupt the Ho Chi Mihn Trail, we radicalized the people to the point of "Let's kill anyone who supported the Americans" kind of seemed like a good idea.

You're an idiot. It was, is and will ALWAYS be about who has the guns. Pol Pot (as all Communists do) purged anyone with an education or cultural appreciation. He then "re-educated" them to the point where they would do ANYTHING they were told to do. Especially since they knew they and their families would die if they didn't. How do you think the Russians were able to not break in Stalingrad? The army set up machine guns and ordered their troops to charge telling them that if they took ONE step backwards they would be shot.

 

[Norman]

There are ideas and elements of socialism that can happily coexist with our capitalism and make things better for everybody.

Yep. I would think that a reasonable person would understand that this all lies along a continuum, that you're not either "socialist" or "not socialist". But it sure does seem like there are a lot of people who can't seem to grasp that.
.

Here Mac... You replied "yes", which implies you agree.

Look at what I quoted. The word "can" is known as a "qualifier". My point was that this stuff exists on a continuum.

Do you agree with that?
.

You can have an interpretation where it doesn't exist on a continuum or one where it does. That is you can say that once country crosses certain threshold it becomes socialist, or that it is x % socialist. Both are valid ways of looking at the world. Since we are talking about definitions of words here and not any actual reality, you can define it either way. But this is so pointless, what is your actual point?

 

[Mac1958]

There are ideas and elements of socialism that can happily coexist with our capitalism and make things better for everybody.

Yep. I would think that a reasonable person would understand that this all lies along a continuum, that you're not either "socialist" or "not socialist". But it sure does seem like there are a lot of people who can't seem to grasp that.
.

Here Mac... You replied "yes", which implies you agree.

Look at what I quoted. The word "can" is known as a "qualifier". My point was that this stuff exists on a continuum.

Do you agree with that?
.

You can have an interpretation where it doesn't exist on a continuum or one where it does. That is you can say that once country crosses certain threshold it becomes socialist, or that it is x % socialist. Both are valid ways of looking at the world. Since we are talking about definitions of words here and not any actual reality, you can define it either way. But this is so pointless, what is your actual point?

My actual point is that it appears the GOP hasn't figured out that the word doesn't scare people any more.

Outside "the base", I guess.

I thought I made that pretty clear.
.

 

[Confounding]

It makes it so much easier to distinguish between the two major political parties when the crazy democrat left finally quits the smoke and mirrors and comes out of the socialist political closet. Live with it and embrace it while you can lefties because the democrat party ain't likely to be around much longer at this rate.

If you think the Democrats are socialist you're fucking nuts. The Democrats would be right wing in most European countries.

Don't tell me, tell it to hyphen Cortez and Bernie Sanders and the angry crazy democrat leadership who are starting to make the European liberals look sane.

As a European liberal I can say your full of it. Bernie is slightly more to the right of the general Western European citizen. Still waiting for him to say for instance that Election Campaigns should be funded by the government. A perfectly normal and non-controversial thing here. Not only that, look at the better life index. You will find that the US is behind a lot of, so called socialist countries, as they are referred to by the right. What does that tell you?OECD Better Life Index

Bernie mentioned quite a lot that campaigns should be publicly funded. Thank you for backing up my point, though. Bernie is as far as the left goes in America and he'd still be questionable as a leftie in Europe.

 

[Camp]

It's funny that whenever socialism is brought up, social security is also brought up as a glorious example.

Yet, this program is over 20 trillions in debt, because of the Ponzi scheme financing.

And pays much less than you would get in the free market. Glorious success indeed. In fact, it's one of the worst ideas I have ever seen. This just shows that the "socialists" here have no idea what they are talking about.

Nonsense and misinformation.

 

[Norman]

There are ideas and elements of socialism that can happily coexist with our capitalism and make things better for everybody.

Yep. I would think that a reasonable person would understand that this all lies along a continuum, that you're not either "socialist" or "not socialist". But it sure does seem like there are a lot of people who can't seem to grasp that.
.

Here Mac... You replied "yes", which implies you agree.

Look at what I quoted. The word "can" is known as a "qualifier". My point was that this stuff exists on a continuum.

Do you agree with that?
.

You can have an interpretation where it doesn't exist on a continuum or one where it does. That is you can say that once country crosses certain threshold it becomes socialist, or that it is x % socialist. Both are valid ways of looking at the world. Since we are talking about definitions of words here and not any actual reality, you can define it either way. But this is so pointless, what is your actual point?

My actual point is that it appears the GOP hasn't figured out that the word doesn't scare people any more.

Outside "the base", I guess.

I thought I made that pretty clear.
.

What does this have to do with continuums?

Yeah, the GOP is abusing the word, just like dems are abusing racism. Now I still don't expect anyone who self declares themselves as a racist or socialist to win.

 

[EGR one]

Our conservative posters continue to start thread after thread pertaining to "socialism". And even though their exact definitions are fairly unclear, it's obvious they think that screaming SOCIALISM is, by itself, enough to win a debate.

As most of us can see, more and more people are becoming perfectly comfortable with the word - in part, no doubt, because the Right has completely over-used and diluted it.

How long before the Right realizes the term "socialism" no longer scares people?
.

If it doesn't scare people, it should. Socialism is a race to the bottom, and third world status. There are many books written on what motivates people to work hard and/or excel in their endeavors. Socialism is not a positive factor.

 

[Norman]

It's funny that whenever socialism is brought up, social security is also brought up as a glorious example.

Yet, this program is over 20 trillions in debt, because of the Ponzi scheme financing.

And pays much less than you would get in the free market. Glorious success indeed. In fact, it's one of the worst ideas I have ever seen. This just shows that the "socialists" here have no idea what they are talking about.

Nonsense and misinformation.

Apparently the misinformation is impossible to be pointed out?

Because there is no misinformation, only facts and my opinion regarding the program, shared by all reasonables.