New York Times: Europe Socialists Suffering

[Ame®icano]

Just one day after socialists in Germany suffered defeat, American democrats turned against democrats and killed the public option. European turn to the right gave signal to American left that, if they continue with their socialist agenda, they will share the same fate.

Even in the midst of one of the greatest challenges to capitalism in 75 years, involving a breakdown of the financial system due to “irrational exuberance,” greed and the weakness of regulatory systems, European Socialist parties and their left-wing cousins have not found a compelling response, let alone taken advantage of the right’s failures.

German voters clobbered the Social Democratic Party on Sunday, giving it only 23 percent of the vote, its worst performance since World War II.

Europe’s Socialists Suffering Even in Downturn

Just six months ago, the same New York Times asked Obama if he was a socialist, and get reply from him: "The answer would be no". - March 7, 2009. Today, American Democrats finally stud up against liberal socialism and hopefully returned to their path.

 

[Modbert]

Actually, if one uses common sense (I know you may have a tough time of it) the reason that the specific people in Europe lost is because they were the ones in office during the economic collapses in the respective countries. It has little to do with beliefs, rather to vote out the ones in charge during the crisis.

 

[Ame®icano]

Actually, if one uses common sense (I know you may have a tough time of it) the reason that the specific people in Europe lost is because they were the ones in office during the economic collapses in the respective countries. It has little to do with beliefs, rather to vote out the ones in charge during the crisis.

Socialists in France lost elections before the economic collapse, Sarcozy won in 2007.

 

[Missourian]

Keep telling yourself that Rob.

Then explain how the Prime Ministers Party came out relitively unscathed.

 

[Modbert]

Socialists in France lost elections before the economic collapse, Sarcozy won in 2007.

He did not win in a landslide either. He won with 53% in the end.

Besides, Sarkozy is a hypocrite.

Talking at the French-American Foundation in Washington, D.C. on 12 September 2006, he denounced what he called the "French arrogance" and said: "It is bad manners to embarrass one's allies or sound like one is taking delight in their troubles."[97] He also added: "We must never again turn our disagreements into a crisis." Jacques Chirac reportedly said in private that Sarkozy's speech was "appalling" and "a shameful act".[97]

 

[Ame®icano]

He probably is a hypocrite. What that makes Obama?

But this is not thread about Sarcozy, but about socialism in retreat. Please stay on the topic.

 

[Modbert]

Keep telling yourself that Rob.

Then explain how the Prime Ministers Party came out relitively unscathed.

The world had seen one of the worst economic crisis since WWII, so therefore the party in charge is going to get results such as that time.

Some of the leaders were able to stay in office due to the fact that the people saw their opponents as obstacles to them getting stuff done.

 

[Modbert]

He probably is a hypocrite. What that makes Obama?

But this is not thread about Sarcozy, but about socialism in retreat. Please stay on the topic.

You're the one who brought up Sarkozy. (Spell his name right please)

I have made my point.

 

[Maple]

Just one day after socialists in Germany suffered defeat, American democrats turned against democrats and killed the public option. European turn to the right gave signal to American left that, if they continue with their socialist agenda, they will share the same fate.

Even in the midst of one of the greatest challenges to capitalism in 75 years, involving a breakdown of the financial system due to “irrational exuberance,” greed and the weakness of regulatory systems, European Socialist parties and their left-wing cousins have not found a compelling response, let alone taken advantage of the right’s failures.

German voters clobbered the Social Democratic Party on Sunday, giving it only 23 percent of the vote, its worst performance since World War II.

Europe’s Socialists Suffering Even in Downturn

Just six months ago, the same New York Times asked Obama if he was a socialist, and get reply from him: "The answer would be no". - March 7, 2009. Today, American Democrats finally stud up against liberal socialism and hopefully returned to their path.

They have finally woke up to the fact that socialism is a FAILED agenda and CAPITALISM is the way to grow their economies. They have had years of practice at socialism, you would think that our leaders in the congress would learn from someone else's experience, but don't count on it. They will press on with their omnipotent, egotistical leader Obama.

 

[Ame®icano]

@ Dogbert

True, but I mentioned him as an argument to your statement:

...reason that the specific people in Europe lost is because they were the ones in office during the economic collapses in the respective countries

Instead of France, I could mention Belgium or Netherlands, my argument would still be correct.

 

[Modbert]

Instead of France, I could mention Belgium or Netherlands, my argument would still be correct.

Belgium and especially the Netherlands can be considered radically different than the U.S. in several ways. In fact, they are more progressive than us.

 

[AllieBaba]

Keep telling yourself that Rob.

Then explain how the Prime Ministers Party came out relitively unscathed.

The world had seen one of the worst economic crisis since WWII, so therefore the party in charge is going to get results such as that time.

Some of the leaders were able to stay in office due to the fact that the people saw their opponents as obstacles to them getting stuff done.

As they should.

I think the failure in Europe is yet another example of how SOCIALISM NEVER SUCCEEDS. Which is why the US hopefully won't go there anymore than it already has.

 

[Modbert]

As they should.

I think the failure in Europe is yet another example of how SOCIALISM NEVER SUCCEEDS. Which is why the US hopefully won't go there anymore than it already has.

Socialism how? It all depends how you define Socialism. Many European countries have implemented many Socialist policies and are more successful because of it. You seem to harp on the idea that Socialism is evil when if you want to look at it from a certain perspective, taxes in general are Socialist.

 

[AllieBaba]

Now we're in lala land, I see. Only a libtard reject defines failure as success.

But I know you will do it, because that's what the left does. Makes up an alternate reality.

 

[Ame®icano]

Instead of France, I could mention Belgium or Netherlands, my argument would still be correct.

Belgium and especially the Netherlands can be considered radically different than the U.S. in several ways. In fact, they are more progressive than us.

They were. Recent waves of immigrants is turning them towards right.

 

[Modbert]

Now we're in lala land, I see. Only a libtard reject defines failure as success.

But I know you will do it, because that's what the left does. Makes up an alternate reality.

It's not lala land. You refuse to admit the successes because that would mean admitting that Socialism is not the evil little word you think it is. Quick Allie! Bomb Drill! Get under the desk quickly!

 

[Modbert]

They were. Recent waves of immigrants is turning them towards right.

Then they will become worse countries because of it. Netherlands actually has to shut down prisons due to a lack of prisoners. That's how progressive they are.

 

[AllieBaba]

Now we're in lala land, I see. Only a libtard reject defines failure as success.

But I know you will do it, because that's what the left does. Makes up an alternate reality.

It's not lala land. You refuse to admit the successes because that would mean admitting that Socialism is not the evil little word you think it is. Quick Allie! Bomb Drill! Get under the desk quickly!

Spare me, and name all the "successes". I guarantee they're figments of your imagination.

And Netherland...they're so progressive they kill off babies and old folks. That's what I call CIVILIZED.

 

[AllieBaba]

"The table shows 101,143 violent crimes and 919,262 property crimes in 2001. With a population of 16,171,520 (September 2002), this works out as 625.4 violent crimes per 100,000 people and 5684.4 proprety crimes. Or, to put it differently, the violent crime rate in the Netherlands in 24% higher than in the US, and the property crime rate is 55% higher."

DILACERATOR: Guns and crime in the Netherlands

 

[Modbert]

Spare me, and name all the "successes". I guarantee they're figments of your imagination.

And Netherland...they're so progressive they kill off babies and old folks. That's what I call CIVILIZED.

Care to back up your vague bullshit with evidence?

And these successes are many of the policies that you don't want here in the United States.

Netherland's Health Care System is 62% Government funded and is better than ours.