The Republicans have the Tea Party and the Democrats have the social democrats, and most of us are somewhere in between the two.
The question to me is whether the conservatives will either figure out or admit that the goal is Sweden & Germany, not Cuba & Venezuela.
The conservatives are fighting something that doesn't exist right now, and it's helping the social democrats big time.
.
The Democrats promise Sweden and deliver Venezuela.
That would actually be the argument to make. But the problem with just screaming "socialism" is that it makes it easy for the social democrats to point out existing "socialist" stuff like cops, roads, social security, Medicare, etc., and suddenly the conservatives have to either (1) defend the absurd or (2) call for the end of social security and Medicare, which is just a freakin' brilliant idea.
Just sayin' - while conservatives are screaming "socialism", the liberals are easily poking holes in that argument and then making gains with their own arguments. They need a more nuanced approach.
.
Cops and roads aren't socialism, unless you think it's either socialism or anarchism, with no in-between. Social Security and Medicare, but I frankly find it funny that you leftists keep pointing to them as though you think conservatives approve of them. We do, in fact, call for replacing both systems, and the more you object to it, the more brilliant an idea it appears to be, just FYI.
Just saying, while liberals think they're "easily poking holes", they're actually just making conservatives look better by comparison. You need a more intelligent approach.
Replacing Social Security and Medicare with what, precisely?
.
These social programs can be separated by Party,
so that members can quit fighting over prochoice/prolife policies
and fund the policies they AGREE to sign up for by their Party's democratically passed platforms.
If they don't agree they can split off and form separate parties where all members agree to
fund the same programs under the same terms of membership.
this would solve the issue of marriage benefits that are splitting the parties by beliefs.
Let each fund their own beliefs, similar to churches.
So the same way Christianity is one collective system but has different denominations
each funding their own terms, conditions, facilities and programs for their members by VOLUNTARY
compliance participation and funding, the Social Programs for the public can be organized by party.
If we have private schools with their own administrative policies and separate funding,
why not have prison rehab and recovery/restitution programs that people can fund separately,
or choose to pay for HEALTH CARE instead of paying for inmate care if people don't agree with
that and expect all citizens, even ones in prisons, to work to pay for their living expenses instead of charging the public.
We could solve a lot more problems by agreeing to separation options for people
to pay for the health care, social programs, and restorative justice programs they WANT to fund
instead of wasting billions of dollars on campaigns fighting each other's policies
and then wasting billions of dollars more when problems with prisons, health care, schools, etc. aren't fixed
because all the money is spent fighting between opposing parties for dominance in govt
instead of fixing the actual problems directly with those same resources.