Trump's lifeline: Democrats' socialism surge

[B. Kidd]

'Democrats are flirting with socialism in ways they carefully and clearly ran away from in the past, handing President Trump a new way to unify Republicans — and to club his opponents.

• It started with Democrats sitting silently as he railed against socialism in his State of the Union speech.
• It intensified with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's release of a Green New Deal, a vague policy manifesto loaded with big-government policies.
• The surge is unlikely to abate: Young, Twitter- and social-savvy Democrats favor socialism over capitalism. And no Democrat in politics today plays the social media game with more savvy than AOC. '

Democrats' surge of socialism could be Trump's 2020 lifeline

The article is right - Democrats themselves are handing Trump a political lifeline.

There is NO WAY Democrats will win a general election on a socialism-mandate. There simply are not enough American voters to support that platform.

Sure, lots of people love the idea of everything being provided for them by the government - free university, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed income, free healthcare and so on.

But when the Republicans (if they are smart) remind people of the INCREDIBLE and unsustainable costs of ALL of these programs (except free healthcare to the needy - so long as it is dual-payer and NOT single payer) AND stay away from the silly moral arguments of it?
Most of these people will shy away from the socialism angle.

The fact remains - not one progressive has REMOTELY explained how all of these pie-in-the-sky programs (especially that Green New Deal) can realistically be paid for.
Why?
Because it is IMPOSSIBLE to fully fund all of these things in a sustained manner.
Impossible.

The bottom line - if Democrats fully embrace socialism...IMO, THEY WILL COST THEMSELVES FAR MORE VOTERS THEN THEY GAIN.

The article is wrong, as is the thread premise.

Democrats are not ‘flirting with socialism’ – and the article exhibits a comprehensive ignorance as to what ‘socialism’ actually is.

The mistake Democrats are making is to allow Republicans to use rightwing lies about ‘socialism’ as a political weapon.

This is the definition of socialism:

'socialism

• Definitions

from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition

• n. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.'

It does not matter what people want socialism to mean...the above is what it ACTUALLY means.

And I guarantee you that most Americans are not for that.

By God, you're finally onto something!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Needless to say, the ridiculous rightwing lie about Democrats and ‘socialism’ is predicated on the election of freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

The irony of this, of course, is that Ocasio-Cortez is the best thing to happen to Democrats in a while – she’s intelligent, articulate, and energetic, attracting young voters to the Party and helping to get out the Democratic vote.

Idealistic and naïve, however, Ocasio-Cortez is in no manner ‘representative’ of the Democratic Party or Democrats in general; she’s likely to be relegated to the fringe of the Party.

And her advocacy of ‘socialism’ will find no place in the Democratic Party.

In time Ocasio-Cortez will either mature into a mainstream corporate Democrat or remain permanently on the political sidelines.

What’s best about Ocasio-Cortez is the way she’s gotten the right to obsess over her – conservatives are frightened of the positive, beneficial change Ocasio-Cortez represents, and the right’s incessant attacks on Ocasio-Cortez serve only to further energize Democrats.

 

[McRocket]

Needless to say, the ridiculous rightwing lie about Democrats and ‘socialism’ is predicated on the election of freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

The irony of this, of course, is that Ocasio-Cortez is the best thing to happen to Democrats in a while – she’s intelligent, articulate, and energetic, attracting young voters to the Party and helping to get out the Democratic vote.

Idealistic and naïve, however, Ocasio-Cortez is in no manner ‘representative’ of the Democratic Party or Democrats in general; she’s likely to be relegated to the fringe of the Party.

And her advocacy of ‘socialism’ will find no place in the Democratic Party.

In time Ocasio-Cortez will either mature into a mainstream corporate Democrat or remain permanently on the political sidelines.

What’s best about Ocasio-Cortez is the way she’s gotten the right to obsess over her – conservatives are frightened of the positive, beneficial change Ocasio-Cortez represents, and the right’s incessant attacks on Ocasio-Cortez serve only to further energize Democrats.

Well said, and I pretty much agree with all of that.

But the left-leaning press (like CNN) is also obsessing about her. As are the late night talk shows that tend to lean left as well. And the danger is that people start to assume that the Democratic Party IS what this gal is idealizing about.

The Democrat leaders would be well-served to play down the most extreme views of these people. And I think Pelosi did the right thing in reacting quite tepidly to Ocasio-Cortez's extremist 'Green New Deal'.

Nancy Pelosi just threw some serious shade at Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's 'Green New Deal' - CNNPolitics

She did not attack it - but she definitely threw cold water on it. As she should.


The Dems are in a similar position to 2016. They have a big lead and it is theirs to blow for the 2020 election.

Last time, the corrupt, unlikable Clinton blew it.

This time, if the Dems embrace 'socialism' as a major, party platform...they could blow it again.

I guarantee you most independents (which both sides need to win) will NOT vote for socialism. And that talk could - gulp - scare them over to Trump.


I DO despise both parties - both are worse than useless. But I despise Trump as President more than I despise the Democratic Party.

 

[kyzr]

Trump can't win....no fucking way.....the polls all said....

Well, most of the polls said he would not win the popular vote - which he didn't.

So the polls were - generally - actually VERY accurate.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

There is no "popular vote" in presidential elections, please stop lying. The EC is how we elect presidents, period.
The MSM said, as seen in the video "there is no way Trump can win and get 270 EC votes". The polls were and still are still total bullshit from the tiny blue dot urban plantations.

 

[McRocket]

Trump can't win....no fucking way.....the polls all said....

Well, most of the polls said he would not win the popular vote - which he didn't.

So the polls were - generally - actually VERY accurate.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

There is no "popular vote" in presidential elections, please stop lying. The EC is how we elect presidents, period.
The MSM said, as seen in the video "there is no way Trump can win and get 270 EC votes". The polls were and still are still total bullshit from the tiny blue dot urban plantations.

1) Show me where the ENTIRE MSM said 'there is no way Trump can win and get 270 EC votes.'? That is TOTAL nonsense.
And who gives a shit what the MSM says? Anyone who gets their news from ANY MSM source has not a clue what is going on.
They are ALL next-to-useless - to varying degrees...especially the American ones.

2) I am talking about polls.

True or False - did the polls estimate the popular vote VERY close to the real outcome in 2016?


Trump lost the popular vote by only 3.2%.

Right now, his approval rating is nowhere near where it was on election night 2016.

And Trump was an unknown on election night as a candidate. He had ZERO political track record. Now he does...and it stinks.

He has acted like a buffoon and he lies like it is a bodily function.

Trump Lies

Barring a war (or the Dems embrace Socialism as THE party platform) - Trump is toast in 2020....guaranteed.

 

[Deno]

'Democrats are flirting with socialism in ways they carefully and clearly ran away from in the past, handing President Trump a new way to unify Republicans — and to club his opponents.

• It started with Democrats sitting silently as he railed against socialism in his State of the Union speech.
• It intensified with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's release of a Green New Deal, a vague policy manifesto loaded with big-government policies.
• The surge is unlikely to abate: Young, Twitter- and social-savvy Democrats favor socialism over capitalism. And no Democrat in politics today plays the social media game with more savvy than AOC. '

Democrats' surge of socialism could be Trump's 2020 lifeline

The article is right - Democrats themselves are handing Trump a political lifeline.

There is NO WAY Democrats will win a general election on a socialism-mandate. There simply are not enough American voters to support that platform.

Sure, lots of people love the idea of everything being provided for them by the government - free university, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed income, free healthcare and so on.

But when the Republicans (if they are smart) remind people of the INCREDIBLE and unsustainable costs of ALL of these programs (except free healthcare to the needy - so long as it is dual-payer and NOT single payer) AND stay away from the silly moral arguments of it?
Most of these people will shy away from the socialism angle.

The fact remains - not one progressive has REMOTELY explained how all of these pie-in-the-sky programs (especially that Green New Deal) can realistically be paid for.
Why?
Because it is IMPOSSIBLE to fully fund all of these things in a sustained manner.
Impossible.

The bottom line - if Democrats fully embrace socialism...IMO, THEY WILL COST THEMSELVES FAR MORE VOTERS THEN THEY GAIN.

What's up?

You are making sense....

 

[McRocket]

'Democrats are flirting with socialism in ways they carefully and clearly ran away from in the past, handing President Trump a new way to unify Republicans — and to club his opponents.

• It started with Democrats sitting silently as he railed against socialism in his State of the Union speech.
• It intensified with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's release of a Green New Deal, a vague policy manifesto loaded with big-government policies.
• The surge is unlikely to abate: Young, Twitter- and social-savvy Democrats favor socialism over capitalism. And no Democrat in politics today plays the social media game with more savvy than AOC. '

Democrats' surge of socialism could be Trump's 2020 lifeline

The article is right - Democrats themselves are handing Trump a political lifeline.

There is NO WAY Democrats will win a general election on a socialism-mandate. There simply are not enough American voters to support that platform.

Sure, lots of people love the idea of everything being provided for them by the government - free university, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed income, free healthcare and so on.

But when the Republicans (if they are smart) remind people of the INCREDIBLE and unsustainable costs of ALL of these programs (except free healthcare to the needy - so long as it is dual-payer and NOT single payer) AND stay away from the silly moral arguments of it?
Most of these people will shy away from the socialism angle.

The fact remains - not one progressive has REMOTELY explained how all of these pie-in-the-sky programs (especially that Green New Deal) can realistically be paid for.
Why?
Because it is IMPOSSIBLE to fully fund all of these things in a sustained manner.
Impossible.

The bottom line - if Democrats fully embrace socialism...IMO, THEY WILL COST THEMSELVES FAR MORE VOTERS THEN THEY GAIN.

What's up?

You are making sense....

What's up is in my sig...I despise both parties and have zero loyalty to either.

 

[kyzr]

Trump can't win....no fucking way.....the polls all said....

Well, most of the polls said he would not win the popular vote - which he didn't.

So the polls were - generally - actually VERY accurate.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

There is no "popular vote" in presidential elections, please stop lying. The EC is how we elect presidents, period.
The MSM said, as seen in the video "there is no way Trump can win and get 270 EC votes". The polls were and still are still total bullshit from the tiny blue dot urban plantations.

1) Show me where the ENTIRE MSM said 'there is no way Trump can win and get 270 EC votes.'? That is TOTAL nonsense.
And who gives a shit what the MSM says? Anyone who gets their news from ANY MSM source has not a clue what is going on.
They are ALL next-to-useless - to varying degrees...especially the American ones.
2) I am talking about polls.
True or False - did the polls estimate the popular vote VERY close to the real outcome in 2016?
Trump lost the popular vote by only 3.2%.
Right now, his approval rating is nowhere near where it was on election night 2016.
And Trump was an unknown on election night as a candidate. He had ZERO political track record. Now he does...and it stinks.
He has acted like a buffoon and he lies like it is a bodily function.
Trump Lies
Barring a war (or the Dems embrace Socialism as THE party platform) - Trump is toast in 2020....guaranteed.

The video showed that Hillary's approval was 80%...(total bullshit)
You challenged me to show you where the MSM's polls/projections were wrong. Please see below where CNN said that Hillary had a 91% probability of winning. The other MSM's all predicted her to win, Trump had at best a very slight chance of winning because of the dem's "blue wall of PA, MI, WI, MN"
Here is ABC's projection, Hillary 274 to Trump's 188
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hil...ld-trump-abc-news-electoral/story?id=39672451

Here is NBC's projection, Hillary 274 to Trump's 170
NBC's final battleground map shows a lead for Clinton

Clinton's chances for the White House on the rise - CNNPolitics
"Washington (CNN)Hillary Clinton's odds of winning the presidency rose from 78% last week to 91% Monday before Election Day, according to CNN's Political Prediction Market."

 

[McRocket]

Trump can't win....no fucking way.....the polls all said....

Well, most of the polls said he would not win the popular vote - which he didn't.

So the polls were - generally - actually VERY accurate.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

There is no "popular vote" in presidential elections, please stop lying. The EC is how we elect presidents, period.
The MSM said, as seen in the video "there is no way Trump can win and get 270 EC votes". The polls were and still are still total bullshit from the tiny blue dot urban plantations.

1) Show me where the ENTIRE MSM said 'there is no way Trump can win and get 270 EC votes.'? That is TOTAL nonsense.
And who gives a shit what the MSM says? Anyone who gets their news from ANY MSM source has not a clue what is going on.
They are ALL next-to-useless - to varying degrees...especially the American ones.
2) I am talking about polls.
True or False - did the polls estimate the popular vote VERY close to the real outcome in 2016?
Trump lost the popular vote by only 3.2%.
Right now, his approval rating is nowhere near where it was on election night 2016.
And Trump was an unknown on election night as a candidate. He had ZERO political track record. Now he does...and it stinks.
He has acted like a buffoon and he lies like it is a bodily function.
Trump Lies
Barring a war (or the Dems embrace Socialism as THE party platform) - Trump is toast in 2020....guaranteed.

The video showed that Hillary's approval was 80%...(total bullshit)
You challenged me to show you where the MSM's polls/projections were wrong. Please see below where CNN said that Hillary had a 91% probability of winning. The other MSM's all predicted her to win, Trump had at best a very slight chance of winning because of the dem's "blue wall of PA, MI, WI, MN"
Here is ABC's projection, Hillary 274 to Trump's 188
Hillary Clinton Leads Donald Trump in ABC News' Electoral Ratings Before Tough Battleground Contests

Here is NBC's projection, Hillary 274 to Trump's 170
NBC's final battleground map shows a lead for Clinton

Clinton's chances for the White House on the rise - CNNPolitics
"Washington (CNN)Hillary Clinton's odds of winning the presidency rose from 78% last week to 91% Monday before Election Day, according to CNN's Political Prediction Market."

WRONG. That is only part of the MSM.

You typed:

'The MSM said, as seen in the video "there is no way Trump can win and get 270 EC votes".'

MSM means - Mainstream Media. ALL OF IT.

'Mainstream media (MSM) is a term and abbreviation used to refer collectively to the various large mass news media that influence a large number of people,and both reflect and shape prevailing currents of thought.[1] The term is used tocontrast with alternative media which may contain content with more dissentingthought as they do not reflect prevailing opinion.'

Mainstream media

So you said - in essence - that ALL of the MSM said 'there is no way Trump can win and get 270 EC votes'.

1) the ENTIRE MSM did not say that.
2) you still have not quoted even one MSM source that said exactly that.

I suggest, in future, that you learn what words/phrases mean before you utter them.


And you still have not answered my question:

True or False - did the polls estimate the popular vote VERY close to the real outcome in 2016?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Got a link for that bullshit claim?

Yes, and it is true. And don't post to me in this thread again unless the first sentence is to admit that you were wrong and don't even check the facts before your outburst.

National Polling Accurately Nails Popular Vote

While the State polls were not as spot on, they still were withing the average error:

The Polls Are All Right

 

[jknowgood]

'Democrats are flirting with socialism in ways they carefully and clearly ran away from in the past, handing President Trump a new way to unify Republicans — and to club his opponents.

• It started with Democrats sitting silently as he railed against socialism in his State of the Union speech.
• It intensified with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's release of a Green New Deal, a vague policy manifesto loaded with big-government policies.
• The surge is unlikely to abate: Young, Twitter- and social-savvy Democrats favor socialism over capitalism. And no Democrat in politics today plays the social media game with more savvy than AOC. '

Democrats' surge of socialism could be Trump's 2020 lifeline

The article is right - Democrats themselves are handing Trump a political lifeline.

There is NO WAY Democrats will win a general election on a socialism-mandate. There simply are not enough American voters to support that platform.

Sure, lots of people love the idea of everything being provided for them by the government - free university, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed income, free healthcare and so on.

But when the Republicans (if they are smart) remind people of the INCREDIBLE and unsustainable costs of ALL of these programs (except free healthcare to the needy - so long as it is dual-payer and NOT single payer) AND stay away from the silly moral arguments of it?
Most of these people will shy away from the socialism angle.

The fact remains - not one progressive has REMOTELY explained how all of these pie-in-the-sky programs (especially that Green New Deal) can realistically be paid for.
Why?
Because it is IMPOSSIBLE to fully fund all of these things in a sustained manner.
Impossible.

The bottom line - if Democrats fully embrace socialism...IMO, THEY WILL COST THEMSELVES FAR MORE VOTERS THEN THEY GAIN.

The article is wrong, as is the thread premise.

Democrats are not ‘flirting with socialism’ – and the article exhibits a comprehensive ignorance as to what ‘socialism’ actually is.

The mistake Democrats are making is to allow Republicans to use rightwing lies about ‘socialism’ as a political weapon.

Lol, the green deal says no air planes in 10 years. Please campaign on that, please!

 

[jknowgood]

Needless to say, the ridiculous rightwing lie about Democrats and ‘socialism’ is predicated on the election of freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

The irony of this, of course, is that Ocasio-Cortez is the best thing to happen to Democrats in a while – she’s intelligent, articulate, and energetic, attracting young voters to the Party and helping to get out the Democratic vote.

Idealistic and naïve, however, Ocasio-Cortez is in no manner ‘representative’ of the Democratic Party or Democrats in general; she’s likely to be relegated to the fringe of the Party.

And her advocacy of ‘socialism’ will find no place in the Democratic Party.

In time Ocasio-Cortez will either mature into a mainstream corporate Democrat or remain permanently on the political sidelines.

What’s best about Ocasio-Cortez is the way she’s gotten the right to obsess over her – conservatives are frightened of the positive, beneficial change Ocasio-Cortez represents, and the right’s incessant attacks on Ocasio-Cortez serve only to further energize Democrats.

5 of the democrat front runner back her green deal. Like i said, please, please, please run on that! About her being smart, she proves how stupid liberals are.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Needless to say, the ridiculous rightwing lie about Democrats and ‘socialism’ is predicated on the election of freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

The irony of this, of course, is that Ocasio-Cortez is the best thing to happen to Democrats in a while – she’s intelligent, articulate, and energetic, attracting young voters to the Party and helping to get out the Democratic vote.

Idealistic and naïve, however, Ocasio-Cortez is in no manner ‘representative’ of the Democratic Party or Democrats in general; she’s likely to be relegated to the fringe of the Party.

And her advocacy of ‘socialism’ will find no place in the Democratic Party.

In time Ocasio-Cortez will either mature into a mainstream corporate Democrat or remain permanently on the political sidelines.

What’s best about Ocasio-Cortez is the way she’s gotten the right to obsess over her – conservatives are frightened of the positive, beneficial change Ocasio-Cortez represents, and the right’s incessant attacks on Ocasio-Cortez serve only to further energize Democrats.

5 of the democrat front runner back her green deal. Like i said, please, please, please run on that! About her being smart, she proves how stupid liberals are.
View attachment 245135

Of course, the principles will matter more than the specifics, when it comes to the GND or any other plan to address sustainable energy or climate change.


Just as the abortion crusaders every year call for a Nationwide ban on abortion, and then do victory dances because one state made abortions a little harder to get.

Just as the Trump cult cheered him mightily for a Muslim ban, then did a little victory dance over a partial ban of travel from a few countries.

You overestimate the power of your own rhetoric and the inability of people to settle for baby steps. Those who care about these issues will vote for a person who also does, even if they trot out pie in the sky ideas, over someone who shits on all of it.

 

[McRocket]

Needless to say, the ridiculous rightwing lie about Democrats and ‘socialism’ is predicated on the election of freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

The irony of this, of course, is that Ocasio-Cortez is the best thing to happen to Democrats in a while – she’s intelligent, articulate, and energetic, attracting young voters to the Party and helping to get out the Democratic vote.

Idealistic and naïve, however, Ocasio-Cortez is in no manner ‘representative’ of the Democratic Party or Democrats in general; she’s likely to be relegated to the fringe of the Party.

And her advocacy of ‘socialism’ will find no place in the Democratic Party.

In time Ocasio-Cortez will either mature into a mainstream corporate Democrat or remain permanently on the political sidelines.

What’s best about Ocasio-Cortez is the way she’s gotten the right to obsess over her – conservatives are frightened of the positive, beneficial change Ocasio-Cortez represents, and the right’s incessant attacks on Ocasio-Cortez serve only to further energize Democrats.

5 of the democrat front runner back her green deal. Like i said, please, please, please run on that! About her being smart, she proves how stupid liberals are.
View attachment 245135

Don't be ridiculous.

I think her Green New Deal is for the birds...but she is clearly not stupid. If you think she is - then you do not even know what stupid means.

From wikipedia:

'She graduated cum laude from Boston University's College of Arts and Sciences in 2011, majoring in international relations and economics.'

In case you don't know what cum laude means...it means 'with honor'.

You do not graduate cum laude from Boston University (a respected institution that boasts numerous Noble Prize winners who attended), majoring in international relations and economics if you are 'stupid'.

Intelligent people can have dumb ideas you know.

She is incredibly naive and out-of-touch with reality (politically)...but she is NOT stupid.

 

[jknowgood]

Needless to say, the ridiculous rightwing lie about Democrats and ‘socialism’ is predicated on the election of freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

The irony of this, of course, is that Ocasio-Cortez is the best thing to happen to Democrats in a while – she’s intelligent, articulate, and energetic, attracting young voters to the Party and helping to get out the Democratic vote.

Idealistic and naïve, however, Ocasio-Cortez is in no manner ‘representative’ of the Democratic Party or Democrats in general; she’s likely to be relegated to the fringe of the Party.

And her advocacy of ‘socialism’ will find no place in the Democratic Party.

In time Ocasio-Cortez will either mature into a mainstream corporate Democrat or remain permanently on the political sidelines.

What’s best about Ocasio-Cortez is the way she’s gotten the right to obsess over her – conservatives are frightened of the positive, beneficial change Ocasio-Cortez represents, and the right’s incessant attacks on Ocasio-Cortez serve only to further energize Democrats.

5 of the democrat front runner back her green deal. Like i said, please, please, please run on that! About her being smart, she proves how stupid liberals are.
View attachment 245135

Don't be ridiculous.

I think he Green New Deal is for the birds...but she is clearly not stupid. If you think she is - then you do not even know what stupid means.

From wikipedia:

'She graduated cum laude from Boston University's College of Arts and Sciences in 2011, majoring in international relations and economics.'

Assuming you don't know what that means it means 'with honor'.

You do not graduate cum laude from Boston University (a respected institution that boasts numerous Noble Prize winners that attended), majoring in international relations and economics if you are 'stupid'.

Intelligent people can have dumb ideas you know.

She is incredibly naive and out-of-touch with reality (politically)...but she is NOT stupid.

Noble peace prize is a joke after Obama got one for no reason.

 

[Rustic]

'Democrats are flirting with socialism in ways they carefully and clearly ran away from in the past, handing President Trump a new way to unify Republicans — and to club his opponents.

• It started with Democrats sitting silently as he railed against socialism in his State of the Union speech.
• It intensified with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's release of a Green New Deal, a vague policy manifesto loaded with big-government policies.
• The surge is unlikely to abate: Young, Twitter- and social-savvy Democrats favor socialism over capitalism. And no Democrat in politics today plays the social media game with more savvy than AOC. '

Democrats' surge of socialism could be Trump's 2020 lifeline

The article is right - Democrats themselves are handing Trump a political lifeline.

There is NO WAY Democrats will win a general election on a socialism-mandate. There simply are not enough American voters to support that platform.

Sure, lots of people love the idea of everything being provided for them by the government - free university, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed income, free healthcare and so on.

But when the Republicans (if they are smart) remind people of the INCREDIBLE and unsustainable costs of ALL of these programs (except free healthcare to the needy - so long as it is dual-payer and NOT single payer) AND stay away from the silly moral arguments of it?
Most of these people will shy away from the socialism angle.

The fact remains - not one progressive has REMOTELY explained how all of these pie-in-the-sky programs (especially that Green New Deal) can realistically be paid for.
Why?
Because it is IMPOSSIBLE to fully fund all of these things in a sustained manner.
Impossible.

The bottom line - if Democrats fully embrace socialism...IMO, THEY WILL COST THEMSELVES FAR MORE VOTERS THEN THEY GAIN.

People with any common sense at all can clearly see socialism in any form will never be long term.
History has proven socialism is an absolute failure because it’s been tried countless times and in countless forms.
There’s no such such thing as individualism in Socialism, Because socialism always rots from inside out.
Socialism always consumes far more than it gives, and it’s all about control....

 

[McRocket]

Needless to say, the ridiculous rightwing lie about Democrats and ‘socialism’ is predicated on the election of freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

The irony of this, of course, is that Ocasio-Cortez is the best thing to happen to Democrats in a while – she’s intelligent, articulate, and energetic, attracting young voters to the Party and helping to get out the Democratic vote.

Idealistic and naïve, however, Ocasio-Cortez is in no manner ‘representative’ of the Democratic Party or Democrats in general; she’s likely to be relegated to the fringe of the Party.

And her advocacy of ‘socialism’ will find no place in the Democratic Party.

In time Ocasio-Cortez will either mature into a mainstream corporate Democrat or remain permanently on the political sidelines.

What’s best about Ocasio-Cortez is the way she’s gotten the right to obsess over her – conservatives are frightened of the positive, beneficial change Ocasio-Cortez represents, and the right’s incessant attacks on Ocasio-Cortez serve only to further energize Democrats.

5 of the democrat front runner back her green deal. Like i said, please, please, please run on that! About her being smart, she proves how stupid liberals are.
View attachment 245135

Don't be ridiculous.

I think he Green New Deal is for the birds...but she is clearly not stupid. If you think she is - then you do not even know what stupid means.

From wikipedia:

'She graduated cum laude from Boston University's College of Arts and Sciences in 2011, majoring in international relations and economics.'

Assuming you don't know what that means it means 'with honor'.

You do not graduate cum laude from Boston University (a respected institution that boasts numerous Noble Prize winners that attended), majoring in international relations and economics if you are 'stupid'.

Intelligent people can have dumb ideas you know.

She is incredibly naive and out-of-touch with reality (politically)...but she is NOT stupid.

Noble peace prize is a joke after Obama got one for no reason.

So is Alexander Graham Bell a 'joke'? He attended that university.
Is Martin Luther King Jr. a 'joke'? He also attended Boston University.

Boston University - Wikipedia

And, while I agree the Noble Peace Prize was rendered a joke by the Obama nomination. The other fields it recognizes are still highly prized and respected...with good reason.

If you think Boston University is a crappy 'college'...then you have just proven you have NO IDEA what you are talking about on that subject.


I TOTALLY disagree with Ocasio-Cortez's socialism ideas.

But she CLEARLY is NOT 'stupid'...far from it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

People with any common sense at all can clearly see socialism in any form will never be long term.

Well, except for public transportation, public schools, state universities, medicare, medicaid, welfare, social security, public highways, etc etc


But yeah, other than a very long list of things that show you are full of shit...you're spot on!

 

[Rustic]

Trump can't win....no fucking way.....the polls all said....

Well, most of the polls said he would not win the popular vote - which he didn't.

So the polls were - generally - actually VERY accurate.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

The popular vote does not mean jack, for good reason

 

[Rustic]

Trump can't win....no fucking way.....the polls all said....

Well, most of the polls said he would not win the popular vote - which he didn't.

So the polls were - generally - actually VERY accurate.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

You do realize more people voted for the conservative/libertarian side than the other side?
Candidate Party Popular Votes
Donald J. Trump Republican 62,980,160
Hillary R. Clinton Democratic 65,845,063
Gary Johnson Libertarian 4,488,931
Jill Stein Green 1,457,050