@ossobuco,
Unfortunately, we live in an age when words have no concrete meanings and concepts are subject to the spin of whoever considers them, and so your hope that this thread will be visited by people who "really understand these terms," is a fallow one.
I would suggest, however, that we dispense with labels and consider economic issues on a continuum where totally unrestricted markets represent one end (let's, for laughs, call this the Right) and complete control of the economy by a centralized governmental authority represents the other (the Left).
Obviously there are political points to be scored as respects the use of "socialism," but since political points scored rarely relate to substance, the argument of whether one candidate's political position is or is not "socialist" is without substance.
Perhaps those with a greater knowledge of history than I will correct me, but I am not aware of an example of the failure of a Right based economy leading to the downfall and transition of the associated system of government. On the other hand, we have several (The USSR being the most obvious) examples of Left based economies leading to chaos and complete political transformation.
The Right end of the spectrum relies upon the principles of a self-organizing system or what John Stossel would call "spontaneous order."
The Left end of the spectrum relies upon the judgment of individual human beings.
It's understandable that many people would prefer to rely upon the judgment of their fellow humans than the somewhat abstract notion of events taking care of themselves.
The problem is that the latter has a much better track record than the former.
I'm extremely bullish on humanity. I believe we are on a path towards an end where we truly transcend natural law, but we're no where near that end yet.
What's more, people far to the Left of me agree!
What is the current consensus among ecologists (invariably supported by the Left)?
Mankind should not mess around with the natural order of things. When we try to fiddle with ecologies (rabbits in Australia, feral pigs in Hawaii) we create larger problems than we solve.
Interestingly enough, these same people who understand and agree that ecologies should not be messed with by humans, usually also believe that we will all benefit from human intervention with economic systems that are equally self-organizing.
Now the extremes of either positions are not sound in world which cannot dismiss human sensibilities, but this is a spectrum we are talking about and it is not an either or choice.
Ultimately it comes down to whatever superficially partisan/tribal influence is directing you, but for those who are serious about considering these issues the ultimate consideration is whether or not you trust the judgment of individuals above the natural order of things.
For me, it's a no-brainer (at least for the next 100 years or so).