Bernie's In

"According To Polls Most Americans Are Socialists Like Bernie Sanders


"Most Americans should understand that a ‘label’ is an identifier, or more aptly put a word or short phrase that describes someone or something. Republicans are real big on labels, and they have had a fair measure of success improperly labeling “socialism” as any policy or agenda that does not enrich corporations and the wealthy, spend half the budget on the military, or create greater numbers of poverty level Americans. To be fair, America does have one purely ‘socialistic’ program in the Veterans Administration, but other than that one agency, America is the epitome of anti-socialist.

"In its basic form, socialism is simply organized society in which all major industries and financial institutions are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and corporations. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont self-describes himself as a ‘democratic socialist,’ but there is not only nothing ‘socialistic’ about his policies, those he does espouse are supported by the majority of Americans that likely rail at the idea they are socialists. It is why he is having a measure of success creating a grass roots movement and may have even more if he did not self-label as a socialist.

"The reason Sanders is unlikely to win the nomination for president is because only 31% of Americans “react positively” to the word socialism. However, among 18 to 29-year olds, about half view socialism favorably and only 47% see capitalism as a good thing. Still, even with the ‘socialist’ label, Senator Sanders’ policy positions enjoy a great deal of support among the population and it should not only frighten Republicans, it should, and is, pulling Hillary Rodham Clinton farther to the left; the left that twenty years ago was decidedly Centrist. One thing is clear; even as a self-described socialist, Sanders’ views on ‘key political issues’ are more in line with mainstream Americans’ opinions of, expectations for, and demands of government."

There is much more excellent reading of this article in the link below:

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/03/polls-americans-socialists-bernie-sanders.html
____

Sums it up, doesn't it? The repukes have already won if they scare the dems into such a fearful state.

It has become almost a tradition.

What we must guard against are people who mistake stupidity for spine.

I can understand it though. They both start with "s."

Don't rush to judgement. There's a long time from now to November 2016. Hillary hasn't unveiled much of her proposals yet. You commit to voting for her even before you know what she will want to do.

I truly have not committed my vote to her, Olivier, so there is a straw man element to your remark. She may not even be on the ticket...and I recognize that.

I am committed to voting for the Dem candidate...because I do not want the Republicans to get into the Oval Office. I am convinced whatever the Dem candidate offers will be more in line with what I want for this country than what the Rep candidate will offer.

Maybe I will be wrong on that. Maybe the sun will appear to rise in the west rather than the east.

Anything can happen, though...so we will see.

I was referring to your vote in the primaries. True that i don't know if you will vote at that stage and for whom. Just seems to me you are a bit quick in dismissing Sanders and calling his supporters stupid.

I am a registered Independent, Olivier. I cannot vote in primary elections...which are just for party members. I am not a Democrat...and cannot vote in a Dem primary.

I did not "dismiss" Sanders, nor would I. I have mentioned that I admire him and his policies. I have mentioned that I would love for the day to come where he, or someone like him, could be a reasonable candidate. I just think at this moment in time, this country is not ready for the likes of him.

I have never called his supporters "stupid." I made a snarky remark in reply to a snarky remark...but it was not me calling Sanders' supporters stupid.

Respectfully as possible, Olivier, can you finally get away from the straw men you are creating...and deal, if you must, with what I actually say?

Ok then, it's a choice the Dems will have to make, not you.


I hear what you're saying but it seems premature to me. Let him and other candidates campaign in the primaries. 16 months is a long time in politics. Maybe Bernie can turn things around, especially if his opponents are weak.


You called some of his supporters stupid though, as I understood your comment.

The debates will decide if he has a real chance. If he shines there, a lot of people are going to take a closer look. It's premature to count him out.

I have a right...and in my opinion, an obligation...to be involved. You are involved...and you are a Frenchman.

In any case, as you noted, the Dems will make the choice...and I am totally within my rights to try to influence their choice...just as I am within my rights to try to influence the choice of the Republicans. One of those two candidates will almost certainly be president of the country in which I live.



Okay...fine with me that it it seems to you premature.

How about giving me that same courtesy in my thinking that it is anything but premature?




Have I suggested otherwise?

Let him do whatever he wants...run as aggressive a campaign as possible. I am left with having to hope against hope that he will not "turn things around"...because to my mind, although I love the man...he will lose the election massively if he is at the top of the ticket.



I repeat...I have never called his supporters "stupid'...nor would I. In fact, I have not called ANYONE "stupid" in this forum during the last three or four years. It is an expression too often used...and I detest it.

I am not responsible for how you understood what I wrote...but I have tried to make clear that I made a snarky remark in response to what I perceived to be a snarky remark. Perhaps I should have included a smiley emoticon.

Accept it or not. Nothing I can do about that.

My point entirely. I don't know much about him, to be frank, but he seems interesting. Hillary Clinton's personality does not appeal to me, too religious, too manipulative, though I respect her strength. Frank has a point that she would appear right now as a safer bet than Sanders, but let's not rush to judgement. Either of them could fly or sink in the primaries. Clinton has weaknesses too.

Oh wow! What did finally convinced you of that? :-)

Yes, I am "involved", if by that you mean that I have voiced an opinion. But I respect the fact that it's not for me to aggressively engage in that debate. It's not my fight.


I said: "i hear what you are saying". Was that courteous enough?


You are entitled to make that guess. I'll refrain from guessing so far ahead. I agree it seems a long shot at the moment but if the repukes choose a clown as their candidate, everything is possible.

I said I would not speak ill of the candidates, but Hillary at one time said as president she would attack Iran. I don't know if she has altered her stance, but I do not want to vote for more neverending war.

Hillary spoke about Iran at a college recently.

My Iranian FB friends and a lot of millenials I see were furious.

Thats wonderful!! Perhaps you can explain why we have a republican congress, and a republican Supreme Court if the majority of Americans are Socialists?

I think they finally get you and Tes aren't the same person.

I don't know how it started, what thread, what post, that you are canadian.

One of my favorite people thinks you are canadian. Your english is too good. It might or might not have started with Frank. You know too much, you have been to New York, lived there.

These folks loved Francis (me too) but he could also write english.

There must have been a pin point, the big rejection of Olivier, quite early on.

I think a review is in order.

I suspect he is just trying to piss me off. I guess i should feel insulted or something...

Yeah, there's a lot of bad history between the US and Iran that neither country has much gotten over.

People get the people they vote for, Rabel, my friend. Keeping the voters stupid is usually good for unethical politicians. And these Republicans excel in getting voters to vote against their own interests. These red states have the poorest economies and the Republican Governors refuse to allow "ObamaCare," into their state, which is now a firmly rooted component of the nation’s social contract, in to improve the lives of so many poorer Americans. Believe it or not, black and white Americans have more in common when it comes to extreme poverty; whites would rather cut off their own nose than be identified as just as poor as blacks or other minorities.

In traditional mid-term elections a large number of Americans do not bother to vote leaving this critical opening to GOP zealots. It is during these mid term intervals the Ted Cruz, Joni Ernst and other rightwing extremists are more easily elected; mainstream America would never knowingly vote for someone like Cruz who rubs people the wrong way or someone as conservative as Joni Ernst of Iowa, a female who openly brags about castrating hogs. This is one way the most undesirable misfit Congressmen/women get into office to rip off the people and enrich themselves; this also extends to a couple of Democrats who greedily serve themselves from the public coffers. The Republicans, however, hold the principal lead when it comes to non-caring regarding the American people whom they swore to serve faithfully when taking the oath of office.

The US as a Capitalist Republic as opposed to a Socialist Republic, Bernie Sanders seemingly has a utopian program for the masses; unfortunately, in the rational world of major corporations, huge business empires, etc, not too many socialistic programs will ever be realized, at least not in the current climate. If one thought getting rid of the Confederate Flag in SC was challenging, think how even harder getting rid of capitalism in the US is going to be! Bernie Sanders might even get the nomination and possibly the White House, but the opposition against him will be even more savage than it currently is against Obama and nothing would ever be achieved by him for the American people, and this is presupposing he would possibly get elected! Entitlements are on the front line of being cut...and trust me, Americans will fight tooth and nail against slashing Social Security and Medicare and so far we have beaten back the more drastic cuts, but the GOP keep eating around the edges with raising the retirement age to 69 or 70. Even Unions are under attack and very few will back Sanders, instead they're giving their money to major presidential candidates where a deal might be struck for their workers. Most people love what Sanders stands for and the way he articulates our heartfelt desires and needs, but many also realize the Independent senator from Vermont's program is merely theoretical or impractical.

Since the Voting Rights Act of 1965, a large segment of Whites left the Democratic Party for the Republican Party to get away from Blacks who could now vote in general elections. Whites, for the most part, vote overwhelmingly for Republicans with many voting against their own interest. Obama brought in the Affordable Care Act or ObamaCare but many Red States refuse to implement this insurance program for their constituencies. The GOP exploits poorer whites' naïveté unmercifully. There are just as many poor whites as poor blacks in fact more of the former but racism is the dividing force. Whites would stand to benefit health wise by pressuring their red state governors to allow Obamacare into their state. Arizona, a Red State, does allow the Affordable Care Act implementation. Arizona's Governor Jan Brewer recognized the value of this government money coming into her state via the Affordable Care Act and put politics aside for the good of her people. She is to be commended for this unselfish act or at least for doing her job!

A racially polarized America has cemented the Republican base and poor uneducated whites tighter than ever. This is because Barack Obama captured the White House TWICE and this is an anathema to racists whites some who originated the Tea Party to oppose Obama...note Tea Party darling Ted Cruz who shut down the government for nothing!!!!!. I am surprised the Confederate Flag was eventually taken down in SC but then again those nine murdered people paid the ultimate high price.

Oh, as you realize, each president may nominate his own US Supreme Court jurist to serve and the present conservative stalwarts Justices are: John Roberts and Samuel Alito who were selected by George W Bush. Justice Antonin Scalia was appointed by Ronald Reagan. Justice Clarence Thomas was appointed by the first President Bush to replace Thurgood Marshall who retired. Even though John Roberts is ultra-conservative I, for some reason, have more respect for him as being fairly decent...this does not apply to the other partisan conservatives.