Thatonemoor
Member
The US has socialist institutions in it all ready. The government pays for roads, public education, social security, social welfare programs, and more just to name a few. These programs are socialist by nature.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Democratic National Primary Debate #1 |Tokyo2016| Rise of Mecha-Godzilla
- Thread starter B-Dubs
- Start date
- Status
The US has socialist institutions in it all ready. The government pays for roads, public education, social security, social welfare programs, and more just to name a few. These programs are socialist by nature.
So I wasn't the only one who found O'Malley dreamy. Anyway, very happy about democrats. A few good choices compared to absolutely none from the other side of the coin. My brothers were pretty happy too considering they're consistent voters.
Too late, I've already infected Gaf!I bet this guy thinks millions are pouring over the border.
lack of zingers in the debate, obviously
Back in the old days, when an emperor (let's say in Rome) wanted to invade another country and raised taxes to build an army up -- is that also socialism? Defining socialism as anything a government does or any sort of welfare (even if it's to protect the current capitalist system) is a seriously lacking definition. Having the government provide basic services, like social security, for example in no way addresses generalized wage labor even if people are receiving their wages from the government. It doesn't democratize the workplace, bring people closer to owning the means of production, or address the droit d'aubaine, or the right of the capitalist to appropriate the fruit of social labor.
The government bailing out large corporations, the military invading countries so American companies can profit, etc. are examples of crony capitalism. And it would be a huge mistake if you thought that's what socialists were advocating for.
Here is a relevant Friedrich Engels quote about why state ownership =/= socialism necessarily:
Keru_Shiri
Member
I think his closing statement during last night's debate resonated well with a lot of folks.
Interfectum
Member
https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/posts/10153760071741336
This is a good one:
All the Repub candidates were watching the Dems' debate last night; they wanted to see the next president.
O'Malley had a weekly segment on a local sports talk show in the DC area while he was Mayor and Governor. He sounded like an average dude that you would want to hang out with and drink beer. He used to talk about his band a lot too. Rarely talked about politics on the show.
The hosts would give him shit about his bad sport picks and raz him with goofy codenames they gave him for Mayor and Governor.
He seemed like a good guy. Shrugs.
The hosts would give him shit about his bad sport picks and raz him with goofy codenames they gave him for Mayor and Governor.
He seemed like a good guy. Shrugs.
Just watched it. Overall Hillary didn't have to do to much seeing how weak everyone else was except for Bernie.
Some embarrassing facepalm moments for Hillary though.
On Wall Street: "Cut It Out!"
"How would you be different then Obama"
Hillary: "I'm a women"
and the biggest enemy "...Iranians...(giggle).."
Some embarrassing facepalm moments for Hillary though.
On Wall Street: "Cut It Out!"
"How would you be different then Obama"
Hillary: "I'm a women"
and the biggest enemy "...Iranians...(giggle).."
Clinton had excellent presence. It's funny, I was commenting to my friend that I felt like her opening statement was like the host of a show greeting the audience moreso even than Cooper's who was actually a host actually greeting the audience.
She was all like, "Oh, hey there, America. I didn't see you there. My name is Hillary Clinton and welcome to my show. Take a seat. Tonight, we're going to mostly agree and talk a ton of shit about how incompetent the Republicans are. It's going to be a good time. C'mon, let's see what everyone has to say."
She was all like, "Oh, hey there, America. I didn't see you there. My name is Hillary Clinton and welcome to my show. Take a seat. Tonight, we're going to mostly agree and talk a ton of shit about how incompetent the Republicans are. It's going to be a good time. C'mon, let's see what everyone has to say."
Beer and sports doesn't qualify anyone for the presidency, unfortunately.
Euphoria14
Member
Right off the bat, Rush Limbaugh says the entire debate was a total joke and one of the worst he has seen in over 30 years and that the democrats basically admitted being a socialist party.
This guy...
This guy...
shoplifter
Member
This. Exactly this.
As far as 'throwing my vote away' and 'voting logically' - I've done that for five presidential cycles already and where has it gotten the progressive left?
Sanders did a really good job of being to the left of Hillary, but also positioning himself as someone that does not have the hatred for the Republican party that Hillary does.
Even though he is to the left of Hillary on most issues I think he appeals to moderate Republicans more than Hillary does. Anyone else get this impression?
Even though he is to the left of Hillary on most issues I think he appeals to moderate Republicans more than Hillary does. Anyone else get this impression?
It got you the tea party
Good of him to spend time doing that as his over policing destroyed Baltimore communities.
" Cut it out! " is a slap on the wrist which is precisely what she'd handle Wallstreet and banks. She's being honest at least.
Interfectum
Member
Obama's presidency has pretty much destroyed the republican party. So there's that.
Is the alternative just not voting? Seriously, it's that thinking that leads to progressives not showing up during midterms, and the progressive left losing time and time again.
A ton?
If Obama didn't win in 2008 we wouldn't have gay marriage nationwide right now, that is a fact. It was a 5-4 decision and Obama had two judge nominations that a Republican would otherwise get.
And the state of healthcare is much improved this past 8 years. Millions and millions of more people have health care that did not have it before.
What about re-establishing diplomatic and trade relations with Cuba? McCain nor Romney would have done so.
We have had major progressive reforms and advancements this past 8 years.
To deny we have had progressive advancements under Obama that we would not have got under a Republican is crazy.
Veritigo_X
Member
Is there a video of when Bernie fell asleep listening to Webb? I can't seem to find it. Luckily it wasn't something that affected his debate performance since I don't think there was any way to respond to the crap Webb was saying. I just thought it was funny.
One could argue the Obama presidency paved the way for someone like Bernie Sanders to even run at all. He wouldn't have connected in 2008 like he is now. So at least there's that.
shoplifter
Member
I'd sooner vote 3rd party than vote for the corporatist wing of the democrats. On social policy I largely align with them, but I'm pretty far off from them on economics. Call it 'wasting my vote', I call it 'fuck it, i'll throw my lot in with these folks in spite of the fact that it's not going to get me much of anywhere. it's still better than giving begrudging approval to shitty crony capitalism.'
dehydratedbabies
Member
Improved health insurance access, improved student loan repayment options, marriage equality, FCC and White House backing of net neutrality, a slew of progressive ballot measures that were passed just a year ago, and Bernie Sanders on stage.
Uh, like a million victories?
If you've done that for five cycles, that means you started voting left in 1996, for Bill's second term.
If you really don't think that there's been meaningful progressive change since then I am doubtful that you were paying attention in all those intervening years.
shoplifter
Member
Sure, socially. But economically?
I'd even argue that Obamacare is shitty law because it's more or less a large handout to private insurers rather than the single payer we should be trying, whether or not you think it's realistic in the current environment. It was a shitty compromise.
If the GOP continues to lose at the Presidential level, their major donors are going to force the party to "evolve" in a more moderate direction (see also: Democrats after repeated losses in the 70s & 80s); this would move the political center of gravity for the country leftward.
And to the vote-wasters: how can you claim to care about progressivism with a straight face when you're willing to stick a SCOTUS-shaped shiv into its back if you don't get your way in the primaries? I ask this in all seriousness. Are you about a candidate.. or are you about causes? Because voting to doom those causes for a generation speaks volumes about your alleged seriousness. At the very least, you can vote in the general in a way that allows you to live to fight another day.
This. That these "progressives" that want shit as pie in the sky as the Tea Party and Freedom Caucus can look back at the Obama administration and see . . . nothing . . . simply don't pay attention in the least.
benjipwns
Banned
What are we measuring by? Senate, House, and state legislator seats? Governorships?
You got to give it a few decades and then you'll see.
These types want a liberal socialist utopia or else they think its a complete waste. The tea party comparison for these are very very apt. It's all or nothing with them.
Hey lets be shortsighted and forget the party is literally falling apart before us.
Being short-sided is to think they are falling apart honestly. They had a huge landslide victory just last year.
And no, they aren't going to nominate Trump or Carson. Rubio is the safe bet for the nomination. GAF's beloved Nate Silver says he is the the odds on favorite to win the GOP nomination for example. People thinking the GOP is imploding despite having major major victories just last year and thinking they are going to nominate someone like Trump or Carson are not looking at things clearly.
benjipwns
Banned
Just like 2006-2008.
Veritigo_X
Member
Let's not jump the gun here. People have been saying the republican party has been falling apart for years. We've been shown time and again that this isn't actually the case.
Demographics. We know that republicans are going to start loosing in great amounts within 10 years, they are trying to purge democratic voters in every state, there's a reason republicans focus so heavily on "ID laws" "voter taxes" and making it harder for college students to vote. They know what's coming
guy implies that he's an actual human being and not just a pile of garbage
So have you been voting the midterms?
In 1996, you got continued Bill Clinton. Minimum wage increase, Children's Health Insurance Program, first global warming agreement, gun control, and a litany of other things.
In 2000 and 2004, the opposition got more votes. Promoting a more progressive candidate wouldn't have won those elections.
In 2008, we got Obama. Go see for yourself what you got.
I understand the value of my vote very simply: progress, regardless of how small or seemingly insignificant. The country is trending left. We're moving forwards, with the burden of the kicking and screaming right. Even if I don't get everything I want or get something not exactly what I wanted, I'm not frustrated by the lack of progress. Because there are 300 million other people with opinions that differ from mine, so the government that governs this mass of people will have to move slowly and compromise.
Did America elect a black president right after slavery ended? No. Did America elect a female president right after women got the right to vote? No. It's been over a hundred years for black people and decades for women, and those two are still struggling for equality today. Progress is going to happen slowly, no matter what. It's the ones who are impatient that give up.
If you only value the economic progress and handily brush aside the social progress of the past 16 years, well then, great, good for you. Would you like to turn to the 9 million people who became insured under Obamacare and say, "Hey, this shitty compromise bill is too bad for you, I know better" and then offer something that can't pass Congress? Because in the end, you don't have anything better; you have an ideal better, not an actual one.
How so? Republicans in congress have gone along with him on several issues & his approval ratings are fairly average when compared to other presidents in their second term, about ready to leave office.
They'll probably just change their policies.
I'd argue as someone who was able to stave off making the choice between no insurance (and potentially bankrupting out-of-pocket costs if something had ever happened to me) or taking on impossible-to-budget-for premiums at a time when I was barely able to pay rent, that Obamacare actually kind of improved my quality of life drastically and immediately. Does that count as a progressive win for me?
Yes a single-payer system would be ideal, but that doesn't exist (yet), this does. I can't get health coverage through a system that doesn't exist -- and thankfully, because of the groundwork laid by the ACA, a single-payer system is more feasible in the long-term now.
I hate to put it in threatening terms, but let's be clear about the facts: a progressive who doesn't vote for the Democrats ends up as a vote for the Republicans. If you're cool with Marco Rubio as president and an overwhelmingly conservative Supreme Court for the next several decades, then by all means, vote third-party to spite corporatist Democrats.
benjipwns
Banned
That's impossible, a political party would never sell out their principles like that. Just think, they might only win one or two states in a Presidential election. Then they'd be destroyed for sure.
So they'll either collapse or move to the left? Seems like a win for the left.
Why do millions have to die while we wait for the perfect deal? You idealist need to realise that a compromise, sometimes, doesn't start your way.
shoplifter
Member
I'm absolutely not saying it wasn't an improvement for people who needed coverage. That Barry had the Senate *and* the House and couldn't do better was a failure. That even members of the democratic party were so against it is a failure. I'm not actually so sure that a single payer system is any more feasible than it was given how against it even dems were.
And to sound spiteful, maybe eight years of full on crazy GOP control is exactly what this country needs to wake up. Awful tasting medicne? Maybe.
The vote wasn't for glass-steagal, it was to repeal it.
Euphoria14
Member
Good point.
I couldn't do more than 2 minutes or it. It was pure garbage and chock full of lies.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked