The government is social ownership only if the government is 'socially owned.'
Not all governments are.
Thus, the definition using the word "government" would be wrong in a lot of instances.
-
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.
PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
The government is social ownership only if the government is 'socially owned.'
Not all governments are.
Thus, the definition using the word "government" would be wrong in a lot of instances.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
so if its a democracy, which at least nominally the US is. So what again is wrong with that statement. Democrats and leftist in the US want government control of many parts of the economy because we have democratic control over such systems. social ownership, aka socialism.
It's similar to why Republicans would call something "government controlled healthcare" rather than "Single payer system." Politics is largely a word game. Why give up ground?
ErasureAcer
Banned
Bernie Sanders surges ahead of Hillary Clinton in N.H., 44-37
Pack it in HillaryGAF. You had a good run.
Pack it in HillaryGAF. You had a good run.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
The statement was: "Socialism is the government owns the means of production and distribution; capitalism is the private sector owns it."
Government implies nothing about whether it itself is subject to social ownership. He didn't say, "socialism is when a socially controlled democracy..."
And even if we impute government to mean socially controlled, it still doesn't make sense to say that a subset of the greater whole is the true owner anymore than it is to say that a subsidiary and not the parent corporation is the 'true owner'. It's not about the mechanism by which a particular form of ownership is exercised, it's about who the true owner is.
Government implies nothing about whether it itself is subject to social ownership. He didn't say, "socialism is when a socially controlled democracy..."
And even if we impute government to mean socially controlled, it still doesn't make sense to say that a subset of the greater whole is the true owner anymore than it is to say that a subsidiary and not the parent corporation is the 'true owner'. It's not about the mechanism by which a particular form of ownership is exercised, it's about who the true owner is.
Jesus, that cover lmao.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I hope he gives her a good fight - I still don't think he'll win but I'm less concerned about his electability I guess.
That same cover says Trump's support is eroding, when clearly it isn't. One poll is one poll, it could be a trend or it could be an outlier.
Hobbestetrician
Member
Somebody help this guy out, he has been Diablosing for at least an hour and a half! The human body should not be put through that!
The general idea is that capitalism corrupts democracy. Can it reasonably be said that you have as much say in who represents you than any given millionaire or business interests?
Edit: The difference is whether or not the democracy in question is a worker's state or ruled by the dictatorship of capital (or something). Otherwise it's just capitalism as we've always had it.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
somebody doesn't like dems, I think.
RastaMentality
Banned
All these people choosing Fiorina in polling just have to be going off people saying she did well, right? Because I've barely seen any clips of her performance on the news.
Bristol Palin came out attacking Erick Erickson for being a misogynist. This should be fun.
Also, too. Ben Carson is against abortion in cases where the mother's life is at stake as well. That makes 3 candidates who have gone on the record to make no exceptions for abortions whatsoever. Not that this douche was gonna win the primaries let alone the election, but still. It's fun to watch.
Also, too. Ben Carson is against abortion in cases where the mother's life is at stake as well. That makes 3 candidates who have gone on the record to make no exceptions for abortions whatsoever. Not that this douche was gonna win the primaries let alone the election, but still. It's fun to watch.
speculawyer
Member
I actually listened to that debate. She certainly made her points consicely and with vigor. She knew what she wanted to say and said it clearly.
But Trump's tweet about her the other day did have some ring of truth.
i might be wafting fumes off my own spiked cool-aid
i've managed to convince every republican i've spoken with to pledge support to trump and cast down all the gop establishment candidates if trump goes third party, but i'll chalk that up to me using Dark Arts Rhetroic and them not being politically well-versed
he is still the crazy birth certificate man and has a ~60% unfavorability despite his continued lead
breathe quote, breathe
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
He's outwardly racist and sexist. People of color and women aren't ever going to like him. If he does somehow win the nomination, it'll probably through a split vote where 40% of his own party still thinks he's a joke.
He can't deflect his lack of experience by citing his net worth nearly as easily outside his party. He can't deflect his offensive comments by complaining about political correctness outside his party.
And even if he did somehow win the whole thing, he'd probably be better than the rest of the crappy field in the republican party.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Bernie Sanders tweeting The Based God to talk about the CNN coverage enlightens me to the fact that this new Hillary story has to be part of the Based God's Curse.
speculawyer
Member
42.3% of respondents to that poll were independent which is significantly higher than the 2012 electorate and highly suspect.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Well, the RCP average for Sanders in New Hampshire has been skyrocketing through July, so there is reason the poll might be true, if he maintained that momentium. Trump's support is also eroding if you only look at the Rasmussen poll, and there's various reasons you could reasonably dismiss all the other post debate polls.
Still, devoting a cover to two headlines both having exactly one poll each worth of evidence behind them is a criminal use of polls.
It would still be a big swing for Sanders to make without some sort of huge scandal hitting Hillary or a debate and other polls have said different about Trump.
RastaMentality
Banned
Yeah, your comment especially about her points being concise is spot on. You could tell she was a pretty seasoned public speaker.
--
Also, is there any reason to believe Sanders can debate well?
I would say no. I think chances are that Bernie will get wrecked. But I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised.
I don't get it. He said he believed in traditional marriage and that he went to a gay wedding once. He didn't even answer Megyn Kelly's question. She asked "how would you explain to your gay son or daughter your opposition to same sex marriage?" And he answered "I would love my son or daughter".
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
I wonder if Bernie would accept a VP nod.
And_Gignac
Member
lol the meltdowns.
Is just one poll. The scrutiny this ONE POLL is getting seems hilarious to me. As if people should not even mention it or the media shouldnt report on it just because "we have to wait for more polls!"
Black Mamba
Member
NEGATIVE ONE IN A POLL. LOLOLOLOL
I'm gonna go with Sam Wang on this one and assume it's a trash poll by a KNOWN TRASH pollster until other data points confirm this poll as reasonable.
The problem is this one poll is likely bunk based on both the pollster's history and 6 year absence and the actual results (how does someone get -1 in a poll?) . And the bigger problem is that people are going to actually report it and use it as evidence of Bernie's supposed lead.
Let me remind you, I'd probably prefer Bernie over Hillary in a vaccum. I'm not trying to put him down. But this poll is likely worth whatever we wipe our asses with each day.
And no, I'm not unskewing anything. I'm not trying to change numbers. I'm saying there's a big likelihood this pollster doesn't know how to conduct a poll. And we know this based on his track record of being very bad at polling.
edit: to clarify, the poll is NOT an outlier. Outliers are GOOD polls where 1/20 of the time randomness causes a bad result. The above is probably not that.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Didn't realize that pollster was so shady. Of course this poll is bunk given that history.
You don't just come out with a first poll in 6 years which just happens to be a complete game changer.
You don't just come out with a first poll in 6 years which just happens to be a complete game changer.
eBay Huckster
Member
god damn it I knew I was using the wrong term for these situations (like that Mainstreet/Postmedia poll from last month of the Canadian federal election, which included at least one transcription error that actually got carried into the topline)
Yellowtail
Member
Lol the meltdowns.
The poll is junk but there will be polls showing Sanders up on Clinton in NH this year. The margins are close enough and at the very least a rogue polling outfit gets a huge amount of publicity by posting such a result. Clinton just needs to not take the Gore 1999 approach (as the analogous primary race) of completely freaking out and moving campaign headquarters/firing staff like he did when Bradley edged him out in IA/NH polls in the late summer.
NH will be decided by <5% margins just like in 2000 and 2008. I think Clinton will just edge it out due to momentum from winning Iowa/ NH's gender gap/superior organisation, but it will be close. New Hampshire loves local insurgents.
The poll is junk but there will be polls showing Sanders up on Clinton in NH this year. The margins are close enough and at the very least a rogue polling outfit gets a huge amount of publicity by posting such a result. Clinton just needs to not take the Gore 1999 approach (as the analogous primary race) of completely freaking out and moving campaign headquarters/firing staff like he did when Bradley edged him out in IA/NH polls in the late summer.
NH will be decided by <5% margins just like in 2000 and 2008. I think Clinton will just edge it out due to momentum from winning Iowa/ NH's gender gap/superior organisation, but it will be close. New Hampshire loves local insurgents.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Polling is whatever you want it to be if you're looking for attention/money. Just look at Zogby.
Who could forget this masterpiece. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2008/10/zogby-mccain-takes-lead/
Who could forget this masterpiece. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2008/10/zogby-mccain-takes-lead/
benjipwns
Banned
Former Play editor, Whose Line cast and GAF member likes Bernie: https://instagram.com/p/6QXTE9v_hh/
Damn, Jeb is too close to Hillary for comfort.
The difference is the debt limit wasn't a scandal per se. Hillary is a very polarizing figure with manufactured scandals consistently keeping her negatives too high. This is concerning.
Bernie fever is getting a bit out of hand. There is no way he can win.
Democrats really do not have anyone but Hillary and she has proven not to be quite as invincible as once thought. This really sucks. It would be hard to top Obama, but surely someone else who is articulate, charismatic and able to campaign could have come along over the past 5-6 years. Nope! It's kind of embarrassing as a Democrat.
Jeb! has plenty of time to flame out. He was pretty boring during the first debate. Give him time and he'll fuck up even more, ala his Planned Parenthood background.
Orbis Tabula
Member
I feel like I'm trying really hard to be realistic and reasonable about Bernie, but so many of the threads are now just the crazy supporters and trolls trying to mess with them. I really do like the guy. I think he has a small, but non-zero, chance of taking it, but it would require running and near perfect campaign. I hope he wins, but I'm not going to waste any effort fighting for him. I fully expect to be voting Hillary come election day, but if Bernie were there instead, I'd be thrilled.
Walker couldn't excite a hyperactive dog if he were made of pure bacon, he is the definition of a hollow suit.
Ohio resident here. Don't believe his lies. The only difference between Kasich and Walker is that instead of a recall election, we held a referendum to overturn one of his egregiously antilabor laws and won big, and that made him do some triangulation. As President, he would absolutely dismantle as much of our country as he could get away with.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Walker would excite republicans and nobody else. That's a problem for them.
benjipwns
Banned
Speaking of Kasich, people act like he's some new toy. He was a Congressman for 18 years and already ran for President once. He was the first Republican House Budget Chairman in 40 years. He had his own show on Fox News for six years.
He graduated from an Ohio State University with a degree in political science and immediately entered politics getting elected to the Ohio Senate at 26 and to the U.S. House at 30.
He graduated from an Ohio State University with a degree in political science and immediately entered politics getting elected to the Ohio Senate at 26 and to the U.S. House at 30.
Fragamemnon
Member
Glad someone posted this. Kasich stands out among the piles of poo but give him a good whiff-he's still a turd.
Jeb seems really off message all campaign and feels like damaged goods both due the combination of his brother's disastrous tenure and Jeb's eagerness to surround himself with the exact same people Dubya had working for him.
The GOP still hasn't found what they are looking for at all levels, ranging from the angry base, the pundit/wonk class, and the hyperrich elites. That's a big part of why we're still entertaining the Donald Trump sideshow.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked