Jump to content

Socialism fails every time


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Bernie will probably win a crowded race in Iowa, will win going away in NH, and with the new moved-up date in CA, he will win there. 

 

No no one will stop that momentum. No one. 

 

He’s the the only candidate with enough money and an established campaign network to be rolling in CA well before NH and Iowa conclude. 

 

There may be others who hang on past CA, (Beto may because he could win TX) but the race will go from 30 to 4 real fast after the CA primary. 

 

I suspect you're right about this. I keep thinking Harris makes the run because she checks all the leftist boxes and has enough PP money to start her own, small country.

 

But Bernie vs Trump would be a bad thing for the left. Rich white guy vs. rich white guy. The left won't show up for that.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

I suspect you're right about this. I keep thinking Harris makes the run because she checks all the leftist boxes and has enough PP money to start her own, small country.

 

But Bernie vs Trump would be a bad thing for the left. Rich white guy vs. rich white guy. The left won't show up for that.

 

My guess is that the wacky left shows up just fine for Bernie, but the middle, which the Dems need to win, does not. 

 

It’s not quite the same error as 2016 in that Bernie is not as dirty and doesn’t have Hillary’s baggage, but it’s a new way to fumble the ball. 

 

If a moderate Dem can somehow win the nomination (Biden, Kerry in the wings, as-yet politically undefined Beto), they would give Trump trouble. 

 

Winning the general election for Dems goes through the middle both politically and geographically. If they put up a far leftist, they are, I hope, screwed. 

 

Trump is a better choice than Bernie, and god does that hurt. 

1 minute ago, row_33 said:

a country that deep down doesn't believe all its people should have a health insurance system that covers catastrophic, but treatable, illnesses will never go socialist.

 

 

 

 

It’s a trend, not a fait accompli. Winning a party nomination would be pretty significant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

It’s a trend, not a fait accompli. Winning a party nomination would be pretty significant. 

 

the US is an individualist nation of folks who can band together for projects of 2 to 300 million when they agree it is essential, God bless it for being this!

 

failing to promote a single payer health care system (which does make total sense to reject it) is the acid test of any traces of socialism

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Foxx said:

Sanders was the recipient of the 'not Hillary' vote. don't know that he will get those this time around.

 

There won’t be anyone left to oppose him. He’s got mo money, mo in-place campaign, and he’s set up to have absurd momentum. CA moving up his primary on the heels of Iowa and NH will make him almost unbeatable. 

 

Who is going to donate to Booker and the rest when he’s got no states won and Sanders has about 6-7 including big hauls in CA and Mass on Super Tuesday?

 

Unless someone with enough money and name recognition to fuel a big political machine enters the race, ie, someone who can win a lot of votes on Super Tuesday, Bernie’s candidacy is a piece of cake. 

 

Right now there’s no one. Biden might be able to put up a fight but he will need not just money, but tons of it. (Kerry is a wild card and could do it too.)

10 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

the US is an individualist nation of folks who can band together for projects of 2 to 300 million when they agree it is essential, God bless it for being this!

 

failing to promote a single payer health care system (which does make total sense to reject it) is the acid test of any traces of socialism

 

 

 

We passed a mess of an attempt at socializing medicine. Again, note the trend, which is that anything passed at all, not its undoing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hillary will step in or be drafted at the convention

 

The last serious quasi-draft attempt was Reagan in 1976, rumours stil abound that LBJ was hoping to show up at Chicago 1968 at the last minute for a draft movement, but the yippies and hippies and zippies and pippies made it impossible to get into the city the last few nights  :D

 

 

Edited by row_33
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Foxx said:

super delegates are all that matters in the DNC anymore, they are not bound thanks to the DNCC. the primaries are just more dog and pony crap.

 

they can fix anything they really want to with old school smoke filled back rooms

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, row_33 said:

Hillary will step in or be drafted at the convention

 

The last serious quasi-draft attempt was Reagan in 1976, rumours stil abound that LBJ was hoping to show up at Chicago 1968 at the last minute for a draft movement, but the yippies and hippies and zippies and pippies made it impossible to get into the city the last few nights  :D

 

 

  Even though the media is her friend Hillary realizes that the longer her name is not spoken to the public the better it is for her.  Also, she become more palatable to Democrats as the others lose their appeal in the light of day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Foxx said:

super delegates are all that matters in the DNC anymore, they are not bound thanks to the DNCC. the primaries are just more dog and pony crap.

 

That's a conspiratorial soundbyte--sounds good though. 

 

The DNC sueprdelegates play no role in the initial nomination at the convention. That was a change the DNC enacted after 2016. 

 

The smoke-filled rooms are smoke-free unless there's a deadlock at the convention. If that happens, then it's the wild west, to mix metaphors, like it has always been. 

Edited by BeginnersMind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

That's a conspiratorial soundbyte--sounds good though. 

 

The DNC sueprdelegates play no role in the initial nomination at the convention. That was a change the DNC enacted after 2016. 

 

The smoke-filled rooms are smoke-free unless there's a deadlock at the convention. If that happens, then it's the wild west, to mix metaphors, like it has always been. 

 

It's not a conspiratorial sound byte.  It's just a dated one, because as you said, they changed it after the Bernie Bro Blowback Brouhaha.

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  Even though the media is her friend Hillary realizes that the longer her name is not spoken to the public the better it is for her.  Also, she become more palatable to Democrats as the others lose their appeal in the light of day.

 

the current clowns declared way too early to sustain $$$ demands and keep themselves from spacing out and disqualified

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

My guess is that the wacky left shows up just fine for Bernie, but the middle, which the Dems need to win, does not. 

 

It’s not quite the same error as 2016 in that Bernie is not as dirty and doesn’t have Hillary’s baggage, but it’s a new way to fumble the ball. 

 

If a moderate Dem can somehow win the nomination (Biden, Kerry in the wings, as-yet politically undefined Beto), they would give Trump trouble. 

 

Winning the general election for Dems goes through the middle both politically and geographically. If they put up a far leftist, they are, I hope, screwed. 

 

Trump is a better choice than Bernie, and god does that hurt. 

 

It’s a trend, not a fait accompli. Winning a party nomination would be pretty significant. 

I think he's done a pretty good job of defining himself. He's for the New Green Deal, tearing down the walls we have on the southern border and just recently came out for reparations. That's pretty well defined in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

I think he's done a pretty good job of defining himself. He's for the New Green Deal, tearing down the walls we have on the southern border and just recently came out for reparations. That's pretty well defined in my mind.

 

His ideology is a work in progress and he’s already blown in the wind a few times. I don’t have much faith in him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

His ideology is a work in progress and he’s already blown in the wind a few times. I don’t have much faith in him. 

 

who do you like?

 

do you see anything stopping Trump for 2020?  It's not a horribly wrong thing to accept this.... you don't have to like it...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

It's not a conspiratorial sound byte.  It's just a dated one, because as you said, they changed it after the Bernie Bro Blowback Brouhaha.

 

He was stuck in an old deep state narrative loop.  

1 minute ago, row_33 said:

 

who do you like?

 

do you see anything stopping Trump for 2020?  It's not a horribly wrong thing to accept this.... you don't have to like it...

 

 

 

Too early. Choosing between Trump and the socialists on the far left, Trump is preferable if I could overcome the gag reflex and push the button for him. Choosing between Trump and a lot of others, probably the others. 

 

But the field is totally undefined now and I can’t say what other choices I may have in November 2020. 

4 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Beto has no substance...…………………………………...whatsoever.

 

Seems to be the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Beto has no substance...…………………………………...whatsoever.

 

Even if he had a ton of substance all you'd have to say would be "would you vote for someone who changed his name to appeal to a certain ethnic group?"  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Even if he had a ton of substance all you'd have to say would be "would you vote for someone who changed his name to appeal to a certain ethnic group?"  

 

I wouldn’t vote for an empty suit. 

 

But Beto has gone by that nickname since he was a kid. Was that all part of his master plan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...