ActualCornHusker

My opposition to some of his policies is not because they're "socialist" - There are MANY reasons to be opposed to many of his policies than trying to label them as socialism. All I've said is that socialism and communism should carry the same disdain that nazism does, and Bernie's willingness to label himself as socialist is alarming given the history of socialism.

*sigh* How about a left leaning source?

You're not talking about the same point as me. I'm referring to Bernie specifically identifying as a socialist. I've already said that I'm not inherently opposed to universal healthcare. It's not the best system available, but it appears to be the direction we're heading, so that is what it is I guess...

Socialism is Not ‘Public Roads’ and '911 Service'

Please clarify

Maybe a more appropriate word would be tyranny?... Although fascism fits... Fascism is characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy

Is this a version of "That's not real socialism"?... Honestly trying to get what you're saying. Fascism is MANDATORY for socialism/communism to be implemented.

Never said Trump was innocent. But he should be presumed so until proven otherwise

Someone in this very thread has said this (maybe Danny Bateman?): Regarding Bernie specifically, he's championed actual socialist and communist policies of other countries his entire political career and has recently softened his public affection for these ideals. And yes, foreign policy of the US has been atrocious for decades, so I'll concede that the US has affected Venezuela, as long as you concede that Maduro murdering his citizens in the street and letting them starve while he's eating steak and feeding the leftovers to his dog has nothing to do with America and everything to do with the inevitable implications of socialism. None. That's why we should want as little government as possible

THIS is an echo chamber.... On the impeachment, I'm fairly impartial, but the presumption of innocence is a benchmark of our justice system. I know when it's a republican on the hot seat, you would prefer a lynch mob mentality, but that's not how this deal works... So unless you've got evidence that hasn't been presented in the hearing that actually links the financial aid to the Biden/Burisma investigation, then there's nothing here... And what I mean by that is, if that evidence (other than assumptions and vague circumstantial evidence) exists, then please post it here.

Both sides are garbage, and there's very little media out there that isn't riddled with opinions, so.... I don't really care what you think about what I read tbh

Prior days of testimony appeared to show no wrong-doing, and multiple witnesses testified that explicitly. Today I watched the opening statement by Sondland, and the interjection of Giuliani was definitely interesting and somewhat troubling, as well as the fact that the white house apparently did not let him access the documents he would need in order to recall an accurate account of the events. Then Schiff's questioning was basically trying to put words into Sondland's mouth, which didn't work.... Still, no one has any evidence whatsoever that the foreign financial aid was contingent upon the investigation of Biden & Burisma - only assumptions... Meanwhile, no statement has been made, no investigation has been opened, and the aid has been released. So until that actually gets confirmed it's an open case

It's astonishing just watching this circus with no particular bias one way or the other. Reading through this far-left (& never-Trump) echo chamber, people think the case is irrefutable and Trump is doomed Reading through Republican media sources, they're poking holes in the case and say it's a sham. It's really mind-blowing to see how the 2 sides just live in alternate realities (both of which are probably wrong btw) and just let their confirmation biases run amok..

I've watched the whole clip, and it's not out of context. It shows his absolute ignorance of the atrocities that socialism has caused every single time it's been tried, and it's extremely alarming. Even suggesting the idea that food lines are a good thing is inexcusable and completely disregards history. And what's MORE alarming about that statement is that it's exactly the opposite of reality - that the type of governmental control that he's defending in the video clip (socialism) results in the very thing that he's criticizing...

Sorry, just getting back on here. My point is I'd never vote for a person who identifies as a socialist (the word democratic in front of it is meaningless), and I'd definitely never vote for someone who is on record saying this:

MORE TAXES! TAX EVERYTHING! TAX BREATHING! Just messin'

Not at all. It's definitely been a challenging conversation as i view the world through a different lens than a lot of the people here, but i agree, these conversations are good to have.

Literal dictionary definition of socialism: (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism. And then look at the actual evidence of socialist experiments in countries around the world - the most recent example being Venezuela obviously, even though I hate to beat a dead horse

I didn't compare them. I simply said that someone who identifies as socialist or communist should receive the same or similar backlash that someone does when they identify as nazi.

Like I've said, I think our current healthcare system is the worst of all possible systems and needs changed. I'd ideally be in favor of a free market based model (which ours is not) with transparency in pricing and some sort of safety net. Unfortunately, the chances of that happening appear to be very slim, so I'm not inherently opposed to the idea of universal health care, but I do think that advocated of it are being disingenuous and not acknowledging the unintended consequences that a medicare for all system would come with. I definitely don't buy the pitch that prices would magically go down as a result - there are many many other factors that cause our healthcare and medication prices to be super high, a few of which I've touched on previously.

I didn't say Nazis were socialist, so let's get that out of the way. Regarding the things that are going on in the US that fit within the planks of communism, I'm literally against every single one of those. Instead of me listing off all the reasons socialism and communism are evil and inevitably end in tyranny and mass genocide of people by their own government, can you tell me any country or civilization in the history of mankind that has successfully implemented socialism and/or communism? And please don't say the native Americans because I went down that road on a different site last week...

I'll have to do some research on that one - at this point my knowledge of those countries is very broad. But I know where you're going with this, and I'll preface that conversation with this: 1. Most of those countries have very small military budgets because the US defends many of them - maybe all of them, I'm not sure. 2. Even if a policy is "successful" in those countries doesn't mean we should implement it here. 3. All of those countries have MUCH smaller populations (Sweden only has 10mil ppl), so implementing any social program here has to be done on a MUCH larger scale which makes it a LOT more complex. This is the importance of states rights in America. If Washington state wants to implement a $20/hr min wage, they can do that. If people would rather not live in Washington because of that policy or another, they can move to Montana or Arizona.

By their own admission they are not. They are mostly capitalist societies with a vast social safety net, and a couple of them actually rank higher on the economic freedom index than the US.

You'd have to ignore the history of every socialist or communist country that we've seen arise over the last 150 years to think that's stupid...

I respect that Bernie seems honorable in that regard, and he's probably the "least corrupt" of all the candidates, but I couldn't be much farther away from him on actual policy. I could lock arms with him on about 2-3 issues, but the rest I want no part of. I also feel that identifying yourself as a socialist or communist should be as off-limits as identifying as a nazi... The wider focus on Bernie and corruption would be this: even if he's an extremely honorable individual, the vast expansion of the powers and scope of the federal government that he espouses would be a breeding-ground for greater and greater levels of corruption down the line. Remember the cliche "absolute power corrupts absolutely" - that applies to governments without exception. I'm for shrinking of the federal government, not expanding it.