Bernie Sanders

Bernie Sanders is the Future of the Democratic Party

Leftward ho

|

"The rise of Bernie Sanders is proving awkward for the Democratic Party," contends Politico in a recent piece about the surprisingly popular socialist presidential candidate.

Well, maybe it's not that surprising. And it's probably not that awkward. Politico could have just as easily declared: The rise of Bernie Sanders is a completely predictable outcome of the Democratic Party's trajectory. Or, maybe: The rise of Bernie Sanders portends a socialistic future for the Democratic Party.

After all, while the press had fun detailing every rightward lurch of the conservative movement, not only has the "socialist surge" been a restive force within Democratic Party politics during the Obama Age, but it's been making tremendous policy progress.

Although we rarely frame politics in these terms, as a philosophical matter, we've often been engaged in a debate that pits the theories of 18th-century liberalism—the kind that brought us the Constitution and limited government—against ideas first embraced in 19th-century Marxism. Is there any doubt the left's grassroots is driven by the latter, whether it's intuitively or on purpose? Just think about the emotional core (often confused as an intellectual position), the rhetoric and the focus that propel most ideas liberals toss around about inequality, plutocracy, "democracy" and the role of government in our lives.

So the author of the psychosexual drama "Man—and Woman" is polling at 35 percent in one recent CNN poll of New Hampshire, even though he is supposedly operating far outside the norms of American political debate. Sanders can draw 10,000 fervent fans at a campaign event in Wisconsin—a number that would be envied by most presidential candidates this cycle. Sanders correctly points out that his positions on higher minimum wage, pay equity and other state interference in markets enjoy high approval ratings with most voters. "It is not a radical agenda," he says. "In virtually every instance, what I'm saying is supported by a significant majority of the American people."

This is almost true.

What is wholly true is that big majorities within the Democratic Party support these policies, and they would probably go a lot further if they could. Hillary Clinton is lucky there isn't a more compelling and charismatic candidate making a more comprehensive socialistic case to Americans, as there was the last time around. The difference between her adopted position and his real one is scope.

That's not to say Democrats are unadulterated socialists sitting around studying communist theorists in their spare time, any more than small-government conservatives are opposed to every state-run program. But today, many prefer policies that would be referred to as socialist anywhere else in the world. And the stigma attached to the word is slowly, and fittingly, disintegrating.

According to a YouGov poll, 52 percent of Americans hold favorable views of capitalism, while only 26 percent have a favorable view of socialism. When broken down further, 43 percent of Democrats hold sympathetic views toward socialism. Democrats are just as likely to have a favorable view of capitalism as they do collectivism. The future does not bode well for free-market fans. According to a Pew poll, 49 percent of those between ages 18 and 29 say they have a positive view of socialism—with only 43 percent having a negative view. Considering the history and connotation of the word, that's quite extraordinary.

So the awkwardness surrounding Sanders' candidacy—one that is supposed to make Clinton seem more reasonable—is that he is running with almost indistinguishable philosophical positions from the frontrunner.

Now, of course, Sanders will not win the Democratic Party nomination. I'm skeptical he's even as popular as polls claim. Still, he's moved to the ideological center of the Democratic Party without changing at all. So will his ideas. Democrats will not pull back once they get their $10 minimum wage. They will not be content once universal pre-K is passed. They will not be satiated after the next round of unilateral Environmental Protection Agency intrusions into the energy markets are instituted. And liberals will never concede that health care is now working and so we won't need any more government involvement.

Liberals may not believe in controlling the means of production, but many do believe in tightening controls enough through regulatory regimes and laws that they can dictate the outcome in markets they do care about. When the downturn hit us, Americans witnessed an unprecedented array of interventions, producing the weakest recovery in history. When oil prices spiked, and the populist rage against energy companies was reaching a crescendo, a Rasmussen poll found that a plurality of Democrats (37 percent) supported outright nationalization of the oil companies. When the health care debate was at its most overwrought, a New York Times/CBS News poll found a majority supporting a government-run insurance company. What happens the next time we're in trouble? 

Sanders might be treated as an outlier. But really, it's more likely he's the future.

COPYRIGHT 2015 CREATORS.COM

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

259 responses to “Bernie Sanders is the Future of the Democratic Party

  1. sanders is so creepy. 10 to 1 he has a cane with a mirror on the end of it.

    1. 100 to 1 you’re right.

    2. What is the optimum length of that cane?
      Asking for a friend.

    3. He always looks like he just got done fingering a 7 year old girl although I supect he prefers 3 year old boys.

      1. He looks like he can’t wait to get to your wallet. Eyes of anticipation.

    4. The only creep is a troll like you, if all you have to talk about is your own kinks. Then you have nothing to say ! Bernie Sanders Right Then And Right Now For America!

      1. Socialism kills. So Socialists are at least wanna-be murderers. Even the sainted Bernie.

  2. Hey, it could be worse. On these pages about a year ago, Nick Gillespie opined that Ted Cruz was the future of the GOP.

    1. Psst, Comrade, wanna buy some toilet paper? Only costs one deorderant ration.

      1. Yeah, but joe isn’t a socialist.

        1. So no deodorant ration for him?

        2. “Yeah, but joe isn’t a socialist.”

          OK, he’s just a steaming pile of crap.

      2. deorderant,

        I see what you did there.

    2. Hey Jackand,

      Ever notice that these “libertarians” get pretty bitchy any time you start criticizing republicans? Why is that, i wonder?

      1. Hey, Jackass ? have you noticed that the Marxians get pretty bitchy when we talk about anything at all?

      2. Because there are some commenters here that are pretty sympathetic to the Republican party. Some may even best be described as libertarian Republicans. And some commenters here absolutely hate the Republicans. And some, such as myself, really don’t care that much about labels and prefer to judge individuals on an issue by issue basis. We’re a diverse group of ruffians.

        Is that clear?

        1. “Is that clear?”

          No. Someone said something that was different from what someone else said. Therefore libertarians are hypocrites.

          1. Well clearly if you aren’t reading off the same set of Talking Points, then you aren’t part of a serious political philosophy.

            1. I know, right? It’s like Tony says below, where the hell do these ideas even *come* from?

              1. Has Thomas Sowell compared Obama to Hitler yet today?

                1. Who?

                2. Psst! Hey Tony,
                  Somebody here did say you were useless…. I want you to know I stood up for you though! (nobody is so useless they can’t be used as a bad example!)

                3. Actually, he shared his own life story, reflecting on his 85th birthday, at least in our local paper today. A fine read actually,

                  I knew he referred to himself as being old in the past. But I had no idea that he was in his 80s. His ideas seem so young.

                  I’m sure, as usually happens, letters to the editor from leftists will rip him to shreds in tomorrows edition. 🙁

                  1. Happy Borthday Mr Sowell. I love that guy, even if he is too conservative for me. He is my favorite living economist and it’s great to see he is still giving hell at 85. A toast to Thomas Sowell!

                4. Has Charlie Rangel (the US congressman) compared opponents of affirmative action to Hitler yet? Why yes, he has. In fact i think he said ‘worse than Hilter.’ So what are we to make of that?

                  1. He’s not the guy all liberals cite as their intellectual north star?

                    1. I know the answer to that question: Eric Hobsbaum. He’s the lefty north star.

                    2. The guy who stayed in the communist party through the era of Stalin, through the invasion of Czechoslovakia? Through event he invasion of Hungary, which drove even many of the blindest among them to leave? The guy who basically sided with a dictator who was every bit as bad as Hitler?

                      One of the intellectual scions of the left. RIP.

                5. No . Obama isnt as bright or able as hitler, Hitler was capable of painting houses, actual work.

        2. Is that clear?

          Too complicated. Proggy/socialist/commie brains can’t comprehend anything more complex than “Us v. Them.”

          There have been many discussions around here with people take all sides of the “which is more libertarian: TEAM RED or TEAM BLUE”. The general consensus among the commentariat is probably something a slight TEAM RED lean, along the lines of “Both suck donkey balls, but TEAM BLUE won’t pick the hair out its teeth afterward.” The Reason staff, I suspect, lean more toward TEAM BLUE.

          1. Slight? The democrats are the antithesis of classical liberals. Would you ever expect a libertarian candidate to ever come from team Blue?

            1. Well, TEAM BLUE is much closer to the Reason line on pot, immigration, and gay marriage.

              1. Yeah, but with the possible exception for pot, for the wrong reasons.

              2. My personal reason for liking Republicans more is because of the average Joe that is in that party. They are generally honest. You may not like their stance, but they are upfront about it, and their intentions are good based on past experiences, not some fantasy world.

                Democrats on the other hand are fucking vile human beings with zero concept of morality.

      3. Might I interest you in a narrower brush?

        Of course, I and many others have noticed that some who post here have less distaste for Republicans than they do for Democrats, and in this you are not incorrect.

        “Ever notice that these “libertarians” get pretty bitchy….”
        I think you could have left it at that.

        1. There is a fundamental problem with seeing less of a problem with starting a trillion dollar war based on lies than with Obamacare.

          Squandering trillions of dollars and thousands of lives in order to kill a country for no reason vs. modest healthcare reform. The ideology that lands on this moral calculus is… flawed.

          1. Well, that’s certainly one take.

            I note that TEAM BLUE’s current heir apparent voted for that war, as did the one it ran against Bush’s re-election. Obama didn’t have a vote, so he gets a pass on this one.

            Others might note that, if you’re talking cost, its hard for anyone to pick TEAM BLUE as an exemplar of fiscal responsibility.

            And its odd to hear ObamaCare, hailed by none other than VP BIden as a “big fucking deal”, as “modest” healthcare reform.

            1. Can you idiots even admit that Republicans are mostly responsible for that war? That a Republican president started it? You guys keep proving the point over and over and it’s like you don’t even fucking realize it.

              1. Hillary is literally exactly equal to any other Senator who voted for the Wars in terms of responsibility. Obama kept the troops in both Wars when, as CiC he could have pulled out day 1 of his Presidency. About 80% of the causalities in Afghanistan have now been on his watch. That blood is on his hands.

                You are a mendacious Team playing piece of shit.

              2. Can you socialists even admit that Democrats are mostly responsible for 75% of all US dead in Afghanistan ? That a Democrat president surged into it resulting in massive deaths ? You guys keep proving the point over and over and it’s like you don’t even fucking realize it.

              3. You do get that almost none of the major Republican candidates for president were even in Congress back then, right?

                So as far as today’s crop goes, it is entirely correct to blame a Democrat like Hilalrry Clinton more for the wars than a Republican like Paul or Cruz. Neither of them had anything to do with it, whereas Clinton actually voted for it.

                That’s a fascinating bit about your reasoning and I guess it goes handing in hand with being a collectivist: you purport to get more upset about what someone from the same party as a Republican candidate did 10 or 15 years ago than what a Democrat actually did personally just now. Also it’s probably hard for you to get around the fact that the least hawkish major candidate to emerge in the last three elections is not a Democrat, but a Republican (that being Paul).

              4. Hillary Clinton voted for that war. Interesting – there isn’t a war she HASN’T supported. She even started her own civil war.

                1. But BUUUUUUUUUSH!!!!

              5. The Iran war was constitutionally approved by congress. Dems voted for it. It was a bipartisan war as was WW2 .

          2. “seeing less of a problem with starting a trillion dollar war based on lies than with Obamacare”

            Here’s the thing you’re consistently not listening to:

            Most people here have significant, even fundamental, problems with BOTH THINGS. You just fixate on the people who defend Republicans and decide that they speak for all libertarians, because you seem to need to reduce other people’s opinions and then attack them.

            Why the pervasive and compulsive hostility toward people you don’t even actually know?

          3. Decent point. The Iraq war happens to other people though. Obamacare happens to us.

          4. Just because some people here defend Republicans on some issues doesn’t mean they have less of a problem with starting a trillion dollar war than hey do with Obamacare.

            1. They should have a much bigger problem with a fuckup crime against humanity of massive proportions than a modest healthcare law. The latter can always be undone.

              1. See, the problem with you Tony, is that you’re not a forward thinker nor a lateral thinker.

                I’m pretty sure the FDA and other government intervention into the health system has caused more deaths than all of our war deaths combined. Obamacare will exacerbate that substantially.

                I know it is beyond your comprehension, it is like as a gay man you didn’t even pay attention to Dallas Buyers Club.

              2. You’re begging the question. It’s not a modest health care law, it’s a waste of trillions of dollars that is already proving to be counterproductive in its aim of reducing healthcare costs and improving quality. If you’ve seen are deficit projections, then in terms of dollars and cents, Obama’s mistakes will indeed end up costing us more than Bush’s.

                And turning helping to turn Libya and Syria into Islamist countries may not seem like a big fuck up to you, but I’d say it certainly deserves a mention.

                And most importantly, Obama is president now, not Bush. Why should we do like Jon Stewart and spend 8 years bitching about ships already sailed instead of dealing with the particular tyrant of the status quo?

              3. You are required to have health insurance, whether you want it or not. You can be sent to jail if you refuse to comply.

                The only thing “modest” is they fine you first. Then, they jail you.

          5. The fundamental problem is seeing a “problem” in everything and proposing governmental solutions for them.

            It’s not team red vs team blue. But both teams against the fans in the stands.

            I refuse to be victimized by either team.

          6. You are such a pig fucker. The same government elites who jailed Japanese Americans during WW2, created Jim Crow and invaded Iraq are identical -regardless of party. Power-hungry morons who think they are always right and use government force to fuck our lives.

            Modest health care reform? Are you fucking retarded? Govt does NOTHING right, and you’re insane to trust these power-hungry fascists when all they prove is how venal they are.

            1. Not to mention started the Vietnam War. But Tony doesn’t want us to live to far in the past. Just far enough in the past for him to think he has a point.

              1. Not to mention started the Vietnam War. But Tony doesn’t want us to live to far in the past.

                Yeah, he conveniently forgot to mention Kosovo as well.

            2. Though more Japanese were interned than any nationality, others were as well including Italians.

              Just like the Democrats interned and imposed curfews – in smaller numbers – on Italians in the USA, Liberals did the same under King here in Canada (the number interned was about 3000 in North America ).

              Ukrainians and Germans too.

              http://bit.ly/1D6Qbli

          7. Find one fucking person here besides Cytotoxic that supported Bush/Cheney and the fucking war.

            What’s that, you can’t? Then fuck off.

          8. The Iraq war wasn’t based on any “lies”. Many intellectually honest liberals admit it this. Based on faulty intelligence, yes.

            Let’s not forget that the Democrats got us involved in at least 3 wars and Obama’s eager intervention during the “Arab Spring” created a power vacuum that gave rise to ISIS.

            If we seriously want to play this game, let’s discuss how Truman mishandled of the Korean War (Hello, North Korea) and prog hero FDR rounded up the Japanese. The old timey Dems were firmly behind Jim Crow. Wow, I’m Asian, so I should hold that against the Dems forever.

            ACA is bad policy, Tony. If the Dems passed a new law to jail people for drinking too much soda, most sane people would rise against it. Only the truly asinine liberals would mutter insane nonsense like “But Bush killed more people in Iraq”. Someone kinda like you.

            I only plan to vote for Rand and MAYBE Cruz. But I’ll vote for SOMEONE to keep Sanders out of office. He’s insane.

            1. The intelligence wasn’t faulty. Iraq hadnt hundreds of tons of poison gas artillery rounds. The US spent a year or two disabling some of the storage facilities they found and there are loads more still there rusting away. Both the kurds and the marsh arabs suffered poison gas attacks during the Saddam years. So if Poison gas weapons are weapons of mass destruction (and under the definitions in use at the time they were) then Iran had plenty. No nukes were found , perhaps because Saddam was afraid of Israeli interference or perhaps because they moved to Syria, which also suffered from Israeli interference.

      4. I think it could be that Libertarians have a tendency to think intellectually and that is more in line with conservatism than emoting your way to an agenda.

        1. Republicans, the party of the intellectuals.

          1. Relatively closer as opposed to not at all.

            1. Well Sarah Palin did attend five colleges.

              1. And no one has a fucking clue what Obama did in college, on account of it is a deep dark secret.

                1. But, but, but, we do know that Bill didn’t inhale!

                  What a schmuck!

                  And, a waste of good weed!

              2. Yes, and when you cherry pick one individual, and one characteristic it absolutely defines the entire party.

                Oh wait, do I recall truthful Joe Biden LYING about his walking down to Katies Restaurant back home every time he goes to talk to the regular guys. Katies Restaurant that CLOSED 20 years before. Can we extrapolate that all Democrats are baldfaced liars? Mmmmm, didn’t think so,

                Of course, even Sarah Palin had more actual executive experience than either of the people on the opposing party’s ticket. So, would you like to measure then on the classes they took and the grades they got, or what they did and how well did it work out?

                Oh wait, we can’t actually compare classes or grades because one party won’t release any of that information. (clearly because it is so wonderful)

                Or, you could take my view they both parties are mostly lying scum.

                1. This is a frankly embarrassing demonstration of american socialist’s claim. Sarah Palin is the dumbest human being ever to be on the national ticket. I mention her name and you jump to her defense, as if that’s even remotely necessary.

                  1. How did you determine her to be the dumbest on a national ticket? What is this based on?

                  2. “. . . Sarah Palin is the dumbest human being ever to be on the national ticket . . . “.

                    Since she got there because John McCain was desperate and begged for a game-changer and she didn’t actively seek the #2 spot (unlike Joe Biden) – I would say, using your own criteria – it was John McCain who was the “most stupid human being”.

                    Right?

                  3. Tony|7.10.15 @ 7:35PM|#
                    “This is a frankly embarrassing demonstration of american socialist’s claim. Sarah Palin is the dumbest human being ever to be on the national ticket”

                    Two words for you, shitstain:
                    Joe
                    Biden
                    Two more: you lose.

                  4. So, you admit then that affirmative action is bad?

                    Oh, and btw, having intelligent tyrants is hardly nicer than having stupid ones. Hitler and Stalin both had much higher than average IQs. Safe to say we’d all be better off if they’d been a little dumber. So a person can be forgiven to some extent for preferring an idle moron in the white house to some miseducated self-imagined ubermensch who wants to save us all from ourselves.

              3. If only they were as smart as your typical socialist voter.

                1. The best comment to that clip:

                  raceboy1971 1 year ago
                  These are the same morons $80K in debt with a liberal arts degree making my latte each morning at Starbucks.

              4. George W. Bush went to Yale. Are you still going to tell us that getting that degree confers intelligence?

                There are people with PhDs who sincerely believe that Newtonian physics is rapey, that white people invented HIV to kill off black people, not to mention remarkably popular views among ‘intellectuals’ like GMOs being capitalist poison or that work is what makes stuff valuable.

                I think this is one appeal to authority (the authority of a piece of paper it seems) that has had its credibility pretty shot; kind of amazed you actually thought it would be worth trotting out again.

                1. George W Bush actually went to Harvard AND Yale.

      5. There is a very narrow gap between genuine rightwing bullshit websites/radio shows and thinly veiled pro-GOP propaganda. These people do not get their information and ideas from mainstream journalism, academia, or any place else normal people go to. They all get it from bullshit rightwing propaganda sources, and it’s all pretty much the Frankenstein monster creation of big business interests. They simply cannot help themselves, because this is the bubble of bullshit they live in.

        Some may wonder how the often tacit but ever-present white/male supremacy fits into big business interests. I’ll quote Lyndon Johnson:

        “If you can convince the lowest white man that he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll even empty his pockets for you.”

        1. If there’s one man who knew what was going on, who one can’t help but respect and admire and agree with, and whose quotes are probably always applicable everywhere, it’s LBJ.

          1. Say what you will, he had some prescience with respect to race and political party allegiance.

            1. What were his exact words, again?

              1. I believe they were “Yeah, I’m a fucking racist because I’m a kind of obnoxious white man living in the 60s. But I also delivered landmark civil rights reforms, so there.”

                1. How do his racist comments stand up next to those of other obnoxious white men from the 60s like, say, Barry Goldwater?

                2. Yes, I remember his claim that The Great Society would “end poverty.” How’d that work out?

                  1. Cut it in half in perpetuity.

                3. “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference… I’ll have them niggers voting Democratic for the next two hundred years”

                  How prescient.

                  1. Still about 150 years to go, so we’ll see.

                    Funny thing about that quote, so often trotted out by rightwingers trying to deflect the own inherently racist foundation of their ideology, is that it is not real.

                    1. “inherently racist foundation of their ideology”

                      Specifics? Are you still looking for racist Barry Goldwater quotes?

                    2. It’s very rich that the fool lecturing people on the ‘inherently racist foundation of their ideology’ decided to belittle/ignore the lives and skills of millions of people based on their geographical origins because it doesn’t fit with his perception of the tech industry. Yep Tony, those other people are the racists.

                    3. Being anti-(federal) government is now and has always been about white racial resentment over brown people getting handouts. You never ever examine your own handouts, or even recognize them as such. It’s just a very specific kind that drives rightwing antigovernment rhetoric, and it’s not corporate tax loopholes.

                    4. Are you saying white people don’t get handouts? Why do you assume brown people are the only ones getting handouts?

                      What are their own hand outs you speak of?

                    5. Hey fuckwad, I think someone here put it best a month or so ago:

                      White privilege has been that we have had the “privilege” of not having a government boot on our necks through most of history.

                      Your fucked up, ignorant, vindictive solution is to place that boot on everyone’s neck equally.

                      The libertarian, your moral and intellectual superior, strives to see that boot lifted off the necks of ALL human beings.

                      Go fuck yourself, scumbag.

                    6. And Tony provides himself to be historically, culturally, and philosophically ignorant once again. Because apparently anti-federal government positions only exist in his little American bubble. I mean, come on Tony, I get that your public education system sucks, but could you at least try not to come off as a stereotypical self-centred American when foreigners are around?

                      You’ll forget me if I take your analysis with a grain of salt, given your constant attempts to demonize Republicans/right-wingers/whatever. Somehow I suspect that you are unable to actually understand or empathize with the positions of people you hate and instead construct ones that are easier to attack. I don’t really see you as capable of maintaining any degree of objectivity for rather obvious reasons. Because it’s not an honest analysis, it’s a pathetic attempt at demonizing propaganda. Your ’empiricism’ consists of tarring your opponents and declaring yourself superior and right, while ignoring the actual ideas discussed. And see, that’s actually not called ’empiricism’, it’s actually a form of anti-intellectualism.

                    7. Tony|7.10.15 @ 7:33PM|#
                      “Being anti-(federal) government is now and has always been about white racial resentment over brown people getting handouts”

                      Translated from shitstain:
                      ‘If you don’t agree with me, you hate wymyns, chillens and minurities! ‘Cause I’m smart!’

                    8. Dafuq?? You realize Libertarians fight against goverment handouts period, right? Not least of which would be handouts to those big, nasty corporations…???

                    9. Wanting lower taxes and fewer regulatory impediments in the economy is clearly just a front for hatred of black people. Just because.

                    10. It’s an attributed quote. Of course he wouldn’t admit to saying that, and would probably insist that it isn’t real (nor would his supporters), even if it is.

                      As far as I can tell, it’s about as real as yours.

                    11. Mine I believe was said during an interview with Bill Moyers.

                    12. “believe”?

                      And I believe that mine was said during circumstances, too.

                      As far as I know, “real” and “not said in front of Bill Moyers” aren’t mutually exclusive.

                    13. What is the racist foundation of their ideology? What is right wing ideology anyway?

                    14. Except that it was the Democrats who were the racists. Of course the Republicans ran the occupation of the South. S both are guilty of victimizing black and white citizens of the South.

                      But you, Tony, cannot let go of your devotion to Team Blue not matter what. Maybe this blind devotion of yours toward evil, power-hungry racists is why so many thinking people loath your position.

                4. The exact quote is “i’ll have those n****rs voting democratic for 200 years” and its worked for 60 so far .

            2. Know how I know how you’re racist and stupid, tony?

              Because you quote LBJ.

                1. I came here to read Tony’s and am soc’s posts. Shit just got interesting.

              1. american socialist|7.10.15 @ 7:35PM|#
                “Know how I know how you’re racist and stupid, tony?
                Because you quote LBJ.”

                No, shitpile, it’s because he’s racist and stupid.

              2. Reverse causality.

        2. “There is a very narrow gap between genuine rightwing bullshit websites/radio shows and thinly veiled pro-GOP propaganda. These people do not get their information and ideas from mainstream journalism, academia, or any place else normal people go to.”

          … Not like hardcore lefties like yourself, who get their news from perfectly balanced sources like Mother Jones and DailyKos.

          1. But I don’t. I may occasionally find myself in those places, reading articles by people who actually value an empirical approach to thought, unlike the rightwing BS artists who openly disdain it in favor of what has been coined “truthiness.” I get my news from maybe an average of 10 mainstream sources a day.

            Your sources tell you that all those places are in a giant conspiracy to oppress you, and you’d best avoid them. Gee I wonder who’s the propaganda victim.

            1. “what has been coined “truthiness.” . . . by a left wing comedian.

            2. “truthiness”

              It appears that one of those mainstream sources of yours is a comedy show.

            3. Where have writers at motherjones and dailykos shown to value an empirical approach to thought?

              If so…why do they support obamacare, min wage to 15, making college free as somehow being good for society instead of addressing why k-12 quality is low, pushing climate change is bringing out the destruction of the earth while continuing to move the goal posts….

              Hurricane sandy = climate change! wait i thought climate change was supposed to be the result if we continued are ways down the road?

              1. The hilarious attempts to elevate progressive politics to ’empirical’ truth is great because it inherently leads to a poorly thought out assumption that must be defended at all costs. Thus, flaws in the great ’empirical’ system must be covered up, or blamed on others. The ’empiricism’ in politics that Tony believes in is not actual empiricism, but the neurochemical twitch in his amygdala and others from sharing a standard orthodoxy that should not be questioned. Tony’s ‘Empiricism’ comes with the built-in assumption that they are right and their opponents are wrong. I wonder why the only ’empiricist’ work is those that support his bias? It produces a dogmatic faith and fervour in its believers’ own inherent rightness that is no different from a religious fundamentalist. It would be funny if it weren’t so profoundly delusional.

              2. Thank you Frankjasper1 for so thoroughly demonstrating my exact point. Everything you believe is the opposite of reality. It’s frankly confusing why rightwingers need to be wrong about everything. Maybe it’s because they’ve decided that their only political worldview is being the opposite of the ones who believe in facts.

                1. What are they wrong about and why? What are the facts and how do they relate to the policies you support?

                  Ah i think i get where tony is at…all the policies he supports actually makes those things worse per the empirical evidence thus it justifies him taking more power.

            4. Tony: “I value an empirical approach to thought! Now I’m going illustrate my point by using a term from a left-wing comedy show with a history of editing footage or blatantly ignoring everything that doesn’t conform to their bias. Because those Republicans are getting their information from media with a history of editing footage or blatantly ignoring everything that doesn’t conform to their bias!”

              Self-awareness really isn’t your thing, is it?

            5. You must assume all commenters here read articles over at Fox then rush over here to comment. Rather than, I don’t know, reading the articles right here and commenting on the given topic.

              1. Tony can’t beat anyone here in a debate, so he builds straw men and knocks them down like a retarded kid swinging at a pinata.

        3. This is nonsense. Regular people by your definition.

          I wish big business was pro-liberty. Instead they are myopic pragmatists.

          Academia and the News media were corrupted by the left wing cabal decades ago. They are useless.

        4. “These people do not get their information and ideas from mainstream journalism, academia, or any place else normal people go to. ”

          Tony, is that where you get your ideas?

          That explains it!

        5. “These people do not get their information and ideas from mainstream journalism, academia, or any place else normal people go to.”

          “I get my news from maybe an average of 10 mainstream sources a day.”

          And all 10 of those sources are left wing partisan sources that parrot the same big government proglodyte point of view.

        6. “These people do not get their information and ideas from mainstream journalism, academia”
          Oh the horror. That anyone should not get their information from those hallowed sources. “He who does not read the news is uninformed; he who does is misinformed.” -Twain.

          “they all get it from bullshit rightwing propaganda sources, and it’s all pretty much the Frankenstein monster creation of big business interests.”
          Forgot to mention the Koch brothers. Koch money bad, Soros money good.

        7. There is a very narrow gap between genuine rightwing bullshit websites/radio shows and thinly veiled pro-GOP propaganda. These people do not get their information and ideas from mainstream journalism, academia, or any place else normal people go to.

          Mainstream journalism and academia especially is occupied and run by lefty progressives. That’s where “normal people” should get unbiased information? Please.

      6. Maybe it’s because, no matter what else the Republicans have done, they haven’t spent the last several decades wearing t-shirts with the face of a mass-murdering Communist on them. We get a little weary of you Totalitarianism fans, and your endless belief that somehow THIS time, YOU won’t be among the ones liquidated.

        The Republicans are ordinarily Political animals. It’s you Socialists who want to keep pushing measures to eradicate all civil rights (except maybe the right to f*ck anybody you please, and the right to an abortion).

        We’re simply sick of you. You didn’t have much of an act left after the U.S.S.R., admitted that Stalin was a monster, and what you do have left doesn’t wear well.

        1. So Republicans get a pass for hogwash economics that destroys the global economy, wars based on lies, corrupting democracy, and being competent basically only at fleecing Americans and destroying shit… because Democrats are supposedly the same as Stalin, for some reason. Thoughtful.

          1. No. Neither one gets a pass. You don’t *have* to choose between them.

          2. You seem to think that Democrats should get a pass no matter how many times socialism is shown to fail. Medicaid is a 450BB pa failure and your only answer is MOAR!

            Socialism: 100million served and counting. Your lunacy continues to shine.

          3. So Republicans get a pass for hogwash economics that destroys the global economy, wars based on lies, corrupting democracy, and being competent basically only at fleecing Americans and destroying shit… because Democrats are supposedly the same as Stalin, for some reason. Thoughtful.

            But,what you’re saying is so vague, I don’t know what it means. So, it’s bullshit.

            What is hogwash economics? What is the destruction of the global economy? How has democracy been corrupted? What is the difference between corrupt and uncorrupt democracy? What does “corrupt” mean? What does competence means? What does fleecing mean? What does destroy mean? Who is Stalin? What is thoughtful?

            You use these terms, but you don’t define them. Therefore, your whole political philosophy is buzzword bullshit bumperstickers. QED.

            1. Corrupting democracy means billionaires giving to republicans…but billionaires giving to democrats is a noble cause

              1. Obviously…..

              2. Koch money bad, Soros money good. That’s the motto. Citizens United video is propaganda, while the Guardian and Salon.com are just honest “mainstream journalism” in Tony’s eyes.

          4. What were these hogwash economics that destroy the global economy and how are they the only ones responsible when the dems have been around controlling congress at the same time?

            I always get a kick of Elizabeth Warren saying reagan-economics dont work. Not even sure what those are specifically and I have to wonder why the all-dem congresses didn’t do anything about it before

          5. Since 1931 seen as the year of the modern government (82 years)

            Republican: 20 years of the senate, 20 years of the house and 36 years pres

            Democrat: 62 years of the senate, 62 years of the house and 46 years

            Yet republicans are somehow responsible for all the united states problems!!!

            1. Yes, because the Republicans are obstructionists!

              /std issue prog

          6. Republicans are just like you, you butt-fucked freak.

          7. “So Republicans get a pass on hogwash economics that destroy the global economy . . . “. You mean – they adopt socialist, big government programs.

          8. Democratic economics dont even reach the level of hogwash, they are proven absolute falsehoods and nonsense. Unfortunately once an institution has been granted the ability to create money and it funds political campaigns and economics programs at major institutions it isnt easy to control it. Consequently neither party will take on the Fed, but at least Republicans dont seem quite so eager to make it impossible to run a business or earn a living as the democrats do.

        2. Alf was an alien. Not a mass murdering Communist! He never hurt anyone.

          1. Communists never hurt anyone either, it was just guns……thus if we outlawed guns communism would work perfectly.

          2. I think Alf did eat a cat or two.

      7. Hey AS,

        Ever notice that you furiously and pathetically attempt to portray yourself as the most morally righteous person in the thread while ignoring or handwaving the deaths and suffering of millions under regimes you like? Why is that, I wonder? Could it be that you’re nothing more than vapid, egotistical scum?

        I mean, I’ve been on these threads long enough to realize you’re a moron with a very inflated sense of self-importance, but I’m curious as to how you don’t recognize your own crippling moral degeneracy. I’m willing to chalk it up to the Dunning-Kruger effect, but I suspect there may be deeper psychological issues that may be manifesting themselves in a grandiose ego.

        *Grabs notebook* How was your relationship with your parents?

        1. No one gets out alive.

          Live is like that.

          Sigh.

      8. You’re obviously asleep, ignorant or deliberately obtuse.

        Some libertarians are disappointed with Republicans and criticize them for failing to live up to their ‘limited government’ rhetoric. And then they become hard to differentiate between asswipes like you.

        Find a Republican who wants to make social security “sustainable”, and you’ll find a traitor to limited government and individualism. A Democrat, in other words.

        1. RINO.

      9. I think it depends on which Republicans.

        Establishment Republicans like Bush or Romney or Chris Christie and people like Karl Rove are hated because they are complete statists, the antithesis of libertarianism.

        OTOH, Tea Party types like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Mike Lee actually share at least some values with libertarians. At least in theory they want smaller government, even though they support some things that some libertarians don’t.

        Beyond that, I don’t think any Republican professes love for socialism, yet almost every Democrat does. Do many Republicans like it in practice? Sure, but that’s because they are reflexly big business, and often big business likes socialism because they get handouts from the government and also get the government to pay benefits to workers, saving them money.

        1. You don’t see it, do you? The Democrats have WON! As long as Republicans want to “save” social security, they have surrender the political argument to Democrats.

          That’s why Democrats are kicking GOP ass, year after year. Government grows and the GOP argue on the margins.

      10. Apparently we have a moderate preference for stupid over evil.

    3. Re: Jackass Ass,

      Hey, it could be worse.

      It’s already worse.

    4. There is no future for the Grand Old Pedophile party. Read “The Franklin Scandal Cover Up” if you doubt my veracity. Dennis Hastert is just the tip of the iceberg!

  3. I sure hope so because it would ensure the destruction of the party, the breaking of the entrenched system and permit the rise of a true Libertarian party free from the stupidity of the GOP.

  4. The future?

    The democratic party has been hiding their socialism like Liberace hid his predilections.

    1. Darn, I’ve had one of WFMU’s streams off for a few hrs., and now you’ve driven me to seek some free Liberace music.

    2. So, Democrats can play piano?

    3. Whoa, what I just found on Blank on Blank’s SoundCloud: Liberace on Peacocking, which is introduced as including his political platform, said to be a cross between Reagan’s & FDR’s.

  5. Democrats will not pull back once they get their $10 minimum wage. They will not be content once universal pre-K is passed. They will not be satiated after the next round of unilateral Environmental Protection Agency intrusions into the energy markets are instituted. And liberals will never concede that health care is now working and so we won’t need any more government involvement.

    That’s because their interventions don’t solve the problems they claim to want to solve. So more always has to be done.

    A $10 minimum wage isn’t going to end (relative) poverty or income inequality.

    Universal pre-K isn’t going to improve educational outcomes.

    The next round of EPA regulations won’t reduce energy costs or magically make wind and solar a viable alternative for replacing fossil fuels.

    Healthcare (still) isn’t working, at least as well as it could.

    In many cases their policies and interventions make these things worse. But they’ll find other excuses for their failure and demand yet more intervention. It’s almost enough to make you think the real goal is not to solve these problems. But that’s just some revealed preferences mumbo jumbo. What do I know.

    1. In militancy the result is not the goal and never has been. Militancy is always about the militancy. Look at the new feminists. They make no sense and bully their way to the agenda while screaming victim hood. Very effective in a low information populace and very similar to Alinsky rule #5 “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. Uhm…..intended or not.

      1. ^^^^^Excellent point!

  6. He belches… he farts….he bathes at least once a month….he’s a moocher….he’s lazy…he snarls…he’s depressed…he picks his underwear from his crack without hesitation

    Yup. He’s your perfect Democrat.

  7. Sanders may well be the Democrat primary winner if late in the race he thinks he can win and takes the gloves off with Hillary.

    Educating the low info Dems, which is a big number, on just how corrupt she is (IMHO) won’t get them to vote for Cruz or Rand instead of her, but it might get them to vote for Bernie.

    1. Talking to people helps. I had a conversation with an extended family member over July 4 who is in the Hillary camp, seemingly buying the “fake scandals” line. He said that he could vote for Jeb Bush but that he absolutely hated Rand Paul. One of his gripes was that Paul was grandstanding, and this surveillance stuff really wasn’t going to impact anyone in real life. I shared our very own tale of woodchippers and subpoenas with him. It seemed to make an impact.

      By the end of the conversation he was at least admitting he needed to look more into Paul’s actual platform and promising to do so. Will that actually materialize in to a vote? Maybe not, but it’s a start.

      1. I applaud you. Continue with you efforts, 1477.

  8. SOCIAL SECURITY SUCKS!!! Give your checks back now! You are taking money from the producer class and giving it to 70 year olds who want to go on vacation to Florida. They could be working instead! Fuck that, grandpa!

    1. Don’t you have a rally to attend and famous celebrity to stalk?

      1. I just want to make an IPad app so I can become a producer too.

        1. What’s stopping you?

          1. Capitalism?

            1. The well manicured hand of the bourgeoisie?

          2. It is not intelligent enough.

          3. Ignorance.

          4. He needs the government to mandate the purchase of his app because the market won’t accept it.

          5. Laziness.

            1. “No one expects the American socialist! His chief weapon is ignorance, stupidity and ignorance; two chief weapons, stupidity, ignorance, and zero self-awareness! Er, among his chief weapons are: stupidity, ignorance, zero self-awareness, and near fanatical devotion to the State! Um, I’ll come in again…”

        2. You’d have to pull your head of your ass first but you’re too well fed in there to ever change. So that will never happen.

        3. I think you’re missing his lousy attempt at snark; namely the sneer that someone can create an app an be called a “producer”, when OBVIOUSLY only the regulator writing the next 1,000 laws or MAYBE the farm producing (the exact allotment, no more or less) of grain can be called a producer.

          1. Oh no, I know what he’s doing. I’m just calling him on it.

    2. OK, so you think Social Security is great. What do you do when Social Security literally can’t make it’s promised payments?

      1. 1477

        You import millions of young workers to start paying into the system to replace the money you spent on other gov programs to buy votes with and thereby kick the can down the road for another couple of generations.

      2. That would be now (actually starting in 2010). We put Madoff in jail. FDR gets his mug on currency.

      3. He’d rape his grandchildren into giving him more money. Oh wait, social secuirty…

    3. Re: American Stolid,

      SOCIAL SECURITY SUCKS!

      It’s actually broke, but whatever.

      Fuck that, grandpa!

      Yeah, fuck that. He ain’t my grandpa.

    4. Don’t you have some dissidents to murder?

    5. For the first time in memory, I’m right there with you.

      Which candidate will give me back my SS withholding from the last forty years. With interest please.

      That’s who I’ll vote for.

      If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.

      1. Also adjusted for inflation – the true rate of inflation and not some bull shit made up numbers from the government.

    6. You’re admitting that you’re too fucking stupid to save for your own future.

      Well, it took you long enough.

  9. Liberals may not believe in controlling the means of production, but many do believe in tightening controls enough through regulatory regimes and laws that they can dictate the outcome in markets they do care about.

    Can’t we just call their ideology what it actually is? Fascism.

    1. That really ticks them off.

  10. Democrats will not pull back once they get their $10 minimum wage. They will not be content once universal pre-K is passed. They will not be satiated after the next round of unilateral Environmental Protection Agency intrusions into the energy markets are instituted. And liberals will never concede that health care is now working and so we won’t need any more government involvement.

    In short, the Democrats will not rest until America becomes the Soviet paradise that comrade Stalin set as goal back when the Democratic party was infiltrated by the ComIntern!

    Ok, so they haven’t received the “Never mind!” memo. Call it “inertia” if you want…

  11. The rise of Bernie Sanders portends a socialistic future for the Democratic Party.

    The future? He’s their past and present, too–a bunch of white progressives that migrate to lower-scale, higher-trust ethnically homogenous and defensively conformist communities, and think that the institutions which foster these communities from falling into dysfunction can be exponentially scaled up with no loss in efficiency or quality whatsoever, and with no correlated increase in social dysfunction.

    1. Is “white progressive” guilt a new thing?

      /sarc

      1. How can you feel guilty when you “give” them other people’s money?

        They can assuage their guilt, and it doesn’t cost them a dime!

        1. Limousine liberals. I well remember the Kennedy clan. The epitome of the term.

          But wait a minute. JFK by today’s demo standards, was a freaking, right wing repub.

          What the hell?

  12. Sanders, unpolished in perhaps a refreshing way, can be made to admit that he is surprised by his reception, which is also sort of an admission that his candidacy was not so much about actually winning. I don’t think he really wants to live in the White House. If he actually threatens to close the poll gap with Hillary, this puts things in an annoying bind. What does he do, drop out as he is winning? A sudden illness perhaps? I’m not looking forward to dusting off my seething rage toward starry-eyed liberals who’d rather lose pure than win. Regardless, I do pray that Mr. Trump sticks around as long as possible. If it’s going to be a coronation there might as well be a jester.

    1. Maybe you should all hold a vote on who to vote for. That way, you could coordinate your votes.

      If everyone just goes into the voting booth and votes for whatever they want, they may very well accurately assess that their vote won’t change the outcome, and vote for Bernie, because they like him, and it makes them feel good.

      But, if they turn around and find out that they’re all doing that, and nominating Bernie, that could be a problem, you say.

      Clearly, they need to coordinate their votes, and you can’t do that by giving everyone freedom. You need government. And elections.

      So, you should all have a primary vote to see who you should vote for. So, you vote in the primary see the results, and then ask everyone “Is that what you really wanna do?” and then they get to vote again. That time, for real.

      Or, maybe you should just have a vote before the election that asks “Do you want to nominate who ever you want, or do you want to nominate someone who’s most likely to win?” And if enough people vote for nominating a winner, then every really votes, with that goal. And no dissent! Because, democracy.

      That’s called solving problems.

      1. Activists on both ends of the political spectrum seriously underestimate the importance of winning. Which I find strange.

        1. Do you think Bernie’s support is being driven by “activists”?

          1. No, nor extremists. People are entitled to back him. I just wish they wouldn’t because he’s a goober with an untested record of being supported outside Vermont.

            1. Anything for the team!

        2. I don’t think they underestimate, I just think they don’t really want to win. Part of the reason is because they don’t want to compromise in order to appeal to a winning majority. Part of the reason is because some people on the fringes like it that way. If they become mainstream, they become the thing they despise. Which is to say that they are on the fringe in part (probably mostly) because they sincerely believe in those ideas, but that there is also probably an element of simply rebelling against the norm. We see this with all fringe movements, from music to politics.

        3. Tony if you prog fucks really cared about fairness and equality you would insist that Bernie has to beat Hillary by 10 points or more to win.

          Hillary is burdened with her lady parts and Bernie enjoys white male privlidge and that’s just not fair.

          1. Bernie shouldn’t be running against Hillary at all.

            Women are underrepresented in presidents, and they’re equally qualified. Hillary should be the affirmative action choice.

            Frankly, I was surprised how many equally qualified old white men ran against Obama.

            1. Why should Bernie not run ?

              Because Hillary is a woman ?

              Are you actually saying that you think Hillary should win because she is a woman ?

              1. Whoooosh!

        4. Maybe stop trying to stuff absolutely everybody’s views into two incoherent categories and start thinking of politics as a forum to negotiate competing interests, rather than as a team sport to “win.”

    2. So Sanders, the avowed socialist who thinks America’s big problem is we have too many choices of deoderant, is unpolished in a refreshing way but Trump , an acomplished capitalist billionaire, is a court jester ?

      Tony how old were you when you father abandoned you ?

      1. Trump is a jester.

        1. I have no argument with that.

          Bernie isn’t refreshingly unpolished though.

          He is a professional politician who has carved out a niche for himself by appealing to those who don’t want to accept responsibility for themselves and want government, ie someone else, to take care of them..

          1. Bernie isn’t refreshingly unpolished though.

            Them’s fightin’ words.

            1. You wouldn’t get very far, leftoid sissy boy. You would probably call a government bureaucrat to come fight your fight for you, since you want the state to live your life for you in every other regard. You leftoids are pathetic vermin, hence the putrid appeal of Bernie fucking Sanders.

      2. Trump is an unhinged narcissist. So, the perfect capitalist. And fine, Bernie is unpolished in a neutral way. Geeze.

        1. Bernie is just a plain idiot. The guy clearly hasn’t had a novel thought since he graduated college in the 50s. Unpoloshed? No, just dumb. An honest idiot is still an idiot, and frankly, idiocy is more dangerous in a leader than selfishness. At least a selfish person will do what’s in your interest as long as it coincides with his own, but an idiot will sink the boat with you and him in it.

          1. Trump runs his mouth but hasn’t proposed any concrete policy. Sanders already floated a few unworkable ideas, notably taxing investments to pay for free college. He’s expressed interest in a French level super tax and single payer system.

            It won’t be the right wingers that stop him. No, it’ll be mainstream Wall Street and the 1% that run expensive ads portraying him as a kooky socialist. Clinton is in their pocket and she’s proven to be friendly to the liberal elites.

            The 1% are mostly white liberals, and they strike a surprisingly libertarian note when their interests are threaten.

            1. Likely true. Generally, extreme candidates tend to do better in the polls if only due to frustration with the established candidate, but when the election turns up, cooler heads generally prevail. Both Sanders and Trump will get buried when the primaries actually start happening I expect.

      3. You really can’t expect Tony to actually be consistent when he’s more driven by their partisan politics than any actual analysis. This is a guy who would decry any Republican as racist for saying ‘Asians don’t count’.

        1. Reminds me, a video posted at CafeHayek nicely illustrating how retarded Tony’s claim is about the GOP being fundamentally motivated by white supremacy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixi9_cciy8w

          Both retards like Tony and anti-immigrant types should see that video.

    3. So, what you’re saying is that the idea of having a choice between two different candidates is unsettling and you’d prefer the Democratic voters not have the potential of choosing poorly?

      1. you’d prefer the Democratic voters not have the potential of choosing poorly

        If the alternative is Hillary, I don’t think they have the option of not choosing poorly.

      2. Since a large portion of the Democrat base can’t conjugate the Be verb and the candidates are both white he makes a good point.

      3. I prefer to win. Fairly and honorably, but win. 2000 did a number on me.

        1. You mean because of the election where Al Gore never at any point led in the voting in Florida, no matter how many ballots the Democrats tried to doctor?

          Yeah, I can see why that would do a number on you…it’s a shame when your candidate is so pathetic that even the usual Team Blue cheating can’t get him a win.

          1. And it’s hilarious that these idiots think Hillary Clinton has it in the bag. Who the fuck do they think is going to show up to vote for her? lol

            1. Nobody likes Hillary Clinton. They like the idea of Hillary Clinton. I saw a Gillespie article on TDB talking about how she was smart to not say anything. It was kind of hilarious that none of the leftists saw the snark and praised Nick for admitting that Hillary was smart.

          2. Jesus fucking Christ is everyone here deliberately trying to prove american socialist right?

            1. Alright, I admit it. I would actually, if forced to choose, prefer a socially conservative, constitutional candidate to the sort of candidate who appeals to a person who openly identifies as a national socialist.

            2. Right about what? That many people here see economic liberalism (that is economic freedom, not socialism) as a higher priority than a few social issues on which the dems are more liberal (like marriage, which is little more than a piece of paper)? And so view the dems as a greater evil?

              I don’t see how that’s some big news to you. Like a Jacobin ‘calling out’ people for being ‘partisans’ and siding with the Girondins after the first reign of terror. Not to mention that at least the GOP is moving in the right direction, while the Democrats are moving exactly in the wrong direction, getting more totalitarian by the day. I mean a democratic senator recently argued that people who publicly don’t believe in global warming should be imprisoned. That doesn’t scare the shit out of you, that kind of blatant opposition to the first amendment? Who am I kidding, you probably agree 100% with that position.

              What exactly is your point again?

        2. Well that explains a lot about you I guess.

    4. “Here’s a tip, have a point. It makes it so much more interesting for the listener (reader)!”

    5. Sanders unpolished?

      Surely you mean Trump.

      “polished” is just a code word for PC. 😉

  13. Fine. We should have two diametrically-opposed political parties.

  14. Democrats have been socialist for decades. They claim to be pro-choice but force all to comply with their socialist agenda from social security to Obamacare. They know what’s best for us.

    As for comrade Sanders: if elected we will have a right to free Ben & Jerry’s – any flavor.

  15. “The future does not bode well for free-market fans. According to a Pew poll, 49 percent of those between ages 18 and 29 say they have a positive view of socialism?with only 43 percent having a negative view.”

    49 percent of 18 to 29 yr olds have no clue what Socialism is.

    1. Cuba is calling. Let them take a vacation in the worker’s paradise only 80 miles off our shores.

      1. But it has great healthcare!!!

        1. For the party elite. The man on the street gets no healthcare at any price.

    2. You have no clue what Democratic Socialism is ! We like the health and happiness index in Denmark better then your fair wagon. We Progressives need too play the bully with you retards! Shame you right out of the light where cold blooded lizards of your ilk so often dwell. I will not let you fools any longer play with history. It is full of your kind and always the same misery follows you. Boom and bust because this is how you fleece the poor! You are part of a traitorous bunch who has plundered their on country and brought hunger and misery to the children and elderly. To you it is a shame you could not just kill them as you wish. As your Nazi brothers did before you ! You are the worst part of America. You are the dying part. You wither as I speak! We Progressive are calling you out traitors! Where are our Factories! Where is our Steel! Where are our good paying jobs! And Fack you if you say we don’t deserve it! We are Progressive Americans and we do deserve it!

      1. You progressives have been in charge for about 80 years. If you want to know why we have so many problems you need to look in a mirror. I will say though based on your incoherent babbling that you don’t deserve a good paying job. Good paying jobs are for people with intelligence and skill sets.

  16. Tony do you feel you are superior to black people? Does any black person who doesnt vote dem make you angry?

    1. Tony’s a hardcore neofascist.

    2. I don’t think he seems them as human enough to make him angry. To him, they’re probably like cattle who have been led astray and need to be brought back into the herd.

      Neither Walter Williams nor Thomas Sowell is capable of an original thought. They’re just puppets for their white masters, isn’t that right Tony? Clearly, opposition to economic totalitarianism is clearly just a front for re-instituting slavery.

    3. Very few black people don’t vote dem, and I couldn’t begin to fathom what you mean by “superior.”

      1. Does that make the Democratic party racist the same way white people disproportionately voting Republican makes the Republican party racist? Just curious.

  17. I don’t know who first noticed Sanders looks like Matt Welch’s father, but damn you whoever you were. It’s now impossible for me to view Sander’s image without thinking Matt Welch. Arrrrghh!!

  18. Liberals may not believe in controlling the means of production, …

    Hell, why worry about controlling the means of production when you can control the fruits of that production?

  19. As to what a Progressive is and is not . Since you just don’t know or want to know. I am a gun toten, pot smokin, intellectual, singer songwriter. I am 48 white hetro, Anti-Racist, Pro Gay/Lesbian/Transgender Rights, Pro Choice,fought against Apartheid starting when I was 14. We Progressives know how to fight. That’s how we won World War II on a Progressives agenda. Lets see what did the Republicans do before that? The Great Facking Depression is all ! Nothing serious! Just a flesh wound ! I love how Republicans and Democrats have sold us out to China all in the name of Big Business middle of the road conservatism. You see we Progressives want our steel back and our Industry! We want a strong middle class! We want to end the Federal Reserve by paying off our debt once and for all ! We understand that you have been retarded because that is what not being Progressive really means! You have limited yourself and all of America with your ideas! We repudiate you and you ideas. We don’t just give you the finger we will shame you from our midst !

  20. We Progressives need too play the bully with you retards! Shame you right out of the light where cold blooded lizards of your ilk so often dwell. I will not let you fools any longer play with history. It is full of your kind and always the same misery follows you. Boom and bust because this is how you fleece the poor! You are part of a traitorous bunch who has plundered their on country and brought hunger and misery to the children and elderly. To you it is a shame you could not just kill them as you wish. As your Nazi brothers did before you ! You are the worst part of America. You are the dying part. You wither as I speak! We Progressive are calling you out traitors! Where are our Factories! Where is our Steel! Where are our good paying jobs! And Fack you if you say we don’t deserve it! We are Progressive Americans and we do deserve it!

    1. Uh, you do realize that the Nazis were “progressives”? And almost everything you rant about was something that they ranted about?

      Okay, maybe not the transgender rights stuff, but still, economically they were “progressive”

      1. And the progressive final solution will match the nazi’s if they ever get total power. They are Jacobin’s at their core. You can feel the hate and violence ooze from this guy even in his incoherent babblings.

        1. You are living in some other universe, rude. Any educated person knows that Nazism is the anti-thesis of Progressive. Illiterate fools like you and Jeremy have made of America, and all Americans, an international laughing stock. The only problem is, for you, that most Democrats are educated so your ridiculous, illiterate, dribble won’t impact anyone. Sanders for President, 2016! http://www.theguardian.com/wor…..ndworldwar

      2. Ummm … one thing we DO realize is that you are a ridiculous illiterate, Jeremy. Nazism if an extreme right wing political party. There was never anything “progressive” about Nazism. It’s your sort that has ruined America and made of her an international laughing stock because they DO know what Nazism is / was, Jeremy, and they know you are an illiterate fool. http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_…..us-economy

    2. when are you progs bringing back prohibition, cant have people escaping utopia with alcohol.

  21. Got to agree with Harsanyi though I wish he’d have something more encouraging than what conservatives have been saying. The political mainstream in this country is all about delivering the goods to a dumbed-down and dependent electorate. Depressing future awaits.

  22. what ever his politics-dude is 75 he is not the future of anything

  23. I voted for Dennis Kucinich in 2004 (I switched my registration to Democrat, from Republican,* on St. Patrick’s Day of 2003, in protest of our then-imminent invasion of Iraq), and I like him a LOT more than “Bernie” Sanders. Sen. Sanders is well nigh indistinguishable from Hillary Clinton, and the rest of the quasi-treasonous neo-“conservative” conspirators, with respect to foreign policy issues. But because of that unfortunate fact, it may be unwise to entirely count Sanders out. As long as the powers-that-be can have their endless warfare, they may let “Bernie” tinker around with irrelevant fripperies, such as permitting ostensibly “transgendered” Kindergartners to use any bathroom of their choice…or whatever the Microaggressed Left imagines to be important these days.

    *I’ve since switched back to Republican in order to vote for Ron Paul in 2008 & 2012, and now face the prospect of switching back to Democrat, so I can vote for Jim Webb.

    1. Kucinich is a nutcase. But his wife is pretty hot.

  24. Im making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

    This is what I do! .. http://www.homejobs20.cf

  25. OT: Two-thirds of subsidized financial aid swallowed up by tuition increases, Federal Reserve Bank study finds.

    http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/23293/

    Subsidies are primarily enriching universities at the expense of taxpayers and unsibsidized students. Yay socialism!

    Btw, Tony, is the Federal Reserve bank and “research by George Washington University and Harvard economists and University of Oregon economists” sufficiently ‘mainstream’ for you to pay attention? Or are they all just fringe right wing lunatics trying to spoil the wonders of state subsidized higher education?

  26. Nice try there, David Harsanyi. Trying to convince people that Bernie won’t take the 2016 Primary and that he’s the “future” of the Democratic Party.

    Well, the last time I checked, Bernie is the PRESENT as well as the future of the Democratic Party and the only hurdle that Bernie will encounter is the likes of someone like David Harsanyi trying to sabotage him. I believe that Harsanyi, et al, are paid shills either for Clinton or for the right wing.

    Shut up, Harsanyi, et al. The people have spoken and it’s clear to see that our preference is BERNIE SANDERS, not tomorrow, not in the future, but right now, here & now.

  27. The future does not bode well for free-market fans. According to a Pew poll, 49 percent of those between ages 18 and 29 say they have a positive view of socialism?with only 43 percent having a negative view.

    I’m not dismayed by that. It’s traditional for young people to be progressive idiots. Then they hit 30, start having kids, jobs, responsibilities, trying to save and get ahead, and all of a sudden, whoa, an economy based on stealing other peoples’ money doesn’t start to look so good anymore, because they now are the “other” people.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.