Author Topic: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist  (Read 6092 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #50 on: July 12, 2011, 11:44:35 AM »
 ::)  ::) 

Sorry that your advocacy of multiple planks of the commie mainfesto disturbs you so much. 

Now go get your shine box you gay piece twinkish piece of communist trash.   Some aids riddled homeless bum in the gay bar bathroom awaits you. 

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31054
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #51 on: July 12, 2011, 11:48:23 AM »
Gay projection is a bitch isn't it?


Quote
Due to complete unhappiness of their own lives.

garebear

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 6491
  • Never question my instincts.
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #52 on: July 12, 2011, 11:50:24 AM »
Why don't you all just stop arguing with each other about politics and just give each other handjobs already?
G

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #53 on: July 12, 2011, 12:14:33 PM »
Gallup did a poll to where 71% of democrats believe in redistribution of wealth by the govt.   What do you call that? 

CITE YOUR QUOTE, FUCKTARD!!!

Maybe you're confusing it with the Wall Street Journal poll from earlier this year that showed 81% of AMERICANS were in favor of instituting a millionaire’s surtax

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=373029.0

Personally, I'd be fine going back to the tax brackets we had during the socialist utopia called the Clinton Administration


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #55 on: May 21, 2014, 07:44:23 AM »
http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/21/dem-congressman-weve-proved-that-communism-works
 >:(

will you ever learn to read an entire article before you post it

he was mocking idiots like you who believe Dems are communist (for an example see the title of this thread)

seriously man, you've got to do your own due diligence when you post the latest round of right wing talking points

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63738
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #56 on: September 21, 2017, 01:17:43 PM »
Democrats slouching towards socialism.

Sanders' single-payer bill causing headaches for Dems in 2018 midterms
By Fred Lucas, Fox News

One of the latest hints of support for Bernie Sanders’ single-payer health care plan came not from a liberal enclave like San Francisco or Brooklyn – but from West Virginia’s senior senator, Joe Manchin.

The proposal “should be explored,” Manchin told Bloomberg News earlier this month, while clarifying that the Senate should consider all options and that he’s “skeptical” single payer is the “right solution.”

While the statement from Manchin – whose state overwhelmingly backed President Trump last fall – was cautious, the senator’s willingness to even consider Sanders’ costly health bill shows how the legislation has caused major political complications for Democratic congressional candidates.

Not so long ago, moderate Democrats avoided single payer at all costs. Now, to use the parlance of the left, it has been "normalized." The bill, introduced last week, already has been cast as a litmus test for Democrats eyeing a White House run. And well before 2020, Democratic candidates will face pressure from the liberal flank to get behind the bill in exchange for support in the 2018 midterms.

Manchin – an unlikely ally for single payer, but also one of the most vulnerable Democrats in 2018 – is just one candidate who could find himself torn between the party’s national activist base and his state’s constituents on the proposal, estimated to cost tens of trillions over a decade.

SINGLE-PAYER HEALTH CARE: WHAT IS IT?

Other Democratic senators expected to face close races are:

Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Jon Tester of Montana -- all from red states that Trump carried by double digits in the 2016 presidential race.

Democrats also are defending Senate seats in states that Trump won by tighter margins, such as Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Some Democrats facing re-election in Trump states have spoken out publicly on single payer.

Heitkamp said her chief focus is preserving the Affordable Care Act, better known as ObamaCare. Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, is pushing legislation to expand Medicare to people who are 55 and up.

But Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., is all in for Sanders’ bill, tweeting, “I’m proud to announce I’m co-sponsoring @BernieSanders' Medicare for All bill. Sign if you're with me!”

After an impressive showing in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary, Sanders, a Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats, gained 16 co-sponsors for his legislation. This includes possible 2020 presidential contenders Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, and Kamala Harris of California.

'Democrats must come clean on whether they back Sanders’ plan for government-run health care, or if they will stand with taxpayers against this unrealistic boondoggle.'
- Katie Martin, NRSC
The liberal MoveOn.org pointed out that Sanders pushed the same bill two years ago with zero supporters. The same group also touted the nod from Sen. Manchin.

t isn't just liberal Democrats from deep blue states getting on board. Joe Manchin of West Virginia—a state Donald Trump carried by 42 points—says it should be explored as well. Joe Manchin!” the group boasted in a fundraising email.

Republicans seem as gleeful as MoveOn.org, for different reasons.

“Bernie Sanders’ $32 trillion socialist health care plan will force Senate Democrats to choose between liberal activists and common sense,” Katie Martin, communications director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said in a statement. “Democrats must come clean on whether they back Sanders’ plan for government-run health care, or if they will stand with taxpayers against this unrealistic boondoggle.”

The cost of ‘free’ health care

The Sanders bill has zero chance of passing in a Republican Congress.

But here’s what it proposes to do:

-Expand Medicare to pay for everyone’s emergency surgery, prescription drugs, mental health and eye care with no co-pay.

-Phase Americans into Medicare, meaning those with employer-plans would get Medicare.

- Allow private companies to be used for elective treatments.

The latest Sanders bill did not come with an official cost estimate.

On Sept. 12, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan fiscal watchdog group, determined the plan would cost $25 trillion over the next decade, basing its estimate on the Sanders campaign proposal. The additional taxes Sanders has talked about would raise $11 trillion in revenue, leaving the remaining $14 trillion added to the national debt, the organization estimates.

The Urban Institute, a left-leaning think tank, did an analysis of the Sanders campaign plan in May 2016 and determined it would cost $32 trillion over a decade. Further, the institute determined that even after the tax increases, revenue still falls short by $16.6 trillion.

Sanders proposes options that include imposing a 7.5 percent tax hike on employers and raising the top income tax rate to 52 percent for incomes of more than $10 million.

Grace Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, a free market health care research group, said the problems with ObamaCare will make it nearly impossible to sell voters on more government in health care. She noted a single-payer plan collapsed in Sanders’ home state of Vermont.

“They may promise you can have everything, but people will no longer believe that,” Turner told Fox News.

Single-payer politics in 2018

When the “skinny repeal” of ObamaCare came up in July, Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., sponsored a single-payer proposal – but only to force Democrats on the record.

It was not exactly popular at the time. Forty-three of 48 Democrats voted present. Voting no were Donnelly, Heitkamp, Manchin, Tester and Sen. Angus King, a Maine independent who caucuses with Democrats.

Tester’s campaign said the senator has been clear in his opposition to single payer.

“He’s also made clear that too many Montanans are paying too much for health care, which is why he is fighting to improve the current health care system to lower costs for Montana families,” Tester campaign manager Christie Roberts told Fox News.

Both the Cook Political Report and Inside Elections rank Missouri, Indiana and West Virginia as tossups. Inside Elections ranks North Dakota as a tossup, while Cook says the race leans Democrat. Both consider Montana to be advantage Democrat.

“Whether or not a Democrat supports Sanders' legislation, this is a party issue, meaning that a Democrat is likely to be called out over supporting or opposing the legislation in a primary rather than a general election,” Jennifer Duffy, senior editor for the Cook Political report, told Fox News.

Republicans will likely hold the issue against Baldwin in Wisconsin, said Duffy, who expects other Trump-state Democrats to oppose the legislation.

Seeing an opportunity in these red states, some GOP primaries are quite crowded.

Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley leads the pack of five other Republicans running to challenge McCaskill.

In Indiana, U.S. House members Luke Messer and Todd Rokita are among seven Republicans hoping to challenge Donnelly in November 2018.

North Dakota state Sen. Tom Campbell appears the likely Republican opponent for Heitkamp.

Manchin’s likely Republican challenger is West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrissey, but others are considering a run.

Both the Cook Political Report and Inside Elections still consider Trump states Florida, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to be likely or leaning Democrat in the 2018 Senate races.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/21/sanders-single-payer-bill-causing-headaches-for-dems-in-2018-midterms.html

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #57 on: July 02, 2018, 06:47:11 AM »
Dem generation gap widens
The Hill ^ | 07/02/18 | Scott Wong
Posted on 7/2/2018, 9:41:53 AM by yesthatjallen

Some septuagenarian House Democrats have a message for their younger colleagues clamoring for a spot at the leadership table: Age ain’t nothin’ but a number.

Democrats in their 70s have started pushing back against some of the more youthful members of the Democratic Caucus who are making noise about launching leadership bids in the wake of Caucus Chairman Joe Crowley’s stunning primary loss last week to 28-year-old Democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York.

Older lawmakers argue that just because Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), 78, and her top lieutenants are getting up there in years doesn’t mean they’re not progressive or effective. Instead, they say it’s their decades of experience fighting in the trenches on a range of issues — from the gender pay gap and gun control to LGBT rights — that make them the right ones to lead the fight against President Trump and the Republicans.

“If we get back the House, Nancy Pelosi deserves to be the speaker,” said Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), a Pelosi ally. “She is leading this effort to get these candidates elected. She is barnstorming the country. She is helping to fashion the message.”

Frankel, who turned 70 in May, noted that septuagenarians of all stripes are some of the most popular politicians in the country today: former Vice President Joe Biden, 75; Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), 76; and President Trump, who is 72.

“This should not be a generational fight at all,” Frankel added. “And people who want to make it into a generational fight are, quite frankly, people who don’t like seniority because they want power.”

ETC...

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #58 on: July 02, 2018, 07:20:59 AM »
July 2, 2018
Time to Put the Democratic Party on Suicide Watch?
By Selwyn Duke
There perhaps has never been a time when the Democrats did a better job of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. After being well ahead in the generic congressional polls, those numbers collapsed early this year along with the Trump/Russia/Collusion narrative. Since then, leftists have been flailing around desperately searching for an issue.

The first act was stripping Second Amendment rights after the Parkland mass shooting, starring soy boy Camera Hogg; Democrats, infamous for short, childlike memories, obviously forgot that this issue might have cost Al Gore the 2000 election. And gun grabbing doesn’t poll any better today. The second act is the treatment of those invading our country (a.k.a. illegal migrants), starring a hapless little Honduran girl used as a human prop by Time magazine (never mind that her father has a good job back home as a boat captain). Now, related to this, Democrats have a new issue: abolishing the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.


A week ago this was recognized as a fringe idea even among staunch Democrats, the fringiest fringe around, but then something happened: One Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez shocked the Democrat establishment by defeating the favored 20-year incumbent, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.), in last Tuesday’s Democrat primary in New York’s 14th district. She ran, in part, on abolishing ICE, so now this has become the “[n]ew rallying call for 2020 Democrats,” as the AP put it.

Now, I really shouldn’t say this — I mean, I really shouldn’t. I want nothing more than for the Democrats to continue marching toward their cliff, but, alas, honest commentary is my bag. And here’s reality: If you leftists think avowed socialist Cortez’s win had mainly to do with abolishing ICE, you’re putting your electoral chances on ice. Cortez won, largely, for a simple reason.

Bigotry.

She had the right profile: a young, female, Hispanic in a district 70 percent non-white — a figure no doubt even higher among its Democrat electorate — and in which the incumbent was a wizened old white fellow (Crowley is 56 and looks 66). It helped that she’s attractive and articulate, but she shamelessly played the group-identity card, too, sending a message that no one should vote for an old white male. She even retweeted the picture of an attorney who expressed the sentiment that “all white people are racist.”

The Washington Post pointed this phenomenon out, by the way, running a Wednesday article titled “The worst thing to be in many Democratic primaries? A white male candidate.” The paper writes, “Democratic voters have been picking women, racial minorities, and gay men and lesbians in races around the country at historic rates.”

Is this a surprise? I wrote years ago about what I dubbed “Cultural affirmative action”; this is the phenomenon whereby people will, often unconsciously, show preference for or advantage members of so-called “victim groups” simply because of their association with those groups. Cultural affirmative action is especially intense among the Democrat electorate, which comprises many who wish to virtue signal and buttress their own self-image by bearing the new “white man’s burden.”

That is, when they are white. Much of that electorate is non-white and Hispanic. Regardless, anti-white bigotry is intense among Democrats, which is why you hear about mythical “white privilege” and the alleged evils of our white ancestors. And if the Left hates that today’s civilization has been shaped by “dead white males,” it’s easy to understand why they wouldn’t want tomorrow’s to be shaped by live ones.

I expounded upon this phenomenon years ago, mind you. When ex-North Carolina senator John Edwards was running against Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for the 2008 Democrat nomination, I pointed out that there simply was no way the Democrat electorate was going to choose a white man over a woman and a “black” guy. He was wasting his time. And, sure enough, a subsequent poll of all Americans (not just Democrats) bore this out, showing that while Obama’s race made six percent of Americans less likely to vote for him, it made nine percent more likely to do so.   

(By the way, this is why you, Governor Andy Cuomo, and you, Little Big Gulp — a.k.a. soda-warrior Michael Bloomberg — have no chance of capturing the 2020 Democrat nomination. Zero, zilch, nada. You’re being hoisted on your own petards, as your grand political ambitions will be devoured by the politically correct monster you helped create. And, yes, I am experiencing laughing-out-loud schadenfreude.)

As for Cortez, she beat Crowley by a whopping 57 to 42 percent; if Democrats suppose that more than a handful of points of this are attributable to her anti-ICE position, I say they’re crazy. Heck, I’d think that many of her constituents, upon hearing about abolishing ICE, would only ask, “But what about the warming climate?” (to quote an Internet commenter who made this quip).

Moreover, the Big Apple represents the rest of America politically the way it does scenery-wise. If you think you can extrapolate what happened there to most political races, well, I have a forested mountain range in Manhattan to sell you.

Democrats likely have an emotional impediment precluding them from being intellectually honest here: They don’t want to come to terms with their own bigotry (liberals aren’t big on self-knowledge). The reality, however, is that Cortez won over low-information voters by exploiting their prejudices.

But, hey, what do I know? I’m just an idiot oblivious to reality — and a white male, too. So by all means, my Democrat friends, please run on a pro-illegal-migration, anti-ICE platform. A 28-year-old big city socialist thinks it’s a great idea.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

There perhaps has never been a time when the Democrats did a better job of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. After being well ahead in the generic congressional polls, those numbers collapsed early this year along with the Trump/Russia/Collusion narrative. Since then, leftists have been flailing around desperately searching for an issue.

The first act was stripping Second Amendment rights after the Parkland mass shooting, starring soy boy Camera Hogg; Democrats, infamous for short, childlike memories, obviously forgot that this issue might have cost Al Gore the 2000 election. And gun grabbing doesn’t poll any better today. The second act is the treatment of those invading our country (a.k.a. illegal migrants), starring a hapless little Honduran girl used as a human prop by Time magazine (never mind that her father has a good job back home as a boat captain). Now, related to this, Democrats have a new issue: abolishing the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.

A week ago this was recognized as a fringe idea even among staunch Democrats, the fringiest fringe around, but then something happened: One Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez shocked the Democrat establishment by defeating the favored 20-year incumbent, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.), in last Tuesday’s Democrat primary in New York’s 14th district. She ran, in part, on abolishing ICE, so now this has become the “[n]ew rallying call for 2020 Democrats,” as the AP put it.

Now, I really shouldn’t say this — I mean, I really shouldn’t. I want nothing more than for the Democrats to continue marching toward their cliff, but, alas, honest commentary is my bag. And here’s reality: If you leftists think avowed socialist Cortez’s win had mainly to do with abolishing ICE, you’re putting your electoral chances on ice. Cortez won, largely, for a simple reason.

Bigotry.


She had the right profile: a young, female, Hispanic in a district 70 percent non-white — a figure no doubt even higher among its Democrat electorate — and in which the incumbent was a wizened old white fellow (Crowley is 56 and looks 66). It helped that she’s attractive and articulate, but she shamelessly played the group-identity card, too, sending a message that no one should vote for an old white male. She even retweeted the picture of an attorney who expressed the sentiment that “all white people are racist.”

The Washington Post pointed this phenomenon out, by the way, running a Wednesday article titled “The worst thing to be in many Democratic primaries? A white male candidate.” The paper writes, “Democratic voters have been picking women, racial minorities, and gay men and lesbians in races around the country at historic rates.”

Is this a surprise? I wrote years ago about what I dubbed “Cultural affirmative action”; this is the phenomenon whereby people will, often unconsciously, show preference for or advantage members of so-called “victim groups” simply because of their association with those groups. Cultural affirmative action is especially intense among the Democrat electorate, which comprises many who wish to virtue signal and buttress their own self-image by bearing the new “white man’s burden.”

That is, when they are white. Much of that electorate is non-white and Hispanic. Regardless, anti-white bigotry is intense among Democrats, which is why you hear about mythical “white privilege” and the alleged evils of our white ancestors. And if the Left hates that today’s civilization has been shaped by “dead white males,” it’s easy to understand why they wouldn’t want tomorrow’s to be shaped by live ones.

I expounded upon this phenomenon years ago, mind you. When ex-North Carolina senator John Edwards was running against Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for the 2008 Democrat nomination, I pointed out that there simply was no way the Democrat electorate was going to choose a white man over a woman and a “black” guy. He was wasting his time. And, sure enough, a subsequent poll of all Americans (not just Democrats) bore this out, showing that while Obama’s race made six percent of Americans less likely to vote for him, it made nine percent more likely to do so.   

(By the way, this is why you, Governor Andy Cuomo, and you, Little Big Gulp — a.k.a. soda-warrior Michael Bloomberg — have no chance of capturing the 2020 Democrat nomination. Zero, zilch, nada. You’re being hoisted on your own petards, as your grand political ambitions will be devoured by the politically correct monster you helped create. And, yes, I am experiencing laughing-out-loud schadenfreude.)

As for Cortez, she beat Crowley by a whopping 57 to 42 percent; if Democrats suppose that more than a handful of points of this are attributable to her anti-ICE position, I say they’re crazy. Heck, I’d think that many of her constituents, upon hearing about abolishing ICE, would only ask, “But what about the warming climate?” (to quote an Internet commenter who made this quip).

Moreover, the Big Apple represents the rest of America politically the way it does scenery-wise. If you think you can extrapolate what happened there to most political races, well, I have a forested mountain range in Manhattan to sell you.

Democrats likely have an emotional impediment precluding them from being intellectually honest here: They don’t want to come to terms with their own bigotry (liberals aren’t big on self-knowledge). The reality, however, is that Cortez won over low-information voters by exploiting their prejudices.

But, hey, what do I know? I’m just an idiot oblivious to reality — and a white male, too. So by all means, my Democrat friends, please run on a pro-illegal-migration, anti-ICE platform. A 28-year-old big city socialist thinks it’s a great idea.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com



Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/07/time_to_put_the_democratic_party_on_suicide_watch.html#ixzz5K6hQCwes
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Howard

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15401
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #60 on: July 02, 2018, 08:55:00 AM »
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/06/29/charles_hurt_new_generation_of_democrats_are_communists.html


Exactly

 Trump's friendly relationship with NK and Russia are influencing young folks now to go commie. Go figure .

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #61 on: July 02, 2018, 09:14:30 AM »
Trump's friendly relationship with NK and Russia are influencing young folks now to go commie. Go figure .

 ::)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #62 on: July 02, 2018, 10:10:33 AM »
Breaking news :

Reagan spinning in his grave, Ike may start soon . ;)


Trump is a more conservative president so far than either. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #63 on: July 02, 2018, 10:14:42 AM »
???? Ok, do you think he's a better POTUS then Reagan or IKE ?

He is on track to be

SOMEPARTS

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15869
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #64 on: July 02, 2018, 11:37:20 AM »
35 yrs ago I was on track to be a pro bodybuilder and stay married to my 1st wife.
How'd that work out... ;D



35 years ago Trump was a multi-millionaire married to a model. Today he's a multi-billionaire married to model and happens to also be POTUS.

Another guy on here comparing his life to Trump's like it matters. Only ends in sadness.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #65 on: July 03, 2018, 10:03:54 AM »
Socialist candidates the 'future of our party,' says DNC Chairman Tom Perez...
Washington Examiner ^ | July 03, 2018 11:39 AM | by Anna Giaritelli
Posted on 7/3/2018, 11:55:46 AM by caww

The chairman of the Democratic National Party, Tom Perez, on Tuesday said socialist political candidates like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are the "future" of the party.

Ocasio-Cortez, a self-described "democratic socialist" who defeated a top House Democrat in a recent primary election, symbolizes where the party is headed.

The Obama-era Cabinet official said Ocasio-Cortez and Ben Jealous, a socialist running for governor in Maryland, are examples of "spectacular" candidates the party believes represents its future.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39418
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

SOMEPARTS

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15869
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #67 on: July 03, 2018, 01:12:49 PM »
The fact you took my self-deprecating silly joke  post serious... PROVES you're an idiot.

The only sad thing here is your lack of cognitive ability  :D



I get that you were trying for that...but sorry to say your joke posts and legit posts on politics are about the same level of humor for the reader.

Trump(granted, so far) is ahead of schedule in fulfilling his campaign promises compared to where the previous two POTUS mentioned were. You threw in a "joke" about yourself that wasn't relevant or necessary or most of all funny.

Moontrane

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5880
  • a Harris administration, together with Joe Biden
Re: DEMOCRAT = Socialist/Marxist/Communist
« Reply #68 on: July 03, 2018, 04:25:59 PM »
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-democratic-socialists-getting-started-20180702-story.html


Natural progression.

It's all there in the writings of Marx and Engels.  Society "progresses" thusly: fuedalism, capitalism, socialism, then communism.  The marxists want to skip capitalism and go straight to communism - see Cuba and Venezuela today, and consider Cambodia and N. Vietnam from the past.

Progressives are just staying true to their game plan.