Kenny boy is doing a little pot stirring along with trying to boost Barney's socialist cred. Not everyone is buying what he's selling
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/1251428791Ken Burch (36,777 posts)
Barack Obama was called "socialist" in '08 and '12. He had popular vote majority wins TWICE.
The "s-word" officially no longer works as a slur in American politics.
DUmmies are quick to fall in line but it becomes apparent during the replies that many, neigh most, could not actually define socialism. Fewer still realize that the youth vote began to bail on Obie in the second election at the same time many fundamentalists and conservatives refused to vote for Romney. Obie won a second term but not in anything close to a coat tail landslide. Please, Please, Please, put Barney front and center on your ticket as a Democratic Socialist.
Man of Distinction (26 posts)
1. Yes, We were told that Obama was a Muslin Kenyan Socialist that is supposed to TAKE AWAY YOUR GUNS
and did exactly nothing of that sort...
So the Republicans have successfully abused the word "social(*)" to where people go, "Huh?" - we all practice all kinds of socialism every day, and people don't realize it.
Nothing scary about it.
NanceGreggs (16,847 posts)
19. I am astounded by the naivete ...
... of those who think that Sanders' self-identification as a "socialist" is not a liability, even among many staunchly liberal Democrats.
Pretending that "the "s-word" officially no longer works as a slur in American politics" actually goes beyond naivete; it is demonstrative of a total lack of cognizance of the long-ingrained distaste many Americans have towards the word "socialist", and what images it conjures up in the minds of many.
(Besides, I am still trying to figure out how a word can "officially" no longer work. Is there a committee somewhere that determines such things?)
"I'm not there, and I don't think the majority of our party is ready to call their politics socialist anything."
Well, exactly. The Bernie supporters seem to believe - and this is evident in so many of their posts - that whatever is good enough for Bernie is automatically acceptable to the American voters at large. They don't seem to want to face up to the reality that their worship of the man isn't shared by the rest of the populace, and that labeling himself as a socialist is not about to catapult the voting public into adopting his political views on the matter.
"Is it intentional? Is Sanders' intention to define our party's economic policy as economic socialism?"
One has to wonder what he IS thinking in that regard. For myself, I admit that I DO have a problem with his running on the Democratic ticket despite the fact that he still refuses to be identified as a member of the Party. If we Democrats are not good enough for him to be one of us, and we are simply the "party of convenience" when it comes to his presidential aspirations, I have a HUGE problem with that. And I know I am not alone in that opinion.
Star Member bigtree (57,211 posts)
27. he's good at telling us what it's not, but all over the place explaining what he means by it
..it's like 'Finland?' Really? That's the explanation?
Why is there a need to group what are essentially Democratic initiatives under a label of 'socialism,' even if it's got 'Democratic' in front of it? That's not something which is part of our Democratic party's history, is it? Is there some point in the history of our party where we resolved to be 'Democratic Socialists?'
That may be fine for Bernie Sanders, but it's too hokey for me. He's running for president under the Democratic banner, so I'd expect he'd make clear some degree of separation from whatever he was trying to convey as an independent from Vermont and the candidacy he expects us to rally around today. Or, maybe not. Maybe he expects voters to swallow his 'Democratic Socialist' philosophy whole. It's going to take more than pointing to Finland to square that circle.
Dukakis was a great candidate compared to Barney. Wonder if Ken supported him as well?
