2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI heard on MSNBC that 42% of Iowa Democrats, also, ...
self-identify as being socialists (or, perhaps, democratic socialists).
Can anyone point me to a source that supports or refutes that claim?
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)68% of Iowa Dems say they're ok with a Dem Socialist president. This state was tailor made for Bernie to win: FAIL.
rurallib
(62,448 posts)O'Malley had the same deficit and went nowhere.
Sanders almost did the impossible here. It was amazing.
What should be of concern is that a candidate could fall so far to end in a dead heat.
Clinton walked in the door with a huge lead, money, name recognition and organization and came within an eyelash of losing to a little known senator from a small state.
This will be a major concern if Clinton is the party nominee.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)With all her experience and political capital, it shows that, while the establishment is behind her, support among actual voters is very, very shaky.
riversedge
(70,299 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)Overwhelming win...Sanders must concede the nomination right now!
jham123
(278 posts)Some will never understand what is right in front of their face.
The Clinton Campaign machine bested by the Curmudgeon from the East.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)that you need a microscope to see it.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)That wasn't the narrative a few days ago.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)Hillary should have wiped the floor with Bernie, instead she squeaked by on a coin toss. Shows what a gamble she will be as the Democratic nominee.
P.S.--We already have a Kenyan socialist in the White House.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)firebrand80
(2,760 posts)IMO, All it really tells you is that they responded favorably to the word socialist. It's not like that many people are walking around using that term every day.
Gothmog
(145,554 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)'democrats'.
They're big on co-ops. That's a strong strategy in agricultural circles for small farmers to compete against the corporate agri-businesses, letting them compete against the corps rather than each other.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)My grandfather was a farmer. He went to high school. That was not some little trifling accomplishment for Iowa farmers at the time. He listened to the radio and read journals on farming and was trusted as a resource for all kinds of information by other farmers, his neighbors. I remember visiting and having one of the farmers from a neighboring farm come to his door and ask for advice about if I remember correctly (it has been a long, long, long time) when to harvest.
The farmers at that time and probably still were a community. At harvest time, they had to decide who would get the harvest machinery (the combine?? Am I right that that is what it was called?) to come to their farm. They had to cooperate on the schedule. Farming at least then was not just a competitive thing although it certainly was a competitive business in some respects. Neighbors had to help each other. It was all about community as well as about working very hard for yourself and doing your best. My grandfather was great with animals and used to help neighbors with lots of things including taking care of sick animals.
It does not surprise me that farmers would understand the advantages of a community working together toward some goals. On the other hand, farmers are individualists because farming demands a lot of work and determination. It is very, very difficult, and the individual is responsible for the outcome in the end.
Vinca
(50,303 posts)"Keeping in mind that Social Security and Medicare are socialist programs, would you consider yourself a socialist?" For the most part, people don't know one "ist" from another, but they know they love programs which have been created by everyone to help everyone.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)The are social programs. Unless they involve the public ownership of the means of production, they are not socialist.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)democratic socialism. You are thinking of Marxism. That is not the same as democratic socialism. Not at all. Democratic socialism is what you have in many countries in Europe. It is also called a mixed economy. IKEA was originally a Swedish company if I remember correctly. Sweden is a democratic socialist country. IKEA is not owned by the Swedish government.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)politicaljunkie41910
(3,335 posts)gave his definition of what "he" defined as a "Democratic Socialist". Bernie doesn't get to redefine the term to suit his candidacy. There are political groups out there that consider themselves "Democratic Socialists" and there is a definitive definition of what Democratic Socialism is. So it is disingenuous of Bernie to try and re-define himself based on a definition that exists only in his mind and what he chooses it to mean.
Here's Bernie's response was at the DNC Town Hall Meeting when asked how he defined "Democratic Socialist" to clear up the confusion.
QUESTION: Yes, Senator, some of your detractors have called you a socialist on occasions, and you don't seem too troubled by that, and sometimes embrace it. I wondered if you could elaborate on that...
SANDERS: ... Sure...
QUESTION: ... And just to show us what the comfort level you have your definition of it so that it doesn't concern the rest of us citizens.
SANDERS: Well, what Democratic Socialism means, to me, is that economic rights, the right to economic security is - should exist in the United States of America. It means to me that there's something wrong when we have millions of senior citizens today trying to get by on $11, $12,000 a year Social Security. It means there's something wrong when the rich get richer, and almost everybody else gets poorer. It means there is something wrong, and government should play a role in making sure that all of our kids, regardless of their income, are able to get a higher education.
Which is why I'm calling for free tuition at public colleges and universities, and why we have to deal with this horrendous level of student debt that people are having.
Now, what's going on in countries around the world, in Scandinavia, and in Germany. The ideas that I am talking about are not radical ideas. So, what Democratic Socialism means to me in its essence is that we cannot continue to have a government dominated by the billionaire class, and a congress that continues to work for the interest of the people on top while ignoring working families.
What this campaign is about, and what I believe, is creating a government that works for all of us, not just a handful of people on the top. That's my definition of Democratic Socialism.
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2016/01/26/cnn-iowa-democratic-presidential-town-hall-rush-transcript/
For Bernie to mislead his supporters with his "tailor-made" definition of what Democratic Socialism is, is wrong on so many levels. The fact that he has the youth vote doesn't surprise me, because he is talking about things in tangible terms that they are the ones who stand to benefit the most from with the policies he is proposing. Unfortunately, Bernie is preying on their naivete as he's only telling them good things that they want to hear. He's not being realistic about the costs, the impact on our debt, and the ability to actually get those policies to become a reality in the current political climate.
Vinca
(50,303 posts)You want to give the impression that it's all a Commie plot. Those are socialist programs. Other socialist programs include the military and the Interstate highway system.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I want to use the profits capitalism generates to ameliorate social ills but it is disingenuous to argue supporting public roads makes one a socialist. By that loose definition Adam Smith was a socialist.
Vinca
(50,303 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Thank you in advance.
Vinca
(50,303 posts)You sound more like a fan of trickle down economics. Wrong site?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)You sound more like a fan of trickle down economics. Wrong site
I would tell you what you can do with your ad hominem attack but I don't want a hide. As it is I will leave it to your fertile imagination.
Using an anonymous medium to disrespect random strangers is neither cute nor clever.
Your turn.
Vinca
(50,303 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I made an innocuous remark. You then accused me of saying something I didn't say. I had the temerity to point it out and then you doubled down and made an ad hominem attack on me. Maybe that works with other posters but it doesn't work with me.
Your turn.
Vinca
(50,303 posts)Oops. My apologies. Another attack.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)it has nothing to do with being a "tender flower" and everything to do with the fact I made an innocuous comment and your response was to bear false witness against me. When I had the temerity to point it out you refused to do the civil thing and apologize and instead made an ad hominem attack on me.
Oh, almost forgot, we are now on your third attack on me.
Vinca
(50,303 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)Forbes (The Capitalist Tool) says--
Looking for a land of opportunity? The Old World beckons. Despite a sluggish economy, Europe dominates the top of FORBES annual ranking of the finest countries for capitalismwith Scandinavia as a particular stand-out. European countries represent two-thirds of the top 25 with Denmark repeating in the lead position of the Best Countries for Business.
The picture isnt as bright for the U.S., which slides four spots to No. 22.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2015/12/16/the-best-countries-for-business-2015/#d1ab59d7364c
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)I suspect you are not dim witted, just obstinate and feigning stupidity.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)WHEN BERNIE SANDERS was asked during CNNs Democratic presidential debate how a self-proclaimed socialist could hope to be elected to the White House, he gave the answer he usually gives: Socialism has been wonderful for the countries of Scandinavia, and America should emulate their example.
...snip...
Such paeans may inspire Clintons love and Sanders faith in Americas socialist future. As with most urban legends, however, the reality of Scandinavias welfare-state utopia doesnt match the hype.
To begin with, explains Swedish scholar Nima Sanandaji, the affluence and cultural norms upon which Scandinavias social-democratic policies rest are not the product of socialism. In Scandinavian Unexceptionalism, a penetrating new book published by the Institute of Economic Affairs, Sanandaji shows that the Nordic nations prosperity developed during periods characterized by free-market policies, low or moderate taxes, and limited state involvement in the economy.
...snip...
The real key to Scandinavias unique successes isnt socialism, its culture. Social trust and cohesion, a broad egalitarian ethic, a strong emphasis on work and responsibility, commitment to the rule of law these are healthy attributes of a Nordic culture that was ingrained over centuries. In the regions small and homogeneous countries (overwhelmingly white, Protestant, and native-born), those norms took deep root. The good outcomes and high living standards they produced antedated the socialist nostrums of the 1970s. Scandinavias quality of life didnt spring from leftist policies. It survived them.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/10/15/bernie-sanders-scandinavia-not-socialist-utopia/lUk9N7dZotJRbvn8PosoIN/story.html
Human101948
(3,457 posts)So we just have to accept the current clusterfuck.
Republican hogwash all the way.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)It's this insistence on calling it "socialism" (modified or not) that I can't accept, because it presents huge risks in the General Election.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)I am not as concerned, even though I grew up in the era of Senator McCarthy.
LexVegas
(6,094 posts)People will see how shallow the support for Sanders really is.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Bernie will do well across the country. He does well with independents. Look at the caucus exit poll results. They are broken down by all kinds of demographics. Hillary does better with people who have higher incomes and live in suburbs. Bernie does better with the young, with people with lower incomes and people who do not live in the suburbs.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Latinos and African-Americans and large segments of women voters and large segments of the LGBT voters.
Though I really would like to see the segmentation of those demographics to see how Bernie fairs among the young among lower-incomed and urban, Latinos, African-Americans, and LGBT (I have seen the female demographic segmented out) ... just to see how Bernie fairs.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)...is not how Clinton won in 2008.
Bettie
(16,125 posts)and I quickly learned two things.
1. Iowa liberals tend, overall to be VERY liberal.
2. Iowa conservatives tend, overall to be VERY conservative.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...not that you ever cared..
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but will not give you the satisfaction of allowing you to bait me into using them so you can skip to the alert button.
I'll just say ... Keep up the classy discourse.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Here is the underlying survey.
http://media.bloomberg.com/bb/avfile/rgsikEKtNf30
yardwork
(61,703 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)yardwork
(61,703 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)yardwork
(61,703 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)What you are trying to say?