Elliott

Damn, you've read the Epstein-Trump files? You're in a cult

There's no other reason to do this. Trump has completely freaked out about the Epstein-Trump files and is throwing everything at the wall like arresting Obama. You're a fool or a liar.

It's just a distraction from the Epstein-Trump files. They'll do nothing like they did nothing in L.A.. Still an impeachable offense though.

You guys have this all backwards. Republicans are top down sheep follow the leader, Democrats are the opposite, legislators follow the people, it's not a failure of Democrat leadership as in legislators, the leaders of the democratic party are the people. People don't look at political campaign policy to decide on who to vote for, it's more herd mentality and politicians don't lead the democratic party, the people lead the democratic politicians. This structure for Democrats is a really good thing by the way, the people just need to work harder while the magat mind virus rages. For crude example, what did Obama win on? Biden? Bill Clinton?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/jd-vance-ohio-vacation-kayaking-b2803394.html Vice President JD Vance’s team requested that water levels in an Ohio lake be raised so he would enjoy “ideal kayaking conditions” on a birthday outing, according to a report

There's no hope for most conservatives, but there's a lot of people that have voted Republican that can be reasoned with, and that's all you need. Former Georgia lieutenant governor joins Democratic Party https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-georgia-lieutenant-governor-joins-democratic-party/ar-AA1K2ie3?ocid=socialshare

They say socialism bad because they don't want Trump in charge of their health care or groceries, and they don't want to pay for whiny suburban kids college.

In regard to opposing socialism, which is the singular issue that lets republicans win.

In that vein, I was trying to say even dumb people can know something that you don't.

And who was I talking to and what electorate was I talking about? I was talking to a specific user, a socialist, the electorate i was refering to was not exclusively republican voters. Electorate doesn't mean whoever wins the election, it's all voters.

I didn't say they understand capitalism, i said some people understand the benefits of capitalism. Most people don't know what's going on, especially conservatives. Most people do know some things though.

It's just convenient that they're not the billionaires though? That they would be the beneficiaries. They only support it because they are a part of that group, that happens to be larger. I asked for people to think critically about their positions. A lot of people do know the hazards of socialism and understand human nature, and a lot of people do understand the benefits of capitalism, I don't believe most individuals understand both socialism and capitalism, no, but collectively through voting, the electorate 'understands' in a way. Most people that support capitalism don't understand socialism, that's not what I mean, I meant the electorate as one, the outcomes of elections, and I don't mean that it's completely correct, just that elections go certain ways for a reason. Either 80 million Americans are literally retarded, or, they may see something you don't.

Rural families growing their own food, repairing their own houses and vehicles, isn't a self-sustaining lifestyle? You need planned and governed communities, governed business, governed education, governed farming for self sustaining lifestyles?

Here's the epitome of stupidity and contradiction for me from socialists Socialists rail about free college right? What is college for, what do they want free college for: to make people smarter or to get better jobs? And then Socialists in their next breath rail for 'escaping the system', yet they're promoting the system in the other breath by promoting college and 'better jobs' as the answer. Socialists should be promoting self-sustaining lifestyles if they want to 'take down the system', what they promote clearly shows you that they don't care about basic needs, they're just envious and lazy, they want the system for themselves. How many socialists are running around demanding we feed and house the poor of the world, and then how many are demanding higher pay for baristas and amazon workers, free college, the ability for young people to move out of their parents homes, take more expensive vacations? What really is their order of priorities? How are they ethically different than Republicans in regards to economics?

I was sincerely just asking for people to think critically. They understand capitalism vs. socialism better, they understand human nature better. Socialists believe socialism is about cooperation while capitalism is solely about competition, but capitalism is based on cooperation, free will cooperation while socialism is based on forced cooperation. Socialists believe people will cooperate together ethically if we ban competition, that's not how people work, even fellow tribesmen steal from each other and harm each other. 'Competition' means immediate options, means immediate free will, which means immediate repercussions for businesses and people behaving unethically. Socialism in practice has a harder hurdle to police ethics. Socialists think that government healthcare would be better for people, but Trump would be in charge of our healthcare right now. Socialists believe americans have no agency, that they have no choices, it's not true, a lot of americans just make dumb choices.

This thread is about democrats winning elections. Have you considered that you might be wrong about the theories you espouse? That the electorate might understand something better than you do? That's what critical thinking is, critically questioning your conclusions and information you've used to come to conclusions.

So, you admit that the electorate doesn't buy what you're selling? It's not a winning political issue to get elected?

So, the majority of Americans helping themselves politically, is a more difficult task than women's and black's voting rights or ending slavery?

So, it doesn't work for bernie but you think it will work for democrats, the "media and big corporate" will stop bernie, but not democrats?

Then why doesn't bernie win? should be able to run on his own and win 80% of the vote, no? why isn't the socialist party more than 2.000 members?

I think it's safe to say that you're just making stuff up

The middle class isn't destroyed, they're in the best place they've ever been. Much better living standards, working standards, ability to attain upper class, more ability in general. Prices have increased, real wage has stagnated but not declined all while living standards have improved. All while the rest of the developing world have made amazing gains due to trade with the u.s.. https://www.pewresearch.org/race-and-ethnicity/2024/05/31/the-state-of-the-american-middle-class/ From 1971 to 2023, the share of Americans who live in lower-income households increased from 27% to 30%, and the share in upper-income households increased from 11% to 19% Just look at what boomers and Gen X blow their money on. ChatGPT The U.S. middle class hasn’t been destroyed, but it has been eroded and reshaped over the past few decades due to several economic, political, and social forces. Here's a breakdown of what's happened: 📉 What's Happening to the Middle Class? Shrinking Share of the Population According to Pew Research, the share of American adults in the middle class has declined from 61% in 1971 to around 50% in recent years. Stagnant Wages, Rising Costs While productivity has risen, real wages for many middle-class workers have stagnated since the 1970s. Meanwhile, costs for essentials like housing, healthcare, childcare, and education have increased sharply. Job Polarization Many middle-income jobs (especially in manufacturing or clerical work) have been replaced by: Low-wage service jobs High-skill, high-paying tech or financial jobs This leaves fewer opportunities for stable, mid-income work without a college degree. Wealth & Income Inequality The top 10% of earners have taken a growing share of national income and wealth. Meanwhile, the middle class holds a shrinking share of total U.S. wealth. Housing and Regional Displacement In many cities, the middle class is priced out of homeownership. Suburban sprawl and gentrification have also shifted where the middle class can afford to live. 📈 But It's Not All Doom: Some middle-class families have moved up into upper-income brackets due to higher education, two-income households, or entrepreneurial success. The U.S. still has a large and diverse middle class, just under more strain than in previous generations. 🔍 Summary: Destroyed? No. Shrinking and under pressure? Yes. The American middle class still exists but is facing major stressors and is more economically insecure than in past decades

The fact that he's independent disproves it is a formidable two-party system. In your estimation what progressives voted for trump, how many, and how many sat out the vote? Mamdani won the democratic primary with little resistance, democrats didn't even run a contender against him. The problem is that Socialist policies are mindless in my opinion, lack any reasoning and are full of contradiction. For example, how many people are leaving the "wage slavery" system to live more self-sustainable lives, how many people are selling their suburban million-dollar homes and moving out to humble rural areas to grow their own food. I didn't say why isn't everyone, I understand many people cannot do this, but why aren't more people doing this? Why aren't more people car-less and riding bicycles. Why do so many people have expensive vacations, working class people, why is tourism a leading industry? Why is fast food a leading industry? It's because the system works for the people, again it's not a zero sum gain system, yes the rich are disproportionately getting richer, we need to tax the heck out of them, BUT the system works for the people too. Socialists are just envious and lazy. How many of these popular hard-working activists have started health insurance co-ops? Grocery chain co-ops? Why don't they focus in on some progressive towns and grow the movement from them? It's because their theory is flawed.

There are intrinsic problems with socialism. Socialism is completely unnecessary and yet comes with steep dangers. Captialism works, we currently don't have capitalism. Capitalism requires regulation, elimination of monopolies, and disproportionately taxing corporations and the wealthy: which is only fair because they benefit more from tax revenue. You do not need socialism to take care of the needy, you can have free housing, healthcare, and food for the needy without socialism. You can have free education without socialism. Socialism is fundamentally based on the false premises that capitalism is opposed to cooperation, and that humans are naturally ethical. Even in tribes, fellow tribe members steal from each other, kill each other, harm each other. Capitalism is completely based on cooperation. Socialism puts all your eggs in one basket, for instance Trump would be in charge of our healthcare and income right now.