4/19 Democratic Primary

[Jalen Bluntson]

Democratic Socialism is the American way. Socialism is not the same. From what I understand the 2 to be.

[Rasho Brezec]

They are two very independant economic and governmental structures. Socialism is and has been the American model for over a century, while Communism is something entirely different, that has led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and is currently strangling the life out of China.

From what you are saying, I take it that you oppose all things our democratic socialist country have implemented, as it is something reserved for "losers". Are you aware that K-12 schools, the military, fire, police, the clean water from your faucet, the garbage that's picked up from your home each week, the roads you drive on to work each day, the internet we are conversing on right now are a direct result from our country being a democratic socialist government?

Maybe your view of socialism is misunderstood, as the media likes to spin socialism (something our country has been for over 100 years) into something evil along the lines of communist Russia. It's understandable, but hopefully you understand now that democratic socialism is the backbone of our country, and is very very different than communism.

You don't seem to have the faintest clue what socialism is. None of the examples you describe have anything to do with socialism. Those are public services that the society has agreed of having a collective ownership over them because leaving them open to free market competition would be ineffective. Such social contracts exist in pretty much every country in the world no matter the political system.

I do agree that the USA is very much a socialist country, though. But for different reasons than you're describing.

Instead of insulting me, explain how I am wrong, with facts and definitions. I am genuinely curious as to why the idea that our country's infrastructure, education system, police, fire, military, etc are not socialism. You yourself said they are public services, with money backed by tax payers, written into law by elected officials of said tax payers. These services are the will of the people, that serve everyone, regardless of who voted in favor of them. Someone that votes against the military or a fire department receives the same protection. That's socialism in my eyes, as well as millions of others. I'm not sure what you're reading, but I am certainly curious. I always enjoy a new perspective, so long as it is not condescending.

Socialism is state control over means of production and goods distribution. There is little economic value in these described public services - nobody would profit, let alone benefit from having a competition of different militaries or police forces in one country.

[Rasho Brezec]

Democratic Socialism is the American way. Socialism is not the same. From what I understand the 2 to be.

There is no democratic socialism because socialism is inherently against democracy.

This idea of democratic socialism was tried before. It failed like every attempt of socialism fails.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_with_a_human_face

[Jalen Bluntson]

Whatever you wanna call it. The fact is..what made this country strong has been stripped away and it is because capitalism/oligarchy is not the answer. That is what is happening.

[CJackson]

Democratic Socialism is the American way. Socialism is not the same. From what I understand the 2 to be.

There is no democratic socialism because socialism is inherently against democracy.

This idea of democratic socialism was tried before. It failed like every attempt of socialism fails.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_with_a_human_face

what are the systems in scandinavia? countries there have publicly elected officials and parties in power change and there are social services available to everyone including in most case free university and free or very cheap health care

[Knickfan1982]

You don't seem to have the faintest clue what socialism is. None of the examples you describe have anything to do with socialism. Those are public services that the society has agreed of having a collective ownership over them because leaving them open to free market competition would be ineffective. Such social contracts exist in pretty much every country in the world no matter the political system.

I do agree that the USA is very much a socialist country, though. But for different reasons than you're describing.

The problem here is that you also don't really understand socialism either. You don't need revolutionary Marxism in order to have Socialism. Socialism existed prior to Marx. Marx described hunter-gatherer societies as examples of primitive communism for good reason. Those societies were far more equitable because they needed everyone to be strong and healthy to survive. At the same time there is ample evidence that they did care for their sick, injured and elderly. So socialism existed before Marx....Marx simply codified and labeled the concept. Moreover, you're talking about society agreeing to collective ownership in some cases as if collective ownership was something distinct from socialism. It isn't. You cannot have socialism without collective ownership. That is kind of how it works. So if the society has decided collective ownership of a service is a more effective method of filling a void than the Free Market they have chosen to "socialize" the solution to their problem.

As for the instances in which the Free Market is ineffective. That statement really bugged me. Why? Because if it people who live in states like Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and the Dakotas depended upon the Free Market to build a vast network of roads across them most of those people would still depend upon horses to get anywhere. The Free Market would probably determine there isn't an economic justification for the creation and maintenance of a vast network of paved roads to link the comparatively isolated populations of those states.We give the elderly government subsidized medical insurance in the form of Medicare? Why, because the elderly are incredibly vulnerable to illness and injury while no longer receiving a biweekly income from work. The Free Market would prefer to let the elderly wither and die rather than provide necessary services at a loss. So it isn't simply a matter of the Free Market being ineffective in their efforts to fill the gaps in certain needed services. In reality the free market is completely indifferent at best towards the idea of filling them.

[HarthorneWingo]

I f*cked up and read the wrong poll (the national poll) and represented it was the NY poll, which it is not. The most recent NY polls have Bernie down double digits. My bad.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ny/new_york_democratic_presidential_primary-4221.html

[CJackson]

I f*cked up and read the wrong poll (the national poll) and represented it was the NY poll, which it is not. The most recent NY polls have Bernie down double digits. My bad.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ny/new_york_democratic_presidential_primary-4221.html

you done fuqqed up bro. if bernie loses now its all on you

[CJackson]

but sanders may really be closing the gap in ny just like i thot he could

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/4/17/1516577/-Gravis-New-York-Poll-Shows-Sanders-Within-Six-53-47-Among-Likely-Democratic-Voters

http://www.inquisitr.com/3006333/shock-poll-bernie-sanders-cuts-clintons-lead-to-single-digits-in-new-york/

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/17/bernie-sanders-brooklyn-hillary-clinton-new-york

[HarthorneWingo]

I f*cked up and read the wrong poll (the national poll) and represented it was the NY poll, which it is not. The most recent NY polls have Bernie down double digits. My bad.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ny/new_york_democratic_presidential_primary-4221.html

you done fuqqed up bro. if bernie loses now its all on you

I know, I know. Badass Bernie's going to send his goons after me and have them drop acid on my eyeballs.

[Rasho Brezec]

Democratic Socialism is the American way. Socialism is not the same. From what I understand the 2 to be.

There is no democratic socialism because socialism is inherently against democracy.

This idea of democratic socialism was tried before. It failed like every attempt of socialism fails.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_with_a_human_face

what are the systems in scandinavia? countries there have publicly elected officials and parties in power change and there are social services available to everyone including in most case free university and free or very cheap health care

Scandinavia has Nordic capitalism. Nothing is free. It is paid through taxes. Health care providers and schools can still be run by private organizations using a voucher system. They're funded by the government, but the taxpayers have the option to pick and choose the provider of public services.

[Capn'O]

There is no democratic socialism because socialism is inherently against democracy.

This idea of democratic socialism was tried before. It failed like every attempt of socialism fails.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_with_a_human_face

what are the systems in scandinavia? countries there have publicly elected officials and parties in power change and there are social services available to everyone including in most case free university and free or very cheap health care

Scandinavia has Nordic capitalism. Nothing is free. It is paid through taxes. Health care providers and schools can still be run by private organizations using a voucher system. They're funded by the government, but the taxpayers have the option to pick and choose the provider of public services.

Once again Rasho schools us on systems of government.

Most of Bernie's proposals are closer to Scandinavian systems. I still haven't really figured out why he willingly calls himself a socialist when he's not really one. Maybe socialism is his personal belief system but it's not his political platform, which is more socialesque.

[Rasho Brezec]

what are the systems in scandinavia? countries there have publicly elected officials and parties in power change and there are social services available to everyone including in most case free university and free or very cheap health care

Scandinavia has Nordic capitalism. Nothing is free. It is paid through taxes. Health care providers and schools can still be run by private organizations using a voucher system. They're funded by the government, but the taxpayers have the option to pick and choose the provider of public services.

Once again Rasho schools us on systems of government.

Most of Bernie's proposals are closer to Scandinavian systems. I still haven't really figured out why he willingly calls himself a socialist when he's not really one. Maybe socialism is his personal belief system but it's not his political platform, which is more socialesque.

Because everything is tilted to the right in American politics. I'd gladly export some actual socialists to you guys. They'd end up in hospital or in jail.

[Capn'O]

We're good, thanks

[machu46]

but sanders may really be closing the gap in ny just like i thot he could

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/4/17/1516577/-Gravis-New-York-Poll-Shows-Sanders-Within-Six-53-47-Among-Likely-Democratic-Voters

http://www.inquisitr.com/3006333/shock-poll-bernie-sanders-cuts-clintons-lead-to-single-digits-in-new-york/

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/17/bernie-sanders-brooklyn-hillary-clinton-new-york

Gravis is historically perceived as a joke of a poll, and that poll that shows it a 6 point race was done weeks ago. They just didn't release the results back then because it draws more media attention to release just before the primary while all the other polls show a blowout.

The NY polls have probably been the most steady polls of any state so far in this race (meaning for example, YouGov's numbers from 2 weeks ago to a couple days ago are the exact same, Emerson's numbers have remained the same (with the exception of that weird outlier where Hillary had 72%), etc. All of the polling is showing Hillary at 53-56% and Bernie at about 40% (with a small chunk still undecided).

[HarthorneWingo]

Emergency lawsuit filed to make NY and open primary.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/04/18/3770355/new-york-voting-open-primary-lawsuit/

New Yorkers File Emergency Lawsuit To Give Voting Rights Back To 3.2 Million People
BY KIRA LERNER & EMILY ATKIN APR 18, 2016 11:53 AM

NEW YORK, NEW YORK — With less than 24 hours until the presidential primary, a group of New Yorkers who saw their party affiliations mysteriously switched are filing a lawsuit Monday seeking to open the state’s closed primary so that they can cast a ballot.

New York has the earliest change-of-party deadline in the country — registered independent voters who wanted to participate in Tuesday’s presidential primary had to change their party by last October. Many voters missed that deadline — or thought they met it, only to have paperwork get lost in the mail — and are disenfranchised as a result.

The lawsuit is asking for an emergency declaratory judgment that would make Tuesday’s primary open, meaning any registered New York voter could cast a ballot in either party’s primary.

This is our attempt to provide a means of recourse for those thousands of New York voters who find themselves in this very frustrating position.

“This is our attempt to provide a means of recourse for those thousands of New York voters who find themselves in this very frustrating position, and to raise awareness about the need for a new level of accountability in the electoral process,” said Shyla Nelson, a spokesperson with Election Justice USA, which is filing the lawsuit in New York federal court on behalf of hundreds of voters.

More than 3 million people — about 27 percent of New York voters — were registered outside the Republican and Democratic parties as of April, and are therefore ineligible to vote on Tuesday. A significant number of voters, including many named in the lawsuit, say their party affiliation was switched without their knowledge.

-more-

[DaGawd]

Got the weed stash ready for if Bernie wins..or losses..

[HarthorneWingo]

Emergency lawsuit filed to make NY and open primary.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/04/18/3770355/new-york-voting-open-primary-lawsuit/

New Yorkers File Emergency Lawsuit To Give Voting Rights Back To 3.2 Million People
BY KIRA LERNER & EMILY ATKIN APR 18, 2016 11:53 AM

NEW YORK, NEW YORK — With less than 24 hours until the presidential primary, a group of New Yorkers who saw their party affiliations mysteriously switched are filing a lawsuit Monday seeking to open the state’s closed primary so that they can cast a ballot.

New York has the earliest change-of-party deadline in the country — registered independent voters who wanted to participate in Tuesday’s presidential primary had to change their party by last October. Many voters missed that deadline — or thought they met it, only to have paperwork get lost in the mail — and are disenfranchised as a result.

The lawsuit is asking for an emergency declaratory judgment that would make Tuesday’s primary open, meaning any registered New York voter could cast a ballot in either party’s primary.

This is our attempt to provide a means of recourse for those thousands of New York voters who find themselves in this very frustrating position.

“This is our attempt to provide a means of recourse for those thousands of New York voters who find themselves in this very frustrating position, and to raise awareness about the need for a new level of accountability in the electoral process,” said Shyla Nelson, a spokesperson with Election Justice USA, which is filing the lawsuit in New York federal court on behalf of hundreds of voters.

More than 3 million people — about 27 percent of New York voters — were registered outside the Republican and Democratic parties as of April, and are therefore ineligible to vote on Tuesday. A significant number of voters, including many named in the lawsuit, say their party affiliation was switched without their knowledge.

-more-

If you've been screwed by voter registration, as many have (see above lawsuit), I understand that the court ruled that aggrieved voters can use "provisional ballots" to vote today and they will be ruled on at a later date.

[HarthorneWingo]

Just took my mother to go vote. She's been a life-long democrat, but when they tried to verify her name and address in the books, they found that she had been unknowingly switched to a registered republican. So she had to fill out a provisional ballot. This is BS.

[Knickfan1982]

Just took my mother to go vote. She's been a life-long democrat, but when they tried to verify her name and address in the books, they found that she had been unknowingly switched to a registered republican. So she had to fill out a provisional ballot. This is BS.

It happens. A few years ago I went to vote and my registration was changed to Independent. I don't know how that stuff happens.