Dems are bankrupt of leadership that Ocasio-Cortez was on the campaign trial for other candidates

wildchild

wildchild

The democrats have such little leadership the Ocasio-Cortez was going around the country campaigning for democrats.

Now let me get this straight, a 28 year old, whose sole achievement was winning a primary is campaigning for other democrats. She is not even in elected office. Is this a joke?

BTW, all the people she endorsed LOST. She is the new face of the democrat party.
 
AdNvCGw.jpg
 
All the candidates she endorsed lost but she is the new face of the Democratic Party? Were you high when you wrote that?

Dems took the House though :fistbump:
 
Those are not socialist societies, those were run by corrupt dictatorships. The ideals of socialism were never represented by those countries and would not work in a capitalistic society like ours.

But let's not pretend those are examples of socialism. More closely they are communist dictatorships with horrible leaders that abused their people and power.
 
AAAintheBeltway said:
But history has taught us that is where "socialist" societies tend to end up.
More...

But socialism cannot be looked at in a vacuum. Those societies were never backed by socialist ideals. If you look at Pol Pot and Mao and Chavez, it was about overthrowing another party in power by fostering support in the poor neglected by the corruption of the current leaders by promising to take care of them and take away the excess of the rich that cared little for them. Castro as well followed the same model. Once they got their army of popular support from the people (look at Mao's armies in China after WWII) they violently overthrew the government and put in their own form of corruption and left behind the people who they supposedly claimed they were there for. This was to make sure their power was never challenged in the way they took control so their policies morphed into dictatorship control over the masses through alternating violent suppression of oppostiion balanced with constant catering at times to the poor masses but never giving them enough to rise out of their situation.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely and it is nothing to do with socialism. Studying these political events paints the same picture over and over again. These are completely different than the U.S. economy and political environment which is why it will not only never take over the current system, but only small facets of policy.

It is disingenuous to equate those countries with policies in the U.S. some democrats push. It is apples to oranges and not even the same. What Ocasio and Bernie propose is nothing like a dictator like Pol Pot or Mao or Chavez because President's have no such power but mire importantly their policies sound good to the people but are not practical due to cost. Can never be implemented.

History has not taught us where socialist societies end up, it has repeatedly demonstrated the path of dictators overthrowing a government and then using all means to maintain power/control. You never see these in a democratic or republican form of government. Even the Nordic countries where people erroneously claim socialism, are more like capitalism but can add some socialistic type policies due to the small size of the population and lack of budget drains U.S. suffers from.
 
AAAintheBeltway said:
Why is it disingenuous when they call themselves socialists?
More...

Oh they are off base as well using that term, I believe it equally disingenuous on both sides.

Ocasio and Bernie are not socialist, they are just supporting a set of policies but never would support a true more detailed socialist approach. Ocasio calling herself a Socialist is as much a fake label as Trump calling himself a Republican.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top