It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

47 Percent of Americans Would Vote for a Socialist: Gallup Poll

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

At least with a King we would know what to expect. We could get rid of the constant election cycle and just know we are going to take it up the backside.




posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969

Since when is obama a socialist, cause fox told you so.


I've said it before, I'll say it again... Obama is a bloodsucking, crony capitalist disguised as a socialist.



I"m quoting here because not only have you said it once and then said it again, it still needs to be said again.

And now once more. "Obama is a bloodsucking crony capitalist disguised as a socialist"



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: wasaka

Dont think there is much choice anymore, you could have "voted" for it, now its gonna be forced. And aint # u can do about it



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969

Since when is obama a socialist, cause fox told you so.


I've said it before, I'll say it again... Obama is a bloodsucking, crony capitalist disguised as a socialist.

BTW, whatever happened to that super cool avatar of yours?


Crony capitalist or fascist? I see shades of both there.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 04:23 PM
link   
We are starting in Sweden to look at voting in local elections only and oligarchy ruling in the nation.

Since democracy is #



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

They're the same thing from my perspective.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 04:30 PM
link   
considering the term socialist has been watered down soo much that it is ultimately meaningless outside of being not hard right, then yeah, sure, why not.

the problem when you corrupt a word into oblivion is that people stop caring about such words. hard right folks have nobody but themselves to blame
(as demonstrated by the first comment on this thread of how little the word means)

Now
I would not vote for a social authoritarian, I would vote for a civil libertarian...both can be considered a socialist depending on how fanatically right the person is.
Bernie Sanders is ok..better than many candidates out there, I see him as the opposing weight to Ron Paul..attracts thinkers but with no pop appeal.

One issue I dont like about Bernie is that as much as he seems fairly in tune with science, he voted to ban human cloning research for medical research purposes..which will slow down the US in regards to new cutting edge treatments down the road. Want to get a perfect match kidney grown? gonna have to go to europe or the far east..America is too weirded out by misunderstood technology.
and the odd thing is, it makes no sense for his stances. he is ok with stem cell research, which is pretty much the exact same thing, just without the ability to fully flesh out the biotech with such weird restrictions. If the understood aspect of human life is personhood, then a beginning stages fetus is simply building material..can't go both ways depending on how taboo the subject sounds.
As far as the other part, for reproduction...well, that is purely an ethical consideration..and those specific ethics are grounded in..nothing much outside of personal sci-fi bias



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

Bernie Sanders is ok..better than many candidates out there,
I see him as the opposing weight to Ron Paul..attracts thinkers
but with no pop appeal.


Paul and Sanders have pop appeal in that
they are both "populist" among those who
are disenfranchised from two party system.

However, you are correct to say they lack
the "pop appeal" within their own party.
The key to being President is getting the
nomination of either the REP or DEM and
failing that, you don't stand a chance in
the general.

The question is can Bernie get the nomination?
The answer for Bernie will be the same as
it was for Ron Paul, is my guess. Sadly, in
our system, being a "populist" isn't enough.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: wasaka

originally posted by: SaturnFX

Bernie Sanders is ok..better than many candidates out there,
I see him as the opposing weight to Ron Paul..attracts thinkers
but with no pop appeal.


Paul and Sanders have pop appeal in that
they are both "populist" among those who
are disenfranchised from two party system.

However, you are correct to say they lack
the "pop appeal" within their own party.
The key to being President is getting the
nomination of either the REP or DEM and
failing that, you don't stand a chance in
the general.

The question is can Bernie get the nomination?
The answer for Bernie will be the same as
it was for Ron Paul, is my guess. Sadly, in
our system, being a "populist" isn't enough.




Its why none of these people get in, Paul, Kucnenic, Bob Barr, etc..people are conditioned over here to understand a 2 party system. its a sport, and in sports, you got 2 teams only.
Politics needs to be more like the hunger games.
Its hard to compete with the 2 party system hitting a billion per election each side when the alternatives are spending some lunch money and have maybe a yard sign here and there and a 20 minute lecture on late nice pbs as the core marketing campaign.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: wasaka



Good news for Bernie.


Bad news for America and those that work.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Well let's see... currently, our government leans HEAVILY toward Corporatism and Oligarchical rule which are the unfortunate side effects of Capitalism allowed to spin out of control.

The decisions in this country are made to benefit the top 1% and the mega corporations while destroying the middle class and small business owners. The wealth inequality in this nation is far worse than it has been at any point in history.

If things continue as they have been, we'll remain on a steep downhill slide toward disaster.

Some countries have implemented policies that would be considered socialist but it has worked well for them. The IDEA of limited socialism is great but proper implementation is key and the US government has shown that they can't be trusted with that level of control.

The US could be fixed but our government is too deeply entrenched in the pockets of Corporate America.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer

It's like a game of Jenga. After pulling enough wooden pieces from the bottom to stack on top, eventually the entire tower collapses.

The wooden pieces in this metaphor are jobs/money/wealth. If you keep stripping it from the middle and lower classes and giving it to those on top, the entire thing will collapse. No one will have any money to buy stuff from rich people.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer

Socialism won't fix that. Social democracies (socialist states by the modern name) are still ruled by a small cabal at the top.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

People who are anti socialism are like being against people working together to achieve common goals.

They don't even know what they are for or against just band-wagoners.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

So is capitalism its all about resource control.

Lets take all of the earths resources and pool them together and put them in control of powerful capitalist who use those resources to benefit their legacy rather then to manage them globally for humanity for the sake of power and money.

Yay! So smart we are!
edit on 6/25/2015 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 05:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
If you keep stripping it from the middle and lower classes and giving it to those on top, the entire thing will collapse. No one will have any money to buy stuff from rich people.


That's the direction we're headed, unfortunately.

The rich get richer, more people are added to "the poor", prices continue to rise, laws are passed to make the "American Dream" more of an impossible fantasy.

Our handbasket is charging full steam into hell and we're all just along for the ride.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Answer

Socialism won't fix that. Social democracies (socialist states by the modern name) are still ruled by a small cabal at the top.



Which is exactly why I said that it's a great idea, but proper implementation is the real hurdle.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Interesting read.

Bernie Sanders is a democratic socialist, but what does that term mean?
edit on 6/25/2015 by ~Lucidity because: excerpt too big



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Interesting read.

Bernie Sanders is a democratic socialist, but what does that term mean?


Imagine a world in which nobody is obscenely rich and nobody is poor, and the average person makes about double – maybe triple – what most people make today.

I can imagine that easily enough. Can you?
Would you like to live in a world like that?

I sure would. We’re ready for it. We just have to believe it and reach for it, and reclaim the word that stands for it.

That word is “socialism.”

It’s being misused today to describe something it’s not, a world of giant bureaucracies, stagnant economies, and secret police. That’s not what it means. It means a world in which ordinary people – probably people like you – own the businesses that provide your livelihood, instead of the economy being owned by a few hogs on Wall Street who see you as their peon.

That’s what socialism is about.

It’s about finally freeing ourselves from the vestiges of the old aristocracy, preserved without the titles in high-rise offices and gated communities.

It’s about democracy in the workplace, not just the polling-place.

It’s about ending the lie that we live in an era of austerity. We don’t. We live in an era of abundance, with technology capable of producing more wealth than ever before – but we also live in an era when a small, powerful, greedy elite see that wealth as belonging to them instead of to all of us, and that’s the reason so many people today are struggling.

The world is rightfully ours, but like the word “socialism” it’s been stolen from us.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: ketsuko

So is capitalism its all about resource control.

Lets take all of the earths resources and pool them together and put them in control of powerful capitalist who use those resources to benefit their legacy rather then to manage them globally for humanity for the sake of power and money.

Yay! So smart we are!




"Climate change is the most important issue of our time, and I fear that when I am old it will have become the only issue that matters. Sanders proposes taxing carbon and would do what it takes to reduce emissions in a country that emits far more per capita than practically any other industrialized country. - www.dailykos.com... "

If "resource control" is a Capitalist plot.... and it is... then the socialist who believe taxing people will stop "climate change" are just playing into the hands of the Capitalist (who are just corporate-socialist themselves).




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join