MovieChat Forums > Bernie Sanders Discussion > U.S. Voters Don’t Want Socialist or Very...

U.S. Voters Don’t Want Socialist or Very Old President: Poll


One strike for Biden, two strikes for Sanders. Clinton and Trump nearing 75.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-03/u-s-voters-don-t-want-socialist-or-very-old-president-poll

Americans are least favorable toward a presidential candidate who’s a socialist or one who’s older than 75, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll that said President Donald Trump’s approval rating ticked up in the past month.

Only 25 percent of respondents ranked “socialist” as a desirable trait for a candidate. Only 37 percent said “someone over 75” was desirable, according to the survey, released on Sunday. More voters were accepting of candidates who were gay or lesbian, independent or under 40.

The poll comes as Democrats line up for a chance to take on Trump in the 2020 presidential election. The survey suggests that 41 percent of voters would definitely or probably vote for Trump in 2020, against 48 percent who said they would vote for the Democratic candidate.
___

As at least one well-funded independent -- former Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz -- considers jumping into the race, only 38 percent of Americans said the two-party system is seriously broken and that the U.S. needed a third party. But that was the highest percentage on the question in a poll that dates back to 1995.

reply

Whether you like it or not. Bernie wave is coming

reply

only wave gonna come to this commie bozo is a wave goodbye

reply

You seem to have a problem understanding numbers. LGBT, young, and independent candidates are far more popular than ancient socialists like Comrade Sanders.

reply

As if anyone is going to trust what someone who calls themselves "satan" or "borat" writes. LOL.

Whether you like it or not. Bernie wave is coming

reply

40 something Beto is a real sleeper especially if his fake Hispanic act goes over. White man bad so he must cover up that he is a White Irishman the best he can.

reply

Bernie's people seem to know this, too. They've almost got a dirty tricks campaign going against him. I think they were behind the video of "Beto" in his band, all dressed up like sheep. "Beto is a furry!" was the caption of the piece, and it went viral on Twitter. They told people they were a hot band in New Zealand, hence the sheep costumes.

They also hate that moderate gay guy, Pete Buttigieg. The smell in the air I'm getting is that since they rooked Bernie out of the nom last time with their "Super-Delegate" rule that basically assured Hillary the win, that now it's "Bernie's turn."

I remember when we all laughed at Vermont for electing a socialist/communist mayor. Then again, back then we were all laughing at an attention hog named Trump. I miss the values of the good old days....

reply

That's ok because Sanders isn't a socialist, he is a DEMOCRATIC socialist like just about every other country in Europe and many outside of it, that have nicer things than we do. However we have nice Democratic socialist things like Freeways, Social Security, Medicare, libraries, the Army, navy, marines and air force, fire and police departments, weekends and free speech.
Democrats Are Not Socialists, and Neither Is Bernie Sanders
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/democrats-are-not-socialists-and-neither-is-bernie-sanders/

reply

If they have better things than we do...move there!

I'm so sick of people saying, "Well, in Europe they do it this way. In Denmark they do it this way."

Well, guess what, this isn't fucking Europe or Denmark, and if you like it so much how they do it there, then fucking move there!

Assholes. Jealous as hell of people who worked hard to earn a healthy living, claiming to be "moral" as they have no problem stealing from these people for their entitlement programs, and think everything in life should be handed to them for free. I'm sick of people with no concept of personal responsibility. It's disgusting.

I have no problem helping people who actually need it, but hiking any tax rate to 50% is criminal.

I'm speaking from the lower middle class. I'm not rich at all, but I am not jealous of someone who worked hard to make a better living than I did. It's MY job to improve my situation...not the government's!

reply

Trump and Reagan were 70 upon inauguration. Biden would be 78 and Sanders 79. Good chance they would be dead or very ill 4 years later.

reply

It's not the age of the candidate that bothers me, or their appearance. It's what they stand for, and their policies, and Bernie Sanders is not only a big fat fake, he's pushing a way of life on Americans that has failed time and time again in the past, and yet there are people stupid enough to fall in love with his siren song of "equality" and "no more poverty."

Thankfully, I can see right through him, and know better about him and socialism than his idiot voter base. I wouldn't vote for Bernie the Buffoon in a million years.

reply

First of all, you need to get straight the difference between socialism and communism. Every western democracy is a hybrid socialist-capitalist system. The only thing that differs from one country to the next is where they strike the balance. When you socialize everything you have communism, when you privatize everything you have an oligarchy. Both horrible systems to live under. When the right throws around the label "socialist" they really mean "communist", which nobody is. The people they're trash talking are simply for more socialist policies than we currently have. And by the way, Venezuela is a military dictatorship where the strongman in charge - first Chavez, now Maduro - pays phony lip service to the idea of socialism. They need to stop citing Venezuela in their talking points.

Single payer health care does NOT mean a "government takeover". Hospitals and individual practices will remain as they are, in private hands. The one and only thing the government will handle is the billing part. They will be everyone's "insurance". What idiot ever thought paying a regular recurring expense with private insurance was a good idea? Stupidest concept ever. All it does is make sure a middleman siphons off huge profits that could be going into providing actual health care. Even the Koch Brothers' own study concluded single payer would be $2 trillion cheaper over the next ten years than our current system - which is why they haven't been trumpeting those results from every rooftop, like they were planning to when they funded the study.

No one has suggested we can equalize incomes, that some people will not be richer than others - that would be communism. We can and should stop the parasitic billionaire class from running the government with their naked bribery though, and raking in obscene and exponentially increasing amounts of wealth, while the people who actually WORK to create that wealth get paid peanuts and struggle harder and harder to make ends meet with every passing year. That much we can do.

Citizens United was a horrible ruling and a big nail in the coffin of our democracy. This corporations are people, money is free speech garbage has to go. We do indeed need to build a wall: one that seals off our political process from the influence of outside money. Either restrict contributions to small amounts from individuals or go to a public funding model. We don't need a two year, or even one year, election cycle. Campaigning should be limited to, say, six months before the election. Especially these days with mass communications you don't need that long to get your message out. And when time and funds are conspicuously finite, debates become more important. If you waste your limited allotment on ads to smear your opponent instead of focusing on your own policy ideas you're probably going to lose.

reply

Tell me, can you name one country where socialism has been successful? And please don't use Scandinavia. Those countries are a market-based economy. They are not the socialist paradise some leftists claim. Also, explain why Europe has had economic problems ever since they adopted "Democratic Socialism?" [which is a contradiction in terms.]

The only difference between communism and socialism is the way it's implemented. Many people claim that various nations that experimented with both ways were not practicing the real thing, because greedy people took over the govt. and turned it into a dictatorship.

What many people don't seem to realize is, it goes against human nature to share resources for the common good. We are naturally selfish, territorial creatures, and like to be rewarded for doing hard work. Do you really think you're gonna be motivated to do your job well, whether you're paid or not? Do you really think the government, the cold, unfeeling, selfish, lowest bidder in everything, is gonna have your best interests at heart when it comes to intimate parts of your life? Do you really think life will improve for everyone if we "rob the rich" (the elite) to feed the poor? There isn't enough to go around, even if we did confiscate everything the rich in America had. Even Fort Knox doesn't have enough money to fill such a bottomless pit. And once you start pouring money into such a pit, you will never see it again in such quantities.

Margaret Thatcher was quoted as saying "Socialism is great until you run out of OTHER people's money," namely, robbing all the rich to pay for government programs, but eventually, the debt that the country racks up from people not producing as well catches up to them, whether it takes 10 years or 80.

If you actually looked into the plans various organizations that don't have America's best interests at heart had, one of the first steps they planned to implement to take over America and destroy it from within, is to take over the healtcare system. Others included stamping out Christianity and taking over our public school system. If you're too blind to see it in front of you, you are too stupid to live.

Yes, lobbying is an issue in our government, but how do you, a keyboard warrior, intending to deal with it, beyond pissing and moaning about it on a movie chat site? You are just one person, amongst millions of others who don't like what they're seeing, and yet I don't see you going out and doing something about it.

reply

Uh ... here you are on the same site. So what does that make you? And you have no idea what I do with most of my time. Yet suddenly you know everything about me. How did that happen?

Did you not understand my point that all western democracies are hybrid socialist-capitalist systems? The only thing that changes going from one to the next is the exact balance they strike. You seem to have mostly ignored that part. There ARE no successful socialist countries but there are plenty of successful democratic socialist ones. The two systems are not the same. And don't even think of trotting out a reference to Venezuela, a country run by military dictators who SAY they're socialists. The official name of North Korea is the DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) even though it's neither democratic nor a republic. Authoritarian leaders lie to make their regimes sound more benign. What else is new? Right wingers need to stop using Venezuela in their talking points because it's a dumb example.

The current health care system - the business end of it, not the doctors and hospitals which are first rate - is nothing but a giant empire of greed. As I said before single payer would cost at least $2 trillion dollars less over the next ten years than our current system. And that figure came from a Koch Brothers study that made the most pessimistic possible assumptions in several areas to AVOID coming to the conclusion they came to anyway. You need to ditch the idea that because you're ideologically against something, it cannot work. It not only does work, it works better than the crap system we have now AND frees up (not costs us) money. Big pharma and the insurance companies are the only losers. Cry me a river!

We don't take all the money from the rich - you didn't read what I said very carefully, did you? Yes, they need to pay their damn taxes and stop being allowed to loophole their way out of it. But what we need are laws similar to what some other countries have tying CEO and executive pay to the pay of the company's lowest tier workers. Setting a limit of, say, a factor of 30. That means you can pay yourself at most thirty times what a janitor at your company makes. If you want to make more, you have to give everyone else a raise. Who cares how competitive American companies are if most employees are living paycheck to paycheck so the top management can make billions? Who cares what the GDP is if almost all of it goes to the top 1%? I mean honestly, what good does it do us to have a strong economy if it's only strong for a few?

Other than countries like Greece, who grossly mismanaged their internal finances, Europe has been doing as well as we have. And the standard of living for the European middle class is higher on average than it is for their counterparts here in the US.

reply

The whole purpose of health insurance or any kind of insurance is to pool risk. I don't have the same risk as you. I don't want coverage for AIDS or drugs or psychotherapy. Why should we pay the same price?

Single Payer is a government takeover. It "crowds out" these private options just like we see with schools where we have a two tiered system for rich and poor instead of a spectrum of everything in-between like we have with TVs or any kind of commercial product. If government gave us "free houses", you'd quickly see everything turn to mansions or shacks.

Citizens United means the media doesn't get to have sole authority in choosing our politicians. I know it sounds bad to say corporations should be allowed to buy elections, but the big ones are always going to do that anyway. They control the media. It's the smaller ones who would be blocked.

It's not every western democracy that has a hybrid of socialism and capitalism. It's every country period. You're trying to single out the good countries, the white countries. That's what they have in common. Not mixed economies. Mexico has universal health care. Why would free health care in America look more like Sweden than like Mexico? It wouldn't. You're just making a coded racist argument.

reply

The argument I was trying to counter is that socialist policies equal communism, which is antithetical to democracy. That's the argument the right wing tends to use. That somehow "pure" capitalism is the only true democratic system. If it's not giving all power to the corporations and super rich it's downright un-American!

Insurance is a stupid way to pay for regular recurring expenses. It's a model intended for NON recurring expenses. We don't have incendiary insurance to cover firefighting services, or crime insurance to cover police protection - you can see how idiotic it is in other contexts because you haven't been numbed by familiarity. Imagine the fire truck rolls up to your house and they have to make a phone call to verify your coverage before they do anything. Then they tell you that you're covered for the suppression but not search and rescue. Sorry sir, your trapped kids are going to burn. Nothing we can do. This is how our medical system works and it's just as batѕhit insane.

Here's the health plan everyone needs: you need to see the doctor you get to see the doctor, you need tests you get the tests, you need treatment you get the treatment (whether it's a band aid or an organ transplant), no premiums, no deductibles, no prior authorizations, no BS. We cut out the useless middle man. We force big pharma to cut their prices WAY down because there's only one customer to sell to. We pay for health care through taxes that cost us far less than what we're charged now for employer based insurance by the greedy industry. There's a whole layer of unnecessary financial sector leeches and rampant price gouging. We'd save trillions of dollars over the next decade alone, and get FULL universal coverage. It's a no-brainer for everyone ... except the parasites. The economy that works for the many and the one that works for the few are not, as Republicans try to convince us, the same. They look VERY different.

Citizens United can't be allowed to stand no matter what. Big donor contributions to politicians can be barred and lobbying made illegal. Then corporations will never be able to buy another election. That's the only acceptable outcome, and this is one of the few issues where no room exists for compromise. If the system allows rich people more of a say than everyone else then the system must go - by any means necessary. And I mean that exactly the way it sounds. Right now we still have the potential to fix this mess the easy way, through peaceful reforms, but the hard way works too and the billionaire class needs to remember that before it's too late.

reply

Bloomberg. Lol. The guy that threatened to hand the election over to Trump if Sanders got the nomination in 2016 over Hillary.

You can fear labels all you want. But democratic socialism has just as much socialism as it has capitalism. Bernie will point to Denmark and Sweden while republicans will divert to Venezuela. Republicans will then turn around and say Denmark and Sweden aren't socialist. We know. Neither is Bernie. Bernie is only a socialist to crony capitalists who want to rule the oligarchy.

reply

It's a CNN/WSJ journal poll, not Bloopberg.

Republicans are right, Denmark and Sweden aren't socialist. Their leaders actually say that! If they think Bernie is a fool, his groupies must be too.

reply