Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you realize that socialism is the politico-economic theory of social organization advocating that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be regulated or owned by the community.
The Marxist theory is that socialism is the transitional stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. Do you think that Obama would lead this country towards communism? Wait don't answer that, I don't want your head to explode.
I've always disagreed with that Wikipedia explanation of Socialism based on my readings of Marxist ideology, socialism, and communism.
True Marxist Socialism is actually quite moderate when compared to Communism. True Marxism can actually be used interchangeably with Social Liberalism in many respects, and Marx never saw a logical progression to Communism. Marx actually commented many times before his death that his principles were taken so far the 'left' that he no longer no longer claimed to be a Marxist. Communism really took Marxist political theory and went off the deep end with it. Some would say that we already live in a Social Liberalism or true Marxist society with our tax structure, mixed economy with government ownership of such companies as Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, and other social programs. Obama's proposals for healthcare and government creation of jobs would bring us closer to his definition. So while I personally would agree that Obama can be considered a 'Socialist' in these terms, I would also be required to add that my definiton of Socialism, Marxism, and Communism differs from common usage.
The political theory that compares the 'Conservative Right' to the Nazism is also based on flimsy correlations IMO also. But that's another useless fact for another day...
I spent a few hours knocking on doors in what I thought would be a fairly evenly divided (D and R) neighborhood. Income, average house price and type and number of cars argued for at close to a 50/50 split.
A bit of suprise, out of 60 doors, only 2 McCains, 2 "won't say", 4 undecided, 1 Ron Paul, 0 Bob Barr, 6 Obama. 3 of the Obama folks wanted to get signs, bumper stickers, 4 of them wanted to donate and 3 asked about volunteering. Two of the last group said they had been pretty undecided until they caught more than the first 10 minutes of Palin.
As one Viet Nam vet said; "that woman scares me more than Bush or McCain ever did, and McCain looks like one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel" (partially paraphrased).
One other item of note, 3 of the six Obama supporters said they had been for Hillary, but after some consideration they're "all in" for Obama.
So while you guys have been bleating on about Obama being (1) a Muslim, (2) a trojan horse for Al-Queada, (3) a community organizer, (4) inexperienced, because he was never the mayor of a "red neck, white bread, quiet little mountain town" (see South Park, Bigger, Longer and Uncut). Some of us have been out "moving the ball down the field".
golfgod
More people opting for welfare. How in the world are the few, "working" tax-payers going to afford to upkeep the hordes of dependents? I'm getting tired, just thinking about how to take care of them. Maybe I am stupid, and should join them--but then there would be one more burden on the few remaining responsible "care takers".
You've got to do your thing in a red state for it to have true meaning. It's easy to get your type of results in a blue state.
Well I live in a purple state, in what is generally considered a swing district. We have an R congresswoman who is severely down in the polls, one D and one R Senators and the R is leaving, the R candidate to replace him is, I think down in the polls too.
Actually in a RED state it wouldn't matter a bit. In a red state I'd only be working at the congressman/senator level.
In a BLUE state it probably wouldn't matter either.
Your math doesn't add up, which is really not surprising. I volunteered for a McCain phonebank here in chicagoland. I have writers cramp and my ears are ringing. Couldn't believe how busy it was.
You can't be this clueless, can you?
I spent today canvassing for some local candidates - 62 houses, plus anybody we ran across on this fine day. I live in a very conservative town in Idaho, and that means something. We found only two people who defended Bush's record. There were a few others who said they were registered Republicans. Almost everybody else was interested in learning about our candidates.
More people opting for welfare. How in the world are the few, "working" tax-payers going to afford to upkeep the hordes of dependents? I'm getting tired, just thinking about how to take care of them. Maybe I am stupid, and should join them--but then there would be one more burden on the few remaining responsible "care takers".
Thanks, Roberta, for working so hard for the rest of us. I was getting worried.
Rasmussen Reportsâ„¢: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/idaho/election_2008_idaho_presidential_election - broken link)
You can always move from Idaho to California! Here in the Bay Area it's Obama who has the 68 percent, if not even more.
Socialism??? This is what kills me about how people believe the lies that McCain's camp spreads. I'm willing to bet that you, paullySC, are precisely the kind of person who will actually pay less tax under Obama's plan.
Rasmussen Reportsâ„¢: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/idaho/election_2008_idaho_presidential_election - broken link)
You can always move from Idaho to California! Here in the Bay Area it's Obama who has the 68 percent, if not even more.
Sorry, I wasn't suggesting that Obama will win Idaho. I do think it will be closer than in many of the previous elections. But I do think that Dems will make gains at the state level - and it will be because of Obama's coat tails. We did a big sigh of relief that Romney wasn't selected for VP.
Rasmussen Reportsâ„¢: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/idaho/election_2008_idaho_presidential_election - broken link)
You can always move from Idaho to California! Here in the Bay Area it's Obama who has the 68 percent, if not even more.
I did the opposite, figured I was more needed where there were fewer like me....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow!
Really?
