2016 USA Presidential election thread II: And. Here. We. Go!

[Andalusian girls]

The Nordic system is called both Nordic capitalism and Nordic social democracy for a reason. The elements of national level collective bargaining at the national level combined with a robust welfare are strong elements of a socialist state although they have manifested in an undoubtedly market-friendly variety in the Scandinavian countries. The high public spending of these states isn't just welfare, it's also high state spending from a "big" government. Sweden's SAP party is self-described as a democratic socialist party.

I mean if we're going to nitpick, we can point out all the ways America deviates from "true" capitalism as well. That's not really the point here. I'm objecting to the wholesale rejection of "socialism" in much the same way that I would object to a wholesale rejection of "capitalism."

you misunderstand if you believe Scotsmen are involved. the fundamental definition of socialism is the communal ownership of the means of production. the fundamental definition of capitalism is the profit motive driving private ownership of the means of production. within these broad conceptual frameworks there are multitudinous iterations, including true hybrids systems in state capitalism + corporatism (something like that practiced by the fascist movements of the 1930s), but the social democracies of the Nords very soundly reside in the capitalist framework.

i would provide examples showing high state spending and a large welfare state are not attributes unique to any single form of economic or political association, but in an effort to appease Day's bourgeoisie delicacies i will attempt to limit my prolixity and only invoke my compare and contrast paper on Victorian-era Prussia and modern Singapore if pressed.

i understand the intricacy is difficult for many Americans without a background in economics given the degradation of terminology in our political discourse, witness how Obama's textbook Keynesianism was portrayed as a rising red tide of hammer & sickle, but the distinction is neither immaterial nor pedantic (besides being extremely pedantic). social democracy as practiced by the Europeans and a handful of Asians and maybe a Canadian or two is an iteration of capitalism, an ideology that emphasizes the general welfare within the confines of a capitalist economy. it is by both definition and practice not socialism.

if it seems as though you would be hard pressed to find a socialist state given the above definitions that is simply because it is. socialism lost, and today most societies on earth are merely engaged in defining the optimal shape their capitalism should take.

[Andalusian girls]

tldr social democracy =/= socialism

oh and Bernie was no socialist. though like most Americans i'm not sure he really understood the difference

[thetruepandagod]

And here I am havin tindies sending me booty pics and gettin praised for usin the word immaculate in reference to their posterior. If only 9th grade us could've seen us now.

[Andalusian girls]

i was more eloquent than you in 9th grade too

[thetruepandagod]

Ya, but now i'm the viagra poppin slut fuckin highschoolers.

[Gryffes]

Hillary Clinton or unreleased Wu-Tang album.

An easy choice.

[Minions]

Hes doing that because if Trump is elected hes going to get the case against him dropped. haha

[kuronosan]

People make my head hurt.

[Uzor]

tldr social democracy =/= socialism

oh and Bernie was no socialist. though like most Americans i'm not sure he really understood the difference

I never understood why people believe Sweden is a country run by socialism. Sure, we have similar values to that of socialism -- such as everyone being equal (who don't agree with that) -- but we are NOT a socialist economic system.

I mean, fuck, have Americans never heard of the term "Nordic capitalism"? Like you said, the Scandinavian countries are a free market capitalism with collective bargaining and an elaborate social safety net, in addition to public services such as free education and universal healthcare. NOT a socialist nation. It's why the Nordic countries have always ranked among the highest in the UN report about world happiness.

Sure, we like to joke about being socialists -- especially since USA always hate on socialism -- but we learn early in school that we are, in fact, a free market capitalism with democratic socialism.

[kuronosan]

Most people don't delve beyond the superficial with socialism because they're still McCarthy-era morons.

I don't think anyone that identifies with it identifies beyond the social aspect and would readily agree that controlled-capitalism is the only way to go. I'm all for free-market economics, but unless you have a minimum provision for your citizens it will ALWAYS favor the company. That's why minimum wage laws, health care, housing, standards of living, etc., should all exist. Fuck regulating mergers. Give them no voice in government and ensure your citizens don't end up homeless when they ship business to Sanjay in India.

We're almost North Korea levels of delusional here, thinking that for some reason health care is a privilege and if you're homeless it's because you aren't trying hard enough.

[Quicklet]

Supporters don't get policy passed. See Obama's grass roots. See every argument against Bernie's revolution in this thread and the past threads. Politicking gets policy passed.

Disagree. Obama made the mistake of dismissing his organizational apparatus after getting elected. Conservative supporters absolutely made the difference on the post-ACA agenda. If Democrats could generate the kind of turnout they need in midterms, particularly in more moderate districts, it absolutely would have an impact. IMO part of the difficulty Democrats have is that they've ceded a lot of the public argument to Republicans on issues like ACA, trade, etc., so the Republican narrative often dominates the public discourse in elections.

Again dirty hands is a feature, not a bug.

Also that's assuming we feel that we addressing the problem is even on the table given GOP obstructionism. I've argued multiple times that a Democratic presidency here is likely to be nothing but a bulwark with most meaningful impacts coming from executive power not legislation (my "Bernie = high risk, no yield, Hillary = low risk, no yield" argument). If the problem cannot be addressed, why is it part of the discussion?

That's why if Dems don't take back the House they need to find a message that creates consequences for Republican obstructionism. Republicans are already promising to spend the next 4 years doing nothing and wasting taxpayer money if Hillary gets elected, yet this doesn't seem to get mentioned by Dems.

Or, like the GOP should have done with the Tea Party, you don't give their crazy agenda legitimacy.

There's a difference between making promises that are knowingly unworkable because of veto threat and following through on the agenda that your coalition is fighting for. Immigration reform, criminal justice reform, and increased scrutiny on banks and monopolies are not crazy unworkable policies -- if Dems have the opportunity to make progress on these and fail to follow through, it's going to hurt enthusiasm and turnout in 2018 and 2020.

Except the rules of the system, as written, make that extremely difficult. If the Dems go nuclear they immediately regret it in 2018 when they are defending 25 Senate seats vs the GOP's 8.

Plus the GOP has been playing the last two decades (holding the country hostage to get their way) empowers them far more than the Democrats - majority or minority.

Disagree here. The filibuster for judicial nominees and SCOTUS is dead, one way or another. Better to have 2 years where the Senate can actually make some progress than 4+ years of more obstuction. There are already threats and arguments from the right to keep SCOTUS at 8 judges even if Hillary gets elected.

It's not like I want the filibuster to go away, but Republicans have abused it to the point where it's no longer being used in a responsible way. Maybe you keep it for legislation, especially if the House stays Republican-controlled, but there's no excuse for the level of judicial vacancies that exist solely because Republicans want to take their ball and go home instead of doing their jobs.

[Uzor]

Believe it or not, Sweden is not all that different from USA. Whereas USA is acting as the world police, Sweden is acting as the moral world police, defending the world through humor and sarcasm. Performing infamous acts like putting up an underwater gay sailor to scare off russian submarines or starting a gay club on Putin's plot of land. And while America drops bombs, Sweden performed a teddy bear invasion of Belarus.

[Zoner]

[chazzyphizzle]

gr8 b8

[Ragnus]

Just a personal note,

It's kinda weird still seeing all the discussion going on when you early vote. The election cycle is effectively over for me since I made my choices, but it's still interesting to see the debate.

[Minions]

If you are smart you early vote. Nobody wants to stand in line for hour(s) when you can vote in a few minutes and not catch the herpaderp from all the sick people standing around you on voting day.

[Tyrath]

I live in the burbs, don't think I'll be waiting that much in line on election day. Plus its a nice excuse to work from home ^_^

Edit: I should say I'm registered in the burbs even though I live in the city now.

[Uzor]

But if you vote early your vote will be wasted due to rigged machines!!11!11

[Aerin]

We get mailed the ballot here in Washington and just have to mail it back or drop it off. So nice and easy.

[Uzor]

No wonder Clinton wins Washington then. Obama probably personally intercept all ballots and change them all to Clinton then.