Right Wing Extremists

Officially, Platner (the guy who tattoos himself with Nazi symbols, but accuses Israel of "genocide" - which he says he doesn't like, even though he likes Nazis) had cancelled all of his campaign events, and it taking time off to "reflect".Shortly after Hezbollah broke the ceasefire (broken March 2) and fired nearly 7,000 missiles at Israel (my mid April), the United States Senate voted on legislation to halts arms sales to Israel - one major argument Senators gave was the 2026 Israel-Lebanon war.The argument anti-Israel Senators gave, on Lebanon, was that Israel owed Hezbollah a ceasefire and Israel was guilty of killing civilians. The argument was presented in typically anti-Israel propagandist fashion:The Democratic Senators described themselves as reasonable people who really wanted peace - so Israel should give Hezbollah the ceasefire when Hezbollah was good enough to ask for. Israel was said to not want peace. Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran were presented as more moderate on war and more Pro peace than Israel. And again, Israel was said to be run by a bunch of war-lovers who want to kill civilians. Naturally, the Senators said it was Netanyahu, not the Israeli people, that they were attacking.That is the bad part (bad is too mild a term) of the Democratic Senate move.Is there a good part? Actually yes. There is some good in the evilFirst, understand that Democrats have Senators in 25 states:One Senator in these 3 states:Pennsylvania
Maine
WisconsinBoth Senators in 22 states:Vermont
New Hampshire
Delaware
Rhode Island
Connecticut
Massachusetts
New York
New Jersey
Maryland
Virginia
Georgia
Illinois
Michigan
Hawaii
New Mexico
Arizona
Colorado
Minnesota
California
Washington
Oregon
NevadaThe good part?I am getting there.The worst vote was the vote against the sale of $295 million in bulldozers. Because that featured the most scary amount of YES votes. 40 Democrats in the Senate voted yes. But:All Republicans - even Rand Paul! - voted NO. Even the solidly anti-war Senator Paul.But the Democratic party picture has a silver lining:20% of the states with Democratic Senator had at least one Democrat who had the courage to do the right thing the right thing and voted no:Leader Schumer (NY) voted no
Senator Gillibrand (NY) voted no
John Fetterman (Pennsylvania) voted no
Senator Blumenthal (Connecticut) voted no
Senator Coons (Delaware) voted no
Senator Rosen (Nevada) voted no
Senator Cortez-Masto (Nevada) voted noBe sure to support the courageous Senators for standing up for the side that truly wants prace in Palestine and Lebanon. Israel wanted peace when it agreed to the November 27, 2024 ceasefire. Netanyahu wanted the ceasefire to mean something. THATS WHY HE WAS FAITHFUL TO IT!And the Democratic Governor candidate for Senate (Janet Mills) hopefully will become the party nominee once that anti-Semitic abomination drops from (hopefully the face of the earth too!) the race for Susan Collins seat.Either Janet Mills or Susan Collins are worthy of the seat. (Both are light years better than Angus King and especially Graham Platner)Go Susan Collins!
Go Janet Mills!(And give support to the courageous seven Senators who cast a politically tough vote, but I won't forget their courage)(And peace lovers like me, appreciate that Israel wants a ceasefire that ends all fighting and bombing. Unlike the IRGC, Hamas, Hezbollah and their disgusting, completely dishonest "anti-war" allies in the United States and Europe WHO ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING TO END THE WARS and don't want to)

I do not favor putting broad labels on people (including on fellow EvC members) without regard to whether they're accurate, justified or overly broad. There are two ways labels are dangerous: 1) Many people think that if they put a label on someone then they've defined them; 2) Many people let the labels others put on people define them.Commenting on the broader picture, I think Democratic Socialism as a national political movement is a loser. While its short term goal is to improve people's lives, which I wholeheartedly agree with, its longterm goal is public ownership of the economy, in other words, pure socialism, which is anti-capitalistic and which I unambiguously reject.Even if the long and short term goals of Democratic Socialism were the same, namely improving people's lives, it's still a loser at the national level simply because of the name. Any political movement that includes the word "socialism" has a built in handicap because every campaign conversation has to begin like this: "Hi, I'm here representing the Democratic Socialist Party, and...wait, come back, it's not that kind of socialism..."I don't know Mamdani's politics well enough to comment, and I don't follow the news out of New York City very closely, but from the little I've heard he seems to have the people's interests at heart.--Percy

Yes, I am sure the most happy and healthy people in the world in the Scandinavian countries would agree. ___Surprised by your unenlightened post Percy. For the millionth time . . .Here are some, SOME, U.S. Government Programs Considered Socialist that you probably are glad to support:• Social Security• Public Infrastructure (Highways, Parks, Water Systems)• Medicare and Medicaid• Public Education (K-12 and Public Colleges)• The U.S. Postal Service (USPS)• Unemployment Insurance• Food Assistance Programs (SNAP/WIC)• Public Housing and Housing Vouchers• Libraries• Fire departments___These programs don’t replace the capitalist system (which I, Bernie Sanders, and other democratic-socialists support); instead they operate within capitalism to balance market failures or inequities. I get it though, if you are a sociopath (republican), then you DESPISE the idea that your tax money is assisting the non-white, non-christian, non-heterosexuals. A republican would rather cut off its own children’s leg then give equality to “lesser” people. This is why tRump continues to have near full support from his core supporters, it’s all about irrational, self-injuring, hatred, . . . nothing about economy.As I said before, the quality of cars, appliances, finger-spinners and other things improve because of competitive capitalism. It improves my life. I don’t want capitalism taken away. But I do want a few more socialist programs, as most non-sociopathic Americans do:1. Universal healthcare (sole profit motivation in healthcare is sick!). And when we can afford Billions, BILLIONS, of dollars a day for the immoral and illegal Iran war fiasco, we certainly have money for universal health care.2. Free or nearly free education. We are one f****** dumb nation. 70 million+ "people" voted for a hateful and retarded sociopath, . . . TWICE! It would improve everyone’s life and society if people were taught some critical thinking skills. I get it though, if you are a stupid and hateful white hillbilly from the Ozarks, you wouldn’t want a black person to upstage you.3. US Postal Service Bank. US Banks are exploitative and parasitic.___Lastly, neither left-wing extremists nor socialism is on-topic. Tsk, tsk, tsk..

First of all, Comrade, had you been paying attention in schoolsky, Percy himself changed the topic header. I suggested that it be about Ideological Extremism in general, not just Right Wing which, to you, is the only political extremism there even is. So tell me, Comrade...when all of the millionaires and billionaires move out of NYC....exactly where is the tax base going to come from to give all of the broke people of the Left free everything? I think the hillbilly from the Ozarks has more common sense than some of you socialist Libtards. One such "Hillbilly was Sam Walton. Also, did you ever wonder why the National Debt increases exponentially so much? Its because Sam moved out of town because he was tired of paying for all the free stuff that Genius Mamdani proposed that he and his fellow self made millionaire/billionaire "hillbillies" were made to pay for. Did you or your fellow socialists eveer roll up your sleeves and build a business or did yiou simply sit in the local college ivory tower trying to educate the masses on the evils of the Right Wing?Explain to me, oh Dronestar, where the NYC tax base is going to get its money to feed all of the gay brown people (and a few white ones too) that the socialist mayor seeks to pander to?Oh thats right...lets regrow big government and find the tax base in Texas and Florida to help pay the bills of the huge, broke liberal enclave! Many of us know that it wont work. No nation can simply rely on the top 5% to support all of the diverse liberal darlings. Next time they will simply move somewhere else. Then we can tax the crap out of the liberal millionaires. ​

No, I never did wonder about that. I did not wonder, because it is obvious why this happens. The national debt grows, because of Republicans.More specifically, the Bush tax cuts and the Trump tax cuts are the primary cause that the debt is growing.

What you more specifically mean is that tax cuts for the top 25% cause the debt to rise. Thus....Tax cuts=$5.1 Trillion.So what causes the National Debt to rise? So to sum it up, YES War increases the National Debt but so does soft power diplomaccy and deficit spending. Free health care and free public transit as well as free education cost money too.

Matthew 19:21Matthew 19:24Luke 12:33-34There once lived this radical SOCIALIST who lived in the first century. He preached about helping the poor and was against the rich. If you lived in his time you would certainly hate him and his non-white skin.Given the opportunity, you would happily crucify him..

July 1,2026 Civiqs rolling pollNational
Trump -21%Approve 37%
Disapprove 58%Some select states for relative strength per stateSouth Carolina
-7%Alaska
-9%Ohio
-11%Florida
-12%Arizona
-12%54% Disapprove
42% ApprovalTexas
-13%Wyoming
-13%54% Disapprove
41% ApproveIowa
-14%North Carolina
-14%41% Approve
55% DisapprovePennsylvania
-17%39% Approve
56% DisapproveMichigan
-19%38% Approve
57% DisapproveGeorgia
-20%37% Approve
57% DisapproveNevada
-24%35% Approve
59% DisapproveMaine
-28%New Hampshire
-32%So -21% nationally if this poll is accurate. The RealClear average is average approval at 40.5% and average disapprove at 55.5%The -21% national benchmark, in this Civiqs poll, helps us see the relative approval per state in the same poll, so this is an extremely valuable poll. (Keep in mind that not every state will be equally accurate, but the advantage is for us to see a national poll show us results from the state polls it draws from - and Civiqs polls a lot of people from each state)Trump polls better in 6 of the 7 swing states, than he does nationally, except for Nevada. But Georgia (-20%) is a necessary state for Republicans - if the candidate wins Arizona, North Carolina (somewhat tough in 2028, and probably even tougher in 2032), and Pennsylvania BUT LOOSES WISCONSIN in the 2028 Presidential race. Wisconsin has a habit of going Democrat's way. Republicans only narrowly won Wisconsin in 2016 and 2024, and Democrats do better in statewide office races generally.Georgia is polling horribly for Republicans. The Democratic party candidate has won three for three Senate races since Biden won in 2020, and the Democratic party incumbent is leading the Republican by 13% - with 56% of the vote. Trump is doing as bad in Georgia as he is nationally. Georgia is on track to becoming a Democratic leaning state. Republicans better hope some candidates on the future are a better sell to Georgia than Trump or Vance. Republicans are looking like shit in Georgia - and with that goes the chances of the GOP holding the White House.

Wyoming show read Wisconsin.Wisconsin
-13%41% Approve
54% Disapprove

I think you may have misinterpreted my post. Another reading may reveal that it's not actually saying what you thought. If that doesn't help just let me know and I'll clarify at greater length.--Percy

Won't be the first time I misinterpreted. But I don't wish to play guessing games on a debate forum, just clarify please..

I think the key part is where I said, "While its short term goal is to improve people's lives, which I wholeheartedly agree with, its longterm goal is public ownership of the economy, in other words, pure socialism, which is anti-capitalistic and which I unambiguously reject."By "improve people's lives" I meant social programs.--Percy

Yes, I didn't misinterpret that part. Hate to debate by definitions but:

quote:

---

Socialism is an economic philosophy advocating public ownership of key industries and reducing inequality through regulation and social programs, while communism envisions a classless, stateless society with all property collectively owned and distributed based on need.

---

The definition is not "ALL". (and I'll argue that two key industries are health and education which should be socialized). Regardless, if not ALL industries, only KEY industries, then the definition of "pure socialism" is obviously not FULLY anti-capitalism. That is why I SPECIFICALLY replied with:These programs ["that improves people's lives"] don’t replace the capitalist system (which I, Bernie Sanders, and other democratic-socialists support); instead they operate within capitalism to balance market failures or inequities.I know of no democratic-socialistic society like Scandanavia where they are striving to FULLY abolish capitalism. Why even state a silly term like "pure socialism"? Really, "pure socialism" sounds like something Phat would argue. You'll note that Phat cheered your post, shouldn't that instantly and horrifically give you pause?I'll re-state, competitiveness in material goods is a good PART of a capitalistic society, let's keep that part, but just expand two more social programs within it.Also, denigrating the term 'socialism' as a loser term doesn't help, just ask Phat.

Ask yourself where NYC is going to get the money to afford all that free stuff?

Many big companies started by individuals with conservative values have moved or are planning to move out of NYC. I would argue that extremists such as Mamdani have the exact long-term goal that you mention: Public ownership of the economy. Increasing taxes on the prosperity of the businessmen who benefit is often rejected based on their objection tousie or attempt to use their profits to "rebalance inequalities." Why, they would argue, should I support free health care and free public transportation? (That should be an individual rather than a government decision.) The wealthy pay over 60% of the taxes as is. To hijack them for more will only cause them to leave...either a city, state, or if pressured, even the country. The point Dronestar doesn't get is that the rich owe us nothing apart from that. Try running this country on a socialist adjustment program and watch your tax base go down very quickly.
​