US Democrats to be rebranded 'demo-socialists' by repubs

[IcarusAngel]

UKnH7mo4bsc

Libertarians and Republicans believe the US democratic party should be renamed.

Say for the moment that this actually sticks, this will be just another misnamed socialist party like most of the other ones mentioned in that long lists. "Democratic-Socialist" is even worse than "social democrat" to apply to the US democratic party because Democratic-Socialist is supposed to be the type of system that say, Einstein advocated, not the corporatism that Obama advocates.

[Comrade Anarchist]

i heard about this. this is the biggest bull other than the republican beliefs. They obviously think they can scare the working and middle class away from the democrats.

[Kassad]

And Republicans will henceforth be known as 'Republi-can-they-get-any-more-ignorant?'

SEE WHAT I DID THERE? :cool:

[GracchusBabeuf]

The Democrats are equally to blame for this. It is no secret that the Democrats are just diet Republicans. They will not openly say they are not socialist, instead they will continue this ongoing process of dragging the name of socialism through the mud, while the right-wing scares the crap out of US workers by bogeyman terms like "socialism", "communism", "Marxism". Let us not think that the Republicans are the only player in this bourgeois game for one second. Its sickening that a major chunk of "leftists" unconsciously or consciously support the Dems as "the lesser evil".

[teenagebricks]

That was actually quite a good video considering it was from MSNBC. I don't think this will work though, it's clearly just another tactic to scare people away from voting for Obama or another Democrat in 2012, even if they did go through with it, I don't think it would even work.

[Audeamus]

The desperation of the RNC is rather amusing. Trying to incite hysteria among voters about Obama's "socialism" didn't work out well during election season, and I can't imagine the idea that Obama is a socialist will find fertile soil now either.

And is it just me, or is the re-branded name rather awkward to say? When I say it out loud I feel like I should be saying "Democratic Socialist Party" not "Democrat Socialist Party". If you are going to re-brand the opposition with a ridiculous name, at least make it catchy.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I thought the GOP were calling the Dems fascists? (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/us/politics/20caucus.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper)

[GPDP]

And this is with Olbermann is my favorite mainstream media pundit.

Really, now, the Democrat Socialists?

Really?

[Marx22]

*chuckle* Bourgeois scare tactics. John Cornyn and the RNC are in their death bed, this is nothing but a publicity stunt. What will they pull out of their ass next? A pint of logic maybe? I doubt it.

[manic expression]

The ongoing meltdown of both American bourgeois parties is positively delicious. With the Republicans making a six-ring circus out of themselves, all that's left to do is simply drive home how the Democrats are completely ignoring the plight of working people because they're not socialists. With the financial crisis and the lack of answers from the capitalists, I knew the left would have more opportunities, but this is something else entirely, and it's great.

[Rusty Shackleford]

The ongoing meltdown of both American bourgeois parties is positively delicious. With the Republicans making a six-ring circus out of themselves, all that's left to do is simply drive home how the Democrats are completely ignoring the plight of working people because they're not socialists. With the financial crisis and the lack of answers from the capitalists, I knew the left would have more opportunities, but this is something else entirely, and it's great.

i know others were calling for it. i also know this is slightly off topic, but why not show the world what true socialists are? be a bit more agressive and put up flyers and such.
maybe target malls and major shopping centers(with propaganda).


as for the re labeling, anyone heard of www.familysecuritymatters.org (http://www.familysecuritymatters.org)?
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.3238/pub_detail.asp

they label the obama administration as that of a closet commie one, but applaud obamas move to block the photos of abuse by soldiers as a common sense streak...

[RGacky3]

The republicans are loosing it.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The republicans are loosing it.

The Republicans lost it a long time ago.

[Bud Struggle]

The republicans are loosing it.

Yea, but they will be back in power in eight years. They always are. And then the Democrats will be back in power eight years after that. they always are.

Same old same old.

[S.O.I]

i think this could be good, its would put back socialism in everyday language, and people would get used to the wold.

[RGacky3]

i think this could be good, its would put back socialism in everyday language, and people would get used to the wold.

Yeah, but its typical ruling class tactic, redefine something as negative, then anyone that supports that must defend the redefinition.

The problem is, people are so desperate now, even the redefinition sounds good.

The same was the case in the early 1900s with Anarchism, they tried to redefine it as chaos and disorder, and thus could label people as anarchists, and a the same time demonize an entire movement.

[scarletghoul]

Ha.
Its kinda cool though, because the name socialism is losing its taboo and one of the major parties is killing itself. I predict a shift to the left in america

[Demogorgon]

This is infantile.

The Republican Party is retreating further and further to its far-right core as it looses more and more ground. How it expects to be taken seriously by anyone other than the far-right who always back it anyway is beyond me.

[Bud Struggle]

This is infantile.

The Republican Party is retreating further and further to its far-right core as it looses more and more ground. How it expects to be taken seriously by anyone other than the far-right who always back it anyway is beyond me.

The last time they did that they found Ronald Reagan and conquered the world. America is a lot more right leaning than people suppose.

[RGacky3]

The last time they did that they found Ronald Reagan and conquered the world. America is a lot more right leaning than people suppose.

Not when it comes to actual issues. In general republicans are better at dirty politics, although now I think its starting to blow up in their face.

[Demogorgon]

The last time they did that they found Ronald Reagan and conquered the world. America is a lot more right leaning than people suppose.
Reagan won the Presidency on the back of his "Reagan Democrats", by presenting the Democratic Party as out of touch with "real Americans", that and the fact that the South, the traditional bastion of the Democratic Party, had abandoned it.

That second advantage is no longer going to swing anything now that that realignment of American politics is long complete and the first advantage is unlikely to be achieved through childish name calling. Obama is a popular President at present and his opponents behaving like ten year olds may well please those who hate him anyway, but it won't win over his supporters.

Of course the Republican party is going to have to spend some time as very much the second party while it puts itself back together after the battering Bush gave it, so it probably won't win the next Presidential election anyway, but this kind of behaviour will only make things worse. The centrist aspect of the Republican party is increasingly jumping ship. Colin Powell and and Lincoln Chaffee both endorsed Obama, Michael Bloomburg has quit the party and of course Arlene Specter has crossed the floor. If the party doesn't stop that from happening, it will be in trouble for a long time to come.

Still what do I know, I am a Scottish Communist who regards the American system as undemocratic even by bourgeoisie standards!

[FreeMan]

Whats a more accurate description for them?

Democratic semi socialist?

[gorillafuck]

Whats a more accurate description for them?

Democratic semi socialist?
No. The best description of them is Democrat.

[ZeroNowhere]

No. The best description of them is Democrat.Actually, it's 'lib'rul'. Alternatively, 'reformist'. Or just 'annoying'. Though yes, most certainly not socialist, or 'semi-socialist' (whatever that means), or X-treem communist.

[Robert]

U.S. presidential politics turn as much on personality, salesmanship and circumstance as they do on policy differences.

Reagan would likely have beaten Carter even if they had exchanged parties. Same with Nixon v. Kennedy, Bush Sr. v. Dukakis, Bush Sr. v. Clinton, Clinton v. Dole, Bush v. Gore, Bush v. Kerry, and Obama v. McCain.

The winners had clear personality and/or cosmetic advantages in every one of those races. Nixon had a terrible personality and won, but only because Robert Kennedy was assassinated, I think.

I imagine any Democrat could have beaten any Republican in this last election. I don't know, though ... could a Dennis Kucinich ever beat a John McCain?

Hey Demo, you're an economist: are these massive deficit spending measures for banks and healthcare reform in the USA going to trigger massive inflation as Republicans predict? Is that helpful from your standpoint in showing up an inherent flaw in capitalism or somesuch? I think if inflation can be controlled over the next 4 years, notwithstanding the government spending and increased printing of money, Republicans can kiss it goodbye for a long time.

[Demogorgon]

U.S. presidential politics turn as much on personality, salesmanship and circumstance as they do on policy differences.

Reagan would likely have beaten Carter even if they had exchanged parties. Same with Nixon v. Kennedy, Bush Sr. v. Dukakis, Bush Sr. v. Clinton, Clinton v. Dole, Bush v. Gore, Bush v. Kerry, and Obama v. McCain.

The winners had clear personality and/or cosmetic advantages in every one of those races. Nixon had a terrible personality and won, but only because Robert Kennedy was assassinated, I think.

I imagine any Democrat could have beaten any Republican in this last election. I don't know, though ... could a Dennis Kucinich ever beat a John McCain?

Hey Demo, you're an economist: are these massive deficit spending measures for banks and healthcare reform in the USA going to trigger massive inflation as Republicans predict? Is that helpful from your standpoint in showing up an inherent flaw in capitalism or somesuch? I think if inflation can be controlled over the next 4 years, notwithstanding the government spending and increased printing of money, Republicans can kiss it goodbye for a long time.
Well to clarify I am trained as an economist, these days I pursue other interests, but the notion of inflation coming seems a bit suspect to me as inflation is not normally associated with this kind of economic situation, indeed many parts of the world are experiencing inflation. Huge increases in Government spending will cause inflation when rather than encouraging new production they simply cause the economy to "overheat". We are at a stage just now where that is not the most likely outcome. Our capacity to produce hasn't fallen at all, but production has (a huge problem I have with capitalism is that it allows us to happen), under such circumstances new spending from borrowing will likely encourage new production. So I don't think inflation will come about. If anything the danger is the opposite if all this Government borrowing crowds out private capacity to borrow, but that is by no means certain.

The Republican party complaining about about the dangers of borrowing causing inflation is pretty rich though. Throwing all that money at the military without caring where the money was coming from wasn't exactly the height of fiscal responsibility either.

The current situation is a bit of a no win for Governments of course. Increased borrowing is simply inevitable despite what opposition parties might say. Of course, what I object to, but certainly do not find surprising, is what this borrowed money is being spent on. But I'm sure you can guess what I have to say on that.

[Nulono]

The desperation of the RNC is rather amusing. Trying to incite hysteria among voters about Obama's "socialism" didn't work out well during election season, and I can't imagine the idea that Obama is a socialist will find fertile soil now either.

And is it just me, or is the re-branded name rather awkward to say? When I say it out loud I feel like I should be saying "Democratic Socialist Party" not "Democrat Socialist Party". If you are going to re-brand the opposition with a ridiculous name, at least make it catchy.But democracy is good. That's why they tried to start calling it the "democrat party" back in 2000.