(11-05-2026 04:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-05-2026 03:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-05-2026 07:14 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-04-2026 03:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ...the raises in the minimum wage which have more to do with 6 and 7 dollar hamburgers than the cost of ground beef..

I don't think the data supports your conclusion. Have you seen a study that bolsters this, and if so, can you please share it? I'd like to read it. Thanks.

Labor makes up about a third of production costs related to fast food---about the same as ingredients. So increasing the minimum wage from $7.25 to $25 is going to more than triple that third of production costs---which means the labor cost increase by itself would basically require doubling the cost of every food item in order to maintain the same dollar profit (and since the dollar value of the profit is the same---but the cost of each item is higher, the same dollar profit would yield a lower overall profit margin). Furthermore---given the fact that the law of supply and demand has not been repealed---at higher prices---fewer food items are being sold---thus the overall profit is likely down despite sales posting the same or even higher dollar amounts (simply because every food item now costs roughly double).

Why waste your time. The principles involved are so basic to the economics of any business that if they need explaining you are wasting your breath and time. When people don't grasp that an elevation in labor costs, or any cost of components for a product go up, that inflation is occurring to the price of the product then they simply don't understand how business operates. I might add that a raise in minimum wages for a food product will very likely impact every component of that product. The harvesting of lettuce, the picking of tomatoes, the pulling of onions, the harvesting of wheat used in production of the buns, the packaging of all of those items, the cost in shipping them, and the cost at the physical location of the fast-food place in producing the finished product. It's not just the fast-food worker's raise, though it is absolutely a component of it.

What most Dems who have never managed any business also fail to grasp is if the product is something for which foreign manufacturing is a competitor they end up destroying American jobs and relying on the child, slave, and cheap labor women all who live at the work site in poor conditions to make that cheaper product for them. And for the hard lefties that means the enslaved Muslim minority in China who are imprisoned and worked hard, a nice tactic learned from the Nazis. After spending two careers at various levels of management both in for profit and non-profit I don't feel like digging out some dipshit text book I had in undergrad to provide a citation for things I mastered in a lifetime. And as a moderator I would remind the board that statements from experience are only confusing and intimidating to the ignorant, that life is the greatest teacher, and that the principles of capitalism and the making of a profit in order to stay in business, and the impact of higher costs in raw materials are virtually a gestalt. And the use requesting some biased left or right sites material to bolster a point is just another case of whataboutism.

Well, if you read again what I actually said, I never made any such claim...that labor and/or product cost components increases...don't cause the price of products to rise (inflation)

I was remembering this study that I had previously read:

Quote:We find that the sectoral wage standard raised average pay of non-managerial fast-food workers by about 10 to 11 percent. Nonetheless, the policy did not reduce employment. It did increase fast food prices by about 1.5 percent, or about 6 cents for a $4 item, implying a price pass-through of 0.5 and a reduction in restaurant profits. Restaurant revenues likely increased; the royalty fees that restaurant operators pay to franchisors therefore probably rose as well.

Effects of a $20 Minimum Wage: Evidence from Granular Data on Wages, Employment and Prices

Now, how much has just beef added to the cost of hamburgers? That's the comparison you made? While it's impossible to know exactly...hence why I asked if you had a study. In California, beef prices have increased about 27% since that law took effect. And copilot estimates that amounts to around 14-22 cents more per burger just for the beef component.

(11-04-2026 02:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-04-2026 10:02 AM)bullet Wrote:  RCP has House 236-148, D +30

Pickups (Democratic unless stated)
AZ
CA (5)
CO
IA (3)
IN
KY
MO
MT
NC (but there are 9 undecided-Dems have won all 5 so far, so there could be more)
NE
NJ
OH (3)
PA (4)
SC
TN Republican pickup
TX (2 D, 1 R)
UT
VA (2)
WI (2)

Add:
MI (2)
NC (5) up from 1 (Dems have won all 9 and the other 5 could go either way with slim R leads in 3 and 2 basically tied)
NV
NJ (2) up from 1
244-151 + 38
One clear pattern is that Republicans lost a lot in the corn belt. High fuel prices kept farmers home or had them voting D.

Updated

RCP showing it 251-160 +42 for the Democrats with apparently only 5 of the 24 remaining Democratic held seats.

AZ (2) up from 1
CA (5) (R won a 2nd! Its 45-2 with 5 to go)
CO (2) up from 1
IA (3)
IN
KY
MI (3) up from 2 in the last update
MO
MT
NC (5) (Dems have won all 9 and the other 5 could go either way with slim R leads in 3 and 2 basically tied)
NE
NJ (2)
NV
NY (new pickup from last update)
OH (3)
PA (4)
SC
TN Republican pickup
TX (2 D, 1 R)
UT
VA (2)
WI (2)

What a wipeout.

(11-06-2026 11:39 PM)TripleA Wrote:  What a wipeout.

Trump has hurt the republican party for years to come with this debacle. I knew it was going to be bad but not this bad.

Even if they win in 2028 there is no way they will have control of the Senate or House for several years. He has basically handed the congress to the Dems for the next 2-3 cycles.

And if a Dems wins the WH, they will insure a one party rule for a generation (if we last that long).

The days of checks and balances will be over and the entire nation will be California.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opini...elections/

"...Pennsylvania was one piece of a national sweep. With Arizona and the Georgia House now settled, Democrats flipped 12 legislative chambers in one night. Eleven came from Republicans; the 12th, the Minnesota House, had been tied. Democrats netted at least 330 seats and went from 39 of the 99 chambers to a projected 51. It was the biggest single-election shift in state partisan power since 2010.

It was also 2014 in reverse. In President Barack Obama’s second midterm, Republicans netted 300 to 350 legislative seats and took 11 chambers from Democrats. They came out holding 68 chambers, matching a high-water mark last reached after the 1920 election. The two nights were almost the same size, and 2026 was slightly larger. What differed was where each party started. Republicans in 2014 were adding to their 2010 Tea Party gains. Democrats in 2026 were climbing out of a hole; they held only 29 chambers when Trump was first elected. Pennsylvania lived the 2014 version. Democrat Tom Wolf ousted a Republican governor even as Republicans expanded their legislative majorities, which set up years of budget standoffs...."

Many analysts neglect for example the Georgians who saw the writing on the wall and fled the state before it turned from purplish to blue. As well, those who were fed up that in 2025 Trump and Republicans were keeping campaign promises and prices were down, economy improving in meaningful ways to average citizens (border closed down, illegals detained and deported, fuel prices down substantially from Biden*-Dem disaster years, inflation brought under control from disastrous Democrat legislation and Autopen control, massive Democrat fraud in government and Deep State investigated, identified and beginning to be addressed).

Then starting in Feb 2026, with the advent of the Iran war, on the heels of unfortunately high hubris from the (now forgotten, but still significant game changer) resounding success in Venezuela (non-Persian, valueless crazies in control in terrorist Iran not the Christianized bad guys in control in Venezuela) much of the good will built up the previous year was undone enough that he lost the voters who had switched and or come out for him and the Reps in 2024.

These were not ideological conservatives, they were the populist middle classes, Reagan Democrats, middle class folks so hurt by the Democrat's oppressive, individual and family-killing big government overspending, over taxing and over regulation that they gave Trump and Republicans a chance to begin to undo some of the damage the Democrats caused in such a short time during the Obama and Biden* years.

A big part of the problem was that the same Admin who pointed to the folly of the previously idiotic Democratic messaging of things like "temporary inflation" and a "roaring economy that's fine" and "more jobs created than before COVID" when every sane voter knew the reality was Permanent, Democratic-caused CRUSHING Inflation that persists to this day, without adding the war price increases to gas and diesel, terrible economy under Biden for poor, middle and upper classes (Biden*-connected insiders and elites excepted, but of course) and mostly the very same jobs shut down under COVID returning in a lesser form and often part-time or temporary instead of full-time. The same Republicans who rightfully ridiculed those and other Democrat lies resorted to some of the same messaging: The war will be short and 'temporary" as would the higher gas prices.

The difference being that under Trump, the underlying economic numbers were in fact getting better, inflation was actually way down in percentage increase from the Horrendous Biden* years, and as we continue to see, jobs, including an increase in full time versus part time employment are trending upwards and unemployment falls down.

The problem is entropy: It is far easier to destroy in a short time and takes much longer to recover and build back up after. And fighting a war with hands tied behind your back (no ground troops! Ceasefires! "Deals" with folks who don't and have never believed in them, et cetera) never works (see: Vietnam and Chamberlain's appeasement of Germany between WWI and WW11) certainly doesn't help and gave the enemy time to wait out our election cycle featuring too much of a fickle and sacrifice-averse leftist coopted American population infiltrated by tens of millions of non-citizens who hate the very place they ran off to in order to destroy it from within with glad-handing and cheering for the DSA-types who will do and say anything for power. Just look at who is cheering the Democrat gains around the world and who is not. Not good for America, but, hey, it's 'hope and change' all over again...Buyers remorse will be a biatch, even worse this time,. The destruction from Democrat DSA policies will be even harder to crawl out from when the fickle voters realize and beg for help in 2, 4, or 6 years. Problem is, there will be fewer people to help them back up.

Building a country takes individual time and recovering from socialist damage takes several times a s long as it takes Democrat policies to destroy in the first place. The war was not properly prepared for, the economic consequences and duration not properly assessed and planned for, and the messaging felt the same as Biden* and the Democrats telling American citizens how great the terrible inflation, mass illegal invasion and unaffordability the Democrats created was good for them.

Now, many people are still in pain, renters suffering from the ungodly high rents from so much absorption and squatting by illegals and their never-ending chain migrations, subsidized heavily by taxpayer money the illegals get handed to them for free, the massive, trillions of dollars of fraud sucking taxpayer money from hardworking American citizens trying to do their fair share only to be pizzed on by Deep State government operatives, millions of foreign scammers plugged into the NGO system because Democrats protect it from vigilant oversight and prevent ending fraudsters and holding them accountable every step of the way (because they take a cut for the Democrats themselves--how do you think they get so much money in the first place? It ain't from their churches (they hates Christianity, right Tallywhacko?) So they have lost patience and turn back to the very people who originally caused so much of that pain because they think they can't hold on any longer.

Only it's not going to stop or get better by more taxation, more economy stifling regulations, more green new scams sucking billion of taxpayer dollars away from the folks that need those dollars for themselves and their families, more illegals coming through again a semi-open border by Democrat governors who care not for you, but only how they can line their own pockets using illegals as a pawn to gain and retain power, America be d@mned (as they openly shout these days with PRIDE!)

And don't forget the all-important impeachments! and Investigations! My goodness, THIOSE will REALLY help make American's lives affordable again (they'll only spend half a trillion or so on the necessary background research and paperwork, since it's for the 'cause', right?)

Too many weak, frustrated people, rightly so, bought the lies. Now, everyone unfortunately will pay for their short-sightedness.

The fundamental rule of Economics is scarcity: everyone CAN'T have everything they want. The fundamental rule of Politics is to avoid the fundamental rule of Economics. We have just seen that truth work like a charm. Those who don't study history are doomed to repat it. But hey, I'm sure the Socialism will work THIS time!

(Yesterday 04:00 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  And don't forget the all-important impeachments! and Investigations! My goodness, THIOSE will REALLY help make American's lives affordable again (they'll only spend half a trillion or so on the necessary background research and paperwork, since it's for the 'cause', right?)

Some of the omitted comments you make I agree with, some nt.

As to the above --

Point 1: If there are impeachable offenses, there shouldnt be impeachments? Uhhhhh.... okay.....

Point 2: Impeachment is a political tool The only legal aspect about it is that it is a Constitutionally proper procedure.

Point 3: Every current modern government modeled under a form of democratic (little d) system has a political tool to remove a still-in-office head of state.

When taking our current President's in the light, he has been through two.

The threshold for the action is simple -- they have the power under the Constitution.

For the first as to 'seriousness' of the offence passed the only threshold legally needed -- they could. After that examination, many find them fully warranted and others see it as a travesty. My personal viewpoint was that the substance didnt meet the hype. I found it light.

As to the 2nd, the question was much deeper -- if a President broke the law in order to smother fully certified electoral ballots, I would hope *everyone* sees the very strong basis for that one.

Point 4:

I prefer the tact of instead of wildly charging about wholly made up suppositions on impeachments, maybe put aside the blind bias and let the actions speak for themselves. Id prefer impeachments on substance -- which you blindly presuppose wont happen. If the President does some wrong using the power of his office, I would welcome an impeachment -- something you wholly dont conceive of being in your blind shrill rant above.

Younext turn to tje horror investigations. There is a lot of whiff of really seamy stuff happening within the administration. I guess under your polemic one *must* turn a blind eye on issues like that?

Id prefer investigations for actual real wrongdoers. None animus retribution based. If the democrats stay in the realm of looking at, say, the just current Kushner 'thrwoing and moving billions' withthe speed of an ace at three card monte', then yeah, take a look at it. I guess you dont want to actually look further into events like that?

The problem is you are assuming that those actions currently will be performed like the ****** personal retribution crap currently going.

And *if* the Dems hit the nadir of 'lets investigate and charge for forming a number out of seashells' -- Ill join you attacking that usage of the investigatory power.

(Yesterday 12:45 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(11-06-2026 11:39 PM)TripleA Wrote:  What a wipeout.

Trump has hurt the republican party for years to come with this debacle. I knew it was going to be bad but not this bad.

Even if they win in 2028 there is no way they will have control of the Senate or House for several years. He has basically handed the congress to the Dems for the next 2-3 cycles.

And if a Dems wins the WH, they will insure a one party rule for a generation (if we last that long).

The days of checks and balances will be over and the entire nation will be California.

It blows my mind that a Trump supporter is worried about checks and balances being over after the last two years of Darth Cheeto. Really?

Let’s look at some of the things Trump did to push beyond the checks and balances.

**1. Overriding Congress's spending power.** Trump used a "pocket rescission" for the first time in nearly 50 years, blocking $4.9 billion in foreign aid Congress had approved, and did it again in 2026 with funds Congress's own watchdog said he was required to spend. Running out the clock on appropriations lets the president cancel laws he signed without a vote, which takes away Congress's most basic power.

**2. Taking control of independent agencies.** Trump fired commissioners whom Congress had protected by law, and the Supreme Court then overturned the 1935 precedent that had allowed Congress to protect agency heads from being fired at will. Regulators that Congress set up to be independent now serve at the pleasure of one man.

**3. Ignoring the courts.** Deportation flights kept going to El Salvador after a federal judge ordered them turned back, and the judge found the government had willfully disregarded his order. If the executive branch can ignore a judge's order and avoid contempt, judicial review stops meaning anything.

**4. Waging war without Congress.** Trump ordered months of deadly strikes on boats and then attacks inside Venezuela without asking for or receiving approval from Congress, which the Constitution makes responsible for declaring war. This puts the most serious decision a nation makes in the hands of one person.

**5. Dismantling agencies Congress created.** DOGE gutted USAID and Trump ordered the Education Department wound down, even though only Congress can legally abolish an agency it created. Starving an agency until it can't function is a way to repeal a law without passing a new one.

**6. Taxing by emergency decree.** Trump used an emergency-powers law to impose sweeping tariffs, which are taxes the Constitution assigns to Congress, until the Supreme Court struck them down 6–3. He immediately imposed a new global tariff under a different law, showing that he would find a new legal route rather than accept the ruling's limit.

**7. Turning the Justice Department against critics.** Trump publicly demanded that his attorney general charge his opponents, and a hand-picked loyalist indicted James Comey after the career U.S. attorney reportedly left over insufficient evidence. A judge voided the indictments of Comey and Letitia James and grand juries refused to re-indict James, which critics say shows the prosecutions were retribution, not law enforcement.

**8. Sending troops into American cities.** Trump federalized the National Guard and sent troops into Democratic-led cities over governors' objections, while arguing that courts had no power to review the decision. Using the military domestically while claiming courts can't review the decision threatens both federalism and civilian rule.

**9. Removing the watchdogs.** Days after taking office, Trump fired at least 17 inspectors general overnight, ignoring a law that requires 30 days' notice to Congress. A judge called the violation obvious but couldn't reinstate them, so the people charged with finding executive misconduct were removed without consequence.

**10. Going after the Federal Reserve.** Trump tried to become the first president ever to fire a sitting Fed governor, Lisa Cook, over allegations she denies and has never been charged with. Critics see the effort as a pretext for taking control of interest rates, which Congress deliberately kept away from the president.

**11. Punishing law firms for their clients.** Trump issued orders against Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block and Susman Godfrey that cut off their access to federal buildings, stripped their lawyers' security clearances and threatened their clients' government contracts. Punishing lawyers for whom they represent discourages people from bringing cases against the government, which weakens the courts' ability to check it.

Trump just lost both houses of Congress and his party got wiped out at the state and federal levels nationwide.

It blows my mind anyone could be pretending there are not checks and balances on Trump after that election and its impossible to take anyone serious who argues he had no checks and balances.

But then again no one here takes you serious on anything ever.

Meanwhile the DSA openly tells us they want to totally dismantle the constitution and our entire republic.

The DSA agenda according to their own words:


• Abolishing the U.S. Senate: The DSA wants to completely eliminate the Senate. DSA national leadership argues that the Senate is fundamentally undemocratic because it grants disproportionate voting power to states with smaller populations, historically serving wealthy interests rather than the working class.

• Overhauling the House of Representatives: To replace the current system, the DSA advocates for expanding the House of Representatives and implementing a system of proportional representation and ranked-choice voting. This is designed to break up the current two-party system and establish a multi-party democracy.

• Replacing the Presidency: The DSA platform proposes abolishing the Electoral College and replacing the independently elected executive branch. Instead of the president leading a separate branch of government, the country's leader would be chosen by and remain directly subordinate to Congress.

• Subordinating the Supreme Court: Similarly, the current independent structure of the U.S. Supreme Court would be replaced. The judiciary would instead be selected by Congress and answer directly to legislative authority.

• Expanding Voting Rights: Enacting open borders, granting amnesty and voting rights to undocumented immigrants, and extending voting rights to individuals with criminal convictions.

• Abolishing Immigration and Border Enforcement: Completely eliminating ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and dismantling traditional border enforcement structures.


Economic and Corporate Control

• Nationalization of Industries: Bringing major corporations, energy providers, financial institutions, and real estate under public or government ownership.

• Mandated Workweeks and Wage Guarantees: Enforcing a federal 32-hour work week with full pay and benefits alongside a guaranteed living minimum wage.

• Universal Social Services and Housing: Guaranteeing universal free housing, utilities, food, healthcare (Medicare for All), and college tuition, alongside universal rent control and the construction of publicly-owned social housing. Detailed arguments regarding these frameworks can be examined through the Cato Institute.


Police, Prisons, and Foreign Policy

• Abolishing Police and Prisons: Demilitarizing and defunding police departments as a step toward the total abolition of the police and prison system, while ending qualified immunity.

(Yesterday 08:23 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Trump just lost both houses of Congress and his party got wiped out at the state and federal levels nationwide.

It blows my mind anyone could be pretending there are not checks and balances on Trump after that election and its impossible to take anyone serious who argues he had no checks and balances.

But then again no one here takes you serious on anything ever.

The three states I care about held the line

Let the filth suffer. Gridlock is good.

(Yesterday 08:28 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Meanwhile the DSA openly tells us they want to totally dismantle the constitution and our entire republic.

The DSA agenda according to their own words:


• Abolishing the U.S. Senate: The DSA wants to completely eliminate the Senate. DSA national leadership argues that the Senate is fundamentally undemocratic because it grants disproportionate voting power to states with smaller populations, historically serving wealthy interests rather than the working class.

• Overhauling the House of Representatives: To replace the current system, the DSA advocates for expanding the House of Representatives and implementing a system of proportional representation and ranked-choice voting. This is designed to break up the current two-party system and establish a multi-party democracy.

• Replacing the Presidency: The DSA platform proposes abolishing the Electoral College and replacing the independently elected executive branch. Instead of the president leading a separate branch of government, the country's leader would be chosen by and remain directly subordinate to Congress.

• Subordinating the Supreme Court: Similarly, the current independent structure of the U.S. Supreme Court would be replaced. The judiciary would instead be selected by Congress and answer directly to legislative authority.

• Expanding Voting Rights: Enacting open borders, granting amnesty and voting rights to undocumented immigrants, and extending voting rights to individuals with criminal convictions.

• Abolishing Immigration and Border Enforcement: Completely eliminating ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and dismantling traditional border enforcement structures.


Economic and Corporate Control

• Nationalization of Industries: Bringing major corporations, energy providers, financial institutions, and real estate under public or government ownership.

• Mandated Workweeks and Wage Guarantees: Enforcing a federal 32-hour work week with full pay and benefits alongside a guaranteed living minimum wage.

• Universal Social Services and Housing: Guaranteeing universal free housing, utilities, food, healthcare (Medicare for All), and college tuition, alongside universal rent control and the construction of publicly-owned social housing. Detailed arguments regarding these frameworks can be examined through the Cato Institute.


Police, Prisons, and Foreign Policy

• Abolishing Police and Prisons: Demilitarizing and defunding police departments as a step toward the total abolition of the police and prison system, while ending qualified immunity.

Bernie Sanders is an Independent elected Democratic Socialists. What you posted is not true. European countries are like Democratic Socialists, and many of those things you listed are not part of them. The government don't own private businesses for example. China for example as Communists do that. Bernie talks about a common sense migration for people who wants to come to the country with their families to work in the fields on farms and ranches, and only remove the violent ones.

Newly elected Governor of Texas added Republicans and Democrats to work together instead of Partisian.

(Yesterday 08:01 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(Yesterday 08:28 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Meanwhile the DSA openly tells us they want to totally dismantle the constitution and our entire republic.

The DSA agenda according to their own words:


• Abolishing the U.S. Senate: The DSA wants to completely eliminate the Senate. DSA national leadership argues that the Senate is fundamentally undemocratic because it grants disproportionate voting power to states with smaller populations, historically serving wealthy interests rather than the working class.

• Overhauling the House of Representatives: To replace the current system, the DSA advocates for expanding the House of Representatives and implementing a system of proportional representation and ranked-choice voting. This is designed to break up the current two-party system and establish a multi-party democracy.

• Replacing the Presidency: The DSA platform proposes abolishing the Electoral College and replacing the independently elected executive branch. Instead of the president leading a separate branch of government, the country's leader would be chosen by and remain directly subordinate to Congress.

• Subordinating the Supreme Court: Similarly, the current independent structure of the U.S. Supreme Court would be replaced. The judiciary would instead be selected by Congress and answer directly to legislative authority.

• Expanding Voting Rights: Enacting open borders, granting amnesty and voting rights to undocumented immigrants, and extending voting rights to individuals with criminal convictions.

• Abolishing Immigration and Border Enforcement: Completely eliminating ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and dismantling traditional border enforcement structures.


Economic and Corporate Control

• Nationalization of Industries: Bringing major corporations, energy providers, financial institutions, and real estate under public or government ownership.

• Mandated Workweeks and Wage Guarantees: Enforcing a federal 32-hour work week with full pay and benefits alongside a guaranteed living minimum wage.

• Universal Social Services and Housing: Guaranteeing universal free housing, utilities, food, healthcare (Medicare for All), and college tuition, alongside universal rent control and the construction of publicly-owned social housing. Detailed arguments regarding these frameworks can be examined through the Cato Institute.


Police, Prisons, and Foreign Policy

• Abolishing Police and Prisons: Demilitarizing and defunding police departments as a step toward the total abolition of the police and prison system, while ending qualified immunity.

Bernie Sanders is an Independent elected Democratic Socialists. What you posted is not true. European countries are like Democratic Socialists, and many of those things you listed are not part of them. The government don't own private businesses for example. China for example as Communists do that. Bernie talks about a common sense migration for people who wants to come to the country with their families to work in the fields on farms and ranches, and only remove the violent ones.

What I posted is taken straight from their own material the DSA themselves put out, so you sir are a liar.

(Yesterday 09:05 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(Yesterday 08:01 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(Yesterday 08:28 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Meanwhile the DSA openly tells us they want to totally dismantle the constitution and our entire republic.

The DSA agenda according to their own words:


• Abolishing the U.S. Senate: The DSA wants to completely eliminate the Senate. DSA national leadership argues that the Senate is fundamentally undemocratic because it grants disproportionate voting power to states with smaller populations, historically serving wealthy interests rather than the working class.

• Overhauling the House of Representatives: To replace the current system, the DSA advocates for expanding the House of Representatives and implementing a system of proportional representation and ranked-choice voting. This is designed to break up the current two-party system and establish a multi-party democracy.

• Replacing the Presidency: The DSA platform proposes abolishing the Electoral College and replacing the independently elected executive branch. Instead of the president leading a separate branch of government, the country's leader would be chosen by and remain directly subordinate to Congress.

• Subordinating the Supreme Court: Similarly, the current independent structure of the U.S. Supreme Court would be replaced. The judiciary would instead be selected by Congress and answer directly to legislative authority.

• Expanding Voting Rights: Enacting open borders, granting amnesty and voting rights to undocumented immigrants, and extending voting rights to individuals with criminal convictions.

• Abolishing Immigration and Border Enforcement: Completely eliminating ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and dismantling traditional border enforcement structures.


Economic and Corporate Control

• Nationalization of Industries: Bringing major corporations, energy providers, financial institutions, and real estate under public or government ownership.

• Mandated Workweeks and Wage Guarantees: Enforcing a federal 32-hour work week with full pay and benefits alongside a guaranteed living minimum wage.

• Universal Social Services and Housing: Guaranteeing universal free housing, utilities, food, healthcare (Medicare for All), and college tuition, alongside universal rent control and the construction of publicly-owned social housing. Detailed arguments regarding these frameworks can be examined through the Cato Institute.


Police, Prisons, and Foreign Policy

• Abolishing Police and Prisons: Demilitarizing and defunding police departments as a step toward the total abolition of the police and prison system, while ending qualified immunity.

Bernie Sanders is an Independent elected Democratic Socialists. What you posted is not true. European countries are like Democratic Socialists, and many of those things you listed are not part of them. The government don't own private businesses for example. China for example as Communists do that. Bernie talks about a common sense migration for people who wants to come to the country with their families to work in the fields on farms and ranches, and only remove the violent ones.

What I posted is taken straight from their own material the DSA themselves put out, so you sir are a liar.

You're still being extremely disingenuous Eric, while that is the DSA platform that is NOT the platform or agenda of the mainstream Democratic party. While some DSA members were elected as Democrats last Tuesday, they are far from a majority of the party and their numbers are insufficient to hold legislation hostage due to the large majorities we were given by an American electorate fed up with failed Trump policies.

(Yesterday 09:17 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  You're still being extremely disingenuous Eric, while that is the DSA platform that is NOT the platform or agenda of the mainstream Democratic party. While some DSA members were elected as Democrats last Tuesday, they are far from a majority of the party and their numbers are insufficient to hold legislation hostage due to the large majorities we were given by an American electorate fed up with failed Trump policies.

Unless the mainstream dems denounce the DSA they are going to have to deal with being tied to it just as much as republicans had to deal with being tied to everything in project 2025 whether they agreed with all 900+ pages of it or not. Just how it is.

(Yesterday 09:17 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  You're still being extremely disingenuous Eric, while that is the DSA platform that is NOT the platform or agenda of the mainstream Democratic party. While some DSA members were elected as Democrats last Tuesday, they are far from a majority of the party and their numbers are insufficient to hold legislation hostage due to the large majorities we were given by an American electorate fed up with failed Trump policies.

I never once claimed this was from "mainstream" democrat party (whatever that even means now), I said very specifically this was from the DSA and they are rapidly becoming a very powerful and influential group within the Democrat party.

I made clear who its from and what they themselves say. The only one being disingenuous here is you, which is nothing new from you.

(Yesterday 09:41 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(Yesterday 09:17 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  You're still being extremely disingenuous Eric, while that is the DSA platform that is NOT the platform or agenda of the mainstream Democratic party. While some DSA members were elected as Democrats last Tuesday, they are far from a majority of the party and their numbers are insufficient to hold legislation hostage due to the large majorities we were given by an American electorate fed up with failed Trump policies.

I never once claimed this was from "mainstream" democrat party (whatever that even means now), I said very specifically this was from the DSA and they are rapidly becoming a very powerful and influential group within the Democrat party.

I made clear who its from and what they themselves say. The only one being disingenuous here is you, which is nothing new from you.

Whoever posted that is not what Bernie Sanders is or other countries. There have been pushed back by Dems on some of these. I think someone should tell the DSA that several of their ideas are Communists and not the views of the majority of Democratic Socialists like Bernie Sanders.

(Yesterday 09:26 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(Yesterday 09:17 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  You're still being extremely disingenuous Eric, while that is the DSA platform that is NOT the platform or agenda of the mainstream Democratic party. While some DSA members were elected as Democrats last Tuesday, they are far from a majority of the party and their numbers are insufficient to hold legislation hostage due to the large majorities we were given by an American electorate fed up with failed Trump policies.

Unless the mainstream dems denounce the DSA they are going to have to deal with being tied to it just as much as republicans had to deal with being tied to everything in project 2025 whether they agreed with all 900+ pages of it or not. Just how it is.

Bummer the Republicans are tied to Project 2025. Approximately 45% of Project 2025 has either been completed, implemented, of attempted by that written Project. Last I saw *this* administration is Republican, the President being the leader of of the Republicans, *and* the main editor and driving force of Project 2025 was installed as a high ranking member of this administration.

And last I saw, no leading republicans have ever complained about the *actual* implementation of that. I think it safe (absolutely safe) to note any opposition ot that plan or its being implemented to beig directly supported by the Republican Party in general.

Kind of a sin qua non of linking Project 2025 to the *actual* and *explicit* position of the Republican party in general.

Your argument in comparing the DSA position from a very insignificant portion of party and comparing it to the *actual* position of the Republicans looks amazingly disingenuous.

When it becomes the actual position of the Democratic Party., and non-DSA openly advocate it, or the voted in members actually push and support it in a cohesive mass, your comment comparing the two above might hold some water.

Eric thinks his comment valid comparing postion from a fringe as beng held by Ds overall is valid -- its pretty false on its face.

*If* that position is taken by a *sizeable* portion of the Ds, Eric would be correct and not spouting hogwash. It has not.

The flaw in your argument actually highlights the point -- the Repubs have *absolutely* in the whole not only adopted Project 2025, but have seemingly studiously adopted it when it has been the policy of *their* administration, and also *when* it has been actively supported and implemented by that administration.

(Yesterday 09:41 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(Yesterday 09:17 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  You're still being extremely disingenuous Eric, while that is the DSA platform that is NOT the platform or agenda of the mainstream Democratic party. While some DSA members were elected as Democrats last Tuesday, they are far from a majority of the party and their numbers are insufficient to hold legislation hostage due to the large majorities we were given by an American electorate fed up with failed Trump policies.

I never once claimed this was from "mainstream" democrat party (whatever that even means now), I said very specifically this was from the DSA and they are rapidly becoming a very powerful and influential group within the Democrat party.

I made clear who its from and what they themselves say. The only one being disingenuous here is you, which is nothing new from you.

The also disingenuous as heck. And further, your statement above is abjectly false.

On sheer numbers, the DSA is very small component of both the Democratic Party, and the current D platform has almost zero overlap with what you state above.

Highly vocal? Yes. Influential? My ass. Nice try at a false narrative.