Can a self described socialist get an agenda through congress?

I’m no American, but I have seen a lot of Schoolhouse Rock. Wouldn’t the point be whether someone can get a bill through Congress, and doesn’t that solely depend on the content of the bill?

If not, shouldn’t it?

Anyway, to answer your question, you presume that Congress will be held mostly by Republicans after the next election. I wouldn’t count those chickens if I were you.

Finally, even if the House remains red, Americans shouldn’t reward House Republicans’ obstructive tactics by only voting in Republican-approved presidential candidates from here on out. That would be like giving in to a ransom demand.

The Google term you’re looking for is “Democratic socialist”.

When you’re done burning down those straw men, we can talk.

If Obama never got anything done how did he single-handedly destroy the country?

@johnpowell
I didn’t know he destroyed the country. If you say so, OK.
I only knew, with one exception, he had a tough time getting his agenda through congress.

Nope.

@josie :: Perhaps I have listened to Rubio and Cruz, Carson, Kasich, and Trump more than you have.

As long as Citizens United is in force he does not stand a chance in hell to make even free snow cones for all.

There may very well be some changes in the Congress, but even if there aren’t, the election of Sanders would shakeup things considerably. His very election would indicate a marked decrease in the compliance of that population you talk about. Sanders brings an alternate description to that of those who currently force the government to wreak their version of capitalism on the rest of us, and its a story that’s been rigidly suppressed.

@stanleybmanly Seriously and with all due respect “an alternate description to that of those who currently force the government to wreak their version of capitalism on the rest of us”

Can you further explain how or what you have said is an alternate or supportive position to that of those who currently force the government as you suggest to wreak their version of capitalism on the rest of us going to change one thing? I may be over tired but this seems to me like double speak in search of a valid point.

Okay. The way it’s been working is that we battle tooth & nail over supposedly liberal & conservative ideals on the notion that one of the 2 parties will do a better job meeting our interests and those of the country as a whole. Sanders is the only candidate who takes the position that the system itself has been coopted in such a way that most of us must lose and the country itself slide toward ruin. While conservatives preach that our problems stem from an overbearing and wasteful government pampering folks who don’t want to work, and liberals rail against the plummeting decline in social services and scarcity of resources, Sanders makes the claim & I agree that the game is fixed against the interests of the great majority of us and it’s a point of view that needs airing.

1) Sanders does not “think the political state can force the notion on a compliant population.” In fact, he keeps pointing out that the government has been not doing what the people want, but rather what the corporations want, for a long time. He’s popular because the ideas and changes he’s suggesting are popular.

2) “But if he got elected, how could a socialist get an agenda through congress?” Apart from point 1, where I don’t think Sanders matches your idea of “socialist”, there would no doubt need to be changes in Congress as well, and there should be, if there are are voters and candidates that like what he says. If Sanders is elected president, but no other new progressives get elected to Congress, it’ll be pretty hard to get major changes passed, and he’ll need to work with them to the degree that whoever is elected resists his ideas. Good thing Sanders has been in Congress for so long, so he has a good idea what that takes.

3) “Why do Bernie fans think he will be anything but a frustrated dictator if he gains office?” Bernie fans don’t have a knee-jerk reaction to the word socialist, nor associations with it that involve dictatorship. We hope there will also be more progressives elected to Congress. But even if they aren’t, we’re glad for every progressive that is in office, especially Sanders, because he speaks honestly and with focus on the important issues, and says the right things about them. Even if most of the other politicians remain bought, we still want every honest and benevolent person in office that we can get. We have no interest in having well-supported officials who will use their support to get corrupt agendas done.

@stanleybmanly You not “we” battle tooth & nail over supposedly liberal & conservative ideals created by liberal and conservative media outlets solely to get ratings. I also think you are smart enough to know just how F’d up things are in Congress now and have been for the last 7+ years. These problems are not just from an obstructionist Republican agenda…it takes both sides to create the gridlock we have endured. The lack of effort by the Liberals to compromise is what has created this gridlock.

Honestly where is this “plummeting decline in social services and scarcity of resources” you speak of? The only thing Sanders will accomplish is to further that kind of hysteria which IMO will only make matters much much worse if he or Hillary for that matter gets elected.

It is time to stop the nonsense and finally admit we are not in Kansas anymore and the world you and I grew up in no longer exists. What worked in the past is not working anymore. Obama is a VERY smart man and catered to a hoping liberal constituency that demands old school governing that just isn’t working and only making things worse. He has screwed up and time to accept and admit his policies just aren’t working and I am just amazed people can’t see this and that they/you somehow think a socialist has a hope in hell to implement policies and legislation that will actually improve what you think needs improving. I don’t think what you and I think is wrong with our government is all that far apart but we apparently are miles apart on how to fix things.

Bottom line Congress is dysfunctional and needs a strong leader to lead from the top down to begin to straighten things out. Our country is financially broke, corrupted, insanely in debt, has national security issues, has immigration issues and real significant international issues and all the liberals seem to care about is a “decline in social services”!?! If that is all you think is wrong with our country then yes Sanders is your Pied Piper but it is time you and others wake up to the reality there is much much more that is much much more important that needs fixing first and time we reset our priorities for if we do our economy will then rebound and everyone will benefit not just the wealthy.

@Cruiser You and I pretty much agree on the ills confronting the country. But it’s your last sentence that I plead with you to think about, because it is the key as to why a socialist has a shot at the White House. Let’s look at some facts.

1. Ours is the wealthiest country on the planet. And yet…

2. The list of maladies you conveniently provide us above. Yet incredibly in the face of #2…

3. The rich ALONE get richer, and beyond that…

4. The rate at which the rich accumulate wealth INCREASES the faster #2 deteriorates.

What Sanders is saying is that under the present setup, it is impossible, as you say, to reset our priorities because things are now arranged that NOTHING is permitted to interfere with #4. In fact #2 is REQUIRED in order that #4 continue. There is no longer any hope for an economy in which we ALL benefit because those who benefit MOST right now will not permit it. They own the government, and the present setup suits them just fine. The only weak spot in the setup is in the fact that they are outnumbered. And this is why it is vital that Sanders puts this view of reality before the public.

@Cruiser This is the thing that frustates me most in these discussions with you and Jaxk. We all recognize that things are askew. The 2 of you take the position that our troubles are about government going amok, and YOU’RE RIGHT. To me the point you miss is in interpreting the role of government. And despite what we were all taught in civics class, it was Marx who pointed me toward the reality that only the rich seem to appreciate. The REAL role of the government is to determine the winners and losers. And you 2 can continue believing that it is the unions and folks on the dole that are the winners in the country if you choose, but I just don’t see it that way.

Here’s a satirical reply from Shane Ryan, trying to pretend like this argument is a reason to vote for someone other than Sanders:

BACKWARDS SARCASM ON

”Even if he was elected, he couldn’t pass any of his legislation.

This is a really important one. If there’s one message that should sink through your thick heads, it’s this: Cast your vote for the candidate who understands Washington, D.C. as it actually is, and not as you’d like it to be. Real change happens for progressives when we elect a centrist candidate who doesn’t represent our values in the first place, in the hopes that she makes concession after brutal concession to Republicans in an effort to pass legislation that strengthens banks and pharmaceutical companies and other monolithic institutions that contribute to our horrific wealth inequality.

One thing you should never do is to vote for the candidate who represents what you want the country to become, in the hope that it’s the start of a process that leads to an America we can be proud of—one which protects and supports all its people. That would be exactly the kind of naive, starry-eyed mistake you and your stupid Sanders comrades are dumb enough to make. What you would do, if you had any brains, is to forget the big picture entirely, ask reductive questions like, “can Bernie Sanders immediately pass universal health care?” and, if the answer is no, throw your vote to whichever compromised puppet the establishment shoves down your throat.

In other words, rubes, concede. Concede pre-emptively. Concede now, tacitly admit that your country is fucked beyond repair, and maybe even skip the middle man entirely by liquidating your assets, gathering the cash, and leaving it all on the doorstep of Goldman Sachs before you screw off and die in the streets.”

BACKWARDS SARCASM OFF

@stanleybmanly I guess this is the core reason on where and why we are not seeing what each other is seeing as you say I miss in interpreting the role of the government and that is exactly how I see that you miss it’s core role.

You think I see the role of the Gov is to determine winners and losers…that is LAST role I see the Gov play. The Gov is here to protect us ALL of us not just facilitate the rich or placate the poor. The Gov is there to provide security, uphold the Constitution again that protects ALL of us. I see Gov biggest and most important role was to provide opportunity for one to seek out the American dream and find a way to not only support themselves but get them a pathway to their American dream and not simply support people who otherwise could, would and should provide for themselves.

America has been turned into a Nanny state by politicians who get elected and depend getting re-elected and will say anything and do anything to stay in office. We have gone from “we the people” to “we the politicians” who are bending over for their donors both big and small. Cruz, Rubio and Clinton et all are beholden to their big donors and will say and do anything to keep that big money spigot flowing. Bernie on the other hand will say anything and do anything to keep that small donor liberal/socialist spigot flowing.

It’s all a scam…you know it I know it and 90% of the talking points that rule these primaries are so far removed from the real issues we face it is both laughable and depressing. These talking points only create confusion and lure in the low information voters who are too lazy and too stupid to dig deep to really get into the nitty gritty of why we are in the shape we are in. In the mean time these same low information voters are getting their skulls filled to the brim with sensational misinformation that only takes the attention away from the very hard, very difficult and for many of us the very painful remedies we MUST undertake to even begin to address the number one problem we face and that is a 19 trillion dollar debt.

What I find telling and that supports everything I just said is NONE of the candidates are talking about the debt and how to fix it. Bernie just wants to give away free stuff. Hillary want to continue Obamas failed policies, Cruz & Rubio want to nuke Obamas failed policies, Trump wants to make deals and say stuff he has no real clue to what he is talking about.

We could not be in a worse predicament than we are and I refuse to succumb to the notion we simply have to vote for the person that is the best of the worst. But I am smart enough to know there is indeed a way that through sacrifice and compromise we as a country can make things better and workable for all involved unfortunately this election is being paraded before the masses as we must win and they must lose. Couldn’t be more F’d up.

And who benefits from it?

@stanleybmanly I know it is too late to do anything today that would personally benefit me today in a meaningful way but I do believe these changes I speak of will benefit those who are not yet old enough to vote and have a say-so in the matter, those who are truly trying hard yet find themselves in the middle of a shit storm financially and economically and the elderly who in their sunset years deserve the respect of the country they served with a solution to lessen the burden of insane medical costs.

I agree that changes are necessary. And we don’t disagree on what the function of government should be. But the government does determine who the winners are and will be. And whoever is winning in the quagmire we struggle through is doing so with the explicit assistance of the government.

Exactly how @stanleybmanly does the government “determine” who the winners and losers are?? Your statement is a direct affront to the last 33 years of my life in that I cannot remember one single day that this so called government EVER had an iota of direct influence of “deciding” on whether I succeeded or failed. I got to where I am today solely because I studied hard and worked hard and often at places and for people I was not fond of because the alternative at the time meant I would not be able to pay my bills. This same Government you speak of did not give me a free college education nor free health care….what it did give me was opportunity and the freedom to pursue my American Dream.

If because I am now in the 1% is because I busted my ass for 33 years to get there and you then assume the government had anything to do with me going from minus to plus in this convoluted world we live in then you sir are far more clueless and misinformed than the benefit of doubt I have so far afforded you.

The Government NEVER gave me anything more than they have afforded you and everyone else…It’s called opportunity and the freedom to do with it as you see fit.

I’m surprised that I have to get into this, but the government determines your fate in more ways than you can count, beginning with how much of your money you will be allowed to keep. And I think you should really think about that statement on the government not giving you anything. Personally I believe both of us are extremely fortunate that we began the climb in our businesses better than 30 years ago. I can tell you for a fact that I couldn’t pull it off starting today. I will also tell you frankly that it was an excursion through a brief period in which I earned an obscene amount of money that brought me to the realization that the playing field is by no means level. But don’t take my word for it. Go in peace for now. We will probably go round again on this later.