Smirconish: Democratic Socialists platform from their own website
- Thread starter Yellowsnow51
- Start date
Maybe. But I am in favor of borders, prisons, funding police and private ownership of businesses, and don’t want illegals voting in our elections, among many other crazy things they advocate for.
You've obviously/inevitably been looking for your excuse to vote Republican in 26/28 and you've found it. Closet MAGA.
A few DSA'rs getting elected to the Congress as powerless backbenchers are for sure's going to implement their entire policy agenda immediately.
And you're even lying about that. Which candidates are advocating for the agenda you're claiming above?
And no, deleted tweets or statements from long ago don't count. Provide evidence that these people are running on the agenda you're claiming they're running on in 2026.
I'd endorse tossing you off of a rooftop, but you already have the rubberlegz.
It’s on their fvcking website. Congrats. You equate not being an insane person, but instead, being someone who wants borders, prisons and deportation for murderers and simply “having policeto “being a closet MAGA”. Not only that, you’re actually admitting those stances are embarrassing by denying those are the actual positions. You know…the ones that are listed on their website.
Make up your mind. Agree with the crazy s#it or don’t agree with it. Just don’t pretend what they say they want isn’t what they want.
You’re doing great as the new Dem spokesman, BTW. “If you delete the tweet and remove the Nazi tattoo it never happened! #Dems 2026!”
here's what you might consider...let's say democrats take back the house 220 seats...they have a bill that they want to pass that has to do with immigration... they can only afford to lose 3 votes to win...but now we have 9 (estimated) members of DSA who want a more open borders perspective in the bill...they decide to vote en bloc...in effect, they control the Democrat party bill at that point.
This DSA effort not democrats in the normal sense, WILL be included in the Democrat caucus because that will enable democrats to take control of the house. So, in effect, the democrats will "sell their souls" now to win at any cost and it might well come back to bite them in the butts. Democrats can say that their party is not moving further left, and they might well believe that, but, that's what's happening.
If only the Democrats could be like Republicans and not have a handful of radical members.
Yeah and there are what, three, candidates running on this one vs the ENTIRE GOP running on Project 2025 energy in 2024. The both sides stuff is so ridiculous these days.
Democrats are the party of communism. If they don’t like it, stop electing communists
I'd like to see the math on how they raise enough money from taxes to pay for all these things... There have already been studies showing that you get about 6 months of today's government if you tax billionaires at 100% of their income....and that's without free everything. So, open borders, free everything, what could possibly go wrong?
Read back through the history of Germany in the 1930s...what could a few nationals sociaists do to impact the government?
There's pretty much zero chance any of this happens even if a Bernie type gets in the White House. Meanwhile there is a 100% chance Republicans will get us in a pointless war, drive up inflation, kill job production, set record debt, and protect pedophiles if a Trump type gets in the White House. It's already happened.
You're claiming the Dems can pass an open border immigration bill with Trump in the WH? How?
Please give me the math on how we can afford a $1.3 trillion a year military budget, a $500 billion Iran War, a broken down jobs market, and a president who goes on vacation every weekend on the taxpayer dime?
What world are you living in? You voted for the Hitler guy. His name isn't Bernie. It's Donald.
You just described the Biden administration flawlessly lol
He starts off by telling two popular libera lies:
- Trump gave $trillion of additional tax cuts to billionaires
- Stripped government services from millions of Americans
Then he moves to an agenda that is not remotely achievable
- Free college for all
- Free healthcare for all with no copays
- Free childcare for all
- Rent control for all
- Free debt cancellation
- Government takeover of large corporations
- Allow non citizens to vote in American elections
It's true that a lot of Americans are feeling the affordability pinch and would appreciate a government that's more focused on addressing these issues. But this is absolutely insane and 100% not workable. You know it's a problem when left leaning groups get called out by CNN.
They wouldn’t be able to “control” any bills if GOP leadership didn’t enforce obedience while allowing a sycophantic culture to take hold. There used to be plenty of GOP reps willing to cross the party line for reasonable legislation that improved the lives of their constituents. Now? Unless you adhere to the Trumpian purity test you get primaried. So GOP reps toe the line. That is not true representation. That is…control.
(For the record my fiscal policy positions are a world away from what the DSA proposes).
Provide some effing evidence, provide the links to these websites you're talking about at the least.
The current Republican party is actually run by extremist lunatics, you haven't even provided any evidence at all that the tiny number of DSA'rs who won their primaries Tuesday are advocating what could be termed as "extremist" policies.
You're saying that there are going to be 9 DSA'rs in the House who will support open borders as an absolute per any immigration legislation?
Who are these people? Where have they made these assertions?
Oh FFS.
Comparing the DSA to the Nazis, for craps sake.
And there is actually no relevant comparison here anyway, the Nazis at the time they took power had the largest percentage of Reichstag deputies compared to any other party by a large margin.
Last edited:
Find me any current Congress members who ran on the government controlling all corporations? Find me the same for "free" everything? They don't exist.
You know what does exist? Mainstream Republican groups like TPUSA and Erika Kirk arguing that women shouldn't be allowed to vote because their husbands can vote for them.
Those are the real dangers. They are already here.
You know what does exist? Mainstream Republican groups like TPUSA and Erika Kirk arguing that women shouldn't be allowed to vote because their husbands can vote for them.
Those are the real dangers. They are already here.
I put a link in the OP. Michael Smirconish read these things directly from the site. Watch the OP if you dare.
These are going to be backbenchers in the House who will have no power to enact their full agenda, they may potentially have the power to influence/alter legislation, but since the DSA Caucus is so tiny they aren't going to be passing their entire agenda, and they'll be primaried themselves if they try to hold legislation supported by the vast majority of the party hostage. Bernie and AOC know this and have acted accordingly.
Bernie has been a way way way more reliable member of the Democratic Caucus when it comes to supporting compromise party Caucus legislation then those on the right of the party who have been saboteurs, see Sinema, Manchin, Fetterman, Lieberman et al.
We don't have a public option when it comes to healthcare because of Lieberman, which was a disaster for the country.
In the main, the DSA approach per policy matches the center-left parties of Europe, supporting large government subsidies or control of child care, health care, and higher education. We're the insane outlier when it comes to these areas, and Americans are drowning in debt and an inability to make ends meet because of it.
There's ALWAYS enough money in this country to give to the military for wars of choice and to pass huge upper-income tax cuts, and nothing to try and solve problems the rest of the first world took care of for their populations long long ago.
Last edited:
OH ffs. You posted a link to a tweet from a rightwing nut, Gerald Posner. JFC. Provide me links to an actual firsthand source. If these people are running on what you say they're running on, it should be easy to find first hand sources, they should be bragging about it on their websites and in their public comments in their campaigns.
Laundered crap from rightwing liars doesn't prove a damn thing.
Out of curiosity, what is your stance on government control of corporations? I ask because that is already happening under Trump, especially in the media sector. ABC is currently in a massive fight with Trump over his attempted, and unprecedented, takeover of their news shows. Thoughts on this?
I'm repeating (that's why I used the term "estimated") that there would be 9 so called "socialists" in the next house....we know already that there were 4 members of the "squad" then there were a couple more (I don't know their names) who started supporting squad, and now we have 3 more from the NY primaries.
I didn't say that there were 9 supporting open borders...but, if you look up the smerconish show above, open borders is one of the elements on their platform page.
democrats, in general, have voted against border security bills, most recently against DHS and border control funding.
I didn't use the term NAZI...I said national socialist. the party started in 1919-1920 and about 13 years later took control of the government. In 1920 12 members of the national socialists were elected - there were 459 members at the time.....and what were the major platform items...nationalism, and Included demands for the nationalization of major industries, the confiscation of war profits, profit-sharing in large enterprises, and expanded social welfare, such as old-age pension
seem somewhat familiar...
so everybody is on the same page, what is your definition of "public option" and, why does it have to be at federal level? why not do it at state level?
Last edited:
National Socialist = Nazi's, especially in the German context.
Below is just straight out copy/pasted from an AI query per "public options" on the topic :
Leading frameworks proposed by Democratic lawmakers and policy groups include:
- Medicare-for-All / Medicare X: Proposals like the Medicare by Choice framework or the Choose Medicare Act allow all Americans to buy into a Medicare-like public plan. This plan would operate on the ACA exchanges, offering a robust benefits package and utilizing Medicare's lower provider reimbursement rates to keep premiums down. [1, 2, 3]
- Medicaid Buy-in: A model allowing individuals at any income level to “buy in” to their state's Medicaid program. Because Medicaid already negotiates highly favorable hospital and physician rates, this provides a low-cost alternative to expensive private plans. [1, 2, 3]
- State-Run Quasi-Public Options: Some Democratic-led states (such as Washington and Nevada) have implemented public options that rely on public-private partnerships. The state dictates plan parameters and caps provider payments (e.g., at 160% of Medicare rates), while contracting with private insurers to actually administer the coverage. [1, 2]
- Nonprofit Health Cooperatives: Loosely related to co-op models, these ideas focus on creating member-run, nonprofit entities that operate on the Marketplace to drive down administrative costs and keep profit margins out of premium pricing. [1, 2]
I hate it and I hate him. He needs to go away. The quicker the better.
It’s a video of CNN Michael Smirconish reading the site. Your effort to stay ignorant is expected. But here…get ready to move the goalposts….
I’m sure you’ve already been here.
We are committed to the horizon of abolition and the path leading us there. Our demands:
We must constrain, diminish, and abolish the carceral forces of the state — from prisons and police themselves…”
- Defund the police by rejecting any expansion to police budgets or scope of enforcement while cutting budgets annually towards zero
- Freedom for all incarcerated people
- Demilitarize the police and end colonial policing of our cities and neighborhoods
- Invest in community self-governance and care, not cops
thank you, but my point was that you start with 12 or 9 and go from there...
thanks for the public option....I'm not an expert, but, to a point - obviously not a Medicare or Medicaid buy in - but doesn't the ACA offer somewhat of the same thing? Only right now, the ACA offers subsidies as opposed to simply "grouping policies" and gaining reduced reimbursement to providers?
Man…you really don’t pay attention and have no idea when these yahoos have been saying and believed and met to defend the hell out of them. Very weird.
Darializa Avila Chevalier.
She explicitly advocated abolishing borders, police, prisons, and deportations, including opposition to deportation of violent offenders, and she declined to directly say convicted murderers should be sent to prison when asked.
Based on archived social media posts and recent interviews, the strongest documented quotes are:
On Borders and Deportation
According to archived posts reported by multiple outlets, Chevalier wrote:
“A world without borders—just like a world without prisons or police—is possible, necessary, and the only moral way forward.”
She also reportedly clarified:
“Yes, literally, abolish the border. All deportation is wrong.”
More recently, when interviewed during her congressional campaign, she stated:
“I still believe that all deportations are wrong.”
On Police
During the 2020 police abolition debates, she reportedly wrote:
“We’re gonna defund and abolish.”
When another user suggested ending policing “as we know it,” she reportedly responded:
“No. It means ending policing full stop. Period. No more police at all ever.”
On Prisons
She has identified herself as a prison abolitionist. In a recent interview, when asked repeatedly whether a convicted murderer should go to prison, she did not give a direct yes-or-no answer. Instead, she argued that incarceration perpetuates harm and trauma and focused on preventing the conditions that lead to violence.
Did She Oppose Deporting Murderers?
Yes. In a recent interview clip that received significant attention, she maintained that deportation is wrong even for non-citizens convicted of serious violent crimes. The controversy arose specifically because interviewers asked whether murderers who were in the country illegally should be deported after serving their sentences, and she maintained her position that deportation itself is wrong.
Did She Say Murderers Should Not Be Incarcerated?
The evidence is more nuanced there. I have not found a quote where she explicitly says, “Murderers should never be incarcerated.” What is documented is:
- She advocates prison abolition as a long-term goal.
- She declined multiple opportunities to directly endorse prison sentences for convicted murderers when asked.
- She instead discussed restorative approaches and the systemic causes of violence.
So if you’re trying to characterize her position accurately, the strongest supported statement is:
Uh they'll tax every Trump voter 100% on everything. They pay for Trump diapers and ear tampons so we know they are very loose with their money and be ok giving it up.
No. That crap on their website will get Biden voters to stay home again.
that’s why they lost in 2024.
only the democrats can screw up a gift wrapped election.
Well Nazis used to barge into homes and take them to concentration camps. DSA members will barge into people's homes and make sure they're signed up for free health care.
