Woke 2.0 is coming..

WDDT

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
10,886
11,708
113
I cannot fathom being a grown adult and looking at how many programs the government runs with huge administrative deficits, that would be out and out failures on the open market, and think to myself..... lets give them more access to housing cost. At best you will see short term growth and just like social security, every generation after will get hosed.
 
Jun 16, 2025
3,748
8,021
113
I cannot fathom being a grown adult and looking at how many programs the government runs with huge administrative deficits, that would be out and out failures on the open market, and think to myself..... lets give them more access to housing cost. At best you will see short term growth and just like social security, every generation after will get hosed.
Wars, Ballrooms, Arches and Reflecting Pools be damned.
 

JMNSH0

All-Conference
Aug 20, 2025
559
1,158
93
We were at war every single day of the obama admin. That comment isnt as pointed as you think. Private fundraising will always be part of a presidency. Yes, we need to quit doing **** that isnt inside our own borders.
There are plenty of us on the left who were never all that enamored with BHO, Biden, Clinton, Kerry, Gore. What the blurb calls “woke 2.0” is all of the stuff the corporate dems have willfully under-delivered on for so long that there is a bit of a revolt brewing. Call it Marxist foolishness all you want, but every day, more people are fed up with our intractable political cartel; we may have missed our chance to work incrementally. We could have proactively managed our economy to favor working people, but we didn’t, and people are going to become more impatient, impulsive and angry; it is a predictable response to the predatory economic environment that has been allowed to form. You have a bunch of people in power who have been pushing the pendulum so far to one side that it is going to very soon slip above and beyond their fingertips and come crashing back in the other direction.
 

WDDT

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
10,886
11,708
113
There are plenty of us on the left who were never all that enamored with BHO, Biden, Clinton, Kerry, Gore. What the blurb calls “woke 2.0” is all of the stuff the corporate dems have willfully under-delivered on for so long that there is a bit of a revolt brewing. Call it Marxist foolishness all you want, but every day, more people are fed up with our intractable political cartel; we may have missed our chance to work incrementally. We could have proactively managed our economy to favor working people, but we didn’t, and people are going to become more impatient, impulsive and angry; it is a predictable response to the predatory economic environment that has been allowed to form. You have a bunch of people in power who have been pushing the pendulum so far to one side that it is going to very soon slip above and beyond their fingertips and come crashing back in the other direction.
Ive said it a 1000 times. If there is not an obama esq flip at the midterms the dem party is going to fracture and Joe Biden ( as an old white dude) will get thrown under the bus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RagnarLothbrok

Huey Grey 2

Heisman
Jul 1, 2025
4,586
15,252
113
Even the new Trump accounts are geared to help the rich. Every nickel goes into the stock market. Taxpayers will plow billions into the market and it's doubtful that many kids will ever see any of this money since there's conditions on withdrawing and what you can spend it on.
 

hawkeyetraveler

Heisman
Aug 10, 2010
5,602
22,580
108
There are plenty of us on the left who were never all that enamored with BHO, Biden, Clinton, Kerry, Gore. What the blurb calls “woke 2.0” is all of the stuff the corporate dems have willfully under-delivered on for so long that there is a bit of a revolt brewing. Call it Marxist foolishness all you want, but every day, more people are fed up with our intractable political cartel; we may have missed our chance to work incrementally. We could have proactively managed our economy to favor working people, but we didn’t, and people are going to become more impatient, impulsive and angry; it is a predictable response to the predatory economic environment that has been allowed to form. You have a bunch of people in power who have been pushing the pendulum so far to one side that it is going to very soon slip above and beyond their fingertips and come crashing back in the other direction.
I tend to agree there is an intractable political cartel that has been in an unholy alliance with big corporate spenders. However, the issues that we see are being blamed on capitalism and free markets when it is the marriage of big capital and politics that is the problem. A crony capitalist model, like we have post citizens united, is not a truly free market. It advantages the donor class who happen to also be big corporations or their leadership.

What I worry is that this leftward swing towards more socialist concepts is throwing out the free market baby with the cronyism bathwater. I would FAR prefer we place limits on the cronyism and light regulation on corporate reach while allowing the free market to operate.

There are areas where I think social support are necessary (I’ve come around to government provided basic health insurance so no one goes into medical debt bankruptcy). But outside select cases the truth is socialism will never beat capitalism at improving society because it lacks capitalism’s inherent win/loss signal.
 

Moral

Heisman
Dec 16, 2022
10,203
37,412
113
I tend to agree there is an intractable political cartel that has been in an unholy alliance with big corporate spenders. However, the issues that we see are being blamed on capitalism and free markets when it is the marriage of big capital and politics that is the problem. A crony capitalist model, like we have post citizens united, is not a truly free market. It advantages the donor class who happen to also be big corporations or their leadership.

What I worry is that this leftward swing towards more socialist concepts is throwing out the free market baby with the cronyism bathwater. I would FAR prefer we place limits on the cronyism and light regulation on corporate reach while allowing the free market to operate.

There are areas where I think social support are necessary (I’ve come around to government provided basic health insurance so no one goes into medical debt bankruptcy). But outside select cases the truth is socialism will never beat capitalism at improving society because it lacks capitalism’s inherent win/loss signal.

The free market is just an ideological theory like Marxism. It just doesn't exist and probably never will. Regulated capitalism is the only way when dealing with capitalism because it will always flow to crony capitalism if it isn't properly regulated.
 

Huey Grey 2

Heisman
Jul 1, 2025
4,586
15,252
113
The free market is just an ideological theory like Marxism. It just doesn't exist and probably never will. Regulated capitalism is the only way when dealing with capitalism because it will always flow to crony capitalism if it isn't properly regulated.
The free market is propped up by the government. Trump proves that everyday. He doesn't work for regular Americans. He works to prop up his Wall Street buddies.
 

hawkeyetraveler

Heisman
Aug 10, 2010
5,602
22,580
108
The free market is just an ideological theory like Marxism. It just doesn't exist and probably never will. Regulated capitalism is the only way when dealing with capitalism because it will always flow to crony capitalism if it isn't properly regulated.
Agree capitalism needs guardrails for sure. But even with guardrails it is a more efficient model than socialism. I also worry because capitalism has been abused that we swing to a socialist ideology that on the surface seems more egalitarian, but in reality is much more prone to abuse because it lacks the effective signaling that markets provide.
 

GesterHawk

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
19,576
38,241
113
Even the new Trump accounts are geared to help the rich. Every nickel goes into the stock market. Taxpayers will plow billions into the market and it's doubtful that many kids will ever see any of this money since there's conditions on withdrawing and what you can spend it on.
To be fair, the same could be said about any market based financial instrument that a parent would use.
 

Moral

Heisman
Dec 16, 2022
10,203
37,412
113
Agree capitalism needs guardrails for sure. But even with guardrails it is a more efficient model than socialism. I also worry because capitalism has been abused that we swing to a socialist ideology that on the surface seems more egalitarian, but in reality is much more prone to abuse because it lacks the effective signaling that markets provide.

I don't think it will go too much further than social democracy/regulated capitalism which is essentially what had been since the days of FDR but with varying degrees. However, there will most likely be an eventual hard push for Medicare for all because clearly the market has not been good to us in that department. Like paying twice as much for healthcare as other developed nations, having a for profit insurance middleman make life and death decisions, and leading the world in medical bankruptcies by far type failure.
 

GesterHawk

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
19,576
38,241
113
I tend to agree there is an intractable political cartel that has been in an unholy alliance with big corporate spenders. However, the issues that we see are being blamed on capitalism and free markets when it is the marriage of big capital and politics that is the problem. A crony capitalist model, like we have post citizens united, is not a truly free market. It advantages the donor class who happen to also be big corporations or their leadership.

What I worry is that this leftward swing towards more socialist concepts is throwing out the free market baby with the cronyism bathwater. I would FAR prefer we place limits on the cronyism and light regulation on corporate reach while allowing the free market to operate.

There are areas where I think social support are necessary (I’ve come around to government provided basic health insurance so no one goes into medical debt bankruptcy). But outside select cases the truth is socialism will never beat capitalism at improving society because it lacks capitalism’s inherent win/loss signal.
I think we also see this, at least from an employee standpoint, in salary stagnation that has been caused by making the stockholder king in the publicly traded corporate world.
Corporations don't have the incentive to pay their employees better because the C Suite has to maximize shareholder gains. And the C Suite has such high incentives to maximize the gains that they will do so at any means necessary.

I feel this could be tied back to the allowed proliferation of shareholders suing companies for not maximizing gains.
Yes, companies should be accountable for their performance to shareholders, but I personally feel it has really come at the cost of the worker.
 

GesterHawk

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
19,576
38,241
113
Agree capitalism needs guardrails for sure. But even with guardrails it is a more efficient model than socialism. I also worry because capitalism has been abused that we swing to a socialist ideology that on the surface seems more egalitarian, but in reality is much more prone to abuse because it lacks the effective signaling that markets provide.
But don't you think that the guardrails on capitalism are inherently socialist in nature - regulations that benefit workers and consumers alongside programs to benefit citizens in general?
 

hawkeyetraveler

Heisman
Aug 10, 2010
5,602
22,580
108
But don't you think that the guardrails on capitalism are inherently socialist in nature - regulations that benefit workers and consumers alongside programs to benefit citizens in general?
To a small degree sure. They definitely aren’t as socialist as Trump’s government taking an ownership stake in private corporations.

To me it is a balancing act. I believe some social programs are good (Medicare for all makes my list), and some regulation is necessary, but most of the time I want government out of private enterprise decision making.

The progressive movement goes too far IMO. Their hearts are in the right place, but the policies are often ineffective (often because of the lack of good signaling mechanism on what is working and what is not).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Torbee

RagnarLothbrok

Heisman
Jun 11, 2025
5,417
14,873
113
And this time it's pushing: (Checks notes) making things affordable, attacking corruption, and ending support for a genocide.



RW media machine is going to need to polish their messaging on this one a little bit for the sheep to buy it.

1&3 are why Democrats will continue to lose elections.

None of those ideas are novel. And Communism has never worked. Anywhere. Ever.
 

RagnarLothbrok

Heisman
Jun 11, 2025
5,417
14,873
113
Woke 2.0: Woke Harder

"You better be careful - Woke 2.0 is coming for blood and is bringing affordability!"
Jaylen Brown Lol GIF by Boston Celtics
 

RagnarLothbrok

Heisman
Jun 11, 2025
5,417
14,873
113
I tend to agree there is an intractable political cartel that has been in an unholy alliance with big corporate spenders. However, the issues that we see are being blamed on capitalism and free markets when it is the marriage of big capital and politics that is the problem. A crony capitalist model, like we have post citizens united, is not a truly free market. It advantages the donor class who happen to also be big corporations or their leadership.

What I worry is that this leftward swing towards more socialist concepts is throwing out the free market baby with the cronyism bathwater. I would FAR prefer we place limits on the cronyism and light regulation on corporate reach while allowing the free market to operate.

There are areas where I think social support are necessary (I’ve come around to government provided basic health insurance so no one goes into medical debt bankruptcy). But outside select cases the truth is socialism will never beat capitalism at improving society because it lacks capitalism’s inherent win/loss signal.
Good gravy, you are smart.

Twins Twinning GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon
 
  • Love
Reactions: hawkeyetraveler

GesterHawk

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
19,576
38,241
113
To a small degree sure. They definitely aren’t as socialist as Trump’s government taking an ownership stake in private corporations.

To me it is a balancing act. I believe some social programs are good (Medicare for all makes my list), and some regulation is necessary, but most of the time I want government out of private enterprise decision making.

The progressive movement goes too far IMO. Their hearts are in the right place, but the policies are often ineffective (often because of the lack of good signaling mechanism on what is working and what is not).
To be honest, I always consider the government ownership of the means of production to be communistic whereas the redistribution of wealth without government ownership to be socialistic.
Government ownership of a chip manufacturer = communism.
Trump Accounts = socialism.
But that is just splitting hairs.

The thing is that many progressive social programs take years or decades to bear fruit. So there needs to be a level of commitment to see them through.
The majority of the beneficial aspects of SNAP outside of immediate non-starvation (yeah that is the big one) for children are not seen until later in life - kids who aren't hungry do better in school, stay out of trouble more frequently, go to some sort of higher education or vocational training... But the real effect is on that child's children and grandchildren. Breaking cycles takes generations.

Now, yeah, like anything there are wasteful programs or programs that have benefits that are less tangible but federal governments shouldn't be run like businesses looking to turn a profit - just to steward our tax dollars in the best ways they can.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JWolf74 and Torbee

RagnarLothbrok

Heisman
Jun 11, 2025
5,417
14,873
113
I don't think it will go too much further than social democracy/regulated capitalism which is essentially what had been since the days of FDR but with varying degrees. However, there will most likely be an eventual hard push for Medicare for all because clearly the market has not been good to us in that department. Like paying twice as much for healthcare as other developed nations, having a for profit insurance middleman make life and death decisions, and leading the world in medical bankruptcies by far type failure.
Ironically, it was what resulted from Obamacare that shifted my view to favoring a more publicly funded system where we eliminate the egregiously unnecessary pork from the insatiable middlemen (private insurance).

A government model will undoubtedly be problematic, but it should be clear by now it would be the lesser of two evils.
 

WDSMHawk

All-Conference
Jun 30, 2019
1,277
3,534
113
1&3 are why Democrats will continue to lose elections.

None of those ideas are novel. And Communism has never worked. Anywhere. Ever.

Communism is just a scare word right wingers like to attach to any proposal brought forward by the left wing of the Democratic party.

And if you think being Israel's piggy bank is becoming an increasingly unpopular position for politicians to take and unless something drastic happens i don't see that changing in the future as more and more Boomers die off.
 

RagnarLothbrok

Heisman
Jun 11, 2025
5,417
14,873
113
But don't you think that the guardrails on capitalism are inherently socialist in nature - regulations that benefit workers and consumers alongside programs to benefit citizens in general?
This is a great point, which is why those who accused Obama of being a “socialist” were simply providing incontrovertible evidence they don’t know WTF they are talking about (especially since almost all of them became Trump supporters).

We teach middle school students there is no such thing as a pure market economy. It’s really not that difficult to understand. We have had elements of socialism for decades, most noticeably dating back to the 1930s. With that said, there are guardrails and then there are Bernie Sanders and a new wave of actual Democratic socialists actually getting elected and actually getting nominated (and soon to be added to the United States Congress in 2027).

By my count, the United States House of Representatives is about to have 5 actual seats held by actual socialists in 2027.

The point is this: be careful what you “wish” for. Calling George W Bush a racist and a fascist led to the FAFO nomination and eventual presidency of Donald Trump. Calling Obama and Biden socialists may very well lead to a future Newsom/AOC presidency (i.e.).

Words matter and tend to become prophetic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GesterHawk

RagnarLothbrok

Heisman
Jun 11, 2025
5,417
14,873
113
Communism is just a scare word right wingers like to attach to any proposal brought forward by the left wing of the Democratic party.

And if you think being Israel's piggy bank is becoming an increasingly unpopular position for politicians to take and unless something drastic happens i don't see that changing in the future as more and more Boomers die off.
Okay, fair. I understand the point of the OP now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDSMHawk

GesterHawk

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
19,576
38,241
113
This is a great point, which is why those who accused Obama of being a “socialist” were simply providing incontrovertible evidence they don’t know WTF they are talking about (especially since almost all of them became Trump supporters).

We teach middle school students there is no such thing as a pure market economy. It’s really not that difficult to understand. We have had elements of socialism for decades, most noticeably dating back to the 1930s. With that said, there are guardrails and then there are Bernie Sanders and a new wave of actual Democratic socialists actually getting elected and actually getting nominated (and soon to be added to the United States Congress in 2027).

By my count, the United States House of Representatives is about to have 5 actual seats held by actual socialists in 2027.

The point is this: be careful what you “wish” for. Calling George W Bush a racist and a fascist led to the FAFO nomination and eventual presidency of Donald Trump. Calling Obama and Biden socialists may very well lead to a future Newsom/AOC presidency (i.e.).

Words matter and tend to become prophetic.
It all comes back to whether the Joker created Batman or Batman creater the Joker.

Jack Nicholson Batman GIF


But in all seriousness I think you are skipping over the impact that the audacity of electing a black man had in the election of an orange man.

GesterHawk's First Rule of Politics:
For every action there is an unequal and opposite overreaction.
 

What Would Jesus Do?

All-Conference
Nov 28, 2010
34,977
4,187
113
I cannot fathom being a grown adult and looking at how many programs the government runs with huge administrative deficits, that would be out and out failures on the open market, and think to myself..... lets give them more access to housing cost. At best you will see short term growth and just like social security, every generation after will get hosed.
Which government programs would you turn over to the "open market"?

Not saying that none would be better, but many if not most would be worse. Many are not profitable if run for the benefit of all - which is why we ask government to do them . . . because it's the benefit to all, not profit to some, that governments are supposed to care about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GesterHawk

WDDT

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
10,886
11,708
113
Which government programs would you turn over to the "open market"?

Not saying that none would be better, but many if not most would be worse. Many are not profitable if run for the benefit of all - which is why we ask government to do them . . . because it's the benefit to all, not profit to some, that governments are supposed to care about.
Social Security.



Many of them are not profitable because when you are a government agency you dont need to be profitable and you can have ridiculous expenses. ( including salary).
 

WDDT

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
10,886
11,708
113
This is the point.
This is why we can't turn over our social programs and safety nets to privatization.

This is why healthcare needs to be provided by the government for all.
That is the exact opposite of what needs to happen. The government doesnt make a single thing more efficient, they just print the money they need to remain existing.
 

What Would Jesus Do?

All-Conference
Nov 28, 2010
34,977
4,187
113
We were at war every single day of the obama admin. That comment isnt as pointed as you think. Private fundraising will always be part of a presidency. Yes, we need to quit doing **** that isnt inside our own borders.
Yes, Obama caved entirely too much on supporting the Republican wars he inherited. But he did wind down one. And Biden wound down the other. Quibble how you want about the winding-down processes, Democrats finally got us out of them.

To the best of my recollection, neither Obama nor Biden started new wars (unless you want to count predictably backing and funding anything Israel wanted to do).

Trump didn't start any foreign wars in his first term. Which is why this liberal only considered him the 2nd worst President in modern American history. But he tried harder this term and has taken that honor from Bush.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dpic73

Sullivan

All-Conference
Oct 12, 2021
2,018
2,695
113
The free market is just an ideological theory like Marxism. It just doesn't exist and probably never will. Regulated capitalism is the only way when dealing with capitalism because it will always flow to crony capitalism if it isn't properly regulated.

If the free market is just an ideological theory, why do so many foreign people come here legally and thrive?

Free market works for those that have some ambition and smarts. V.P. Vance is a great example of this.

Those that whine every day about free markets tend to lack ambition, smarts, or both.
 

WDDT

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
10,886
11,708
113
Which government programs would you turn over to the "open market"?

Not saying that none would be better, but many if not most would be worse. Many are not profitable if run for the benefit of all - which is why we ask government to do them . . . because it's the benefit to all, not profit to some, that governments are supposed to care about.
You seem to be of the belief being born implies you need to be taken care of by society.
 

GesterHawk

Heisman
Jan 3, 2023
19,576
38,241
113
That is the exact opposite of what needs to happen. The government doesnt make a single thing more efficient, they just print the money they need to remain existing.
And privatization benefits no one but the ones at the top of the food chain.

One is the lesser of two evils and it isn't the one that makes people rich.