DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus The Dems... again

LMAO ... peddling crap about a group that has 120,000 members in a country with a population of 342 Million. That's a new low which is quite something for you, your 'condoms for Hamas' was better and that was a giant lie you never owned up to.

Keep it up, scumbags! Amazing to me that nobody in the party has the balls to tell these losers to sit down and shut up. They just sit back and watch this take over the party, because, you know, everybody has to toe the line on that side of the ball. Democratic Socialists Communists running wild!

Hasan Piker celebrates 9/11 with a framed pic of the towers burning in his studio. #humangarbage

We get it. You're so used to the trump administration and his cronies telling everyone who stands up to him to sit down and shut up you think that's normal now when someone has a different view. Here is a newsflash. That isn't normal. 120k people aren't "taking over" anything.

I agree. Actual Democrats are running scared.

While actual Republicans sold their soul to trump.

Anyone celebrating the twin towers in flames is a complete douche. Or using it in any way to try to goad and inflame emotions. Complete c**t.

That said that organisation has 120000 members and over 10 million online mentions ... Any "success" they have is being driven by the right wing media and MAGA for giving them the unwarranted attention they are receiving.

No offense, but I think that's a weak talking point when they're:

Polling so well.
Winning elections.
And again, no one in the party has the balls to reject any of the weak talking points. It's either cryptic answers or "Trrruump!!"

Honest question.... Do you think that poll well because of their policies? Or do you think some people who are anti Trump above all will vote for anything or anyone that pokes an eye on anything "Trump"...

My comment about how many online mentions.... I think those mentions, overwhelmingly by right wing sources from what I've seen, are elevating this tiny organisation and getting them noticed more than anything else. Jmo

#bIgTeNtPaRtY

Oh, memories.....

Literally! That's the company line. That's the first sentence of every response! I swear, we could find out a democrat candidate eats babies and the response from other democrats would start with "well, you know Joe, we pride ourselves on being a big tent..."

]

There are a number of things at play and I'll list a bunch. But first, I do not understand the infatuation with trying to prove the organization is small or that this is some right-wing scheme.

I can't think of a sloppier term, in internet jargon, than "mentions"; and when you say "from what I've seen" as a backing qualifier it can't lead to anything more than a senseless debate over a useless metric. Not senseless from an opinion standpoint, you're certainly welcome to yours. Senseless from a standpoint of not enough meat on the bone to debate.

I honestly don't think anyone watching cares how many members there are. They care about the rash of new candidates on the horizon that are either affiliated or endorsed by them. Full stop.

Why are they gaining traction and polling well? Your response surely has merit, but I think you need to peel back one more layer for the real answer. It's not just because people hate Trump; it's truer (100% my opinion) that they are exhausted by most from your party running on, speaking on, campaigning on and non-stop b*tching about "stopping Trump". At least these people have some original ideas and platforms. Bat-$h*t crazy... but original.

Lastly, I think that whole debate is senseless as well. They're not running against Trump or even other (R)s at this point. They're eating their own in primaries all over the country. The voter isn't voting this way to stop Trump, they're voting because the other candidates can't do anything more than foam at the mouth 24/7 about stopping him.


So again, my opinion is that this has little to do with the DSA, little to do with the "propaganda machine" (at least not from a partisan standpoint) and everything to do with what is coming out of these clowns' mouths.

Some valid points.

What any of it means won't be known until this 'rash' of candidates goes to the polls. As for eating their own - you're probably right. And I suspect any real voters - or thoughtful voters might realise that. So we'll see.

And yes the Democratic Party and leadership do need to do better.

I still do not know how else you count and quantify the online spamming of about the DSA - there doesn't appear to be standardized metric. But it is absolutely worth highlighting the fringe-ness of who they are compared to the airplay they are receiving. It's the same phenomena as the population that identify as Trans, then the even tinier % of those that are then in some sort of "issue" whether it's about changing rooms or sports or whatever - and then the volume of noise and attention that gets.

Where we they when we warned them about Project 2025? Not only did we explain what was in it, we explained the trump administration would execute it. And he did. We pointed out how he injected people that actually wrote and worked with Project 2025 into his administration. They ignored the warning and then didn't say a peep as it was being executed. Now they seem shocked and outraged that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction when every thinking person knew something like this was coming in response? You reap what you sow.

All the Democratic Socialists are doing is telling them to "Hold my beer."

And you're surprised he is influenced by the appearance of what he sees online?

Come on man. You're talking about a guy who uses X as his #1 news source.

Was it "spamming" when all we heard about was Project 2025? That org has 350 contributors and another 100 coalition partners. A far cry from 120,000... yet we were told they were going to facilitate wholesale elimination of FEMA, cut SS, have a national pregnancy monitor and random police ID checks.

I can't even dog-walk AI into an estimate of "mentions", it says there is no way to track but said google searches alone were millions higher than any sporting events or celebrity news.

There's plenty of hyperbole available for all the new viral internet sensations this isn't much different.

What IS different, in this case, is the many videos available like the above... where someone reads off a freaking checklist to make sure each candidate will profess out loud to abide.


Anyway, you hit the nail on the head with the Trans comparison you have a very tiny percentage of people that are trans and mostly quiet, and then a few million people with no skin in the game screaming out loud as if it impacts their lives somehow. I've often thought if the former had their own united voice, they would say in unison "please, please, please just shut the hell up! We were better off before you came along!".

Not since they overhauled the government exactly as we said they would. But you sure didn't give a damn as they were doing it.

The project 2025 contributors is a poor comparison. jmo. There is no relevance to the contributors to a thesis being used for a political agenda to a membership of a political party.

With the Trans thing you are almost right (you may be right) but you've missed or intentionally missed my point while sort of acknowledging it. Yes there are a small % of the population of the Trans community. There's a much smaller % that either "scream about it" (as you say) or have a news story about it because of bathroom use or sporting incidents etc .... here we are agreed. What you didn't want to acknowledge or chose not to is the absurd amount of noise from the right wing media about this tiny tiny tiny % of the population ...

I'll give you another similar-ish example. Immigration in the UK gets a ton of airplay and we have a national party who have (like Trump) made it a big issue and blaming the entire countries woes on Immigrants. It gets a huge amount of airplay. When polled nationally 80% of the people respond that immigration is a big deal, something like a top 3 issue for the country. When you go LOCAL and ask what people see LOCALLY - immigration drops off the charts and if I remember, doesn't even break the top 10 or top 8 list of things. SO people are influenced by the media to PERCIEVE a problem that the majority of people do not see locally.

Not sure of Project 2025 and it's use by Trump as a blueprint is a good analogy for the DSA.

And regardless of where someone gets their news from - it's worth an attempt at a real conversation when the chance arises.

I think bias posters on X could be precluded from the category of "news".

That's because you didn't utter a word about the right-wing media. Maybe that's what you were thinking but that's not what you typed...


Certainly reads like you criticized the undue focus on trans people, not right-wing media. That's the way I took it, I wasn't trying to avoid anything. When you merely say "volume of noise", that came from all angles at all times for years... and is still running. Right, left and center looking for the next poster child at all times. When they can't find one, they drum up a new story about Caitlin Clark.


That said, I'm not sure what should be expected when a movement to protect a certain class turns into advertising campaigns, retailers declaring their bathroom policies (and expected to), trans people invading (yes, invading) women's sports and schools declaring themselves as safe spaces to the point of states like California forbidding teachers from discussing students' feelings with parents.

Really not sure what you expected to happen there.

As far as local vs national sentiment. I think that's probably absolutely normal and not in the least bit surprising. I see NO impact of immigration in my area, doesn't make me any less concerned for the impact nationwide. If you poll my area the response would be, data centers, data centers, data centers, followed by infrastructure and property taxes.

russian bots are people too

Well you read the Trans comment one way, I'd warrant others interpreted my comment about noise and attention (on the back of a post about media coverage/mentions on DSA) a different way. No big deal.

As for as England, or even the UK - although Scotland has less of an issue with immigrants so including the whole of the UK so lumping them in is a bit of a disservice -- but the whole of the UK is nearly half the size of Michigan so "National" and "local" issues in the UK is an entirely different kettle of fish than comparing it to the US and Natl and Local experiences.

Yeah, I'm not being disingenuous, I took it as an overall sidebar to the original subject and a comment to the entirety of Trans coverage/arguments. I mean, it's multifaceted on more than a few fronts and all forms of media have kept it in headlines for years.

Anyway, because I didn't address it but meant to, I think the partisanship is just part of the game at this point of the media monster we live with. I'll make no effort to deny the fact that amplification on the DSA subject will be done by right-wing media, why wouldn't it be? It's not like they're inventing anything; they're taking 90% of it straight from the horse's mouth.

We know the game, listen with one ear, believe nothing, if you want the truth-read between the lines and find verification outside the person with the megaphone.

And good point on the UK, didn't even think about that. That does make your point rather intriguing. Not sure I have an explanation.

DSA makes little sense to me... Guess we'll see if they actually get traction... And see if the Democrats realize why they might be popular and try to come up with something other than "we're not Trump"....

As for the UK thing ... My opinion but it's populist politics. Point fingers, create scapegoats ... No solutions but get lots of people worked up.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-43301423

Regarding "from what I've seen" qualifier...

I don't know if this was the original intent, but I'll tell you what that means when I say it (or something like it)... and that's as a pre-argument against the most-extreme views that get turned into strawman arguments (in this very thread, ironically enough). I don't spend my time scouring the internet/twitter for the clowns the inevitably reside in each slice of the political spectrum. Pretty much exactly along the lines of what you said later on in your post, I have little to no interest arguing for or against cherry-picked snippets from the other side.

Whether it's liberal folks posting a video of some hillbilly in a MAGA hat strapped with guns from head to toe like a tough guy that can't form a full sentence, or video of pink/blue-haired kids with little to no life experience allowing them to exist detached from reality... posting that like it's representative of the liberal or conservative viewpoint is lazy, embarrassing, and not worth the time or effort to acknowledge.

I think the rise in popularity of groups like the DSA is absolutely Dems "eating their own". I think voters are fed up with the status quo from the DNC, and can more easily gravitate toward any loud and "against the grain" voice. From that perspective, it's really no different from the Tea Party/MAGA movement. Voters want to feel heard, and they're getting less and less of that from the main party leadership.

Seems to me that ther DSA is the dems equivalent to the repubes tea party

Pretty much eye-to-eye with everything you said there.


The status quo has to change or the party dies. The party has been held hostage by the socialist movement, and nobody seems to have the balls to tell them to sit down and shut up. It's crazy to me.

Also crazy to me is that we're entering an age where if you want a shred of common-sense political talk, you turn to Bill Maher or Stephen A. Smith. Maher teed off the other night and he couldn't be more right...

I think you have it backwards. The party has been held hostage by the Pelosis and the Schumers and the Clintons... the establishment dems. It's the DSA and other fringe groups that are gaining traction because they are not the establishment that everyone is fed up with. The "socialist movement" isn't the problem, it's the symptom (or the consequence if you want to see it that way).

You make great points, but I don't think I have it bakcwards (<call me mac), I think there's a timeline to follow here that's getting lost in fog.

The Pelosis and the Clintons had maintained power because they had the political capital to define balance at all times. And nobody f'ed with them. I think Barack was the Oracle behind the scenes that helped maintain balance at the top.

Biden was the apt puppet that was just happy to finally get the seat he thought he deserved. (Look back at the 2020 election and all the cards that fell to grant him the nomination.) With the puppet in place they figured they had eight years to figure out the next move... then he couldn't beat Father Time.

I really, really think they were tired of all the flack, tired of all the responsibility, and let's face it, had become splintered themselves. When they stepped asisde, the far-left grabbed the megaphones... and the rest of the party was still stuck on "Stop Trump!!!!".

I hope some of this makes sense, in a bit of a hurry.

#bIgTeNtPaRtY

I am in agreement with you. I believe what we're seeing with DSA and a move to the left is a response to an aging, out of touch "leadership" who do anything but truly lead. There's angst against Trump and his version of Project 2025 and what it means for the USA, and the Democratic party seems inept - so people are willing to try 'anything' believing anything is better than the other 2 options. An over simplification - but I think that is the root of it.

I don't think they were tired of it at all. I think that is how the DNC operates, as a rule. The Establishment decides whose turn it is at each nomination, and anyone who has the gall to actually mount any sort of campaign during the nomination is dealt with (ex. Bernie round 1). And if there is one thing that the establishment is really good at, it's doing nothing. I think people are tired of that, and are gravitating towards anyone that sounds like they're different. When you have a candidate who crafts their platform around the idea of "I'm going to do my job and actually try to help you", then their "brand" will start sounding better, whatever it is.

I do understand what you're saying. I think we're both trying to read between the same lines and gravitating towards different issues within this party.

I believe the reason for what we are seeing is two fold. First people are tired of excuses on things such as national healthcare and every other thing that promotes helping every day Americas and they see establishment Democrats being as much of a problem as Republicans in that regard. So in part it's the rebuke of the democrat establishment.

The other reason seems pretty clear to me. When one side goes so far extreme in one direction you will get an equal and opposite reaction. Whether that extreme is based in reality or not is a matter of perception. The right thought Obama was extreme. The tea party took over and transformed into Project 2025. No matter how anyone tries to slice and dice it, that's about as extreme of a right wing ideology as you can get.

People hated Obama and reacted with an extremely unhinged president in trump and installing project 2025.

The reaction on the left is to respond with an extreme swing in the other direction.

The people who elected trump are just as responsible for this opposite reaction in extremism as anyone but you'll never see any of them admit it.

j/c...

I love Mike Rowe. He's fundamentally common-sense, fundamentally middle-ground, fundamentally these are the things you can do to be a good person, father, worker, that will keep a great country great. Besides that he is very well-spoken and very entertaining.

I know this isn't an easy read, but I promise you it's worth it. This is why "DSA" is trending. It's not because right-wing loudmouths are trying to create a narrative, it's because the narrative creates itself. And too many on the left just want to dance around it like it's nothing and scream "Truuummp!!" in the face of anyone that raises an objection. You have a slew of "Democrats" spewing communist ideals... not socialist, communist... and people like Gavin Newsom saying they deserve your support.

Here's two back-to-back posts from Mike. The second is in response to the tremendous backlash he got to the first.




Facebook
Mike Rowe

A͏u͏g͏u͏s͏t͏ ͏2͏ ͏a͏t͏ ͏2͏:͏1͏3͏ ͏P͏M͏
·
I'm not what you'd call a keen observer of the political climate in our country, but I do pay attention, broadly, to what's going on within our two parties. Watching the latest from Bill Maher, I was reminded of how we struggle to reconcile our support for an idea we might like, if it’s promoted by a politician we hate. And vice versa. Here though, we have an opportunity - Democrats, in particular - to speak out loudly and clearly against an ideology that has been proven, demonstrably, to be a really bad idea.

It’s alarming to see how quickly communism has been embraced by so many, but it's even more alarming, to see how many have yet to condemn it, in favor of sheltering under a “big tent.” This week, Gavin Newsom dismissed concerns over Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and progressive candidates winning key primaries, stating he would gladly campaign for them. He argued that the party must be in the "addition, not subtraction business" to retake control of Congress.

Not that anyone asked me, but…wow. The candidates that Newsom is referring to here are not subtle. They have clearly articulated precisely what they want, and exactly what they will try to accomplish if they gain power. No borders. No police. No prisons. No Senate. From each according to his needs, from each according to his abilities, and so forth. They are literally quoting Karl Marx, and they are literally on the record as desiring to completely dismantle our government and replace it with actual communism. And the Governor of California says he will campaign on their behalf, if doing so will result in a Congressional win. Truly amazing.

Seems to me, that this is best opportunity Democrats will ever have to make some kind of reasonable appeal to Independents, and those not on board with this administration. This is a chance to affirmatively distance themselves from an ideology that has caused more human suffering than any other scheme dreamt up by man. And yet, they have not.

I understand how unpopular President Trump is in the eyes of many. But if the DSA continues to grow in popularity, and the Democrats actually campaign on their behalf, I think it’ll be the largest political blunder in my lifetime. Unless of course, I’m wrong, and the DSA expands to swallow the Democratic Party, and communism winds up on the ballot. In which case, Ronald Reagan’s warning will haunt us all.

“Freedom is never more than one generation from extinction.”


=================================================================================


Facebook
Mike Rowe

14h͏
·
Not the way I planned on spending my afternoon, but 7,600 comments should not be ignored! Bots, trolls and personal attacks notwithstanding, the critics of yesterday’s post were dominated by a large and vocal contingent who rushed to remind me that there’s “a difference between socialism and communism,” an obvious indication that they didn’t actually read the post.

Shelley Armour writes… “Mike! You know there is a difference between democratic socialism and communism, right?”

Hi, Shelley. Yes, I know there’s a difference, and I understand what the difference is. The larger point, and the fundamental flaw with your comment, is that you seem to believe the candidates within the Democratic Socialist Party are both “democratic and socialist" simply because that’s the name of their club. Well, maybe some of them are. I really couldn’t say. What I can tell you for sure is that more than a few have called for the complete dismantling of capitalism, free markets, representative government, property rights, borders, police, prisons, and the Constitution in general. My post referred to them, as well as a number of elected Democrats who have agreed to campaign on their behalf – including Gavin Newsom, who said, "The Democratic Party must accept the DSA in order to take back the Congress.” His words, not mine.

Tracey Steele writes…“Wow! I cannot believe Mike Rowe said this. He has a huge reach, and he is actually spouting the word “communism” like it’s the 1950s! Wow Wow Wow!”

Wow indeed, Tracey, and thanks for noticing the size of my reach! (Contrary to popular belief, size does matter!) To say it again, I am not the one “spouting” communism or conflating socialists and communists. The word is being “spouted” by members of the DSA who are using it to describe themselves. I am not accusing them; I am quoting them.

John Engles… Hey Rowe, what’s the difference between the Communists who want to run the country and the Nazi/fascist who currently is?

Several differences, John, but the only one relevant to this conversation is the fact that the communists currently running for office have clearly identified themselves as such. They do not dispute or reject the label. They embrace it. It is who they are, who they claim to be, and who they want to be. The president, on the other hand, has never claimed to be a Nazi or a fascist. That doesn’t mean he isn't, but it is worth noting he has rejected the accusation outright. Obviously, you are entitled to that opinion and the right to share it publicly, thanks to our Constitution. Unlike in a fascist, Nazi, or communist regime. (Also worth noting, Nazis and fascists are not the same thing.)

Chris Tomaloff writes… “Kinda like how the political right didn’t shout down the extreme rhetoric coming from their candidates?”

No, Chris, not like that at all. In the video I shared, we saw examples of prominent Democrats saying things like, “We need to elect more communists!” (Cea Weaver, Director of the NYC Mayor’s Office.) Mamdani himself literally tweeted, "Each according to their need, each according to their ability." That’s a direct quote from the Communist Manifesto.

But what exactly is the corollary from the right? Are prominent Republicans tweeting, “We need to elect more Nazis! We need to elect more fascists! Eat the poor!” I don’t think so. John Engles may think Trump is fascist and a Nazi, but Trump disagrees, and so do a majority of voters. Communists, on the other hand, say it loud and say it proud. I’m inclined to take them at their word.

Beto Ojeda… “Mike has always leaned to the Trumpian view of things but never states it, so as not to alienate anyone, but we know how to read between the lines. This “communist” talk is McCarthyism 2.0.”

I wasn’t around in the 1950s, Beto, but from what I’ve read, it was indeed a very difficult time to be a communist in this country. Lots of private citizens were dragged before Congress, made to take “loyalty oaths," and blacklisted in their places of work. I can’t justify it or condone it, but I can explain it. We had just fought a hot war against fascism and Nazism and just begun a Cold War against a communist regime. The existence of an organized Communist Party in this country at such a time strained the limits of tolerance. But do you really think we’re less tolerant today than we were seventy-five years ago? Do you really believe my comments about communists who claim to be communists are synonymous with another Red Scare? If you haven’t noticed, Chris, no one in the DSA, including the communists, is being dragged before Congress and made to swear a loyalty oath to the Constitution. Today, a communist in America can run for office…with the endorsement of the governor of California! And the tacit approval of a major political party! Seems to me we’re about as far from McCarthyism as we can get.

As for my desire not to alienate anyone, I suppose I am guilty of that. I run a foundation that is open to people of all political beliefs, and we’ve assisted lots of Americans who lean to the left. I also know for a fact that many Democrats have supported mikeroweWORKS historically, and I have no desire to run them off. But do you really have to “read between the lines” to understand where I’m coming from?

True, I’ve never endorsed a candidate or publicly encouraged people to vote. But I’ve been very transparent about the fact that I’m a registered Independent who favors policies and programs that often align with conservative principles. Obviously, I would not characterize those conservative principles as “Trumpian,” because a) they were around long before him, b) Trump is not a conservative, and c) I do not agree with or support everything the President says and does. So, is it possible, Beto, that your accusation is rooted in the fact that I have never publicly denounced the president to your satisfaction? Is it possible you think I'm a Trumper, simply because I've never called him a fascist, or a Nazi, or a liar, or a conman, or a traitor, or whatever else you believe him to be?

Gretchen Seipp… Mike, the fact that you still act as though you’re not political after all this time is a bit ridiculous. I still support your work and foundation because I believe in it, but the folksy act has worn thin.

Aw, shucks, Gretchen. Folksy? Lil' ole me?
Honestly, how am I acting as if I am “not political?” This entire conversation is the very definition of “political.”

Christopher Pugh… I would have voted for Mike Rowe and Freddie a few years ago before he went full-on MAGA, and I’m all in favor of his project, but it’s pretty clear the political direction that he’s moved in and the money trail that has influenced it.

It’s Freddy, not Freddie. (I don’t much care, but he’s a terrier and particular about such things.) As for the “full-on MAGA” moniker, is there something I did specifically to earn that designation? Is there some kind of general definition you can share? Or, are you coming from the same place as Beto? Is calling me “Full-On MAGA" your way of saying that I’ve failed to condemn Trump to your satisfaction?
For the record, MRW is supported by liberals and conservatives alike. I have no idea what “money trail” you are referring to. Also, regarding my personal politics, think about the implications of what I wrote. I said that the Democrats have been given a gift – an opportunity to appear reasonable by doing something that 80% of the country would support. All they have to do is distance themselves from candidates who have called for the complete dismantlement of our Constitution. All they have to do is say, “Hold on, comrade. Our tent is not that big. We respect your right to hate America, but we don’t want you in our party, and we will not support your candidacy.”

If they say that, I think a lot of Independents would see them as they see John Fetterman, who has, in the eyes of many voters, become the most “rational” Democrat currently in office. If they don’t – if they actually welcome communist candidates into their party – then I’m afraid the Democrats, by default, will offer the American people a very simple choice in November – a party that disavows communism vs. a party that doesn’t. I think such a choice would be very positive for Republicans because I don’t think most Americans want to align themselves with a Democratic Party that welcomes communists. The question for you, Chris, is why would a “Full-On MAGA” like me encourage Democrats to act in a way that would disadvantage the Republican Party? And the answer is simple – it’s because I support the existence of a Democratic Party that believes America is still a fundamentally good place.

I think there’s a lot of room for improvement in our country, and I believe the best way to realize those improvements is for Democrats and Republicans to have continuous, robust and public debate about all the issues. But if one of those parties is affirmatively determined to transform our democratic republic into a communist state, then we’re no longer debating the various ways to make our country better; we’re debating the merits of destroying it. And really, what’s the point of tolerating that?

America is already a big tent, filled with hundreds of millions of people with wildly differing views and lots of political parties that represent those views. We’ve got the Green Party, the American Freedom Party, the Socialist Workers Party, the Constitution Party, and of course, the Communist Party USA, as well as the Democratic Socialist Party. America’s tent is so big, we can even tolerate fringe parties like the KKK, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, and so forth. Why then, does Gavin Newsom want to make room in the Democratic tent for socialists and communists? There’s only one reason, and he’s already spelled it out for us – he believes the Democrats need them to win back the Congress. I think it’s a bad bet for the Democrats and for America. And if a prominent Republican reached out to the KKK with the same “big tent” offer, you’d better believe my vote would be in play.

Michael Tillman… When are you going to throw your hat into the ring, Mr. Rowe?

Ha! When it no longer fits my head!

I read the first missive - reading between the lines, I wouldn't say he's neutral or fair and balanced, he has an agenda he is trying to stack the deck with. He's doing what Rush used to pretend to do and take a common sense issue and then extrapolate from that hypothesis which is speculation but because the start of the conversation was based on something fairly common sense some people go along for the ride and assume he's still on fact based observation as opposed to a viewpoint heavily jaundiced by his political lens. I say that because this bit is nonsense:

""I understand how unpopular President Trump is in the eyes of many. But if the DSA continues to grow in popularity, and the Democrats actually campaign on their behalf, I think it’ll be the largest political blunder in my lifetime. Unless of course, I’m wrong, and the DSA expands to swallow the Democratic Party, and communism winds up on the ballot.""

Right or wrong Newsome didn't campaign on their behalf, he's playing politics and trying not to alienate them. It may end up being a mistake - but it's also politically understandable. The Tea Party movement wasn't alienated by the Republicans ... it was embraced and that analogy seems more appropriate than others (to me) .... And finally there is zero chance that the DSA swallows the Democratic Party, that's such nonsense.

I could be wrong ... I might be being overly harsh. IDK. And if others like him that's fine - up to you not me.

Communism is not what the American people want - no matter if there is a lot of attention on a small number of people from a small organization .... They may be on a lot of ballots - they may get some votes .... talk to me when they have some power and win elections. 

I do like his program that helps our youth learn trades......

https://mikeroweworks.org/

But these comments just show he has been convinced that trying to re-direct our tax dollars back to every day Americans rather than the military industrial complex, lobbyists, corporations and special interest is somehow a communist plot. I don't agree with some of the DSA policies either. Just like I don't agree with the Republicans policies or the Democrat establishment policies on some issues.

Trying to paint some faux portrayal this like it's a good verses evil battle is hilarious.

So... Newsom... is just playing politics. Yep, totally harmless.

Row, however... is "stacking the deck with an agenda".

Welp, I guess everyone is welcome to their opinion.

No interest in reading the second entry, I take it?

Good enough.