In January, the Progressive Policy Institute released an <a href="https://www.progressivepolicy.org/projects/center-for-funding-americas-future/how-the-democratic-presidential-candidates-would-fund-americas-future/">analysis</a> of the costs of the leading Democrats&#8217; policy proposals and found that democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders&#8217; (I-VT) far-left policies were by far the most expensive, costing around $50 trillion over ten years, effectively doubling the size of the federal government.
The group, which describes itself as &#8220;radically pragmatic,&#8221; found that Sanders&#8217; policies would cost taxpayers more than $15 trillion more over ten years than the next most radical Democratic candidate (Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren&#8217;s $35 trillion in proposals) and $42 trillion more than the third most expensive Democrat (former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg&#8217;s $7.6 trillion).
The progressive group&#8217;s relatively modest estimates on the costs of Sanders&#8217; radical plans include:
<ul>
<li>Medicare for All $24.4 trillion</li>
<li>Green New Deal $16.3 trillion</li>
<li>Child Care, Pre-K, and K-12 Education $2.2 trillion</li>
<li>Higher Education and Debt Forgiveness $2.1 trillion</li>
<li>Social Security and SSI Expansion $1.4 trillion</li>
<li>Affordable Housing $850 billion</li>
<li>Paid Family Leave $430 billion</li>
<li>Other policies under $160 billion</li>
</ul>
The total offsets Sanders has proposed, even given optimistic assessments, amount to less than half of the more than $50 trillion he&#8217;s proposed in costs over 10 years, PPI found. His proposed offsets total $22.5 trillion and include potentially economy-devastating tax increases, including:
<ul>
<li>4% across-the-bard income tax increase</li>
<li>7.5% payroll tax increase (and a 12.4% increase above $250,000)</li>
<li>$3.3 trillion wealth tax,</li>
<li>35% corporate income tax rate increase</li>
</ul>
IPP offers a summary of its assessment of Sanders&#8217; cripplingly costly policies and his woefully inadequate proposed offsets:
<blockquote>Sanders has proposed just over $50 trillion in new spending, the largest component of which is his $24.4 trillion Medicare-for-All plan. Sanders embraces a suite of aggressive tax increases and lays out a broad “menu of options” to finance Medicare for All, but even if all of these policies were adopted, they would fall $25.3 trillion short of what Sanders has proposed in new spending. Another costly proposal is his $16.3 trillion “Green New Deal,” which includes a federal jobs guarantee that could seriously harm the economy by pulling workers away from gainful employment in the private sector while doing nothing to stem greenhouse-gas emissions. Sanders proposes more spending on higher education than his competitors, but the majority of it is for universal debt forgiveness that would give even high-income professionals a windfall without increasing the productivity of America’s workforce. Although Sanders proposes the biggest increase in dollars for public investment of any presidential candidate, it is fiscal fantasy to believe he could ever deliver on it given his non-investment spending priorities and failure to develop sufficient revenue proposals.</blockquote>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-crowd-goes-after-bernie-for-defending-communism-again-during-debate">WATCH: Crowd Goes After Bernie For Defending Communism AGAIN During Debate</a>
About $15 trillion behind Sanders in costs, according to PPI, is Warren, whose proposed policies would cost taxpayers about $35 trillion over ten years. Here&#8217;s PPI&#8217;s summary of the senator&#8217;s much-touted &#8220;plans&#8221; for various issues:
<blockquote>Warren has proposed $34.9 trillion of new spending to date – less than Sanders, but still nearly five times as much as the what the next highest-spending candidate (Buttigieg) proposes to spend. Her most-expensive initiatives include a $22.5 trillion Medicare-for-All framework, a $3.9 trillion plan to tackle climate change, and $3.6 trillion for investments in education and student-debt forgiveness. Warren also proposes to increase Social Security benefits by far more than any other candidate, including for wealthy retirees. She proposes more new spending for research and educating low-income students than any of her competitors, but these proposals are dwarfed by new consumption spending that by itself exceeds the total revenue raised from Warren’s proposed offsets. Given the large taxes on high-income people she has already embraced, Warren’s agenda leaves little room to raise enough taxes to close the $8.3 trillion gap between her proposed spending and revenue (let alone address existing fiscal needs) without breaking her commitment not to raise taxes on the middle class.</blockquote>
H/T <a href="https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2020/02/25/progressive-group-sanders-proposed-53-trillion-new-spending-can-pay-half/">John Sexton</a>

Bernie Sanders

Progressive Group Analysis Shows Bernie’s Plan To Pay For His Policies Doesn’t Come Close

2020 Election

Democratic Socialism

Elizabeth Warren

As socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) continued to build momentum over the weekend by grabbing up yet more Democratic delegates, this time in Nevada, self-styled &#8220;center-left&#8221; political think tank Third Way posted an urgent open memo to the more moderate Democratic candidates still vying for the nomination. The memo, co-authored by the organization&#8217;s president, details Sanders&#8217; &#8220;stunningly radical political history,&#8221; his &#8220;outrageous support for our enemies,&#8221; &#8220;hopelessly out of touch views on taxes,&#8221; &#8220;preposterous spending plans,&#8221; and willingness to burn down the party for his own agenda.
The <a href="https://www.thirdway.org/memo/stand-up-to-bernie-or-you-and-we-all-lose">memo</a> which was posted on Third Way&#8217;s website and written by Third Way President Jonathan Cowan and Executive VP for Public Affairs Matt Bennett, warns the Democratic candidates that they must &#8220;stand up to Bernie&#8221; or find not only that they have lost the race but the country has lost in the process. The warning begins:
<blockquote>Memo to Vice President Biden; Mayor Bloomberg; Mayor Buttigieg; Senator Klobuchar; and Senator Warren
At the Las Vegas debate, each of you took aim at one another, often to withering effect. But with few exceptions, you declined to really challenge Senator Sanders. If you repeat this strategy at the South Carolina debate this week, you could hand the nomination to Sanders, likely dooming the Democratic Party – and the nation – to Trump and sweeping down-ballot Republican victories in November.</blockquote>
Why the &#8220;dire prediction&#8221;? Because, Cowan and Bennett explain, &#8220;Bernie Sanders is a socialist, and the political toxicity of his self-selected brand cannot be overstated.&#8221;
&#8220;As <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/285563/socialism-atheism-political-liabilities.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">recent polling from Gallup</a> shows, 53% of voters, including 51% of Independents, say they would not vote for &#8216;an otherwise well-qualified candidate for president&#8217; if that candidate is a socialist,&#8221; they write. &#8220;That’s game over.&#8221;
The memo goes on to highlight why Sanders is such a &#8220;toxic&#8221; candidate, including &#8220;His Stunningly Radical Political History&#8221;:
In the early 1980s, Sanders campaigned for <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/bernie-sanders-campaigned-for-marxist-party-in-reagan-era" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">candidates from the Socialist Workers Party</a>.
<ul>
<li>The <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/642/1357/2398821/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">stated goal</a> of the SWP was &#8220;the abolition of capitalism.”</li>
<li>That party called for “the destruction of the bourgeois state,” arguing such an act ‘is a necessary prerequisite for the conquest of state power by the working class.”</li>
<li>Sanders was twice an elector for an SWP candidate for president who <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/642/1357/2398821/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">once said that</a> American soldiers should “take up their guns and shoot their officers.”</li>
<li>That candidate <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/02/bernie-sanders-radical-past-would-haunt-him-in-a-general-election.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">called for</a> the abolition of the US military.</li>
<li><a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/02/bernie-sanders-radical-past-would-haunt-him-in-a-general-election.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Even in Congress</a>, Sanders proposed slashing the military budget by half.</li>
</ul>
And &#8220;His Outrageous Support for our Enemies,&#8221;: &#8220;In <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/02/bernie-sanders-radical-past-would-haunt-him-in-a-general-election.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the middle of the Iran hostage crisis</a>, Sanders’ party &#8216;called for…’solidarity’ with the revolutionary regimes in Iran&#8230;&#8217; How is such an attack in the hands of Trump not disqualifying for many voters?&#8221;
&#8220;His Hopelessly Out of Touch Views on Taxes&#8220;: &#8220;<a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/06/12/bernie_sanders_on_socialism_people_would_be_delighted_to_pay_more_in_taxes.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">On CNN last year</a>, Sanders said that Americans would be &#8216;delighted to pay more in taxes&#8217; to fund his huge new programs. How can he propose a huge new tax increase without saying how much it would be?&#8221;
And &#8220;His Preposterous Spending Plans&#8220;: &#8220;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/14/politics/bernie-sanders-proposals-cost/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Experts estimate</a> that Sanders’ major proposals would cost a staggering $60 trillion and would <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/14/politics/bernie-sanders-proposals-cost/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">double</a> the size of the government (while his tax plans fall $27 trillion short of paying for it). There’s a reason that, when <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhwAqSSE8pA" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pressed on the cost of his plans</a>, Sanders simply refuses to answer, saying he actually has no idea and &#8216;no one does.'&#8221;
Cowan and Bennett conclude by warning that for Sanders, &#8220;his party is himself&#8221;:
<ul>
<li>Sanders has <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7088909/Sanders-campaigned-radical-Socialist-Workers-Party-investigated-FBI.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">called the Democratic Party</a> “intellectually and spiritually bankrupt,” so it is no surprise that he routinely has declined the Democratic endorsement for Senate in VT.</li>
<li>In 2011, he suggested it might be a “<a href="https://thinkprogress.org/bernie-sanders-says-it-would-be-a-good-idea-to-primary-president-obama-313b4f05f3c1/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">good idea</a>” to primary President Obama in 2012. He had brought up a potential primary challenge to Obama <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/bernie-sanders-talks-primary-challenge-obama-good-idea-our-democracy-and-democratic-part/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">several times that summer</a>.</li>
<li>After 2016, he worked on the committee to change the DNC rules and now has said (in Las Vegas) that he won’t follow those rules.</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://www.thirdway.org/memo/stand-up-to-bernie-or-you-and-we-all-lose">Read Third Way&#8217;s full memo to the remaining Democratic candidates here</a>.

READ IT: Memo To Democrats Details Bernie’s ‘Stunningly Radical Political History,’ ‘Outrageous Support Of Our Enemies’

Joe Biden

Michael Bloomberg

Pete Buttigieg

Socialism

Socialist Bernie Sanders, the frontrunner in the race for the Democratic nomination for president, faced widespread backlash late on Sunday night over positive remarks that he made about murderous Cuban communist dictator Fidel Castro.
Sanders made the disturbing remarks on CBS News&#8217; &#8220;60 Minutes&#8221; with host Anderson Cooper when Cooper pressed him about positive remarks that he had made about brutal communist regimes in the past.
&#8220;You know? When Fidel Castro came into office, you know what he did?&#8221; Sanders said. &#8220;He had a massive literacy program. Is that a bad thing? Even though Fidel Castro did it?&#8221;
Sanders&#8217; claim that Castro &#8220;came into office&#8221; lacks the historical context that Castro was essentially a terrorist who attacked Cuba&#8217;s government; he did not win in an election. Sanders&#8217; claim that Castro had a &#8220;massive literacy program&#8221; is communist propaganda, a point that many critics hit Sanders on in response to his pro-communist remarks.
Among those who fired back at Sanders were people on the political left &#8212; including politicians and people who appear on CNN and MSNBC &#8212; as well as Republican senators and conservative political commentators.
Left-wing CNN commentator Ana Navarro tweeted: &#8220;Castro regime’s been in power in Cuba for +60 yrs w/o free elections. They’ve killed, jailed, tortured thousands. They confiscated assets, expelled priests &amp; nuns&#8230; And let’s be clear, Cubans weren’t exactly communicating by grunts. Most knew how to read.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Castro regime’s been in power in Cuba for +60 yrs w/o free elections. They’ve killed, jailed, tortured thousands. They confiscated assets, expelled priests &amp; nuns&#8230; And let’s be clear, Cubans weren’t exactly communicating by grunts. Most knew how to read. <a href="https://t.co/kKGM66a8ci">pic.twitter.com/kKGM66a8ci</a>
&mdash; Ana Navarro-Cárdenas (@ananavarro) <a href="https://twitter.com/ananavarro/status/1231766703115325441?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Navarro added, &#8220;I was in 2nd Grade when Sandinistas came to power in Nicaragua. They adopted Cuban education model. The books/curriculum taught ideological indoctrination. Children had to recite communist, revolutionary, anti-American slogans. That’s how communist teach people to read and write.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I was in 2nd Grade when Sandinistas came to power in Nicaragua. They adopted Cuban education model. The books/curriculum taught ideological indoctrination. Children had to recite communist, revolutionary, anti-American slogans. That’s how communist teach people to read and write.
&mdash; Ana Navarro-Cárdenas (@ananavarro) <a href="https://twitter.com/ananavarro/status/1231797010820403200?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Left-wing MSNBC frequent guest Fernand Amandi tweeted out a series of videos showing Sanders&#8217; repeated praise for communist leaders.
Amandi tweeted, &#8220;Here’s avowed socialist @BernieSanders talking about how President Kennedy made him &#8216;want to puke&#8217; because JFK stood up to and condemned Fidel Castro’s tyrannical totalitarian regime in Cuba&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Here’s avowed socialist <a href="https://twitter.com/BernieSanders?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BernieSanders</a> talking about how President Kennedy made him “want to puke” because JFK stood up to and condemned Fidel Castro’s tyrannical totalitarian regime in Cuba👇🏼<a href="https://t.co/qHXTea08Zp">pic.twitter.com/qHXTea08Zp</a>
&mdash; Fernand R. Amandi (@AmandiOnAir) <a href="https://twitter.com/AmandiOnAir/status/1231796430345510912?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Amandi continued, &#8220;Here is @BernieSanders TONIGHT defending Fidel Castro’s murderous totalitarian Communist regime in Cuba. Democrats, nominating this man will absolutely re-elect @realDonaldTrump and end our Constitutional republic.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Here is <a href="https://twitter.com/BernieSanders?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BernieSanders</a> TONIGHT defending Fidel Castro’s murderous totalitarian Communist regime in Cuba
Democrats, nominating this man will absolutely re-elect <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a> and end our Constitutional republic. <a href="https://t.co/vAJX2ffbSQ">pic.twitter.com/vAJX2ffbSQ</a>
&mdash; Fernand R. Amandi (@AmandiOnAir) <a href="https://twitter.com/AmandiOnAir/status/1231738392603451392?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Amandi added, &#8220;Here’s a compilation clip of avowed socialist @BernieSanders talking about &#8216;how impressed he is,&#8217; with Fidel Castro’s murderous, communist totalitarian regime in Cuba&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Here’s a compilation clip of avowed socialist <a href="https://twitter.com/BernieSanders?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BernieSanders</a> talking about “how impressed he is,” with Fidel Castro’s murderous, communist totalitarian regime in Cuba👇🏼<a href="https://t.co/5xXsXqpeEW">pic.twitter.com/5xXsXqpeEW</a>
&mdash; Fernand R. Amandi (@AmandiOnAir) <a href="https://twitter.com/AmandiOnAir/status/1231787068914884608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Miami Herald reporter David Smiley wrote: &#8220;That’s the sound of Bernie’s Latino voter wave crashing on the shores of Miami&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
That’s the sound of Bernie’s Latino voter wave crashing on the shores of Miami <a href="https://t.co/FwN64IOlY7">https://t.co/FwN64IOlY7</a>
&mdash; David Smiley (@NewsbySmiley) <a href="https://twitter.com/NewsbySmiley/status/1231747588271067136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Former Obama White House staffer Christopher Hale wrote: &#8220;Fidel Castro was a dictator and a tyrant. He spent his regime murdering dissidents, imprisoning gay people, separating families from each other, banning the free and open practice of religion, and bringing the world to the brink of nuclear war. He’s not worthy of praise.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Fidel Castro was a dictator and a tyrant. He spent his regime murdering dissidents, imprisoning gay people, separating families from each other, banning the free and open practice of religion, and bringing the world to the brink of nuclear war.
He’s not worthy of praise.
&mdash; Christopher J. Hale (@chrisjollyhale) <a href="https://twitter.com/chrisjollyhale/status/1231764029590376448?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Statistician Josh Jordan responded: &#8220;On the same day that Bernie Sanders welcomed an endorsement from anti-Vaxxer Marianne Williamson, he&#8217;s got a 60 Minutes interview where he praises Castro&#8217;s indoctrination&#8230; I mean &#8216;literacy program.&#8217; I can&#8217;t wait to see how this plays with swing voters come November.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
On the same day that Bernie Sanders welcomed an endorsement from anti-Vaxxer Marianne Williamson, he&#39;s got a 60 Minutes interview where he praises Castro&#39;s indoctrination&#8230; I mean &quot;literacy program.&quot;
I can&#39;t wait to see how this plays with swing voters come November. <a href="https://t.co/aABSiAspDo">https://t.co/aABSiAspDo</a>
&mdash; Josh Jordan (@NumbersMuncher) <a href="https://twitter.com/NumbersMuncher/status/1231751874530988032?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Leftist Democrat Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo, who is highly political and hates the Second Amendment, responded, &#8220;For the record @BernieSanders, Fidel &amp; Raul Castro, their murdering regime, &amp; co-conspirators have never had a redeeming quality, ZERO. They worked on literacy programs in a State that controls everything available for reading, in essence, literacy was a path to indoctrination.&#8221;
&#8220;I remember my high school history teacher trying to feed us the literacy achievement line,&#8221; Acevedo continued. &#8220;My response to him was I would rather be unread than to spend a lifetime reading the communist/socialists propaganda the Cuban government provided.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I remember my high school history teacher trying to feed us the literacy achievement line. My response to him was I would rather be unread than to spend a lifetime reading the communist/socialists propaganda the Cuban government provided.
&mdash; Chief Art Acevedo (@ArtAcevedo) <a href="https://twitter.com/ArtAcevedo/status/1231789783195832320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), whose father is from Cuba, responded, &#8220;It really makes a difference when those you murder at the firing squad can read &amp; write.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
It really makes a difference when those you murder at the firing squad can read &amp; write. <a href="https://t.co/4DKbSKpI6t">https://t.co/4DKbSKpI6t</a>
&mdash; Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) <a href="https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1231762113141649408?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Political strategist Rory Cooper responded, &#8220;Say goodbye to Florida. And prepare to spend money in New Jersey. If he’s the nominee.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Say goodbye to Florida. And prepare to spend money in New Jersey. If he’s the nominee. <a href="https://t.co/SgGActS5L7">https://t.co/SgGActS5L7</a>
&mdash; Rory Cooper (@rorycooper) <a href="https://twitter.com/rorycooper/status/1231735754633732097?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Democrat Rep. Donna Shalala (FL) tweeted: &#8220;I&#8217;m hoping that in the future, Senator Sanders will take time to speak to some of my constituents before he decides to sing the praises of a murderous tyrant like Fidel Castro.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I&#39;m hoping that in the future, Senator Sanders will take time to speak to some of my constituents before he decides to sing the praises of a murderous tyrant like Fidel Castro. <a href="https://t.co/Iwvmay9LOH">https://t.co/Iwvmay9LOH</a> <a href="https://t.co/KT9sQ0pfkh">pic.twitter.com/KT9sQ0pfkh</a>
&mdash; Donna E. Shalala (@DonnaShalala) <a href="https://twitter.com/DonnaShalala/status/1231760466776657923?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) tweeted: &#8220;Likely Dem nominee praised the supposed &#8216;achievements&#8217; Castro regime. 
And he’s wrong about why people didn’t overthrow Castro. It’s not because &#8216;he educated their kids,gave them health care&#8217; it‘s because his opponents were jailed, murdered or exiled.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Likely Dem nominee praised the supposed “achievements” Castro regime
And he’s wrong about why people didn’t overthrow Castro. It’s not because “he educated their kids,gave them health care” it‘s because his opponents were jailed,murdered or exiled <a href="https://t.co/6i41w7zcDe">https://t.co/6i41w7zcDe</a>
&mdash; Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) <a href="https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1231779260911800320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) tweeted: &#8220;Shameful ignorance from @SenSanders. The Castro regime has killed &amp; imprisoned dissidents, oppressed its people and propped up murderous dictators like Maduro and Ortega.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Shameful ignorance from <a href="https://twitter.com/SenSanders?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenSanders</a>.
The Castro regime has killed &amp; imprisoned dissidents, oppressed its people and propped up murderous dictators like Maduro and Ortega. <a href="https://t.co/ROnmWT9oka">https://t.co/ROnmWT9oka</a>
&mdash; Rick Scott (@SenRickScott) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenRickScott/status/1231767757345230849?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;

Bernie’s Pro-Castro Remarks Backfire: ‘Sound Of Bernie’s Latino Voter Wave Crashing’

Communism

Fidel Castro

Democratic socialist and Bernie Sanders promoter Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has endorsed an &#8220;all-female slate&#8221; of left-wing candidates, some of whom hope to take out more moderate, establishment and incumbent Democrats in key races.
&#8220;Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez plans on Friday to endorse an all-female slate of progressive candidates through her new political action committee, using her clout in the insurgent left and the considerable campaign funds she has drawn to counter the Democratic establishment in key races around the country,&#8221; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/21/us/politics/aoc-democrats.html">The New York Times</a> reported on Friday.
In an announcement of her plans on social media Friday, Ocasio-Cortez tweeted: &#8220;It’s time to elect a progressive majority in Congress accountable to strong, grassroots movements that push support for issues like Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, racial justice, &amp; more. It’s time to elect public servants with the Courage to Change.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
It’s time to elect a progressive majority in Congress accountable to strong, grassroots movements that push support for issues like Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, racial justice, &amp; more.
It’s time to elect public servants with the Courage to Change: <a href="https://t.co/K6JXmCH2Vh">https://t.co/K6JXmCH2Vh</a>
&mdash; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1230875522705641481?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The seven women the radical representative has now added to her growing list of endorsements include one Senate candidate and six congressional candidates: Senate candidate Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez, who is taking on a Senate Democrat-endorsed candidate to face off against Republican Senator John Cornyn; New Mexico&#8217;s Teresa Fernandez, New York&#8217;s Samelys López and California&#8217;s Georgette Gómez, who are all vying for open seats in Democratic districts; and Nebraska&#8217;s Kara Eastman, who is taking on a Republican incumbent.
Ocasio-Cortez has previously announced her endorsement of two progressive primary challengers to Democratic incumbents: Marie Newman and Jessica Cisneros, two women who are taking on male Democrats in Illinois and Texas.
The freshman congresswoman&#8217;s endorsement, says the Times, is a &#8220;powerful stamp of approval&#8221; for her fellow progressive candidates. It&#8217;s also more evidence that the Green New Deal advocate is attempting to &#8220;reshape the Democratic Party,&#8221; the paper notes — something she has made clear from day one is one of her larger priorities and which has repeatedly resulted in friction between the freshman representative and the party&#8217;s leadership. One of her first moves when she arrived on Capitol Hill was to join a group of radical protesters for a sit-in at the office of the leader of the House Democrats, Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Since, she has publicly traded barbs with the party&#8217;s leadership on multiple occasions.
The Times highlights the larger issue at play in Ocasio-Cortez&#8217;s campaign against fellow Democrats: &#8220;the struggle among Democrats that is defining the race for the presidency, which is pitting Senator Bernie Sanders, the self-described democratic socialist, against more moderate candidates who are presenting themselves as better able to appeal to a broad section of voters in taking on President Trump.&#8221;
Her anti-establishment move follows a dust-up between the House Democratic campaign arm and progressives last year when the campaign arm &#8220;barr[e]d campaign vendors from conducting business with a primary opponent of a sitting Democrat, a move intended to shield incumbents,&#8221; the Times notes.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ocasio-cortez-unloads-on-bloomberg-engaged-in-cover-up-had-most-racist-policies">Ocasio-Cortez Unloads On Bloomberg: Engaged In ‘Cover Up,’ Had ‘Most Racist Policies’</a>

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Ocasio-Cortez Endorses ‘All-Female Slate’ Of Candidates, Aims To Take Down Establishment Democrats

Democratic Party

Nancy Pelosi

With the success of 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and rival Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has come the rise in notoriety and popularity of so-called Democratic Socialism in the United States.
According to a 2019 Gallup survey, 43% of Americans said that “some form of socialism [would] be a good thing” for the United States. Regardless of whether or not Americans fully understand what “socialism” means, they appear to support it in some way nonetheless.
Because of this development, I thought it would be vital to speak with Swedish author Johan Norberg, an historian of ideas and CATO Institute fellow, who has written such books as “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004XOZ612/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&amp;btkr=1">In Defense of Global Capitalism</a>” and “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Progress-Reasons-Look-Forward-Future-ebook/dp/B06XRXM6CV/ref=pd_sim_351_1/131-1837604-6179500?_encoding=UTF8&amp;pd_rd_i=B06XRXM6CV&amp;pd_rd_r=a12d6166-914b-4e62-8b4d-1740b7135366&amp;pd_rd_w=Kb9sj&amp;pd_rd_wg=8EbMt&amp;pf_rd_p=65e3eab0-d81f-4a76-93ff-f0b7b1d6cd3d&amp;pf_rd_r=CF7BWNGM5EXJS4Q655T1&amp;psc=1&amp;refRID=CF7BWNGM5EXJS4Q655T1">Progress: Ten Reasons to Look Forward to the Future</a>,” among others.
His documentary film, “Sweden, Lessons for America?” hit the airwaves in 2018, and can be rented or purchased on Amazon and <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/us/movie/sweden-lessons-for-america/id1455593303">iTunes</a>, and can be viewed for free on <a href="https://youtu.be/jq3vVbdgMuQ">YouTube</a>.
In part one of this two-part interview, which can be read <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/interview-part-i-swedish-author-johan-norberg-on-the-devastating-impact-of-socialism-and-what-it-could-cost-the-u-s">here</a>, Norberg talked about socialism as a philosophy, the rise and fall of Sweden due to its experimentation with socialist ideas, the popularity of Sen. Bernie Sanders and what that means for the United States, and how even voluntary “libertarian” experiments in socialism have failed.
In part two of this interview, Norberg discusses the essentially non-existent distinction between “socialism” and “democratic socialism,” polls suggesting that 43% of American voters are amenable to socialism, how Sweden turned things around, how capitalism hasn’t “failed” as many socialists suggest, and more.
<blockquote>DW: Sen. Bernie Sanders says that he’s not a “socialist,” but a “Democratic socialist,” and that they are not the same thing. Can you speak to that?
NORBERG: When it comes to democratic socialism, it really means socialism. The point is not which means to you use to enforce it and implement it on everybody. If you&#8217;re saying that you will go in there and socialize people&#8217;s abilities and innovations and businesses, you will destroy individualism, and you will destroy wealth. Whether you do it democratically by having a majority or by dictatorial means, that&#8217;s like the difference between murder and suicide. It&#8217;s not who does it or how many are in favor of it, it&#8217;s the result that really counts.
I think what he’s referring to is that, &#8220;Look, it&#8217;s not Venezuela or the Soviet Union. It’s Sweden and it&#8217;s Denmark.&#8221; That&#8217;s more his take on it, or that&#8217;s what he wants to be associated with nowadays, and then his problem is just that we do not recognize his ideals in any way or form whatsoever. Sweden is now lowering its corporate tax even further so that it will be lower than in the United States. I guess that&#8217;s not the direction he would take the United States.
DW: There&#8217;s a 2019 survey from Gallup that says 43% of Americans believe that “some form of socialism [would] be a good thing” in the United States. What does that tell you about the American voter?
NORBERG: It tells me that you&#8217;ve never experienced socialism and you don&#8217;t really know what it means. I think people believe that it means “free stuff.” And obviously, everybody wants free stuff – but I don&#8217;t think they really understand what it&#8217;s like.
If you compare this to a country where we&#8217;ve actually seen socialists in power having tried to implement similar policies, like Sweden, we would not have those polling numbers. I know there&#8217;s a poll recently where I think 10% of Swedes said that they were socialists. So, it seems like there are fewer socialists in Sweden than in the United States. If you ask our most successful social democratic prime minister of the modern era, Göran Persson, he was asked, &#8220;Are you in favor of socialism? Are you a socialist? Would you call yourself that?&#8221; He said, &#8220;No, I don&#8217;t because you get confused with too many crazy people.&#8221; And I think that&#8217;s what you get when you&#8217;ve experienced socialism. You have a more nuanced way of looking at it.
DW: Sweden pulled the reins and turn things around. With the rising tide in the United States that seems to favor socialism, or at least what they believe to be socialism, has the ship sailed on the advancement of this ideology, or is there a way to turn it around?
NORBERG: Well, as a Swede, I would have to remind you that, unfortunately, the only thing that turned it around was that the economy collapsed in Sweden. We experienced the results of socialism and that&#8217;s why it changed. But I don&#8217;t think it would necessarily have to go that far because there&#8217;s also so much information and knowledge about this. So many places where they tried, and we&#8217;ve tried, to implement policies similar to that, and we know the results. They are there if you care to just open a book or Google it. I think that&#8217;s an important task right now for those who oppose this development, to get that knowledge out there. It&#8217;s an important moment in U.S. history in that way.
DW: Have you seen a shift in attitude globally and in the United States toward socialism since 2015/2016?
NORBERG: What I&#8217;ve seen is that something happened after the financial crisis, because after 2008 or so, people began to lose their faith in the financial system, in the banks, and rightly so because they&#8217;d been awful in so many ways. I would argue, and I&#8217;ve even written a book on this subject, that this was because the government really pushed everybody in that direction by an excess of liquidity, and at the same time, a promise of bailouts if they made stupid mistakes. Then of course you take stupid risks because heads you win, tails the taxpayer loses.
Unfortunately, what often happens after recessions, and especially the financial crisis, is that people begin to lose their faith in it and begin to think that the government should step in to a larger degree. I think this was the pivotal thing that made people begin to think that they could experiment with anticapitalist ideas.
DW: Proponents of socialism or socialistic ideology will claim that the United States is an example of “failed capitalism.” They will point to the wealth gap or to the way corporations operate in certain ways, and claim that we need to go in a new direction. What would you say to that?
NORBERG: The system isn&#8217;t broken. American capitalism is not broken. If you look at the kinds of benefits it’s creating for people, for consumers, for workers, and for retirees who have their money invested in businesses, it keeps delivering.
There&#8217;s this narrative saying that the American worker is getting a raw deal over the last decade, and you look at the headline numbers like, &#8220;Hourly wages have only increased by 5% since 1970,” and it&#8217;s a completely distorted number. It doesn&#8217;t include all the non-monitored benefits that we&#8217;re getting to a larger extent now, for tax purposes and because workers demanded to take a particular job, like health insurance, pension contributions, paid leave, vacation, etc.
If you include that, it&#8217;s not a 5% increase in hourly wages since 1970, it&#8217;s 66%.
That&#8217;s a bit of a difference and it&#8217;s pretty good – and that doesn&#8217;t even capture the most important thing, namely, the reduction in price of all the goods and services that we buy on the market, which increases our purchasing power to a larger degree. So, that&#8217;s the first thing that has to be mentioned. It keeps on delivering. Don’t take this for granted because that doesn&#8217;t happen in every place around the world.
The other thing I would say is that there are things that are broken. There are sections of the economy that definitely don’t work. In the U.S., we&#8217;ve failed in getting people who&#8217;ve lost their jobs into new jobs; we have a housing market that&#8217;s completely broken, etc. But when you examine those things, in every case, the problem is not that people acting in their own best interest on the market have failed, it is that the government has stepped in and stopped them from doing that.
When it comes to the housing market, it&#8217;s a perfect correlation between the places blocking new construction and the zoning laws and all those things that make it impossible to move to the places where the jobs are being created.
Occupational licensing is another one of the major problems, especially coming from Sweden, where we don&#8217;t do stuff like that. I&#8217;m appalled to see how it can take months, even years to get an education for a simple job that&#8217;s traditionally considered low-skill in many ways – and this is just to protect those who already have the jobs. Even worse, when they are not coordinated across state borders, it means that if you lose your job as a plumber or a barber in one state, you can&#8217;t move over the state border and take a similar job without going through the efforts, the costs, and the time to get a new license like that.
We need to look seriously at what the government does to hurt us before we start saying that the government should do even more.
DW: Is there anything that we haven&#8217;t mentioned on this subject that you want our readers or the general voting public to know?
NORBERG: I&#8217;ve noticed that one of the more popular suggestions by the left-wing of the Democratic Party is some sort of wealth tax, and it’s important to mention that we&#8217;ve abolished that in Nordic countries – in Denmark as early as 1997, and in Sweden in 2007. It wasn&#8217;t a tax on rich people because the rich people always find a place to stuff their assets or move somewhere else. It was a tax on investing in Sweden. It was a tax on creating new businesses and jobs. We benefited tremendously by abolishing the wealth tax because suddenly people felt free to create fortunes and moved to Sweden again. So it’s also worthwhile for people to look at the experience of European countries who experimented with the ideas that are now on offer in the United States.</blockquote>
I’d like to thank Johan Norberg for taking the time to speak with me about such an increasingly important topic. For more information, you can follow him on <a href="https://twitter.com/johanknorberg?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor">Twitter</a>, or visit his <a href="http://www.johannorberg.net/">official website</a>.
RELATED: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/interview-part-i-swedish-author-johan-norberg-on-the-devastating-impact-of-socialism-and-what-it-could-cost-the-u-s">INTERVIEW (Part I): Swedish Author Johan Norberg On The Devastating Impact Of Socialism, And What It Could Cost The U.S.</a>

Johan Norberg

INTERVIEW (Part II): Swedish Author Johan Norberg Talks The Destruction Of Socialism, How Sweden Turned It Around, And More

Economics

Sweden

In response to prominent Democratic strategist James Carville sounding the alarm on the party&#8217;s hard move to the far-left, socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) denounced the distinguished Clinton-era adviser as a &#8220;political hack.&#8221;
&#8220;Look, James, in all due respect, is a political hack who said very terrible things when he was working for Clinton against Barack Obama,&#8221; Sanders told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Wednesday night.
&#8220;We are taking on the establishment. This is no secret to anybody&#8230;,&#8221; he said. &#8220;The insurance companies don&#8217;t like me, the pharmaceutical industry, which is charging us ten times more for the same drugs they sell in Canada, they don&#8217;t like me either, nor does the fossil fuel industry, because their product happens to be destroying our planet, nor does military-industrial complex or prison-industrial complex. We are taking on Trump, the Republican establishment, Carville, and the Democratic establishment.&#8221;
&#8220;At the end of the day the grassroots movement we are putting together of young people, of working people, of people of color, want real change,&#8221; added Sanders.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders hits back after criticism from James Carville, calling the Democratic strategist “a political hack.”
“We are taking on Trump, the Republican establishment, Carville and the Democratic establishment.” <a href="https://t.co/iv31C0QKV1">https://t.co/iv31C0QKV1</a> <a href="https://t.co/IZoIqzDNzd">pic.twitter.com/IZoIqzDNzd</a>
&mdash; CNN (@CNN) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1227769432216350722?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 13, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Carville&#8217;s warning about the Democratic Party&#8217;s lurch toward extremism made headlines last week when <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/top-democrat-strategist-james-carville-on-2020-elections-were-losing-our-damn-minds-people-dont-want-to-hear-this-st">he told Vox</a> that he was “scared to death” of the upcoming election following the disastrous Iowa caucus.
“Look, the turnout in the Iowa caucus was below what we expected, what we wanted. Trump’s approval rating is probably as high as it’s been,&#8221; said Carville. &#8220;This is very bad. And now it appears the party can’t even count votes. What the hell am I supposed to think?”
“I’ll just say it this way: The fate of the world depends on the Democrats getting their s**t together and winning in November,” Carville continued. “We have to beat Trump. And so far, I don’t like what I see. And a lot of people I talk to feel the same way.”
Carville could not understand how the party could do so well in the 2018 mid-terms by running reasonably moderate candidates and then go so far into extremism just two years later.
“We have candidates on the debate stage talking about open borders and decriminalizing illegal immigration,” Carville said. “They’re talking about doing away with nuclear energy and fracking. You’ve got Bernie Sanders talking about letting criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells. It doesn’t matter what you think about any of that, or if there are good arguments — talking about that is not how you win a national election.”
&#8220;There’s no chance in hell we’ll ever win the Senate with Sanders at the top of the party defining it for the public,&#8221; he added.
Shortly thereafter, Carville <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/end-of-days-carville-warns-dems-about-choosing-sanders-im-not-interested-in-being-in-a-cult">doubled-down</a> on his attacks against Sanders and specifically denounced the &#8220;cult&#8221; that seems to have built up around him.
“The only thing, the only thing between the United States and the abyss is the Democratic Party. That’s it. If we go the way of the British Labour Party, if we nominate Jeremy Corbyn, it’s going to be the end of days. … So I am scared to death, I really am,” Carville said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”
“If we lose that, we’re going to be the British Labour Party and be out in some theoretical left-wing la-la land,” he continued. “There’s a certain part of the Democratic Party that wants us to be a cult. I’m not interested in being in a cult. I’m 75 years old. I’m just not a very cult-y person. Some people in this country want a revolution, they want disruption. I don’t know — they scream at people, they go and bully people. I don’t know how you win an election like that, 78 years old standing up screaming at a microphone about revolution. But you gotta’ give people an alternative.&#8221;

BernieCar

WATCH: Bernie Lashes Out At Top Dem Strategist James Carville For Saying He’s Too Extreme

James Carville

As Soviet Union-honeymooning, Sandinista-supporting, Fidel Castro-praising, full-on socialist loon bag Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) emerges as the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/who-will-win-democratic-primary-latest-2020-josh-hammer">undisputed front runner</a> for the Democratic Party&#8217;s 2020 presidential nomination, it nonetheless seems that the median American is rather lukewarm about the possibility of supporting someone for the presidency who holds such historically fringe views.
According to a Gallup <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/285563/socialism-atheism-political-liabilities.aspx">survey</a> released yesterday, &#8220;[m]ore than 90% of Americans say they would be happy to vote for a presidential candidate their party nominated who would be black, Catholic, Hispanic, Jewish or a woman; 80% would accept evangelical Christians, homosexual men, and lesbians; 60-70% are willing to embrace a presidential candidate who is under 40, over 70, a Muslim or an atheist; but only 45% say they would vote for a socialist for president,&#8221; the Jewish Press <a href="https://www.jewishpress.com/news/us-news/gallup-90-of-americans-would-vote-for-jewish-black-catholic-hispanic-woman-candidates-but-not-for-a-socialist/2020/02/12/">summarized</a>.
&#8220;Gallup’s bottom line conclusion is: The self-declared socialist Sanders could count on 76% of Democratic voters, 45% of Independents and &#8230;  only 17% of Republicans,&#8221; the Press noted.
As Gallup noted at the top of its report, socialists are the &#8220;one group tested&#8221; who &#8220;receive[] majority opposition.&#8221; After all, &#8220;[l]ess than half of Americans, 45%, say they would vote for a socialist for president, while 53% say they would not.&#8221;
The is fairly brutal news for the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and it goes a long way toward explaining why various levers of the DNC&#8217;s broader party apparatus have recently sounded the alarm about a possible Sanders nomination.
“The only thing, the only thing between the United States and the abyss is the Democratic Party. That’s it. If we go the way of the British Labour Party, if we nominate Jeremy Corbyn, it’s going to be the end of days. … So I am scared to death, I really am,” former top Bill Clinton strategist James Carville said earlier this week while likening Sanders to the far-left Corbyn, as The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/end-of-days-carville-warns-dems-about-choosing-sanders-im-not-interested-in-being-in-a-cult">reported</a>.
“There’s a certain part of the Democratic Party that wants us to be a cult. I’m not interested in being in a cult. I’m 75 years old. I’m just not a very cult-y person,&#8221; Carville continued.
Similarly, former Obama-era secretary of state and failed 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry had to deny a recent report that he was considering jumping into the 2020 Democratic presidential race in a purported last-ditch attempt to stave off an impending Sanders nomination.
&#8220;NBC News reported on Sunday that Kerry &#8216;was overheard Sunday on the phone at a Des Moines hotel explaining what he would have to do to enter the presidential race amid &#8220;the possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole,&#8221;&#8216;&#8221; The Daily Wire also <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/fing-false-john-kerry-explodes-over-report-indicating-he-may-jump-in-2020-race">noted</a> earlier this month.
Sanders has a lifelong history as a rabid socialist activist, and Paul Sperry <a href="https://nypost.com/2016/01/16/dont-be-fooled-by-bernie-sanders-hes-a-diehard-communist/">argued</a> at the New York Post in 2016 that Sanders is actually best described as a “diehard communist”:
<blockquote>In the early ’70s, Sanders helped found the Liberty Union Party, which called for the nationalization of all U.S. banks and the public takeover of all private utility companies.
After failed runs for Congress, Sanders in 1981 managed to get elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, where he restricted property rights for landlords, set price controls and raised property taxes to pay for communal land trusts. …
In 1985, he traveled to [Nicaragua] to celebrate the rise to power of the Marxist-Leninist Sandinista government. He called it a “heroic revolution.” …
Sanders also adopted a Soviet sister city outside Moscow and honeymooned with his second wife in the USSR. He put up a Soviet flag in his office, shocking even the Birkenstock-wearing local liberals. At the time, the Evil Empire was on the march around the world, and threatening the U.S. with nuclear annihilation.
Then, in 1989, as the West was on the verge of winning the Cold War, Sanders addressed the national conference of the U.S. Peace Council — a known front for the Communist Party USA, whose members swore an oath not only to the Soviet Union but to “the triumph of Soviet power in the U.S..”</blockquote>

New Hampshire Democratic Primary Debate

Top Pollster: Only 45% Of Americans Would Vote For A Socialist For President

Gallup

John Kerry

Leftism

Poll

On Tuesday, MSNBC anchor Katy Tur attempted to speak to a supporter of presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), pinpointing a potential voter outside the democratic socialist&#8217;s rally.
However, the man Tur approached turned out to be a proud supporter of President Donald Trump. And when he was asked if he thought Sanders had any appeal, the Trump backer ripped apart the Left&#8217;s ideology as &#8220;anti-growth,&#8221; &#8220;anti-family,&#8221; &#8220;anti-American,&#8221; and &#8220;anti-life,&#8221; clearly surprising the MSNBC reporter.
&#8220;Can you tell us who you voted for?&#8221; asked Tur.
&#8220;Donald John Trump,&#8221; the voter proudly told the anchor.
&#8220;You voted for Donald John Trump. Look at that,&#8221; said Tur. &#8220;Bernie Sanders is not appealing to you?&#8221;
&#8220;The whole ideology would be destructive to the country,&#8221; the man replied. &#8220;It&#8217;s anti-growth. It&#8217;s anti-family. It&#8217;s anti-American. And, as a Roman Catholic, it&#8217;s anti-life.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;Can you tell us who you voted for?&quot;
&quot;Donald John Trump.&quot;
&quot;Bernie is not appealing?&quot;
&quot;The whole ideology would be destructive to the country
&quot;It&#39;s anti-growth. It&#39;s anti-family. It&#39;s anti-American. And, as a Roman Catholic, it&#39;s anti-life.&quot;
Someone check on Nicole Wallace 😂 <a href="https://t.co/D9R8cRaPiy">pic.twitter.com/D9R8cRaPiy</a>
&mdash; Elizabeth Harrington (@LizRNC) <a href="https://twitter.com/LizRNC/status/1227340169201831936?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 11, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The interview wasn&#8217;t the only shocking moment for MSNBC on Tuesday, either. As noted by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-nh-dem-tells-msnbc-she-voted-for-bernie-sanders-after-network-treated-him-unfairly">The Daily Wire</a>, a Sanders backer told the network on live air that she shifted her vote to the Vermont senator because of MSNBC&#8217;s alleged biased treatment of Sanders.
“I want to say, the reason I went for Bernie is MSNBC,” the voter told MSNBC’s Ari Melber.
“I think it is completely cynical to say that he has lost 50% of his vote from the last time when there were two candidates,” the woman said. “Now there are multiple, wonderful candidates that would be great candidates and people that we could unify behind.”
“The kind of ‘Stop Bernie’ cynicism that I heard from a number of people… It made me angry, so I said, ‘Bernie’s got my vote,&#8217;” she added.
“This is such an interesting point,” Melber reacted. “What you’re saying is, and we take criticism because we’re journalists, you’re saying that hearing from people, whether it’s guests, contributors, the conversations you’ve heard, that you felt were designed to tear down Senator Sanders, actually endeared him to you.&#8221;
“Absolutely, I could have chosen several candidates, but that’s what pushed me over the edge for Bernie,” the voter answer.
President Trump dominated in New Hampshire on Tuesday, absolutely crushing past incumbent presidents&#8217; numbers in the primary by tens of thousands of votes.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://t.co/I0eZ9UoIQJ">pic.twitter.com/I0eZ9UoIQJ</a>
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1227610766662127616?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 12, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale noted Tuesday night: “With approximately 54% of precincts reporting, President Trump has already received more votes than Presidents Barack Obama (49,080), George W. Bush (52,962) and Ronald Reagan (65,033) in their respective re-election New Hampshire Primaries.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
With approximately 54% of precincts reporting, President Trump has already received more votes than Presidents Barack Obama (49,080), George W. Bush (52,962) and Ronald Reagan (65,033) in their respective re-election New Hampshire Primaries.
&mdash; Brad Parscale &#8211; Text TRUMP to 88022 (@parscale) <a href="https://twitter.com/parscale/status/1227418569039851520?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 12, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“The Democrat story in New Hampshire is the continued dominance of big government socialist policies and the success of their standard bearer, Bernie Sanders,” Parscale said in a statement, as noted by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-campaign-releases-numbers-showing-massive-support-declares-victory-in-new-hampshire">The Daily Wire</a>.
“No matter which Democrat eventually emerges from their months-long dumpster fire of a primary process, we know the contrast will be President Trump’s record of accomplishment and optimistic view of the future versus Democrats and their socialist, job-killing agenda,&#8221; the campaign manager added.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-campaign-releases-numbers-showing-massive-support-declares-victory-in-new-hampshire">Trump Campaign Releases Numbers Showing Massive Support, Declares Victory In New Hampshire</a>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-nh-dem-tells-msnbc-she-voted-for-bernie-sanders-after-network-treated-him-unfairly">WATCH: NH Dem Tells MSNBC She Voted For Bernie Sanders After Network Treated Him Unfairly</a>

Katy Tur

WATCH: MSNBC Tries To Speak To Bernie Supporter, Accidentally Interviews Trump Supporter Who Unloads On The Left

Donald Trump

MSNBC

Democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is not ready to let go of her self-created &#8220;bootstrap&#8221; controversy just yet. After inspiring a flood of criticism and mockery online when she engaged in her own &#8220;you didn&#8217;t build that&#8221; moment during a congressional hearing last Thursday — attempting to debunk the rags-to-riches American ideal by approaching the famous metaphor literally — the far-left freshman congresswoman revived the issue in a post Sunday. Republicans hitting her with &#8220;&#8216;bootstrap&#8217; jokes&#8221; just weren&#8217;t paying enough &#8220;attention&#8221; to the debate, she said.
&#8220;For GOPers who spent this week mocking the poor [with] &#8216;bootstrap&#8217; jokes, why don’t you listen to Ms. Hutchinson’s testimony [and] give one damn reason why we shouldn’t have an accurate poverty line in this country,&#8221; an incensed Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. &#8220;Unless of course you were talking [without] paying [attention] to the actual hearing.&#8221;
The Democrat, who is one of the most vocal supporters of fellow democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders&#8217; (I-VT) presidential campaign, linked to a video of a testimony from a single mom who told Congress, &#8220;I&#8217;ve pulled myself up by the bootstraps so many damn times that I ripped them off.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
For GOPers who spent this week mocking the poor w/“bootstrap” jokes, why don’t you listen to Ms. Hutchinson’s testimony &amp; give one damn reason why we shouldn’t have an accurate poverty line in this country.
Unless of course you were talking w/o paying attn to the actual hearing. <a href="https://t.co/4YCypOfxpB">https://t.co/4YCypOfxpB</a>
&mdash; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1226569210412879872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 9, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The &#8220;bootstrap&#8221; buzz started last Thursday when Ocasio-Cortez brought up the century-old saying to defend her left-wing economic agenda.
&#8220;I also want to thank you about bringing up the poverty draft and this idea of a bootstrap,&#8221; she said. &#8220;You know, this idea and this metaphor of a bootstrap started off as a joke because it’s a physical impossibility to lift yourself up by a bootstrap — by your shoelaces? It’s physically impossible. The whole thing is a joke.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/AOC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AOC</a> on America’s rags-to-riches ideal: “It’s a physical impossibility to lift yourself up by a bootstrap, by your shoelaces? It’s physically impossible. The whole thing is a joke.” <a href="https://t.co/9WNf8UE06T">pic.twitter.com/9WNf8UE06T</a>
&mdash; Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1225506336781357057?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
As noted by the <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/aoc-invokes-mlk-to-defend-comments-calling-bootstrap-meritocracy-a-joke">Washington Examiner</a>, it wasn&#8217;t the first time Ocasio-Cortez had disparaged the notion of being self-made in America. &#8220;Ah yes, of course, it’s classic Republican &#8216;bootstrap&#8217; meritocracy: where the smartest, hardest-working, most fitting person for the job just so happens to be your son-in-law,&#8221; she said back in 2018.
As<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/aoc-gave-her-own-version-of-obamas-you-didnt-build-that-the-backlash-triggered-these-damage-control-tweets"> The Daily Wire</a> noted, the democratic socialist&#8217;s comment is &#8220;an echo&#8221; of then-President Obama’s famous &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/heres-everything-you-need-know-about-elizabeth-aaron-bandler">you didn’t build that</a>&#8221; remark during the 2012 election. &#8220;If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Somebody else made that happen.&#8221;
Met with blowback, Ocasio-Cortez posted a series of defenses of her literal complaint about the metaphorical statement. First, she cited Martin Luther King Jr., who referenced the saying in a comment about racial inequality. &#8220;I see that the right is worked up that we pointed out the myth of bootstrapping when 60% of the wealth in this country is *inherited.* But hey, if you think I’m hopelessly dumb, try listening to MLK talk about “bootstrapping” &amp; the racial wealth gap, too,&#8221; she tweeted along with a video of King (posts below).
She then attempted to elaborate on her premise that no one is self-made in America, specifically citing those who serve in the military and businesses that get tax breaks: &#8220;What does &#8216;bootstrapping&#8217; mean to the GOP? That you didn’t go to public school? That you didn’t enlist in the military, which is funded by the gov? That you never got a tax break for starting a business or buying a home? That your parents never used food assistance to feed you?&#8221;
&#8220;Question for the GOP: Does starting a business with a 60 million dollar loan from your dad count as &#8216;bootstrapping?'&#8221; she asked in another post. &#8220;Does getting a $2 trillion dollar corporate handout from the GOP count as &#8216;bootstrapping?&#8217; Asking for a corrupt president &amp; his friends.&#8221;
Ocasio-Cortez then cited her own rags-to-riches story as supposed evidence that Americans don&#8217;t elevate their economic status by willpower, hard work and talent because she received some help from others along the way. &#8220;I worked my butt off to get elected against all odds, without any special connections or money,&#8221; she tweeted in a follow-up post. &#8220;I worked double shifts and wore through my shoes, outspent 10:1 to get elected. Even [with] all that hard work, it would be narcissistic to pretend I &#8216;bootstrapped&#8217; it alone [and without] others.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I see that the right is worked up that we pointed out the myth of bootstrapping when 60% of the wealth in this country is *inherited.*
But hey, if you think I’m hopelessly dumb, try listening to MLK talk about “bootstrapping” &amp; the racial wealth gap, too: <a href="https://t.co/RHdSfzaJzH">pic.twitter.com/RHdSfzaJzH</a>
&mdash; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1225544102390960128?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
What does “bootstrapping” mean to the GOP? That you didn’t go to public school? That you didn’t enlist in the military, which is funded by the gov? That you never got a tax break for starting a business or buying a home? That your parents never used food assistance to feed you?
&mdash; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1225545010508070917?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I worked my butt off to get elected against all odds, without any special connections or money. I worked double shifts and wore through my shoes, outspent 10:1 to get elected.
Even w/ all that hard work, it would be narcissistic to pretend I “bootstrapped” it alone &amp; w/o others.
&mdash; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1225547053863964676?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Ocasio-Cortez&#8217;s role as one of the more prominent Sanders&#8217; supporters has kept her in the news even more than usual as of late. Over the weekend, she also stirred up some <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/economics-major-ocasio-cortez-invents-new-economist-by-mashing-up-two-names-internet-implodes">blowback</a> online when she, an economics major, conflated two economists with very different theories on the field.
“It’s funny that you ask this because I was just reading today about how Milton Keynes, a famous economist back in the day, predicted that by 2030, US GDP would grow six to eight times what it is, which would allow for everyday people to work 15 hours a week,” she said. In a follow-up social media post, Ocasio-Cortez declared, &#8220;UGGGH TYPO. It’s John Maynard Keynes. Mixed his name with Milton Friedman — a (very) different economist.&#8221;
Like the &#8220;bootstrap&#8221; comment, her &#8220;Milton Keynes&#8221; conflation was met with criticism, including from Johns Hopkins Applied Economics Prof. Steve Hanke, who tweeted in response, &#8220;[Ocasio-Cortez] reveals the meaningless of an economics degree today. Her embrace of [socialism] has her so confused that she mixes up [Friedman] &amp; [Keynes]. As [Friedrich Hayek] said: ‘If socialists understood economics they wouldn’t be socialists.'&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/AOC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AOC</a> reveals the meaningless of an economics degree today. Her embrace of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/socialism?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#socialism</a> has her so confused that she mixes up <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Friedman?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Friedman</a> &amp; <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Keynes?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Keynes</a>. As <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Hayek?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Hayek</a> said: &quot;If socialists understood economics they wouldn&#39;t be socialists.&quot;<a href="https://t.co/udYOtubu5z">https://t.co/udYOtubu5z</a>
&mdash; Prof. Steve Hanke (@steve_hanke) <a href="https://twitter.com/steve_hanke/status/1226521887410356226?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 9, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-makes-series-of-election-predictions-for-democrats-ocasio-cortez-schumer-nadler">Trump Makes Series Of Election Predictions For Democrats: Ocasio-Cortez, Schumer, Nadler</a>

Ocasio-Cortez Has New ‘D*mn’ Message For Those Mocking Her For ‘Bootstrap’ Comment

It&#8217;s safe to say that James Carville is not a fan of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
The &#8220;Ragin&#8217; Cajun,&#8221; a longtime political strategist and former top adviser to President Bill Clinton, has been making the rounds blasting the socialist from Vermont — who polls currently show may blow away the field in the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday.
Carville said Monday that if Democrats give Sanders the 2020 presidential nomination, it will be the &#8220;end of days&#8221; for the party. And he said Sanders does not have the broad appeal necessary to win the general election in November, likening him to Jeremy Corbyn, the far-left leader of Britain&#8217;s Labour Party who was crushed in a recent high-profile British election.
“The only thing, the only thing between the United States and the abyss is the Democratic Party. That’s it. If we go the way of the British Labour Party, if we nominate Jeremy Corbyn, it’s going to be the end of days. &#8230; So I am scared to death, I really am,&#8221; Carville said on MSNBC&#8217;s &#8220;Morning Joe.&#8221;
“If we lose that, we’re going to be the British Labour Party and be out in some theoretical left-wing la-la land,” Carville said.
Carville said Sanders does not appeal to black voters, whom he said are not interested in socialism, a revolution, or &#8220;all this foolishness you hear.&#8221;
And the strategist who pushed Clinton to repeat the mantra, &#8220;it&#8217;s the economy, stupid,&#8221; said Sanders&#8217; appeal to the far-left of the Democratic Party is downright cultish.
&#8220;There’s a certain part of the Democratic Party that wants us to be a cult. I’m not interested in being in a cult. I’m 75 years old. I’m just not a very cult-y person,&#8221; he said.
&#8220;Some people in this country want a revolution, they want disruption. I don&#8217;t know — they scream at people, they go and bully people. I don&#8217;t know how you win an election like that, 78 years old standing up screaming at a microphone about revolution. But you gotta&#8217; give people an alternative,&#8221; Carville said.
It&#8217;s not the first time Carville has railed about Sanders. Last week, he said, “it matters who the candidate is, it matters what a party chooses to talk about!”
“I’m 75 years old. Why am I here doing this? Because I am scared to death, that’s why! Let’s get relevant here, people, for sure. All the Sanders people are taking pictures wishing Jeremy Corbyn the best. I don’t want to go down that path!”
And in a recent interview with Vox, Carville said he was “scared to death” of the upcoming election.
“Look, the turnout in the Iowa caucus was below what we expected, what we wanted. Trump’s approval rating is probably as high as it’s been. This is very bad. And now it appears the party can’t even count votes. What the hell am I supposed to think?” he said.
“I’ll just say it this way: The fate of the world depends on the Democrats getting their s**t together and winning in November,” Carville said. “We have to beat Trump. And so far, I don’t like what I see. And a lot of people I talk to feel the same way.”

Politicon 2019 – Day 1

‘END OF DAYS’: Carville Warns Dems About Choosing Sanders — ‘I’m Not Interested In Being In A Cult!’

Bill Clinton

Jeremy Corbyn

Morning Joe

Progressivism

Longtime Democratic Party strategist and top Bill Clinton ally James Carville unloaded on the Democratic Party during an interview published on Friday, saying that when it comes to the party&#8217;s ideas, the American people &#8220;don&#8217;t want to hear this s**t&#8221; and that Democrats are losing their minds over the upcoming election.
When asked by left-wing <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/7/21123518/trump-2020-election-democratic-party-james-carville">Vox</a> why he was &#8220;scared to death&#8221; of the upcoming election, Carville responded, &#8220;Look, the turnout in the Iowa caucus was below what we expected, what we wanted. Trump’s approval rating is probably as high as it’s been. This is very bad. And now it appears the party can’t even count votes. What the hell am I supposed to think?&#8221;
&#8220;I’ll just say it this way: The fate of the world depends on the Democrats getting their s**t together and winning in November,&#8221; Carville continued. &#8220;We have to beat Trump. And so far, I don’t like what I see. And a lot of people I talk to feel the same way.&#8221;
Carville said he does not know where the party went wrong, considering that it did well in House races in 2018: &#8220;Now it’s like we’re losing our damn minds.&#8221;
It&#8217;s fair to note that after the 2018 races, radical far-left Democrats like socialist Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Ilhan Omar (MN), and Rashida Tlaib (MI) have driven the party increasingly to the far-left.
&#8220;We have candidates on the debate stage talking about open borders and decriminalizing illegal immigration,&#8221; Carville said. &#8220;They’re talking about doing away with nuclear energy and fracking. You’ve got Bernie Sanders talking about letting criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells. It doesn’t matter what you think about any of that, or if there are good arguments — talking about that is not how you win a national election.&#8221;
Carville said that if Sanders gets elected, &#8220;there’s no chance in hell we’ll ever win the Senate with Sanders at the top of the party defining it for the public.&#8221;
Carville then continued to repeat the lie that &#8220;18% of the country elects more than half of our senators,&#8221; a false statement that he also made on <a href="https://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari/watch/-wake-up-dem-vet-calls-for-party-to-be-more-relevant-diverse-after-iowa-chaos-78129221946">MSNBC</a>.
Newsweek <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/senators-who-voted-convict-trump-represent-18-million-more-americans-those-who-voted-acquit-1485972">reported</a> that the Republican-controlled Senate seats represent 44% of the U.S. population, not 18% — although the actual number may be as high as 47.19%.
When asked if the party has gone too far left, Carville responded, &#8220;They’ve tacked off the damn radar screen. And look, I don’t consider myself a moderate or a centrist. I’m a liberal. &#8230; Here’s another stupid thing: Democrats talking about free college tuition or debt forgiveness. I’m not here to debate the idea. What I can tell you is that people all over this country worked their way through school, sent their kids to school, paid off student loans. They don’t want to hear this s**t. And you saw Warren confronted by an angry voter over this. It’s just not a winning message.&#8221;
Carville then claimed, without evidence, that Trump was a &#8220;career criminal who’s stealing everything that isn’t nailed down out of the White House.&#8221;
Carville then went off on the leftist mainstream media over a New York Times editorial board member&#8217;s mocking comments about Louisiana State University (LSU) canceling classes for the NCAA football national championship game, saying: &#8220;You know how f***ing patronizing that is to people in the South or in the middle of the country? First, LSU has an unusually high graduation rate, but that’s not the point. It’s the g*****n smugness. This is from a guy who lives in New York and serves on the Times editorial board and there’s not a single person he knows that doesn’t pat him on the back for that kind of tweet. He’s so fucking smart. &#8230; The Democratic Party has to drive a narrative that doesn’t give off vapors that we’re smarter than everyone or culturally arrogant.&#8221;

CNN 2007 Election Breakfast

Top Democrat Strategist James Carville On 2020 Elections: ‘We’re Losing Our Damn Minds’, People ‘Don’t Want To Hear This S**t’

Louisiana

Louisiana State University

On Thursday, far-left Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), speaking literally about a common expression on hard work, said it was &#8220;physically impossible&#8221; for people to pull themselves up by their own &#8220;bootstraps&#8221; or &#8220;shoelaces.&#8221;
&#8220;This idea of a bootstrap,&#8221; started AOC. &#8220;You know this idea, this metaphor of a bootstrap started off as a joke.&#8221;
&#8220;Because, it&#8217;s a physical impossibility to lift yourself up by a bootstrap, by your shoelaces,&#8221; she continued. &#8220;It&#8217;s physically impossible!&#8221;
Ocasio-Cortez, a former bartender who is now a congresswoman, added: &#8220;The whole thing is a joke.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/AOC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AOC</a> on America’s rags-to-riches ideal: “It’s a physical impossibility to lift yourself up by a bootstrap, by your shoelaces? It’s physically impossible. The whole thing is a joke.” <a href="https://t.co/9WNf8UE06T">pic.twitter.com/9WNf8UE06T</a>
&mdash; Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1225506336781357057?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Ocasio-Cortez was seemingly referencing a piece from the <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps-nonsense_n_5b1ed024e4b0bbb7a0e037d4?guccounter=1&amp;guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly90LmNvL2o3TXNrSzdOYU8_YW1wPTE&amp;guce_referrer_sig=AQAAABocZRdY1bU6ySfkwaOIokQ89kdcJRLsH0p6EdZ9zzbLZCRK7MV6xTtqaVsMCrjEpf3NJIsASWonygQrMKhuQtLNpuWwOURNnNuK5tZzOhZZtXwXOM3UwEIo2vxpEfMkoJzKIpVuOYqvWf-cWJ8hFeYPEPCoLy3PHtVcXQUHjao4">HuffPost</a>: &#8220;Why The Phrase ‘Pull Yourself Up By Your Bootstraps’ Is Nonsense.&#8221;
Here&#8217;s a bit from the post:
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="1" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
<blockquote>“Pull yourself up by your bootstraps.” It’s a common phrase in American political discourse, particularly present in conservative rhetoric about self-reliance.</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote>
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="2" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
The concept is simple: To pull yourself up by your bootstraps means to succeed or elevate yourself without any outside help.
</div>
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="3" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
But when you examine this expression and its current meaning, it doesn’t seem to make much sense.
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="4" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
<blockquote>To pull yourself up by your bootstraps is actually physically impossible. In fact, the original meaning of the phrase was more along the lines of “to try to do something completely absurd.”</blockquote>
AOC was roundly mocked for the comments, not just for the bizarre literal take, but for the anti-American sentiment, which is disproven every day in America.
</div>
&#8220;Long gone are the days when, say, a lower-middle class, outer-borough bartender could ascend to the commanding heights of America&#8217;s ruling elite,&#8221; The Daily Beast&#8217;s Lachlan Markay said, clearly speaking of Ocasio-Cortez herself.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Long gone are the days when, say, a lower-middle class, outer-borough bartender could ascend to the commanding heights of America&#39;s ruling elite <a href="https://t.co/NCA8R28XkR">https://t.co/NCA8R28XkR</a>
&mdash; Lachlan Markay (@lachlan) <a href="https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/1225514432740110342?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;In other news, cats don&#8217;t actually have people&#8217;s tongues, nor do pots have the ability to call kettles black,&#8221; joked Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
In other news, cats don&#39;t actually have people&#39;s tongues, nor do pots have the ability to call kettles black <a href="https://t.co/XN6pA1OsNV">https://t.co/XN6pA1OsNV</a>
&mdash; Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1225512210660720640?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Blaze TV&#8217;s Lauren Chen posted:
<blockquote>&#8220;Not sure what&#8217;s funnier: &gt;AOC taking metaphors literally &gt;AOC, a former bartender who is now a congressman, dismissing the idea of pulling yourself up by the bootstraps.&#8221;</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Not sure what&#39;s funnier:
&gt;AOC taking metaphors literally
&gt;AOC, a former bartender who is now a congressman, dismissing the idea of pulling yourself up by the bootstraps <a href="https://t.co/VuMYnlEmtR">https://t.co/VuMYnlEmtR</a>
&mdash; Lauren Chen (@TheLaurenChen) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheLaurenChen/status/1225528399076175875?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Ocasio-Cortez also made headlines on Tuesday, when she <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-aoc-six-other-democrats-boycotting-trumps-state-of-the-union-address">announced</a> that she would boycott President Donald Trump&#8217;s annual State of the Union Address.
The Democrat wasn&#8217;t alone, of course. According to reports from <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/481424-at-least-four-democrats-to-boycott-trump-state-of-the-union-address">The Hill</a> and <a href="https://www.axios.com/aoc-pressley-state-of-the-union-boycott-79523e81-ddad-41b0-981b-41b981bc2e36.html?utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_campaign=organic&amp;utm_content=1100">Axios</a>, the following Democrats boycotted the speech, too (and four more Democrats walked out mid-speech):
<blockquote>Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY)
Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA)
Rep. Al Green (D-TX)
Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN)
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR)
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA)
Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-FL)
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA)</blockquote>
“After much deliberation, I have decided that I will not use my presence at a state ceremony to normalize Trump’s lawless conduct &amp; subversion of the Constitution,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a Twitter thread on Tuesday. “None of this is normal, and I will not legitimize it. Consequently, I will not be attending the State of the Union.&#8221;
“This is a deeply personal decision for each member to make, and a choice I did not take lightly. I will be hopping on Instagram Live later this evening to connect with my constituents and follow up with their questions about #SOTU,” AOC added.
Instead of attending the speech, the congresswoman spoke to viewers via Instagram. While responding to questions, Ocasio-Cortez mocked conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who announced earlier this week that he was diagnosed with advanced lung cancer.
Limbaugh, who was given the Presidential Medal of Freedom during the SOTU, is a “virulent racist,” AOC claimed, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-aoc-mocks-cancer-stricken-rush-limbaugh-suggests-conspiracy-behind-trump-reaching-out-to-blacks">The Daily Wire</a> reported Wednesday. Furthermore, the Democrat said Limbaugh&#8217;s reaction to the award was “disingenuous,&#8221; calling the cancer-stricken host a &#8220;joke&#8221; who &#8220;needed an &#8220;Oprah moment.&#8221;
Here&#8217;s the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-aoc-mocks-cancer-stricken-rush-limbaugh-suggests-conspiracy-behind-trump-reaching-out-to-blacks">transcript</a>:
<blockquote>“First of all, the Presidential Medal of Freedom is an extraordinarily scared, um, award. We’re talking about putting someone on the same level as Rosa Parks, you know, for example in terms of their contributions to American progress. Rush Limbaugh is a virulent racist, um, but even just on top of that, um, to do it in the middle of a State of the Union and not even dignify it with its own ceremony as it has, there’s all sorts of norms that are being violated, not just for people’s humanity, but also it truly just cheapens the value of it. Um, also him pretending to be surprised was such a joke that this has been news all day, there have been multiple reports from multiple news outlets saying that Rush Limbaugh was going to receive the Medal of Freedom and then Trump announced it and he had to like pretend that this was some kind of Oprah moment, um, was so disingenuous and to do that and to give it to Rush Limbaugh when there were plenty of people in that audience that have contributed positively to the fabric of American society, much more frankly, than he has, um. You know, but it’s red meat to his base, Trump knows what he is doing and he wants to assert that Rush Limbaugh is somehow on the same level as Rosa Parks, um, and it’s truly nauseating.”</blockquote>

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

WATCH: AOC Says It’s ‘Physically Impossible’ To Pull Yourself Up By Your Bootstraps

State of the Union

There is no doubt that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is now the leading Democratic presidential candidate. That&#8217;s not because his ideas are overwhelmingly popular — a majority of Americans approve of capitalism, while less than 1 in 5 like socialism; few Americans are on board with total nationalization of health care, even if many like the idea of universal health care; most Americans do not approve of Sanders&#8217; anti-American ideology with regard to foreign policy.
But nobody in the Democratic Party can stop Bernie.
There&#8217;s a reason for this: The Democratic Party has fed off the energy of Sanders&#8217; ideology hoping that, eventually, the voters would come to their senses. Leading candidates have echoed Sanders&#8217; talking points. Sen. Elizabeth Warren adopted and then abandoned Medicare for All, and former Vice President Joe Biden mirrored Sanders&#8217; Howard Zinn historical perspective. Those who have attempted to siphon off Sanders&#8217; base and approximate his authenticity have failed dramatically.
Instead, Sanders continues to resonate with the base. After all, if you&#8217;re going to go with an anti-Constitution, anti-free market, intersectionality-based perspective, why water it down with insincerity? Sanders brags about the fact that his ideology has never changed. He&#8217;s right. Back in 1976, he suggested that he favored &#8220;the public ownership of utilities, banks and major industries.&#8221; He sounded off for decades on the glories of communist Cuba and the Soviet Union; he basked in the joys of bread lines, saying: &#8220;In other countries, people don&#8217;t line up for food. The rich get the food, and the poor starve to death.&#8221; Sanders trots out campaign surrogates who openly claim that the United States is rooted in genocide and racism, and that the American system must be fundamentally remade.
This is radical stuff. But radicals have passion. And politicians of the Democratic Party are unwilling to quell that passion — not when they believe they can capture it and turn it against President Donald Trump.
This is the mirror image of the Republican problem with Trump in 2016: Trump ran on a platform of bashing the Iraq War and America&#8217;s intelligence agencies, blasting free trade, pledging to avoid entitlement program reforms and slamming the door on immigration. Instead of fighting those elements, Republicans decided to tinge their own campaigns with those attitudes and then assume Trump would collapse under the weight of his own personality flaws. That never happened.
Democrats seem to be waiting for another collapse that simply isn&#8217;t coming. Sanders isn&#8217;t going anywhere. His floor is high, and his ceiling remains low — just like Trump. Electability problems aren&#8217;t going to dissuade his supporters, who believe — correctly — that inauthenticity provides its own electoral issues.
There was another path. Some Democrat could have completely and utterly rejected Sanders&#8217; perspective on the world. Some Democrat could have rejected Sanders&#8217; view that America has been a nefarious force in the world; some Democrat could have argued that America isn&#8217;t perfect but that it has always been great; some Democrat could have talked about the wonders of the free market while arguing for greater strictures on it. After all, the majority of Democrats count themselves as patriots who don&#8217;t despise the free market.
But no Democrat was willing to stand up to the Sanders base. They were too greedy for its energy, and too optimistic that the energy was transferable. It wasn&#8217;t. And so the Democratic Party has been captured by an ideology foreign to it — the ideology of Noam Chomsky infused directly into the bloodstream of a party that once touted former President John F. Kennedy. Partisanship is a hell of a drug.

SHAPIRO: Why The Democrats Won’t Stop Bernie

Health Care

There are a few lessons we can learn from the disastrous beginning of the Democrat Party&#8217;s primary process. A process that, as they boasted in a <a href="https://twitter.com/DNC/status/1224456542478462977">tweet</a> on Monday afternoon, they&#8217;d spent the last three years preparing for. Well the pilot of the Hindenburg was also &#8220;prepared,&#8221; but all of the preparation in the world cannot compensate for incompetent execution.
Somehow, after the build up, Monday night ended without a winner — or any results at all. It seems the Democrats decided to hand the facilitation and management of its primary over to a <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/iowa-caucus-results-delayed-by-apparent-app-issue-11580801699">secretive firm</a> literally called Shadow Inc, which is a bit like sending your children to a daycare center named Child Neglect LLC.
These are the sorts of unforced errors the Democrats cannot seem to stop themselves from making, as they continue to achieve the remarkable feat of making the Republican Party look competent by comparison. Of course, I may be giving them too much credit by calling the Iowa debacle an &#8220;error.&#8221; That categorization assumes there is no deliberate corruption at play here, and that is probably not a safe assumption. Especially given the Democrats&#8217; track record with primaries.
All in all, this amounts to more good news for Donald Trump, a man who has been blessed with the most impotent and ineffectual adversaries the world has ever seen. But it is also an ominous warning about the future, should Trump still manage to lose to these blundering clowns (a possibility that seems less likely with each passing day).
<iframe title="Democrat Clown Show Wants To Run Health Care System | The Matt Walsh Show Ep. 419" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qpWybf4OtGk?start=77&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
We should keep in mind that these people, who cannot figure out how to operate their own primary, also want to operate the entire health care system. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren in particular have promised a complete government takeover of health care. Indeed, Sanders is on the record advocating a complete government takeover of <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/kfile-bernie-nationalization/index.html">all major industries</a>. Which, by the way, is full-blown communism. And not &#8220;communism&#8221; in the loose, pejorative sense, but actual communism. The communism of Soviet Russia and the Khmer Rouge and many of the other evil, blood-drenched regimes of the 20th century.
This latter fact should be enough to cause us to run fast and far away from any candidate who advocates a full government takeover of any industry, let alone every industry. But if the 20th century is too far in the past to make an impression, than this Monday is lesson enough.
In order for the plans proposed by Sanders, Warren, and company, to have any appeal, we must first place our trust in the skill, competency, and integrity of government bureaucrats. This is the part of the case that the socialists never bother trying to make. Yes, they can tell a harrowing tale about the evils of capitalism, and they can convince us to look with suspicion on corporations and those dreaded billionaires, but they never get to the part where they actually explain why we should trust them instead.
That&#8217;s because even they could not make that argument with a straight face. We&#8217;ve all been to the DMV. We know how the government works. This week is just the latest example.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-inconsistencies-found-in-democrat-iowa-caucus-reporting-conspiracies-explode">‘Inconsistencies’ Found In Democrat Iowa Caucus Reporting, Conspiracies Explode</a>

WALSH: The Democrat Party Can’t Run Its Own Primary But Wants To Run The Health Care System

In a recent phone interview with <a href="https://time.com/5776429/alexandria-ocasio-bernie-sanders-iowa/">Time</a> magazine, democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) sent some shots across the bow of the Democratic National Committee, warning that they could be getting themselves into &#8220;dangerous territory in terms of defeating Trump.&#8221;
Ocasio-Cortez has been one of the most vocal supporters of fellow democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who is now running neck and neck in some recent polls with longtime frontrunner Joe Biden for the Democratic nomination. With the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses finally upon us, the tension between the various candidates has escalated — and with Sanders once again outperforming expectations, he&#8217;s become the favorite target of the Democratic establishment, or at least that&#8217;s how many of his supporters see it.
While the freshman representative initially tried to downplay the increasing disunity in the party, calling it &#8220;overblown,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez&#8217;s comments revealed the growing concern among Sanders supporters that they are going to see a re-run of 2016, when the DNC appeared to deliberately take steps to ensure Sanders lost to establishment favorite Hillary Clinton.
&#8220;Bernie has said this, I absolutely believe this: whoever gets the nomination, we have to rally behind them, no matter who it is,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez told Time in the interview. &#8220;And I would hope that everybody would do so if Bernie is the nominee as well.&#8221;
If they don&#8217;t, said Ocasio-Cortez, it would be a &#8220;dangerous&#8221; mistake. Also &#8220;dangerous,&#8221; would be the DNC using &#8220;superdelegate[s] or other kind of subversive policies&#8221; to undermine a candidate.
&#8220;I don’t think it’s a good idea for people to try to use superdelegate or other kind of subversive policies to deny anybody the nomination because it’s incredibly divisive to do so, and very demoralizing, which is a direct threat in November,&#8221; the far-left congresswoman warned.
&#8220;The moment you start playing games trying to deny whoever is the nominee, we really start to get into dangerous territory in terms of defeating Trump,&#8221; she said.
The use of superdelegates, which proved to be a divisive issue in 2016, with many Sanders supporters accusing the DNC of &#8220;rigging&#8221; the process to ensure a Clinton win, has come up again, with multiple reports citing Democratic insiders discussing their use, as reported Friday by <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/dnc-superdelegates-110083">Politico</a>:
<blockquote>
A small group of Democratic National Committee members has privately begun gauging support for a plan to potentially weaken Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign and head off a brokered convention.
In conversations on the sidelines of a DNC executive committee meeting and in telephone calls and texts in recent days, about a half-dozen members have discussed the possibility of a policy reversal to ensure that so-called superdelegates can vote on the first ballot at the party’s national convention. Such a move would increase the influence of DNC members, members of Congress and other top party officials, who now must wait until the second ballot to have their say if the convention is contested.
</blockquote>
Ocasio-Cortez&#8217;s reference to other &#8220;subversive policies&#8221; follows a last-second DNC debate rule change that has been met with strong outcry from supporters of several candidates. On Friday, the DNC announced that it will drop the donor quota for prospective primary debaters, a move that allows self-funded billionaire candidate Michael Bloomberg, who has risen to fourth in the polls, to participate.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/michael-moore-trump-both-blast-democratic-national-committee-for-latest-move-rigging-game-against-bernie]">Michael Moore, Trump Both Blast Democratic National Committee For Latest Move ‘Rigging’ Game Against Bernie</a>

Ocasio-Cortez: Democrats Could Get In ‘Dangerous Territory In Terms Of Defeating Trump’

Democratic National Committee

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) repeatedly demonized successful business owners in an interview during a Martin Luther King Jr. Day event on Monday, literally arguing that business owners were lazy slave owners who profit off the backs of minorities who are &#8220;dying&#8221; because the business owners are successful.
Ocasio-Cortez made the extreme remarks when she was asked why successful business owners were &#8220;the enemy of health care.&#8221;
&#8220;Well, you didn’t make those widgets, did you?&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez began. &#8220;Because you employed thousands of people and paid them less than a living wage to make those widgets for you. You didn’t make those widgets.&#8221;
&#8220;You sat on a couch while thousands of people were paid modern day slave wages, and in some cases real slave, real modern-day slavery, uh, depending on where you are in terms of food production,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez claimed. &#8220;You made that money off the backs of undocumented people. You made that money off the backs of black and brown people being paid under a living wage.&#8221;
&#8220;You made that money off the backs of single mothers and all these people who are literally dying because they can’t afford to live and so no one ever makes a billion dollars,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez continued. &#8220;You take a billion dollars and all of that to say, is that it’s, and I’m not here to villainize and to say that billionaires are inherently morally corrupt – but they are, I mean, I think there is a case, but um, but, it’s not to say that, it’s to say that this system that we live in, life in capitalism, always ends in billionaires. If you don’t do it, someone else will. It’s who decides to make that choice is just kind of up to, you know, circumstance.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
AOC on why successful businessmen don’t deserve their wealth: “You didn’t make those widgets! You sat on a couch while thousands of people were paid modern day slave wages, and in some cases real modern-day slavery; you made that money off the backs of undocumented people &#8230;&quot; <a href="https://t.co/Y2w3nSfezo">pic.twitter.com/Y2w3nSfezo</a>
&mdash; Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1219370971779555334?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Ocasio-Cortez has a history of making wild and largely unsubstantiated claims during this event as she claimed last year that being a billionaire is &#8220;immoral&#8221; and suggested that the world was going to end in 12 years if her radical socialist agenda was not adopted.
“I think the part of it that is generational is that millennials and people, in Gen Z, and all these folks that come after us are looking up and we’re like, the world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change,” Ocasio-Cortez said without evidence. “And your biggest issue, your biggest issue is how are going to pay for it? — and like this is the war, this is our World War II.”
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/AOC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AOC</a> on millennials and social media: &quot;We’re, like, the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change&quot; <a href="https://t.co/HjhbVyfFN4">pic.twitter.com/HjhbVyfFN4</a>
&mdash; Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1087550417653940224?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Ocasio-Cortez also said that government should dictate how well people are able to live by limiting the success of those who are hard working and successful.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY):
-Government should determine how well people live -Wants “moral technology” -People striving to be highly successful is bad -A world that allows billionaires is “immoral” <a href="https://t.co/RyycflBQLa">pic.twitter.com/RyycflBQLa</a>
&mdash; Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1087591902579384320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“Do we live in a moral world that allows for billionaires?” leftist Ta-Nehisi Coates asked. “Is that a moral outcome in and of itself?”
“No, it’s not,” Ocasio-Cortez responded. “It’s not.”
The Daily Wire also <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ocasio-snaps-world-could-end-12-years-algorithms-ryan-saavedra">reported</a> at the time that Ocasio-Cortez &#8220;also suggested that the U.S. needed to pay &#8216;reparations&#8217; like Germany did &#8216;after the Holocaust&#8217; if it wants to heal: &#8216;Until America tells the truth about itself, we are not going to heal.'&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) suggests that the U.S. needs to pay “reparations” like Germany did “after the Holocaust” if it wants to heal: “Until America tells the truth about itself, we are not going to heal” <a href="https://t.co/NlFWwtFH4u">pic.twitter.com/NlFWwtFH4u</a>
&mdash; Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1087631204067684353?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez  And Bernie Sanders Attend Green New Deal Rally At Howard University

AOC Demonizes Business Owners: They’re Lazy Slave Owners, Employees ‘Literally Dying’

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) demanded during an interview on Monday that billionaires give up control of their companies and give up the power that they have earned if they want to be considered &#8220;ethical.&#8221;
“If Jeff Bezos wants to be a good person, you turn Amazon into a worker cooperative,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez said. &#8220;You know, like, not what do I do with all of this money that I have created with this unjust system and, if, usually you’re a billionaire that means that you control a massive system.&#8221;
&#8220;It means that you own oil supplies, it means that you control textiles, it means that you have a massive labor force under your control and to be ethical if you’re a billionaire today the thing that you need to do is give up control and power,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez continued. &#8220;So, I don’t want your money, as much as we want your power.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
AOC says she wants this clip getting out there: <a href="https://t.co/qV8sTcxqqM">pic.twitter.com/qV8sTcxqqM</a>
&mdash; Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) <a href="https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1219376445769814016?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
During the same Martin Luther King Jr. Day event, Ocasio-Cortez repeatedly demonized business owners, declaring that they are lazy slave owners who profit off the backs of their employees who she claimed, without evidence, &#8220;literally dying because they can’t afford to live.&#8221;
Ocasio-Cortez made the remarks in response to a question about why she thinks that business owners are the enemy of health care.
&#8220;Well, you didn’t make those widgets, did you?&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez began. &#8220;Because you employed thousands of people and paid them less than a living wage to make those widgets for you. You didn’t make those widgets.&#8221;
&#8220;You sat on a couch while thousands of people were paid modern day slave wages, and in some cases real slave, real modern-day slavery, uh, depending on where you are in terms of food production,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez claimed. &#8220;You made that money off the backs of undocumented people. You made that money off the backs of black and brown people being paid under a living wage.&#8221;
&#8220;You made that money off the backs of single mothers and all these people who are literally dying because they can’t afford to live and so no one ever makes a billion dollars,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez continued. &#8220;You take a billion dollars and all of that to say, is that it’s, and I’m not here to villainize and to say that billionaires are inherently morally corrupt – but they are, I mean, I think there is a case, but um, but, it’s not to say that, it’s to say that this system that we live in, life in capitalism, always ends in billionaires. If you don’t do it, someone else will. It’s who decides to make that choice is just kind of up to, you know, circumstance.&#8221;
During the same event, Ocasio-Cortez tried to gaslight the audience by falsely claiming that the Democrat party was a conservative party and that it was not a leftist party.
&#8220;We don&#8217;t have a left party in the United States,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez falsely claimed. &#8220;The Democratic Party is not a left party. The Democratic Party is a center or center-conservative party. We do not advocate, we can&#8217;t even get a floor vote on Medicare for All, not even a floor vote that gets voted down, we can&#8217;t even get a vote on it. So this is not a party.&#8221;

Women&#8217;s March 2019 &#8211; New York City

Ocasio-Cortez To Billionaires: ‘Give Up Control And Power,’ ‘We Want Your Power’

Primary season will soon be underway, and the race for the Democratic presidential nomination is only just warming up. While former Vice President Joe Biden still leads in several states, as well as nationally, other candidates have climbed to the top of the heap in early primary states like Iowa and New Hampshire.
Although Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), a self-proclaimed democratic socialist, is considered the most progressive candidate on the bench, each of the other top-tier contenders have offered up policy ideas that would grow the size of the federal government by leaps and bounds.
With socialism and the more friendly-sounding “democratic socialism” seemingly becoming the brand of the Democratic Party, as well as the polls suggesting that more and more voters view the ideology favorably (or at least what they understand to be the ideology), it’s important to properly frame the debate.
The following is an interview I conducted with economist Otto Brøns-Petersen, who is the director for analysis at the Copenhagen-based Center for Political Studies (CEPOS).
<blockquote>DW: When you see people like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and other Democrats touting the virtues of “democratic socialism,” what do they mean? Following that, what does it really mean?
BRØNS-PETERSEN: I fear that some of them really mean socialism. Hopefully, most of them do not. Whether democratic or not, socialism is defined by central government control, planning, and ownership of large parts of the economy.
DW: What’s your opinion of socialism as a philosophical concept and as a form of government?
BRØNS-PETERSEN: As Friedrich Hayek pointed out, you cannot have a free society without economic freedom, so socialism would mean the end of a free society. Economic freedom is the freedom for people to interact on a voluntary basis to pursue their individual goals. Socialism replaces the diversity of goals by the goals set by the planners. That does not only spell the end of individual freedom, but also of economic wellbeing, because socialism is incapable of handling a complex modern economy.
DW: Many progressives point to the “Nordic Model” as an example of “working” socialism. What would you say to that?
BRØNS-PETERSEN: The Nordic countries are far from socialist. It is true that some of us have large public sectors and high taxes, but in most other respects, the Nordic countries are more free-market than even the United States. The government doesn’t own or plan the economy in the Nordic countries, and in some respects, doesn’t even regulate as much as other Western countries. There are, for instance, no minimum wage laws in Denmark.
DW: One argument put forward by many advocates of socialism is that it simply hasn’t been done “correctly.” All the failures aren’t related to “real” socialism, but how it was improperly implemented, and the bad actors who co-opted the movement (example: Venezuela). What would you say to the people who make such an argument?
BRØNS-PETERSEN: No country which has become socialist has escaped dire economic consequences nor the loss of human freedom. This is no strange coincidence, but inherent to the nature of socialism. You can’t have freedom, prosperity, and socialism at the same time because of the nature of socialism, not because all socialists so far turned out to be bad people.
DW: Another argument I hear is that capitalism in the United States is failing, or has failed. Now, the free market in the United States is heavily controlled, meaning it’s not as free as people believe. What would you say to those who see the United States as the prime example of allegedly “failed” capitalism?
BRØNS-PETERSEN: The U.S. has largely been a capitalist success story since its founding. It still is in many respects, being, for example, the world leader in digital technology. But it is also true that it has become quite regulated, and that some of these regulations represent a kind of “crony capitalism.” There is evidence that the increasing regulatory burden has slowed economic growth. You don’t deal with disappointing growth by regulating even more; it would rather produce a vicious circle.
DW: Why are young people in the United States so drawn to socialism?
BRØNS-PETERSEN: I think there are more than one reason. Some are what James Buchanan, the Nobel Laureate in economics, called “libertarian socialists.” They value freedom and individuality, but mistakenly think socialism will make them more free. Buchanan himself used to be a socialist for exactly that reason, but realized that capitalism is a cornerstone of a free society. To some extent, we on the Right who favor capitalism have neglected to communicate the vision of a free society. At the same time, both the Left and the Right have come to embrace the old Marxist ideas that “everything is political” and that all human interaction is basically zero sum, pitting one group against another. But while politics is zero sum most of the time, the free market is positive sum.
Furthermore, I think identity politics and post-modernism is to blame for some of the reemergence of socialism as an ideal. The idea that you should force people to behave in accordance with your own sensibilities has been deeply damaging to morality and the respect for other people. Socialism has become a grand name for anti-social behavior. 
Finally, too many young people don’t know the historic price Europe has payed for socialist ideas when communists ruled behind the Iron Curtain.
DW: What is the best (and worst) case scenario for the United States if more people like Sen. Bernie Sanders are elected and hold power in the government?
BRØNS-PETERSEN: Luckily, the Founding Fathers of the U.S. have put very strong institutions in place to secure that the election of one man, even to the office of president, cannot change American society overnight. But if socialism were to gain a stronghold in the United States, there is no doubt that the U.S. in the longer run would be less free and well-off, and would cease being a beacon to the rest of world.
You are not guarantied to be one of the leading countries and economies forever, no matter what the politicians do. Just compare the fate of North America to that of Latin America, which were more inspired by socialists and populists. If you had followed their policies, you would have had their standard of living, too.
DW: What is the allure of “socialism”?
BRØNS-PETERSEN: Many of us have a strong socialist instinct to “provide according to ability and live according to need.” That is, in fact, the way most families work. But a whole society cannot do that. In fact, the only way a family can be free to organize itself as a “communist commune” is when society at large is free and market-based. So, we need to learn that our collectivist instincts are appropriate only in small group settings, but a recipe for disaster on a national scale.
DW: Do you think we can reverse the tide of the increasing popularity of “socialist” policies? And if so, how?
BRØNS-PETERSEN: You need to spell out a clear vision of a free society, a broadly appealing ideal. You have to show that deregulation means more economic growth, while regulating more will achieve the opposite of what the socialists promise. And I think we have to rid ourselves of zero sum politics, even when it emerges from the right side of the political spectrum. Individual freedom should once more be the highest political goal, and political intervention an exception to the rule of freedom. And then we shouldn’t forget the lessons of history, for instance, that the Nordic countries are not a socialist success story. We are not socialist today, and our high taxes didn’t make us rich. In fact, Denmark used to rank higher among the richest countries in the world when we were a low tax country.</blockquote>
I’d like to thank Otto Brøns-Petersen for taking the time to speak with me about the ideology of socialism. For more information, check out his article for CATO on the “Danish model” <a href="https://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/danish-model-dont-try-home">here</a>, and watch his informational video for PragerU below:
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tzEPKrHalaY" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>

Sen. Bernie Sanders.

INTERVIEW: Danish Economist Otto Brøns-Petersen On The Myths And Failures Of Socialism

Economy

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a former waitress and bartender from Brooklyn who now serves in Congress as a lawmaker, has come up with a new idea: Free everything for everybody.
The self-styled democratic socialist said in a recent speech that there should be a &#8220;guaranteed universality&#8221; for all of the things that people need.
AOC said that &#8220;guaranteed universality&#8221; means &#8220;at the very least, a $15 an hour minimum wage or maybe higher as we introduce things&#8221; is needed. &#8220;It means Medicare for all, or at the very least guaranteed health care as a right. Housing as a right.&#8221;
&#8220;So we have to really say, for the things we depend on to live, we need at bare minimum a public option if not guaranteed universality,&#8221; the 29-year-old lawmaker said.
How to pay for all that free stuff. Not to worry, the international relations and economics major said.
&#8220;So I think in that transition it is worker centered and it invests in jobs and invests in labor. I think that progressive taxation is potentially a component of it,&#8221; she said.
&#8220;It’s not about how are we going to pay for it, it’s how do we want to pay for it,&#8221; she said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Ocasio-Cortez: need “guaranteed universality” of anything people depend on<a href="https://t.co/f6lzKfrmxW">https://t.co/f6lzKfrmxW</a> <a href="https://t.co/KMNkIfPNLh">pic.twitter.com/KMNkIfPNLh</a>
&mdash; RNC Research (@RNCResearch) <a href="https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1206662196907909120?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The term &#8220;guaranteed universality&#8221; is reminiscent of a plan that has been deployed in Europe and some Scandinavian countries. &#8220;Universal Basic Income&#8221; provides a set amount — say, $1,000 — per month for all citizens, whether they work or not. That money can be used to buy the necessities of life.
Twitter lit up after AOC&#8217;s brilliant plan.
&#8220;God she is dumb&#8230; free&#8230;.free&#8230;.free. Everything is free and everything is a right. Free housing, how is that going to work? All the strides that Trump has made with the economy and the dems would flush it all down the toilet. It&#8217;s like they never want to win another election!&#8221; wrote on user.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
God she is dumb&#8230;free&#8230;.free&#8230;.free. Everything is free and everything is a right. Free housing,how is that going to work? All the strides that Trump has made with the economy and the dems would flush it all down the toilet. It&#39;s like they never want to win another election!
&mdash; Garrett Sikes (@GarrettSikes2) <a href="https://twitter.com/GarrettSikes2/status/1206717471610298368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;The first lesson of economics is scarcity: there is never enough of anything to fully satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.&#8217; &#8211; Thomas Sowell,&#8221; wrote another.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;The first lesson of economics is scarcity: there is never enough of anything to fully satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.&quot; &#8211; Thomas Sowell
&mdash; Morey L (@MoreyL5) <a href="https://twitter.com/MoreyL5/status/1206706270801137664?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Yet another replied, and linked to an article headline: &#8220;Harvard study finds increased minimum wages contribute to restaurant failures in California’s Bay Area.&#8221;
&#8220;Two years after this study and hundreds more businesses closing because of the $15/hr min wage, idiots like Ocasio still spew their socialism diarrhea as the solution,&#8221; said the user.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://twitter.com/AOC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@aoc</a> Two years after this study and hundreds more businesses closing because of the $15/hr min wage, idiots like Ocasio still spew their socialism diarrhea as the solution.<a href="https://t.co/eGUQADsL6d">https://t.co/eGUQADsL6d</a>
&mdash; mltcjl76 (@mltcjl76) <a href="https://twitter.com/mltcjl76/status/1206772366031740928?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
AOC keeps coming up with this these really expensive plans. Her so-called &#8220;Green New Deal&#8221; would cost as much $93 trillion over 10 years, the American Action Forum determined.
Under the draft plan, Ocasio-Cortez proposes eliminating all fossil-fuel-powered electricity. That would shutter all coal and natural gas power plants across the United States, costing hundred of thousands of jobs. Oh, and she also wants to get rid of all gas-powered cars — in 10 years.
What’s more, the plan calls for a guarantee for every American to have a job, pledging to &#8220;provide all members of our society, across all regions and all communities, the opportunity, training and education to be a full and equal participant in the transition, including through a job guarantee program to assure a living wage job to every person who wants one.&#8221;
According to the draft plan of the Green New Deal, the program also plans to &#8220;mitigate deeply entrenched racial, regional and gender-based inequalities in income and wealth (including, without limitation, ensuring that federal and other investment will be equitably distributed to historically impoverished, low income, deindustrialized or other marginalized communities in such a way that builds wealth and ownership at the community level).&#8221;
In other words, socialism.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/no-one-should-go-through-this-aoc-complains-about-being-on-government-healthcare">‘No One Should Go Through This’: AOC Complains About Being On Government Healthcare</a>

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Holds Green New Deal For Public Housing Town Hall

FREE EVERYTHING! Ocasio-Cortez Wants Federal Government To Give You Everything You ‘Need’

On Tuesday’s episode of “The Michael Knowles Show,” Knowles talks about Elizabeth Warren’s plan to get rid of the electoral college. Video and partial transcript below: 
Liz Warren, who&#8217;s now considered a top-tier candidate — all sizzle, no steak. In the case of Elizabeth Warren, it&#8217;s all smoke signals, no peyote. Elizabeth Warren comes out a couple of weeks ago, she unveils her health care plan, and this gets her a lot of attention. [It’s a] $52 trillion dollar plan, she has no idea how she&#8217;s going to pay for it — she says that she&#8217;s going to pay for it by taxing billionaires. 
That doesn&#8217;t make any sense — 621 billionaires in the country, their combined net worth is about $3.2 trillion. If she took away all of their money, it wouldn&#8217;t get her through one year of her plan. But it gets a lot of attention, she&#8217;s rising up — all the momentum&#8217;s with Elizabeth Warren. Then, once people stop and consider that plan, she starts to tank in the polls. 
Once you get into this cycle, once you get into the cycle of requiring all of this just negative attention and attention at all costs to stay relevant, to stay in the headlines — it creates a very vicious cycle. So now she&#8217;s out of the news for a little bit, all that good press that came quickly has fizzled, so she&#8217;s trying to recapture it by even more radical plans. She just endorsed, the other day, getting rid of the Electoral College. 
Here she is:
<blockquote>QUESTIONER: As a presidential candidate, what are your thoughts on the Electoral College? 
WARREN: I want to get rid of it. So here&#8217;s my goal: My goal is to get elected, and then to be the last American president elected by the Electoral College. &#8230; I want the second term to be that I got elected by direct vote, I’m ready … popular vote. I just think this is how our democracy should work. &#8230; Call me old-fashioned, but I think the person who gets the most votes should win. </blockquote>
That doesn&#8217;t make a lot of sense for a number of reasons. First of all, call me old-fashioned, but I think that we should overturn over 200 years of American precedent in electing our president? That doesn&#8217;t make any sense. If you were old-fashioned, you would support this institution, the Electoral College, which has served our country very, very well since its Founding. But she won&#8217;t do that. 
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TFJUwlWR-qo?start=625" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
It&#8217;s amazing, they talk about how Donald Trump is overturning norms and traditions in our country. &#8220;It&#8217;s totally, totally unprecedented! He&#8217;s a radical! He&#8217;s overturning norms!” These people are trying to overturn all of the basic norms of our country. They&#8217;re trying to overturn the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Electoral College, trying to overturn all of these things, and yet they attack Trump for it. 
This point she&#8217;s making, though, doesn&#8217;t make a lot of sense for another reason. She says the electoral college is totally corrupt, it&#8217;s terrible, it’s an awful thing, it&#8217;s undemocratic. So she&#8217;s saying, [paraphrasing] “I want to when I get elected, I promise to abolish that corrupt, terrible, undemocratic, untrustworthy institution that elected me president.” That doesn&#8217;t have a whole lot of ring to it, doesn&#8217;t make sense. 
The argument, at least from the Left or the only people making this argument — the argument to get rid of the Electoral College — is that there&#8217;s no way Democrats can win with the Electoral College, because we&#8217;ve now twice had a situation in the last 30 years —  or last 20 years, I guess — where a president got elected, even though he lost the popular vote. 
We don&#8217;t elect presidents on the popular vote. We are the United States of America, not the United People of America. We have a federal system here, and the vote for president is more complicated than just some guy going to the polls so that New York, and L.A., and San Francisco [don’t] dominate every presidential election. But, if the argument is that Democrats can&#8217;t win with the Electoral College, and then a Democrat wins with the Electoral College, then the argument for getting rid of the Electoral College sort of goes away. It&#8217;s radical. 
She just needs to say it to get more press because she&#8217;s lost a little bit of her momentum. Again, polls keep showing that people don&#8217;t want this kind of radicalism. The problem for these candidates is they require the radicalism to stay in the news. 
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-michael-knowles-show">Listen to full episodes of “The Michael Knowles Show” on iTunes. 
</a><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-michael-knowles-show/id1266577963?mt=2">Watch “The Michael Knowles Show” on-demand!</a>

Menu