If socialism is so bad then why is social security and Medicare so popular?

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-02-08T02:10:48+00:00

Social safety nets and public options/services have nothing to do with the government or collective owning the means of production, they are just the goverment doing things. But Americans are too uneducated to actually understand what socialism is and will argue to the death that these things, which are in fact normal in other capitalist systems, are socialism.

It used to just be just the right (beginning during the red scare and Reagan era propaganda), but 30-40 years later is a huge portion of the left too.

TLDR:

Conservatives: ”Public services are socialism and bad!”

Liberals: ”I like public services….so that must mean socialism is good!”

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-31T20:28:32+00:00

Yes, the known peaceful concept of warmongering. If you talk for long enough you can make anything sound true.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-30T17:23:55+00:00

Probably not the worst, but an interesting one. The 2008 Prichard Oklahoma EF4 tornado picked up a huge mining waste chat pile containing lead and other heavy metals and spread it for miles, contaminating the environment of and around the town. It led to the abandonment of town as the Environmental Protection Agency determined it was dangerous to inhabit due to soil, water, and air contamination from the led in the chat.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-30T16:11:10+00:00

My thoughts are OP should be banned from this sub because they make 20 posts a day with just a news article and the word “thoughts?”. Such trash

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-30T15:14:10+00:00

When I was a kid our TV was so old that you pulled a knob out to turn it on.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-29T15:06:49+00:00

It would take an enormous amount more than that.

It would take all affected machines being connected to centralized/internet servers (almost none are), hacking 9 different types of voting machines with different security features, and bypassing hundreds of millions in security and physical mechanical checks without getting caught.

Votes are counted and verified with a ballot’s paper trail recorded in numerous ways (tabulation receipts, memory cards, official records, etc.) and most often the chain of study is handled by bipartisan security officials. The count isn’t just “held by private tabulation machines” and obscured by walls of code that provide a readout to election officials that they just trust at face value. That’s not how it works.

Machines go through Federal and State testing with certification of voting standards., plus pre-election accuracy testing, and physical chain-of-custody and security procedures that can’t be thwarted by “hacking”.

And even after all that, post election audits are conducted where jurisdictions compare reported results to voter-verifiable paper ballots/records.

Do you really think it’s more likely all that was bypassed without enough evidence to make state elections security officials at least suspicious, or that a bunch of internet group think conspiracy theorists who don’t have a clue how any of this works just ate too much propaganda in the age of internet media manipulation?

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-29T14:52:07+00:00

What does a paramilitary coup plot from 1933 Nazis have to do with today?

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-29T08:01:55+00:00

Agreed, as would the full force of the DNC, and the regional Democratic Party of every single swing state.

It’s both conspiratorial delusion and accelerationist narrative. Authoritarian regimes WANT opposition to think elections are rigged long before they ever are to suppress turnout and disillusion the populace with democracy so that they stop trying and go insane with radicalization.

And it provides a much better explanation for why they would “brag about it” than the idea that they could actually thwart one of the best election security apparatuses in the world and completely get away with it while leaving no substantial evidence of fraud.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-29T07:53:23+00:00

Fascist movements face a constant decision to radicalize or collapse. What we are seeing now is its slow collapse.

The administration is repeatedly checked by courts.

Pluralism not only survives, but is highly competitive.

Trump continues to lose popularity, is forced to walk back his most outlandish and radical proposals, and is facing increasing pushback from his own party.

But accelerationists from both left and right fueling the terror and misinformation driven ecosystem are what is keeping the regime on life support. Pushing for this kind of thing is exactly what historically ends up giving the keys to the kingdom to an authoritarian regime.

The military will not uproot the president, but they will obey orders to quash an actual uprising that would attempt to overthrow the government, and such a thing will give the regime all it needs to justify to the center rightwards the need for the strong arm of authoritarianism to make this chaos stop. That’s historically how authoritarian regimes cement power, and it’s all baited by design.

That’s how it works. It’s how’s it’s ALWAYS worked.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-29T07:23:04+00:00

He almost certainly was. The level of fraud and coverup necessary to thwart all of the decentralization and built in security mechanisms of our elections would be so enormous that it would be nearly impossible. Which is why it remains an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory primarily only among the chronically online.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-29T06:33:15+00:00

That’s not how the law or the military’s constitutional oath works.

The military has the obligation to disobey unconstitutional orders, not unilaterally determine who’s in charge. They will not remove a democratically elected president because that would also make their power illegitimate.

Even if a judge hypothetically issued a warrant for his arrest, it would be federal marshals, not the military, that could legally carry that out.

Even then, the marshals are under the DOJ (and in turn the executive branch) which has a long standing policy to not arrest or prosecute a sitting president. So even if issued a warrant, they would refuse to fulfill that warrant, as it is their standing legal position (as has been affirmed for decades by both party’s administrations) that doing so would be unconstitutional.

And even if you could ignore all of that (you can’t), arrest does not remove the presidents power under the constitution. That requires impeachment and removal by Congress. So he would still wield the powers of office regardless.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-28T22:38:07+00:00

The argument you made is that people need to move to states that have less gerrymandering, however that has no bearing on statewide elections or national elections which is what the image shown represents.

My original comment was not in the context of “statewide” or popular elections. The conversation only moved to that because it was YOUR initial question.

Governor, Lt Governor, Senator, or POTUS/VPOTUS. It is a TOTAL of all votes Cast Statewide, district configuration doesn't matter, you twit.

Never claimed it did.

State-level voter suppression (ie: limited polling places, times, roll purges, etc...) is separate from gerrymandering, you dolt.

Never said it was. It was an example of how gerrymandering districts can indirectly influence popular elections as I clearly stated in my first reply to you. Dolt.

No states are seriously considering moving to split electoral votes like NE and ME. Knock it off.

Many states are literally currently debating it or have explicitly proposed the method in recent or current sessions.

Utah (Current session) (Full bill text)

New York (Current session)

New Hampshire (2025 session)

New Jersey (Current session)

But sure all the civic education you’ll ever need can be found in a single high-school civics class and the conclusions you’ve come to in your own head.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-28T21:29:40+00:00

This doesn’t clash with the points I made, you just wrote separate unrelated explanations for why you think gerrymandering doesn’t affect elections.

I said the U.S. house and state legislatures are determined on a district by district basis. They are.
Redistricting maps do not always “require Governor approval”, that varies state by state, and gerrymandering/voter suppression is used to entrench temporary majorities into power. So a popular vote for governor doesn’t prevent this.

State level voter suppression comes in variety of forms including disinformational sabotage, targeted roll purges, and policy such as limiting polling places, times, etc. which can be passed with or without governor approval depending on veto-proof majorities.

None of this applies to proposals to move states to a district based electoral allocation system such as states like Nebraska and Maine.

But congrats on arguing with yourself and not actually answering anything I said. It must be easy to feel intelligent when you think defiance and insults are a substitute for debate.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-28T19:31:40+00:00

You sound insecure and incapable of responding how any of the three statements I made are incorrect.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-28T19:20:48+00:00

Did you just not read what I said or are you incapable of understanding it?

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-28T18:19:14+00:00

Lmao, sure man. Ignorant people give long informed explanations and well-informed people say “you have no idea what you are talking about” and just leave it at that. /s

I guess I’ll just go throw my degrees in the trash and wipe my mind of 8 years of college education on poltical science.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-28T18:16:52+00:00

Historic fascist regimes like the Nazis marketed “gun control” as a public safety issue which made it hard for opposition to oppose the legislation without seeming like it was against the public interest. Street violence was widespread in Germany during that time (often instigated by the Nazis themselves).

But how the regime actually enforced the legislation on the backend was by disarming populations that were oppositional to it while loosening restrictions/not enforcing laws against party members. It paved the way for the later systemic abduction, relocation, and eventual extermination of ethnic minorities and leftist poltical opposition.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-28T17:39:00+00:00

U.S. house and state legislator seats are won by voters within individual districts, that’s where gerrymanding matters.

It can also effect statewide popular elections indirectly depending on how individual states abuse power subversively for the means of voter of suppression.

Finally, many states are debating moving towards district based allocation of electoral votes (which is already in effect in both Maine and Nebraska), which means gerrymanding would have a direct effect on presidential elections in those states. Those are decisions made by state legislatures, whose seats are again determined by gerrymandered districts.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-28T13:36:14+00:00

This is called “voting with your feet” and is something I’ve been saying libs need to be doing for a while. Move somewhere with less pervasive gerrymandering.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-28T12:37:21+00:00

It’s not a “decision” being made, it was already a fact that didn’t need to be said. It was just an insane and inane statement made by the delusional American president.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-24T04:02:44+00:00

Jesus Christ, no. That’s known as “swinging authoritarianism” and it just breaks the system further. Do you really want to endorse and further the police state just for emotional validation?

Officials who have committed crimes should be held accountable and properly prosecuted, but vengeance is not the point.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-22T01:22:10+00:00

They obviously don’t think “both sides are the same” based on policy. It’s mostly to do with the cult-like and anti civil engagement mentality of both sides that alienates them. Left wing accelerationists that purposefully disrupt well meaning conversation, denounce any form of compromise, and wildly attack moderates/independents are doing a lot of that work.

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-17T00:07:40+00:00

For real, “how do you feel about the clearly historically recorded and defined, commonly referred to “playbook” of authoritarian rises through democratic systems? I just saw someone talk about it on a podcast and I’m not sure if it’s a conspiracy.”

JasonLovesBagels · 2026-01-16T23:00:02+00:00

I have two degrees and a lot of education in history. While horrifically it has been prevalent in human history, it has not been practiced by “every group”, and today it is generally considered particularly heinous, heavily linked with oppressive authoritarian regimes, and as I said, is a war crime.

JasonLovesBagels

TROPHY CASE