Gallup Poll Shows Democrats Super Excited For Socialism

Well, of course they do, because they’re very interested in Other People’s money (not their own, of course) and Social Justice Warrioring


Seventy percent of Democrats say “some form of socialism” would be a “good thing” for the U.S., according to a new Gallup survey.

While socialism is popular among Democratic voters, a majority of voters overall, 51%, say embracing it would be bad for the country, the Gallup survey found.

Just 25% of Democrats said some form of socialism would be “a bad thing for the country as a whole,” according to the survey, which Gallup released Monday.

Among Republicans, 84% of respondents said that embracing some form of socialism would be bad for the U.S.. A plurality of independents, 48%, said the same.

Gallup’s writeup of the survey did not note that it showed 70% of Democrats supporting some form of socialism, which was included in the full results.

Establishment Democrats, meanwhile, have attempted to distance their party from socialism ahead of the 2020 election.

“I do reject socialism as an economic system. If people have that view, that’s their view. That is not the view of the Democratic Party,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said last month.

Yeah, well, Nancy and the few remaining less lunatic Democrats are being over-ridden by people like AOC, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, etc.

The survey that year found that 57% of Democrats had a favorable view of socialism. That survey also marked the first time that Democrats had a more favorable view of socialism than capitalism.

They’ll have that favorable view right up till the money starts streaming from their pockets and their freedom starts being seriously impacted. Apparently, they do not see what has happened in places like Cuba and Venezuela, but, then, they try to spin the Bad Things away.

But, what do they mean by “Socialism”? From the Gallup link

Previous Gallup research shows that Americans’ definition of socialism has changed over the years, with nearly one in four now associating the concept with social equality and 17% associating it with the more classical definition of having some degree of government control over the means of production. A majority of Democrats have said they view socialism positively in Gallup polling since 2010, including 57% in the most recent measure in 2018.

That socialism link leads to

When asked to explain their understanding of the term “socialism,” 17% of Americans define it as government ownership of the means of production, half the number who defined it this way in 1949 when Gallup first asked about Americans’ views of the term. Americans today are most likely to define socialism as connoting equality for everyone, while others understand the term as meaning the provision of benefits and social services, a modified form of communism, or a conception of socialism as people being social and getting along with one another. About a quarter of Americans were not able to give an answer.

So, they do not necessarily understand what it truly means. They’ll be surprised as hell if they get it. What they’re really describing is Progressivism (nice Fascism), whereby the government is really in charge of everything, not just the economy.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

36 Responses to “Gallup Poll Shows Democrats Super Excited For Socialism”

  1. Professor Hale says:

    Communists who live in Capitalist countries are the worst sort of brainless cowards. They don’t have to wait in bread lines or watch their children die because they didn’t have a high enough priority at the free hospital. They don’t have their sleep broken by the sound of midnight raids on their neighbors and have to cower hoping it will pass over them. They get to be paid to be rebels under circumstances that cost them nothing and places them in zero danger. And they get to be condescending to all the people who work and produce to make it possible for them to enjoy their lifestyle, that is totally divorced from what they preach. Communism was never about building a better world, run by the workers. it was about replacing the aristocracy with a different aristocracy. One that didn’t create the society they wish to rule over. Communism is theft.

  2. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    What is socialism?

    Do you support Social Security? Medicare? unemployment benefits? agricultural subsidies? national parks? police? fire departments? public libraries? interstate highways? the VA? FDA? FBI? public schools? state and federal prisons? EPA? public parking lots? airports? seaports? city and county roads? dams? environmental regulations? child labor laws? border patrol? sea walls? bankruptcy laws? White House? Medicaid? Secret Service? Army? Air Force? USDA? restaurant inspections? bridges? sewer systems?

    If you support any of the programs or functions… you’re a socialist!

    The US economy and society is always striving for the most effective blend of private and public influences.

    • formwiz says:

      Hate to tell you, but law enforcement, public education, public roads, military services, fire departments, or the US government do not constitute socialism.

      Neither do providing for one’s retirement, public sanitation, public parking, or the White House.

      Before you start lecturing people on what socialism is, you might want to learn about it yourself.

  3. Kye says:

    “If you support any of the programs or functions… you’re a socialist!”

    And if you actually believe what you typed there you’re an idiot. Capitalism is the system of wealth generation that underpins the ability to pay for all those things you listed, and more. Capitalism is not the absence of government at any level local, state or federal. Like the typical ignorant leftist you are conflating the economic system with the political system. Capitalism is the ability of the individual to self determination, self interest and above all PRIVATE PROPERTY. It does not mean we as a society do not work together for the greater good when it is necessary. But for capitalism to work it must exist in a politically free society.

    Your entire list is a mish-mash of programs some of which are socialist like “public schools” and stupid like “public parking lots” mixed with items that are neither capitalist nor socialist like “Army? Air Force? bridges?” and silly stuff like that.

    You’re a Red Diaper Baby that grew into a Red. You can’t discern the difference from the freedom we enjoy and the tragedy that is socialism. Just look at Venezuela. But you won’t because it destroys your argument.

    If you support any private ownership of the Factors of Production you’re a capitalist!!

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      But Kye, of course I AM a capitalist, and proud of it! We’ve invested our own money in the company, and take outside investments hoping to make profits for everyone! We’ve quintupled the size of the company in the past year. Capitalism is the engine that drives the economy. That’s my point. Just because I support public schools, restraints on corporations, the social safety net, universal healthcare and progressive taxation doesn’t make me a commie any more than your support of the authoritarian trump makes you a fascist.

      Neither I, nor most of the people surveyed advocate the state taking over the means of production. What people are conflating is the actual definition of “socialism” vs the concept that government has a role to play in assuring the common welfare of citizens. Do you know of any mainstream politicos, pundits or academics advocating “that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” Me either.

      Is Norway a socialist nation? Israel? Germany? Canada? Australia? Japan? Or is it only Venezuela?

      You just call people and programs you don’t like “socialist” or “commie” or “red” – for you, it’s an expletive that you don’t even understand.

      Almost all our tax monies support what you call “socialism” – Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security – all programs that could be handled by private companies seeking profit but are not.

      You (purposely?) conflate socialism with authoritarianism.

      Explain to us what YOU think constitutes an American socialist, please.

      I thought you wanted to discuss things like adults?


      a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

      • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

        I thought you wanted to discuss things like adults?

        That’s a knee slapper right there.
        BWAHAHA… little missy wants to act like an adult… BWAHAHA… stop it…let me catch my breath… BWAHAHA… next she’ll be telling us she joined the Army… BWAHAHA…

      • formwiz says:

        If you were a capitalist, you would be working now instead of making an ass of yourself here.

        You support government control of everything. You’re a Commie.

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          And you’re an ignorant cucksucker.

          My taxes support your sucking at America’s teat. You’re welcome.

          • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

            That’s another good one, little missy. BWAHA…
            You’re on a roll, don’t stop.
            Tell us how you saved us from communism back in 1971 during the Vietnam war ya know.
            BWAHAHAHA… you are funny and we luv you for it.

          • formwiz says:

            You must really want to get banned. And I’d love to see it happened.

            Libeling people is a serious thing and I’m sure Teach doesn’t want to get caught up in it.

            As for your taxes, if you actually pay any because you sound like one of the socialists who complains about the rich as he parks his fat ass on a welfare couch.

            My money comes from annuities, thank you, so you can fantasize about teats all you want.

            The fact the bear suit is coming out tells us he’s losing and he knows it. Most people here are more intelligent, better educated, better mannered, and more thoughtful.

            So he gets nasty and profane. Keep it up, sweetie. Teach’s patience only goes so far.

            (and, if the blog were mine, bunny suit would be gone; I guess Teach is a better man thasn I am, Gunga Drain)

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            Every man is a better man than you, teatsuckler.

            So you don’t collect Social Security or Medicare?

  4. formwiz says:

    Hate to tell you, but law enforcement, public education, public roads, military services, fire departments, or the US government do not constitute socialism.

    Neither do providing for one’s retirement, public sanitation, public parking, or the White House.

    Before you start lecturing people on what socialism is, you might want to learn about it yourself.

  5. Kye says:

    Elwood, your definition of socialism is not very good, where did you get it? Specifically, “the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole” is inaccurate. All societies regulate the means of production even capitalists. Under socialism as it is practiced the means of production remain in private hands but are completely controlled by the government (like Nazi Germany or Venezuela). Under communism the government (or as your definition so euphemistically puts it “the community as a whole”) both owns and controls all factors of production (like China or North Korea).

    “You (purposely?) conflate socialism with authoritarianism.”

    I don’t “(purposely?) conflate” socialism with authoritarianism. There is no “conflation” since in order to be socialist one must be an authoritarian. It’s not a bug, it’s a feature of socialism. Can’t be helped. Once the State has decided how the means of production will function and be allocated it must ENFORCE that decision by force since they do not allow the free market to do so. And just because countries have some socialist policies (some more than others) does not make them socialist states. Most of the countries you named are free market economies (the Host) with some socialist policies (the parasites). Frankly, if not for the free market in those countries you wouldn’t be able to tell them from the basket case Venezuela has become based on total socialism. Also, most of those countries have for decades depended on the Free Market Capitalism of their benefactor, America to provide for their defense which freed up Trillions for them to piss away on leftist boondoggles.

    As the left destroys our Great Republic and we become less able to support the socialists of the world having ourselves become the New Green Democrat Communist country of the elitists dreams you will see them slump into second and even third world conditions.

    And Elwood, calling people “ignorant cocksucker” is not good for your argument.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Kye typed: “calling people “ignorant c*cksucker” is not good for your argument.”

      Neither is calling people “commies”, but you do it repeatedly.

      I called formwiz the cucksucker, a cucksucker. You think only you and your triumvirate of stupid are allowed to call people names?

      Regarding parasitism, have you ever attended public schools; collected SS, Medicare, Medicaid or unemployment payments; driven on our public roads; walked on sidewalk; visited a park?

      Here’s how Merriam-Webster defines socialism:

      so·​cial·​ism | \ ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm

      Definition of Socialism
      1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

      2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
      b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and
      controlled by the state
      3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

      You don’t understand what socialism is. So if the US was as socialist as say Denmark, would that be the end of the republic? If taxes on the wealthy were restored to the Clinton era, would that make us an authoritarian, socialist regime? If we had a mixed public-private universal healthcare system like France, would we become Venezuela?

      Is Bill Gates a commie? Warren Buffet? George Soros? Hillary Clinton?

      Do YOU even know what you think?

      • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

        Is calling people you don’t know “fluffers” good for your arguments?

      • Bill589 says:

        You support socialism that never can exist with individual liberty?
        Socialism is Communism.
        Calling you a commie is accurate.

        “There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism – by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide.” — Ayn Rand

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Quoting a Hollywood screenwriter is not very persuasive.

          Enslaving men by vote??

          As previously noted, the US already has several important socialist programs – Social Seurity, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance etc.

          Other advanced nations have healthcare programs (usually a mix of public/private administration) that mandate coverage for all their citizens. Are these other advanced nations on Earth, e.g., Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, England, France, Germany etc authoritarian nations, similar to communist countries?

          • Kye says:

            You have noted (about ten thousand times) those socialist programs you are so happy to promote. You do realize they are either broke or going broke, don’t you? Every. Single. One. Of. Them!

            I would think that a wealthy guy like yourself who claims to be a successful capitalist businessman would realize there is no self-sustainable socialist policy anywhere. Many have lasted quite some years but they ALWAYS eventually go bust after they devour all the wealth created by capitalism and spits it out.

            That is because as I’m sure you realize, socialism is a system for the redistribution of wealth NOT the creation thereof. Socialism allows “chosen elites” who are in bed with and play ball with the government to own companies as long as they do as they’re told.

            That is the reason why after decades of the Republican Party being known as “the party of the rich” all of a sudden almost all the big Billionaires are far left ideologues and Swamp people. You think it’s an accident that Bezos, Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffet, Page, Ellison and Brin are all Democrat (read Socialist/communist) supporters?

          • formwiz says:

            She was a novelist. And a pretty influential one.

            And unemployment insurance was originally a private effort, so what is and what isn’t socialist is about on par with your knowledge of modern literature.

            Other nations have usurious tax rates to support a welfare system that provides minimum care, but advanced, they’re not.

            Most would qualify as AL or MS if they were US states.

            PS Mrs Rand was only expanding on Lenin’s statement that the object of socialism is communism.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            They. Are. Not. Going. Broke. Unless the US is going broke. Trump is doing his worst to bankrupt the nation, but we’ll survive. As will our programs.

            Do you find it discouraging that the European nations are surviving and the citizens are contented? Do you think those nations are becoming authoritarian communist nations?

            Curiously, right-wing authoritarians are making inroads in Europe. Hungary has become a right-wing authoritarian nation. Austria just kicked right-wing authoritarian thugs out of its national government for corruption with Russia.

            Do you favor ending Social Security and Medicare? If not, why not?

            Can any of the “anti-socialists” here state clearly what level of “socialist” programs they find acceptable. You seem to dance around any specifics.

            Who makes all that money for capitalists? Workers, right? Are you against rewarding workers for THEIR contributions? Do you think Jeff Bezos contributes $10 billion worth of effort to Amazon each year? Bill Gates? Warren Buffett? Don trump?

            And isn’t it the trump regime acting like royalty?

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Calling you a fascist is accurate.

          • formwiz says:

            The closest we’ve had to a fascist in this country was our Gay President.

            Federalizing GM was pure National Socialism.

            BTW Fascism, the Italian kind, was almost a carbon copy of Russian Communism, command economy, state capitalism, and all. That’s what Ernst Rohm wanted for Germany

            The only difference was Benny wanted Italy to be the new Rome and Nicky wanted to rule the world.

            You really are that ignorant.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            And you’re a cucksucker, as you’ve proven.

      • Kye says:

        Elwood, if you support communists, back communist ideas and defend communists in America what do you think you are? Hell you’ve called me a racist and a white supremacist knowing my first wife was a Jew and my current wife is a Korean. How stupid can you be Elwood? Racists and white supremacists don’t marry Jews and Koreans you stupid dope.

        My point was the use of the term “cocksucker”. Is it really necessary to get that debased and foul to make a point?

        You have no credibility when it comes to telling me what I know about socialism, Elwood. First of all I have a degree in economics and you don’t. Second, you can look up shit all day on Google but still miss the idea behind the subject which you do quite regularly.

        Not if but when the US becomes as socialist as Denmark yes, that would be the end of the Republic because a republic cannot exist in a state of LIMITED FREEDOM. If taxes are “Restored” to any level specifically AIMED AT ONE GROUP OF AMERICANS we no longer are EQUAL under the law and no longer are an actual Republic and would in fact be living under an authoritarian regime with the ability to pick and choose winners and losers and the people who will benefit and those who won’t. You obviously believe you would be one of the “winners” so it won’t matter to you. Trust me it will.

        Finally you ask if we had a mixed public-private universal healthcare system like France would we become Venezuela? We already do have a mixed public-private healthcare system but it’s not “universal” since it is not our job to cover the universe. Now if you mean “mandatory” rather than universal then you just added “authoritarian” to the conversation by taking away our RIGHT TO CHOOSE therefore yes, we would become Venezuela.

        “Is Bill Gates a commie? Warren Buffet? George Soros? Hillary Clinton?” YES! YES! YES! YES!

        And I know EXACTLY what I think and you hate me for it. I will not submit to your anti-freedom agenda.

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          So when the top marginal tax rate was 90% America was no longer a Republic? When did we regain our status?

          As someone who claims to be an economist you should understand progressive taxation even if you don’t support it.

          Are Social Security and Medicare authoritarian programs?

          You think c*cksucker is a worse slur than commie or warmist?? TEACH promotes name-calling since he does it in every post.

          • formwiz says:

            Why don’t you try that little epithet on Teach?

            I think I speak for everyone when I say your presence does nothing to enrich the proceedings.

            Go on, make our day. Tell Teach what you told him in the bear suit.


          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            When TEACH start calling me names, I’ll answer in kind.

      • formwiz says:

        From what liljeffy says, the term fits you more than me.

        Unless you think you can prove it in a court of law.

        Do YOU even know what you think?

        He knows exactly what he thinks.

        You’re the one who just vomits talking points.

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          The term fits lildutchy well.

          • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

            Feel better now, little missy?

          • formwiz says:

            Well, no one has ever accused me of homosexuality, so you must be trying to libel me.

            And here you’re the one who just loves them.

            I must have really bitch slapped you when I showed up your pathetic understanding of what socialism really is.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            I didn’t call you a homosexual, I called you a cucksucker, a made up word, but it sure sounds bad doesn’t it?

            But I’m pleased you’re offended, so sue me.

  6. formwiz says:

    You have noted (about ten thousand times) those socialist programs you are so happy to promote. You do realize they are either broke or going broke, don’t you? Every. Single. One. Of. Them!

    Nice point. Privatizing them would have allowed them to flourish, but the Lefties weren’t going to let go of their cash cows.

  7. formwiz says:

    Every man is a better man than you, teatsuckler.

    I only mentioned Teach.

    You certainly aren’t.

    What’s got you so upset? Fatty not going anywhere in his witch hunt?

    Good Federal judges being confirmed?

    Foreign policy humming like nobody’s business?

    Everybody happy in a roaring economy?

    I know, the Democrat clown car just doesn’t make him want to sucker punch a Conservative woman.

  8. formwiz says:

    And you’re a cucksucker, as you’ve proven.

    Proven? When? Where?

    Put up or shut up, you gutless, foul-mouthed excuse for a black man.

    If, in fact, you are black. You certainly are no man.

Pirate's Cove