New survey show 53% of registered voters see entire Biden agenda as 'big government socialism'
By: Just The News Staff
democrats are the socialist party of America.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
New survey show 53% of registered voters see entire Biden agenda as 'big government socialism'
A new survey shows 53% of registered U.S. voters think the entire Biden administration agenda can be described as "big government socialism," after months of Republicans and others making similar comments about President Biden's trillion-dollar spending bills.
The new Scott Rasmussen.com poll also shows just 23% of respondents disagree with the characterization.
Congress has already passed the roughly $1.1 trillion, bipartisan infrastructure bill, but the large Build Back Better measure, which includes the proposed expansion of social programs, remains stuck in the evenly split Senate.
The survey, released Thursday, also shows 52% of Hispanic voters see the Biden agenda as big government socialism, which Rasmussen suggests may be one reason many Hispanic voters are shifting their loyalties away from the Democratic Party.
The survey of 1,200 registered voters was conducted online by Rasmussen for Dec. 6-8. The survey field work was conducted by RMG Research.
The survey also appears to show many voters think the Democratic Party, of which Biden is the leader, is not focusing on the most important issues.
By a 65% to 19% margin, respondents said they were more interested in economic than cultural issues. At the same time, they also said less than half of Democratic politicians and activists -- just 37% -- appear most interested in economic than cultural issues.
Sixty-four percent said the influx of migrant at the U.S. border is a crisis, and just 34% said the federal government is seriously trying to secure the border and reduce illegal immigration, also according to the survey.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
159 visitors
Oooh, socialism. Be afraid.
Biden's agenda is big government secular liberalism. The only Red in Biden's agenda is his fiscal policy.
Calling Biden's agenda what it is should scare people more than trying to tie that agenda to socialism. The United States has done a pretty good job at knocking down socialism. Secular liberalism is the threat from within.
Generally correct; skip the secular adjective. Biden is following the "Big Government" playbook. This is simply social democracy applied to the USA; it is adding on to the extant social democracy of the USA.
None of this is 'socialism' per the USSR/Red China/Venezuela/... nor is it socialism per Marx. The word 'socialism' used here is simply a display of ignorance. Biden is engaging in basic social democracy: using a capitalist engine (albeit based on future revenue) to fund government sponsored social programs.
My only question is, what programs do you and any one else wish to get rid of?
My preference (since before the election even) is for Biden to basically calm things down. Work on real infrastructure to ensure the funds are spent efficiently and reduce the corrupt diversion to line pockets so that we actually do improve our roadways, bridges, utilities, etc.
In addition, continue to ensure the highest possible level of vaccination, secure our borders (priority on pandemic related factors) and continue to encourage the national evolution to clean, renewable energy sources and technology.
That would be a successful single term for Biden, IMO. If he could unite the nation a bit then that would be a find cherry on top.
No more spending. $1.2 T is plenty for now. Let's get that right before leaping into several more $ trillion.
I agree with that. If he were to do that, he could rightfully call his first term a success. And by extension the Democrats would be in a much better position for 22 and 24. But I doubt if the hard progressives would allow that to occur.
I suspect that the hard progressives will not have a choice in the matter. I do not see the $3+ trillion package passing and that is their main objective.
By the same token, I do not see Biden changing his border policy; I do not understand why he would not crack down heavily on immigration simply for safety reasons (even setting aside the practical reasons why ALL nations control immigration) except due to pressure from within his ranks.
Meh, your opinion based on no supporting facts.
Oddly, both the D and R parties have some rather severe extremes within them. I do not see that as a good thing.
TiG,
You can't do that to me. Here I am trying to take a 7 min break from my job before my idiotic coworkers get in and proceed to make a mess of everything for me to take care on call tonight; and I read your post.
I laughed so hard I almost cried.
While I agree with the sentiment in the post; and if Biden would do it support it whole heartedly. This is Joe Biden we are talking about.
Calm things down? Since when has Biden ever calmed anything down? His track record is one of confrontation to anyone that doesn't agree with him. He has shown it repeatedly on the campaign trail, and at every single event he has attended while president. Calming things down is the last thing on his mind. His begging the media for better coverage was an epic gaffe. That is the only way Biden can get things to calm down; by getting his media surrogates to present him in a better light. Fake news at it's finest.
Remember when Obama put Biden in charge of the 2009 stimulus funds to make sure that every dime ended up where it was supposed to be? Those "not so shovel ready jobs"; and the funds being misused. Expecting Biden to make sure waste and fraud doesn't happen is like asking a charity or politician to never call again for donations. You will get the same robocalls forever.
You mean the Trump vaccines that Biden and Harris said they would never take? That really came back to bite them in the ass. Maybe if he wasn't so concerned with making Trump look bad during the campaign he wouldn't be in this situation? Why should anyone trust him now? Especially after he stated he didn't have the power to institute a vaccine mandate- and then did so anyways. Thankfully the courts, and now Congress, shut his mandate down.
Never on his agenda. Ending all things Trump was his goal and he did that. Since Trump wanted to close the border and thought illegal immigrants were bad; Joe undid everything Trump had in place- and encouraged the current surge we see now. Wish he would hold illegal immigrants to the same standards as everyone else visiting this country. Proof of full vaccination, and a negative Covid test no more than 3 days before entering. If those standards were applied to our southern border not a singing illegal would be allowed in this country. No sense in expecting him to end the world's largest super spreader event now.
Joe is a weak leader. The whole world sees it. No one is going to follow him anywhere. Not even his own party it seems. The world needs to worry about China and Russia right now. Assuming that we are still all around when Taiwan and Ukraine finally get sorted out, and not in the middle of WWIII, or the start of the next cold war (which will be on multiple fronts- great news for the US military industrial complex); then we can worry about moving on to future disaster that will be clean energy. Nationally it is the economy, current energy shortages, and taking care of rising inflation that need to be addressed. Joe is not the man for any of it.
Agreed, but Biden is all in on BBB. If the bill hits his desk he is going to sign it. Manchin is the last hope for sanity. So far he is holding strong; but Joe and the rest of the Democrats wouldn't be doing the full court press on him if he wasn't showing signs of buckling.
If the government took every millionaire and billionaire in America's total net worth today and combined it, you would have about 5 trillion in total, the next round is going to wind up near 4 trillion, and overall we are at about 27 trillion in debt...
And there is no rescue ladder long enough to reach the bottom of that hole...
My post was stating my preference; what Biden should do. You seem to be interpreting it as an expectation.
My preference. Do you agree with the preference or would you prefer he make things worse?
Yet again, you pretend this is my expectation when I stated preference.
That is factually incorrect. Both said they would take the vaccine, and did.
I stated that he should control the border. Clearly he is not doing so. I did not state I expect him to do so.
I stated that he should work on encouraging use of renewables ...; not that he would necessarily accomplish it.
Great? No, I stated that I would prefer he work on uniting the nation. Not that I expect these results.
Preference
Your entire post pretends that I expect Biden to do all that I stated he should do to have a successful term. I clearly stated upfront that these were my preferences, not my expectations.
In effect, you posted a strawman pretending that I listed what I thought Biden would accomplish.
An honest reply would be to agree or disagree with my position on what Biden should do. That is, if you do not think these are what Biden should do, then state why and list what you think he should do.
This is why thoughtful discourse rarely exists anymore.
Your comments are likely the most divisive on this forum. Ever think about that?
I think every member of this forum knows that your comments are intentionally divisive and that the divisiveness of comments from other members do not come close to yours.
You apparently do not understand the concept of a sweeping generalization. A sweeping generalization is a comment about an entire group of people based on some characteristic. For example, you typically use the sweeping generalization of 'secular progressives ...' with some pejorative.
In this case, I am speaking strictly of YOUR comments in this forum. See how that works? Speaking on the comments of one person cannot possibly be a sweeping generalization.
And my comments to you cannot be divisive either because, again, I am speaking only of YOUR comments ... only one author is in question. See?
But it is indeed true that I am critical of the utter crap you seed and write on this forum.
Comment 3.1.15 is typical of a "loser-type" comment.
Yes, it is well known that you are here on this forum only to try to piss off those you consider to be your opponents.
You seed absurd, extremist crap and write emotive comments and I suspect even you do not believe half of what you spew.
You seed and post from a reactionary extremist/theocratic dominionist perspective. Reactionary extremists are without question the biggest threat America faces, as has been confirmed by the DHS, the FBI and the reactionaries' own ravings.
Is that your 'feeling', XX, "utter contempt"? Emotion clouding the picture? Maybe tone down on the emotions and spend more time thinking things through (sans all that confirmation bias); might do some good.
Further, you do not know what I 'believe in' so you clearly do not know what you are talking about.
My criticism of your comments does not presume to know all you 'believe in'. Rather I focus on the crap you write and seed and criticize that. And it is, IMO, mostly extremist, irrational, emotive crap. It is as though you seed and write to simply try to antagonize those who you envision as 'them'. Just a stream of divisive spin. I suspect the majority on this site agree with that assessment.
If someone was trying to maliciously promote a ridiculous stereotype of christian conservatives ... to make that group look bad ... your self-labeling of your collective content would, IMO, be perfect.
Start with your denial of everything that Trump did during his Big Lie campaign and your labeling evolution as a worldwide conspiracy. That is a fine foundation for fostering a ridiculous stereotype of the 'average christian conservative'. If I were a christian conservative, I would want you to cease and desist.
Whatever you call them, your expressed political beliefs are reactionary and extremist, and not at all in keeping with traditional conservatism. Trumpist beliefs bear no relation to traditional conservative political ideology.
Comment 3.1.23 is typical of reactionary extremist disinformation, lies and propaganda.
The majority of your comments on this site are factually and/or logically incorrect. When you make a ridiculous comment such as claiming that Trump did nothing wrong in his Big Lie campaign or that evolution is a global conspiracy of godless scientists then expect a challenge for that nonsense.
Further, when you engage in divisive comments designed as a pathetic attempt to trigger those who do not share your confirmation bias induced fantasy reality such as "xx @ 3.1.23 ☞ secular progressives are the greatest threat America’s constitution, founding fathers, traditions, and values face " or your utterly dishonest and exaggerated allegations about Biden, expect to be challenged.
With all the comments by you that fit the above, there is no wonder you get backlash. It is of your own making. Bottom line, you predominantly do not engage in thoughtful topical discourse. Your comments are typically extreme and divisive. Whining that you are not treated with sufficient respect is a joke.
I accurately described your ideology. It is not conservative no matter how much you falsely claim otherwise.
Yes, you are. That is obvious.