Step two- sell magic beans
Step three- insist on planting magic beans
Step four- demand Democrats climb beanstalk
Step five - chop down beanstalk

rinse repeat.

Voted for Bernie in the 2016 primary. Then he lost - damaged the party and election cycle.
Thank you for your service, Bernie. This time no sale.

Without that step, Bernie Sanders is just one of 13 or 14 primary candidates for President. Unless he wins that office, he will not get to define what the Democratic Party is.

That's a lesson he does not yet seem to have learned. If he doesn't win the nomination, he will return to being just the Independent Senator from Vermont. Now, that's a pretty big deal, of course, but it's not the same as being President.

Do you even know what socialism is? Do you understand that America has existed with socialist systems for decades quite successfully? I suppose you'd like to see the back of Medicare and the other socialist programs?

Means of production. What a crock of shit. Do you see many breadlines and summary executions happening in socialist Europe?

people regularly slam social programs instituted by the most effective democrats that ever lived!

The constant regurgitation of right wing GOP Trumpism talking points is really sickening!

I personally would be living under a bridge right now if not for the SOCIALIST program started by the greatest democrat that ever lived, FDR!

MILLIONS of Americans would be destitute and dying without Medicare and Social Security..(GASP..SOCIALISM!!11!!) but somehow even people who call themselves Democrats get infected with the Fox noise virus and condemn all socialist type programs!

What's next?

Meals on wheels is a socialist commie plot!??

and that the great social programs our party has championed are not socialist.

It is disconcerting when those in some quarters pick up right-wing talking points and begin calling liberal social programs "socialism."

It is intellectually dishonest.

We are the liberal Democratic Party of FDR. Not the party of "Democratic Socialism."

Never BS. Anyone but BS.

Social democracy has worked, i.e. open but regulated markets, strong unions, and a robust safety net. Everywhere socialism has been practiced it has been an abysmal failure.

In a way that protects the needs of the normal person within a democratic society. It’s not some standalone ideology.

so the generous social welfare programs can be sustained through wealth-building.

"Democratic Socialism" is about ending private enterprise and replacing capitalism with an economy where the means of production and distribution are under government ownership.

Yuge difference. Not compatible economic ideologies.

But it's the profits the former creates that pays for the latter. I don't know how we arrived at this point of debate. It saddens me, that we are accepting right wing framing. Socialism begin where markets fail. It's not a replacement for markets.

by the Sweden argument which is Social Democracy and not Democratic socialism as exists in some unsavory places.

I don't know if the conflation is just because some people are naïve or by nefarious design one doesn't know.

I don't know why folks would dispute that.

FDR was not a socialist. Never needed to be one.

Europe and the US have been blending socialism and capitalism within Democratic systems for well over half a century, and no serious political candidate is talking about anything else than where that balance should lie. There is absolutely no-one on a major ticket talking about the kind of extreme socialism you are talking about, so what’s the point in endlessly raising this strawman?

Or prove me wrong by linking to Bernie advocating seizing the means of production.

The United States and the liberal Social Democracies of Europe have not blended capitalism and socialism. None of these nations has a socialist economic system, even a partial one. Norway, late discoverer of off-shore oil did develop the find as a national resource and has an exceptional national industry in an otherwise capitalist economy.

The definition of Democratic Socialism is very clear. Using the correct definition is not creating a straw-man, it is knocking down the straw-man claims that roads equal socialism, or schools, fire& police equal socialism, or that Social Security equals socialism.

Did a memo go out?

To be fair, the failure of socialism is so complete it is easier to take credit for liberal democratic/liberal Democratic successes through a process called "re-framing" than to look for positive examples of Democratic Socialism.

At least the DSA is not afraid to show their true colors by backing the Democratic Socialist dictatorship of Venezuela to the hilt.

"Long Live the Bolivarian Revolution!" the official position of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Bernie and the Bernie Bro's have to make Bernie seem like a democrat by hijacking the democratic narrative and wedding it to socialism.

...on whether or not to endorse Sanders.The DSA published arguments for and against endorsing Sanders. The argument against includes a line about how Sanders is not a real socialist, that he's just a New Deal liberal. Because the DSA advocates actual, by-the-book socialism; and not New Deal liberalism.

Perhaps Sanders would agree that he's not a real socialist, in which case one has to wonder why he chooses to call himself a Democratic Socialist instead of a Social Democrat (if Bernie doesn't know the difference, well, that's just sad). That would seem to be an epic branding error on the part of all those who call themselves Democratic Socialists without actually subscribing to what the DSA is advocating. Not only because Social Democrat is more accurate, but also because of how many people have a negative opinion of "socialism." If one wants to hold up the Nordic Model as something to aspire to (which many of us can get behind), one shouldn't conflate it with socialism by calling oneself a Democratic Socialist and a member of DSA. Logic 101.

Because all of this nonsense about police and fire departments, for instance, being examples of socialism is just that, nonsense. It's become popular to suggest anything that's publicly funded is an example of socialism. Just as it's become popular to suggest that today's Democratic Party is way to the right of FDR's Democratic Party (or even Eisenhower's Republican Party). Likewise, it's become popular to suggest that until Bernie ran for president the Democratic Party didn't support, for instance, universal health care. All of those claims are grossly inaccurate, their appeal to naive millennials notwithstanding.

The countries with the top ten highest standards of living all have Democratic Socialist economies.

Canada has a Democratic Socialist economy. It isn't that scary.

Canada is a Social Democracy. Same with Sweden, et al.

Venezuela is a "Democratic Socialist" state and is one backed to the hilt by the DSA (Democratic Socialists of America)

They have the two ingredients necessary for a Democratic socialist economy. Highly regulated Capitalism with a heavy focus on the commons.

"Democratic Socialism" isn't Democratic Capitalism no matter how much "re-framing" is applied.

Where do alchemy and the elixir of immortality fit into the plan?

I have my ranking of who I would prefer, but I will vote for the eventual nominee because every one of our candidates beat any of the GOP candidates hands down.

So what you are describing is not the European experience of democratic socialism.

Imagine that the Government ran a huge business, and rather than raise prices to boost profits, the Government offered the service at a price far lower than other businesses. And gave better service.

Well you do not have to imagine it, because it exists in the US in the form if the USPS, the United States Postal Service.

The former are liberal democracies with advanced capitalist economies that generate the wealth to pay for generous social programs. None of the Social Democracies have socialist economies. Not one.

"Democratic Socialists" believe capitalism is incompatible with human freedom (despite being the opposite of the truth) so this ideology seeks to eliminate private enterprise and to replace it with a system where the means of production and distribution are owned by "the collective" (aka the state).

Since Democratic Socialist states have always failed economically and failed to protect human rights the "re-framing" of reality is to associate "Democratic Socialism" with Social Democracy despite the untruthfulness of the conflation.

Or to claim post offices and fire department are socialist. It is a laugh.

The DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) are hailing the Democratic Socialist dictatorship of Venezuela with postings of "Long Live the Bolivarian Revolution."

Some have suggested Venezuela is an example for the "new American Dream." I don't think you'll find many liberal Democrats who will buy into that BS.

The means of production are owned by the Government.

The profits accrue to the people.

All of the workers are government workers.

Classic socialism.

Unregulated capitalism, predatory capitalism, produces depressions, and wage inequality, and all of the problems associated with these conditions.

Simply stating what exists.

And the postal workers I know hate their jobs.

"Going postal" didn't come from nowhere.

I ask as a USPS retiree, a long time former Union representative, with 37 years in the USPS.

And how do you rank the USPS versus other systems?

And what is the reason for the current USPS deficit?

One is my oldest friend from childhood. He just retired. Happiest day of his life.

The other, also a Union rep, unfortunately, passed from cancer leaving three young children. He didn't hate his job but had all sorts of disputes with his superiors in the USPS and he disliked the working conditions. At least the good health benefits meant his family wasn't completely bankrupted by medical bills.

The other two questions are outside my expertise.

I suggest that you do some research into the USPS, and the reason for its current financial state.

A good starting point would be to search the term Postal Enhancement and Accountability Act.

and into the USPS. The fact that you apparently do not understand that it is Government owned and operated shows that you need to do more research.

Have a nice day.

I'm not buying what you are selling.

Heavily regulated capitalism with a heavy focus on the commons. All of the Social Democracies have that in common.

Hence the name, "Democratic Socialism," not Democratic Heavily Regulated Capitalism.

I'm a proud and loyal Democrat. He had made it abundantly clear that he has nothing but contempt for the Democratic party.

Yes.