Two-thirds of Democrats have a positive view of socialism. But, the Democratic Socialists of America has fewer than 80,000 members. Is that why the DSA is tacking to the center?On “Checks and Balance”, with @JohnPrideaux, @chowardchoward and @jbennet https://t.co/Lh0XHNlfHE ...

Core Viewpoint - The discussion centers around the perception of landlords amidst rising rents and housing shortages, questioning whether landlords are truly "evil" or if the situation is more nuanced [1]. Group 1: Landlord Perception - The narrative that owning property and charging rent is immoral is challenged, with the argument that societal resentment towards successful individuals stems from envy and jealousy [2][3]. - Ramsey emphasizes that not everyone is equal in terms of success and capabilities, suggesting that the push against successful landlords reflects a broader societal issue [2][3]. Group 2: Charging Rent - Charging market rent is defended as a legitimate transaction rather than an immoral act, with Ramsey stating that landlords provide housing options for those who cannot afford to live in certain areas [4][5]. - The reality of income disparities is highlighted, noting that individuals earning $45,000 a year cannot afford to live in high-cost areas like Manhattan, which is a part of life [5].

Socialism is emerging as the populist alternative on the left. Rising generations do not remember the Soviet Union. Indeed, like “MAGA” and unlike “Democrat”, the term “socialism” carries a subversive appeal https://t.co/bcmsydU1EU ...

TrueSteven Barrett 🎗 (@SBarrettBar):The greatest lie of our timeIs pretending that Hitler's National Socialists.Were 'right wing'. All Socialists are Left Wing. ...

From @WSJopinion: Democrats who endorse Mamdani are sending a message: There’s room in the party for members of an organization whose commitment to socialism is shared by only a minority of the American people, writes William Galstonhttps://t.co/dlXwZtNEFk ...

Government Financial Deals & Policy - The US government is engaging in unprecedented financial deals with companies like Intel, Nvidia, and US Steel [1] - The administration is pressuring universities on DEI policies, anti-Semitism, and admissions [10] - The administration aims to save money and get money back for taxpayers [11][12] - The administration is focusing on saving money as opposed to cutting federal workers [12] - The government is sending letters to universities like Harvard and the University of California regarding federally funded patents [12][13] - The president is moving on the affordability of prescription drugs [16] - The government is going to push prescription drug companies on the most favored nation approach [17] Potential Concerns & Criticisms - Concerns are raised about the US government potentially taking half the profits from university patents funded by taxpayer money, which is viewed as "full blown out socialism" [3] - The idea of the government taking a percentage from private companies that it helped is criticized as socialism [8] - The administration's actions are seen as a move from state capitalism to straight socialism, with the government wanting money back [9] - The administration is criticized for going after researchers and asking for money after giving tax cuts to billionaires and corporations [14]

Political Ideologies - The report suggests a fundamental similarity between socialism and fascism, as articulated by Friedrich Hayek [1]

For one of this morning's must-read op-eds, National Review senior political correspondent Jim Gered. Also a contributing columnist for the Washington Post has a new piece in the Post titled, "When mom Donnie says it, it's socialism. When Trump does it, it's genius. " Jim writing Jim writing tongue and cheek here. Quote, "It's a good thing we have President Donald Trump and his administration to stop the spread of Zoran Mani's socialist agenda.Instead of having the government take greater control of private ...

Political Commentary - The discussion revolves around whether President Trump's actions align with socialist policies, citing examples such as government stakes in private companies and intervention in business operations [1][2][3][5] - The analysis distinguishes between left-wing and right-wing versions of socialism, noting that the Trump administration's actions involve state control over private business to achieve specific policy ends, rather than expanding social services [5][6][7] - There's a debate on whether these policies represent a lasting shift in the Republican party's philosophy or are specific to Trump's administration, with some arguing that conservatives generally favor limited government intervention [12][13][15] - Some view Trump's actions as a cult of personality, suggesting that these interventions are accepted because of Trump's leadership rather than a fundamental change in Republican ideology [19] Economic Intervention - The government is considering equity stakes in defense contractors, signaling increased federal involvement in private industries [2] - Examples of government intervention include approving a US chip sale to China in exchange for 15% of profits, the sale of US Steel in return for a government golden share, and securing a 10% government stake in Intel [1] - Concerns are raised about the potential negative outcomes of government investment in private companies, referencing past failures like the Celindra loan [10][11] Data Security Concerns - A whistleblower complaint alleges that sensitive personal data from the Social Security Administration was uploaded to an unsecured cloud structure, raising concerns about data security and identity theft [21] - The incident is compared to a "move fast and break things" mentality, suggesting potential risks associated with rapid implementation of new technologies [22]

Government Intervention & Socialism Accusations - Conservative radio host Eric Ericson criticizes Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik's suggestion for the US government to take an equity stake in Intel [1] - The proposal is labeled as "socialism" and "state capitalism" [1][2][4][5] - The US government potentially becoming Intel's largest shareholder is viewed as government seizing the means of production [2][3] - The administration is accused of embracing socialism, with the proposal seen as a bright line being crossed [1][4] Concerns Over National Security & Private Company Control - There is a lack of national security justification for the government's proposed equity stake [2] - The government seeking a 10% stake in a private company is considered federal government taking over a portion of a private company for their benefit [4][5]