Why do people give a shit about what Joe Rogan thinks? He's the Fear Factor guy. I don't understand how that douche is somehow considered some kind of political expert now.
It's just that he has a massive audience. Same as if Oprah endorsed someone.
Okay I just looked up his audience size and I am shocked.
How the fuck can the Fear Factor guy (okay, and the News Radio) guy have an audience like this? He's nothing but a washed up comedian/reality tv show host. I don't get it.
washed up? really? he's one of the most popular stand up comedians out there right now. his podcast has millions of subscribers. he is a massively influential and respected MMA announcer. why do you think all of these candidates are falling over themselves to get an audience with him?
See my last post. Washed up was the wrong word, I guess. I don't understand how a comedian/reality tv show host/"respected MMA announcer"(really, there is such a thing???!) give him credibility in anything outside of those arenas.
why would anyone give a fuck about oprah's endorsement? the same reason. in a perfect world, politicians would be seeking endorsements from college professors, inventors, scientists, but no, they go with people who live in hollywood because the average voter is a blooming idiot.
You think Rogan's resume is on par with Oprah's? I'm not a huge Oprah fan (haha) but I would lend more credence to someone like that over a "respected MMA announcer" any day of the week.
Joe Rogan. haha.
Come on people
not on par, just an example of another famous person. why would you lend more credence to oprah's opinion? because of her level of fame?
i'm not really sure what your last two sentences are about. Sanders is the one who tweeted rogan's endorsement. You asked why rogan has so many followers, I told you. If you haven't watched or listened to him, you are commenting from an ignorant place. the fact you dismiss him simply because he's from MMA is also profoundly ignorant. he's an incredibly intelligent guy.
I just wish he'd stop putting a microphone in front of Jordan Peterson. I don't listen to Rogan, so I'm certainly willing to believe there's some thought-provoking conversations, but the large number of Peterson appearances makes me question the nature of that provocation.
I was having this conversation with a friend over the weekend about peterson. that's one of the biggest criticisms I have of joe; when he has a serious guest, he often doesn't challenge them. going in, I didn't really know who peterson was. on joe's podcast, I agreed with much of what he said. But then I did my own research on him. And I realized that peterson seemed to purposely come off as a "lighter" version of himself on the podcast, probably knowing the reach joe had. peterson seemed reasonable and knowledgeable on the podcast, but when i read some of the other shit he's said afterwards, he seems like a pretty awful person.
I can see why some then criticize joe as being the things they claim he is. I don't personally think he is those things, I think he just likes to get different points of view.
I worry that Rogan's seeming fascination with Peterson might be indicative of his overall approach to these thought-provoking conversations. Peterson is a magnet for gadflies and dilettantes. I don't listen to Rogan, so I'm happy to be corrected, but I'm not sure I trust his ability to separate the Petersons from the rest.
Why do people give a shit about what Joe Rogan thinks? He's the Fear Factor guy. I don't understand how that douche is somehow considered some kind of political expert now.
It's just that he has a massive audience. Same as if Oprah endorsed someone.
Okay I just looked up his audience size and I am shocked.
How the fuck can the Fear Factor guy (okay, and the News Radio) guy have an audience like this? He's nothing but a washed up comedian/reality tv show host. I don't get it.
washed up? really? he's one of the most popular stand up comedians out there right now. his podcast has millions of subscribers. he is a massively influential and respected MMA announcer. why do you think all of these candidates are falling over themselves to get an audience with him?
See my last post. Washed up was the wrong word, I guess. I don't understand how a comedian/reality tv show host/"respected MMA announcer"(really, there is such a thing???!) give him credibility in anything outside of those arenas.
why would anyone give a fuck about oprah's endorsement? the same reason. in a perfect world, politicians would be seeking endorsements from college professors, inventors, scientists, but no, they go with people who live in hollywood because the average voter is a blooming idiot.
You think Rogan's resume is on par with Oprah's? I'm not a huge Oprah fan (haha) but I would lend more credence to someone like that over a "respected MMA announcer" any day of the week.
Joe Rogan. haha.
Come on people
If you're trying to understand why he's popular you have to ditch his resume. It comes down to him being a curious guy, a great host for conversations, and what Hugh said about a wide range of guests. If you earnestly want to grasp his appeal (and you don't want to listen to his shows), just start scrolling through his list of guests.
Oprah is a perfect analogy. Her influence is insane but it's not like she grew an audience on intellectual content. She has spun off stuff like Dr. Phil and Rachael Ray.
I think in either case an endorsement serves to open up your audience to check out your preferred candidate. They're not union leaders standing up in a hall and directing membership on how they should vote. Hell, the Sanders campaign just chopped up a clip from a recent podcast. It's not like Rogan was teeing up an endorsement. He just, in the course of conversation, said he was voting for Bernie.
Why do people give a shit about what Joe Rogan thinks? He's the Fear Factor guy. I don't understand how that douche is somehow considered some kind of political expert now.
It's just that he has a massive audience. Same as if Oprah endorsed someone.
Okay I just looked up his audience size and I am shocked.
How the fuck can the Fear Factor guy (okay, and the News Radio) guy have an audience like this? He's nothing but a washed up comedian/reality tv show host. I don't get it.
washed up? really? he's one of the most popular stand up comedians out there right now. his podcast has millions of subscribers. he is a massively influential and respected MMA announcer. why do you think all of these candidates are falling over themselves to get an audience with him?
See my last post. Washed up was the wrong word, I guess. I don't understand how a comedian/reality tv show host/"respected MMA announcer"(really, there is such a thing???!) give him credibility in anything outside of those arenas.
why would anyone give a fuck about oprah's endorsement? the same reason. in a perfect world, politicians would be seeking endorsements from college professors, inventors, scientists, but no, they go with people who live in hollywood because the average voter is a blooming idiot.
You think Rogan's resume is on par with Oprah's? I'm not a huge Oprah fan (haha) but I would lend more credence to someone like that over a "respected MMA announcer" any day of the week.
Joe Rogan. haha.
Come on people
If you're trying to understand why he's popular you have to ditch his resume. It comes down to him being a curious guy, a great host for conversations, and what Hugh said about a wide range of guests. If you earnestly want to grasp his appeal (and you don't want to listen to his shows), just start scrolling through his list of guests.
Oprah is a perfect analogy. Her influence is insane but it's not like she grew an audience on intellectual content. She has spun off stuff like Dr. Phil and Rachael Ray.
I think in either case an endorsement serves to open up your audience to check out your preferred candidate. They're not union leaders standing up in a hall and directing membership on how they should vote. Hell, the Sanders campaign just chopped up a clip from a recent podcast. It's not like Rogan was teeing up an endorsement. He just, in the course of conversation, said he was voting for Bernie.
and it wasn't even that much of an endorsement. all he basically said was bernie is the most consistent, he said nothing about his policies or anything.
Why do people give a shit about what Joe Rogan thinks? He's the Fear Factor guy. I don't understand how that douche is somehow considered some kind of political expert now.
It's just that he has a massive audience. Same as if Oprah endorsed someone.
Okay I just looked up his audience size and I am shocked.
How the fuck can the Fear Factor guy (okay, and the News Radio) guy have an audience like this? He's nothing but a washed up comedian/reality tv show host. I don't get it.
washed up? really? he's one of the most popular stand up comedians out there right now. his podcast has millions of subscribers. he is a massively influential and respected MMA announcer. why do you think all of these candidates are falling over themselves to get an audience with him?
See my last post. Washed up was the wrong word, I guess. I don't understand how a comedian/reality tv show host/"respected MMA announcer"(really, there is such a thing???!) give him credibility in anything outside of those arenas.
why would anyone give a fuck about oprah's endorsement? the same reason. in a perfect world, politicians would be seeking endorsements from college professors, inventors, scientists, but no, they go with people who live in hollywood because the average voter is a blooming idiot.
You think Rogan's resume is on par with Oprah's? I'm not a huge Oprah fan (haha) but I would lend more credence to someone like that over a "respected MMA announcer" any day of the week.
Joe Rogan. haha.
Come on people
not on par, just an example of another famous person. why would you lend more credence to oprah's opinion? because of her level of fame?
i'm not really sure what your last two sentences are about. Sanders is the one who tweeted rogan's endorsement. You asked why rogan has so many followers, I told you. If you haven't watched or listened to him, you are commenting from an ignorant place. the fact you dismiss him simply because he's from MMA is also profoundly ignorant. he's an incredibly intelligent guy.
Level of fame has nothing to do with it. That is my whole point and I think Rogan's level of fame is literally the only reason people are giving his opinion any credence. When I asked why should I care about what he says about this, literally the only response is that he has such a huge audience. That's ridiculous.
No, look at Oprah's philanthropy, her success as a business woman, and look how she's conducted herself personally (no weird conspiracy theories spouted by her in comparison to this Rogan guy etc). That stuff gives you credibility when talking about things that matter in people's lives. And, again, I don't really like Oprah Winfrey at all. You just used her as an example for some reason. But, yeah, her opinion matters to me much more than someone like Joe Rogan. I also seem to think she is incredibly intelligent.
Why do people give a shit about what Joe Rogan thinks? He's the Fear Factor guy. I don't understand how that douche is somehow considered some kind of political expert now.
It's just that he has a massive audience. Same as if Oprah endorsed someone.
Okay I just looked up his audience size and I am shocked.
How the fuck can the Fear Factor guy (okay, and the News Radio) guy have an audience like this? He's nothing but a washed up comedian/reality tv show host. I don't get it.
washed up? really? he's one of the most popular stand up comedians out there right now. his podcast has millions of subscribers. he is a massively influential and respected MMA announcer. why do you think all of these candidates are falling over themselves to get an audience with him?
See my last post. Washed up was the wrong word, I guess. I don't understand how a comedian/reality tv show host/"respected MMA announcer"(really, there is such a thing???!) give him credibility in anything outside of those arenas.
why would anyone give a fuck about oprah's endorsement? the same reason. in a perfect world, politicians would be seeking endorsements from college professors, inventors, scientists, but no, they go with people who live in hollywood because the average voter is a blooming idiot.
You think Rogan's resume is on par with Oprah's? I'm not a huge Oprah fan (haha) but I would lend more credence to someone like that over a "respected MMA announcer" any day of the week.
Joe Rogan. haha.
Come on people
not on par, just an example of another famous person. why would you lend more credence to oprah's opinion? because of her level of fame?
i'm not really sure what your last two sentences are about. Sanders is the one who tweeted rogan's endorsement. You asked why rogan has so many followers, I told you. If you haven't watched or listened to him, you are commenting from an ignorant place. the fact you dismiss him simply because he's from MMA is also profoundly ignorant. he's an incredibly intelligent guy.
Level of fame has nothing to do with it. That is my whole point and I think Rogan's level of fame is literally the only reason people are giving his opinion any credence. When I asked why should I care about what he says about this, literally the only response is that he has such a huge audience. That's ridiculous.
No, look at Oprah's philanthropy, her success as a business woman, and look how she's conducted herself personally (no weird conspiracy theories spouted by her in comparison to this Rogan guy etc). That stuff gives you credibility when talking about things that matter in people's lives. And, again, I don't really like Oprah Winfrey at all. You just used her as an example for some reason. But, yeah, her opinion matters to me much more than someone like Joe Rogan. I also seem to think she is incredibly intelligent.
That wasn't the only response. I suggested you shouldn't care about what anyone like that has to say about politics. Joe Rogan, Oprah, Eddie Vedder, etc.
Why do people give a shit about what Joe Rogan thinks? He's the Fear Factor guy. I don't understand how that douche is somehow considered some kind of political expert now.
It's just that he has a massive audience. Same as if Oprah endorsed someone.
Okay I just looked up his audience size and I am shocked.
How the fuck can the Fear Factor guy (okay, and the News Radio) guy have an audience like this? He's nothing but a washed up comedian/reality tv show host. I don't get it.
washed up? really? he's one of the most popular stand up comedians out there right now. his podcast has millions of subscribers. he is a massively influential and respected MMA announcer. why do you think all of these candidates are falling over themselves to get an audience with him?
See my last post. Washed up was the wrong word, I guess. I don't understand how a comedian/reality tv show host/"respected MMA announcer"(really, there is such a thing???!) give him credibility in anything outside of those arenas.
why would anyone give a fuck about oprah's endorsement? the same reason. in a perfect world, politicians would be seeking endorsements from college professors, inventors, scientists, but no, they go with people who live in hollywood because the average voter is a blooming idiot.
You think Rogan's resume is on par with Oprah's? I'm not a huge Oprah fan (haha) but I would lend more credence to someone like that over a "respected MMA announcer" any day of the week.
Joe Rogan. haha.
Come on people
not on par, just an example of another famous person. why would you lend more credence to oprah's opinion? because of her level of fame?
i'm not really sure what your last two sentences are about. Sanders is the one who tweeted rogan's endorsement. You asked why rogan has so many followers, I told you. If you haven't watched or listened to him, you are commenting from an ignorant place. the fact you dismiss him simply because he's from MMA is also profoundly ignorant. he's an incredibly intelligent guy.
Level of fame has nothing to do with it. That is my whole point and I think Rogan's level of fame is literally the only reason people are giving his opinion any credence. When I asked why should I care about what he says about this, literally the only response is that he has such a huge audience. That's ridiculous.
No, look at Oprah's philanthropy, her success as a business woman, and look how she's conducted herself personally (no weird conspiracy theories spouted by her in comparison to this Rogan guy etc). That stuff gives you credibility when talking about things that matter in people's lives. And, again, I don't really like Oprah Winfrey at all. You just used her as an example for some reason. But, yeah, her opinion matters to me much more than someone like Joe Rogan. I also seem to think she is incredibly intelligent.
no, my response was you shouldn't care. I said the reason others care about what he says is because of his audience, and that's it unfortunate that is how our society and politics work.
I really don't know who is giving rogan's opinion any credence beyond the sanders campaign. I just find him entertaining.
I used oprah, as stated, just as a random celebrity (probably because I saw a video last night online with her and the rock drinking his tequila). I don't know who you'd find on par with rogan, since you don't seem to think he's at all famous for anything.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
this conversation isnt goink9g anywhere with this irrelevant stuff.
So, what do you think? The non-Senator candidates keep campaigning in fairness to the 3 sitting for the trial? Should they?
not sure how it's not relevant. sanders posted an endorsement by a polarizing figure. pretty relevant to me.
ok. exhausted conversation. Again I will point out I think Joe said he WOULD not WILL vote for Bernie. So not exactly a ringing endorsement. I wonder how Joe feels about that snippet being used this way....... it is his work product being co-opted.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
this conversation isnt goink9g anywhere with this irrelevant stuff.
So, what do you think? The non-Senator candidates keep campaigning in fairness to the 3 sitting for the trial? Should they?
not sure how it's not relevant. sanders posted an endorsement by a polarizing figure. pretty relevant to me.
ok. exhausted conversation. Again I will point out I think Joe said he WOULD not WILL vote for Bernie. So not exactly a ringing endorsement. I wonder how Joe feels about that snippet being used this way....... it is his work product being co-opted.
I would be shocked if the sanders campaign didn't check with rogan and his team prior to posting that.
This is what I argued four years ago. Teh Republicans and Trump have been silent because they don't want to damage him too soon.
Again, 1000% yep. It's why Trump is already saying the system is rigged against Bernie.
Republicans are better at politics and branding than democrats are. If Bernie is the nominee, you democrats better get used to all being labeled as a bunch of socialists for the rest of eternity.
This is what I argued four years ago. Teh Republicans and Trump have been silent because they don't want to damage him too soon.
Again, 1000% yep. It's why Trump is already saying the system is rigged against Bernie.
Republicans are better at politics and branding than democrats are. If Bernie is the nominee, you democrats better get used to all being labeled as a bunch of socialists for the rest of eternity.
As people has said from the beginning ”they will label us socialists whoever we pick”.
But keep running away from the bullies I guess.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
This is what I argued four years ago. Teh Republicans and Trump have been silent because they don't want to damage him too soon.
Again, 1000% yep. It's why Trump is already saying the system is rigged against Bernie.
Republicans are better at politics and branding than democrats are. If Bernie is the nominee, you democrats better get used to all being labeled as a bunch of socialists for the rest of eternity.
As people has said from the beginning ”they will label us socialists whoever we pick”.
This is what I argued four years ago. Teh Republicans and Trump have been silent because they don't want to damage him too soon.
Again, 1000% yep. It's why Trump is already saying the system is rigged against Bernie.
Republicans are better at politics and branding than democrats are. If Bernie is the nominee, you democrats better get used to all being labeled as a bunch of socialists for the rest of eternity.
Andrew Yang has also been labeled a "socialist" by some which is quite the joke and, sadly, proves that many Americans don't read very well or think very clearly or critically. Thus Yang's slogan: MATH, Make America Think Harder. Many people need to think harder. I try, but I know I can do better.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
This is what I argued four years ago. Teh Republicans and Trump have been silent because they don't want to damage him too soon.
Again, 1000% yep. It's why Trump is already saying the system is rigged against Bernie.
Republicans are better at politics and branding than democrats are. If Bernie is the nominee, you democrats better get used to all being labeled as a bunch of socialists for the rest of eternity.
As people has said from the beginning ”they will label us socialists whoever we pick”.
This is what I argued four years ago. Teh Republicans and Trump have been silent because they don't want to damage him too soon.
Again, 1000% yep. It's why Trump is already saying the system is rigged against Bernie.
Republicans are better at politics and branding than democrats are. If Bernie is the nominee, you democrats better get used to all being labeled as a bunch of socialists for the rest of eternity.
Andrew Yang has also been labeled a "socialist" by some which is quite the joke and, sadly, proves that many Americans don't read very well or think very clearly or critically. Thus Yang's slogan: MATH, Make America Think Harder. Many people need to think harder. I try, but I know I can do better.
This is what I argued four years ago. Teh Republicans and Trump have been silent because they don't want to damage him too soon.
Again, 1000% yep. It's why Trump is already saying the system is rigged against Bernie.
Republicans are better at politics and branding than democrats are. If Bernie is the nominee, you democrats better get used to all being labeled as a bunch of socialists for the rest of eternity.
As people has said from the beginning ”they will label us socialists whoever we pick”.
But keep running away from the bullies I guess.
Right. Because that has happened so many times before.
You nominate a guy who actually calls himself that and then, voila, there you have it. Not rocket science.
If Bernie is the nominee, you democrats better get used to all being labeled as a bunch of socialists for the rest of eternity.
Then just quote this speech back to them like a man:
Mr Fälldin has been nagging me to explain why I am a socialist. I am a democratic socialist, with pride and with joy. I became one when travelling India seeing its terrible poverty blended with pockets of immense wealth; when travelling the United States and seeing an in some respects even more humiliating poverty; when, as a young man, I came eye to eye with Communist enslavement and the oppression and inhuman persecution in the Communist states. And when I came to the Nazi concentration camps and saw the death lists of social democrats and trade-unionists.
I got that conviction when it became clear to me that it was the social democratic movement that brought democracy to Sweden, when it became clear to me that it was the social democratic movement that had lifted the country out of poverty and unemployment with its politics of the 1930s. And when I myself was campaigning for state pensions for the elderly and got up against the anti-Socialist campaigns of those with special privileges who objected ordinary workers securing their own retirement. Because that is what you (the right) was doing back then.
But even more important is that I am strengthened in my conviction when I look at the state of the world, when I see the wars and the arms race and the mass unemployment and all that divides people. I am strengthened in my conviction when I see, here in our own country, an increase in injustice, unemployment, speculation and graft. When I look into the future which the right-wing has to offer, where the workers will get less and the rich will get more, where social security will be in decline and the number of luxury yachts on the rise, where solidarity diminishes and egotism increases, where the strong can enrich themselves while the weak will have to beg if they are to get anything at all.
Of course I am a democratic socialist. I hold that conviction with pride in what democratic socialism has achieved in our country, and with joy, because I know that we have important tasks ahead of us as a result of right-wing negligence. And with confidence, because now people know what happens with their jobs and with security and stability when the right-wing is in power. In a way I hold that conviction with a smile because I know that modern Swedish history is full of valuable reforms, which you at first described as evil socialism but then later fought to get credit for when people understood their significance.
Certainly Mr Fälldin and Mr Ullsten am I a democratic socialist. As Mr Branting was, who gave everybody the right to vote. As Per-Albin who fought unemployment in the 30s and introduced our social safety nets. As Mr Erlander who expanded our social safety nets and gave us decent pensions.
Because it is about solidarity and compassion between people.
Comments
Oprah is a perfect analogy. Her influence is insane but it's not like she grew an audience on intellectual content. She has spun off stuff like Dr. Phil and Rachael Ray.
I think in either case an endorsement serves to open up your audience to check out your preferred candidate. They're not union leaders standing up in a hall and directing membership on how they should vote. Hell, the Sanders campaign just chopped up a clip from a recent podcast. It's not like Rogan was teeing up an endorsement. He just, in the course of conversation, said he was voting for Bernie.
www.headstonesband.com
No, look at Oprah's philanthropy, her success as a business woman, and look how she's conducted herself personally (no weird conspiracy theories spouted by her in comparison to this Rogan guy etc). That stuff gives you credibility when talking about things that matter in people's lives. And, again, I don't really like Oprah Winfrey at all. You just used her as an example for some reason. But, yeah, her opinion matters to me much more than someone like Joe Rogan. I also seem to think she is incredibly intelligent.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
I really don't know who is giving rogan's opinion any credence beyond the sanders campaign. I just find him entertaining.
I used oprah, as stated, just as a random celebrity (probably because I saw a video last night online with her and the rock drinking his tequila). I don't know who you'd find on par with rogan, since you don't seem to think he's at all famous for anything.
www.headstonesband.com
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
www.headstonesband.com
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
www.headstonesband.com
Congratulations.
Republicans are better at politics and branding than democrats are. If Bernie is the nominee, you democrats better get used to all being labeled as a bunch of socialists for the rest of eternity.
But keep running away from the bullies I guess.
www.headstonesband.com
Andrew Yang has also been labeled a "socialist" by some which is quite the joke and, sadly, proves that many Americans don't read very well or think very clearly or critically. Thus Yang's slogan: MATH, Make America Think Harder. Many people need to think harder. I try, but I know I can do better.
www.headstonesband.com
You nominate a guy who actually calls himself that and then, voila, there you have it. Not rocket science.
Mr Fälldin has been nagging me to explain why I am a socialist. I am a democratic socialist, with pride and with joy. I became one when travelling India seeing its terrible poverty blended with pockets of immense wealth; when travelling the United States and seeing an in some respects even more humiliating poverty; when, as a young man, I came eye to eye with Communist enslavement and the oppression and inhuman persecution in the Communist states. And when I came to the Nazi concentration camps and saw the death lists of social democrats and trade-unionists.
I got that conviction when it became clear to me that it was the social democratic movement that brought democracy to Sweden, when it became clear to me that it was the social democratic movement that had lifted the country out of poverty and unemployment with its politics of the 1930s. And when I myself was campaigning for state pensions for the elderly and got up against the anti-Socialist campaigns of those with special privileges who objected ordinary workers securing their own retirement. Because that is what you (the right) was doing back then.
But even more important is that I am strengthened in my conviction when I look at the state of the world, when I see the wars and the arms race and the mass unemployment and all that divides people. I am strengthened in my conviction when I see, here in our own country, an increase in injustice, unemployment, speculation and graft. When I look into the future which the right-wing has to offer, where the workers will get less and the rich will get more, where social security will be in decline and the number of luxury yachts on the rise, where solidarity diminishes and egotism increases, where the strong can enrich themselves while the weak will have to beg if they are to get anything at all.
Of course I am a democratic socialist. I hold that conviction with pride in what democratic socialism has achieved in our country, and with joy, because I know that we have important tasks ahead of us as a result of right-wing negligence. And with confidence, because now people know what happens with their jobs and with security and stability when the right-wing is in power. In a way I hold that conviction with a smile because I know that modern Swedish history is full of valuable reforms, which you at first described as evil socialism but then later fought to get credit for when people understood their significance.
https://youtu.be/7i2Ws1X5DSA
Certainly Mr Fälldin and Mr Ullsten am I a democratic socialist. As Mr Branting was, who gave everybody the right to vote. As Per-Albin who fought unemployment in the 30s and introduced our social safety nets. As Mr Erlander who expanded our social safety nets and gave us decent pensions.
Because it is about solidarity and compassion between people.
And by the way Mr Fälldin, what exactly are you?
- Olof Palme
September 17, 1982
I, and I assume everyone else, will not read that gibberish or view your inane video.
Now how could I, an accused bigot with insensitivities towards the LGBTQ community, prove my progressiveness by voting for an old white man?
Shit, I called him "old." Now I'm an ageist too!
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com