1175
Corporate media, owned by billionaires, refuse to recognize the wave of democratic socialism
(discuss.online)
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2026
1175 points (98.3% liked)
Work Reform
17232 readers
251 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No. Support is ~30%. Last time I checked, that's not a majority.
~47% (almost half) view them unfavorably. Another ~23% are unsure.
23-30% of people are perpetually unsure of everything lol
Those are people who don't wanna answer. Tbh if some rando was asking which political view I had, I would also not share it.
Especially when you get asked in a way that makes it clear that they have an agenda.
Like to ask say, "Do you support what the Mayor is doing with raising taxes on rich residents" they might ask "Would you be ok with having your taxes raised?"
Then report it in a reframed way later.
Polls are bull shit no matter what they say.
Hell in the first term I got a Trump poll and "How do you think the president is doing" disn't even have negatice options, just degrees of Good, Great, Excelent etc.
If I was approached in the NYC street by someone asking me how I felt about politics, I would not take the risk that they have my name and face already and want to put me in a oligarch's database.
"No comment.
And here, take my wallet and phone."
Exactly
Maybe. I don't know about that.
;-)
I don't know about that
undecided voters as well.
Or they're in the "nothing ever happens" camp.
About 35% of the unfavorable are the lost ones that vote R because that's what they've always done, what their church tells them, and what their one or two propaganda channels tell them. And the other 10% of those are probably Wall Street and adjacent. The ones that actually do have things to lose, since they're the ones stealing it from the rest.
It's a fair position, as far as they are concerned, they haven't seen it in action, at least not for very long. So they are waiting to see if it pans out as promised.
Still garbage, to compare "view them unfavorably" then you have to do "view them favorably" and not "Support" if you want to compare "Support" then you have to do "Against" with clear questions.
Source: https://sri.siena.edu/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/SNY0826-Release-Crosstabs_Corrected.pdf
That table isn't on the link provided
Thanks, corrected the link.
For context Trump's numbers are (according to the Economist, but most polls are similar):
34% approve 61% disapprove 4% unsure
So the DSA's approval is less than Trump's, but there's a much larger percentage in the "Don't know" column. Which makes sense, Trump is an incumbent, everyone knows him, while a lot of people don't know what the DSA is about. But then I'm not sure the DSA knows what the DSA is about.
So Trump's net approval is -27 while the DSA's is -17. So the DSA is currently at 10% better than a criminal pedophile.
Obviously that 23% "Don't know" number is significant. If every single person that doesn't know about the DSA learns more about them and decides they like them, then I guess the DSA could get to a net approval of +6. But if people learn more about them they fall into similar categories as those that already have an opinion, then their net approval approval would drop to similar levels to Trump.
If they could clean things up a bit in regards to the antisemitism and things like "America deserved 9/11" kind of rhetoric they could improve their numbers. But I don't think the DSA is interested in doing that. So they're probably going to be stuck at around a net -20.
There's good reason why people like Abdul El-Sayed and AOC are distancing themselves from the DSA.
Reminder, disliking Israel murdering all the Palestinians is not anti-semetic, that's propaganda working.
And this is why the left has an antisemitism problem. It's forbidden to ever discuss the issue. I've seen people on the left say that Jews have been evil throughout history, I've seen leftists openly admit they want to kill all Jews. People post rationalizations for why all Jews are an acceptable target of harassment even if they've never set foot in Israel.
But there's a blanket rationalization for why that kind of talk is completely fine because it's "criticizing Israel". That rationalization only works within your group. You've created a permission structure for antisemitism, and automatically block anyone who brings up the problem.
These rationalizations and whitewashing only work within your group. Everyone else just sees some bullies harassing Jews at synagogues. You can see in the polling data that your movement is unpopular. You can't even consider there may be reasons why. You can't even discuss those reasons because your group forbids that kind of discussion. The first step is to admit there's a problem, but leftists are incapable of doing that.
Is the netanyahu government committing genocide? Yes or lie.
you're assuming that the 47% unfavorable are there because they know what the DSA are about? My theory is that they are unfavorable because of hundred years of propaganada against anything opposing capitalism, partially caused by the media being owned by the wealthy, as well as hundreds of millions or more from Israel to discredit the ones that oppose their genocides.
Leftists are just really terrible at communicating with the working class. It's mostly a movement coming out of universities where the goal is to prove how clever you are to everyone else. That just doesn't play well with the working class.
You're implying that the working class doesn't like leftism because they're too stupid. Consider the possibility that how you think about the working class might have something to do with why the working class doesn't like you.
And you have too many leftists that are completely disconnected from reality. This comes at the expense of the working class.
Anyone who has worked with someone that's from Eastern Europe or has read a history book documenting the famines in the Soviet Union or China are really going to be turned off by a conversation with a tankie. When leftists dismiss the plight of the working class in these countries as being minor details because there's a "bigger picture" that's more important? Yeah that's not going to fly with the working class. Obviously.
Really if leftists cared about reaching the working class they'd drop the use of the word "socialist" entirely. People obviously associate that word with the USSR, because that word is actually in the name of the country. But leftist care more about winning some debate (it's the university crowd) so feel like if they can successfully argue that socialism is good actually, they have achieved something. The working class should appreciate us for how clever we are!
But how clever is it to think that a socialist movement can have success without the working class? There's a lack of any kind of wisdom coming from leftism.
Yeah, there should be a similar poll simply asking about policies puahed by the DSA.
Absolutely. And there's no way all of that 47% knows that the DSA is an actual communist group.
Some of them are, some of them aren't. They're basically Schrodinger's communists. Both communist and not communist until you have a conversation with someone from the DSA.
Maybe you talk to someone in the DSA that says "hey we just want things like better healthcare" or maybe you talk to someone that wants to burn everything down and recreate the Soviet Union to prove it would've worked if it started out industrialized or whatever.
Yes, they should be more consistent. Like centrists, who reliably support genocide and nothing else.
You could be correct, but that's not what the headline says. People who lack support also "don't support". "Less than half don't support" is the same thing as "more than half do support." "!support < 50%" can be converted to "support >= 50%."
Why would you count "unsure" as "support"?
I don't. Unsure is lacking in support. They don't support him. They are included in the "less than half don't support" of the headline.
For another example of this language, atheist = lacking belief in a god. It does not mean you believe there isn't a god. Non-believers includes those who are anti-theist and atheist. They all lack belief, but one is against and one is neutral. Believers are the other group, who actively believe in one.
70% < 50%?
What?
If 47% view the DSA unfavorably, and 23% are unsure (which you're counting as unsupportive) then we're at 70%.
I'm only discussing the headline posted, not if it's wrong. What it says is that more than half support. I'm not claiming that's correct.
No, the headline says less than half support.
And there's a case to be made for the author to only include those who indicated they were explicitly unfavorable, and not those who were unsure (or agnostic). Otherwise Dan's criticism would have been that they included those to inflate the numbers.
The only thing that there isn't a case for is claiming that more than half do support the DSA.
Alright, this is my last message, but I'll try to explain it. This is an example of DeMorgan's law.
Let's call "support" A, and "50%" B, just so we can move it away from natural language. Not A means "not support" or "don't support".
The headline can be expressed as "not A < B". Using DeMorgan's law, we can change that to an equivalent statement of "A >= B".
Now, convert it back to natural language and that's "support >= 50%".
Again, I'm not making a claim on the validity. I am only expressing what the headline says. Headlines can be wrong, and the article may even contradict it. That doesn't affect the headline though.
I understand your pedantry. And I explained the rationale.
Not sure why you felt the need to restate it, no one is confused.
Damn, y'all two are splitting the dumbest fucking hairs.
yeah it's more of a splash if anything
hyper magnified by media focus on a about 3 charismatic individuals that are not following DSA policies
they're a bunch of independents waving a commie and palestinian flag