Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, October 01, 2026

Oct 1, 2026

We're told progressive ideas are "fringe." Really?

59% want Medicare for All
57% want a $20 minimum wage
61% want a billionaire wealth tax
63% want to pause AI development
66% want the wealthy to pay more into Social Security

Maybe it's the establishment that's out of touch.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

... Maybe it's the establishment that's out of touch. ...

Nah.

It looks more to me like a desperate GOP that seems to be trying to put labels on Democrats, labels that they can run against, instead of the actual issues.

I mean, it is easier to just argue against "woke" (just look at he most lame Sec Hegseth) than to try to argue against what they think "woke" represents.

GOP strategy, put a label on it, then argue against that label and not the issues involved.


#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-01 09:33 PM | Reply

Republicans are better at labels than they are at governing.

Unfortunately the electorate are morons.

#2 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-10-01 09:37 PM | Reply

"A substantial majority of Americans support requiring higher-income earners to contribute more to Social Security to address the program's upcoming funding shortfall.

Public Support and Context

66% support: Polling highlights strong public backing for making the wealthy pay more into the system.

Insolvency timeline: The Social Security trust fund faces depletion projected around the early 2030s.

Current cap: In 2026, the maximum earnings subject to the 6.2% payroll tax is $184,500.

' Proposed Solutions

Lifting the cap: Lawmakers propose raising or eliminating the wage tax cap so high earners pay on income above $184,500.

Solvency boost: Proponents argue this revenue change extends the program's solvency for decades.

Benefit protection: Advocates favor tax adjustments over across-the-board benefit cuts for average retirees."

"It's only 6% of us that experience any benefit from the cap and an even smaller percentage " three or four " who benefit from scrapping the cap on income above $250,000," O'Malley reportedly told host Blake Burman.

"Most Americans, Blake, think it is unfair that wealthy people don't pay the same tax rate as a custodian in a school or a teacher."

www.usatoday.com

#3 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-01 09:45 PM | Reply

@#3 ... "Most Americans, Blake, think it is unfair that wealthy people don't pay the same tax rate as a custodian in a school or a teacher." ...

The wealthy here in the US want the upward transfer of the Country's wealth towards them to continue.

That should be no surprise.


#4 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-01 09:53 PM | Reply

Why didn't the author of this thread not fight harder to get his name on the ballot in 2016. Just a thought.

#5 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2026-10-01 10:00 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#5

Hey, great to see your comment(s) again.

:)

#6 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-01 10:03 PM | Reply

Thanks. I've been on a Christa Pike bender for a while. I'll be back in a few.

#7 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2026-10-01 10:06 PM | Reply

#5

Because he couldn't win the Dem Primary, much less a national election, even when he had the advantage of Caucuses.

And...

"No, the DNC didn't rig' the Democratic primary for Hillary Clinton"

www.washingtonpost.com

After Trump, perhaps we'll be fortunate enough to get someone who can; someone Bernie supports.

#8 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-01 10:27 PM | Reply

@#7 ... I'll be back in a few. ...

Looking forward ...

:)

#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-01 10:40 PM | Reply

@#8 ... "No, the DNC didn't rig' the Democratic primary for Hillary Clinton"

we'll be fortunate enough to get someone who can ...

I object to any hint of rigging elections.

Is that what you really meant? Or did I just misread it?

#10 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-01 10:43 PM | Reply

I was referring to Laura's #5.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-01 10:53 PM | Reply

Because he couldn't win the Dem Primary, much less a national election, even when he had the advantage of Caucuses.
And...
"No, the DNC didn't rig' the Democratic primary for Hillary Clinton"
www.washingtonpost.com

After Trump, perhaps we'll be fortunate enough to get someone who can; someone Bernie supports.

#8 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-01 10:27 PM | Reply

You know how to lie a lot. Of course the 2016 primary was rigged in Hillary's favor. That's established fact.

#12 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2026-10-01 10:58 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#11

thx for the follow-up.

#13 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-01 11:03 PM | Reply

@#12 ... That's established fact. ...

Got a link?

#14 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-01 11:05 PM | Reply

Washpo didn't think so, Laura. Neither did Nate Silver and a lot of others.

I posted their article. I was supporting Bernie before you were born, dearie.

#15 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-01 11:17 PM | Reply

Progressive ideas stopped being "radical" since before Theodore Roosevelt became president.

#16 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-10-02 07:09 AM | Reply

Bernie Bros don't give a shit if we all die in a nuclear war.

#17 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-10-02 05:23 PM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort