Most People Have No Idea What NBC Just Dropped About The Democrats | Elon Musk

Truly Right View Video Transcript

Freedom
Let The Truth Be Told!

Are you ready to hear the real truth unfiltered by bias media or government intervention?
Subscribe to the Truly Right View YouTube Channel
Subscribe to the Truly Right View Rumble Channel

What happens when everyday Americans, people who built this country, served in uniform, paid their taxes, raised families, start hearing that the new normal means an economy steered by politicians who fundamentally distrust free markets, don’t believe communities should make their own decisions, and want government bureaucrats calling the shots on everything from your healthcare to your energy bills. Today, we’re going to look at something NBC’s own news segments and polling data have revealed, but rarely put together in one clear picture. We’re seeing rising sympathy for socialism inside the Democratic party base. We’re hearing open calls from elected officials to transform the American system and uh we’re watching candidates step forward who are comfortable, even proud, to signal that shift. Now, I’m not here to throw around scary labels or chase outrage clicks. We’re going to zoom out, think from first principles, and ask the practical questions. What does this actually mean for your retirement savings, for your neighborhood, for your grandchildren’s future, for the freedoms you spent your life defending and building? We’re going to test the claims, follow the data, and see where this road actually leads. Think of it like tuning out the static on an old radio so you can hear the actual signal underneath. Uh headlines scream at us every day. Outrage, drama, someone said something shocking. But beneath all that noise, there are real trends, real shifts in stated beliefs and political incentives that matter far more than any single sound bite. Let me define a few terms quickly because we need everyone on the same page. When we talk about capitalism, we mean an economic system where individuals and private businesses own property, make decisions about what to produce and sell, and prices get set through voluntary exchanges in a marketplace. It rewards innovation. It punishes waste, and it decentralizes power across millions of decision makers. Socialism on the other hand means government ownership or control of major industries and resources. What people call seizing the means of production. The state steps in as the central planner deciding who gets what at what price and for purpose. The promises equality and fairness. The track record historically has been concentrated power, economic stagnation, and people losing the ability to chart their own course. Now, a general strike is when workers across multiple industries walk off the job simultaneously, not just for better wages at one company, but to pressure the entire system, the government, the economy, to bend to political demands. It’s a tool of mass disruption. Throughout history, it’s been used by revolutionary movements to destabilize societies and force radical change. And when we talk about the party base, we mean the most loyal, most ideologically committed activists and voters within a political party. The folks who show up for primaries, donate, volunteer, and hold candidates accountable to a particular vision. They’re not the swing voters in the middle. They’re the engine that determines which candidates even make it onto the general election ballot. With that map set, let’s examine the moments that made this feel less like abstract political theory and more like something brewing in real time in American cities right now. Picture this. You’re watching the mayor of one of America’s largest cities, Chicago, the third biggest in the country, standing at a rally, microphone in hand, calling on black Americans, white Americans, brown Americans, Asian-Americans, immigrants to unite in a general strike. Not a protest, not a petition drive, a general strike. He’s telling the crowd they need to send a message to the ultra rich and big corporations by withholding their labor, shutting things down, forcing the system to its knees. He invokes his ancestors, enslaved people, and claims they led the greatest general strike in American history. He wraps it in the language of justice, healthcare funding, school funding, transportation. But listen to the framing. He’s not asking for incremental reforms or negotiating a budget compromise. He’s calling for transformation. Then he goes on national television MSNBC and doubles down. He says, “If working people aren’t willing to withhold their labor and make real economic demands, he doesn’t see how the country can be transformed.” He cites Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. talking about the collision of labor rights and civil rights and suggests we’re living in that collision right now. Now, for those of you who remember the Cold War, who saw what happened when movements like this took hold in other countries, that language isn’t theoretical. A general strike isn’t a union negotiating better shifts at the factory. It’s a coordinated political weapon. And when an elected mayor in a major American city uses a national platform to advocate for it, that’s a signal about where the political center of gravity is shifting. One speech can be a spark, but polling data, that’s the oxygen. Let’s zoom out and look at the long arc because this didn’t start yesterday. NBC aired segments citing Gallup polling that’s been tracking Americans attitudes toward capitalism and socialism for well over a decade. And here’s what the trend line shows. Back around 2010, Democrats were essentially split 50/50 on whether they viewed capitalism positively. Fast forward to the most recent data, and support for capitalism among Democrats has fallen to around 40%. At the same time, favorable views of socialism have climbed to around 2/3 of Democrats nationally. Let me say that again. Roughly two out of every three Democrats um across the entire country, not just in Brooklyn or San Francisco, but everywhere now say they view socialism favorably. And uh fewer than half have a positive view of the free market system that built the strongest, most innovative economy in human history. Now compare that to independents and Republicans. Among independents, you still see a slight majority favorable toward capitalism. Among Republicans, it’s even stronger. Around 3/4 view capitalism positively, and well under half have any favorable view of socialism. The gap between the parties isn’t 5 or 10 points. It’s a chasm. It’s 40 percentage points, separating what economic system Democrats prefer versus what the average American prefers. Why does that matter to you sitting at home maybe on a fixed income trying to keep up with the cost of groceries and utilities? Because when a party base shifts that far toward an ideology that centralizes control, that shift doesn’t stay theoretical. It shows up in primary elections. It shows up in who gets funding, who gets endorsements, who gets to write the platform, and eventually it shows up in the policies those elected officials try to enact. If the center of gravity inside one of America’s two major parties is now explicitly skeptical of markets and favorable towards state control, that explains why the rhetoric keeps moving in the same direction. More talk of equity enforced from above. More talk of transformation, more talk of making entire classes of people pay for the sins of history. So, let’s do what any good engineer would do. Let’s strip away the labels and look at the mechanics. Forget capitalism and socialism as team jerseys for a second. Let’s talk about how systems actually work from first principles and what that means for your life. In a market-based system, you’ve got millions of people making billions of decisions every day. What to buy, what to sell, what to invent, what to try. Prices act like signals. If something’s in short supply, the price goes up and that tells producers, “Hey, make more of this and tells consumers, hey, use this more carefully.” It’s a feedback loop. Nobody’s in charge of the whole thing, which means nobody can corrupt the whole thing. Innovation happens at the edges. A kid in a garage can build the next big company. A retiree can start a side business. It’s messy. It’s chaotic, but it’s also resilient. And it’s accountable because if a business fails to serve its customers, it goes out of business. Now, flip to a system where the government owns or controls the major industries. One central authority decides what gets produced, where it goes, who gets it, and at what price? The promise is fairness. No more greedy corporations. No more inequality. But here’s the problem. Who decides what’s fair? The people in charge. And how do you hold them accountable if they mess up or get corrupt? You can’t vote with your wallet anymore. You can’t start a competing business. You just have to hope the bureaucrats are wise and benevolent. History shows they rarely are. Because when you concentrate that much power, you attract people who want power, not people who want to solve problems. And when there’s no competition, there’s no incentive to innovate or improve. The system stagnates. And the first people to feel it are the folks who can’t afford to leave or work around it. people on fixed incomes, small savers, retirees who depend on stable currency and functioning services. Think about your own experience when you’ve dealt with the DMV or the VA or tried to get a simple answer from a government agency. How did that feel? Now, imagine that’s your healthare system, your energy provider, your grocery supply chain, all run the same way. So when leaders say they want to transform the system, we should stop and ask into what exactly? Who’s going to run it? What happens to my pension if the currency gets devalued to pay for it? What happens to my property if the state decides housing should be redistributed? What happens to my small business or my kids small business if the government decides it’s not serving the collective plan? These aren’t scare tactics. These are the trade-offs that every society faces when it moves away from decentralized markets towards centralized control. And if you think it can’t happen here, I’d invite you to look at the language being used not by fringe bloggers, but by elected officials and candidates winning major party primaries. Let’s clarify the terminology because words matter and people use them loosely. Socialism isn’t just when the government does stuff. It’s specifically about the state taking ownership or control of the economies, commanding heights, factories, farms, energy, transportation, banking. The idea is that this is a transition phase. You concentrate power temporarily so you can redistribute wealth, equalize outcomes, and eventually according to the theory, you reach this utopian endpoint called communism. No state, no money, no classes, just people sharing everything voluntarily in harmony. Sounds nice, right? Problem is, no society has ever made it past that transition phase. Why? Because once you’ve given a small group of people total control over the economy, they don’t voluntarily give it up. They like having that power. And anyone who disagrees with how they’re using it, well, historically, those people get silenced, imprisoned, or worse. That’s why socialism always seems to come with secret police, goologs, suppression of speech, and eventually mass poverty. The script we’re drawing from today puts it bluntly. Socialism is where you get dictators for life. Political opponents thrown in camps. Starvation. Because the people who knew how to run the farms and factories are dead or imprisoned. And the bureaucrats left in charge have no idea what they’re doing. It’s not a bug. It’s a feature of consolidating that much power. Now, you might say, “But wait, aren’t there some nice European countries that call themselves socialist and they seem to do okay?” Fair question. Most of those countries are actually mixed economies. They have high taxes and big welfare states, but they still have private property, competitive markets, and trade. They’re not seizing the means of production. And even so, many of them are dealing with stagnant growth, youth unemployment, and rising discontent. The rhetoric we’re hearing from some American politicians today isn’t about tweaking tax rates. It’s about fundamentally reordering who controls resources and decisions. And for seniors, that’s not abstract. That’s your healthcare. That’s your energy bill. That’s whether you can sell your house or pass it to your kids without the state taking a giant cut in the name of equity. So that’s the theory. But do mainstream candidates actually signal comfort with this worldview? Let’s test it with a real case that made headlines. Up in Maine, there’s a Democratic candidate running for US Senate. Um, an oyster farmer and military veteran named Graham Platner challenging the Republican incumbent. Sounds like a compelling story, right? Workingass guy served his country, wants to give back. But then reporters dug up his old social media posts. Turns out he had written online that instead of getting more conservative as he got older, he got older and became a communist. He described himself as a vegetable growing, psychedelics taking socialist. He trashed police officers and called rural white Americans stupid and racist. When people brought up these posts, he apologized and said he was struggling, angry, felt betrayed after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. But here’s the kicker. He also had a tattoo on his chest, a skull and crossbones design that’s widely recognized as a symbol used by certain Nazi SS units. Now, he claims he got it during a drunken night two decades ago and didn’t know what it meant. Maybe that’s true. He since covered it up, but the combination of openly communist rhetoric and a Nazi tattoo on the same person tells you something about the ideological crossover when you concentrate power. Authoritarianism is authoritarianism whether it waves a red flag or a swastika. Both systems centralize control, silence disscent and treat individuals as property of the state. And when a major party candidate can carry both symbols literally and figuratively and still get endorsements from national figures, that tells you the standards have shifted. Who endorsed him? Senator Bernie Sanders. When reporters asked Sanders about the tattoo and the old posts, he waved it off, saying he wasn’t going to talk about tattoos when the healthare system is collapsing. In other words, ideology and coalition building matter more than the actual content of a candidate’s past statements and symbols. Now, why would a national figure like Sanders stand by someone like that? Because the math inside the party has changed. If twothirds of your base views socialism favorably, and if the energy and donations come from the activist wing, you can’t afford to distance yourself from candidates who speak their language, even if that language would be toxic in a general election. That’s the trade-off. You mobilize the base and risk losing the middle, or you moderate and risk losing the enthusiasm that wins primaries. And right now the incentive structure inside the Democratic Party is pushing toward the former. Which brings us to the next question. What does that actually mean in practice? Not in theory, not in speeches, but in your kitchen, at your doctor’s office, in your neighborhood. Let’s translate ideology into real world impact because that’s what matters to you. Think about what you care about dayto-day. your retirement account, the cost of heating your home in winter, whether your grandkids school is teaching them to read and do math or spending all day on ideological curriculum, whether your neighborhood is safe, whether you can afford your prescriptions, whether you can sell your home if you need to downsize, and whether you’ll be able to leave something behind for your family. Now, here’s how a shift towards state control plays out across those areas. Let’s start with savings. If the government decides it needs to fund massive new programs, universal health care, green energy mandates, reparations, expanded welfare for millions of new arrivals, it has two options. Raise taxes or print money. Often it does both. Higher taxes on investment income, capital gains, even wealth taxes on assets you’ve already paid taxes on. That hits retirees hard. You saved diligently your whole life. And now the rules change. Meanwhile, printing money to cover the bills causes inflation. Your fixed income buys less every month. Your savings lose value in real terms. The government isn’t stealing your money directly. It’s just making it worth less, which amounts to the same thing. Energy is another one. When politicians talk about transforming the energy sector, what they mean is shutting down reliable, affordable sources like natural gas and coal and mandating expensive intermittent sources like wind and solar, often before the technology is ready to replace what we’re losing. The result, higher electricity bills, rolling blackouts, and vulnerable grids. If you’re on a fixed income and your heating bill doubles, that’s not theoretical. That’s a crisis. Healthcare. Right now, the system is a mess. Too expensive, too bureaucratic, too much paperwork. But imagine if the government took over entirely. You’d have one giant DMV for your heart surgery, waiting lists, rationing by committee, doctors becoming government employees with no incentive to go the extra mile. And if you wanted to pay out of pocket for faster care, in a true singlepayer system, that’s often illegal. You wait your turn, no matter how urgent your need. Housing and property. There’s already talk in some cities about rent control, mandatory affordable housing set aides, even policies that make it harder for small landlords to evict non-paying tenants or sell their properties. If you own a rental property as part of your retirement plan, those policies can destroy your income. And if the ideology shifts further, you start hearing about land redistribution, property taxes based on race or historical grievances, or eminent domain used to correct inequality. Your home stops being yours in any meaningful sense. Schools and communities. This is where the cultural side of the ideology shows up. The argument in today’s source material is that modern American progressivism isn’t just economic Marxism. It’s cultural Marxism. Traditional Marxism divided people into workers and capitalists. This version divides everyone by race, gender, sexuality, and adds those categories to the grievance list. So maybe you’re not poor, but you’re a woman. Come join the coalition. Maybe you’re not poor or a woman, but you’re black. Come join the coalition. It’s a way to build a bigger tent of people who feel oppressed and owe loyalty to the movement. What does that look like in practice? It’s school curricula that teach your grandkids they’re either oppressors or victims based on skin color. It’s city policies that explicitly prioritize certain groups for contracts, loans, or services. It’s law enforcement that gets defunded or handcuffed because the ideology says police are inherently tools of oppression. And if you live in a neighborhood where crime is rising and response times are slow, you’re the one who suffers, not the activists in gated communities. Then there’s immigration. Millions of people have been allowed into the country without proper vetting as political their future voters. Offer them benefits, give them a path to citizenship, or even just let them stay in blue states where they count for congressional aortionment, and eventually you’ve bolstered your coalition. Meanwhile, workingclass Americans, including black and Hispanic citizens, are competing for jobs, housing, and services with people who arrived yesterday. That’s not compassion. That’s a strategy. And if you disagree with any of this, if you show up at a schoolboard meeting and say, “I don’t want my tax dollars funding this curriculum,” or, “I don’t think biological men should compete in my granddaughter’s sports league.” You risk being labeled a bigot, investigated, even prosecuted under vague laws about causing disruption or spreading hate. We’ve already seen the Justice Department treat concerned parents like domestic threats. That’s the authoritarian impulse in action. So that’s the cost side of the equation. But here’s the question. If this ideology is so unpopular with most Americans, why do some politicians think it’s a winning strategy? Let’s look at the coalition math because it explains a lot. The traditional way to win elections is to persuade the middle. Find out what swing voters care about and offer reasonable solutions. But there’s another way. Mobilize your base so intensely that they turn out in huge numbers and hope that’s enough to overcome losses in the middle. The argument from today’s source material is that by expanding the list of victim groups, progressives are trying to build a coalition that’s bigger than just poor people. If you can get uh women, racial minorities, LGBTQ individuals, immigrants, and young people who feel economically left behind, all rowing in the same direction, you’ve got numbers. And if you can convince them that the other side is not just wrong, but evil, racist, etc., you keep them loyal and angry enough to show up every time. That strategy works great in deep blue districts and states, but in a national election, it runs into a problem because most Americans, including a lot of moderates and independents, don’t see themselves as oppressors. They don’t want their country fundamentally transformed. They don’t want the government running everything. And when you tell them that’s the plan, they vote the other way. If you’re running on an explicitly socialist platform, you might get huge enthusiasm from 20 or 30% of the country, but 70 or 80% is either uncomfortable or outright opposed. You can win primaries with that 20 or 30%, especially if they’re loud and organized. But you hit a ceiling in general elections, especially in swing states where seniors turn out in large numbers and tend to be more skeptical of radical change. Now, midterm elections are different from presidential cycles. Lower turnout, more base driven. But in a presidential year when everyone’s paying attention and turnout is high, the math gets harder. And that’s why even though the Democratic base has shifted dramatically towards socialism, the party as a whole keeps losing ground with independents, with working-class voters of all races, and with older Americans who remember what socialism actually looks like. Which brings us to the counter narrative. If the story from one side is transform the system, redistribute power, correct historical injustices through state control, what’s the story from the other side? And why does it resonate especially with people your age? The counternarrative is rooted in a few core ideas. Sovereignty, liberty, and innovation. Sovereignty means the American people through their elected representatives get to decide what happens in America. not unelected bureaucrats, not international bodies, not activists who think they know better. It means um borders matter. It means laws matter. It means your vote should count and elections should be secure. Liberty means you get to make decisions about your own life, how to earn a living, how to spend your money, how to raise your kids, what to believe and say without the government micromanaging every choice. It means the Bill of Rights isn’t a suggestion. It means free speech, free worship, the right to bear arms, the right to a fair trial. These aren’t old-fashioned or outdated. They’re the foundations that let individuals thrive without having to beg permission from those in power. And innovation means we get better by letting people try new things, fail, learn, and try again. Not by having a central committee decide the one right way, and forcing everyone to follow it. It means if you’ve got a better idea for how to generate energy, treat disease, or educate kids, you should be free to test it in the market or in your community. And if it works, it spreads. That’s how we got the internet. smartphones, electric cars, mRNA vaccines, people and companies competing, experimenting, iterating. From this perspective, the goal isn’t to transform America. It’s to restore it. To get back to the principles that made it the most prosperous, most free, most innovative society in history. That means smaller government, not bigger. Decentralized power not concentrated trust in individuals and communities not mandates from Washington. This is the frame that attributes to figures like Donald Trump and the reform conservative movement. Secure the border so American workers aren’t undercut and American communities aren’t overwhelmed. Deweaponize federal institutions so they serve the people instead of persecuting political opponents. Unleash American energy so we’re not dependent on hostile regimes and families can afford to heat their homes. Protect parental rights so schools work for families, not the other way around. Defend law and order so your neighborhood is safe and your property is secure. It’s a first principles approach. Align incentives, decentralize decision-m, unlock innovation, and get government out of the way wherever possible. And for a lot of seniors, this resonates because you’ve seen what happens when government grows too big, when promises get broken, when inflation eats your savings, when the rules keep changing. You know that freedom isn’t free. And you know that once you lose it, it’s really hard to get back. So where does that leave you? You’ve heard the analysis. You’ve seen the polling. You’ve watched the speeches and the candidate controversies. You understand the stakes. Now what? Let’s make this practical. Here’s a simple checklist. things you can do right now that don’t require a political science degree or a big-time commitment. First, verify the claims. Don’t just take my word for it or anyone else’s. Go watch the original NBC segments. Look up the Gallup polling. Read the actual quotes from candidates and officials. Ask yourself, does this match what I’m being told by other sources, or is there a gap? If you’ve got a candidate running in your area, go to a town hall or send them a written question. Do you believe in free market capitalism or do you support government control of major industries? And why? See if they’ll answer directly. Second, protect your household. Talk to a financial adviser or someone you trust about how to diversify your savings so you’re not overexposed to inflation or policy shifts. Look at your local property tax and utility proposals. Are they sustainable or are they built on wishful thinking and future debt? Support local institutions you trust. Your church, your community center, your library, your neighborhood watch. These are the buffers between you and a distant impersonal state. Third, engage smartly. That doesn’t mean yelling at people online or getting into fights at Thanksgiving. It means showing up. Vote in every election, primary and general, local and national. Volunteer if you can. Campaigns need people to make calls, knock on doors, register voters, attend city council meetings, schoolboard meetings. Your presence matters. And when you talk to friends and neighbors, share facts and data, not just emotions. Be the person who says, “Here’s what I found out. Let me show you.” Not, “You’re wrong and I’m right.” Fourth, tell your story. You’ve lived through a lot. You’ve seen economic booms and busts. Maybe you’ve served in the military or run a small business or raised kids on a tight budget. Your experience is valuable. When young people, your grandkids, your neighbors start repeating slogans about socialism being fair and capitalism being greedy, you can say, “Let me tell you what I actually saw. Real stories beat abstract theories every time. And fifth, stay informed, but don’t let it consume you. It’s easy to get overwhelmed or demoralized. You don’t have to watch the news 24/7, but do keep a finger on the pulse. Follow a few trustworthy sources. Check in regularly and pace yourself. This is a marathon, not a sprint. Your health and your peace of mind matter, and you’re no good to your family or your community if you’re burned out. So, what did we learn from this? The cultural and economic shift we’ve been talking about today isn’t just a headline or a one-time controversy. It’s a trend line that’s been building for over a decade, amplified by polling segments from mainstream outlets, rhetoric from elected officials, and signals from candidates who are winning primaries with this message. It’s real. It’s measurable. And uh it has consequences. Systems beat slogans. The mechanics of how an economy works, who makes decisions, where power sits, how accountability flows matter far more than any politician’s promises. And the track record is clear. Decentralized market-based systems preserve prosperity, reward innovation, and protect individual liberty. Centralized state controlled systems concentrate power, stifle creativity, and punish disscent. And the people who suffer first are always the ones with the least room to maneuver. People on fixed incomes, small savers, retirees who can’t just pick up and move or start over. The coming elections at every level will hinge on whether political parties choose persuasion over escalation. Whether they try to win by offering better ideas and better results or by mobilizing anger and division. Your voice, your vote, and your engagement can tip that balance. Don’t underestimate your influence, especially in local races where a few hundred votes can decide the outcome. If this breakdown helped you see the moving parts behind the headline, do me a favor, tap that like button so more people actually get this information in their feed. Subscribe to the channel to stay with us as we keep tracking what NBC, Gallup, and others reveal in the weeks ahead because the story isn’t over. And we’re going to keep connecting the dots. And here’s where I really want to hear from you. Tell me in the comments based on today’s evidence, the polling, the speeches, the candidate examples, does it reflect a real shift you can already sense in your city, your state, your daily life? What are you seeing on the ground? What are your neighbors saying? Your stories and observations guide what we cover next. So don’t hold back. Experience Socialism

Welcome to the Conversation on Free Speech!

Welcome to Truly Right View!
We’re here to explore real, unfiltered truths—unswayed by media bias or government agendas.

What do you think? Are you ready to hear insights you won’t find elsewhere?
Subscribe to the Truly Right View YouTube Channel | Rumble Channel and join our community dedicated to open dialogue.

What Does Free Speech Mean to You?

In today’s world, where tech giants and news outlets hold so much influence, is free speech at risk?

From silencing certain viewpoints to heavy censorship, the freedom to speak without fear is under threat.

Tell us your thoughts:

Is free speech still a right everyone enjoys?
Do you think we’re protecting it well enough?

Let’s dive into the heart of this discussion. Add your voice below!

The Founding Fathers and Free Speech—Is This the Future They Envisioned?

The U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to free speech, yet today, we see more restrictions than ever in the name of “misinformation” and “hate speech.”

What do you think?