CNN Says It’s Not Communism. David Sacks Says Look at Their Platform.
Trump called the Democratic socialist candidates …. “hardcore Godless communists” and said they were “the greatest threat to our country since its founding.”
The primary victories of three socialists in New York’s Democratic congressional primaries last week sent shockwaves throughout the political world. They demonstrated that New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s upset victory was no fluke and that his brand of democratic socialism is gaining traction, particularly among college-educated voters in their twenties. Since then, Democratic leaders and progressive talk show hosts have been bending themselves into pretzels to minimize the fallout. But the implications of those victories could prove far more significant than their defenders are willing to acknowledge.
Consider this scenario: Democrats reclaim the House in November with a razor-thin majority. Speaker Hakeem Jeffries needs every Democratic vote to pass a key piece of legislation without Republican support. That would give New York’s three democratic socialists enormous leverage. What price might they demand in exchange for their votes?
Although academics would vehemently disagree, democratic socialism is a euphemism for communism — a rhetorical rebranding to make it more palatable to the electorate.
— The Briben Crime Family (@BribenInc) June 27, 2026
On Friday, President Donald Trump warned of the growing threat of communism in the U.S. during a speech at the Faith & Freedom Coalition’s Road to Majority Conference. The event was held at the Washington Hilton, the same venue where two months earlier, a shooter tried to assassinate Trump and members of his Cabinet at the 2026 White House Correspondents’ Dinner.
Trump called the democratic socialist candidates who won their primaries in New York — and will likely win their races in November — “hardcore Godless communists” and said they were “the greatest threat to our country since its founding.”
Here are some excerpts from his remarks (via RealClearPolitics):
Communism is very easy to sell. It destroys everything, but it’s very easy. I’d be — I’ll be honest, I think I’d be the greatest communist in history. I’d give free rent.
Ladies and gentlemen, from now on, you don’t have to pay any rent. From now on, anybody wants a house, don’t worry about it, just pick the house you want. Everybody gets free food. Everything is free from this point forward.
Everyone is going to vote for me. The problem is, after two or three years, the country is a disaster area. The country fails. They always do. It always does. So easy to sell. That first year, boy, you’re the most popular.
It’s happening right now in New York and California. But you’ll start living in squalor. You’ll live in squalor. There will be no food. There will be no housing. There will be no military. There will be no law and order. There will be no nothing. … You’ll be a third-world inhabitant in every way, and everyone will suffer or die. You’ll suffer or die. That’s what happens.
For thousands of years, it’s been happening by different names. Thousands of years. I would be — I’m telling you, I’d be the greatest communist in history. It would be so easy. You wouldn’t have to work. You could stay home. The problem is, a couple of years go by, the whole place collapses. Always does. Always has.
Trump: Communism is very easy to sell. It destroys everything, but it’s very easy. I’ll be honest, I think I’d be the greatest communist in history.
I’d give free rent. Ladies and gentlemen, from now on, you don’t have to pay any rent. From now on, anybody who wants a house,… pic.twitter.com/Uw7L6S85QS
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 26, 2026
Contrary to the Left’s claims that Trump was exaggerating — a charge he certainly invites at times — he was right. The slow, insidious embrace of communist ideology in America, which began during the Cold War, is real, and it has now reached the point where it can no longer be ignored.
Although there is no difference between what the New York primary candidates are proposing and what a communist insurgency would promise, the legacy media, as always, are pushing back hard against Trump’s attempt to equate democratic socialism with communism.
CNN host Kaitlan Collins declared Trump’s response to be “borderline apocalyptic.” She told viewers, “While Democrats themselves have been wrestling with what Tuesday night means for the direction of their party, socialism, much less democratic socialism, is not communism.”
Kaitlan Collins: "socialism much less Democratic Socialism is not communism.
You saw the President he stayed up past 2:30 in the morning at one point he post quote America the beautiful will never be a communist country.
He made a prediction that borderline apocalyptic." pic.twitter.com/QrAouI1eVO
— Winter (@LeftyWinter) June 27, 2026
But Collins and the others who are downplaying the significance of last Tuesday’s political earthquake in New York are flat-out wrong.
Venture capitalist David Sacks, a current co-chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, addressed this issue during the Friday edition of the All-In podcast, which he co-hosts. He itemized the New York democratic socialists’ stated proposals. The following excerpts focus on the structural and constitutional changes the candidates advocate.
[Note: These proposals begin after the extensive list of free government benefits outlined in the DSA platform such as free medical care, free college tuition, etc.]
After reviewing the list, one would be hard-pressed to argue that democratic socialists are not communists.
Here is a partial transcript of Sacks’ remarks:
But let’s look at what these DSA candidates stand for. So, let’s look at what their platform is.
They actually say they want to abolish the Senate.
They want to abolish the carceral state, that means basically police forces and prisons.
They want to abolish ICE and grant amnesty for all. They do not support any deportations whatsoever.
They want to replace the president and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary that is chosen by and subordinate to Congress, which basically now, I guess, this means this House. And with respect to House elections, they want to abolish the electoral college.
They want to replace the two-party system with a multi-party democracy.
And they want to expand the House of Representatives, implement proportional representation and ranked-choice voting in all elections, which would be a total makeover of our constitutional system.
They want to free Palestine.
They want public ownership of major corporations.
They want to defund the Department of War.
This is a very radical organization, and you would laugh at a lot of these types of proposals, but you can’t really laugh at it anymore, because these guys are taking over the Democratic Party, and you can see the Democratic establishment is in complete panic right now, because they have lost control of the party to Zohran Mamdani and his allies.
Sacks addresses Darializa Avila Chevalier, the most radical of the three, whom he describes as “an unemployed 32-year-old PhD candidate. She’s never had a job; she’s been in college for 10 years, I guess, writing this PhD thesis, and I think even by DSA standards, she might be kind of a lunatic.
“She has declared that she wants to end western civilization — she wants to eradicate western civilization. … She attended a rally one day after Oct. 7 celebrating the slaughter of Israeli civilians. … She calls white women ugly colonizers.”
Sacks continues his itemization, leaving his fellow co-hosts visibly stunned. The remainder of his remarks can be heard in the video below.
Whether one agrees with Trump’s characterization of the Democratic socialists as communists or not, the victories in New York cannot be dismissed as an isolated local story or written off as overheated campaign rhetoric. If Democrats regain the House with only a narrow majority, the influence of these lawmakers could extend far beyond their districts, giving them leverage over the party’s legislative agenda. As for the platform Sacks outlined, I’ll leave it to readers to decide whether it represents merely an aggressive form of democratic socialism — or something far more radical.
🚨 David Sacks on the Socialists Taking Over the Democratic Party
“The Democratic establishment is in complete panic right now because they have lost control of the party to Zohran Mamdani and his allies … They want to introduce something much different, and it's going to look… pic.twitter.com/TXwGnVvFah
— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) June 27, 2026
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Well socialism isn’t traditional communism but they are close cousins. It doesnt matter. Socialism is bad enough. The government controls everything and owns everything. “Democracy” exists only until 1 party rule is implemented. Then you have a pure authoritarian regime which is what socialists want because they know better than you what’s good for you.
Have to go back to Lenin for reference….. communism is socialism in a hurry. Same destination… different speeds. Depends on how much power and where it is directed to get there. Looking at Marxist and Islamist take overs….. these are minority groups given access to power. The Dems thought giving the socialists power would bolster the old guard’s party…. wrong…. the Dems are wanting power so much that they are risking it all to hope to regain control later on. Ask Weimar Germany how that went also. Mao wrote of how power is taken…. Dems are on the same path…. gun control.
The USA has already adopted and ‘main streamed’ many policy ideas with Marxist roots. Organized labor, particularly public sector unions. The Frankfurt School ‘intellectuals’ Critical Theory spread throughout Academia in a straight line to ’60s radical goons to today’s CRT/DEI. Socialism has been operating for well over 100 years in the USA. New Deal policies, homogenized curriculum of govt run schools, Social welfare systems including social security, Medicare, Medicaid and ACA among many other programs …usually operating with broad public support. Using a basic definition of socialism as ‘public sector (govt) control/management of essential/ basic services that create a public good’ there’s plenty of socialism in the USA; utilities in some places (most if we include monopolies granted), public transit systems not just busses as Amtrak isn’t paying into way, USPS in the era of FedEx/UPS and e-mail makes less sense than in prior eras. Most of these Marxist rooted things we all just accept as normal and non controversial despite the origins.
Boiling the frog by low small incremental increases…..
Studies have shown the boiling frog theory to be a myth. Frogs jump out really quickly.
Many Dems are fellow travellers with their DSA Comrades. They will more openly embrace the DSA goals and values if they see it as a means to acquire power.
DSA – We want to destroy America
Democrats – We want the DSA to destroy America
Sounds like another politico-“religious” group, doesn’t it?
Heard recently, you may vote your way into socialism but you’ll have to shoot your way out.
CNN delenda est.
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”
Usually attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler. While some challenge the attribution, that’s a distraction to shift focus away from the content. Voting requires less effort than working. Many people want to live in NYC, but don’t have the resources, so they vote Communist to get what they want for free. The comedian Jonathan Winters did a skit in the 1960’s where he played the role of a Third-World dictator, threatening the US. “Give us aid or we will go Communist.”
I wonder if anyone will ever read Article IV Section 4
“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,” and argue that any form of socialism or communism is unconstitutional.
No, it isn’t. The republican guarantee clause addresses only the form of government. Not what policies that government adopts.
Swoops in to defend the communists he elected.
As expected.
Socialism and communism are not republican forms of government however much they may style themselves such.
They are dictatorial in nature, referring to themselves as ‘the dictatorship of the proletariat’.
And all have quickly moved to a dictatorial state upon becoming the power in any nation they infest.
But you voted for that infestation, Milhouse–you know this. And love it.
Sorry to be “that guy”, but it’s not just the attribution, the quote itself has problems. Here’s a guy who goes through it:
https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/slandering-democracy/
In particular: “As I look over history, I cannot find an instance of the ‘Tytler cycle’ having run its full course. Yes, there have been instances where dictatorships followed on democracies – the cases of Italy and Germany come to mind; let me throw in Russia for good measure. Such transitions to dictatorships took place after major wars that destroyed the very social fabric of these nations. Spain never got a chance to work out its problems: the Falange destroyed the 1931 republic in the 1936–1939 civil war (in which foreign powers provided massive assistance).”
Also, I have not found any serious historical work that supports the “average age is 200 years” statement, and I think the quote’s ACTUAL author either pulled the figure out of thin air, or the actual author lived in the 20th century, when the USA was 200 years old.
Ancient Egypt:
3150 BC – 30 BC; 3,120 years
Akkadian Empire:
2334 BC – 2154 BC; 180 years
Assyria:
2025 BC – 609 BC; 1,416 years
Babylonia:
1894 BC – 539 BC; 1,355 years
Achaemenid Empire:
550 BC – 330 BC; 220 years
Roman Republic
509 BC – 27 BC; 482 years
Roman Empire
27 BC – AD 395 (unified); 422 years
AD 395 – 476/480 (Western); 85 years
AD 395–1453 (Eastern); 1,058 years
For the sake of time I’m leaving out Eastern empires and focusing on the West. I also counted each Roman phase as a seperate civilization, and with the 476/480 discrepancy, I went with the 480. Averaging it all together gave me 926.44 years. You could probably drive down the average by including Ancient Greek city-states, tribes like the Goths, Gauls, Vandals, Huns, etc. But then you have to clarify what you mean by “great cilvilization” or even what you mean by “civilzation” itself. Do they have to have a state beaucracy? Do they have to have their own language AND their own government AND their own religion AND a government monopoly on the use of force?
Bottom line, I think this quote is a “just so” story that has little use in explaining history. It’s little different from the “just so” stories communists and socialists tell about history being defined by class wars.
Sacks was very thorough. His video deserves to be shared widely.
The Democratic Party, just like the Republican Party, is a private club that sets its own rules, selects its leaders, and can choose who is part of the private club. Remember that the Republicans threw George Santos out of the party and also voted to remove him from the House of Representatives, based upon actions, he did during the campaign, most notably lying about his background and miss using campaign funds. It was argued that the Republicans should not do that because it made the margin for the House of Representatives one last seat.
The Democrats have to decide whether these people belong in their party or not. They already have all the tools and rules in which to do so. I doubt they will choose to do so, and thus the entire Democratic brand will be tainted by these individuals.
You keep posting that. It is not the truth. As someone who once was a party official tasked with keeping bogus candidates off our ballot, let me inform you that the question of who does or does not belong party is often in the hands of a public official who has nothing to do with your party, such as a Secretary of State, or a registrar. In many cases, the only thing a party can do to an unapproved candidate is spend precious money to run ads against him, and refuse to provide any funding or support for his campaign.
No, they didn’t. They threw him out of the House, and therefore out of the Republican House caucus, but they can’t “throw him out of the party”, because that’s a meaningless term.
I am reading the Frank Dikotter book on the take over of China by the communists. At the time of the Maoist revolution, the percentage of the population that was communist was the same as in the US. Mao was brought into a coalition with the Nationalist during as after the war, in part by demand of the US (Gen Marshall leading the way). Looking at the take over of countries, appeasement led to power and power led to takeover through arms. The key has been communism…. but as in Iran… the Islamist killed the Marxist… better at the game. We have seen Antifa/BLM as the Red Guard… now the DSA has their Red Rabbits militias.
This is what makes the vile, greasy, subversive, mendacious, duplicitous and evil nazi/communist/Islamofascist/Muslim supremacist agitator-fifth columnist pukes so despicable and dangerous — their rhetoric, ideas and policies are destructive enough, to peoples’ lives, freedoms and livelihoods, but, when they are fairly called out on the intrinsic stupidity, impoverishment and wicked nature of their beliefs and policies, they don’t possess the honesty to admit that the track record of their historical and contemporary comrades and fellow travelers is one of profound failure, in terms of human deaths, murders, suffering and impoverishment.
“particularly among college-educated voters in their twenties” aka future Kulaks.
Educated beyond their intelligence. Or, so smart they’re stupid.
.
They know so much that just isn’t so. ~R.R.
The only difference between communism and socialism is that socialism is a long, steady march towards authoritarianism, while communism runs pedal-to-the-metal straight for it.
Metal is correct, as in the end of a gun.
“Whether one agrees with Trump’s characterization of the Democratic socialists as communists or not”
You don’t have to agree. Socialism is nothing more than the necessary first step to full blown communism. It’s not like that’s ever been a secret. The entire purpose of socialism is to set the stage for communism.
We need to stop being afraid of the word communism. It’s evil and destructive and anyone who attempts to put this country on that path needs to be called what they are.
I’m from Milwaukee, and we had a long tenure with socialism, pretty much “good” socialism
But there was a lot of money to go around then, major manufacturing businesses bought in and Milwaukee was a beautiful, safe city with great schools
My elementary school had activities after school, all provided free to the children outside of a few instances, you could take ballet, play games, art classes, Indian dance lessons ( that was a big one, you had to make your outfit out of leather and fundraiser to go to Disney, to preform), well, that didn’t roll with my sister , brother and I, but I’m sure it was great , sports, cub scouts, Girl Scouts, ballroom dancing ….
I literally thought all school systems had this when I moved to Texas and had my own… no, not even close
It was a wonderful childhood , school wise, and the parks, Milwaukee has beautiful large parks to this day with ice skating in the winter, warming houses… they left for a few decades with the gangs that appeared in the late 60’s, blacks, always the POC….have to destroy and not enjoy and yes, they were allowed , but it didn’t matter
So if socialism could be as my memory, it was a good thing, but I know nothing good lasts and socialism turns greedy , black and destructive.
And no, I’m
Not promoting socialism, just giving my experience
https://www.wttw.com/playlist/2020/08/10/milwaukee-socialism
Very good post which reveals that early stages of socialism lite (good socialism) has much in common with a drug dealer offering up enough free hits early on to get someone ‘needing’ their product forever. I’d argue that in some ways the ‘good socialism’ is analogous to gateway drugs. Some average middle-class kid starts with weed and ends up on the street addicted to heroin committing crimes to support his addiction.
A gateway political drug…..good analogy.
I’m from Milwaukee too, and I’m 90 years old now. The socialists were called “sewer socialists” in our day, not as a pejorative but because they (Mayor Hoag) came up with the idea to use the sewage from the city to create a fantastic fertilizer–called Milorganite–which is popular and effective to this day. I can’t understand why more cities have never adopted the idea. Our longest-running Mayor, Henry Maier (1960-1988), did not identify as a socialist like his predecessors, only as a liberal Democrat, but his policies were not very different from those of his predecessors. We considered him a socialist and, as I recall, he did not object.. Yes, Milwaukee was a great city (still is) and growing up there was wonderful. But the “socialists” of the early and mid 20th century were a totally different species than the “socialists” of today. Then they wanted to build. Today they want to destroy.
It has always been individual rights versus the collective. The collective has constantly rebranded itself, hundreds of times since the creation of Eden, to hide who and what they are.
Communism or not, the DSA’s goal is to gain control over every portion of government by disabling the system devised by the Constitution’s authors that was meant specifically to prevent this from happening. This is ill-advised.
“So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot.”
George Orwell
This is Orwell’s fire. “Mainstream” Dems are just becoming aware that fire is hot. The DSA doesn’t care, as they believe they can master the fire and that it will never turn on them and burn down their house as well. History shows this is not a good bet.
“CNN host Kaitlan Collins declared Trump’s response to be ‘borderline apocalyptic.'”
One of the definitions of “Apocalypse” is “something viewed as a prophetic revelation”. The Greek name of the Book of Revelation is “Apokalypsis”.
Trump’s remarks seem like a prophetic revelation to me. Kaitlan Collins is clueless.
All it takes to understand living under communist rule is getting to know someone who has come here from a communist country.
Socialism is the mask that falls once the so-called socialists get into power.
Weren’t the Nazis technically Democratic Socialists? The Nazi Party, officially the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, sounds pretty close to me. To me, there are those who celebrate freedom, and the rest are all birds of a slightly different color, and their goals and tactics are exactly the same. ANTIFA is about as FA as it gets.
Exactly.
The sole difference between the Fascist form of Marxist Socialism and the Communist form is Indirect vs Direct ownership of the means of production.
Hitler was incredibly proud of his innovation here – he saw it as the solution to what the Soviets were having to deal with with the resistance to collectivizing their farms (which eventually resulted in the deliberate starvation of millions of peasants, mostly in the Ukraine).
Rather than directly seize ownership of businesses and farms, he realized that the initial objective of controlling the entire economy from the central government (effectively achieving his declared goal of destroying capitalism) could be done by indirect control through endless regulation by the central government. Eventually, once this had been established, they could gradually nationalize each industry in turn with far less resistance.
The modern equivalent in the US is seen best in our healthcare industries.
“single payer” is the Communist solution.
“Obamacare” is the Fascist solution.
The Right Wing, Republican solution is to keep the free market and get the government entirely out of it (excepting only the minimum necessary – courts to enforce contracts, for instance).
So, what’s the current ideological breakdown of the Democrat Party’s voter base?
My guess would be about 5% Capitalist/Republican, 75% Fascist, 20% Communist.
Just ask any Democrat if they support NO government healthcare vs Obamacare vs Single Payer.
The “Bernie Bros” level of support early in the primaries when Bernie Sanders was running provides a decent measure also. 20% of D’s are all-in for Soviet Sanders? 20% are therefore Communists.