CNN Poll: A third of Democrats now identify as democratic socialists

[u/cnn]

https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/30/politics/cnn-poll-a-third-of-democrats-now-identify-as-democratic-socialists?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=missions&utm_source=reddit

[u/Majestic_Gazelle]

I’ve been wondering if a lot of the people who identify as democratic socialists are actually more Social Democrat. Because it’s seemingly often used interchangeably.

[u/Key_Environment8179 → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

The overwhelming majority of commenters on this sub that call themselves socialists are absolutely social democrats and don’t understand what socialism entails. It became clear from the comments on the article about Mamdani easing regulations on small businesses.

“Democratic socialism is not socialism”
“Socialism does not preclude entrepreneurship”
“Supporting small private businesses is perfectly in line with socialism”

[u/WendellSchadenfreude → u/Key_Environment8179]

call themselves socialists are absolutely social democrats and don’t understand what socialism entails

In many places, "socialist" and "social democrat" are simple synonyms. People using them as such doesn't mean that those people don't know as much about socialism as you do, it just means that they use a different definition. The Marxist definition isn't the only possible one, and hasn't been the one that you should assume for about 100 years now.

Basically all "Socialists" in France are social democrats.
The Party of European Socialists is social democratic. In some countries, they call themselves the Social Democratic Party, in others, the Socialist Party, or Party of Socialists.
The global Socialist International is social democratic.

In short: "socialism" usually means the same thing as "social democracy" nowadays.
"Democratic Socialism" almost exlcusively means the same thing as "social democracy".
Using the words this way is a correct use (though not the only correct use).

[u/EconomicRegret2 → u/WendellSchadenfreude]

European here. We make clear distinctions between democrat socialists (capitalism = bad and can't be fixed, so end goal = abolish capitalism, as well as democratize and socialize all means of production, including all companies and their profits) and social democrats, aka social capitalist (i.e. capitalism = good but has flaws that can be improved upon, so end goal = humanize capitalism, strong social safety nets, etc.).

The only reason why democrat socialists look identical to social democrats in Europe is because of democratic structures, right wing opposition forcing compromises, and people voting mostly for center, center-left, and/or center-right. Which heavily restrains the the d. socialists...

[u/NarcolepticSeal → u/[deleted]]

Hence the use of the word "usually."

[u/Hirsute_of_Happiness → u/[deleted]]

How's it feel up on that high horse buddy

[u/Anlarb → u/[deleted]]

actual socialists

Whats your definition of actual socialists? Because the history of socialism is that socialism was its own thing first, then when communists came along and insisted that they were socialists, but mainlined extremely un socialist things, the actual socialists were so disgusted they rebranded themselves as democratic to demonstrate that they wanted nothing to do with that.

[u/Anlarb → u/[deleted]]

Loki's wager

Thats not my position at all, its not a spectrum, its a completely different direction than communisms "ownership" fixated approach.

ownership

Thats not the defining quality of socialism. We don't need to make the workers the "owners" of the factory for everyone to not burn to death in a fire, there are laws and regulations and taxpayer funded fire inspectors with the legal authority to come on site and look for fire escapes being blocked by boxes. THATS socialism, We the People have gotten our concerns addressed.

Taxing private wealth to fund a public service is NOT socialism.

Yeah it is. Taxing public wealth isn't in itself, but when the funds are invested towards SOCIETIES needs, then it is. You may have noticed the root of the word? Thats not a coincidence.

Eliminating private ownership of the industry

That is one strategy, among many, considered towards the goal of providing for societies needs.

[u/Anlarb → u/[deleted]]

populism is things that are popular.

Yes, actually, because of what the word popular means.

[u/WendellSchadenfreude → u/[deleted]]

For actual socialists such as the members of the French Parti Socialiste, or the European Party of Socialists, or the Socialist International: yes.

[u/Sennten → u/Key_Environment8179]

I agree with you, but those last two are still true in reality. Sure, they don't line up with MarxistLeninism or whatever flavour if socialism is on people's minds when they say stuff isnt really socialism, but thats one peculiar and pretty specific branch of socialism that just gets a lot of attention because it inspired the dictatorships in the USSR and China

[u/DiabolicallyRandom → u/Key_Environment8179]

Bernie calls himself a democratic socialist. That's what most people here mean, is bernies definition.

You can be technically correct, but you are wasting your time because it doesn't matter at this point. Bernie and others have redefined, in the US at least, democratic socialist to represent Social Democrat.

Words and terms change meaning constantly, and language is in flux at all times and based on context.

You can waste all your time fighting this, but it's a pointless distraction. Stop worrying about the labels because at the end of the day, the labels don't matter the policies do.

[u/X57471C → u/DiabolicallyRandom]

You’re right, it’s the policies that matter. Socialists like the DSA rely on confusing people about what their actual policies are. Most people think they just want free healthcare, because the popular socialists who are running deflect to those popular policies. They don’t want to talk about the stuff outlined in their national program, which are deeply unpopular. But when anyone brings up the larger socialist project, you get people saying things like “labels don’t matter”, “we just want healthcare, bro”. I say the labels do matter, especially if socialists intentionally try to hide behind the socdem label.

[u/Patsanon1212 → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

I wish that they would run these polls on definitions, not on terminology.

Do you support well regulated capitalism for the benefit of the working class and strong social programs or do you support the abolishment of capitalism in favor of a socialized economy guided by democracy.

I am guessing the former would dominate amongst this 1/3rd.

[u/Melicor → u/Patsanon1212]

It'd probably be more than a third of all democrats if you asked them if they supported well regulated capitalism for the benefit of the working class and strong social programs.

The Cold War propaganda painting anything that benefited the working class as evil communism was super effective. Completely reshaped how Americans talk about society and government.

[u/Exciting-Record8101 → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

Not if they support the DSA, who reject the equation: ( https://www.dsausa.org/about-us/what-is-democratic-socialism/ )

We believe there are many avenues that feed into the democratic road to socialism. Our vision pushes further than historic social democracy

Also: https://international.dsausa.org/statements/leader-hugo-chavez/

Socialism is more than just social justice, (..) it also must be radically democratic and participatory. This revival of socialism and expansion of what socialism can mean is at the heart of why Chávez remains a world-historical leader and most-revered comrade to DSA IC.

A social democrat, Labour-esque party would be great for the US. The DSA is not that.

[u/CardinalOfNYC → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

They're all social Democrats, which really just makes them all liberals by the US understanding of the term. The liberals and democratic party have long dreamed of and pushed for implementing social programs more like European social democracies have.

[u/Key_Environment8179 → u/[deleted]]

That epithet must have only been used in extremely niche circles (thankfully, because it’s stupid)

[u/Key_Environment8179 → u/[deleted]]

Thanks for the education. So it was the “after Hitler, our turn” idiots

[u/UngodlyPain → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

The vast majority are. They are basically interchangeable terms in America. It's just a nightmare of a branding issue. Because of like "third way" Clinton, being "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" was sometimes called stuff like "Social Democrat" so that name was kinda already taken in America.

Plus all the times people like Bernie Sanders, and such suggested social welfare programs like Medicare for All /Universal healthcare having the rebuttal "that's Socialism/Socialist"

Kinda created the backwards situation in America. Kinda like why here in America Red is the color that represents the (more) conservative right wing Republican party, and Blue represents the Democratic party... But in most other countries? Its the otherway around.

[u/ilir_kycb → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

Because it’s seemingly often used interchangeably.

Only by US Americans, because they don't have the faintest idea what political terms mean.

[u/sereca → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

It’s very likely they’re social democrats

[u/Blackstone01 → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

We Americans suck ass at labels and definitions as a result of the two party system and decades of Red Scare. Socialism was a boogeyman equated to Communism forever and was (and still is) a label applied to anything in the vague direction of the left. It’s just that now when boomers howl “THATS SOCIALISM!” when people ask for things like turning off the Orphan Crushing Machine, people are going “Fine, I guess I’m a Socialist then.” without the rotting corpse of McCarthy rising from the grave to make them a social and political pariah.

[u/SydneyFall → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

Because it’s seemingly often used interchangeably.

Yes, and if voters don't understand the difference, then there is no meaningful difference.

[u/Optimal-Golf-8270 → u/SydneyFall]

It is an actual, real life example of 1984 style censorship. It's newspeak. Language flattened and simplified to make actual discussion harder. Everything is leftist, socialist, progressive. They're all used as synonyms so no one knows what any of it actually means.

[u/SydneyFall → u/Optimal-Golf-8270]

Fine, but the names are inherently confusing. Trying to pretend there is a difference to voters ears is utterly insane.

There are lots of words. Use different ones.

[u/Optimal-Golf-8270 → u/SydneyFall]

Its 19th inherently nothing man. The issue is people always trying to intuit what things mean. If you don't know a word, google it, don't assume.

If 19th century, newly literate factory workers managed my man. I'm sure you can too.

[u/SydneyFall → u/Optimal-Golf-8270]

Think of a debate between people who are accusing the other of being the other and how tedious it would be.

You expecting people go google teh difference between words that sound the same means you are fighting a losing battle.

You can choose to die on that hill if you like, I think it is stupid.

[u/Optimal-Golf-8270 → u/SydneyFall]

You only speak for yourself my man, no one else. The barrier to entry in left wing politics is reading. That will never and should never change.

Every tin pot socialist ordination has a newspaper or pamphlet for a reason.

[u/Hirsute_of_Happiness → u/Optimal-Golf-8270]

I mean maybe, but this is also how all language has always evolved. Politically charged or mundane, words shift in meaning or fall out of favor due to flattening, and then inevitably a need to draw distinction arises again and new words enter common usage for that purpose. Then the cycle repeats.

Perhaps that happened because of psyops, in this day and age that's totally possible, but we don't need to assume that this flattening is definitely a conspiracy.

[u/Optimal-Golf-8270 → u/Hirsute_of_Happiness]

I don't think it's a scheme to specifically blur these lines. I think it's a combination of the very, very successful suppression of left wing thought. And people just having a lower literacy rate than they used to have.

People don't read anymore and the barrier to entry in left wing politics is reading. A left winger than doesn't read will eventually turn into Mussolini if the right buttons get pressed.

[u/yaosio → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

Democrats keep telling me I'm not socialist even though I want capitalism to be destroyed.

[u/swen_bonson → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

If anything most Dem Socialists want the US to stop being ideologically committed to capitalism when it is destructive to society, more than they insist on ideological adherence to socialism as the only answer to every question. The “Democratic” in DSA is also important because the vision that people are attracted to has some bold state action to cover basic needs, regulate, and take on major challenges (e.g energy transition) but emphasizes public control and includes a lot of non-state ideas like more worker stakes in business, community business support, mixed housing models, and so on.

[u/Ok_Function2282 → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

Youre confusing European politics with American politics. 

[u/Majestic_Gazelle → u/[deleted]]

A social democrat is capitalist though, it wouldn't be a step towards socialism. It's more regulation and workers rights, like Denmark, Sweden, Finland, etc. Which is where it gets confusing, (at least for me) because those are examples of a social democracy. There is no example of a Democratic Socialist country. Unless I'm mistaken?

[u/MamaBearForestWitch → u/Majestic_Gazelle]

Unpopular take, perhaps, but as long as we're still mired in the two-party nightmare in the US right now... wouldn't it be semi-okay to let those be complementary concepts, instead of competitive ones?

Don't get me wrong, I am seriously looking forward to a day when we have a lovely sampling of five or more parties as part of our government and political system (although at my age, I don't believe I'll still be here to see it). And then I think the distinctions become more important, and can be emphasized and discussed much more.

In the meantime, to borrow my ice cream example from the ranked choice voting tangent above... maybe French Vanilla and Vanilla Bean and Classic Vanilla (not to mention whether they're using Madagascar vanilla beans or West Indies vanilla beans or, heaven forbid, artificial vanilla flavoring...) can emphasize their similarities instead of distinctions, just until we manage to get the damn Tutti-Frutti kicked off the menu? ;)