A Neat Little Comparison Chart

[Yerda]

One think even conservatives have to admit is that Obama had a squeaky clean presidency. No criminal activity, scandals, or even affairs (that we know of).

Aye but the leftwing billionaire controlled corporate owned media is biased in favour of socialists like Obama...

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Thanks for the article. I think I must concede that democrats have seen as great a shift to the left as the republicans to the right. That was surprising to me, and the article was informative.

I remain unconvinced of your theory regarding the socialist party merger from the 1920s “just now coming to fruition”. I think we could find closer to home causes, such as W’s poor Presidency or as a reflex against rising conservatism (as displayed by Reagan, Fox News, the tea party, etc).

I note that the questions with the most marked rises in leftism appear to be those regarding racist or discriminatory beliefs.

As noted before, and as the article concludes, while the democratic base may have seen a more distinctive left shift than the Republicans to the right, the democrat power wielders and officeholdrrs have been very slow to shift with them. Whereas the Republican Party has been overrun and overtaken by the far right, with the tea party pushing primary candidates further to the right and the freedom caucus holding the party moderates hostage in congress.

Yes I mentioned Bernie. I do think that he was a concrete notice to those democrat power wielders that the base is interested in a more liberal direction than that currently pursued. But he was a very recent development, and note, he only became a “democrat” so he could run for president and have a chance. He returned to being an independent after the election.

Thanks Falvlun. My faith in humanity is restored, most internet arguments just trail off into nothingness without any closure between commenters, or acceptance of data given. For you to concede on that point is gracious.

I'm a horrible communicator for the most part, it usually takes me many posts to get my point across so bear with me.

The way I see things is that it has taken time for the Socialists to affect real change in the Democratic party. They hitched their horse with the party back in the 20's by choosing to vote Democrat for the most part, and have marched in lockstep with Democrats on policy while slowly introducing their socialist ideas into the mix.

Then the 60's happened, and a lot of these ideas that were suppressed in the Communist scare post WWII could be talked about. College campuses and the education system opened up to educators who could more openly espouse socialist philosophy and teach/push these thoughts on impressionable kids in colleges and schools nationwide. EDIT Keep in mind I'm not insinuating that they were nefariously inculcating kids or anything like that... I'm talking about just a more organic process, ie if you believe in socialist philosophy that will be reflected in your thought and how you teach... END EDIT Everyone knows the nation's education system is almost entirely populated by people with left leaning philosophies (what is it, like 80% of educators have liberal arts degrees?). Everyone knows "most kids" come out of school liberals and then become more conservative philosophically as they get older.

So here we are a few generations later, and as the Pew study shows the Democrats are moving further left towards a more fully socialistic philosophy.

Take all that and add in the other points you brought up about how Repubs started moving right, which caused a pull to the left for Democrats, and it all adds up.

Anecdote time... Socialists have long suffered a stigma in America as we all know, but in the last election I heard many people on Facebook, and elsewhere, people who I knew as Democrats, come out of the closet and proudly proclaim themselves socialists. As we talked about, Bernie got a lot of support from Democrats, not just socialists who vote Democrat.

This is what's going on with the Democratic Party, IMO. Anyway, thanks for the respectful convo!

They might want to change the party name to Democratic-Socialists, like some of the parties are named in Europe. ;-)

 

[tytlyf]

I don't know if I'd go that far, but yes it was definitely more conservative than it is today.

Wha? We're talking about the DemoKKKratic party of the 1920's. You know, the south, klan, confederacy, etc. Yes, I'd go that far because it's the truth.

Since when has the south been progressive?

 

[Stevicus]

Thanks Falvlun. My faith in humanity is restored, most internet arguments just trail off into nothingness without any closure between commenters, or acceptance of data given. For you to concede on that point is gracious.

I'm a horrible communicator for the most part, it usually takes me many posts to get my point across so bear with me.

The way I see things is that it has taken time for the Socialists to affect real change in the Democratic party. They hitched their horse with the party back in the 20's by choosing to vote Democrat for the most part, and have marched in lockstep with Democrats on policy while slowly introducing their socialist ideas into the mix.

Then the 60's happened, and a lot of these ideas that were suppressed in the Communist scare post WWII could be talked about. College campuses and the education system opened up to educators who could more openly espouse socialist philosophy and teach/push these thoughts on impressionable kids in colleges and schools nationwide. EDIT Keep in mind I'm not insinuating that they were nefariously inculcating kids or anything like that... I'm talking about just a more organic process, ie if you believe in socialist philosophy that will be reflected in your thought and how you teach... END EDIT Everyone knows the nation's education system is almost entirely populated by people with left leaning philosophies (what is it, like 80% of educators have liberal arts degrees?). Everyone knows "most kids" come out of school liberals and then become more conservative philosophically as they get older.

So here we are a few generations later, and as the Pew study shows the Democrats are moving further left towards a more fully socialistic philosophy.

Take all that and add in the other points you brought up about how Repubs started moving right, which caused a pull to the left for Democrats, and it all adds up.

Anecdote time... Socialists have long suffered a stigma in America as we all know, but in the last election I heard many people on Facebook, and elsewhere, people who I knew as Democrats, come out of the closet and proudly proclaim themselves socialists. As we talked about, Bernie got a lot of support from Democrats, not just socialists who vote Democrat.

This is what's going on with the Democratic Party, IMO. Anyway, thanks for the respectful convo!

They might want to change the party name to Democratic-Socialists, like some of the parties are named in Europe. ;-)

I think the Democrats may have been further left/socialist during the FDR years, and especially during WW2. Truman moved the Democrats more towards the center. But by the 60s, the Democrats also had sharp divisions, mainly over the Vietnam War and Civil Rights, but there were also some who were decidedly more socialistic than others. But most were relatively capitalistic.

Republican claims about Democrats being "communists" or "pinkos" were always exaggerated and hyperbolic. Guys like Joe McCarthy, J. Edgar Hoover, Nixon, etc. - they were never really quite right in the head.

Ever since the 60s, the Democrats have moved further and further to the right, giving in to conservative economists on numerous programs favored by the Reaganites. The Democrats acquiesced on free trade, globalism, deregulation, privatization, militarization, interventionism.

They've been anything but socialists, so the notion that Democrats are even further left now than they were 50 years ago just seems way off-base.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

I think the Democrats may have been further left/socialist during the FDR years, and especially during WW2. Truman moved the Democrats more towards the center. But by the 60s, the Democrats also had sharp divisions, mainly over the Vietnam War and Civil Rights, but there were also some who were decidedly more socialistic than others. But most were relatively capitalistic.

Republican claims about Democrats being "communists" or "pinkos" were always exaggerated and hyperbolic. Guys like Joe McCarthy, J. Edgar Hoover, Nixon, etc. - they were never really quite right in the head.

Ever since the 60s, the Democrats have moved further and further to the right, giving in to conservative economists on numerous programs favored by the Reaganites. The Democrats acquiesced on free trade, globalism, deregulation, privatization, militarization, interventionism.

They've been anything but socialists, so the notion that Democrats are even further left now than they were 50 years ago just seems way off-base.

Did you not read the Pew study that shows Democrats as being further to the far left than the right is towards the far right? Pew is the gold standard on this topic. I encourage you to read the study, it's in the article I linked upthread to Falvlun.

 

[tytlyf]

Did you not read the Pew study that shows Democrats as being further to the far left than the right is towards the far right? Pew is the gold standard on this topic. I encourage you to read the study, it's in the article I linked upthread to Falvlun.

But that's not based on how a person feels, that's based on the 10-point questions we used. The fact that more people these days are leaning left is due to morality.
The republican party base is on the edge of the right. Bought to go off the cliff. The democratic party base is moderate and not far-left. White christians make up the majority of democratic voters.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Wha? We're talking about the DemoKKKratic party of the 1920's. You know, the south, klan, confederacy, etc. Yes, I'd go that far because it's the truth.

Since when has the south been progressive?

Well, it's a recent thing for southern Democrats, but just prior to the 20's there is what is known as the Progressive era. A period of time between 1890 and 1920 where social activism and political reform was the norm across the United States. It stands to reason that the Democrats would be mostly progressive at the end of this period, does it not? Of course they had their contingent of what are called blue dog Democrats, but overall the party was progressive in its philosophy.

RE recent events... The south has slowly, over the last few decades, been losing its blue dog Democrats. If you read the article you would see that where Republicans have become more conservative on some positions, their average shift towards the far right is only about 10 points. The average shift towards far left positions for Democrats is about 23 points. This happened in southern Democrats too, southern Democrats have voted blue dogs out (or they retired) and voted in more progressive Democrats.

Democrats are more to the far left than the right is to the far right, that's just a fact, as Pew pointed out.

 

[Stevicus]

Did you not read the Pew study that shows Democrats as being further to the far left than the right is towards the far right? Pew is the gold standard on this topic. I encourage you to read the study, it's in the article I linked upthread to Falvlun.

I don't think an opinion poll is really that useful in examining a question like this.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

I don't think an opinion poll is really that useful in examining a question like this.

So no amount of evidence would work for you is what you're saying? Pew is the gold standard on this question of how polarized the electorate is, and what their individual feelings are on individual topics that indicate how left or right their political philosophies are... They've been tracking this data for a while now...

 

[Subduction Zone]

So no amount of evidence would work for you is what you're saying? Pew is the gold standard on this question of how polarized the electorate is, and what their individual feelings are on individual topics that indicate how left or right their political philosophies are... They've been tracking this data for a while now...

Yes, but they are just part of the vast left wing conspiracy In reality roughly 90% of the population is conservative, they just don't know it

 

[Stevicus]

So no amount of evidence would work for you is what you're saying? Pew is the gold standard on this question of how polarized the electorate is, and what their individual feelings are on individual topics that indicate how left or right their political philosophies are... They've been tracking this data for a while now...

No, that's not what I'm saying. If someone wanted to claim that the Democrats are more socialist today than they were in the New Deal era, then I would expect more to back it up than a simple opinion poll.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

No, that's not what I'm saying. If someone wanted to claim that the Democrats are more socialist today than they were in the New Deal era, then I would expect more to back it up than a simple opinion poll.

An interesting discussion on this topic... Good points raised all around

Is The Democratic Party Becoming More Like The GOP?

 

[idav]

An interesting discussion on this topic... Good points raised all around

Is The Democratic Party Becoming More Like The GOP?

If your asking if the Democrats are still run by rich people than sure. However there are some keen differences for example I only see the blue states getting rid of capital punishment, fighting for a better electoral system, fighting for equal marriage rights to name a few issues. Red states like ones in the south and especially texas are constantly fighting for religious type rights like fighting abortion, Texas even still has a law you have to be theist to be a politician. Its like the red states constantly want laws that ride the line on the constitutional equality stuff. Like more recently the state, Tennessee, that mandated all schools put a sign in all schools that says "in god we trust". Then you have blues states like Illinois constantly doing democrat type laws. There is clearly a difference once you get passed the fact that they all lie and are rich.

 

[Underhill]

So no amount of evidence would work for you is what you're saying? Pew is the gold standard on this question of how polarized the electorate is, and what their individual feelings are on individual topics that indicate how left or right their political philosophies are... They've been tracking this data for a while now...

Yes, except that we have a Trump presidency and there are inherent biases in polling data based upon public perception. For example, many on the right are loath to admit to being Trump supporters with everything going on. Meanwhile the left is chomping at the bit to replace him. This means those on the left will be more likely to speak their minds than those on the right.

These things can have a huge impact on polling of this kind.

 

[Stevicus]

An interesting discussion on this topic... Good points raised all around

Is The Democratic Party Becoming More Like The GOP?

On economic issues, this is definitely true. For many Democrats, I've noticed a complete 180° turn when it comes to issues like globalism, free trade, outsourcing, protectionism. They're not the party of the working man like they used to be.

Democrats may have been at their furthest left during the late 60s/early 70s, but since then, they've slowly moved to the right.

 

[Subduction Zone]

On economic issues, this is definitely true. For many Democrats, I've noticed a complete 180° turn when it comes to issues like globalism, free trade, outsourcing, protectionism. They're not the party of the working man like they used to be.

Democrats may have been at their furthest left during the late 60s/early 70s, but since then, they've slowly moved to the right.

In the long run free trade protects the working man. You appear to want to isolate the U.S.. That simply will not work in the long run. The economy is global. If you isolate the U.S. that may help us for the short run, but eventually we will lose since we need material from the rest of the world.

Now "free trade" does not mean that we can't have any rules on trade. Free trade must be free and equal for it to work. That means if China is protectionist then they are not following the rules of free trade and a tariff on their goods may be justified. Trump may have gotten that right. Outsourcing is not a bad idea either. Since it is a world economy our efforts may be better made in another direction than trying to hand weave a basket. Developing countries become first world countries by first having their laborers "abused" by big business. There are complaints by some when Nike goes into a third world country and opens a factory. Those jobs are not long term jobs for the country. But they are a first step up from utter poverty. There are former third world countries that have moved past that by allowing outside sources to set up businesses until they had enough cash flow to begin creating their own businesses. Malaysia is one such example.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

On economic issues, this is definitely true. For many Democrats, I've noticed a complete 180° turn when it comes to issues like globalism, free trade, outsourcing, protectionism. They're not the party of the working man like they used to be.

Democrats may have been at their furthest left during the late 60s/early 70s, but since then, they've slowly moved to the right.

The 60's were the first wave. Yes, they moved right since then, but starting with the people who suffered from Bush Derangement Syndrome, the push has been to become more lefty.

The Pew Research Center data bears that out.

The Democrats are further to the far left today than the Republicans are to the far right, period...

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Yes, except that we have a Trump presidency and there are inherent biases in polling data based upon public perception. For example, many on the right are loath to admit to being Trump supporters with everything going on. Meanwhile the left is chomping at the bit to replace him. This means those on the left will be more likely to speak their minds than those on the right.

These things can have a huge impact on polling of this kind.

The push towards the left began in earnest in the 2000's with the people suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome. Trump has accelerated the push left, yes, but there is no doubt that Democrats are more to the left than Republicans are to the right.

 

[metis]

When it comes to Trump, "left" and "right" no longer applies, as "Trumpism" is an animal all of its own. IMO, it's more a form of what we call "nativism", mixed in with "populism" of the pandering type. Or, to put it another way, it's all about Trump.

 

[Stevicus]

In the long run free trade protects the working man. You appear to want to isolate the U.S.. That simply will not work in the long run. The economy is global. If you isolate the U.S. that may help us for the short run, but eventually we will lose since we need material from the rest of the world.

Now "free trade" does not mean that we can't have any rules on trade. Free trade must be free and equal for it to work. That means if China is protectionist then they are not following the rules of free trade and a tariff on their goods may be justified. Trump may have gotten that right. Outsourcing is not a bad idea either. Since it is a world economy our efforts may be better made in another direction than trying to hand weave a basket. Developing countries become first world countries by first having their laborers "abused" by big business. There are complaints by some when Nike goes into a third world country and opens a factory. Those jobs are not long term jobs for the country. But they are a first step up from utter poverty. There are former third world countries that have moved past that by allowing outside sources to set up businesses until they had enough cash flow to begin creating their own businesses. Malaysia is one such example.

Yes, I've heard all these arguments before, but I also know that Democrats and liberals used to support different policies, particularly during the 1940s and 50s. It was the Republicans who led the big push towards free trade and globalism, and the Democrats gave in to them. While they may have had various motives for doing so, it does challenge the notion that Democrats have gotten more liberal or further to the left, when that's simply not true at all.

I don't want to isolate the U.S., but I would prefer that we implement policies with a historical track record for success, as proven by the massive and unprecedented economic boom the Democrats brought about in the post-war era. Once we started abandoning those successful policies, things went downhill for America.