13
   

Moderate Democrats (also liberals)

 
 
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 02:03 pm
Over 80 some years social security has been changed a bit at a time in to social security, Medicare and medcade. Would any disagree with that statement? Stupid question.
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 07:56 pm
@RABEL222,
This tangent misses the point.

The difference between moderate Democrats and more extreme Democrats is idelogical purity. In liberal circles now, if you stray from the party line in any way... you are shunned.

There was a piece on NPR where a Democratic congresswoman was claiming it is a contradiction to support family leave if you are pro-life. Think about how ridiculous this is, these two issues aren't related. But is where the Democratic party is; once they label you anti-woman (as they define it) they insist that you fit their label across the board.

The true mark of a moderate is the ability to form opinions outside of the rigid ideological boundaries.
neptuneblue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 08:08 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
There was a piece on NPR where a Democratic congresswoman was claiming it is a contradiction to support family leave if you are pro-life.


Can you provide a link?
neptuneblue
 
  2  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 08:48 pm
@maxdancona,
So, from your bully pulpit, is it that there is NO link?

Asking for a friend...
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 08:56 pm
@neptuneblue,
Do you disagree with the point I am making, Neptune, or are you looking just for a fight? It was on NPR One, I just spent a couple minutes looking for it and couldn't find it. If you don't think someone can be pro-life (i.e. believe that abortion should be illegal in most cases) without being anti-woman then the point is moot. Otherwise I will retract my example not having a link.

My point is valid though... It is critical thinking that makes a moderate; being able to disagree with certain ideological goals, to think critically and question the ideological narrative. Being in lockstep agreement with ideological goals of the party but arguing about the time scale doesn't make you a moderate.



neptuneblue
 
  2  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 09:01 pm
@maxdancona,
Take your pick, Max.

You brought it up, now back it up.

The reason you can't find it on NPR is because it does not exist. Therefore you post inflammatory claims yet bully people into accepting your truth, even though it's false.

You spout critical thinking, maybe you should try it.
maxdancona
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 09:04 pm
@neptuneblue,
Nah... Neptune. You bore me, and I am not looking for a fight. I am just going to ignore you.
neptuneblue
 
  3  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 09:08 pm
@maxdancona,
You do that, sweetheart. It's the only game you have left to play.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  3  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 09:50 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
In this very thread I've been called a conservative if not a republican, despite agreeing with 95% of the democratic party platform. Do you think my policy positions line up more with Bernie Sanders or Ted Cruz?

Bernie Sanders.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  3  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 09:56 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
I'm not a "moderate Democrat". But I'd have no problem voting for one.

I agree.

0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 10:11 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
The US is a two-party democracy. Like it or not, that is the reality. Voting for a third party is a wasted vote.

On this one specific point, I definitely agree with you.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 10:15 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
If the Democrats drive away too many voters, they will lose. That is their problem not mine. Whether the Democrats deserve someone's vote is up to them for whatever reason they feel is reasonable. I have always voted consistently for Democrats... I am not expressing my discomfort with the party. If enough people feel as I do, that the Democrats are leaving them behind, then the party is going to have problems.

That is why we have primaries. That is the purpose of having primaries.
After the primaries have picked which democrat will run in the general, I will vote for that democrat.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 10:27 pm
@Real Music,
How did that work for you in 2016?
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Fri 8 Feb, 2019 11:01 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
How did that work for you in 2016?

You win some. You lose some.
Olivier5
 
  0  
Reply Sat 9 Feb, 2019 03:39 am
@revelette1,
And yet sometimes it’s more efficient to build a new system from scratch than to try and fix an old system that has been tweaked and tampered by so many hands over so long a period that it has become messy, unpredictable and unmangeable. Like the electric system in an old house can be so f*cked up that it’s easier to rebuild one from scratch up to modern standards than to fix the old one. Or if a country wants to adopt a new system of weights and measures — move from imperial to metric for instance — it cannot do so incrementally, first with the lengths then a few years later with the surfaces, then later with the volumes... It has to make that full leap of faith into the future at once, not in small bits.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2019 05:11 pm
@Olivier5,
I generally agree with you. Certainly the track record for the development of new technologies and, as well complex engineering designs has many examples of the benefits of a fresh start after a failure . However in those fields, general agreement of what constitutes a failure, and what a near miss warranting further investment for improvement is usually a fairly easy decision for those involved.

Politics involves the complexities and contradictions of human nature, and in that context, I believe revelette's caution is usually warranted.
RABEL222
 
  2  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2019 08:53 pm
@Real Music,
We won the vote on that one. But lost the election because the vote sent relevant.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2019 12:44 pm
@georgeob1,
Human nature includes the capacity for risk taking, though.
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2019 01:11 pm
@Olivier5,
I agree. However in democratic governments, where consensus is a valuable foundation, I believe that, absent compelling need, gradualism has enduring merit.

Autocrats have historically been risk takers and more agile than their Democratic Foes. However, as history also shows, despite occasional brilliance, they had no built in protection from error, and were frequent victims of their own illusions. Consider Napoleon.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2019 01:22 pm
@georgeob1,
Prudence is a virtue, but to deny oneself the capacity to make bold moves is self-defeating.

You seem be a fan of Brexit. There's nothing incremental about it though. It's not even carefully planned or anything. It's a jump in the unknown. You would dismiss it on this basis alone, if you were coherent.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 02/21/2019 at 07:35:19