538 Analysis: Why the Democrats have shifted Left

[TNHarley]

Why would i

Because the notion that people are ONLY one or the other is totalitarian in itself.

Societies exist along a continuum, it's not one or the other.
.

To have a "continuum" implies something must be centralized and dictates. Which is what totalitarianism is.

Quite the opposite. Exactly the opposite.

There is no totalitarianism in this country. We are not North Korea. That's just hyperbole.
.

Thats a centrist grinding on a fence post for the sake of civility.

I think that most people realize that life is not binary, one or the other, all or nothing.
.

I agree. But we are talking politics.

 

[Gdjjr]

There is no totalitarianism in this country.

Not completely, you're right. However, a side by side comparison for policy subscription will show there is no real difference in the left/right paradigm *inside the beltway*- the left/right is a facade to keep voters divided/appeased. Both sides of the aisle, which exists merely for show, support the hegemony of world wide domination- that voters can't see that speaks to what was it Hillary said, wilfull blindness- Republicans lower taxes and ***** about them, Democrats ***** about them and want to raise them- what exactly is the difference? Republicans want you to Keep what you earned? LOL- not really, they want to appear to.
Democrats want to take more of what you earned? LOL- they say they do but can't because they won't have the votes- they know that. The empty suits in the District of Criminals may be lots of things, but stupid ain't one of them- they know, and just in case they don't, they have advisers telling them how they should *act*- act. Think about that.
In the end, the "policies" are "totalitarian" since there is no out.

Here's an "index" of how your congress critter votes based on the constitution. No 100%. Period. Democrats tend to be less in their voting, but Republicans are from from "constitutional"- Freedom Index
You may wonder what does that have to do with the price of tea in China- however, the Founders believed that Liberty was vitally important to NOT being ruled over by a totalitarian regime- they were pretty sharp guys. What they didn't count on, or make provisions for, was graft and corruption- every rule or law passed erodes Liberty one way or another- in a country founded as Liberty as it's main ideology. BOTH sides subscribe to the same monetary policy which funds the foreign policy which drives the domestic policy- why? Being in debt enslaves. We are in debt for generations to come to pay the interest on the money borrowed which didn't exist until the gov't borrowed it- while *complete* totalitarian ruling over isn't visible, one need to look no further than future generations to see it ain't gonna get any better where Liberty is concerned if the same borrow to spend mind set continues-

Then, add the incessant Executive Orders- are you kidding me? That is rule by fiat. This regime may do what you like but the next regime won't- that is one person executing- in the end that is totalitarian- just not one person but a change every *it's the other sides* turn, currently following a pattern of 8 years per side.

 

[Mac1958]

There is no totalitarianism in this country.

Not completely, you're right. However, a side by side comparison for policy subscription will show there is no real difference in the left/right paradigm *inside the beltway*- the left/right is a facade to keep voters divided/appeased. Both sides of the aisle, which exists merely for show, support the hegemony of world wide domination- that voters can't see that speaks to what was it Hillary said, wilfull blindness- Republicans lower taxes and ***** about them, Democrats ***** about them and want to raise them- what exactly is the difference? Republicans want you to Keep what you earned? LOL- not really, they want to appear to.
Democrats want to take more of what you earned? LOL- they say they do but can't because they won't have the votes- they know that. The empty suits in the District of Criminals may be lots of things, but stupid ain't one of them- they know, and just in case they don't, they have advisers telling them how they should *act*- act. Think about that.
In the end, the "policies" are "totalitarian" since there is no out.

Here's an "index" of how your congress critter votes based on the constitution. No 100%. Period. Democrats tend to be less in their voting, but Republicans are from from "constitutional"- Freedom Index
You may wonder what does that have to do with the price of tea in China- however, the Founders believed that Liberty was vitally important to NOT being ruled over by a totalitarian regime- they were pretty sharp guys. What they didn't count on, or make provisions for, was graft and corruption- every rule or law passed erodes Liberty one way or another- in a country founded as Liberty as it's main ideology. BOTH sides subscribe to the same monetary policy which funds the foreign policy which drives the domestic policy- why? Being in debt enslaves. We are in debt for generations to come to pay the interest on the money borrowed which didn't exist until the gov't borrowed it- while *complete* totalitarian ruling over isn't visible, one need to look no further than future generations to see it ain't gonna get any better where Liberty is concerned if the same borrow to spend mind set continues-

Then, add the incessant Executive Orders- are you kidding me? That is rule by fiat. This regime may do what you like but the next regime won't- that is one person executing- in the end that is totalitarian- just not one person but a change every *it's the other sides* turn, currently following a pattern of 8 years per side.

I think those who toss around words like "totalitarian" are just exercising some intellectual laziness and shallowness. But can it be argued that both ends of the spectrum can be guilty of authoritarianism on individual topics? Absolutely.

What seems (to me) to be happening is that both ends of the spectrum have convinced themselves that they will somehow "beat" the other side, allowing them carte blanche to cram their entire agenda down our throats. Because they know what's best for us 'n stuff. Well, THAT is authoritarian, or perhaps more.

This, of course, is the opposite of the communication, collaboration and innovation that created our Constitution, which I find pretty ironic.
.

 

[Oddball]

It's not exactly a secret that the Democratic Party has clearly moved to the Left over the last generation or two. The only people who appear to disagree with that are the Progressive (Regressive) Left - because, I assume, they merely see the party as coming more in line with their beliefs. As the party becomes less liberal and more leftist authoritarian, they become more comfortable and satisfied.

Unfortunately, many of us who lean Left are watching the party become something with which we can no longer identify, leaving us without a party. And the alternative "major" party has done its own changing, and is currently something that is becoming more and more ugly and vulgar. Personally, I don't think the increasing division is a coincidence as much as it is a reaction.

Interesting cultural & statistical analysis on this by 538: Why The Democrats Have Shifted Left Over The Last 30 Years

=====
This means that the recent uptick in the share of voters holding liberal beliefs is driven not just by the departure of conservative voters, but also by Democrats themselves becoming more liberal. It is, of course, hard to identify just one reason the Democratic Party has shifted leftward in recent years, but in my conversations with experts, they all pointed to party elites (both politicians and influential liberal voices online). Now, some research has found that cues from the parties and party elites are even shaping voters’ personal beliefs, particularly on issues of race and immigration.

But why have so many Democrats moved to the left on these issues? On the one hand, the fact that race and immigration played such a central role in the 2016 election was certainly a contributing factor. A 2018 study by Peter Enns at Cornell University found that rather than voters choosing a candidate who matched their views on controversies like the Black Lives Matter movement, they actually changed their own views to match those of their preferred candidates. And there is evidence that Trump is continuing to drive some of this — although, perhaps not in the way one might expect. There isn’t evidence, for instance, that his rhetoric has contributed to an uptick in racist and sexist attitudes among white voters; instead, as FiveThirtyEight contributor Matt Grossmann has written, “the evidence shows that liberal-leaning voters moved away from [Trump’s] views faster than conservatives moved toward them.”
=====

They've become far less liberal, in both the classical sense of the word (libertarian) and in terms of their near total abandonment of civil liberties and personal choice (except for abortion of course) issues....They can't even maintain the facade that they're anti-corporatist, anti- Wall Street party anymore, as they regularly (despite their claims to the contrary) suck up to corporate fat cats and banksters.

They in fact have become the fascists that they accuse anyone who opposes them of being.

 

[Fueri]

There is no totalitarianism in this country.

Not completely, you're right. However, a side by side comparison for policy subscription will show there is no real difference in the left/right paradigm *inside the beltway*- the left/right is a facade to keep voters divided/appeased. Both sides of the aisle, which exists merely for show, support the hegemony of world wide domination- that voters can't see that speaks to what was it Hillary said, wilfull blindness- Republicans lower taxes and ***** about them, Democrats ***** about them and want to raise them- what exactly is the difference? Republicans want you to Keep what you earned? LOL- not really, they want to appear to.
Democrats want to take more of what you earned? LOL- they say they do but can't because they won't have the votes- they know that. The empty suits in the District of Criminals may be lots of things, but stupid ain't one of them- they know, and just in case they don't, they have advisers telling them how they should *act*- act. Think about that.
In the end, the "policies" are "totalitarian" since there is no out.

Here's an "index" of how your congress critter votes based on the constitution. No 100%. Period. Democrats tend to be less in their voting, but Republicans are from from "constitutional"- Freedom Index
You may wonder what does that have to do with the price of tea in China- however, the Founders believed that Liberty was vitally important to NOT being ruled over by a totalitarian regime- they were pretty sharp guys. What they didn't count on, or make provisions for, was graft and corruption- every rule or law passed erodes Liberty one way or another- in a country founded as Liberty as it's main ideology. BOTH sides subscribe to the same monetary policy which funds the foreign policy which drives the domestic policy- why? Being in debt enslaves. We are in debt for generations to come to pay the interest on the money borrowed which didn't exist until the gov't borrowed it- while *complete* totalitarian ruling over isn't visible, one need to look no further than future generations to see it ain't gonna get any better where Liberty is concerned if the same borrow to spend mind set continues-

Then, add the incessant Executive Orders- are you kidding me? That is rule by fiat. This regime may do what you like but the next regime won't- that is one person executing- in the end that is totalitarian- just not one person but a change every *it's the other sides* turn, currently following a pattern of 8 years per side.

I think those who toss around words like "totalitarian" are just exercising some intellectual laziness and shallowness. But can it be argued that both ends of the spectrum can be guilty of authoritarianism on individual topics? Absolutely.

What seems (to me) to be happening is that both ends of the spectrum have convinced themselves that they will somehow "beat" the other side, allowing them carte blanche to cram their entire agenda down our throats. Because they know what's best for us 'n stuff. Well, THAT is authoritarian, or perhaps more.

This, of course, is the opposite of the communication, collaboration and innovation that created our Constitution, which I find pretty ironic.
.

Yeah, I'll agree that both sides profit from the division and feed their base red meat to keep them pissed off. No question, no doubt. The spin machines and propaganda campaigns are running 24/7/365

I cannot agree that both sides' policies are the same. In terms if big govt, new world order stuff, yes. Big $$$ drives that and big money owns every single one of them.

Smaller issues such as gun control, socialization of services (obamacare) etc., no. There are divides there.

And I 100% agree that either side is more than happy to ram their agenda if possible. There is no compromise. There is no collaboration, there is no greater good. There is only demonization of others with an opposing view and a win at all costs mentality, which has resulted in a completely dysfunctional government focused only on gains for the party, which has now infected the population to the point that we are becoming dysfunctional as a society.

We are fucked.

 

[Mac1958]

There is no totalitarianism in this country.

Not completely, you're right. However, a side by side comparison for policy subscription will show there is no real difference in the left/right paradigm *inside the beltway*- the left/right is a facade to keep voters divided/appeased. Both sides of the aisle, which exists merely for show, support the hegemony of world wide domination- that voters can't see that speaks to what was it Hillary said, wilfull blindness- Republicans lower taxes and ***** about them, Democrats ***** about them and want to raise them- what exactly is the difference? Republicans want you to Keep what you earned? LOL- not really, they want to appear to.
Democrats want to take more of what you earned? LOL- they say they do but can't because they won't have the votes- they know that. The empty suits in the District of Criminals may be lots of things, but stupid ain't one of them- they know, and just in case they don't, they have advisers telling them how they should *act*- act. Think about that.
In the end, the "policies" are "totalitarian" since there is no out.

Here's an "index" of how your congress critter votes based on the constitution. No 100%. Period. Democrats tend to be less in their voting, but Republicans are from from "constitutional"- Freedom Index
You may wonder what does that have to do with the price of tea in China- however, the Founders believed that Liberty was vitally important to NOT being ruled over by a totalitarian regime- they were pretty sharp guys. What they didn't count on, or make provisions for, was graft and corruption- every rule or law passed erodes Liberty one way or another- in a country founded as Liberty as it's main ideology. BOTH sides subscribe to the same monetary policy which funds the foreign policy which drives the domestic policy- why? Being in debt enslaves. We are in debt for generations to come to pay the interest on the money borrowed which didn't exist until the gov't borrowed it- while *complete* totalitarian ruling over isn't visible, one need to look no further than future generations to see it ain't gonna get any better where Liberty is concerned if the same borrow to spend mind set continues-

Then, add the incessant Executive Orders- are you kidding me? That is rule by fiat. This regime may do what you like but the next regime won't- that is one person executing- in the end that is totalitarian- just not one person but a change every *it's the other sides* turn, currently following a pattern of 8 years per side.

I think those who toss around words like "totalitarian" are just exercising some intellectual laziness and shallowness. But can it be argued that both ends of the spectrum can be guilty of authoritarianism on individual topics? Absolutely.

What seems (to me) to be happening is that both ends of the spectrum have convinced themselves that they will somehow "beat" the other side, allowing them carte blanche to cram their entire agenda down our throats. Because they know what's best for us 'n stuff. Well, THAT is authoritarian, or perhaps more.

This, of course, is the opposite of the communication, collaboration and innovation that created our Constitution, which I find pretty ironic.
.

Yeah, I'll agree that both sides profit from the division and feed their base red meat to keep them pissed off. No question, no doubt. The spin machines and propaganda campaigns are running 24/7/365

I cannot agree that both sides' policies are the same. In terms if big govt, new world order stuff, yes. Big $$$ drives that and big money owns every single one of them.

Smaller issues such as gun control, socialization of services (obamacare) etc., no. There are divides there.

And I 100% agree that either side is more than happy to ram their agenda if possible. There is no compromise. There is no collaboration, there is no greater good. There is only demonization of others with an opposing view and a win at all costs mentality, which has resulted in a completely dysfunctional government focused only on gains for the party, which has now infected the population to the point that we are becoming dysfunctional as a society.

We are fucked.

Sure, the policies are certainly different. It's just the behaviors and tactics that are so similar.

And yeah, unless we find a way to marginalize the nutters on both ends, we may indeed be fucked.
.

 

[jknowgood]

The centrist, big business democrats are the most cowardly jellyfish that ever pretended to fight for the common man. They buckled under pressure and made deep comprises at every turn. Only the progressives seem to have any courage or conviction. If the center is so great for America why did they seem to hardly ever accomplish anything for the working person?

You do realize that the Trumpsters say exactly the same kind of thing?

What is your opinion of President Obama going public with his concerns about the trajectory of the party? Don't you think him saying that in public is important?
.

The party has it's problems to be sure but if we are ever to claw back some power from the billionaires the progressives are clearly the ones to lead that fight.

Well, that's what we're getting from both ends. What I don't understand is why both ends think they're going to "beat" the other.
.

Right wing anger is directed downward towards regular people while left-wing anger is directed at the powerful where it belongs. This distinction makes all the difference if for some reason you want to live in a free country.

Yeah your anger goes against anyone that disagrees with you.

 

[Gdjjr]

There was a time when Democrats *publicly* stood for the working man, allegedly and publicly it was believed Republicans stood for the rich man- publicly being key- but, we didn't get to where we are "publicly" we got to where we are behind closed doors-one side or the other compromised or was compromised- they now both work for their own well being pretending (acting) as though they're fighting for their constituents- well, guess who their constituents are- the ones who pay for play-

IMO there has not been an honest politician since Davy Crockett- he chose to not run anymore because he learned that he couldn't do what he promised his constituents he would do- I don't know if he was a Republican or a Democrat and don't care-
he told his peers in DC what he thought- you all may go to hell, I'm gone to Texas- he gave a speech on the floor that was absolutely correct in his day, it's called "Not Yours to Give"- (“Money with [Congressmen] is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it.”) Rereading that, just now, it seems he was a member of the Whig party, whatever that was- however, in his day, money was real, not fiat and did belong to the bearer- today's fiat money belongs to the Federal Reserve, thus, Federal Reserve Notes- it ain't really ours- it's borrowed ans we pay user fees for the Federal Reserves magnanimity-

We have been led astray- are we forced? Try not paying taxes. Try leaving without permission.


A Powerful Government Equals a Weak Nation

 

[Oddball]

Yeah, I'll agree that both sides profit from the division and feed their base red meat to keep them pissed off. No question, no doubt. The spin machines and propaganda campaigns are running 24/7/365

I cannot agree that both sides' policies are the same. In terms if big govt, new world order stuff, yes. Big $$$ drives that and big money owns every single one of them.

Smaller issues such as gun control, socialization of services (obamacare) etc., no. There are divides there.

And I 100% agree that either side is more than happy to ram their agenda if possible. There is no compromise. There is no collaboration, there is no greater good. There is only demonization of others with an opposing view and a win at all costs mentality, which has resulted in a completely dysfunctional government focused only on gains for the party, which has now infected the population to the point that we are becoming dysfunctional as a society.

We are fucked.

The "collaboration" is a large part of what got us into this mess....One side basically faked being any real opposition, while continuing to allow the Overton window of the body politic to be dragged to the authoritarian left...Both sides participated, as they overwhelmingly agreed when the legislation in question accrued power to themselves at the expense of the rights of the peasants (hello Patriot Act, EPA, Departments of Energy, Education and Faterl....er....Homeland Security)....Any and all pushback was dealt with by browbeating the opposition by claiming that they "are helping the terrorists (or RUSSIA!)", hate education, and/or are racistmisogynisthomophobic cat kickers who hate the cheeeelllldrennnn.

 

[Gdjjr]

Sure, the policies are certainly different.

How?

 

[Mac1958]

Sure, the policies are certainly different.

How?

Issues. Health care, abortion, gay rights, immigration, gun control, on and on. Clear as a bell.
.

 

[Gdjjr]

I think those who toss around words like "totalitarian" are just exercising some intellectual laziness and shallowness

In a monkey see monkey do world follower monkeys follow the lead monkeys- the District of Criminals are the lead monkeys which is diametrically opposite the original intent- they, the empty suits, are OUR servants, we are the Masters- but not to hear them (any of them talk)- they pay lip service to serving but it can't be questioned that they do serve- themselves.

 

[Gdjjr]

Issues. Health care, abortion, gay rights, immigration, gun control, on and on. Clear as a bell.

I disagree- we have all those which allegedly Republicans disagree with-

 

[joaquinmiller]

It's not exactly a secret that the Democratic Party has clearly moved to the Left over the last generation or two. The only people who appear to disagree with that are the Progressive (Regressive) Left - because, I assume, they merely see the party as coming more in line with their beliefs. As the party becomes less liberal and more leftist authoritarian, they become more comfortable and satisfied.

Unfortunately, many of us who lean Left are watching the party become something with which we can no longer identify, leaving us without a party. And the alternative "major" party has done its own changing, and is currently something that is becoming more and more ugly and vulgar. Personally, I don't think the increasing division is a coincidence as much as it is a reaction.

Interesting cultural & statistical analysis on this by 538: Why The Democrats Have Shifted Left Over The Last 30 Years

=====
This means that the recent uptick in the share of voters holding liberal beliefs is driven not just by the departure of conservative voters, but also by Democrats themselves becoming more liberal. It is, of course, hard to identify just one reason the Democratic Party has shifted leftward in recent years, but in my conversations with experts, they all pointed to party elites (both politicians and influential liberal voices online). Now, some research has found that cues from the parties and party elites are even shaping voters’ personal beliefs, particularly on issues of race and immigration.

But why have so many Democrats moved to the left on these issues? On the one hand, the fact that race and immigration played such a central role in the 2016 election was certainly a contributing factor. A 2018 study by Peter Enns at Cornell University found that rather than voters choosing a candidate who matched their views on controversies like the Black Lives Matter movement, they actually changed their own views to match those of their preferred candidates. And there is evidence that Trump is continuing to drive some of this — although, perhaps not in the way one might expect. There isn’t evidence, for instance, that his rhetoric has contributed to an uptick in racist and sexist attitudes among white voters; instead, as FiveThirtyEight contributor Matt Grossmann has written, “the evidence shows that liberal-leaning voters moved away from [Trump’s] views faster than conservatives moved toward them.”
=====

Political parties don't lead social change - they reflect it, belatedly. This line from 538 - It is, of course, hard to identify just one reason the Democratic Party has shifted leftward in recent years, but in my conversations with experts, they all pointed to party elites (both politicians and influential liberal voices online) - is nonsense. Elites? GMAFB. It's akin to blaming the sexual revolution on liberals, which conservatives have tried to do for decades. It wasn't political - it was driven by development of safe, effective birth control, which, in turn, led to no-fault divorce. The information age is having equal or greater impact on social structures and awareness. Opposing social forces include the Outrage machinery exemplified by Rush Limbaugh, FOX News, and others. Those are ostensibly and overtly political, but at heart, they exist to sell conflict and pecker pills - their politics are somewhat fluid within their target market. A trade war seamlessly replaces free trade without disrupting their audience.

Both parties have moved left, abortion notwithstanding. Progress is always to the left. Republicans now broadly accept gay marriage, or at least gay lifestyles. Was that the case in1986?

"As the party becomes less liberal and more leftist authoritarian, they become more comfortable and satisfied." Primary campaign season always features seemingly-radical positions (such as building a wall and forcing another country to pay for it), but I see no basis for the premise in the first clause, nor the conclusion in the second clause. It may be in the eye of the beholder, but it seems highly colonic.

 

[Oddball]

There is no totalitarianism in this country. We are not North Korea. That's just hyperbole.
.

David Koresh, Randy Weaver, and Cliven Bundy were unavailable for comment.

 

[Fueri]

Yeah, I'll agree that both sides profit from the division and feed their base red meat to keep them pissed off. No question, no doubt. The spin machines and propaganda campaigns are running 24/7/365

I cannot agree that both sides' policies are the same. In terms if big govt, new world order stuff, yes. Big $$$ drives that and big money owns every single one of them.

Smaller issues such as gun control, socialization of services (obamacare) etc., no. There are divides there.

And I 100% agree that either side is more than happy to ram their agenda if possible. There is no compromise. There is no collaboration, there is no greater good. There is only demonization of others with an opposing view and a win at all costs mentality, which has resulted in a completely dysfunctional government focused only on gains for the party, which has now infected the population to the point that we are becoming dysfunctional as a society.

We are fucked.

The "collaboration" is a large part of what got us into this mess....One side basically faked being any real opposition, while continuing to allow the Overton window of the body politic to be dragged to the authoritarian left...Both sides participated, as they overwhelmingly agreed when the legislation in question accrued power to themselves at the expense of the rights of the peasants (hello Patriot Act, EPA, Departments of Energy, Education and Faterl....er....Homeland Security)....Any and all pushback was dealt with by browbeating the opposition by claiming that they "are helping the terrorists (or RUSSIA!)", hate education, and/or are racistmisogynisthomophobic cat kickers who hate the cheeeelllldrennnn.

Zero doubt that the political interests serve their own interests first. Totally agree there.

A good deal of the gridlock and bullshit can be explained by this simple fact, IMO.

 

[Oddball]

Yeah, I'll agree that both sides profit from the division and feed their base red meat to keep them pissed off. No question, no doubt. The spin machines and propaganda campaigns are running 24/7/365

I cannot agree that both sides' policies are the same. In terms if big govt, new world order stuff, yes. Big $$$ drives that and big money owns every single one of them.

Smaller issues such as gun control, socialization of services (obamacare) etc., no. There are divides there.

And I 100% agree that either side is more than happy to ram their agenda if possible. There is no compromise. There is no collaboration, there is no greater good. There is only demonization of others with an opposing view and a win at all costs mentality, which has resulted in a completely dysfunctional government focused only on gains for the party, which has now infected the population to the point that we are becoming dysfunctional as a society.

We are fucked.

The "collaboration" is a large part of what got us into this mess....One side basically faked being any real opposition, while continuing to allow the Overton window of the body politic to be dragged to the authoritarian left...Both sides participated, as they overwhelmingly agreed when the legislation in question accrued power to themselves at the expense of the rights of the peasants (hello Patriot Act, EPA, Departments of Energy, Education and Faterl....er....Homeland Security)....Any and all pushback was dealt with by browbeating the opposition by claiming that they "are helping the terrorists (or RUSSIA!)", hate education, and/or are racistmisogynisthomophobic cat kickers who hate the cheeeelllldrennnn.

Zero doubt that the political interests serve their own interests first. Totally agree there.

A good deal of the gridlock and bullshit can be explained by this simple fact, IMO.

Gridlock would have been a better deal than what we've ended up with.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Actually, Obama has said this at least TWICE in public:

April: https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...04-08/obama-warns-democrats-over-leftist-tilt

November: Obama Warns Democratic Candidates Not to Go Too Far Left: “Be Rooted in Reality”

The guy just got out of the freakin' WHITE HOUSE, and the party has ALREADY left him behind.

Does this not illustrate the point?
.

Yeah it does and the reality is the Clinto/Obama Democrats are no longer welcome and being purged from the political party because the Cortez/Sanders Democrats believe the more moderate Democrats are as much of the enemy as the GOP.

Rham Emanuel made it clear when he called them ******* Retarded because it is better to have someone that votes 51% of the time with you than lose complete control...

Unfortunately the left and right are now looking at it as either you support us 110% or you are thy enemy...

Compromise is dead and Obama words falls on blinded eyes and deaf ears...

 

[SAYIT]

It's not exactly a secret that the Democratic Party has clearly moved to the Left over the last generation or two. The only people who appear to disagree with that are the Progressive (Regressive) Left - because, I assume, they merely see the party as coming more in line with their beliefs. As the party becomes less liberal and more leftist authoritarian, they become more comfortable and satisfied.

Unfortunately, many of us who lean Left are watching the party become something with which we can no longer identify, leaving us without a party. And the alternative "major" party has done its own changing, and is currently something that is becoming more and more ugly and vulgar. Personally, I don't think the increasing division is a coincidence as much as it is a reaction.

Interesting cultural & statistical analysis on this by 538: Why The Democrats Have Shifted Left Over The Last 30 Years

=====
This means that the recent uptick in the share of voters holding liberal beliefs is driven not just by the departure of conservative voters, but also by Democrats themselves becoming more liberal. It is, of course, hard to identify just one reason the Democratic Party has shifted leftward in recent years, but in my conversations with experts, they all pointed to party elites (both politicians and influential liberal voices online). Now, some research has found that cues from the parties and party elites are even shaping voters’ personal beliefs, particularly on issues of race and immigration.

But why have so many Democrats moved to the left on these issues? On the one hand, the fact that race and immigration played such a central role in the 2016 election was certainly a contributing factor. A 2018 study by Peter Enns at Cornell University found that rather than voters choosing a candidate who matched their views on controversies like the Black Lives Matter movement, they actually changed their own views to match those of their preferred candidates. And there is evidence that Trump is continuing to drive some of this — although, perhaps not in the way one might expect. There isn’t evidence, for instance, that his rhetoric has contributed to an uptick in racist and sexist attitudes among white voters; instead, as FiveThirtyEight contributor Matt Grossmann has written, “the evidence shows that liberal-leaning voters moved away from [Trump’s] views faster than conservatives moved toward them.”
=====

I didn't leave the Democrat Party (decades ago) … they left me.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The centrist, big business democrats are the most cowardly jellyfish that ever pretended to fight for the common man. They buckled under pressure and made deep comprises at every turn. Only the progressives seem to have any courage or conviction. If the center is so great for America why did they seem to hardly ever accomplish anything for the working person?

You do realize that the Trumpsters say exactly the same kind of thing?

What is your opinion of President Obama going public with his concerns about the trajectory of the party? Don't you think him saying that in public is important?
.

The party has it's problems to be sure but if we are ever to claw back some power from the billionaires the progressives are clearly the ones to lead that fight.

Well, that's what we're getting from both ends. What I don't understand is why both ends think they're going to "beat" the other.
.

I wouldn't be opposed to watching both parties beat each other into oblivion.