a new party

[Mac1958]

Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?

Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.

I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.

I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:

• Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
• Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
• Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.

My two cents, anyway.

I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?

That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.

 

[Meister]

Did you bitch when Obama put kids in cages? I bet not.
Paris Climate Agreement? You mean YOU are actually for the redistribution of America's wealth?

Obama didn't have a family separation policy as deterrent. You're thinking of Rump, Miller and Sessions.
It's been fact checked to death Meister.
He did build some of the cages as a temporary solution when there was evidence that the parent was a felon or a kid was in danger.

So your for the 'rent a child' program that was promoted from south of the border, huh?
The reason for the separation was there wasn't any proof of who's child was who's.
Sad about the corruption from Mexico where people were being schooled on how to
beat the system in the US.

Nonsense -"Zero Tolerance" meant ZERO tolerance. They literally ripped breast feeding babies from the teat of their mothers. They then tossed them in a cage with a space blanket and didn't keep track of either the mother or the toddler thus were unable to reconnect hundreds of babies and children. The practice was among the cruelest and most gruesome of this administration.

Nonsense? That's bullshit. What do you suggest, that we take names, give them a court date and release them in the US?
Gruesome and cruelest, huh? nice play on words.

 

[HappyJoy]

Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?

Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.

I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.

I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:

• Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
• Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
• Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.

My two cents, anyway.

I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?

That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.

I just think that each political party presents it's ideas and people vote accordingly. I just don't understand what a moderate party looks like, the infighting would get pretty intense.

 

[DrLove]

Did you bitch when Obama put kids in cages? I bet not.
Paris Climate Agreement? You mean YOU are actually for the redistribution of America's wealth?

Obama didn't have a family separation policy as deterrent. You're thinking of Rump, Miller and Sessions.
It's been fact checked to death Meister.
He did build some of the cages as a temporary solution when there was evidence that the parent was a felon or a kid was in danger.

So your for the 'rent a child' program that was promoted from south of the border, huh?
The reason for the separation was there wasn't any proof of who's child was who's.
Sad about the corruption from Mexico where people were being schooled on how to
beat the system in the US.

Nonsense -"Zero Tolerance" meant ZERO tolerance. They literally ripped breast feeding babies from the teat of their mothers. They then tossed them in a cage with a space blanket and didn't keep track of either the mother or the toddler thus were unable to reconnect hundreds of babies and children. The practice was among the cruelest and most gruesome of this administration.

Nonsense? That's bullshit. What do you suggest, that we take names, give them a court date and release them in the US?
Gruesome and cruelest, huh? nice play on words.

Learn something please ...

Lawyers can't find parents of another 100-plus migrant kids

Last month lawyers ordered to find migrant families separated by the Trump administration said they couldn't find parents for 545 kids. Now they say it's 666.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Billiejeens]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

Stupefying ignorance

 

[Billiejeens]

common sense is farrrr right?

far right is anarchy,,,

It's not

 

[Mac1958]

Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?

Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.

I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.

I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:

• Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
• Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
• Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.

My two cents, anyway.

I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?

That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.

I just think that each political party presents it's ideas and people vote accordingly. I just don't understand what a moderate party looks like, the infighting would get pretty intense.

Could be. But I just voted for Biden even though I have serious and intractable differences with the Dems.

I don't look at either party as being willing to collaborate and innovate, not at all. So one that did would be great, even if I disagreed with it on some issues.

 

[progressive hunter]

common sense is farrrr right?

far right is anarchy,,,

It's not

in america it is,,,

 

[Billiejeens]

democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

You are a moderate to the exact degree that the Pope is nondenominational.

Good Intention -
This Pope might be a bad example.

 

[Billiejeens]

common sense is farrrr right?

far right is anarchy,,,

It's not

in america it is,,,

How so?

 

[BlindBoo]

Radical Moderates will be the end of the Republic.

 

[HappyJoy]

Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?

Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.

I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.

I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:

• Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
• Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
• Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.

My two cents, anyway.

I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?

That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.

I just think that each political party presents it's ideas and people vote accordingly. I just don't understand what a moderate party looks like, the infighting would get pretty intense.

Could be. But I just voted for Biden even though I have serious and intractable differences with the Dems.

I don't look at either party as being willing to collaborate and innovate, not at all. So one that did would be great, even if I disagreed with it on some issues.

Is that really a moderate view? I'm liberal and I could have said the very same thing.

 

[Mac1958]

Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?

Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.

I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.

I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:

• Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
• Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
• Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.

My two cents, anyway.

I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?

That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.

I just think that each political party presents it's ideas and people vote accordingly. I just don't understand what a moderate party looks like, the infighting would get pretty intense.

Could be. But I just voted for Biden even though I have serious and intractable differences with the Dems.

I don't look at either party as being willing to collaborate and innovate, not at all. So one that did would be great, even if I disagreed with it on some issues.

Is that really a moderate view? I'm liberal and I could have said the very same thing.

As I described before, I think there are different definitions of "moderate". So I don't know.

I'd just like an option that offered collaboration and innovation, and not stark tribalism. Just to see how it went.

 

[MaryAnne11]

democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.

How are we going to achieve that when people keep voting for those who only want to obstruct?

An example is the bi- partisan agreement a group of Senators has on the table right now to give temporary relief to millions but one Leader is saying no so they can not bring it to the floor. How do they stop the obstruction of one man?

i usually do not blame one person but our Senate is broken. How can it be stopped?

 

[progressive hunter]

common sense is farrrr right?

far right is anarchy,,,

It's not

in america it is,,,

How so?

thats based on the founders construction of our political system,,

they wanted the least amount of federal government possible and first tried the articles of confederation which was close to anarchy and when that failed they replaced it with the constitution,,

their whole goal was to get as far away from a total governemnt they just left with a king,,

so basically far left is total government and far right is no government with the constitution sitting about dead center,,, this is of course at a federal level,,,

what youre thinking of is one of the many european scales not american,,

 

[Mac1958]

democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.

How are we going to achieve that when people keep voting for those who only want to obstruct?

An example is the bi- partisan agreement a group of Senators has on the table right now to give temporary relief to millions but one Leader is saying no so they can not bring it to the floor. How do they stop the obstruction of one man?

i usually do not blame one person but our Senate is broken. How can it be stopped?

Well, in my weird little pipe dream, a smart and reasonable third party would essentially force the other two parties to grow the hell up, by example.

I also may insane for wishing that.

 

[Billiejeens]

common sense is farrrr right?

far right is anarchy,,,

It's not

in america it is,,,

How so?

thats based on the founders construction of our political system,,

they wanted the least amount of federal government possible and first tried the articles of confederation which was close to anarchy and when that failed they replaced it with the constitution,,

their whole goal was to get as far away from a total governemnt they just left with a king,,

so basically far left is total government and far right is no government with the constitution sitting about dead center,,, this is of course at a federal level,,,

what youre thinking of is one of the many european scales not american,,

I'm not

No government is not far right Government
By definition, it's not.

 

[MaryAnne11]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days.

moderate

dont want civil war
dont want religious laws
laws based on logic, reason and necessity
government out of private life
police do their jobs without killing people in the streets
fair tax system
affordable education
affordable healthcare

limit immigration to people who;
speak enough english to get by
have employment ready for them
will not get goverment handouts

stop the war on pot
all citizens have equal rights and protections

be more small business friendly

As a moderate I agree with your ideas.

Where do we start?

 

[progressive hunter]

common sense is farrrr right?

far right is anarchy,,,

It's not

in america it is,,,

How so?

thats based on the founders construction of our political system,,

they wanted the least amount of federal government possible and first tried the articles of confederation which was close to anarchy and when that failed they replaced it with the constitution,,

their whole goal was to get as far away from a total governemnt they just left with a king,,

so basically far left is total government and far right is no government with the constitution sitting about dead center,,, this is of course at a federal level,,,

what youre thinking of is one of the many european scales not american,,

I'm not

No government is not far right Government
By definition, it's not.

thats why its called anarchy and we dont have that here,,,

I'm talking about the scale not what we have,,

 

[SC Patriot]

democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates

I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.

It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.