Has the Democrat Party gone more left wing/liberal the last 20 yrs?

[ripskater]

I think so. Even the Clintons in the 90's were for strong borders, not Islam apologists and Islamophobia fighters and not pushing the LGBTQ agenda on children that we see today.


And I would say that they are the reason this country is so divided. The Democrat Party has gone so far left on many issues, there is no common ground on some of these.

Even back in the 90's many Democrats could agree that borders should be secure and don't have transgender storytime for children at the library.


Anyway, Yes or No, and explain your answer.

 

[zebby23]

When it comes to rip making threads.

 

[Falsedawn]

No. Clinton and the Third Way Democrats moved it right. Obama held that trend. They're a center-right party that just so happens to be a catch all party for anything left wing by virtue of being less right than the alternative.

 

[ChainFlow]

The Democratic Party has very clearly and obviously gone more socially liberal: gay marriage moving from fringe to normal. Immigration going from strong border+deport etc to basically wanting to abolish immigration laws. Other LBGTQ issues becoming primary parts of the platform. A pronounced focus on serious issues like unequal treatment of women in the workplace. So on and so on.

They've also very clearly and obviously moved far to the right on economic issues. Labor and Union support has gone from being a primary pole of the tent to being an afterthought. Open distrust of bankers to appointing them to the cabinet in droves under both Clinton and Obama. The party of FDR would have broken up the banks after the 2008 crisis. We got Obama bailing out the banks instead of the people stuck holding bunk mortgages.. for some reason. Free trade being embraced even if it plainly harms blue collar workers. A disdain for the working class and embrace of the professional/managerial class. Support for Silicon Valley using H1-B visas to suppress tech sector wages. It goes on and on.

The Democrats, starting with Clinton, decided that if they just were somewhere to the left of Republicans, they'd get moderate and leftwing votes by being the default choice for anyone who wasn't a looney. In the process they completely abandoned the principles that made them a real left-wing party, and instead much of the party leadership are just Nixon Republicans who are cool with gay people.

Edit: to be clear, there are still actual left-wingers in the Democratic Party - they just aren't in charge.

 

[emefer]

No. They are further to the right than the last legitimate conservative president Dwight

 

[snakedafunky]

Its hard to say because of what a bad candidate Hillary was. And how crooked the whole 2016 election was handled.
It also depends how you look at things today. I mean LGBT rights, environmental protection aren't left wing issues anymore theses day but center issues.
And if you look at it from an outside view the Democrats are still a party on the right.

 

[Pwent]

yes

-want socialized healthcare
-higher taxes on muh millionayes and billionayes
-more annoying about gun control
-strong borders are racist
-gay marriage
etc.

 

[Pwent]

wait are we doing the thing where we pretend all western european countries are far left and the democrats are right wing in comparison

 

[Possum Jenkins]

No. Clinton and the Third Way Democrats moved it right. Obama held that trend. They're a center-right party that just so happens to be a catch all party for anything left wing by virtue of being less right than the alternative.

Exactly. The entire system moved way, way to the right.

The New Deal was basically a social-democratic program, same with LBJ's Great Society. If this natural trajectory had continued, we'd have had Bernie Sanders' current proposals by the 1980s.

Yet here we are in the tail end of the 2010s and Bernie is a radical that's too idealistic. Fucking unbelievable.

 

[ripskater]

No. Clinton and the Third Way Democrats moved it right. Obama held that trend. They're a center-right party that just so happens to be a catch all party for anything left wing by virtue of being less right than the alternative.

I think Obama went wacko left in his second term with praising Islam, the clock boy invitation to the white house, transgender pushing and his stances and words regarding police.

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

No. Clinton and the Third Way Democrats moved it right. Obama held that trend. They're a center-right party that just so happens to be a catch all party for anything left wing by virtue of being less right than the alternative.

I agree, at least on the presidential level.
Both parties are actually run by con men. The democrats dog whistle a socialist message to their followers but are actually free trade capitalists financed by the banks and big tech.
The republicans dog whistle a white nativist message but are actually open border capitalists financed by banks and big oil.
They are both in bed with Israel, Saudi Arabia and other less than savory allies. They both support wars. They both support mass surveillance.
Obama was a guy that actually grew on me because he sent a big fuck you to Netanyahu and didn't attack Syria and reached a deal with Iran. But these were very small things compared to the whole foreign policy, he still sold a shit load of weapons to the saudis, he still supported their genocidal war in Yemen.

 

[Jim Bob]

No doubt that they have. The Democrat Party has pushed for more government takeover and more involvement in private industries along with further movement away from traditional family values and the traditional family structure.

 

[icecoldvovchanchyn]

The fact that people are saying no is truly mind blowing. Based trolling?

 

[Jim Bob]

Votes for NO are for those left of Lenin!

 

[Falsedawn]

I think Obama went wacko left in his second term with praising Islam, the clock boy invitation to the white house, transgender pushing and his stances and words regarding police.

This is generally why people assert that you have no idea what "left" and "right" actually mean with respect to the political spectrum.

I agree, at least on the presidential level.
Both parties are actually run by con men. The democrats dog whistle a socialist message to their followers but are actually free trade capitalists financed by the banks and big tech.
The republicans dog whistle a white nativist message but are actually open border capitalists financed by banks and big oil.
They are both in bed with Israel, Saudi Arabia and other less than savory allies. They both support wars. They both support mass surveillance.
Obama was a guy that actually grew on me because he sent a big fuck you to Netanyahu and didn't attack Syria and reached a deal with Iran. But these were very small things compared to the whole foreign policy, he still sold a shit load of weapons to the saudis, he still supported their genocidal war in Yemen.

Correctamundo. We don't have a left wing party in this country. We have a center-right party (with a left wing fringe) and a firmly right wing party (with a far right fringe). Somebody mentioned Eisenhower, he'd be considered so far left as to make people blush by today's standards. FDR would basically be a "communist".

 

[RubberGuard5]

This is generally why people assert that you have no idea what "left" and "right" actually mean with respect to the political spectrum.



Correctamundo. We don't have a left wing party in this country. We have a center-right party (with a left wing fringe) and a firmly right wing party (with a far right fringe). Somebody mentioned Eisenhower, he'd be considered so far left as to make people blush by today's standards. FDR would basically be a "communist".

Can you explain the difference between the right and the left? What is the variable that separates them?

 

[Pwent]

In 2008 California, a democrat state, voted to ban gay marriage by popular vote and elected obama

By the end of Obamas presidency, democrats were boycotting states over tranny bathrooms

 

[IDL]

Biggest difference I think is the adoption of NeoMarxist ideology, so the traditional 'sticking up for the working class' is being moved into identity group politics and globalism. Working class is becoming less important to them.

That is in the social arena anyways

 

[Lord_Impaler]

I would say the extremists in both parties, who are often the most visible, have gone further out on each respective side. As far as policies go, I'm not really sure.

 

[Pwent]

Votes for NO are for those left of Lenin!

Can you explain the difference between the right and the left? What is the variable that separates them?

@Falsedawn has unironically recommended the communist manifesto for reading material

While looking for the post, I found this one too

That's actually what drew me to post-scarcity as a concept, then getting into what could actually bring it about. Reading Marx is what actually made me believe it was feasible, though I differ from him in that I believe that it is inevitable. Capitalism does have controls to prevent such a future given that basically every cost has to be justified with some sort of benefit, but we eventually reach the point where the difference in efficiency becomes so stark that it becomes impossible to justify large scale human labor. Ironically, to me, the end game of capitalism is the most prosperous communist society in existence.

I'd take his ideas of what's "far left" with a grain of salt