Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (480576)	10/3/2021 10:43:24 AM
From: Jamie153	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 540865

The word "conservative" is a misnomer also. There aren't any conservatives in Congress and there haven't been during my entire life. The debt soars under them so calling them what they're not is an insult to my intelligence. As for centrists or whatever they want to call themselves I posted a poll a few minutes ago showing 77% of republicans in WV support the Biden $3.5T plan. So who does Manchin represent? Not the people of WV.

To: koan who wrote (480576)	10/3/2021 2:33:41 PM
From: JohnM	1 Recommendation Recommended By epicure Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 540865

Interesting post, koan. I'm less interested in the labels part of this than the history itself. The one exception would be Gore, who was a fine progressive, but he lost to Bush who played the homophobia card in Ohio. In the binary contrast between "moderates" and "progressives", I wouldn't have called Gore a "progressive". What led you to this conclusion? The only view of which I am aware would be his views on climate change. Well ahead of his time. But can't think of any other. Clinton thought of him as a soulmate. But what did a moderate really mean? Humphrey was a moderate who also supported the Viet Nam war at a time when the progressives were protesting it in the streets in the 60's and brought down LBJ. My take on Humphrey was a bit murkier. I saw him as the liberal/progressive opposition to a moderate based JFK in 1960. In 1968, I thought he would have ended the Vietnam War had he been elected. His support for LBJ's policies was tepid, at best. And he was constantly signaling to the left. Also I alway saw his social policies as being on the liberal side. So what Krugman, who is very smart, is pointing out is that the "Democratic "moderates" sort of married the right wing to win elections, but in the process lost their soul. "Lost their soul" strikes me as a bit harsh. It's clearly possible to hold, in a principled way, so called moderate positions. The classic one is conservative in fiscal matters and liberal in social matters. I disagree vigorously but I don't see how the position can be characterized as without soul.

To: koan who wrote (480576)	10/4/2021 12:11:34 PM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 540865

So what Krugman, who is very smart, is pointing out is that the "Democratic "moderates" sort of married the right wing to win elections, but in the process lost their soul. and you wonder why I find US politics confusing ... Dems are like the Holy Trinity LOL ) not being religious...I am not ... but I was raised Catholic I find the Dems as confusing as the Trinity ,.. BTW at the rate Our Mr. Trudeau is squeezing out the NDP (our left of centre party_ Bernie would qualify as a Liberal up here now... or an NDPer Always a hoot to me when he called a commie LOL I find the Reps a little less confusing ... then again Libertarian and Religious Right as allies does not compute for me either :)