Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
Carter is before my memories begin and possibly before the phenomenon I'm talking about began. Clinton's campaign did indeed include some moderate/conservative themes along with the mostly liberal ones, but he got 43% of the vote and was handed a "win" by Perot sapping away Bush's votes. Obama campaigned as a liberal, and can only be described as moderate based on how he governed, not how he campaigned, which made him a big disappointment to people who'd voted for him based on what he was supposed to do. Clinton II avoided issues & stances and campaigned on feelingism & platitudes, and couldn't manage better than rough parity against an inept rabid orange baboon. Polls asking about Sanders/Trump have consistently had Sanders doing around 10 points better than Clinton all along. Polls asking about the issues instead of candidates have been consistently showing that liberal stances are what the American people favor by wide margins, including smaller majorities even among Republican voters. And in both of the recent rounds of non-Presidential elections, the Democrats who lost, and lost biggest, were the ones who had campaigned the most by trying to look like Republicans, while those who won and won biggest were the ones who contrasted themselves against Republicans the most by clearly spelling out liberal stances on the issues; voters who had significant differences to choose among went with the farthest left option they had, and those who had little or no real difference to choose among didn't.
Or, a shorter observation of the same general thing: we all know which party has been gaining the most ground lately and which one has been losing the most lately. Now, which strategy has which side been using? The side that's been actually standing for what they stand for has been winning; the mealy-mouthed group-hug party has been losing.
Hilited: No. Not only did the exit polls show that Perot drew almost equally from both Clinton and Bush, but that the states where Perot did best all went to Bush. Only the West Coast triplets were heavy in Perot support but went Democrat. But CA hasn't gone Republican since '88 , WA '84, and I'm not sure about OR.
Clinton was part of the new wave of corporatist moderate-to-conservative Democrats. Obama's proposols, campaign and actions were right in the same ilk. Only in America, where political affiliation is defined on the "logger scale" (where anyone not as RIGHTeous as Robert Welch is considered a lefty) is Barack Obama a liberal or progressive.
You're obviously biased. Coincidence that so many conservatives would like to see the Democratic Party run hard left? I'm sure. Just as they were all sincere in their praise of Bernie Sanders.