• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Are moderates extinct

Sure with the heretics thing but the GOPs version is anyone not currently kissing Trumps ass. At least the Dems have some ideological heresies.
 
This is the natural result of politics degenerating from "government must do the best for this complex country and its diverse people" into "my political party MUST win power at any cost, regardless of the country and people". The emphasis changes on who is "winning". The latter leaves no space for moderates.
 
Norman Alexander said:
This is the natural result of politics degenerating from "government must do the best for this complex country and its diverse people" into "my political party MUST win power at any cost, regardless of the country and people". The emphasis changes on who is "winning". The latter leaves no space for moderates.
Click to expand...

There is no middle ground. For instance, lets try something here. Anyone can participate.

If you claim to be a "moderate" or a "centrist" tell me one policy you really like that the GOP is actively pursuing, followed by one that the liberals are pursuing. Not something vague like "oh I'm a fiscal conservative and that's why I'm a centrist". I mean like a specific policy that each party has put forward that you genuinely stand behind.
 
plague311 said:
There is no middle ground. For instance, lets try something here. Anyone can participate.

If you claim to be a "moderate" or a "centrist" tell me one policy you really like that the GOP is actively pursuing, followed by one that the liberals are pursuing. Not something vague like "oh I'm a fiscal conservative and that's why I'm a centrist". I mean like a specific policy that each party has put forward that you genuinely stand behind.
Click to expand...
LIBERALS: universal health care
 
Norman Alexander said:
Pre or post Reagan?
Click to expand...

Current. I'm trying to figure out what is considered "moderate" nowadays. If the question is "Are moderates extinct", I'm kind of trying to place where the line for "moderate" would be and what would be "extremist". I don't know what a "moderate" or "centrist" Republican looks like.
 
plague311 said:
Current. I'm trying to figure out what is considered "moderate" nowadays. If the question is "Are moderates extinct", I'm kind of trying to place where the line for "moderate" would be and what would be "extremist". I don't know what a "moderate" or "centrist" Republican looks like.
Click to expand...
Then every politician who is not a Trumpite is a "moderate", because MAGA is just SO far to the right. That includes soft-right and even solidly conservative Republicans. So you can pick and choose any "compassionate conservative" policies you like. They will be moderate in the current climate. So "moderates" are not really extinct at all.
 
bigred said:
Certainly an endangered species at best in this time of extremists. Wondering if there are any others out there as I've found pretty much all family/friends are on one extremist "side" or the other and so impossible to have an objective or even rational discussion about politics with. God forbid you suggest that any liberal (or conservative) idea ever had any merit of any kind ever...it's like blaspheming their holy cause. Sad and scary.
Click to expand...

I have friends who are Democrats, and we have no problem disagreeing about our politics without getting angry or disagreeable. But, I know other people who match the description in your post: it's their way or the highway, and they find it hard to socialize with you if they know you disagree with their politics.

In general, I think that people who limit their news sources to one side or the other are the ones who tend to be dogmatic and extreme. If you get all of your news from left-wing or right-wing sources, you are likely to be polarized and unwilling to seriously consider opposing views.

We see that on this forum quite a bit.
 
No, moderates are still common in the U.S. It's just that the Republicans are so far right now that moderates get characterized as far left in comparison. Hell, Richard Nixon would be lambasted as a pinko Commie by Fox News and OAN for calling on Congress to introduce legislation creating public healthcare. Many people in the middle or near left get categorized as radically partisan for refusing to compromise on issues like women's reproductive rights, or universal healthcare.
 
I'm also not entirely sure what moderate should mean. I think people are using moderate as centrist or basic liberal/libertarian.

To me, moderates favor compromise and incremental change under the current system. Basic liberals are the ones often thought of as moderates today, Democrat or Republican. I think that's what people mean here. If you are a socialist but fairly pragmatic like Bernie Sanders does that still make you extremist? To some people being a socialist is already pretty extreme, but until recently and for most of his career Sanders has worked within the system, befriending mainstream politicians.

If the Trump movement completely took over the country, would militant liberals who want to overturn the system and bring things back to pre-Trump standards be considered not moderate?
 
Venom said:
I'm also not entirely sure what moderate should mean. I think people are using moderate as centrist or basic liberal/libertarian.
Click to expand...

I consider myself moderate, but very clearly not a centrist.

Take gun control. I favor greatly increased regulation of the purchase and ownership of firearms, universal background checks, registration, safe storage, waiting periods, and more. But I also think that we should focus more on handguns than on long guns, because most firearms deaths and injuries are from handguns, that's a clear break with the more liberal side of the gun control movement. I also see nothing wrong with owning multiple guns for hunting and target shooting - within limits (owning multiple hundreds of guns is just plain weird).

Take climate change: I know that the climate is changing, and that we need to reduce carbon emissions asap. But I don't see planting trees as a viable way of pulling carbon from the atmosphere because they often get killed by insects, or wildland fire, or just don't survive period. Oceans and soils make for much better carbon sinks. I also appreciate that worldwide energy consumption can and needs to increase. We are fooling ourselves if we think that people in India or Nigeria or Brazil will never use as much energy per capita as what we in the west use. We need to focus on providing them with non-carbon based energy, including nukes, rather than expecting them not to adopt Air conditioning and refrigerators and personal transportation. And in those ideas I am less far to the left than the people gluing themselves to the Mona Lisa.

I could go on. I kinda bristle at people who can't distinguish "moderate" from "centrist". That's as false of a dichotomy as it gets.
 
Venom said:
I'm also not entirely sure what moderate should mean. I think people are using moderate as centrist or basic liberal/libertarian.
Click to expand...
Waaaay back when I was in school, they taught the political spectrum as being thus, from right-to-left:

[Right Side] Reactionary - Conservative - Moderate - [center point] - Progressive - Liberal - Radical [Left Side]

with each stage away from the center being "more" of its sided quality. Libertarians were placed outside this scale, in the loony bin.

In recent years the right has been using "progressive" to mean "radical", possibly because thanks to 90s slang "radical" just sounds too cool to fight against. And they've been crying-wolf about "liberal" for decades and not making much headway. So they seized "progressive", formerly rightmost segment of the left side, and maligned it to the point of ridiculousness. So I suspect the old terminologies, which made sense, are no longer really applicable in modern times, which do not make sense.

eta: I just realized I could have put Right and Left on the actual right and left sides of the scale, but I didn't think of that. Let's pretend I was thinking "stage left" and "stage right" which is from the actors' POV and thus reversed from how the audience sees it. I'm not stupid. Really!
 
I largely agree with Crescent but owning 100s of guns is no weirder than owning hundreds of ......action figures, hummel figurines, or what not. Folks collect stuff, it's all a bit weird if you ask me but. And the guy that owns hundred of guns isn't really any more dangerous than a guy that owns two guns.

The handgun thing versus long guns is a huge point. Most gun deaths are suicide, almost all hand guns. Most murders, also handguns. Handguns are cheaper and easier to hide than long guns. Cheaper in most cases anyway. They also don't have much use other than killing humans and targets. Some folks need them for vermin but otherwise. We'd reduce gun deaths by up to 90 percent if we could make handguns dispear tomorrow, but everyone focuses on the guns that kill almost nobody.

Edit to add. Tragic monkeys right scale is well, off. First, left is on the right and right is on the left? What's up with that?

Second, nothing conservative about Trump, so the modern American right is radical. Liberal should should be orthognal to progressive. Lots of progressives are quite illiberal. If its going to be on the same access, then liberal should be closer to the center than progressive.

And of course the explanation for why progressive should be the right most part of the left is, idiosyncratic at best.

Then there's libertarians as loons, they also range from moderate to radical.

You must of gone to a very progressive school.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom