But who/what has slated it as such, and gained control over the word?
If Obama does not follow the majority of those stances he therefore cannot be "progressive". But I am confused to what people actually mean? Can they rightfully disqualify Obama as being progressive?
from dictionary.com
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/progressive1.favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, esp. in political matters: a progressive mayor.
from wikipedia.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProgressivismI won't cite anything specific from there, but it is there to reference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism_in_the_United_StatesThe fourth and current Progressive movement grew out of social activism movements, Naderite and populist left political movements in conjunction with the civil rights, LBGT, women's, and environmental movements of the 1960s-1980s.<6> This exists as a cluster of political, activist, and media organizations ranging in outlook from centrism (eg. Reform Party of the United States of America) to left-liberalism to social democracy (like the Green Party) and sometimes even democratic socialism (like the Socialist Party USA).
Modern issues for "progressives" can include: electoral reform (including proportional representation and fusion candidates), environmental conservation, pollution control and environmentalism, universal health care, abolition of the death penalty, affordable housing, a viable Social Security System, renewable energy, gun control, "smart growth" urban development, a living wage and pro-union policies, among many others.
Looking at all this I don't see how Obama is disqualified as a progressive. It seems a broader term that some people have taken as a strict term based on certain political left-stances.
I really am confused, so can someone just clear it up?