Dems who call themselves "centrist"

[OzarkDem]

It appears to be a rather slippery definition, one that's used more often to disagree with another Dem's POV than to actually define a set of values or policies.

Can those who disparage progressive Dems and call themselves more "centrist" help us Dems out a little and give us an idea of what
you define as "centrist" policies?

Iraq

Iran

Domestic Spying

Economic Policy

Health Care Reform

US Job Protection/Minimum Wage

Education

Environment

Let us know what "centrist" policies are in these areas. Thanks in advance for your time and effort.

[ulysses]

1. good luck with that.

The most you're likely to get is a reference to dlc.org.

edit - happy to recommend, though. :)

[OzarkDem]

2. Thanks

I think those who disagree must feel loyal to their positions, but they need to better define them for us if we're going to have a constructive discussion of issues. One has to stand "for" things as well as "against" others.

[ulysses]

3. therein lies the rub.

They don't like to discuss issues.

[TahitiNut]

67. Indeed.

IRL, the folks I've encountered who claim to be "middle of the road" or "centrist" are ill-prepared to discuss socioeconomic issues - usually because they're not well-grounded in the ramifications and impact. The more highly reactive of them are prone to making personal attacks (or forming candidate preferences) on some pretty simplistic and superficial grounds. The less highly-reactive tend to be passive-aggressive. The label "centrist" tends to be political escapism for most or a "go along to get along" approach presumed to attract adherents to the "club." In adopting a claim of being a "moderate" they seem to be trying to unburden themselves of defending any stance and thereby lay claim to some entitlement to allege that others "far right" or "far left" as it suits them. Some even seem to think that they're cozying up to some 'majority' - presuming a mythical 'normal distribution' (or bell-shaped curve) of popular political positions - without considering that the distribution, however one might map it, may be a skewed bimodal or multimodal one.

I am, of course, disinclined to regard such "kiss your sister" labels as useful in any sense - except in being part of some herd without an anchor in principle. I've always believed that unless I have something I'd die for, I don't have anything to live for - if a sat still for everything I'd stand for nothing.

A 'liberal' is one who eschews enforced privilege and values people above property. The distinction between a "democrat" and a "liberal democrat" is that the latter rejects the notion that the human rights and civil liberties of everyone are not "fair game" for abrogation by even a super-majority. In other words, there are boundaries across which 'majority rule' cannot tread. Conservatives favor government-sanctioned privilege ("some are more equal than others"). To me, that's an abomination. I cannot countenance any "centrist" position in that regard - no matter how plaintive the wail about "me" or "mine."

[ulysses]

85. well said.

Wonder what that bell curve would look like if the political spectrum were viewed from the proper angle...

[TahitiNut]

90. I suspect, if it were 3-D, it'd look like ...

... a large multcolored mountain to the southwest, a small green mountain to the north east, and an array of foothills scattered from the northwest to the southeast with a cluster of sand dunes in the central plain.

:evilgrin:

[cuke]

113. I remember discussin NAFTA with you uly

that is, until you fled the scene

Anytime you want to discuss the issues, feel free to PM me and I'll join in

[ulysses]

128. ?

I don't recall having fled the scene of a NAFTA discussion. Please - I'm all ears.

[cuke]

134. ?

I'm not sure what you're waiting for.

Basically, you started a thread about NAFTA. I posted a response and we starte to discuss the issue. But the thread died with me waiting for a response from you. I can't search so I can't post a link to it

[ulysses]

137. see 136.

[Name removed]

136. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cuke]

139. Maybe you've forgotten

but keep focusing on the NAFTA thread and forget all about my offer to discuss issues. That's a great way to show how focused on the issues are while posters like me are unwilling to talk about the issues even though I offered to discuss the issues with you

[ulysses]

141. maybe, but I doubt it.

:evilgrin:

[cuke]

143. How about the offer to discuss issues?

Or do you want to ignore how mistaken you were when you said posters like me were unwilling to discuss the issues?

[ulysses]

145. I'm still hung up on this mythological conversation you and I had on NAFTA.

When was that again? You've only been here a month - surely you can tell me the subject line.

[cuke]

That must be due to your burning desire to discuss the issues

[ulysses]

147. nah - call this one a hunch.

:D I'd forgotten how much fun DU is late at night.

[cuke]

150. Nice to see you sticking to the issues

The important one - "me"

[ulysses]

151. right. tell me about that NAFTA discussion we had again?

[cuke]

152. So now you want to talk about NAFTA?

Go ahead

[ulysses]

154. you say we've discussed it already.

You pick up from where we left off. It can't be more than a month ago.

[cuke]

156. Sure

How can we limit trade when our economy depends on trade?

IIRC, that's where we left off

[ulysses]

158. we limit trade all the time.

And unless you were posting under a different name, you and I have never before now had a discussion on NAFTA. :D

[ulysses]

165. gone to bed?

And just as we were getting to the good part.

[cuke]

166. I think I now understand why no one wants to discuss issues with you?

No one likes dictionary flames.

"limiting trade" was in reference to NAFTA, which IIRC, you oppose and want to withdraw from. And saying we do it all the time is not much of an argument. People kill people everyday. I think that should stop

Do you think you can actually discuss the issue?

[ulysses]

167. sure, I can discuss it in some depth.

I've just never discussed it with you.

[cuke]

168. I haven't seen any evidence of that

[ulysses]

169. I haven't seen any evidence that we have.

If it walks like a duck...

[cuke]

170. Certainly not in this thread

Your devotion to the issue is underwhelming me

And you sounded so sincere

[ulysses]

172. your ability to produce evidence that we've ever discussed NAFTA

is underwhelming me. I haven't worried about your sincerity for the last hour, though.

[cuke]

173. Let me know when you have something substantive to post

so I can ignore that too

[ulysses]

174. google is your friend. find our discussion on NAFTA.

[cuke]

175. Here ya go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3607375#3607797

And I'm still waiting for your answer. While I wait, I'll think about whether or not I should have all those posts of yours deleted, since they break the rules

[ulysses]

176. ok, you were right about the thread.

I'm not sure what rule my posts break, but go ahead and alert if you wish.

Yes, I "fled the scene" of that thread in order to go to bed. I work. :shrug: Would you like to continue to theme of Clinton support for free trade agreements?

[cuke]

181. Thank you

That was gracious of you. I would like to discuss but at a llater time. Last night was a rouguh night at casa cuke

[Cha]

182. And like Wellstone said..

"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for, at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."

[Basileus Basileon]

4. I don't think you'll get many answers, but not because "centrists"

are cowards. It's because, well, "centrist" is a very, very broad (and loosely-defined) term.

Iraq? Certainly people who want all troops in America tomorrow hold the "progressive" line, and people who think we should stay "until the job is done" (whatever the hell that means) hold the "conservative" line. What of those who want us out in nine months? Who want us out as benchmarks are met (or as benchmarks are missed?) What of those who want 95% out immediately, but who want trainers and counterterrorism specialists to remain at the pleasure of the Iraqi government? What of those who want troops redeployed to surrounding nations and ready to intervene in case of collapse?

Some of those are centrist, some liberal, some conservative, depending on who you ask--and depending on the reasons for their answer. I would grade someone who wants troops redeployed to surrounding nations to see if a Darfur-style genocide occurs and prevent it if it does to be more "liberal" than a person who wants them there to threaten Iran.

Asking for a "centrist" position on anything is simply too vague.

[mike_c]

7. ambiguous much...?

Perhaps we could arrive at those positions by consensus. Rather than try to speak for all centrists, why not lay out YOUR views on those issues. If lots of folks who self identify as "centrists" do that, some general concept of "centrist positions" on those issues might emerge. I'll confess, I'm with the OP on this-- it seems to me that "centrists" spend so much time triangulating and avoiding the issues that one is left without any clear sense of what they stand for other than the cult of personality surrounding the candidates that pander to them and a vague sense that they are kind of republican lite.

[ulysses]

8. the OP didn't ask for a definition of "centrist".

She asked that self-identified centrists help define centrist policies. This should be entirely in the realm of the possible.

[Basileus Basileon]

10. "Let us know what "centrist" policies are in these areas"

Like I said. There are no such things as "centrist" policies. "Centrist," in the broadest possible meaning, really just means "not far-left and not far-right" Even in its narrowest meaning, centrism can only be defined as what it is not.

[ulysses]

11. "There are no such things as "centrist" policies."

No shit...

[Basileus Basileon]

13. There are certainly many policies that some may call centrist. Centrists often hold many policies.

But nobody can sit down and say "these are the centrist policies." It's only slightly more meaningful a statement than "these are the policies held by people with green eyes."

[ulysses]

17. then let them define centrist policy by what it isn't.

With the establishment 22 years ago of the DLC, at least some made it clear that there was a difference between what was liberal and what was not. Let's start there. How do centrists differ in policy from liberals?

[Basileus Basileon]

18. Centrists are generally further to the right.

One might also say they're not as far to the left, depending on one's perspective. The philosophy of "centrism" is usually not an ideology. It is a form of pragmatism.

[ulysses]

22. don't skate away here.

The philosophy of "centrism" is usually not an ideology. It is a form of pragmatism.

Yet you use the terminology of "right" and "left", which has everything to do with ideology. Pragmastism is method - no one gets interested in politics because of method. To say that it (edit - "it" being "centrism") has nothing to do with ideology is a load.

[Basileus Basileon]

26. But it's true. Most "centrists" are not such because

they strongly believe in the Holy Truth of being between the left and the right poles. Rather, they are in part because they believe that compromise allows greater successes than unyielding idealism, and in part because they believe that 'both sides' of an issue each have some merit. The centrist who says "I believe X, Y, and Z because I am a Centrist" is rare indeed.

[ulysses]

29. but in order to compromise,

don't you have to hold, at least, an opinion?

[Basileus Basileon]

30. Oh, sure. And most of them do.

But for them to be the same opinions would be unlikely. I can think of a dozen positions off the top of my head regarding what to do with Iraq, or what to do with health care, or what to do with energy costs. So long as they are not the furthest-left or furthest-right position, would you label them all as "centrist?"

[ulysses]

32. well hell, pick the right issue and I can disagree with some fellow progressives.

Religion is an easy one. I'm not going to hide behind that and say that there is no liberal position upon which one could debate.

Perhaps we could go with the opinion, on a given topic, of the majority of centrists? I'm trying to give you every opportunity here.

[Basileus Basileon]

38. Well, sure, I can give some positions many centrists hold.

Keep in mind these aren't my positions (my personal positions are extremely liberal) but just an estimate of centrist opinion.

Iraq: Out as soon as possible, but definitions of "possible" are varied.

Iran: No war, please. However, an Iranian nuke would be bad. We'll try diplomacy, and worry about war later.

Domestic Spying: Rather not have it. Maybe a bit, if it's only on calls from foreigners to suspected terrorists, and there's a FISA warrant.

Economic Policy: Way way way too many positions here.

Health Care Reform: See above. Agree too few are covered, would like to see gov't step in to negotiate prices, maybe expand coverage somehow.

US Job Protection/Minimum Wage: Protect jobs (but don't cripple ability to compete), raise minimum wage.

Education: Raise funding. Don't raise my taxes. Balancing this is your problem; I'm just a voter.

Environment: I like a clean environment. I'm kind of spooked about Global Warming but don't understand why it's a problem. I pay too much for gas already, so don't do anything there. Maybe make the corporations clean up their act.

[ulysses]

42. that's more qualifiers than positions.

Maybe that's the core of the centrist stance - "this, except..."

[Basileus Basileon]

53. Well, it's reflecting the fact that

there is no Centrist stance. Centrist is just a word used to describe "everything not left or right." I mean, I could write something like this:

Iraq: Get out in eighteen months; redeploy to surrounding nations.

Iran: Airstikes if they're a month from a bomb. Otherwise no war.

Domestic Spying: End it, it makes me feel creepy.

Economic Policy: Raise taxes on wealthy, cut on middle class.

Health Care Reform: I like Hillary's plan.

US Job Protection/Minimum Wage: Raise minimum wage, and some outsourcing is okay, but there should be barriers to keep it from happening too much.

Education: Increase Federal funding, end NCLB.

Environment: More regulations on auto manufacturers, but that's it for now.

That would be the positions of a possible hypothetical centrist. However, I could also write:

Iraq: End the surge, and shrink US forces to just trainers over 12 months.

Iran: No war, no how.

Domestic Spying: Sure, so long as there's oversight.

Economic Policy: Lower taxes across the board. Close corporate tax loopholes.

Health Care Reform: Concentrate on expanding Medicare, Medicaid and S-CHIP funding. Lower military spending to pay for it.

US Job Protection/Minimum Wage: Stop outsourcing entirely. Set Min. Wage to $9.00

Education: Keep things local.

Environment: Cap-and-trade.

This would be a totally different centrist. Both have positions, and would defend them. Both are centrists. Both agree on very little.

[ulysses]

56. so centrists don't stand for anything in particular.

We agree.

[Basileus Basileon]

60. That is the opposite of what I wrote.

I gave you two hypothetical centrists with well-defined, centrist views on individual issues, but who do not agree with each other. Saying "Centrists stand for X" or "Centrists don't stand for anything" are both equally incorrect.

[ulysses]

63. so centrists do stand for something.

What is it?

[Basileus Basileon]

71. Depends on the centrist.

That's really all I can tell you. They're not the monolithic bloc you're so eager to see them as.

[ulysses]

72. so there is no "centrist" demographic in terms of desired outcomes.

That's pretty much what I thought. So why are we pandering to a group that can't even get its shit straight about what it wants?

[Basileus Basileon]

74. Because they can be broken into meaningful subdivisions.

They aren't "a group" There exist, "centrists who want a timetable for withdrawal" and "centrists who want civil unions for gays." These may not be the same people at all. But both are large in number, and pandering to them may win votes. We can disagree on whether this is a good idea.

[ulysses]

75. "meaningful subdivisions"

We're crossing into the realm of wonkish tomfoolery. THIS is why strategist-directed Dems keep earning a reputation for waffling.

[rebecca_herman]

86. I don't really know what the "centrist" ideology is

Just that I seem to be identified as one on tests like political compass (as in, left of center, but not extremely far to the left) and people say to me "you sound centrist, you sound moderate," but I've always felt I'm liberal, but not radical.

[ulysses]

87. you keep mentioning the word "radical".

What do you think "radical" is?

[rebecca_herman]

88. what "radical" is

I tend to think of radical as:

pushing for or favoring extreme, drastic changes, with no compromise, not gradually but immediately. usually with a minority position.

This can be good or bad depending on what is being pushed for obviously. but, I am not really inclined to be radical by nature except in extreme circumstances.

[ulysses]

89. it's late and I'm a little slow tonight -

can you give me an example of an issue and an extreme or drastic change regarding that issue?

[UncleSepp]

58. Wouldn't that be "I am a centrist because I believe X,Y,and Z?"

Really, shouldn't all political expressions go like that? "Because I believe x,y,and z, I am a q"?

[Rosemary2205]

46. How do centrists differ in policy from liberals?

I have yet to find two liberals who agree exactly on anything so that might take some doing.

[ulysses]

48. I was offering Basileus his own line of reasoning.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2255765&mesg_id=2255880

[Lorien]

5. I'd also like to know their positions on social justice

for instance; do women, gays, and minorities deserve equal rights in their eyes, or do they think things are "just fine" and that nothing needs improvement in the area of social justice? Have they ever referred to themselves as a "feminist", or do they think that it's a dirty word?

Since the entire field has shifted dramatically to the right over the past 20 years, I've found that most "centrist" Dems are A.) really traditional Republicans B.) really Libertarians, or C.) come from Red areas or families and are ashamed to stand by their beliefs or call themselves either Progressives or *gasp* "Liberals" because they STILL listen to too much talk radio or Faux news.

[OzarkDem]

There may be a shift

especially as more and more people who voted Republican in the past are leaving their party and seeking to find a place in the Democratic party.

Its natural and normal for Dems to resist a humiliated former Republican from seeking to change the Dem party and attack its members simply because they're too embarrassed and frustrated with the Republican Party.

Of course, on the political side, some seek to switch sides for opportunistic purposes - still holding conservative policy values, but taking advantage of the popularity of Dems over Repubs.

[cali]

6. If you genuninely want answers and you're asking this in a spirit

of good will, I suggest you cut the following phrase from your post:

"Can those who disparage progressive Dems and call themselves more "centrist"

Suggesting that people who disagree with you are "disparaging progressive dems", is hostile language.

And although I don't consider myself a centrist, I'm aware that plenty of people here view me as such. I simply don't care for ideological purists. Here's what I think on the issues you listed:

Iraq: I was always against going into Iraq. I organized and marched against the U.S. invading Iraq. I want U.S. troops out, and the U.N, Iraq's neighbors and other interested countries to work together to help Iraq recover from the damage we've inflicted. I also want a transfusion of aid.

Iran: I do not see Iran as posing any thread. I'm adamently against any hostile action against Iran. I want to see active
diplomacy.

Domestic Spying: I oppose any domestic spying withour warrants. I oppose immunity for the telecoms.

Economic policy: Stronger regulation of big business, increasing taxes on wealthy Americans.

Health care reform: Ideally, single payer.

Trade: I support trade pacts with protections for workers.

Minimum wage: Support raising the minimum wage to a living wage- or close to it.

Education: Get rid of of the ineffective and damaging NCLB. Make college truly affordable. Same with good trade schools.

Environment: A muscular plan to fight climate change, ensure that the poor don't continue to suffer the most from environmental degradation, invest in non-polluting renewable energy, raise fuel standards, invest in public transportation.

[OzarkDem]

9. Those positions sound like others here, ie progressive/ liberal

So where does the disagreement come from? Why do those who label themselves "centrist" criticize others who apparently agree on policy.

Is there some other issue not related to policy or ideology that makes one group attack another?

[cali]

15. Yes. It has to do with disagreement on approach and

disagreement on why we're in the mess we're in. It also has to do with the fact that different people have different sensibilities.

[OzarkDem]

16. That's not much to disagree about

I'm surprised it divides so many people here.

[Basileus Basileon]

20. I've generally been of the opinion

that when people get into an Internet Argument™, the closer they are in policy, the more frantically they look elsewhere for ways to "beat" their opponent. Inaccurate namecalling, out-of-context gotchas, and slurs-by-association are most frequently seen here when you have supporters of two nearly-identical candidates or ideas clashing.

[OzarkDem]

24. Very good point

I agree, and I think that's what we are sometimes seeing with these labels being used.

[cali]

25. but those things are huge

they have to do with psychological makeup.

[OzarkDem]

28. When working to advance a political agenda

I've always agreed with those who support using the smartest, most effective strategies, without compromising the agenda. Perhaps that comes from my background in advocacy and lobbying.

I'm not sure I see what psychology has to do with that, can you explain?

[mzmolly]

61. I'm sorry, you sound liberal to me.

;)

[Truthiness Inspector]

12. I've become a centrist

I don't have all night, but I'll start with your first point: Iraq.

You seem to want to differentiate between "progressive" and "Dem." I think that is part of the problem. Many DEMS gunned for taking Saddam out, even before Bush came into office. And then some of the same Dems gunned for his removal after Bush took office. No wonder we fight so much here. I'm all for PROGRESS but not at the expense of selective amnesia.

[Blue-Jay]

14. I'm not aware of anyone who refers to themselves as a "centrist".

But I see people called that on a daily basis here. Usually it happens when someone says something like:

"Al Gore isn't going to run."
"I'll vote for the Dem nominee, even if it's not Kucinich."
"Impeachment is not a constitutional requirement."
"Nader-voters are not the sharpest knives in the drawer."
"No, those aren't chemtrails."

See? Any of those statements will get someone labeled a "centrist" by the -ahem- more strident members of DU, but that doesn't necessarily make it true.

[OzarkDem]

19. Centrist and moderate are used quite a bit

usually in a response where one is disagreeing with a fellow Dem, as in "well, I don't support (name an issue), I'm a moderate Democrat".

There are actually several threads in the GD forum right now where these claims are made in arguments.

I'm trying to determine whether there is that much disagreement between policies Dems support or if its just a convenient accusation one makes against another when they disagree for other reasons, e.g. candidates, etc.

[Blue-Jay]

21. "convenient accusation...."

That.

[OzarkDem]

23. What do you mean?

"That" what?

Have I done something to personally attack or offend you? I don't think I have and can't understand why you exhibit such hostility towards me.

[Blue-Jay]

37. By "That" I meant to agree with you.

I'm trying to determine whether there is that much disagreement between policies Dems support or if its just a convenient accusation one makes against another when they disagree for other reasons, e.g. candidates, etc. <----- THAT.

I see lots of people throw out the "centrist" or "DLCer" or (gasp) "troll" label when there is a simple disagreement on policy or reasoning. It's especially disheartening to see when the disagreement is on a particularly moot point.

I certainly didn't mean to come off as hostile.

[OzarkDem]

39. Yeah, it becomes a casual label

that some throw at each other, but it sure gets confusing when trying to discuss issues.

[rebecca_herman]

27. Pretty sure I'd be considered a "centrist"

I'm certainly no Republican (ugh). I'm left of center on the majority of issues. But I have a feeling most people here would call my political views centrist. I guess I'm not radical enough? Or the fact I might disagree on a couple of things or not feel as strongly about them? I don't know. I still consider myself a Democrat and I don't think it's possible for everyone on a board this large to agree 100% on everything.

I don't post that much here. I'm a lurker mainly I guess. I find a lot of the topics here really interesting, but I'm just plain bad at debating or at wording political arguments well. Oh well. :(

[OzarkDem]

33. Everyone is welcome here

and hopefully you'll learn something new.

[ulysses]

35. I'm not particularly radical.

In fact, most self-identified radicals would laugh me out of the room in all likelihood. Try me.

Regardless, as Ozark said, you're welcome.

[mzmolly]

50. LOL

an excellent post!

[Breeze54]

31. Aren't "centrists"

fence sitters? Not sure where they belong or where their 'true' heart is?

:dilemma:



fence sitter
n. Informal
One who takes a position of neutrality or indecision, as in a controversial matter.

----

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fence-sitter

1. fence-sitter
6 up, 3 down

(n.) One who is afraid to have an opinion, and rather, simply points out the flaws of what everyone
else is saying. Dislikeable to all. The exceptions are those fence-sitters that really don't give a
shit and make fun of everything, who are liked by all.

[ulysses]

34. "dead armadillos" comes to mind.

:)

[Breeze54]

79. Just like a "Dead Skunk In The Middle of the Road" -- ;-)

Dead Skunk

by Wainwright Loudon


Crossin' the highway late last night
He shoulda looked left and he shoulda looked right
He didn't see the station wagon car
The skunk got squashed and there you are!

You got yer
Dead skunk in the middle of the road
Dead skunk in the middle of the road
You got yer dead skunk in the middle of the road
Stinkin' to high Heaven!

Take a whiff on me, that ain't no rose!
Roll up yer window and hold yer nose
You don't have to look and you don't have to see
'Cause you can feel it in your olfactory

You got yer
Dead skunk in the middle of the road
Dead skunk in the middle of the road
You got yer dead skunk in the middle of the road
Stinkin' to high Heaven!

Yeah you got yer dead cat and you got yer dead dog
On a moonlight night you got yer dead toad frog
Got yer dead rabbit and yer dead raccoon
The blood and the guts they're gonna make you swoon!
You got yer
Dead skunk in the middle of the road
Dead skunk in the middle of the road
You got yer dead skunk in the middle of the road
Stinkin' to high Heaven!

C'mon stink!

You got it!
It's dead, it's in the middle
Dead skunk in the middle!
Dead skunk in the middle of the road
Stinkin' to high heaven!
All over the road, technicolor man!
Oh, you got pollution
It's dead, it's in the middle
And it's stinkin' to high, high Heaven

;)

Dead skunk in the middle of the road,
written & sung by (Loudon Wainwrig)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZG1i9FWZa8

[TahitiNut]

97. 'e ain't dead. 'e's just restin'.

'e's pinin' for the fjords. :shrug:

[OzarkDem]

36. I'd like to give them some credit for their views

I can't believe someone who thinks of themselves as a centrist doesn't have any ideas. But maybe it helps to have some perspective on where one's POV falls along the continuum of popular opinion.

Public opinion on issues has been changing and what was once considered centrist or moderate may not be today.

[mzmolly]

40. Check the platform of most of our candidates.

They identify with the word "centrist."

[ulysses]

41. how so?

I'm not disagreeing, but I'm curious how you would unpack that statement.

[mzmolly]

43. What's to "unpack?"

:hi:

[ulysses]

44. in what ways, specifically, do the platforms of most of our candidates

identify as "centrist"?

[mzmolly]

49. I stated that most of the candidates identify with the word "centrist."

Clinton, Dodd, Biden, Obama etc... all have various issues that they are perhaps centrist on. Take gay marriage for example. Most Dem prez candidates are opposed to "gay marriage," yet open to civil unions. THAT is a centrist position IMO. But, I don't attempt to define others personally. That is what the OP is doing.

[ulysses]

51. so...most of the candidates identify as centrists, yet

we can't define others personally so centrists don't actually stand for any particular thing. Where does that leave most of our candidates?

[mzmolly]

55. I haven't defined them - they have been defined as such HERE.

As for not standing for anything, I think Democrats in general have varied opinions, that's what keeps us from becoming a cult. Given you appear to adhere to the label standard of the OP - let me know where each candidate falls on your personal barometer ie. centrist or liberal.

Thanks, I'll await your rankings.

[ulysses]

62. no problem.

Uly's Personal Barometer of Democratic Positions

Kucinich - Liberal.
Edwards - Centrist by initial makeup, but evolving leftward. Think Dean.
Clinton - Centrist.
Obama - Centrist.
Richardson - Centrist.
Gravel - Libertarian (the fair tax thing).
Biden and Dodd - I'll admit to being unsure.

Fair enough?

[mzmolly]

64. I'd add Biden and Dodd to the centrist category personally.

I agree with most of your assertions, but as an evolving liberal and former Deaniac - I like Edwards evolution. I will add that I consider Kucinich "evolving" as well given his past position on choice.

[ulysses]

66. fair enough.

I like Edwards' evolution as well. My initial placement of Biden and Dodd was in the centrist camp, but I'm keeping an open mind. Point taken re: Kucinich, although I consider the weight of his other positions to make him a firm progressive.

(And yet I've always been firmly pro-choice and have been a clinic escort. Ideologue that I am...)

But back to the issue at hand. Do centrists stand for any damned thing at all?

[mzmolly]

68. I think centrist democrats want essentially the same things as progressives?

Opportunity for all, health coverage for all, educational opportunity for all, etc. but they have a different view of how we get there. That's my opinion anyhow, and it's why I'll vote for our nominee.

I have a better time with remembering what they don't stand for:

Lower taxes on the wealthy - increasing deficits
Increased Presidential Powers
Drowning Government in the proverbial bathtub
"Curing" gay people
Allowing the "private sector" to meet all of our needs
Eliminating the minimum wage - etc...

[ulysses]

69. I don't think they necessarily do.

In the absence of any of them stating what they do want, though, I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.

[mzmolly]

70. cali

has done so above, and given we agree that most Dems are centrists, the various platforms give us an idea.

Peace

[ulysses]

73. "and given we agree that most Dems are centrists"

No. We agree that most of the Dem candidates are centrists, not that most Dems are centrists.

[mzmolly]

76. Most Dem candidates

is what I meant.

[ulysses]

78. a meaningful distinction, no?

[mzmolly]

81. I clarified that in my reply to you, no?

However, I don't know that anyone can claim most Dems are XYZ, without national polling data and a consensus on what specifically entails "centrism."

I'm done diddling here, off to bed. Goodnight. :hi:

[ulysses]

82. that's amusing, since this thread

has been about the attempt to get a consensus on what specifically entails "centrism".

Sleep well.

[mzmolly]

83. Glad I caught you before turning in. I agree it is amusing to try an clarify

what "centrism" is in this thread. Though I'll check back tomorrow and see if you've got it all ironed out for us.

I'll sleep very well, thanks. You too!

[ulysses]

84. would that it was up to me to iron!

I've never claimed centrism, so I'll leave the defining for those who do.

You too!

I plan to, if Chris doesn't wake up at 2 wanting a cookie.

[burythehatchet]

45. Health care reform

A centrist wants Universal health - provide insurance to everybody.

A liberal wants to provide insurance to no one. We want to provide health care to everyone.

[OzarkDem]

52. That's a good distinction

but I'd question if that's even what most Americans want.

[OHdem10]

91. On the Hill, as I listen to C-Span, Centrist are Pro Pro Pro

Business. When the GOP was in charge, if they wanted a bill
passed with some Democrats they went to Centrists to try to
get a few Dems to vote with them.

Concrete example. When Medicare Bill was passed under Republicans,
they worked until they landed 9 or 11) Democrats to join them.

The Democrats often refer to this Bill as a giveaway to Big Business.
Drug Companies etc.


On the trade policies this same thing happened this week.
Centrist can be counted on to down on side of business.

I am not being mean spirted just recalling some things.

[burythehatchet]

94. That's how the corporate virus creeps into governance. That's why lobbying

by these interests and its influence is so harmful

[mzmolly]

47. I call myself a liberal, but I think threads like this are non-productive.

Centrists don't demand that everyone agree on the issues do they? How can one centrist speak for another?

Perhaps list the "non-centrist" position on these issues and ask who agrees with you on every nuance. I doubt you'll find two of us here, who agree on "everything" OD.

[OzarkDem]

54. No one is demanding anyone agree with anything

I think we're just trying to define what are really "centrist" positions on issues and what are just labels people use to either gain support for their position or criticize another.

[mzmolly]

57. Given no two "liberals" agree on every nuance of every issue, how can we demand

"centrists" take a position claiming they represent all centrists. Have you ever been accused of centrism here? Ever been called a "freeper?"

[Malikshah]

59. Ah, Centrists...the libertarians of the left.

This should be interesting.

[alfredo]

65. Maybe the progressives should frame themselves as centrists.

The right has defined us, let us define ourselves.

[B Calm]

77. I think the best description of a democratic centrist is Joe Lieberman.

[cali]

80. How convenient. n/t

[Texasgal]

92. It's none of your business

I'll be voting for Dems in 2008.... need any more information? Sheesh!

[ulysses]

93. well, it *is* a discussion board.

:shrug:

[Texasgal]

95. Sure it is...

Until someone tells you that you don't belong or someone is ranting about getting their "board" back.

Makes it hard to discuss much.

[ulysses]

96. I don't see any of that in the OP.

Discuss away. I'll stay up with you.

[Texasgal]

98. It's not in the OP.

It is in several threads tonite.

I apologize if I wasn't clear.

[ulysses]

99. I know.

I'm serious about the discussion, though. If you want to talk, then let's talk.

[Texasgal]

100. Honestly?

I am afraid to talk about it.

If I do it will degrade into the battle of ideology and will turn into a flame fest.

I feel as though I cannot defend who I am and what I believe here on DU anymore.

I realize that I have made a mistake by even posting in here tonight and opening the proverbial can of worms.

All anyone REALLY needs to know is that I will be voting a Dem ticket in 2008.

I do appreciate your kindness in your response however. Thank you.

Back to *lurking* :hi:

[ulysses]

101. I have no use for that.

It's an anonymous board. The idea that you can't defend who you are here is a little silly. If you don't want to talk about it, fine, but why *did* you post?

[Texasgal]

102. I have no idea why I posted...

Good question.

As far the "afraid" part, I didn't mean literally.

And no... It has become pretty hard to articulate your leanings here if you are not lockstep.

Anyhow, I guess I need to stop posting before I get the "foot in mouth" syndrome.

[IndianaJones]

103. I identify myself as a moderate or centrist, mostly because I wouldn't identify myself as a liberal.

[Breeze54]

104. But HRC says she is a 'liberal'...

so where do you really stand then? :shrug:

Maybe conservative, for reals?

[IndianaJones]

105. anything but a self-styled liberal. Sen. Clinton can describe herself as she sees fit. nt.

[ulysses]

106. why wouldn't you?

[IndianaJones]

107. what is wrong with being a moderate? nt.

[ulysses]

108. nothing. what's wrong with being a liberal?

[IndianaJones]

109. an actual liberal? nothing. nt.

[ulysses]

110. ok, I'll bite.

What's the difference between an "actual" liberal and a...well, I guess a "not-actual" liberal?

[IndianaJones]

111. where they hang out I guess. nt.

[ulysses]

119. that's helpful.

:eyes:

[IndianaJones]

120. thats how I feel too. nt.

[ulysses]

122. then you share the (obvious) sarcastic bent of my previous comment.

Good - I was afraid you might miss it.

[IndianaJones]

124. Believe me, I rarely take the fringe seriously. nt.

[ulysses]

125. so am I included in your definition of the "fringe"?

[IndianaJones]

126. are you? nt.

[ulysses]

127. wow.

You're taking the inability to answer direct questions to new heights. Be proud.

[IndianaJones]

129. I have not interacted with you enough to answer the question. Your dissatisfaction is noted. nt.

[ulysses]

130. LOL!

Y'all are a hoot and a half. :D

[IndianaJones]

132. thanks. nt.

[ulysses]

133. you'll be here all week, right?

:D

[IndianaJones]

135. I tend to get involved in threads that don't interest the left as much. nt.

[ulysses]

138. such as what?

[IndianaJones]

140. sports, guns, stuff like that. nt.

[ulysses]

142. how do those not interest the left?

[IndianaJones]

144. the sports and guns themselves....not banning them. nt.

[ulysses]

146. I like sports and shoot guns on occasion.

Careful here. :D

[IndianaJones]

148. you asked. nt.

[ulysses]

149. and you gave me much of interest.

Thanks!

:rofl:

[IndianaJones]

153. I'll look for you in the sports threads. nt.

[ulysses]

155. I like Oklahoma and the Braves, so you know.

[IndianaJones]

157. Well, I can already see you are not a sports fan. nt.

[ulysses]

159. how so?

Unless you're a Longhorns fan who grew up in Philly...

[IndianaJones]

160. anyone that claims to be a Braves fan cannot like sports. nt.

[ulysses]

161. LOL - like I said, Philly.

:D

[IndianaJones]

163. no, years of TBS. I'm a Yanks fan. nt.

[ulysses]

164. christ, I'm sorry.

Torre to LA, A-Rod probably to LA...yikes.

[Solon]

112. Actually I have a question...

If your positions are actually liberal, but you call yourself a moderate, aren't you lying to yourself?

[IndianaJones]

114. I feel comfortable as a moderate. I think that question is more appropriate...

for all the self-styled liberals here.

[Solon]

116. I'm just curious, because generally labels used inaccurately...

render them meaningless. I could call myself a Fascist if I wanted, but that wouldn't be accurate. As far as my political positions, I call myself a Socialist, which is practically the polar opposite of Fascist. To be frank, I have a problem with people who self style themselves one way, while believing another. Its probably easier to call yourself a Moderate, hell, I'm more "moderate" than, for example, Communists, considering I still believe that the ballot box is the most powerful force for change.

[IndianaJones]

117. I will say that most of the self-styled liberals here are probably to the right of me...

that does not make my chosen descriptor inaccurate though.

[Solon]

121. I don't know if its inaccurate or not, considering I know few of your own positions...

Of course, many positions get labeled as "left", "right", or "middle", but then again, that doesn't make much sense in most cases. Is being for peace, as a general goal, not about any specific war or conflict, a leftist value? I would hope not, I was raised to believe it was a goal for all of humanity, even if not universally believed. Even the most staunch Repukes, even Bush, makes platitudes towards wanting peace, even if he doesn't personally believe it. Of course, actions always speak louder than words.

[IndianaJones]

123. That is a reasonable statement. I am comfortable as a moderate.

I get the feeling that those that claim to be on the left may not be as comfortable with that...and thus with their own footing.

[cuke]

115. No.

Politics is about more than just the issues. Tactics, tone, character, etc also come into play.

I agree with almost every one of DK's policies, but he is definitely not my first pick.

[Solon]

118. Candidates aren't what I'm talking about...

Just because you may "settle" for something less than ideal, doesn't mean you are a moderate, if you have policy positions that are more to the left, you are a leftist of some sort, even if you would settle for the "moderate" positions as a means to an end.

[cuke]

131. I spoke of strategy, tone, etc

I mentioned DK only as an example.

And you don't get to define moderate. I am more moderate than someone who thinks we should only support Single Payer health care right now, even though we both agree that SP is the best solution in the long run

Get it? Ideology is the same (Single payer is best) but strategy and willingness to compromise differs. It's more about strategy than issues and ideology

[book_worm]

162. yeah, but if the polls are believed there are more centrist democrats than liberal democrats.

[havocmom]

171. The 'center' is far right of Barry Goldwater, who, in later life, repented and regretted much

of what he advocated in the 60s.

I live among a population that is almost exclusively GOP, and there are darned few to the right of the DLC 'center'. They scoff at the DLC centerists as not being DEMS at all. When MY neighbors think the DEM 'center' is too far right, the 'center' must be meeting in an old John Birch Society Reading Room!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

177. I'm not exactly a centrist, but I'm probably more so than many DUers.

At least inasmuch as that I'd rather see a policy I think is moderately good and has a good chance of being implemented to one that I think is very good but will lose to a bad one. I don't know if these views are representative of people who regard themselves as "left-wing centrists", but I am one such person and they're my views.


Iraq: Get out. Start soon. Don't rush it once you've started - it's worth trying to leave the country in as unbroken a state as possible. It will go to hell in a handcart as soon as the Americans are gone no matter what, though.

Iran: Don't invade it. Try to make people believe that you may invade it if pushed, because doing so is a valuable diplomatic tool, but even if pushed don't actually invade it. Use diplomatic pressure, sticks and carrots to try and persuade it to abandon its attempts to aquire nuclear weapons, or to frustrate them if it continues.

Domestic Spying: Make sure it can only be done via the legal system. Ensure that the security agencies are not used for political purposes.

Economic Policy: Higher taxes on the rich and very rich; tax cuts for the poor.

Health Care Reform: This is one where what I'd like to see brought in and what I think the Democrats should try and bring in differ widely. I think America should have a European style national health service; I think the Democrats should support government funded health insurance, because it will cost them fewer votes, even though it will be less efficient.

US Job Protection/Minimum Wage: Don't try and use America's economic muscle to force companies to employ Americans in preference to non-Americans; that's morally unjustifiable. Tolerate "outsourcing", but don't encourage it. Cut subsidies to American industries & agriculture and protectionist tariffs on imports - they're some of the primary causes of third-world poverty. Pressure the EU to do the same. Pressure Third World countries to impose somewhat better minimum labour standards. Protecting American labour at the expense of the rich if good; protecting American labour at the expense of the poor in the Third World is bad. The minimum wage is an issue for professional economists where the opinions of lay-people are utterly worthless, but from what I've heard something in the region of $8:00 per hour would be sensible.

Education: Spend much, much more money on it, especially in poor & deprived areas. No ID in schools. Subsidise college education for the poor. Education is the most important responsibility of the state.

Environment: Introduce heavier taxes on pollutants. Spend more money on researching renewable energy sources. Build more nuclear power stations - nuclear fuel disposal is not nearly as bad for the environment as global warming.

[Skidmore]

178. Centrist = status quo = more of the same = nothing happening here =

change? = the economy is doing fine = free trade forever ...

[cgrindley]

179. US politics being so far skewed the the right... centrist would be good

even progressives are not terribly left wing compared to the political perspectives of other countries around the world. Even the Canadian conservative party is further to the left than the Democratic party is here.

[RBInMaine]

180. OK, in a nutshell here you go on them all:

Iraq: 1)"Progressive": Get completely out ASAP, unconditionally.
2)"Conservative": Stay indefinitely with permanent bases and a large troop presence.
3) "Centrist": More gradual but more complete pullout, try to stand up the Iraqis and get a
political reconciliation as soon we can. Residual troops for embassy protection and going
after Al Qeada.

Iran: 1) "Progressive": Back off bigtime. Direct negotiations. Work with UN.
2) "Conservative": Play hardball. Heavy sanctions. Go it alone. Military strikes
completely on the table.
3) "Centrist": Multi-national talks. Some sanctions/pressure. Work with UN. Military
strikes a very last resort.

Domestic Spying: 1) "Progressive": Abolish it.
2) "Conservative": Lots of it.
3) "Centrist": Have it but contain it, oversight it, sunset the laws for mandated
comprehensive review/renewal.

Economic Policy: 1) "Progressive": Heavy corporate regulation and high taxes on the rich and
corporations.
2) "Conservative": Unbridled corporations and low taxes, especially for the rich.
3) "Centrist": Some regulation. Lots of quid pro quo: Corporations do something
good like invest in new plant and equipment, they get tax incentives, etc.
Relatively progressive individual tax system.

Healthcare: 1) "Progressive": Public Universal Single Payer System
2) "Conservative": Private Insurance Companies Entirely
3) "Centrist": Mandated universal coverage delivered through combinations of private
insurance venders and public programs.

US Job Protection: 1) "Progressive": Eliminate NAFTA and all other such trade agreements. Go to bi-
lateral trade agreeements with enforceable labor and environment standards.
Unafraid to use high tariffs to protect US markets/worker.
2) "Conservative": The more NAFTAs the better. Unbridled, fast-track,
pro-corporation, executive-driven trade.
3) "Centrist": NAFTAs but with more legislative oversight, worker-labor rules as
part of it,and sunset provisions.

Education: 1) "Progressive": Heavy investment in public education, especially in poorer areas.
Plenty of government regulation but more flexibility on standards
and more teacher-friendly with ability to try differing curriculum
and instructional strategies. No using public money for private
school choice.
2) "Conservative": Funding attached to high-stakes testing. "Teach the essentials
through traditional methods and curriculum" type orientation. Punish schools that
don't meet standards. Using public vouchers for parochial schools or other private
schools is fine. Competition among schools is good.
3) "Centrist": Have standards that must be met but allow schools to determine how to
get there. If standards aren't met, help but don't punish. Public charter and
magnet school experiments are ok, but no public funds for private schools.

Environment: 1) "Progressive": Tough laws and regulations with tough EPA enforcement. High CAFE
standards. Major investments in alternative energy with incentives to use them.
Yes, global warming does exist and is a crisis.
2) "Conservative": Easy laws and regulations. Corporate-friendly policies. Global
warming is highly questionable.
3) "Centrist": Global warming is a real problem but still needs continued study.
Invest in alternative energy but slower expectations. Tax credit incentives for
green practices. Moderate regulatory approach to try and balance environment with
economy.

Here's some cultural issues:

Abortion: 1) Progressive: Entirely legal, woman's choice, private matter.
2) Conservative: Should be illegal. Tantamount to murder.
3) Centrist: Keep it legal but find ways to reduce the rate. Regulate it.

Guns/Hunting: 1) Progressive: Not big fans of this. Heavy regulation at all levels is fine.
2) Conservative: Hunting is great, guns are great, little or no regulation.
3) Centrist: Guns are ok and so is hunting but regulate it fairly. Don't need to
hunt with uzis.

Religion: 1) Progressive: If you believe in ANY religion fine, just keep it private. If you are
an atheist or agnostic, that's fine too. Those who do believe in Jesus should
practice what he preached: love and peace.
2) Conservative: Christianity is pretty much it and the "right" religion. Tell this to
the world.
3) Centrist: Closer to the Progressive view overall, but don't be afraid to talk about
it if you are religious.

Gays: 1) Progressive: Full civil rights in social arenas and marriage is fine. It's a natural
phenomenon.
2) Conservative: It's an unnatural sin. No full civil rights and gay marriage should be
outlawed in the US Constitution.
3) Centrist: It's a private matter so please keep it so, otherwise what you do is your
business. Almost all civil rights protections although marriage is up to the church.
Civil unions with most civil partnership rights is ok public policy.

The Flag: 1) Progressive: Love America as much as anyone, but have the
Constutional right to burn the flag in protest as a statement against government
policies.
2) Conservative: Flag burning is a sin and should be outlawed in the constitution.
3) Centrist: You have the ultimate right to burn the flag in protest, but centrists
don't like it. The flag is seen as a symbol of the nation, not just the government.
There are better ways to protest.

Immigration: 1) Progressive: Welcome them. Make them legal. Allow many rights and services.
Lots of bi-lingualism.
2) Conservative: Round them up and ship them home. English as the official language.
3) Centrist: Secure the border. Send home the criminals. English is a national
language but not the "official" language. Comprehensive immigration reform. Path
to citizenship for those behaving legally but must pay fines and taxes. Also must
learn Enlish.

* There are indeed CENTRIST, MODERATE positions on issues. They are entirely legitimate. No one can be entirely pigeon-holed. Most people's views are on a spectrum, though generally leaning in one direction or another. I myself am relatively moderate on a number of issues, a bit conservative in a few areas, but lean mostly populist/progressive. I think Edwards is great and support him in the primary.

* Dems MUST be a big-tent party. We must rally around commonalities. Like it or not, there are more independents than D's or R's, and most think of themselves as moderates. Dems have lost elections because we have lost moderates. We need to get them back. We'll do it with a populist economic message combined with more moderate approaches on the cultural issues. Like it or not, that's the reality. So let's stop the infighting and accept that there are some differences among Democrats, but we all share some core values, we need to work TOGETHER to win, and no one can have everything he or she wants. We all have to be willing to compromise to some extent, or no one gets anything at all. We wouldn't have a country in first place without some compromise. Most of all, we are NOT Republicans, and that is ball we must keep out eye on: BEATING Republican's asses good and hard and sending them into minority status for a good long time!