Where Do I Fit?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
1

Misfits

@pat asked me a question on a Post that had me do some Soul-Searching the past few days.

I wanted to get back to this.
Thank you for asking, @pat .

You hit it on the head for me.

“Democratic Socialist”; Antifa Pseudo-Revolutionaries; people who talk diversity, inclusiveness and free-speech, but deny it to others at every turn; and those people with no understanding of the Constitution, it’s history, and its basis of our Great Republic have zero appeal for me.

Bigots and Racist who hide behind religion and the Flag to justify their actions; who snidely laugh and make jokes about racism, homophobia, and sexism, and deny that they even exist; or deny the importance of understanding and accepting the tragic and long-term ramifications of our Great Republics past; or who see Trump as perhaps the Greatest President the Republic has ever had and President Obama the worst…

They have no appeal for me either.

Any person that I may be “drawn” to support either is getting out of National Politics (Paul Ryan); is limping along (Mitt Romney); or is very ill and/or dying (John McCain/HW Bush)…

I don’t “discuss” abortion publicly or in private.

Does that make me a “Rhino Lover” who is a “Pro-Abortionist in Sheep’s Clothing” (as “kneedragger” suggested a few months ago?)

I’m okay believing what I believe…and I am not one of those people who finds “coolness” or “smugness” in being different…

But I don’t know what I am (from a Political Standpoint).

What I do know is that in today’s Political Environment, I’m a Misfit in the Land of Misfit Toys…

(@pat; @anon71262119; @thunderbolt23…others…I certainly welcome your thoughts…)

3 Likes
2

That’s a big compliment to me Mufasa… To say I made you think and reflect about something means a lot.

My take is to focus on the issues I care about and see to it that vote and write about those to my reps. That’s all I can do.
I never in a million years believed Trump would be president, but here we are and people are drawing lines in the sand.
What I don’t like is people excusing their own bad behavior because Trump exhibits bad behavior.
He shouldn’t but even if he does, it gives us no right to act up.

That’s why I took exception to Maxine Waters calling for the public harassment of WH employees or outward Trump supporters.

The way I see it right now is that our behavior shows we deserve a Trump. Until we act better we don’t deserve better. We got what we deserved.

When we can act better then we’ll get better.
And no I don’t think HRC would have been better. It would be a different kind of bad.
Unfortunately, the good folks like you @Mufasa are caught in the cross fire.

1 Like
3

These far middle centrists…

3 Likes
4

I’m most likely with you, Mufasa.

Unfortunately, people that are intoxicated with their own emotions are being used to define the sides of the political spectrum when really, they are the ones that don’t fit.

4 Likes
5

Me neither. Re: the GOP: Max Boot described the GOP (paraphrasing) as once being a conservative party with an ethno-nationalist fringe but is now an ethno-nationalist party with a conservative fringe. I disagreed with the GOP on lots of studf prior to the Trumpification of the party, but I will confidently say now that, dor certain, I won’t pull the lever for a Republican for at least 10 years, if ever again - not simply because of Trump, but because of the GOP’s and, importantly, the conservative movement’s “beta-male” bootlicking of Trump and the unwillingness to defend its principles. (If anyone doubts this, when was the last time you heard anyone promoting a “constitutional conservative” approach, which was supposed to be the soul of the Right? How quickly did this rock-ribbed belief in the constitutional conservativism - the one, true faithful philosophy we were told - get conveniently shitcanned for a cheap, lazy platform whose sole aim is to insult and hurt Liberal feelings and nothing more? What a damnable group of wimps and liars. But I digress.)

On the other hand, the Democrats have gone full bore into pointless identity politics extremism and have some of most out of touch leaders you could imagine. Democrats should be building a party set to absorb homeless centrists and populist-ish/conservative-ish people with buyer’s remorse on Trump, but instead they’ve gone the opposite direction.

And yet - the “centrists” could govern for a generation, since that is where mainstream governance lies…if only there was a party to promote the views.

3 Likes
6

Yeah, but the crises of all major two party systems (and the establishment parties in multi-party democracies in the West) pretty much prevents this.

What goes on is that you vote for your team (because the other team is supposedly infinitely worse - racists/babykillers/nazis/marxists/take your pick) and you keep fingers crossed that your preferred faction will prevail in the internal power struggle. When this does not happen you console yourself by placing an inordinate amount of belief that upper-tier meek career politicians (the famous “moderates”) will somehow keep the fringe faction in check (they won’t).

But hey, even the fringe of your party is better than them.

EDIT: Naturally not talking about you personally, but about the average voter in what is the current crisis of democracy worldwide.

2 Likes
7

I completely reject the ‘both sides are equally extreme’ premise of the question, because the Democratic Party hasn’t even remotely gone as rogue as the GOP. May I remind you, the GOP elected Donald Trump on a platform of isolation and explicit xenophobia. Further, they continue to support him despite his myriad demonstrations of unsuitability for office, his authoritarian proclivities, and his disastrous policy initiatives both foreign and domestic.

As for the Democrats…ANTIFA? They hate the Democratic Party, and are in no way affiliated with it. Lena Dunham? To what office has she ever been elected? What position does she hold in the Democratic party? As for democratic socialists, I can think of two: one had a failed bid for the Democratic POTUS nomination, and the other has won a House-seat nomination in a low-turnout primary for a district in which the demographics skew heavily toward those of the winning candidate (read: She won largely because she is of Puerto Rican descent, not because she is a ‘socialist’). These are hardly party-defining characteristics.

So to answer your question: Don’t fall prey to the GOP’s ‘they’re just as extreme as we are’ canard, because it flat-out isn’t true. If you consider yourself a centrist, you belong in the Democratic Party.

Edited for clarity

1 Like
8

This should be the case, but isn’t, IMO. Instead of going Big Tent, the Dems have doubled down on a party litmus test with a special (myopic) focus on social issues.

5 Likes
9

Unwise election strategery (ie, an over-reliance on ID politics) is not the same thing as being ‘too extreme’ on policy issues.

10

I don’t disagree, but it’s bigger than that. I get the DNC mailers and emails (RNC, too) - none of the pitch is about mainstream America and wooing centrists. When I think of basic centrists, I think about flyover state libertarians - not the hardcore ideological kind, but the “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” types who don’t match up with Trumpian ethnonationalism and government-by-corruption but who remain skeptical of Democrats after Obama’s social issue cramdown, hostility to business, and indifference to civil liberties. And seeing Nancy and Chuck at the leas isn’t helping.

The Democrats are going to be stuck in neutral with independents/centrists as legit members of the party until they are willing to have such a person in a visible leadership role, in Congress and at the DNC. For now, guys like Manchin are seen as barely tolerable necessary evils to play defense on a red state seat, not party leaders. That attitude has to change before centrists move into the party to stay.

But I do think this - if Democrats do this and make the party truly a center-left party (in that order), they will govern for a generation. I think the Trumpification of the GOP is bad enough to naturally doom that party to minority status for years to come - if, if, the Democrats build for a majority, starting with these mid-terms.

3 Likes
11

(Just to add; I am a registered Independent. One can take that as they wish).

I’m not seeing how you see that as so “clear-cut”, @EyeDentist.

It isn’t.

If Bernie Sanders; with his platform and followers; almost defeats one of the most seasoned Politicians in a Generation; (and maybe WOULD have, if not for the their internal Shenanigans); to me; that…and the “Democratic Socialist” types simply are not a good fit for me.

(And as I stated earlier; neither are the Trumpbulicans).

I’m just not seeing it as “clear-cut” as you are.

4 Likes
12

Probably because ED agrees with the far left ideology.

5 Likes
13

Let me ask you this, @EyeDentist:

In general terms…how do you view:

Nikki Haley
Paul Ryan
Mitt Romney
John McCain
HW Bush

Dems not pushing ID Politics/“Democratic Socialism” (They are there; but I can’t come up with names off hand).

This is a legitimate question; not one just for the sake of argument.

1 Like
14

Do you have particular stances that Bernie wanted to enact that you disagree with? Maybe it would be easier to see where the disconnect is.

15

@pfury;

I tend to look at Political Issues mostly in terms of 1) general, overall Platforms and 2) specific issues (like Health Care; balancing the budget; balancing social and Defense concerns; etc.).

I never get to #2 if #1 had already lost me.

When people are given something free; they don’t value it nearly as much as if they have some real skin in the game. That’s “human” nature, and is not really up for debate.

Sanders lost me at free College Tuition and Free Health Care for all; with no real plan on how to pay for it all.

And that is just a start.

3 Likes
16

…and as @thunderbolt23 stated…the Ethno-nationalistic turn of the GOP is very concerning to me…

1 Like
17

So I completely understand those 2 things turning you off. That being said, he published full plans on who and how he’d be upping taxes to cover it.

https://live-berniesanders-com.pantheonsite.io/issues/medicare-for-all/

I post these just as inidication that he fully had a real plan on how to pay for it, ignoring that his HC numbers ended up being way off when evaluated by liberal think tanks.

18

First off (NOT directed at you, @pfury, because this isn’t something you mentioned); but I HATE the term “Wealth Redistribution”, manly because to the people who tend to use it and HOW they use it).

But to me; “raising taxes” is not “paying for something” .

Now; in some cases both raising taxes AND cutting spending will have to be done to do something like balancing the Federal Budget…but adding greater and greater spending…and “paying” for it by raising taxes (or equally bad, by the pulling funny numbers out of your ass, and saying you will pay from something by “growing the economy”); are just non-starters for me.

2 Likes
19

Agreed

I’m not sure what else it would be

So is that to say you oppose anything and everything that is new to the budget, as opposed to replacing something?

20

No…not as a blanket statement.

Something that has been floated around for YEARS (and never instituted…)…was they idea that AS A MATTER of LAW…“X” tax increases should always be offset by “X plus 1-2” in Spending Cuts".

Maybe a “naive” concept?

But that is the kind of thing that I would support.