Has the Far Left Taken Over the Democratic Party?

[ScreamingEagle]

I don't deny it. I am a liberal.

Do you deny that you are a fascist?

liberals become fascists.....or haven't you noticed the one in the Oval Office wielding his pen and phone....?

 

[Mac1958]

.

The wingers have taken over both parties.

Unfortunately for the country.

.

Really? When Democrats controlled both houses and the White House, why didn't we get a single payer health care system or at least a public option?

Because that was before the wingers took over. The more pragmatic members of the party evidently decided that public opinion wasn't in their favor, so they chose to avoid the whole topic and instead ran with this pig of a law. A full, comprehensive discussion about single payer may have been interesting, but they just did not yet have the requisite balls.

The wingers came out of the woodwork in the aftermath & controversy of Obama's "you didn't build that" comments. That's when their full-throated defense of, and affection for, government really came out. Elizabeth Warren really got things going, and now we hear the ridiculous "roads, bridges, cops and firemen" straw man that she started whenever the size and scope of government is discussed.

The hard Left is now emboldened, even though most (not all) of them are not yet willing to admit how far they'd like to take us towards a European-style social democracy (although they probably will be soon).

I hope that adequately answers your question.

.

 

[kiwiman127]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8590721-post28.html

It's not a talking point, it's a fact.
Prove me wrong.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Has the Far Left Taken Over the Democratic Party?

Let's ask Joe Liberman.

i think so.....i was a "Blue Dog" in the 80's.....in the first half of the 90's i seen people like Dean,TM,HazelNut,Chris,Jones,Franco moving in......it was time to go....glad i did,look at them now....

 

[Clementine]

I had major concerns about who is in control of the Dem party after seeing the DNC convention videos. The majority of delegates were proud communists, Marxists, socialists and a few terrorist-friendly groups. Just the fact that those groups are attracted to the party is bad news. DNC leaders finally overruled their omission of the word, "GOD" from the platform as well as naming Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel. The boos were deafening when they announced the decision. I doubt very much if they would have overturned that if it hadn't been for so much public pressure after news got out about the radical decisions.

I think many liberals are okay with the radical ideas proposed by communists and anti-Semitic groups.

It's clear that they will go out of their way to protect the image of Muslims and that is fine except when they include terrorists when deciding which groups need protecting. And they continue to bash Christians, which shows a clear bias in how they view religious freedom. While Muslims are exempt from some things, Christians are impugned. Are Muslims okay with gays and abortions? They have a history of being downright cruel to them, yet they aren't afraid to push Christians around by forcing them to cover birth control and such. Christians get bashed far worse just for not wanting to cover birth control than Muslims do for beheading gay people.

Maybe they just expect more from Christians and understand that Muslims are a lost cause when it comes to certain social issues. Who knows, but it sure gets old watching one group belittled for not agreeing with the agenda, while another group can torture, murder and treat women like dogs and the left still has their backs.

 

[Wry Catcher]

This is a great question.

The Reason ObamaCare failed to get the one thing it needed to truly bend the cost curve - The Public Option - was because the Left has a number of moderate, right-leaning Blue Dogs. This also why it capitulated with the Iraq War and Patriot Act, because the party continues to accept members like Joe Lieberman, who was allowed to keep his democratic committee assignments. By contrast, do you know what would happen to a Republican who campaigned for the opposition party's presidential nominee? The Koch brothers would drop a brink truck on anyone who does not vote the party line 100%.

So yes, the Left continues to support a much more diverse coalition of centrists, and right leaning members. This was especially true during the Clinton years when the party thumbed its nose at Labor (through NAFTA) and started playing ball with Wall Street.

I wouldn't bother asking the Right about this. They are trained to see all Democrats as Karl Marx. This kind of stupidity neglects actual policies, like the aggressive deregulation pursued by Carter and Clinton, or Obama's first re-nomination of Bernanke, who is an outspoken follower of Milton Friedman.

A very good post, clear, concise and spot on! Thanks.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8590721-post28.html

It's not a talking point, it's a fact.
Prove me wrong.

I proved you wrong by asking you the political makeup of the state congress in Mass. that passed "Romneycare".

It was overwhelmingly democrat, wasn't it?

 

[HelenaHandbag]

.

The wingers have taken over both parties.

Unfortunately for the country.

.

Really? When Democrats controlled both houses and the White House, why didn't we get a single payer health care system or at least a public option?

Because that was before the wingers took over. The more pragmatic members of the party evidently decided that public opinion wasn't in their favor, so they chose to avoid the whole topic and instead ran with this pig of a law. A full, comprehensive discussion about single payer may have been interesting, but they just did not yet have the requisite balls.

The wingers came out of the woodwork in the aftermath & controversy of Obama's "you didn't build that" comments. That's when their full-throated defense of, and affection for, government really came out. Elizabeth Warren really got things going, and now we hear the ridiculous "roads, bridges, cops and firemen" straw man that she started whenever the size and scope of government is discussed.

The hard Left is now emboldened, even though most (not all) of them are not yet willing to admit how far they'd like to take us towards a European-style social democracy (although they probably will be soon).

I hope that adequately answers your question.

.

Meh.

As mentally deficient as leftists are, they're still smart enough to know that they can't get full-on socialism in one fell swoop, so they go for it in pieces and parts.

It's the evolutionary nature of progressivism, rather than the revolutionary method of pure Marxism.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Has the Far Left Taken Over the Democratic Party?

Let's ask Joe Liberman.

And Lieberman is addressed in the article. But it really pales in comparison to what has gone on and what continues to go on within the GOP. Correct?

when i left the Dems i looked at the Republicans at that time....i felt they had to much influence of the Religious Right seeping in.....i said fuck both parties,i just voted for the person running....by this Century i just said fuck both Parties.... i only look at non-party people now....

 

[francoHFW]

OP- All Dems are liberals, but Pubs have demonized the term so much many call themselves progressives or whatever...The truth is, and the rest of the world believes, that Dems are cener right and Pubs are savage capitalists and ugly American jerks and their dupes. I concur.

For the billionth time, the USSR, China, Cuba are NOT socialist, they're communist, socialists are always democratic- and btw Spain etc were just fine until the greedy idiot new GOP wrecked the world, hater dupes. PFFFFFT

 

[Harry Dresden]

.

The wingers have taken over both parties.

Unfortunately for the country.

.

you got that right.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

.

The wingers have taken over both parties.

Unfortunately for the country.

.

Don't lump the two together. Please. Think it thru and don't pull a management meeting where you have to blame both equally.

I know that game quite well.

i look at it the same as Mac.....there is one thing i will say about both equally....they both care more about their damned party and power then this Countries well being....

 

[percysunshine]

"Has the Far Left Taken Over the Democratic Party? "

This is a trick question...right?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I just read an interesting piece from The Atlantic Monthly which questions whether like the GOP, there is a "civil war" going on within the Democratic Party between the more extreme versus The Establishment members.
The conclusion was no. At this point, The Establishment Democrats still control the show and that there hasn't been serious attempts with using litmus tests, pledges or purging of it's elected government membership. When purges have been attempted such as Howard Dean's "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" with the goal of having liberals dominate Democratic policies failed.
The reason why a complete take over the the Democratic party have failed is because in pure numbers, liberals don't have the strength. Where as within the GOP, 70% call themselves "conservative". Only 43% of Democrats call themselves liberals.
Below are two charts based on Gallup's polling of both parties. As shown, there is more equal diversity of political position within the Democratic Party, which forces more cohesion among the party leaders.
Discuss.
Link to The Atlantic article: No, Liberals Don't Control the Democratic Party
No, Liberals Don't Control the Democratic Party - Molly Ball - The Atlantic

Correct.

The ‘far left’ and ‘liberals’ were successfully and permanently relegated to the political backseat between 1988 and 1992; that democrats have won four of the last six presidential elections starting in 1992 is proof of that.

The myth that the ‘far left’ or ‘liberals’ have ‘taken over’ the democratic party is a lie contrived and propagated by the partisan right, one of the many lies most conservatives repeat over again in the hope it’s perceived to be ‘true.’

 

[Mac1958]

.

The wingers have taken over both parties.

Unfortunately for the country.

.

Don't lump the two together. Please. Think it thru and don't pull a management meeting where you have to blame both equally.

I know that game quite well.

i look at it the same as Mac.....there is one thing i will say about both equally....they both care more about their damned party and power then this Countries well being....

It's impossible to blame both sides "equally" on anything, nor would I try. Besides, those on both ends will always and predictably blame the other side more, so it seems like a silly waste of time to begin with.

Overall, however, the wingers on both ends are causing this country grave damage, and I personally don't care which is "more" responsible. Both ends should clean their own house before attacking the other.

.

 

[Harry Dresden]

.

The wingers have taken over both parties.

Unfortunately for the country.

.

I have to disagree with you on this Mac. There has been no serious attempt to purge establishment liberals in the primaries at this point. This does not say the the growth of the far left within the Democratic Party hasn't shifted the party more to the left.
On the other hand I will agree with your comment "Unfortunately for the country". It's also interesting that the largest voting bloc in the 2012 election, according to two exit polls were moderates. So while the fastest growing voting bloc is in the middle, both parties are moving in opposite directions to the extreme left and right. That's where I agree that it's unfortunate for the country..

but there are still way too many people who claim they are pissed off or disgusted with their party....but yet still vote for them and the same old shit and then continue bitching about the same old shit afterwards.....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

.

The wingers have taken over both parties.

Unfortunately for the country.

.

Really? When Democrats controlled both houses and the White House, why didn't we get a single payer health care system or at least a public option?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nk_HPs34usU]Congressman John Dingell: "It takes a long time to ... control the people" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Harry Dresden]

Not in the GOP, which is still controlled by its liberal neocon wing.

This country would be fortunate if real right conservatives and libertarians got control of that mess.

I don't understand why you guys haven't gone third party. I just don't understand it at all.

Because the democrats and republicans have rigged the game so that only members of one or the other party have a chance.

Most election cycles, the Libertarian and Constitution parties have to expend considerable capital just getting on the ballots in all 50 states.

the "Rents too High Party" had a hell of a time getting noticed....

 

[francoHFW]

hARRY, THE pUB HEALTH PLAN IS NOT SOCIALISM. i THINK YOU JUST GOT SICK OF mEXICANS, BUT KNEE JERK pUB HATE JUST MADE THE PROBLEM worse...and still does....We need a good SS/WORK ID card to stop more coming end of story...

 

[HelenaHandbag]

I don't understand why you guys haven't gone third party. I just don't understand it at all.

Because the democrats and republicans have rigged the game so that only members of one or the other party have a chance.

Most election cycles, the Libertarian and Constitution parties have to expend considerable capital just getting on the ballots in all 50 states.

the "Rents too High Party" had a hell of a time getting noticed....

Well, he did get noticed, that's for sure. Though not in any way that would get anyone elected.