This explains Biden's poll numbers: "the activist left is out of step with most Democrats"

so I was once a so-called moderate - now I am a wild eyed lefty.

graphs of the ideology of Democrats and Republicans over the years. Yes, virtually the entire nation moved strongly to somewhat right during the Reagan era. Many on the left did somewhat and some like me did not at all, but it was a disaster for elected Democrats who needed to represent the demands of their constituencies in order to not be replaced by Republicans. It was bad. Many pundits predicted that liberalism and with it the Democratic Party was dying.

But that was temporary and corrected a couple decades ago now (!), and since then the divisions between liberals and conservatives have only continued to grow. Today virtually the entire left is solidly liberal, with most strongly separated ideologically from conservatives. Something everyone should know right down to their bones these scary days!

The main body of Democrats described in this poll are "moderates" only in the sense of making up the large liberal bloc that overwhelmingly dominates our party.

To their right are the much smaller blocs of Democratic conservatives and crossover voters who might be called centrists or conservatives depending on how much crossover.

And to their left is...the much smaller hostile left who are usually called liberals also but are characterized by extreme righteousness and rejection of other liberals and who usually insist their views alone are those of "the people." Those delusions require all this dishonesty about who Democrats are and what we believe. Most of the zealots who drive these engines always despise the larger group in power no matter the era or policies. Yes, I know, the rhetoric sounds much better, but that's always a big part of why some must oppose even when the goals are the same and even would rather lose everything than join the larger group to achieve them. We saw that in 2016, btw.

Unfortunately, the right finds all this dishonest labeling very useful and is happy to join in attributing the radicalism of fringe groups to the whole Democratic Party.

Maybe go google. I used to post graphs demonstrating ideological reality fairly often and am sure they're still around, perhaps some new ones.

socially liberal, fiscal conservative.

which is what I was trying to get at.

There are sources on the internet to describe it you. Graphs of where liberals fall in the spectrum, what the different groups support, etc.

Individuals can also be far left on one issue, but moderate or even conservative on another.

Which is why I don't pay much attention to such designations but look at the individual's policies. I don't care what someone else calls them.

The far left isn't crazy about Biden. That tells you he's not far left, so at least moderate. To the right of far left.

The far left loves Acasio Cortez. That tells you she's far left, at least in key areas.

But people are more than labels. They can be far left on one issue, but moderate on another.

I consider a moderate Democrat to one who is solidly in the center of the liberal side of the spectrum (the spectrum being from far left to the far right). A conservative Democrat to me would be one is closer to the center line between left and right, but still on the left.

The far left is anti-death penalty, from what I can tell. Some Democrats are okay with the death penalty in certain cases. I'd say that's a moderate position. Or maybe even a conservative one.

Far left position on the environment is that the environment must be protected at all cost, even if it costs us economically. I'd say a moderate position is one that says strong but reasonable steps must be taken, while also protecting the economy. (I fall into the far left category on this issue, although I'm pretty sure others would consider me a moderate overall.)

I think everyone is confused about health care.

I think the far left pretty much approves of Bernie Sanders, wouldn't you say? So whatever his policies are....

Moderates seem to like Biden, so whatever his positions on issues are....

And so on.

I'm one of them.

is like 2 year old kids … they want what they want when the want it with no regard to reality or consequences.

Adults in the room want normalcy, dignity, decorum and diplomacy restored without sacrificing the lives of most of the people.

That’s pretty insulting. What you described is Trump. AOC, Bernie, and Warren plan.

Is full of it. Seriously. Instead of focusing on the win, it is instead of how THEY can win. Instead of focusing on keeping what was gained over years and decades, it is about destroying all of it from within.

Shame to have believed their crap over the last three years. Will not be fooled again.

This is about WINNING, period. Whoever not down with that by which ever candidate comes out on top, can kiss our ***.

To secure a future for generations to come.

Their "principled votes" gave us Trump, and their refusal to vote for the "lesser of two evils" gave us a conservative-leaning Supreme Court.

Or did the Russians? Hillary actually won the vote. Trump won the rigging.

Don't you think Putin can count? If he needed more votes to win the electoral college he would have gotten them. It was the fact that we did not know Russia was playing with the numbers and the propaganda that made it easier for him. And also that Comey letter about Hillary didn't hurt Trump.

That's tin-foil hat rhetoric at best.

Back in the real world: Despite having a larger electorate to work with, Hillary garnered fewer votes than Obama in 2012. That should not have happened. Her platform was the most progressive to date and she was going up against a white supremacist in Trump. That should have been more than enough for Hillary to top Obama's record vote total from 2008, but it wasn't. Too many puritans couldn't be assed to vote, or voted for Johnson and Stein. The result: the shit sandwich we're currently munching on.

Back in the real world voting machines are known to be unreliable and easily hacked. Vote counts are shifted from computers to computers, some of them owned by the GOP and foreign country vendors. Putin went to great lengths, spending $100s of millions through back channel campaign donations to Trump. The GOP has been caught rigging votes and accepting money from Russia. Clear evidence indicates the Russians were attempting to hack the election counts. Some election system vendors are owned by firms with ties to Russian oligarchs.

But we are suppose to believe that despite the Russian advanced computer espionage skills where they actually obtained passwords and codes from US voting officials, despite that the GOP has been caught rigging elections, despite Russia and GOP financiers owning some of the election systems vendors, despite Russia and the GOP working together, despite that we don't allow exit polling (election verification exit poll (EVEP) not media provided surveys done after a vote.) in the US anymore (the only accurate way to determine if elections are fair), despite that our patchy system of vote counting is easily hacked, poorly managed and rarely audited, despite Putin's open willingness to get Trump elected, the Putin Russian mob stopped short of actually manipulating our vote counts.

Yeah, Ok and Trump really didn't invite Putin to hack Hillary's campaign computers and distribute the stolen info through Wikileaks.

A couple of polls showed that she siphoned off just enough votes from Clinton to flip poll results from Clinton ahead, to Trump ahead.

Jill Stein was also connected with the Russians.

Pretty nifty trick they pulled off.

especially white moderates and conservatives.

Scapegoating a small minority of Stein voters ignores the real problems - how do we get white voters to stop voting Republicans in such large majorities, and how do we get more disenfranchised voters to see the value in political participation? Thosee two blocks have much more weight than the 1-2% voting for Stein.

It's a complete fallacy that the left caused the 2016 loss. Liberals voted for Clinton in greater numbers than any other ideological group. Check the exit poll numbers and you'll see.

If normalcy still places us only on a slower road to climate disaster, doesn't propose radical long term planning and monumental diversification of fossil fuel industries, then it is the moderates that are in denial of reality and consequences.
If moderates are mostly interested in what protects their assets without a strong social component to this democracy, then it's more of "plutocracy lite", supporting industries who've automated and cannot provide anything but dead-end mostly low wage service sector jobs.
You've adopted the right wing meme of "they want free stuff" from the rightward shift this whole country has suffered.
It is those very demands that makes for compromise, helps fund education, no not "free" education but funds, not crumbling buildings and crushing student loan debt.
Without the left's demands for distributive policies, I see moderates all too happy with status quo.
I'm getting so tired of the only welcoming party to the left increasingly bashing the left. Thank you Fox News.

If Biden wins with a moderate position, he can always swing left and get stronger measures in place.

If he campaigns on stronger measures today and loses, we lose it all.

This is a game of chess - not craps.

I'm getting really sick and tired of the left-bashing here on DU.
It was never that way till hate media put this into the national conversation.

"If normalcy still places us only on a slower road to climate disaster, doesn't propose radical long term planning and monumental diversification of fossil fuel industries..."

You should then support that premise with objective evidence rather than simplistic allegations and unsupported claims.. Else, "Thank you, Fox News", indeed...

you're in the wrong Party. I'm thinking it's both.

It’s why the Green Party can’t create a coalition in our party and take it over like the tea party did on the right. It’s a good thing in my opinion as it out March to the left is happening at a more gradual rate than the shit show of shock happening on the right. With that said, to the left we are marching.

“Biden is opposing where the center of energy is in the Democratic Party,” said Justice Democrats communications director Waleed Shahid.

Reality: Justice Democrats are opposing where the center of energy is in the Democratic Party.

Thanks for posting this.

It seems to me that the definition is pretty slippery and that it can mean anything one wants it to mean - either an insult or a compliment.

I am FOR Universal Health Care though.

But we want to keep our private health insurance.

sometimes I also ship Fed-Ex over the USPS too (if it is really important).

I want options.

I guess my point is that the labels by themselves don't mean much, at least to me. It's an intellectually lazy way of categorizing a candidate so as to avoid having to analyze their actual positions. So if I consider myself to be a "progressive" voter maybe I can get away with rejecting out of hand any candidate who is labeled (by whom, and why?) as "moderate," or vice-versa. I don't care about moderate vs. progressive; I care about what their actual positions are.

that you must have a low deductible and low max out of pocket. Not everyone is that luckty.

I think that any of those issues would be pretty clear, someone on what I would consider the 'far left' would support them, someone I consider a 'moderate' would not.

We need a moderate candidate who can get votes from all segments of voters.

Not "pie in the sky and the rich will pay for it" type candidates.

Now you could figure that some of those people were conservative enough that they didn't want a woman president.

And some of them probably watched too much FOX news and were brainwashed with anti-Hillary nonsense for over 20 years.

But you gotta admit - that is a lot of people voting for a democratic socialist - in a red state.


Bernie Sanders 335,256 52.5%

Hillary Clinton 303,382 47.5


https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/primaries/indiana

who voted in the primary - compared to about a million Republicans.

I attribute a lot of that to FOX & right-wing radio, etc.

We used to have Democrats as governors, etc. not that long ago.

Since they have open primaries, this is easy to do.

I know many Democrats who voted for Cruz or Trump in the primaries there, and I can imagine a lot of Republicans returned the favor by voting for Sanders.

That's one reason that open primaries can be problematic. The candidate selection can be completely manipulated by voters of the other party.

don't allow cross voting on both sides. In California only Republicans can vote in the Republican primary, and independents can only vote for their party unless they specifically request a different ballot. But they still can't vote for a Republican candidate.

Burnie supporters are famous for not understanding the difference between the two. AOC said "Hillry lost the states Burnie won" Duh.

recalibrate from 2016.

As is evidenced by social media.

It appears that someone else is as big a threat to the GOP and Russia as Hillary was.

divisive and destructive. He's repeating all of his previous errors and maybe even expanding on them.

A lot of good ideas start here and spread to the rest of the country.

Some day they will be labeled moderate as their current positions become law.

I think the activist left mostly understands that they are in the minority in the Democratic Party. But they are a vocal and somewhat influential minority. They are not going to take over the Democratic Party the way that the Tea Party did with the Republicans.

That said, I think that they have had some success in pulling the Democratic Party a little more to the left. Bernie campaigned on Medicare For All, Free College Tuition, $15 Dollar Minimum Wage, etc, etc. At the time, some thought these issues were pie-in-the sky, impractical, not achievable. Now that has changed.

Since these issues have proved successful and popular with a broad swathe of the electorate, there is a sort of progressive populism that is now going on. Now many more mainstream Democrats are adopting these positions. So, the "activist left" might not be taking over the Party, but they are having some influence, making the moderates a little more progressive, and "coloring" the Party a bit more progressive. I do not think that is a such a bad thing.

Link to tweet

Thanks for posting it. Kind of surprising to me that African American and Hispanic Democrats tend to be more moderate than White Democrats. New info to me. I wonder how this breaks down by age demographics? Younger more Progressive/Liberal? Anyway, I notice that you are always good at bringing the science, Gothmog, so thanks again.

African Americans, Hispanics, and the LGBT community has many things in common with some conservative positions. However, they also have "core" issues that are just plain at odds with the republican party.

I've told by friends for some time that POC are more conservative than liberal.

Thank you

policies, they actually fall closer to progressive policies.

I think that many working class people will support any policies that help them, and most so-called progressive policies do. Many of these people are not so much ideological (conservative, moderate, progressive). Yet they often support so-called progressive positions. Popular or mainstream progressivism.

Rather, they are "smartly self-interested". They might call themselves a moderate, but they support positions that will help them and their families. Many of these positions could be called progressive.

So, I agree that there is often a distinction between what people call themselves (moderates, etc) versus what policies they support. There is the label and the actual programs that they want. Most people are not so much ideological but are more self-interested.

I am not sure what you mean by this post. Could you elaborate? What is the reference to Kansas?

But what does it mean?

But:

According to the book, the political discourse of recent decades has dramatically shifted from social and economic equality to the use of "explosive" cultural issues, such as abortion and gay marriage, which are used to redirect anger toward "liberal elites."

Against this backdrop, Frank describes the rise of political conservatism in the social and political landscape of Kansas, which he says espouses economic policies that do not benefit the majority of people in the state.

Frank also claims a bitter divide between 'moderate' and 'conservative' Kansas Republicans (whom he labels "Mods" and "Cons" as an archetype for the future of politics in America, in which fiscal conservatism becomes the universal norm and political war is waged over a handful of hot-button cultural issues.

That clarifies things a bit. I had heard of the book but was not clear on the subject.

LOL............ Glad u r 'supporting' Biden..... looking forward to more 'information' from u !!

open minded. I will support Biden if he gets the nomination.

Biden is doing well, at this time, on account of name recognition.

yet he's a distant second to Biden in most polls.

Ask yourself this: If Biden wasn’t in the race, which of the remaining centrists would be polling above 10%. Hickenlooper? Klobuchar? Bullock?

He will get crushed in SC

progressive I know my age (68) is my wife. Most of the Dems (very few in rural Texas) are just a little left of center. That has changed in the last 30 years. The whole political spectrum has definitely moved to the right. I do think that many in Austin are progressive as are many young people but suburbia and rural America seem to be much more to the right than they did post 60's.

But when I asked her a moderate dem who she is for she said undecided.

🎵 times, they are a changin 🎵

we no need no stinkin activists. Suit yourself.

Democrats are so frustrated because the GOP has collapsed and the Rockefeller Republicans and other "moderate" republicans have joined the democratic party, watering down the influence of the more traditional left leaning democrats.

We can't have a social debate in this country on policy because the GOP is the remnants of a party and only now occupied by the RWNJ's who know little if anything at all. And the democrats aren't supposed to debate each other because "that's how the other side wins".

I want the "conservative democrats" and the former Rockefeller republicans, along with the mythical moderate republicans to return to their party and give us a situation in which both parties are run by reasonable adults. THEN we can have real debates, and create legislation involving real consensus and compromise. Right now we have one party that holds it's breath until they turn blue, and the other that is trying to govern. Which is how we end up with government shutdowns, continuing resolutions, and sequestration.

-Laelth

an attempt to at least compromise and get in step with them.

to dismantle the party and "rebuild it from scratch."

Maybe those who want to dismantle might get a clue that isn't going to happen, and being in step with doesn't mean that they get handed the wheel.

How about a Public Option instead of Medicare for All?

in order to get a winning candidate? Why do we hear this argument the left is somehow more important? Every voter is equally needed. That is what a party is for.

It's called a big tent for that reason.

You would think Bernie would be telling them how important voting for the Democrat is. Otherwise, it looks like our party is just being used as a prop for some of the "activist left," and I only say that because if they are unreachable, then it may be time to challenge their duplicity.

in what they have to say as anyone does. I think Joe Biden appreciates their input as much as anyone's.

-Laelth

Link to tweet

than to be so incremental that major issues are not addressed (i.e. 12 years to address the climate emergency, wealth inequality at pre-Great Depression levels, Citizens United, etc.).

It may be more accurate to say that the majority of Democrats are out of step with the scale of the issues facing us.

Plus, 30%+ of Democrats are in the liberal wing, by these numbers in the OP. And a lot of us are active and motivated, putting the work in beyond our numbers.

The best strategy is to listen and learn from each other, reaching short term goals but always mindful of the need for bold action.