Joe Biden is progressive, but

[Hortensis]

13. Might seem so, don't know what notion of "progressive" you're

using, but studies (REAL ones) show the LIBERAL-DOMINATED Democratic Party is ideologically where it was long before then. Liberals have proven overall very stable in ideology and principle, and it'd be very difficult to find a liberal Democrat who does not believe in progressive use of government. Only application varies depending on current situations and what is possible to accomplish.

Our goal for poverty, for instance, has aways been to use progressive government actions, involving both public and private resources, to eliminate it as much as possible by every workable means, including livable wages, home ownership programs, helping those who can work become self sufficient and even prosperous through various means, and support those who cannot sustain themselves. Etcetera and so on and so on.

In just about the period you mention, for just one instance, Democrats have moved Medicaid and other aid requirements increasingly away from the listed disabilities approach that has been the norm for hundreds of years to a simple income-based qualification.

In the 1980s-90s, though, when the nation, including many who'd voted Democratic, swung conservative, we attempted to save aid programs from RW annihilation by hybrid changes to them, such more focus on aid-to-sustainability pathways via training and work programs. In this century the appeal of Republican focus on the negative "weeding out the undeserving mooching off good people" approach dwindled again as the rates of people living in poverty rose, and Democrats resumed our long trend to providing readily-available aid based on income level and other needs.

People may not remember it, but by the time we passed the ACA in 2010, we'd returned to our goal of a simple income-based qualification for programs like Medicaid, which it initially required be made available nationally to all low-income people to buy health insurance.

Unfortunately, in this century, conservatism has gone mostly extreme (moderate conservatism mostly purged), and we're fighting to save all federal aid programs from complete elimination via the hostile far-right SCOTUS supermajority and state attacks. And of course, while they still exist, we're fighting restoration of bureaucratic roadblocks and limitations on safety net programs.

Speaking for myself, I'd take a bunch of temporary steps back if it would relieve the RW pressure to destroy our democracy. But that's a situational change, not ideological. MY liberal ideals and belief in use of progressive government to achieve them haven't changed in 60 years, and I'm pretty typical of the Democratic type.

Nor has my commitment to the representative government of, by and for the people that makes it possible. If that goes, all we do with it for ourselves and others goes too.