General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The inevitable Hillary will lead to President Rand Paul. [View all]2banon
(7,321 posts)Perhaps it may simply be somantics or your definition/pov of how you define (and see) the term Progressive. I may be mis-reading your pov as "anti-progressive" (or not?).
Putting a side for this discussion the historical fact that the Democratic Party was the Jim Crow Party for over a century, in "modern times" let's agree that the Democratic Party was somewhat "progressive" since FDR (albeit dragging it's heels and hindering progress on Racial Equality and Justice matters for decades, until they weren't - oh no wait - nevermind - I'll agree with you that the party isn't "Progressive", at least not to any serious measure except during FDR times, it could be said that Johnson's administration was progressive, certainly during his times, were it not for the Vietnam War, Carter I would contend instituted Progressive policies.. That was about the end of the "Progressive Era"r as far as the way I see things.
Personally, none of these Presidents were Progressive ENOUGH, (not nearly enough) but given the Political Realities of a Crony Capitalist system... well 'enuff said I think.
Currently, it's completely unrecognizable as to be virtually non-existent. If that's your point, I agree.