Democrats only: Which do you think has done more damage to society?

[darklordoftech]

I'm thinking about the 1980-2002 time frame.

[TML]

The "centrism" which is constantly alluded to has actually allowed right-wingers to gain a great advantage over the past 3-4 decades or so. This is what shifted the Overton window a lot to the right; this window can only be shifted leftward if Democrats run/govern on unapologetic leftism instead of so-called bipartisan centrism.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The "centrism" which is constantly alluded to has actually allowed right-wingers to gain a great advantage over the past 3-4 decades or so. This is what shifted the Overton window a lot to the right; this window can only be shifted leftward if Democrats run/govern on unapologetic leftism instead of so-called bipartisan centrism.

Democrats didnt nominate centrists in 1980, 1984 and 1988 and got obliterated, then in 1992 Clinton ran as a Centrist and won.


Then when he tried to govern as a true liberal for the first two years the Democrats were obliterated in the midterm elections and lost the House for the first time in 40 years to the GOP.


The people didnt want Liberals to win from 1980-2004

[Mr. Smith]

The "centrism" which is constantly alluded to has actually allowed right-wingers to gain a great advantage over the past 3-4 decades or so. This is what shifted the Overton window a lot to the right; this window can only be shifted leftward if Democrats run/govern on unapologetic leftism instead of so-called bipartisan centrism.

Democrats didnt nominate centrists in 1980, 1984 and 1988 and got obliterated, then in 1992 Clinton ran as a Centrist and won.


Then when he tried to govern as a true liberal for the first two years the Democrats were obliterated in the midterm elections and lost the House for the first time in 40 years to the GOP.


The people didnt want Liberals to win from 1980-2004

Dukakis was very much a centrist [so much so that even MH Bill Clinton could appear liberal], Mondale did the silly thing with deficits that no liberal would've, and Carter almost lost nomination for not being liberal enough. John Anderson only got any room at all because Ted Kennedy lost the primary.

Also, Obama lost the House by more in 2010 than Bill in '94 despite the "bipartisan centrist" tack.

[Sumner 1868]

Democrats didnt nominate centrists in 1980, 1984 and 1988

They most certainly did run a centrist in 1980. Carter's whole presidency was basically an experiment for the what later became the DLC. Dukakis was also widely considered a "technocratic" centrist as well, which was part of the argument for nominating him in the first place. As for Mondale, there wasn't really any major issue or theme in his campaign, so ideological terms can't describe his loss. So at least two of these defeats happened with centrist candidates.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Any Democrat not named Jesse Jackson would have won that election.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How on earth did Bill Clinton, who authorized NAFTA, flip-flopped on gays on the military, and proposed a health care plan even more lacking than the ACA govern as a "true liberal"? I suppose talk radio called him that at the time, but that's meaningless.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, if we're going to classify "anti-liberalism" (whatever that means) as a time period, a better one is probably 1968-2008.

[courts]

The "centrism" which is constantly alluded to has actually allowed right-wingers to gain a great advantage over the past 3-4 decades or so. This is what shifted the Overton window a lot to the right; this window can only be shifted leftward if Democrats run/govern on unapologetic leftism instead of so-called bipartisan centrism.

Democrats didnt nominate centrists in 1980, 1984 and 1988 and got obliterated, then in 1992 Clinton ran as a Centrist and won.


Then when he tried to govern as a true liberal for the first two years the Democrats were obliterated in the midterm elections and lost the House for the first time in 40 years to the GOP.


The people didnt want Liberals to win from 1980-2004

Dukakis was very much a centrist [so much so that even MH Bill Clinton could appear liberal], Mondale did the silly thing with deficits that no liberal would've, and Carter almost lost nomination for not being liberal enough. John Anderson only got any room at all because Ted Kennedy lost the primary.

Also, Obama lost the House by more in 2010 than Bill in '94 despite the "bipartisan centrist" tack.

largely agree with this. certainly dukakis tried hard to appeal to suburbanites worried about their taxes

[dw93]

Right wing extremism moved the overton window so far to the right that it birthed the bipartisan centrism that has gripped the Democrats since 1992.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The "centrism" which is constantly alluded to has actually allowed right-wingers to gain a great advantage over the past 3-4 decades or so. This is what shifted the Overton window a lot to the right; this window can only be shifted leftward if Democrats run/govern on unapologetic leftism instead of so-called bipartisan centrism.

Democrats didnt nominate centrists in 1980, 1984 and 1988 and got obliterated, then in 1992 Clinton ran as a Centrist and won.


Then when he tried to govern as a true liberal for the first two years the Democrats were obliterated in the midterm elections and lost the House for the first time in 40 years to the GOP.


The people didnt want Liberals to win from 1980-2004

Dukakis was very much a centrist [so much so that even MH Bill Clinton could appear liberal], Mondale did the silly thing with deficits that no liberal would've, and Carter almost lost nomination for not being liberal enough. John Anderson only got any room at all because Ted Kennedy lost the primary.

Also, Obama lost the House by more in 2010 than Bill in '94 despite the "bipartisan centrist" tack.

LMAO at Dukakis being a centrist , he proudly called him self a liberal and most of the American people believed he was. Clinton was perceived as a Centrist and in 92 he called for Welfare Reform and many other conservative policies.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Then when he tried to govern as a true liberal for the first two years the Democrats were obliterated in the midterm elections and lost the House for the first time in 40 years to the GOP.

How on earth did Bill Clinton, who authorized NAFTA, flip-flopped on gays on the military, and proposed a health care plan even more lacking than the ACA govern as a "true liberal"? I suppose talk radio called him that at the time, but that's meaningless.

[quote]

Hillarycare was easily to the left of Obamacare and Clinton and that was the central part of his presidency during his first two years

[Sumner 1868]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hillarycare was literally created with the intent of assuring there would not be a single-payer program. It included lots of subsidizes for HMO's while cutting Medicare and Medicaid, which puts it even further right than Obamacare. The health insurance companies even initially supported the plan.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2007/november/getting_the_facts_ri.php

[Mr. Smith]

The "centrism" which is constantly alluded to has actually allowed right-wingers to gain a great advantage over the past 3-4 decades or so. This is what shifted the Overton window a lot to the right; this window can only be shifted leftward if Democrats run/govern on unapologetic leftism instead of so-called bipartisan centrism.

Democrats didnt nominate centrists in 1980, 1984 and 1988 and got obliterated, then in 1992 Clinton ran as a Centrist and won.


Then when he tried to govern as a true liberal for the first two years the Democrats were obliterated in the midterm elections and lost the House for the first time in 40 years to the GOP.


The people didnt want Liberals to win from 1980-2004

Dukakis was very much a centrist [so much so that even MH Bill Clinton could appear liberal], Mondale did the silly thing with deficits that no liberal would've, and Carter almost lost nomination for not being liberal enough. John Anderson only got any room at all because Ted Kennedy lost the primary.

Also, Obama lost the House by more in 2010 than Bill in '94 despite the "bipartisan centrist" tack.

LMAO at Dukakis being a centrist , he proudly called him self a liberal and most of the American people believed he was. Clinton was perceived as a Centrist and in 92 he called for Welfare Reform and many other conservative policies.

Nah, no one gave a f^&k what he was until Atwater got in there and saved Bush Sr. If Dukakis had bothered to campaign in a normal fashion, he'd have won. Not by 17, but definitely by a good amount.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The "centrism" which is constantly alluded to has actually allowed right-wingers to gain a great advantage over the past 3-4 decades or so. This is what shifted the Overton window a lot to the right; this window can only be shifted leftward if Democrats run/govern on unapologetic leftism instead of so-called bipartisan centrism.

Democrats didnt nominate centrists in 1980, 1984 and 1988 and got obliterated, then in 1992 Clinton ran as a Centrist and won.


Then when he tried to govern as a true liberal for the first two years the Democrats were obliterated in the midterm elections and lost the House for the first time in 40 years to the GOP.


The people didnt want Liberals to win from 1980-2004

Dukakis was very much a centrist [so much so that even MH Bill Clinton could appear liberal], Mondale did the silly thing with deficits that no liberal would've, and Carter almost lost nomination for not being liberal enough. John Anderson only got any room at all because Ted Kennedy lost the primary.

Also, Obama lost the House by more in 2010 than Bill in '94 despite the "bipartisan centrist" tack.

LMAO at Dukakis being a centrist , he proudly called him self a liberal and most of the American people believed he was. Clinton was perceived as a Centrist and in 92 he called for Welfare Reform and many other conservative policies.

Nah, no one gave a f^&k what he was until Atwater got in there and saved Bush Sr. If Dukakis had bothered to campaign in a normal fashion, he'd have won. Not by 17, but definitely by a good amount.

No he wouldnt have won lol.

The economy and foreign policy situation was too good for him to win, and most believed the US was on the right track. Reagan also left office with sky high approvals so Dukakis wouldnt have won.


Gore would have also won if he ran a half way decent campaign because 2000 was basically the Democrats 1988 in terms of National Environment

[darklordoftech]

Who is or isn't a centrist isn't my point. I'm asking the Democrats of Atlas whether they think GOP dogma or bipartisan policies have done more to harm America and the world.

[President Johnson]

Right-wing extremism is evil and I don't like far-left policies either. Bipartisanship often gets more done and these accomplishments usually last longer. But it requires that neither party is taken over by the extremes, which is a severe problem with the Republican Party today.

The "centrism" which is constantly alluded to has actually allowed right-wingers to gain a great advantage over the past 3-4 decades or so. This is what shifted the Overton window a lot to the right; this window can only be shifted leftward if Democrats run/govern on unapologetic leftism instead of so-called bipartisan centrism.

Democrats didnt nominate centrists in 1980, 1984 and 1988 and got obliterated, then in 1992 Clinton ran as a Centrist and won.


Then when he tried to govern as a true liberal for the first two years the Democrats were obliterated in the midterm elections and lost the House for the first time in 40 years to the GOP.


The people didnt want Liberals to win from 1980-2004

Carter lost regardless, even though he was pretty moderate compared to LBJ, the previous Democratic president. I'd argue that liberal icon Mario Cuomo would have won in 1988 or kept it very close.

[SWE]

Democrats didnt nominate centrists in 1980, 1984 and 1988

Yes they did

[Mr. Smith]

Who is or isn't a centrist isn't my point. I'm asking the Democrats of Atlas whether they think GOP dogma or bipartisan policies have done more to harm America and the world.

Bipartisan centrism isn't inherently bad, but very fragile and defined by an arbitrary middle set by the terms of the prevailing current, to which the far-right's grip on GOP dogma have defined since 1968.

If Dems were unapologetically left and forced the GOP to moderate, bipartisanship wouldn't be a problem.

[All Along The Watchtower]

both/and