Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
34 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bill Press doesn't want centrist Hillary to be the ONLY candidate (Original Post) Omaha Steve Jul 2014 OP
A centrist would be against big war, big insurance, big oil, big wealth, & the TPP. grahamhgreen Jul 2014 #1
+1 And the surveillance state. woo me with science Jul 2014 #4
That's confusing. LWolf Jul 2014 #10
I get in trouble for this all the time. woo me with science Jul 2014 #11
I like this explanation. LWolf Jul 2014 #13
Yeah, that's the truly maddening part. woo me with science Jul 2014 #15
Exactly. Polling data puts Bernie & Elizabeth in the center, Hillary on the far right. grahamhgreen Jul 2014 #14
+100000 woo me with science Jul 2014 #16
+1 Enthusiast Jul 2014 #20
The DLC absconded with the term leadership their claims to centrism HereSince1628 Jul 2014 #23
"... the claim of being moderate, centrist positions requires a stretching bow-legged stance" woo me with science Jul 2014 #24
Agree. Hillary is no centrist at all. I will stay home if shes my only choice. At least with Katashi_itto Jul 2014 #22
Had enough of Third Way politics; Ready for Elizabeth! InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #26
or Bernie! :) woo me with science Jul 2014 #33
Gotta love Bernie; would be very happy to vote for him also. InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #34
You are right. Enthusiast Jul 2014 #19
I hope not as well davidpdx Jul 2014 #2
Hillary wounded herself during her disasterous book tour; no doubt there are several well-qualified candidates on the sidelines ready to jump in. InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #27
That makes (at least) two of us. nt Buns_of_Fire Jul 2014 #3
Count me in... Stellar Jul 2014 #6
Press is a Great Radio Show earthside Jul 2014 #5
Elizabeth Warren is ok, but I really dislike her being used as some symbol of 'genuine progressives' Bluenorthwest Jul 2014 #7
Naw, she is just a wing of the party, not a symbol of 'genuine progressives' Omaha Steve Jul 2014 #8
Her voting record in the Senate is very progressive. cali Jul 2014 #18
Last thing we need is a Hillary coronation ceremony. I'm guessin she won't run when a serious progressive representing the 99% steps up to the plate. InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #29
There not over unless we produce a candidate betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #31
Of course, you're so right, cuz Hillary's cozying up 2 the interests of Wall Street, rather than Main Street, leaves a major vacuum that, by its very nature, WILL be filled.... InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #32
This message was self-deleted by its author InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #30
As much as I like Hillary, I hope there's 10-12 strong candidates on that stage. conservaphobe Jul 2014 #9
who expects that? bigtree Jul 2014 #12
K&R woo me with science Jul 2014 #17
Kicked and recommended! Enthusiast Jul 2014 #21
Why is anyone even seriously contemplating the thought Beacool Jul 2014 #25
K & R !!! WillyT Jul 2014 #28

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
4. +1 And the surveillance state.
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 08:33 AM
Jul 2014

Third Way policies are much more fascistic than centrist. The corporatism, authoritarian policies, and warmongering she represents do not reflect real "centrism" by any stretch of the imagination.

LWolf

(46,179 posts)
10. That's confusing.
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 10:08 AM
Jul 2014

I know that political labels have no true, fixed meaning, and are used to mean many different things.

To me, though, "centrist" and "centrism" are directly related to neoliberalism, which is exactly what you and the OP are saying it ISN'T.

I guess because I relate "centrism" to Reagan Democrats, to the DLC, to the "New Democrats," which are all branches of the third way.

If you leave all of that out, what IS centrism to you?

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
11. I get in trouble for this all the time.
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 11:09 AM
Jul 2014

I'm not a political scientist, and I appraise the words based on how I believe they are interpreted by average citizens who hear the labels. You're absolutely correct that they are used consistently to describe neoliberal and Third Way politicians. I detest their use, because I think they have popular connotations that actively disguise the true extremism and antidemocratic nature of the policies involved.

"Centrism" to me carries a deliberate connotation of being "in the center"..in other words, not extreme in either direction. Ditto for the word "moderate," which is constantly used to describe Third Way politicians whose policies are anything but moderate in the traditional sense of the word.

Austerity and attacks on safety nets in a country that has already devastated its middle class are opposed by over 80 percent of Americans across party lines, yet these Third Way economic positions are nevertheless described as "centrist," as though they fell in the mainstream of American opinion. Policies coming out of our government now routinely bear little resemblance to what people have repeatedly stated in polls that they want, and neoliberal politicians lie their way through campaigns because they realize how unpopular their positions really are...yet we persist in calling them "centrists."

Secret laws, secret courts, "Kill Lists"/indefinite detention without due process, and mass surveillance in the United States of America are extreme violations of our Constitution and should not be considered "moderate" positions in any sense of the word. They are extreme, even fascistic policies, yet the politicians who espouse them are permitted by us to describe themselves as "moderates."

I think we need to start using the words, "corporatist," "extreme," and even "fascist" to describe what is happening in this country under the corporatist/neoconservative/neoliberal/Third Way agenda. We are witnessing a malignant merger of state and corporations and the active dismantling of important Constitutional protections. The corporate state is pouring our tax dollars into propaganda and marketing for their agenda, and IMO the vast majority of Americans, while aware of their own economic pain, have little understanding of the peril facing our democratic institutions and basic Constitutional protections.

We use words that suggest the current neoliberal and neocon policies are business as usual in America...just another flavor of policies that Americans can trust still fall safely within the boundaries of a democratic, constitutional, representative political system. They are "centrist" or "moderate." But they really aren't...and I think we need to adjust our labels to drive home the seriousness of the crisis we face.




LWolf

(46,179 posts)
13. I like this explanation.
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 11:20 AM
Jul 2014

I spent most of my life considering myself a liberal, simply because I knew I wasn't a conservative as I knew them, so I must be liberal. When I found DU in '02, I discovered that, relatively speaking, I was a moderate. Having spent my entire life in conservative territory, I'd never even heard much of what the left had to say. It was refreshing. Today, 12 years later, I am a radical leftist, way too far left for this board.

Yet my positions on issues haven't changed. It's disheartening to hear neo-liberal and neo-conservative propaganda from those who are supposed to be opponents of those very agendas.

We've allowed them to dictate the conversation. That needs to stop.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
15. Yeah, that's the truly maddening part.
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 02:40 PM
Jul 2014

We haven't changed; they have.

It's like Unilever buying Breyer's ice cream and keeping the popular label but replacing the ice cream with a chemical slurry. They ride into office pretending they stand for the same Democratic values as always and betting that most Americans don't realize that they're a corporate-bankrolled infiltration.

"We've allowed them to dictate the conversation. That needs to stop."

Exactly. We need to be explicit about what they really are, because they are a menace.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
16. +100000
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 03:14 PM
Jul 2014

That's why I love the posters who, when someone says "Oh that politician can't get elected; he/she is far left FRINGE," ask point-blank,

"So what are these policies, exactly, that you consider 'too fringe' to appeal to the people?"

Exposes them every time.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
23. The DLC absconded with the term leadership their claims to centrism
Thu Jul 17, 2014, 08:24 AM
Jul 2014

and moderation were not any different.

They built a marketing model around all those notions, not because the claims were true, but because "Winning IS Everything!" That philosophy, justified 'over-representation' aimed at exploiting the belief that American political sentiment follows a more or less bell-shaped curve...simply because that's where most of the votes were believed to lie.

But

1) The reality is people can recognize centrism, moderation and leadership without the help of media managers, but messaging is intended to bias that process. When a politician or a faction of a party claims ownership to those things by dint of volume and repetition those must be recognized as the acts selling what isn't otherwise in evidence.

2) In the US political opinion is no longer bell shaped with a single mode in the middle. It's become both bi-modal and platykurtic. Increasingly, the claim of being moderate, centrist positions requires a stretching bow-legged stance with feet in both modes. It's an awkward posture from which to deliver governance that serves both modes.








woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
24. "... the claim of being moderate, centrist positions requires a stretching bow-legged stance"
Thu Jul 17, 2014, 09:12 AM
Jul 2014

Yup. Hence all the LYING.

 

Katashi_itto

(10,175 posts)
22. Agree. Hillary is no centrist at all. I will stay home if shes my only choice. At least with
Thu Jul 17, 2014, 07:46 AM
Jul 2014

whatever Republican Caligula that got elected, the country's crash would be spectacular. Not this slow "death by a thousand paper cuts" we are experiencing.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
2. I hope not as well
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 07:44 AM
Jul 2014

The whole Hillary is going to lock it up and there is no one else to run is getting old.

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,122 posts)
27. Hillary wounded herself during her disasterous book tour; no doubt there are several well-qualified candidates on the sidelines ready to jump in.
Thu Jul 17, 2014, 10:23 AM
Jul 2014

Stellar

(5,644 posts)
6. Count me in...
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 08:44 AM
Jul 2014

I don't believe that there should only be just one person in the party running for office. I say may the best (wo)man win.

earthside

(6,960 posts)
5. Press is a Great Radio Show
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 08:40 AM
Jul 2014

Indeed, it maybe the most informative and entertaining progressive talk radio show on the air these days.

He is hyping this Facebook page this morning: https://www.facebook.com/ReadyForWarren

While saying he was for Hillary in 2008 and is still a fan, it seems like Bill Press is like a lot of us progressives -- Elizabeth Warren is talking the talk, walking the walk and is exciting us.

While Warren is out stumping for Democrats, Hillary is out selling her book.
The country needs Warren; we are ready for that kind of leadership.

The last thing Democrats need is an inevitable nominee -- so, yup, for a lot of genuine progressives, this is also about pro-actively moving beyond the tired, establishment, Wall Street 'non-candidacy' of you-know-who.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
7. Elizabeth Warren is ok, but I really dislike her being used as some symbol of 'genuine progressives'
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 09:44 AM
Jul 2014

because her voting record is far more Republican than Democratic and she enthusiastically supported Reagan and Reaganomics, GHW Bush, the anti gay policies of both of them, the horrific and unforgivable apathy those monsters displayed toward the AIDS crisis, she stood with their virulently anti choice positions and with their openly racist rhetoric.
While voting against all decent things and for pure evil, she amassed a fortune, a vast collection of millions of dollars.

So perhaps, maybe she is a progressive now, but she's not any example to anyone, and 'genuine' is a word too far, she has much to explain about her past right wing voting record. Her ballots drip with the blood of innocents.

Until I hear her explain how and why she came to reject all that bigotry and sexism and support for trickle down economics. Simply saying 'I used to be a bloodthirsty anti gay crusader opposed to choice but now I am progressive' will not cut it with me, and I am starting to be disgusted with the people and the Party that ask this of us.
I don't think Straight people are very well informed about this. It's a huge, huge turn off.

Omaha Steve

(99,632 posts)
8. Naw, she is just a wing of the party, not a symbol of 'genuine progressives'
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 09:59 AM
Jul 2014

Hillary has baggage too. So your for Bernie? I'll support Bernie too.





 

cali

(114,904 posts)
18. Her voting record in the Senate is very progressive.
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 06:59 PM
Jul 2014

and how do you know she supported anti-gay policies. One can vote for someone- and no I don't get voting for Reagan- without supporting every position. By your logic, you supported DOMA because you voted for Bill Clinton. It's funny, Hillary as she's gone through her political life has become ever increasingly more conservative, more militaristic and more corporate, whereas Warren has gone in the opposite direction.

You're overplaying your hand.

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,122 posts)
29. Last thing we need is a Hillary coronation ceremony. I'm guessin she won't run when a serious progressive representing the 99% steps up to the plate.
Thu Jul 17, 2014, 10:37 AM
Jul 2014

Thankfully, as history has shown, the days of the Democratic party nominating a corporatist, war hawk are over.

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,122 posts)
32. Of course, you're so right, cuz Hillary's cozying up 2 the interests of Wall Street, rather than Main Street, leaves a major vacuum that, by its very nature, WILL be filled....
Thu Jul 17, 2014, 10:53 AM
Jul 2014

I'm confident that we'll have a number of well-qualified candidates, whose names are already being bandied about, ready to step up at the appropriate time. I for one am ready to hit the pavement, lick envelopes or change the bathroom toilet paper rolls or whatever it takes to keep this country in the hands of the people and not under the control of the corporations.

Response to earthside (Reply #5)

 

conservaphobe

(1,284 posts)
9. As much as I like Hillary, I hope there's 10-12 strong candidates on that stage.
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 10:06 AM
Jul 2014

We'll be better off for it.

bigtree

(85,996 posts)
12. who expects that?
Wed Jul 16, 2014, 11:13 AM
Jul 2014

. . . what kind of statement is that from someone who's been covering politics as long as he has?

It's hyperbolic and absurd. Hillary won't be the only candidate. I can't believe anyone has to say that.

Beacool

(30,247 posts)
25. Why is anyone even seriously contemplating the thought
Thu Jul 17, 2014, 09:29 AM
Jul 2014

that there many not be a Democratic primary?

That's just ludicrous.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Bill Press doesn't want c...