What... Exactly, Do Centrists Stand For ??? And Which Founding Father...

[WillyT]

would you consider to be a Centrist???

What happened to the Centrists during the Revolutionary War, and how many of them are remembered fondly throughout history?

It seems to me, that if you stand FOR something, you (by definition) stand AGAINST something else.

So again... what DO Centrists STAND FOR???

:shrug:

[vaberella]

1. I've been wondering what Progressives stand for?!

Centrists are just a whole other ball game. I just know what I stand for and I care not what title others put me in as in Right, Center, Left (Progressive).

[WillyT]

3. "There's nothing in the middle of the road but a yellow line and dead armadillos,"

"There's nothing in the middle of the road but a yellow line and dead armadillos," the Texas humorist and political writer Jim Hightower once famously said.

Just sayin...

:shrug:

Again... what is the Centrist "platform"?

[NYC_SKP]

9. Go find a Centrist, if you can, and ask them. nt

:kick:

[wyldwolf]

31. spectators are on the left and right of the field. The players are in the middle

[Zhade]

42. HAHAHAHAHA!

Yeah, the politically inept and kicked-to-the-curb DLC are the players.

:rofl:

Your time's over, dude. Wishing it weren't so doesn't change that. Even the DLC has admitted they're the minority in this party.

[Alexander]

44. None of these supposed "centrists" want to admit their candidate lost...

Because they'd have to face another truth...

The only reason Bill Clinton (and hence the DLC) won anything was because of Bill's personality.

Take away Clinton's personality and the DLC collapses like a house of cards.

[niceypoo]

69. The primaries rage on, in the minds of few...

...see tagline

[wyldwolf]

49. let's examine your naive post

Most anti-DLCers on DU claim the purpose of the DLC is to "move the party right." You've probably stated it yourself at some point. I always say "yes, right back to the middle." But the process of doing that, which ever version you subscribe to, is through policy. I'm sure you'll agree.

Barack Obama, "dude," has adopted most of the DLC's policy positions. Private social security companion accounts, teacher's merit pay, welfare reform, death penalty, third way stance on abortion, faith-based initiatives, etc. etc.

It was Obama who said:

"It was Bill Clinton's singular contribution that he recognized that the categories of conservative and liberal played to Republican advantage and were inadequate to address our problems.

He understood the falseness of the choices being presented to Americans. He saw that government spending and regulation could serve as vital ingredients and not inhibitors to growth, and how markets and fiscal responsibility could help promote social justice. He recognized that societal and personal responsibility were needed to combat poverty. Clinton's third way went beyond splitting the difference. It tapped into the pragmatic, nonideological attitude of Americans.

By the end of his presidency, his policies enjoyed broad support..."

--- Barack Obama, "The Audacity of Hope"

If the DLC's mission was to "move the party right," they've succeeded spectacularly. You may be proud of the fact we have our first nominee in 16 years that isn't a card-carrying member of the DLC, but that was never what was important, was it? It was the policies you hated and Obama is carrying on the Clinton/Gore/Kerry tradition in that respect.

You like the fact Obama got where he is powered by small donations and not the eeeeevvvviiill corporation dollars? Fine. We still get the same policies because, as Obama said above, third way policies enjoy broad support and Obama will govern for the common good.

You say DLC players are kicked to the curb?

Obama is surrounding himself with Clinton-era advisors, including DLC economist Gene Sperling.

Take a look at his list of likely VPs - Bayh, Nunn, Richardson, Sebelius, even Biden. New Democrats

All the positions and people Zhade leftists hate.

In 2006 the DLC expanded their numbers in the House, winning half of the new seats won. They now enjoy their highest membership in the House since 1992 and look to expand that this year.

15 Senators are DLC members and the three Senate races most likely to flip to the "D" side this year will be won by DLC members - Mark Warner, Tom Udall, and Jean Shaheen.

Doesn't look like my "time's over, dude."

:rofl:

[WillyT]

46. Well... Ya Gotta Admit...

Goldilocks did have a method to her madness.

:shrug:

[NYC_SKP]

4. Categories suck.

Extremists use categories to vilify and divide opponents.

:patriot:

[vaberella]

18. I agree. Which bugs the hell out of me. A lot of people on DU subscribe to the cats though.

You'd think they'd be progressively against it. :D

[vaberella]

19. DP

:(

[NYC_SKP]

2. I fail to see how a productive discussion can emerge from this question.

Labeling or branding or categorizing anything as complex as the human mind and it's political preferences into terms such as, "Centrist", serves little positive purpose, IMHO.

In fact, most attempts to do so are divisive in the end.

DU is pretty strong evidence that "Progressive" can cover a broad range of views, many of them at odds with one another.

Frankly, I think the question is an attempt to challenge the candidate for having taken certain "centrist" positions of late, and I strongly disapprove if this is the case.

I thought we might have one day of positive supportive sentiment toward our candidate.

Sigh.

[WillyT]

8. LOL !!! - I'm Not Challenging The Candidate, I'm Challenging The Voters !!!

Quit being Goldilocks and take a fucking stand!!!

Not you, but the voters.

:shrug:

[NYC_SKP]

13. centristunderground.com, this is not.

But if there are any members who have centrist answers, I look forward to reading them.

These labels are inexact, personal, subjective.

:hi:

[WillyT]

14. Sure... And So Is A Thermometer In Diagnosing A Health Issue...

Yet it's the first thing they stick in your mouth.

Onedit:... or ear, or...

:shrug:

[NYC_SKP]

24. Quantitative versus qualitative data.

One doesn't use a thermometer to measure qualitative data, doing so "dumbs down" the topic.

The Left-Center-Right model has just never worked, except as a tool to mislead or to simplify a matter to the point of meaninglessness.

[WillyT]

25. I Hear Ya... But In A Two-Party System, It Seems To Have Had Some Meaning For Years...

It could be, that we are now cognizant of the intricacies, but we are still left with an either\or choice.

Centrists, and everybody else concerned, will have pretty much a binary choice come November. And no matter how you and I might want to parse it, if we intend to vote, we intend to take a stand.

:hi:

[NYC_SKP]

29. With so much division/variety within each party, however,

it's at the very least challenging to nail down answers unless you are talking about a specific issue.

For example, I expected that DU members would largely be against gun rights and nuclear energy.

After a few posts and polls, and reading threads and checking things out, I learned that I was way off on those two issues.

On other matters we seem to be split closer to 50/50, so I would submit that there is no very very clear general left or right, and thus no center.

Though one could take a series of polls and mathematically find center on a number of issues and create a "profile" for a centrist, but I doubt that many citizens would fit it.

BUT, I like your original point in a big way, that the passionate among us are often not centered on anything but take a principled somewhat extreme position, if that's what you were saying.

[WillyT]

45. That Is Exactly What I'm Saying

:hi:

[NYC_SKP]

50. Cheers!

Take your pick:

:donut:
or
:toast:

:hi:

[anonymous171]

5. Which Founding Father was progressive, or conservative?

I thought they just hated the British.

[WillyT]

10. Yeah... I Don't Remember Any Famous Centrists From Back Then Either

:shrug:

[Quixote1818]

33. It took Ben Franklin a long time to join the Revolution

He supported the British until they humiliated him. He tended to be a moderating force between guys like Jefferson the more radical conservatives in the south. Franklin convinced everyone that slavery would have to be fought later when Jefferson tried to abolish it in the Declaration of Independence. From what I understand the southern plantation owners in the continental congress were not going to sign on then Franklin convinced Jefferson and the others to strike that part out. I don't know if Franklin would be considered a moderate but he understood the importance of compromise for the Revolution to take hold.

[niceypoo]

70. What would have been considered centrist back then?

Can you tell us?

[blogslut]

6. The founding fathers were slave holders who didn't want to pay their taxes

Now, what were you saying about centrists?

[anonymous171]

7. TRUE PROGRESSIVES!

[WillyT]

11. LOL !!!

That's perfect.

:yourock:

[book_worm]

15. well, not all the founding fathers were slave holders and they were

protesting taxation without represetation.

[blogslut]

17. details, details

I thought this was the thread for emotional arguments. ;)

[vaberella]

20. Hahahaha....All day today I've been cracking up by posts.

:rofl:

[WillyT]

23. I'm Trying To Work On My Inner-Progressive

;)

:hi:

[Political Heretic]

26. Most were, and they were all rich white, male landowners who wrote a document that excluded women...

...and said that blacks were only three fifths of a person.

[vaberella]

27. Actually, Blacks were property. Then it was amended ...

with Black men being 3/5ths of the population when they were given the right to vote. That means Black women were still property. ~sigh~

[WillyT]

28. Ah... But Remember... THAT (the 3\5ths part) Was A Compromise...

Couldn't get the Southern Colonies to ratify the Constitution without it.

Remind you of anything???

:shrug:

[Quixote1818]

36. Many of the founders actually tried to abolish slavery in the Declaration of Independence

but the southern plantation owners wouldn't sign on so that part was struck out. The Founders were brought up to believe slavery was normal and women shouldn't vote so it's hard to hold that too much against them. In their intimate writings men like Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Adams etc. were struggling with the treatment of blacks, Native Americans and women but there was only so much they could do in that political climate. Though they didn't impact those problems their personal feelings on such subjects were ahead of their time. One thing they did get right was their understanding of science and the Enlightenment. They understood that reason and not Revelation should determine policy. For that they were WAY, WAY, WAY ahead of there time.

I know it's fun to quote George Carlin on the founders but it wasn't nearly that black and white. The world was coming out of the dark ages and moving into a more enlightened time which profoundly impacted the founding fathers and our constitution.

[Political Heretic]

59. "so it's hard to hold that too much against them"

Um.... no it isn't.

If I was brought up to believe that rape was ok... it still wouldn't be.

I don't like quoting George Carlin.... I like reading honest historians. "The world" wasn't coming out of the dark ages - as far as slavery goes we were more than a bit behind.

They were "struggling" with their treatment of blacks and native Americans? Our treatment of Blacks was violence and oppression on a scale rarely witness, and our treatment of Native Americans was nothing short of a holocaust.

[Thothmes]

57. Exactly which section and paragraph

of the Constitution excludes women.

[Political Heretic]

58. Women were denied the right to vote until the constitution was amended

So yeah... that's excluding women.

[Thothmes]

62. The Constitution did not exclude women from voting

The states and the society in general is what precluded women from voting.

[Political Heretic]

67. The people who wrote the constitution were of the opinion that women did not have equal rights

You can split those hairs all you want. Doesn't change a thing. Of course the constitution was framed amidst a culture and society that reflects its assumptions. That pretty much an obvious truism.

The fact remains, that lest we forget, this country began the foundations of genocide, slavery and inequality, some of which was written right into the very document we hold so sacred.

To me, this isn't some kind of crass attack on America - it is an optimistic reminder that the constitution should be read as a living document - that while the document may have reflected the conventional wisdom at the time, those times change. The story doesn't end with the crafting of the original document. It continues on with some beautiful amendments which reflect our nations journey.

The reason why I so bluntly point things out about the formative years of our country, is because I think it is an extreme danger to romanticize the past - our past. America has not always been right, not has it always been just or pure. But it has been a nation that has struggled to maintain certain ideals and that has striven both moral and social progress. Both of those realities are true, and there is no contradiction.

When people start blindly praising the "olden days" of America without any appropriate understanding or acknowledgment of the darkness of American history that parallels the light - then we are in danger of losing our social memory, losing lessons of history, and losing our way forward as a country.

[Quixote1818]

35. Delete. Wrong spot. nt

[Runcible Spoon]

12. all centrism does is mainstream neoliberal capitalism

by diluting the sting with fairly liberal stances on domestic social issues. That's all they exist to do, and it's working. Just as you will never see a presidential candidate who is an atheist, you will never see one who will fully dismantle NAFTA.

[stimbox]

16. Ding, Ding, Ding!!! We have a winner.

I would add we will never see one who will fully withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan.

[LWolf]

30. You nailed that one. nt

[27inCali]

21. George Washington was a Centrist

centrists are

people whos opinions don't line up very evenly with any party.

people who agree with some ideas of one party and some ideas of the other.

people more interested in the personality and the unique qualifications of politicians as opposed to what party they belong to.

People who tend to think both major parties are totally corrupt.

People who judge the merit of argument on either side of a major issue with little or no reguard to which party is arguing what.

People who are more patriotic about their country and their people than they are a party or ideology.

People who tend to respect and find something good both in the the conservative and liberal ideologies. Like the Universalist church, they mix and match for what fits them

People who tend to believe that are certain junctures in history where a liberal approach is more appropriate but at other times feel a conservative approach makes more sense.

[WillyT]

22. Yeah... I Can Just Hear Washington Saying...

"Look, I know they took your home, put you in prison, and raped your daughters, but hey... we have to WORK with these people."

:evilfrown:

[wyldwolf]

34. why would you think such a thing was centrism?

Sounds more like pacifism.

[wyldwolf]

32. "what do centrists stand for?"

Governing the people, not the fringes of the respective parties.

It means taking the left position on some issues and the right position on others. Often it means finding a middle ground. It really isn't that complicated. For example, sensible gun control laws instead of total freedom to have any kind of guns and total restrictions of all guns (and yes there are people who take those positions.)

Founding Fathers:

"I was no party man myself, and the first wish of my heart was, if parties did exist, to reconcile them."
—George Washington

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all."
—Thomas Jefferson

"I have always sought for the middle ground."
—James Madison

"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, it to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."
—John Adams

Others of note:

"Just as Lincoln got contradictory advice from the extremists of both sides . . . so now I have to guard myself against the extremists of both sides."
—Theodore Roosevelt

"The future lies with those wise political leaders who realize that the great public is interested more in Government than in politics. The growing independence of voters, after all, has been proven by the votes in every Presidential election since my childhood and the tendency, frankly, is on the increase."
—Franklin D. Roosevelt

"The middle of the road is all of the usable surface. The extremes, right and left, are in the gutters."
—Dwight D. Eisenhower

"Extreme opposites resemble the other. Each believes that we have only two choices: appeasement or war, suicide or surrender, humiliation or holocaust, to be either Red or dead."
—John F. Kennedy

"When we put aside partisanship, embrace the best ideas regardless of where they come from and work for principled compromise, we can move America not left or right, but forward."
—Bill Clinton

"The choice we offer is not conservative or liberal. In many ways its not even Republican or Democratic. Its different. Its new. And it will work."
—Bill Clinton

"I'm too fiscally conservative for the Democrats and too socially liberal for the Republicans, like 75% of the American people."
—Governor Angus King

[salonghorn70]

37. Very Well Said

:hi:

[Eyes_wide_ open]

51. excellent quotes

Thank you :thumbsup: Although in my mind, they describe Independents rather than Centrists. OTOH the argument could be made that Centrists are Independents that choose to align themselves with a political party :shrug:

[wyldwolf]

52. Using myself as an example

The issues I'm left on put me solidly in Truman/JFK/Clinton territory - very much a Dem but centrist.

[dionysus]

64. can you list what you agree with the republicans on?

and what liberal positions are too extreme for you and why?

[niceypoo]

71. You are taking an extreme view of what centrist means

My mother is a conservative Democrat. She agrees with republicans on pretty much nothing. She does, however, go to church every week. Everything isn't either extreme liberal or extreme conservative. Most people are not extreme one way or the other.

[Igel]

38. Posts #22 and 32 get to the issue.

Finally.

But in different ways, both possible.

Sometimes it's like asking to point out all the 1.5s when all you have are 1s and 2s. 1.5 is a nice average. A lot of centrists are for and against all sorts of things, it's just that they are in no way "consistent" with a party's platform or an ideology. A centrist is a 1.5 simply because he has a set of opinions, each of which is a 1 or a 2, and they average out in the middle.

This is Lakoff's view of centrism--it's not a philosophy, but a weakness, since there's no thread that he considers worth considering that ties all of the views together. Often there *are* unifying threads, just threads or philosophies that he can't bring himself to acknowledge. (If it doesn't fit his theory, it's to be disregarded. In this, at least, he and Chomsky are united. I studied Russian for years when Chomsky had to say that Russian wasn't really a human language, as far as his theories were concerned. And I've known Lakoff-disciples who look at reams of data that they can have no comment on, and they stare right through it. Such is linguistics.)

In other cases, a centrist really is a 1.5, but you have to phrase the 1s and 2s right. Abortion, for example: Are you for or against it in all circumstances? Since the options are extreme, and most Americans can't honestly give a simple "yes" or "no" answer (even Obama), they tend to be 1.1, 1.5, 1.8, or some other number. 1.3-1.8 is "centrist".

Everybody considers the second group to be unprincipled, impure opportunists. They're also mostly independents these days, with both the left-wing of the dem party and the right-wing of the repub party enforcing ideological purity, driving out the heretics.

Both fall from ideological purity: One by compromising on many issues, the other by being renegade on some issues. Most people are centrists, but appear to be (ideologically) partisan when the important issues of the day line up to make them clearly partisan. Even a lot of political partisans--always dem or repub, even if they disagree with much of the platform--would be judged centrists, with a different set of burning issues on the nation's agenda.

[newmajority]

39. After 28 years of trickle down corporatist bullshit, the problem is not "right vs left."

It's "right vs wrong".

And these policies have been WRONG for the country. NAFTA (and all the other agreements that Hellspawned from it). Massive deregulation, leading to corporate mega mergers, and the refusal to enforce existing laws, like the Sherman anti-trust act to stop it. Pretty much EVERY law passed after 12/12/2000 should be repealed.

Neither the left wing, nor the right wing, nor the mythical "center" benefits from this. Only the ultra-rich whom have reaped the financial benefits.

Class warfare? You bet your ass. But it's them who declared it on us. Not the other way around, as they try to paint anyone who dare raises the issue.

[Runcible Spoon]

40. wow nice to see all of the Republican enablers out and active!

:puke:

[WillyT]

47. Care To Expand On That Thought ???

:wtf:

[Runcible Spoon]

53. if it's lost on you, oh well. my statement is ridiculously obvious

:eyes:

[WillyT]

55. Of Course It's Obvious To You... I Assume You Know What Goes On In Your Own Head, But...

you are correct. I have no idea what you mean by enabling Republicans here.

:shrug:

[TexasObserver]

41. The entire constitution was one big compromise.

Madison was a centrist. So was Jefferson. Their administrations as president prove that.

Centrist believe in balance. They don't want any branch of government being too strong. They favor unions, but not to the point of stifling business. They want affirmative action, but not without close monitoring.

I'm liberal on some points, centrist on others. I don't think a person is necessarily one or the other. It comes down to specific issues. Some liberals tend to think those who are to the right of them on any issue are automatically centrist.

[Alexander]

43. James Madison was probably the most Centrist Founding Father.

However, at the end of the day, he was still a Federalist.

Something to think about.

[CreekDog]

48. Centrism

:eyes:

[TwilightGardener]

54. I'm pretty much a centrist. And DU is littered with all of my numerous opinions

on a wide variety of topics. Not getting this post.

[quaker bill]

56. Well,

it is kind of like this.

There are more than two points of view on most major issues.

There are many many points along the economic spectrum that lie between between pure socialism and laizzez-faire capitalism. Centrism would seem to reasonably occupy many of them.

There is a place between abandoning the poor to the invisible hand of the market / Social Darwinism, and a government provided guarantee of equal outcomes for all, centrism would reside here.

There is a place between global free trade without restrictions and jingoistic isolationism, centrism would lie here.

I consider myself a centrist on a number of dimensions, (though as far left as anyone on the anti-war dimension). I worked for Gore, Dean, Kerry, and now for Obama. I could not be happier that he has won the nomination.

What I like about Barack is that he is entirely sane, almost painfully so. This is an attribute which has gone missing, much to our regret, altogether too often over the last 30+ years.

It is always good to elect the sane.

[fed_up_mother]

63. What he said.

I agree with your post.

Obama's appeal is because he is "entirely sane." He makes you think we can accomplish change. :) And if it's not as far left as we/some would like, that's ok by me. Much better than the stagnation we have, now.

[Balbus]

60. I consider myself a centrist.

If you were to ask me yes/no questions on the issues, I've no doubt my answers would align with the left. But my reasoning behind the answers have nothing to do with party belief aka "the meme." My answers are based on my belief and my belief alone. I'm not going to let any party tell me that I'm going to answer "this way" because of "this reason."

[democrattotheend]

61. Good for you

Honestly, I think a lot of people are where you are. That's where my mom is, even though she increasingly identifies as a Democrat and even a liberal.

[depakid]

65. How is that "centrist?"

:shrug:

[Balbus]

66. Because I believe Democratic, Republican and "Centrism" is more an ideology,

than the results of your vote. My ideology is not typical of the average Democrat, but the end results of my ideology would be considered a Democratic ideology to a person who is reviewing my voting record.

[readmoreoften]

68. Triangulating and trying to win with a "moderate" viewpoint deduced from the

"two extremes".