4 ms·

I always assume most are just oblivious, given the fact that the Democratic Party still tries to identify as a worker-first party. That’s rapidly changing with

I always assume most are just oblivious, given the fact that the Democratic Party still tries to identify as a worker-first party. That’s rapidly changing with the rise of the modern progressive movement, DSA and the like. Part of the problem is the two-party system, which essentially ensures that control remains between the Dems and GOP. This is why so many presidential elections wind up being contests of the least-worst option.

karatestomp 7y ago
It’s also why some positions that should be fairly common are effectively impossible to express. For single payer healthcare, against the death penalty, and anti-abortion? You have no good candidates. Pro union, but also for stronger anti-illegal-immigration measures? Ditto. And so on.
- leetcrew 7y ago
  I'm not sure we need a label for every single combination of positions. your first example could just be a religious liberal/progressive. the second probably describes a lot of blue collar trump supporters, although the man himself would probably not make an explicitly pro-union statement.
  - karatestomp 7y ago
    We need finer-grained party platforms—so, more of them—so issues that might otherwise advance easily don’t become hostages to wedge issues. But for that we have to make structural changes so more than two parties can stably exist at once—or else so that no parties can stably exist long, I guess.
- save_ferris 7y ago
  I'd argue that's more of a symptom of the rise of identity politics in particular than the two-party system. Policy and political discourse is driven so heavily by identity today that political parties find it easier to coalesce around groups of unrelated issues in order to find their voting base. But I do agree with you in that it's an issue.
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    The two party system is a big factor because it allows the two parties to stay closely within their positions and voters have nowhere else to go. When I compare this to Germany there the traditional two big parties received a rude wake up call because suddenly the greens and the AFD started rising. So these parties have to refresh themselves unless they want to become irrelevant. In the US there is no such pressure.
    - kansface 7y ago
      > So these parties have to refresh themselves unless they want to become irrelevant. In the US there is no such pressure. That does not square with the US electing donald trump.
      - Ididntdothis 7y ago
        Trump is just more of the same. He talks differently but he is a typical hard-right Republican in his actions.
- rsync 7y ago
  "Pro union, but also for stronger anti-illegal-immigration measures? Ditto." As an aside, and hoping you find this interesting: Ralph Nader, who was a serious presidential candidate as late as 2000, did embrace exactly that combination ... I believe he claimed that (relatively) open borders were ipso facto anti-union.
  - nwienert 7y ago
    Yea if anything a republican will run on this next now that Trump has shifted the party around.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

karatestomp 7y ago

It’s also why some positions that should be fairly common are effectively impossible to express. For single payer healthcare, against the death penalty, and anti-abortion? You have no good candidates. Pro union, but also for stronger anti-illegal-immigration measures? Ditto. And so on.

leetcrew 7y ago
I'm not sure we need a label for every single combination of positions. your first example could just be a religious liberal/progressive. the second probably describes a lot of blue collar trump supporters, although the man himself would probably not make an explicitly pro-union statement.
- karatestomp 7y ago
  We need finer-grained party platforms—so, more of them—so issues that might otherwise advance easily don’t become hostages to wedge issues. But for that we have to make structural changes so more than two parties can stably exist at once—or else so that no parties can stably exist long, I guess.
save_ferris 7y ago
I'd argue that's more of a symptom of the rise of identity politics in particular than the two-party system. Policy and political discourse is driven so heavily by identity today that political parties find it easier to coalesce around groups of unrelated issues in order to find their voting base. But I do agree with you in that it's an issue.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  The two party system is a big factor because it allows the two parties to stay closely within their positions and voters have nowhere else to go. When I compare this to Germany there the traditional two big parties received a rude wake up call because suddenly the greens and the AFD started rising. So these parties have to refresh themselves unless they want to become irrelevant. In the US there is no such pressure.
  - kansface 7y ago
    > So these parties have to refresh themselves unless they want to become irrelevant. In the US there is no such pressure. That does not square with the US electing donald trump.
    - Ididntdothis 7y ago
      Trump is just more of the same. He talks differently but he is a typical hard-right Republican in his actions.
rsync 7y ago
"Pro union, but also for stronger anti-illegal-immigration measures? Ditto." As an aside, and hoping you find this interesting: Ralph Nader, who was a serious presidential candidate as late as 2000, did embrace exactly that combination ... I believe he claimed that (relatively) open borders were ipso facto anti-union.
- nwienert 7y ago
  Yea if anything a republican will run on this next now that Trump has shifted the party around.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]