Current Topics
"Moron...Man-Ch
ild...Trump"

by Greger
12:17 AM
Just ignore him
by logtroll
08:58 PM
Let's check in on the cattle abusers, deadbeat grazers, wildlife squatter Bundys
by NW Ponderer
08:03 PM
Round Table for January, 2018
by pondering_it_all
06:45 PM
WalMart closing 63 Sam's Club
by pdx rick
01:25 AM
Why Norwegians Aren't Moving to the U.S.
by logtroll
12:58 AM
Happy Shutdown Day
by Jeffery J. Haas
12:17 AM
The Passing Parade: Obituaries: 2018
by Golem
01/19/18 05:14 PM
Is invoking non- existent privilege obstruction?
by NW Ponderer
01/18/18 08:48 PM
Underclass
by Jeffery J. Haas
01/18/18 07:23 PM
list of what Trump has done so far
by Jeffery J. Haas
01/17/18 02:41 AM
Moderation and good will
by pondering_it_all
01/17/18 01:14 AM
Fahrenheit 451
by Jeffery J. Haas
01/16/18 10:21 PM
Car flies into 2nd floor of Santa Ana building
by pondering_it_all
01/16/18 03:27 AM
Five Decades of White Backlash
by pondering_it_all
01/16/18 03:11 AM
Reasons People Lie When They Donít Need To
by pondering_it_all
01/15/18 12:15 AM
Gay Old Time: The rise and fall of Laguna Beachís gay clubs
by pondering_it_all
01/13/18 08:10 AM
Campaign themes for 2018
by matthew
01/13/18 03:28 AM
Immigration Realities
by pdx rick
01/12/18 06:09 PM
Bitcoin
by pdx rick
01/12/18 05:43 PM
Forum Stats
6248 Members
58 Forums
16160 Topics
278610 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#304669 - 12/27/17 04:57 PM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: pdx rick]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 13868
Loc: Florida

What socialist leaning Progressives need to get a handle on is that big changes require really massive voter support to take place. Support that we simply don't have at this time or we'd have Bernie or Hillary and a supportive Congress up there actually making America great again instead of Trump and his authoritarian minions.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."ó Oscar Wilde

Top
#304670 - 12/27/17 06:30 PM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: Greger]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8709
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
Fact is, there's no clean definition for "Progressive" because it isn't an organized party with a platform. I think most of us like the term because it implies thinking outside the box, and obviously, 'progressing' (making progress).

In my small community there are three organized politically active groups; Republicans, Democrats, and the progressive voter's alliance. Many of the PVA folks also attend Dem meetings, though I don't usually, unless there is an interesting agenda. I wouldn't say the PVA is to the left or right of the Dems, but the people who show up are more interested in functional and pragmatic solutions, especially around the economy and the environment.

We used to have a TEAParty group but they dried up several years ago.
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#304671 - 12/27/17 06:37 PM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: logtroll]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8709
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
Funny thing is that the local Progressives and the TEAParty actually were on the same side of several issues and would sometimes attend each other's meetings to work together. However, we were never on the same side for the same reasons...
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#304672 - 12/27/17 07:39 PM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
member

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 1797
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
We shouldn't forget the various groups that make up the Republicans. Right now, for instance, there is the group, led by Speaker Ryan, who are getting ready to gut our "entitled" economy. Their plan, basically, is to privatize just about everything; medicare, madicaud, education, social security, etc. Not only that but they are their way to actually pulling it off. Its really pretty simple. Run the debt WAAAAAY up, scare everybody to death with talk of national bankruptcy, and, then, start reducing gov (starve the beast). Then there are the genuine conservatives which can take two roads. The first, and oldest, are the fiscal conservatives. Their belief is that government finances are exactly the same as personal finance and it needs to be taken care of. To this end they too are for raising the debt to unsustainable levels to force a balancing of the budget and getting rid of any deficits. Then there are the Social Conservatives. These are the ones who know what is best for everybody insofar as their relationship with their god (a moving target). Their goal is, basically, to tell everybody how they must act, believe, pray and worship. Since they, obviously, are the ones who speak directly to the Lord they must be obeyed or they will kill you (not really but it seemed to fit <g>) This means that the Repulblicans tend to only have 2 basic groups that need to exist with one another and they are pretty well defined (unlike the messy Dems).

It used to be that the Democrats, and the Republicans made up the lion's share of American voters and, in the middle (for the most part) were the 'independents". Now, however, the 'independents' seem to be the majority of voters as the parties themselves have failed not only their own membership but voters in general. They, basically, worked this miracle by providing truly lousy candidates, are so worked up over money they will, apparently, do anything to get more, are unable to gain much traction with most of the electorate because they figured they were the only 2 games in town so screw 'em. So, we are now a republic with two embedded parties who represent a minority of the voting public. The interesting thing about this is that both parties are so delighted with the current system of Politics, which, apparently, is just considered a big football game to be won or lost and only the winners get to say what's what because the losing side are just a bunch of losers. Now, however, we are in modern times where the voters are so turned off by it all that they thought they might try something a bit different so we have Trump A guy who has ignored all the 'rules', does as he damn well pleases, lies with impunity, behaves like a spoiled 4 year old, seems incredibly ignorant, cheats at golf, and just may arrange to get us into a nuclear are, with, again apparently, the backing of the entire Republican party which has proven its fealty to their master Trump by eschewing all integrity, honesty or good faith. I have found their very public kissing of their leader's behind to be particularly disgusting and really hard to watch.

The secret might be to reconstitute both parties where both actually have all the citizens welfare as their central goal rather than what they can do to raise more money to buy ads that, basically, lie, scare, promise, and little else.

Top
#304678 - 12/27/17 09:35 PM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: pondering_it_all]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15691
I kinda follow the history as described in Wikipedia:

Quote:
In the late 19th century, a political view rose in popularity in the Western world that progress was being stifled by vast economic inequality between the rich and the poor, minimally regulated laissez-faire capitalism with out-of-control monopolistic corporations, intense and often violent conflict between workers and capitalists, and a need for measures to address these problems.[11] Progressivism has influenced various political movements. Modern liberalism was influenced by liberal philosopher John Stuart Mill's conception of people being "progressive beings".[12] British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli developed progressive conservatism under "One Nation" Toryism.[13][14] Similarly in Imperial Germany, Chancellor Otto von Bismarck enacted various progressive social welfare measures out of conservative motivations to distance workers from the socialist movement of the time and as humane ways to assist in maintaining the Industrial Revolution.[15] Proponents of social democracy have identified themselves as promoting the progressive cause.[16] The Roman Catholic Church encyclical Rerum novarum issued by Pope Leo XIII in 1891, condemned the exploitation of labour and urged support for labour unions, government regulation of businesses in the interests of social justice, while upholding the rights of private property and criticizing socialism.[17] A Protestant progressive outlook called the Social Gospel emerged in North America that focused on challenging economic exploitation and poverty, and by the mid-1890s the Social Gospel was common in many Protestant theological seminaries in the United States.[18] In 1892, during a major political contest between landlords and tenants, the landlord advocates were known as the "moderates" and the land value tax reformers were known as the "progressives".[19]

In America, progressivism began as a social movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and grew into a political movement, in what was known as the Progressive Era. While the term "American progressives" represent a range of diverse political pressure groups (not always united), some American progressives rejected Social Darwinism, believing that the problems society faced (poverty, violence, greed, racism, class warfare) could best be addressed by providing good education, a safe environment, and an efficient workplace. Progressives lived mainly in the cities, were college educated, and believed that government could be a tool for change.[20] American President Theodore Roosevelt of the U.S. Republican Party and later the U.S. Progressive Party, declared that he "always believed that wise progressivism and wise conservatism go hand in hand".[21] American President Woodrow Wilson was also a member of the American progressive movement, within the Democratic Party.


I think the inclusion of Theodore Roosevelt (who was clearly a progressive) and Woodrow Wilson as "progressives", and the inclusion of "conservative progressivism" puts the movement closer to the middle, but I can be persuaded. I've always thought of "liberal" as between "socialist" and "progressive." I think FDR was a progressive, but certainly not a liberal, as he was quite clearly tied to capitalism as a central tenet of the American economy.

Be that as it may, I am in the Roosevelt wing of progressivism (both of them). Capitalism has its place, but it is not at the center of the universe. The triple-bottom-line approach is consistent with both of their approaches to governing - something the modern Republican/revanchist party has abandoned. (Remember Nixon supported the EPA, Clean Air and Clean Water Acts (if reluctantly), and tried to impose limitations on the economy as well, and he was certainly no "Liberal".) The purpose of our government is to provide for the "general welfare," and that includes economic, social (education, health, etc.) and environmental well-being.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#304679 - 12/27/17 10:46 PM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7285
Loc: North San Diego County
"Progressive" has always been defined as "whatever the conservative powers that be are against". So at times it has looked pretty damned conservative by our standards, but not really in context. Being in favor of prison for stealing bread would have been progressive when the standard penalty was hanging. Now I think it has to be left of something and what it's left of is the centrists in the Democratic party.

Top
#304683 - 12/28/17 01:09 AM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: Greger]
pdx rick Offline
Member
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 40737
Loc: Puget Sound, WA
Originally Posted By: Greger
What socialist leaning Progressives need to get a handle on is that big changes require really massive voter support to take place. Support that we simply don't have at this time or we'd have Bernie or Hillary and a supportive Congress up there actually making America great again instead of Trump and his authoritarian minions.

Actually we did have HClinton - it's just that those pesky parliamentary procedures called the Electoral College got in the way...again! mad
_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#304926 - 01/06/18 10:38 PM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7285
Loc: North San Diego County
What do you think about adding some pragmatic processes to our government?

In every bill, we could require explicit sections explaining exactly what the bill is trying to accomplish, who it's going to help or harm, and how we're going to measure those effects. Then we create another non-partisan government department like the Congressional Budget Office, to gather the data on the effects of each bill and evaluate how effective it is. All of that data would go in a public database with a feedback section.

Congressmen and the public could comment on the intent of a new bill, because they may agree or not on that intent. They could also comment on the means to implement it, again pro or con. Finally, after the bill is law they could comment on the results.

I think we could improve the operation of our government by doing this, mostly by preventing a lot of obfuscation that is our current MO.

Top
#305126 - 01/16/18 08:49 AM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15691
This whole sideshow about Congressional Representatives going to the White House to seek Trump's "input" on a DACA bill is a farce. Who cares what Trump thinks? Pass a friggin bill and put it in front of him. THAT'S WHAT THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES. He either signs it, or he doesn't, and then a Congressional override is possible. It's all out in public, and we'll all see him for what he really is.

There are clear majorities of both parties that support passing a bill. The only question is whether a super majority can be mustered.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#305127 - 01/16/18 03:03 PM Re: Moderation and good will [Re: pdx rick]
Ujest Shurly Offline
newbie

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 252
Loc: Michigan, USA
Originally Posted By: pdx rick
Originally Posted By: Greger
What socialist leaning Progressives need to get a handle on is that big changes require really massive voter support to take place. Support that we simply don't have at this time or we'd have Bernie or Hillary and a supportive Congress up there actually making America great again instead of Trump and his authoritarian minions.

Actually we did have HClinton - it's just that those pesky parliamentary procedures called the Electoral College got in the way...again! mad


To my way of thinking, Gerrymandering is the root of this evil. Gerrymandering gave the Republicans control in Congress and many State Legislatures - thus tilting the Electoral College to the Right and Far Right


Edited by Ujest Shurly (01/16/18 03:04 PM)
_________________________
Vote 2018

Life is like a PB&J sandwich
The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >

Who's Online
1 registered (Jeffery J. Haas), 16 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TrentonP, Nosf50, erumonej, Jensen Breck, Albertapkr
6248 Registered Users
A2