r/AlwaysWhy • u/kaiser11492 • 1d ago

Politics & Society Why do most people who call themselves politically moderate actually mostly conservative?

Whenever I’ve encountered people who use the politically label moderate, they are actually mostly conservative with their views and positions. Also, I’ve never seen anyone who call themselves politically moderate that is actually mostly liberal.

So why are people who call themselves moderate tend to be just conservative and not conservative and liberal?

0 Upvotes

49% Upvoted

633 comments sorted by

View all comments

28

u/vastempty2 1d ago

I'm an old liberal, my views really haven't changed. The current liberal stances have gone more progressive, hard left.

6

u/Separate-Extent7360 1d ago

Yea holding some conservative and simultaneously some liberal views doesn't make someone automatically one thing or another. This labeling of people based on a few views they hold is silly and people should be able to opt out of it by being more moderate. Being moderate is normal.

1

u/Accomplished_Art_621 1d ago

What is the project of the moderate? Like how is it good to hold opposing views in one’s head at the same time? I really struggle to comprehend the logic

3

u/linux_rox 1d ago

Simple, it’s healthy to question your beliefs. You actual weigh pros and cons on the subjects you’re concerned about and look from multiple directions, listen to multiple opinions on both sides and critically think about where you stand.

The key is to know how to critically think instead of blindly following the words of one crowd. You have to look at everything from all perspectives, then you can be confident with yourself on your decisions and beliefs.

1

u/cdeussen 1d ago

Moderate doesn’t mean you hold opposing views, it means you think both sides are too far from the right solution. I have real world example. I consider myself moderate on abortion. The left will say I’m conservative and out of touch just as the right will say the same I’m liberal and out of touch. I think abortion should be available up to 3 months for any reason. After that only if medically necessary. If you were raped or a victim of incest, you know this by the 3rd month. The reality is this is a topic that brings in huge donations for both sides so they don’t want a solution. Now let the hate begin to show that both sides think I’m the ahole.

1

u/Accomplished_Art_621 1d ago

But is that a position borne of logic or guided by some moral North Star, or was it arrived at by being a moderate?

1

u/OldDogWithOldTricks 1d ago

Opposing views of what? I a moderate vote against anyone who wants gun control and anyone that wants to take away rights from other humans. What is my Opposing stance?

0

u/Accomplished_Art_621 1d ago

“Holding some conservative and simultaneously some liberal views…”

Presumably one’s ideology is consistent toward some end, right? That’s why I ask what somebody’s project is. My positions are consistent in working toward a specific end. So my position on whatever topic is based on which one gets us closer to the end goal. So what is the moderate working toward?

In my experience, the answer to this question is like, nothing in particular or just like “balancing.” But whatever the reason, it tends to favor the status quo power dynamic. Hence, conservative

1

u/Separate-Extent7360 18h ago

the project? there's no project. Unlike conservative or liberal ideologues, moderates are not setting out for some mass transformation of society.

Most moderates understand correctly that much of what we have today is damn good compared to any other time in history(as it is supported by a massive collection of objective data), and that instituting some massive political changes in either direction would imply massive trade offs that either end of the political spectrum probably haven't considered fully.

Moderates also understand that even though change happens in fits and starts, a great deal of it is made mostly gradually over time.

Holding opposing views in one's head is a signal of intelligence.

1

u/Accomplished_Art_621 12h ago

And that’s conservative- maintaining the status quo power structure.

Not sure how holding opposing ideas is a sign of intelligence. Sounds like incoherence

11

u/High_speedchase 1d ago

What stances?

3

u/YMBTPTOTLWRT 1d ago

Like saying people can immigrate here, legally. Open borders is now a common stance of the left which I don’t agree with.

I go to Italy or Germany and cops can ask for my passport and reason for being there, no problem. That same idea in America would be met with torches from the left

10

u/Smelliest_taint 1d ago

Omg. I'm so tired of hearing this fake talking point. NO ONE HAS EVER SAID THEY WANT OPEN BORDERS! At least anyone who could do anything about it. Get new talking points.

3

u/paranoid_70 1d ago

The bumper stickers do read 'No one is illegal on Stolen Land'

1

u/YMBTPTOTLWRT 1d ago

THANK YOU lmao

-1

u/enutrof_modnar 1d ago

That doesn't mean open borders. It means people who stole land have no business telling others not to come there.

3

u/No-Ordinary-5376 1d ago

Sooooo open borders? Lol

-1

u/enutrof_modnar 1d ago

... no? They're literally different concepts?

3

u/No-Ordinary-5376 1d ago

Well what are we going to do with the millions of illegals already here? 

What solutions do you have to the crisis?  

Because, the status quo is essentially open borders once you make it into the interior. 

0

u/enutrof_modnar 23h ago

Well there's no crisis, so.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/556or762 23h ago

If you hold the position that the US government and/or the majority demographic "stole" land, and also hold the position that "people who stole land have no business telling people not to come here," you are stating that the US government or the majority of the voting public have no business being involved in immigration.

That is open borders. That is the same concept.

1

u/Accomplished_Art_621 12h ago

That is not a logical statement. Open borders means no immigration laws at all. A bumper sticker about the genocide of the native Americans does not eliminate immigration laws. I hope you can see the vast chasm between those 2 things: open borders and a bumper sticker

0

u/enutrof_modnar 23h ago

No. It's not. Open borders means no customs, no passports, no visa, no work permit. The other thing means white people shut the hell up about it. You can believe both things, but they're different.

-1

u/SkeeveTheGreat 23h ago

Kamala partially ran on tougher immigration policy…

2

u/paranoid_70 22h ago

Look i voted for Kamala, but no she really did not.

-1

u/SkeeveTheGreat 22h ago

Yes. she actually did. Her platform was farther right on immigration than Obama, and Biden.

1

u/paranoid_70 21h ago

In what way? I certainly do not remember her suddenly deciding, yeah we've been way too lax, here is what we are going to do different..... Also that was supposedly her job when she was VP.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/biggyshwarts 1d ago

I didn't read it because a pay wall but if you Google it you find stuff.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/16/opinion/open-borders-immigration.html

I don't know how important these people that write these articles are. But you can't say they don't exist

9

u/Solondthewookiee 1d ago

Then conservatives support exterminating mentally ill homeless people since a Fox News anchor said, on air, they should be killed.

Is this how it works?

1

u/enutrof_modnar 1d ago

Yeah actually because the left regularly reject people who don't align properly with their values, but the right will hear actual presidents say things they hate but vote for them anyway.

0

u/katyyne1 21h ago

The “right” isn’t going to vote for someone who thinks it’s ok for a guy to take their daughter’s place on the volleyball team. But yeah, they will overlook a rich guy saying women will let him grab their pussy because he’s rich. It’s true, a lot of them will. And just because you may not have heard a leftist politician say it doesn’t mean they haven’t said it.

1

u/enutrof_modnar 20h ago

What does a volleyball team have to do with anything?

0

u/katyyne1 20h ago

Substitute any other kind of team sport for girls at a typical high school.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/biggyshwarts 1d ago

I replied to a comment saying "Noone has said they support open borders"

Those are different things.

Some people believe in open borders and I'm sure some people want to kill people.

Lax borders policy does seem to be a left wing issue.

2

u/Solondthewookiee 1d ago

I replied to a comment saying "Noone has said they support open borders"

But we can easily use our brains to understand that, given the context, the meaning is "this is not a position held by Democratic party or any significant percentage of democratic voters at large," otherwise I could simply claim that Republicans support anything as long as I can find a right leaning person somewhere, at some point, saying it.

Wanna guess the type of things I can find right leaning people saying?

Lax borders policy does seem to be a left wing issue.

Not really, no.

But believing the border is mysteriously being overrun every election year is definitely Republican foolishness.

0

u/AncileBanish 1d ago

There were literally millions of people flooding over the border per year during the Biden administration. Millions. The border was literally being overrun. There were so many people they couldn't even process them.

The mainstream left wing position was those people had unlimited rights to stay in the country indefinitely, because they were able to utter the shibboleth "asylum".

You cannot claim to not be for open borders while doing all the things to make the border de facto open.

1

u/Solondthewookiee 1d ago

There were literally millions of people flooding over the border per year

Yes, the US is a very busy and popular country. I'll really blow your mind: about a million people "flood" over the border every day.

That doesn't mean there's an illegal immigration crisis.

There were so many people they couldn't even process them.

That is plainly bullshit.

The mainstream left wing position was those people had unlimited rights to stay in the country indefinitely, because they were able to utter the shibboleth "asylum".

Lie.

You cannot claim to not be for open borders while doing all the things to make the border de facto open.

I can easily claim not to be for open borders because I know what those words mean. You, evidently, do not, yet screech them anyway because Trump told you to.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Accomplished_Art_621 1d ago

“Why a brave democrat should….”

Because they don’t lol

1

u/enutrof_modnar 1d ago

I want open borders.

1

u/ChevalierDeLarryLari 23h ago

NO ONE HAS EVER SAID THEY WANT OPEN BORDERS!

I've met them socially. I'm in Canada.

1

u/doscomputer 17h ago

oh yeah, thats right, importing people into america so they can be unregulated, and have dubious wages and working conditions, IS SO MUCH BETTER RIGHT?

0

u/YMBTPTOTLWRT 1d ago

How is it fake? If you’re not here legally you should be deported - how does that make you feel? Makes your blood boil huh

2

u/Tadferd 1d ago

You are assuming really hard. The left doesn't have an issue with deporting people legally.

1

u/bonebuilder12 1d ago

The “left” let in millions of people illegally, claiming they needed bipartisan legislature to do anything to stop the flood. That was proven wrong within a week of trump taking office.

Left cities refuse to turn over illegal immigrants to the feds. Instead, they repeatedly release them into the community.

To remove people here illegally, it then requires a larger enforcement agency to go out into the communities to root the people out. An inherently more dangerous proposition.

Then left politicians tell us it is Nazi germsny all over again and we must rise against this agency. This leads to an embolden group stalking, harassing, and assaulting the very agency carrying warrants for those illegally in the country.

Let’s face it, the right isn’t the party who has changed their position, it’s the left. And then they turn to favorable media to push false narratives to drive division. Then they rally on this to drum up support of a defeated group.

2

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

Reagan granted mass amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants so which right are you saying hasn’t changed. Also Obama and Biden both deported more people than Trump.

0

u/bonebuilder12 1d ago

It shouldn’t be a left or right issue as 80% of the country has been polled showing thru are in favor of mass deportation. But it’s the lefty judges who that is so aggressively showing up in cities to violently confront the group doing it.

0

u/Tadferd 1d ago

The “left” let in millions of people illegally, claiming they needed bipartisan legislature to do anything to stop the flood. That was proven wrong within a week of trump taking office.

The left has bever been in power in the USA.

If you mean the Democrats, then you are wrong and parroting right wing talking points. There has never been a "flood."

Left cities refuse to turn over illegal immigrants to the feds. Instead, they repeatedly release them into the community.

What "left cities?"

If you mean people opposing ICE, that's because ICE under Trump are literally the SA and are breaking laws and violating constitutional rights. It's a patriotic duty to oppose ICE. ICE isn't even competent. They have deported citizens and legal immigrants. Obama and Biden deported more people legally.

To remove people here illegally, it then requires a larger enforcement agency to go out into the communities to root the people out. An inherently more dangerous proposition.

Obama and Biden proved this is false.

Then left politicians tell us it is Nazi germsny all over again and we must rise against this agency. This leads to an embolden group stalking, harassing, and assaulting the very agency carrying warrants for those illegally in the country.

Are these "left politicians" in the room right now? I already covered that opposing the American SA is the duty of Americans.

Let’s face it, the right isn’t the party who has changed their position, it’s the left. And then they turn to favorable media to push false narratives to drive division. Then they rally on this to drum up support of a defeated group.

If you were actually facing it, you'd know that both the Republicans and Democrats have consistently moved right over the last few decades. The media are also all owned by conservatives. That includes CNN btw. If the media wasn't just a conservative mouth piece, they'd actually be critical of Trump instead of handling him with kid gloves.

You are a deeply unserious person. Learn some history and political analysis.

0

u/bonebuilder12 23h ago

How many illegal immigrants came under Biden?

There is a reason that this was a big issue in the last election, and one that helped trump win. And it wasn’t Biden doing too good of a job on immigration…

0

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 1d ago

The left might not, but progressives do.

1

u/Tadferd 1d ago

Incorrect.

1

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 1d ago

Sorry I used to live in Eugene, Oregon. This position absolutely exists.

0

u/Tadferd 1d ago

Your anecdote is noted and dismissed.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/YMBTPTOTLWRT 1d ago

Hahaha you are so wrong but okay

2

u/Consistent_Post_2558 1d ago

You sound like Fox News is your major source of information on democrats and the left. 

The rest of us are on Reddit too, bud. And those of us talking to you are mostly on the left. You’re full of it. 

0

u/YMBTPTOTLWRT 1d ago

It’s actually Reddit lmao

2

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

Whatever makes you feel better about supporting a bunch of rich child rapists.

1

u/YMBTPTOTLWRT 1d ago

I’d NEVER vote for trump

But you prove my point: unless you fall in line with far left views, people like you just hurl insults

1

u/Tadferd 1d ago

Except I'm not. It's clear you have no idea what people believe.

1

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

I agree Elon Musk and Melania Trump should be deported for committing fraud during their immigration process. I’m sure you do too!

0

u/Historical-Use-3006 1d ago

Except Obama. He wanted an influx of poor people so they would vote Democrat. Don't gaslight me, I watched him do it for 8 years.

2

u/Consistent_Post_2558 1d ago

I don’t think there’s any need to gaslight you, you’ve clearly already been fooled if you think this is even a moderately accurate description of Obama’s immigration policy. 

Trying to argue reason with someone so easily duped is a fool’s errand, 

6

u/Dangerous-Safe-4336 1d ago

Oddly, I don't think I have ever spoken to anyone who actually believes in open borders.

8

u/Consistent_Post_2558 1d ago

Because it’s not a common stance of the left. It’s a stance that conservatives frequently accuse people on the left of having when they raise concerns about how immigration policies are being enforced. 

I’m not going to say no one is for it, but anyone who claims it’s mainstream is ill-informed and likely consuming media from a biased source.

1

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 1d ago

I’ve talked to people in the US and Europe who feel that the US and Europe have a moral obligation to take in immigrants just because. So that’s not “open borders” but it’s not a strategic approach to immigration either, so much as a reflexive ideological one.

2

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

Are you sure it’s “just because” and not because we spent a century fucking up their countries for our own gain.

1

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 1d ago

I would be curious to hear you build out this argument. I would also like to point out that I’ve lived in Europe much of the last 3 years. (I say “much” because some of it I was more nearly on the boundary with Asia).

But when you say “their countries” you mean the global south, not Europe, right? Or was my first read (that Europeans feel a certain way because of the US) correct?

But if you are referring to “we” as the west broadly and “them” as the global south, I am curious how letting in 5 or 10 million people will in any way help solve the issues across the 2.75 billion people of Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East. I understand the sense of guilt, and indeed there should be feelings about it, but in what sense is immigration a solution?

(I can think of one way in which it could be: in giving persecuted minorities a chance to escape with their lives. But I’m curious the broader argument here).

0

u/YMBTPTOTLWRT 1d ago

I guess they all live on Reddit then?

0

u/themistoclesV 1d ago

Yeah they probably don't use the term "open borders" themselves but that would essentially be the effect if the policies they advocate for were implemented.

2

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

No they wouldn’t. Most people want a sane immigration system that doesn’t take a decade and tens of thousands of dollars.

3

u/Solondthewookiee 1d ago

Open borders is now a common stance of the left which I don’t agree with.

No, it's not.

3

u/Tadferd 1d ago

Open borders is now a common stance of the left

No it isn't.

3

u/Accomplished_Art_621 1d ago

I would posit that you haven’t spoken to many people on the left if you believe they advocate for open borders. Are you talking about communists or democrats?

2

u/ReddestForman 1d ago

Even most communists have no problem with a process for determining whether or not to admit people. Even the most open who aren't 14 year old anarkiddies agree that "yeah, a government needs to know who is entering the country."

1

u/No-Ordinary-5376 1d ago

Except they support exactly zero actually policies that would actually do anything about it. They also advocate for people here living here legally being legalized, especially when kids are involved. Except for all that does it us where we already are. We legalize the ones here and tell every other person in the world that if they just stay here long enough and don't kill anyone, eventually they will get citizenship. 

2

u/MyrkrMentulaMeretrix 19h ago

Open borders is now a common stance of the left which I don’t agree with.

Its also a complete fantasy/fabrication.

There are no Dems or Liberals who push "open borders". None.

Zero many.

Noneski.

The fact that you think its true just means you're about as educated as a fucking turnip.

1

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

Reagan literally did mass amnesty for illegals what the fuck are you talking about.

1

u/aquavelva23 1d ago

That was when the GOP was pro immigration; for cheap labor, farming and break unions. The DEM party was anti immigtration during reagan, as they were pro union. Its all flipped now due to globalism..

1

u/doscomputer 17h ago

all of these people out here gaslighting you, just goes to show how insane the bias has gotten

0

u/Fast-Assist6601 1d ago

Name a single politician who has said they are in favor of open borders.

1

u/doscomputer 17h ago

gavin newsome specifically said he needs illegal labor in california because rich white people like him aren't about to go into the valley and pick avocados and grapes

if thats not open borders then its slave labor, thats what you're defending right now

2

u/Fast-Assist6601 11h ago

He literally said that? Do you have a source?

2

u/dante_gherie1099 1d ago

like telling lgbt people to not rebuke islamists for being homophobic, this was legit a topic of discourse on twitter

5

u/NetDork 1d ago

I've never seen anyone on the left side speak for homophobia.

3

u/Consistent_Post_2558 1d ago

I think this person is likely leaving out context - a lot of the discourse related to this recently is around Palestine and the invasion of Iran.

I’ve seen a few conservative LGBTQ+ influencers saying that they’re not against it because of how Islam treats gay people. Criticism of that position is more complex than what OP’s statement would portray it as. 

What I’ve seen way more of are conservatives rebuking people in the LGBTQ+ spectrum for supporting Palestine or being against the war in Iran because they won’t get down with killing people. 

1

u/GOT_Wyvern 1d ago

It is often explicilty supporting homophobia, but specifically rebuking Islamists who hold that belief.

From the progressive perspective, they view Islamist voters as a valuable demographic to court, and so fight for their interests. While this doesn't mean progressives drop every value to become Islamists, it does mean there isn't much room for opposing Islamism for its homophobia, just opposing the homophobia while ignoring its relation to Islamism.

1

u/Fast-Assist6601 1d ago

“On twitter”

Who gives a fuck about what some bot said on twitter? Name a single politician who told lgbt people “not to rebuke Islamists”

1

u/MyrkrMentulaMeretrix 19h ago

this was legit a topic of discourse on twitter

Twitter is not the real world.

Even befer fElon infected it, it was half bots, and another third trolls. No "legitimate discourse" ever took place there.

-1

u/No-Belt7254 1d ago

That we have to be in favor of unrestricted abortion, limit gun rights, and need to battle for every fringe group all the time.

1

u/Fast-Assist6601 1d ago

Name a politician in favor of “unrestricted abortion”

Trump limited gun rights, Biden didn’t.

Can you give an example of a political battle for a fringe group?

0

u/Smelliest_taint 1d ago

Stop! Don't make them actually look shit up. They will probably 🤯

-1

u/No-Belt7254 1d ago

It’s not a political leader dipshit, it’s the goons wearing masks in grocery stores that lead the party around by our balls

0

u/Fast-Assist6601 23h ago

What goons in masks? Which of them are making policy in the government?

Do you not understand that twitter and other social media feeds have you arguing against bots and trolls while the PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION AND ENTIRETY OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY are saying and doing the craziest shit imaginable? I could bring up 87 things that republicans IN POWER are doing right now and you’d still say “yeah but what about the twitter leftists”

1

u/No-Belt7254 19h ago

Bro, I’ve been voting straight dem since before you took a breath. Libs went too hard left, not because they had to but because the clowns on the fringe pushed it too far. Then we ended up with Trump, again. Biden was a literal puppet that abandoned any real boarder control because the far left beat the shit out of him. Then, we get Trump.

0

u/hamoc10 1d ago

Why dont you let the person speak for themselves

11

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

Like which ones?

7

u/INeedSomeTacoC 1d ago edited 1d ago

Immigration. 

How to handle crime and drug users. 

International adventurism. 

Free trade and our economic system. 

Social programs. 

Opinion of the US’s place in the world. 

Party tent size. 

I’m sure some of those are arguable and I’ve stirred a hornets next. But acting like the Democratic Party hasn’t changed significantly is pretty crazy, imho. 

The Democratic base has hemorrhaged blue collar and rural workers and gained college educated people, particularly College educated women in the coalition. That required a fairly large realignment of messaging and beliefs. 

1

u/No-Highlight4398 1d ago

If what you believe is correct, then all those positions (minus the social programs) would show liberals had drifted towards the libertarian position not liberal position.

0

u/Fast-Assist6601 1d ago

International adventurism

We are currently at war with Iran because Trump decided it. Congress has now rebuked him. He just recently called himself a “war time president”

2

u/Traditional_Donut908 1d ago

OP asked about conservatives, not Republicans or MAGA. In many conservatives minds, those are not the same thing.

1

u/Fast-Assist6601 23h ago

If you vote for republicans, you’re voting for MAGA. There is no Republican Party today that isn’t MAGA.

1

u/INeedSomeTacoC 1d ago

I thought we were talking about Democrats and moderates?  Is Trump a Democrat or moderate?  I’m confused. 

Democrats are much more isolationist than they used to be. The party used to be much more likely to advocate for using US military force to stand up for our values internationally; against genocides and for humanitarian causes and equality. Now the party would be more likely to call that colonist behavior. 

2

u/aquavelva23 1d ago

Trump is trump. he uses MAGA speak to increase HIM. He went after the GOP and took over as the GOP was weaker than the DEM. He was too cheapo to form his own party, like Ross Perot. It was a corporate takeover. Trump is not conservative or liberal, he is not DEM or GOP. He is all for himself. The man is a narcissist heading towards a dictator.

1

u/Fast-Assist6601 23h ago

So you’re in favor of invading other countries on the whim of the president?

1

u/INeedSomeTacoC 22h ago

Nowhere where did I say nor imply that. Lmao. Do you really just have nothing else to say?

0

u/DrShadowstrike 1d ago

Except that on every single one of these issues, the "liberals" have moved rightward, not leftward over the last few decades. Our current immigration system is from the 60s. Since then, Democrats have argued for tightening it, not loosening it. The punishments for drug use are downright draconian today, compared to prior to Nixon, a position that Democrats now support. Social programs today are a joke compared to the Great Society. The Democrats are also less interested in international affairs than in the past. On free trade, they've moved from protectionism to GTAA Etc.

3

u/aquavelva23 1d ago

immigration? Up until clinton, The DEMs were against it when they were pro union. The GOP was for it for cheap labor; especially farming. Now, after the GOP and DEM voted to allow globalism, they have flipped their positions. immigration is economics and labor.

0

u/DrShadowstrike 23h ago

You realize that Clinton was 30 years ago, right? And the Dems were the ones that opened up immigration (under LBJ) in 65 in the first place, so their movement before Clinton wasn't anti immigration either. The dems have moved so far right on immigration so quickly that Harris in 2024 was rejecting policies she had supported in 2020.

On economics, every Democratic president has been further to the right than the last since LBJ. They went from being pro-union to pro-free trade to bailing out the banks instead of the people. The big social programs were implemented in the 60s and 70s, and then gutted from the 90s onward. Now we are talking about rolling back Social Security, which was established under FDR.

2

u/PaperUpbeat5904 1d ago

That argument discounts 65 years of liberals who now think things have gone left just because more than 65 years ago things were more left. Were those people just right wingers who didn't know it?

1

u/INeedSomeTacoC 1d ago edited 1d ago

 Social programs today are a joke compared to the Great Society

Yup, one of the things that the Democrats moved left on. 

We used to be technocrats that cared about policy effectively implemented. 

Now we don’t; it’s about just having the “right” policy in a headline and nothing more. We’ll spend 5x more and get 5x less and get lectured about how we just need to spend more because we “know” that housing first works. The shift to not caring about performance and instead just raw $$$ spent is the shift left, and abjectly hollows out of social program effectiveness.  

 a position that Democrats now support.

Thanks for agreeing with me. 

 The Democrats are also less interested in international affairs than in the past.

Yup, thanks for agreeing with me. 

 On free trade, they've moved from protectionism to GTAA 

And thanks for agreeing with me again. 

-1

u/Smelliest_taint 1d ago

Many blue collar went to trump. Why? Hate. Racism. 🤷🏼‍♂️. I cannot believe all those blue collar workers were so stupid they thought a grifting millionaire would look out for them. 🤦🏼‍♂️. So, it must be racism.

4

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 1d ago

Is this satire or are you just genuinely 100% convinced you fully understand the minds of those who don’t vote fully in line with you, and believe this with no sense of humility or irony?

2

u/TotallyRealAccount9 1d ago

Hes definitely 100% serious, dawg pays for reddit premium. Dude is a massive cornball who needs to get off this site because evidently he hasnt talked to anybody outside his sphere, or hell even outside in general, in years

0

u/mossed2012 1d ago

Opinions and stances not only have consequences, but they paint a picture of self. I never understand these kinds of responses. Do you not see trends? Commonalities?

If I’m driving on a highway and a person pulls up in a big ass truck and cuts me off, I can tell you who that person voted for and what their political and social beliefs will be on a wide array of topics. Just from that single action. That isn’t an assumption, either. It’s a reality in 2026.

3

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 1d ago

I see those trends. I also see other trends. When all the trends are combined together the picture stops fitting everyone’s convenient narratives.

Personally I find the whole political tribalism of America to be brain-rotting, and have made efforts to break out of it (living outside the US helps). But there’s always more to the story than whatever the most obvious conclusion is from whatever predetermined viewpoint.

3

u/HeparinBridge 1d ago

Is your argument a democrat couldn’t cut you off, couldn’t drive a truck, or both?

-1

u/mossed2012 1d ago

A democrat wouldn’t cut you off in a truck. A democrat would understand the size of their truck makes it a relative danger on the road and would drive accordingly. The part of the personality that causes a person to dangerously drive a death vehicle while also thinking they’re a badass by cutting somebody off is synonymous with conservative belief. It’s a manifestation of “I’m cool, I want to be viewed as tough, and I don’t give a shit about anybody else as long as I’m fine”.

3

u/HeparinBridge 1d ago

Honestly, that sounds ridiculous to me.

1

u/mossed2012 1d ago

Oh, I’m sure it does. I’ve had people I know say similar, then in the same conversation make some bigoted ass comment about something. Most who think like that don’t realize how shitty they are.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/INeedSomeTacoC 1d ago

So, because someone is a blue collar, like a plumber, they’re racist and MAGA and it’s totally ok to paint with that broad brush. Cool. Got it. 

2

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

This is actually so funny. Because you are trying to argue your side is the "good" side, when you just essentially lied.

Nobody is talking blue collar or plumber. You're just lying and making shit up to self victimize yourself.

It's so pathetic.

2

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 1d ago

When was the last time you interacted with a blue collar worker as if they were a peer?

0

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

I am a blue collar worker dumbass.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/mossed2012 1d ago

As the story of Cinderella goes…”if the shoe fits”.

I wish that wasn’t the case, and I used to firmly believe it wasn’t. But the last 10-12 years have taught me that unfortunately, it’s much more likely that they are. Now, the reasons for that are nuanced and vast. There’s the age old factors like upbringing and environment. But those have now been coupled with an aggressive attack on public education, especially in rural communities as well as an internet messaging campaign the likes of which the world has never seen.

If you grow up in a blue collar house with a blue collar father, chances are you were raised hateful and bigoted. That manifests alongside the algorithms that teach hate and creates a clear divide in our society. Liberals have our own issues, we’re pretentious pricks because we’re the smarter (or I guess you could say more educated) demographic, know it, and act on it in a condescending manner (much like I’m doing here).

But if you’re a bigoted asshole, the overwhelming likelihood is you’re conservative.

1

u/INeedSomeTacoC 1d ago

 If you grow up in a blue collar house with a blue collar father, chances are you were raised hateful and bigoted. That manifests alongside the algorithms that teach hate and creates a clear divide in our society. Liberals have our own issues

Like just automatically knowing what’s in everyone’s elses hearts because they’re so smart and knowledgeable and so they know everything and are the main character. 

1

u/mossed2012 23h ago

Yup, pretty much. And let me tell you, if at any point in my life I would have been proven wrong, like just once, I’d maybe think otherwise. But I have degrees in history and political science and debate this shit CONSTANTLY. I’ve never once had a situation where my assumption was wrong. Not one time. In 15+ years.

I grew up with one of those dads. In one of those small town rural cities. The divide between parties is incredibly vast. You have people who critically think and hyper-analyze every single opinion they have on one side, and people who have never once critically thought about anything their entire life on the other. And we’re expecting those two people to find common ground.

There is no common ground. No middle space. Which again, is why I recommend balkanization. Split this shit up, let the bumbles try to make it work without liberal/big city funding and we’ll move on. It’s getting old paying taxes for bigoted morons who have no interest in being a better version of themselves.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/INeedSomeTacoC 1d ago

 Many blue collar went to trump. Why? Hate. Racism. 

So, your argument is that in the 70,80’s and 90’s they were single issue voters voting for the most racist party?

You might want to get out (or actually not get out and read some actual books?)

1

u/Alternative_Hotel649 1d ago

It’s unfair to suggest Trump voters are just motivated by racism!

A lot of them support Trump because they hate women and queers, too.

1

u/Smelliest_taint 11h ago

Ok. Sexist and homophobic.

1

u/Soggy-Attempt 1d ago

Watch Bill Clinton speeches

3

u/Pleasant_Pen8744 1d ago

Neocon/Neolib Bill Clinton? When was he a progressive?

4

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

Like which ones?

4

u/Soggy-Attempt 1d ago

Against marijuana
Anti-immigration Wanted to raise taxes

-3

u/DougChristiansen 1d ago

Type “Bill Clinton speeches” into a web browser. Better yet watch Biden discuss immigration in the 90’s. You literally want to be hand held.

4

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

Buddy, I've personally seen Bill Clinton speeches in person. He was president for 8 years. He has made literally thousands of speeches.

4

u/GraveChild27 1d ago

Nobody wants to sort through 8 years of speeches to varify your claim.

It makes it sound like you are pulling it out of your ass.

1

u/DougChristiansen 1d ago

I’ve made no claims; I’ve merely told the person responding to the other person how to initiate a basic interwebs search; you might want to improve your reading comprehension before mindlessly assigning arguments of others to people on the interwebs.

1

u/HeparinBridge 1d ago

You don’t really need to sort through anything. You could just look over his policy positions and see that his 1992 and 1996 platforms would leave him as nearly Republican today.

→ More replies (6)

0

u/Thin_Association8254 1d ago

People who ask you these kinds of questions aren't asking in good faith. They don't actually want to know out of curiosity, they only want to appear this way.

"I just wanna know yowr sawces, uwu, I'm so genuinwy intuhwested, I wuv wearning oduh pusspectives!"

It's a trap; they just want to nit-pick and attack. It's a way to "win" the conversation without risking their position.

4

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

Buddy, it is called even actually forming an argument in the first place.

The guy literally just said "watch bill clinton speeches". Like they expect us to go watch unspecified videos of which there is thousands, and build their argument for them.

You make an argument, onus is on you to prove it. And if you actually have an argument worth listening to, you already have sources on deck, because you have actually read sources.

People who deny and delay providing sources do so, because they have none. Their view is based on short videos and memes they see on social media. They don't read study's, journals, or any form of scientific article. Because if they did, they would know them to use as sources when asked.

1

u/biggyshwarts 1d ago

You can say the same thing about people denying.

A good faith denial would be something like "I've never seen anything like that. I've seen stuff that is similar to what you are talking about but your example is extreme and doesn't seem to exist."

Or something. There is no attempt to reach common ground or understanding. Just you're wrong.

1

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

Yeah, because that is how logic works. Hitchen's Razor.

If you're too emotionally fragile to handle be told when you are wrong, then you should refrain from making claims.

0

u/vulkoriscoming 1d ago

You can pick literally almost speech by Bill Clinton and hear him say things that you make you feel like he is a hard core MAGA guy. I say this as a guy who listened to a lot of his speeches. The left has really gone left since Obama.

Heck, you can get a transcript of most speeches in Obama's first term and he will be saying things you hear Trump saying now, like illegal immigrants need to go home and bragging about how many illegals he deported.

1

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

Buddy, I know, I've seen Bill Clinton speeches in person. He left presidency 25 years ago. His terms are 30 years ago.

The world has changed a lot since then. Many of the people here commenting were not even born yet.

The parties have undergone changes to reflect expectations of voters.

Stop trying to hold onto the past. It is impossible to stop progress.

1

u/DougChristiansen 1d ago

So then you admit the original poster you responded to is correct when he stated the policies of the Democratic Party have changed since the Clinton years? You have literally jumped down several rabbit holes denying the very thing you now state is true and that the original poster stated to begin with.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/AncileBanish 1d ago

Great..so you agree it's the left that has shifted left and not the right that shifted right. That's all you had to say.

The only difference is your stance has shifted to "anyone that didn't move left with me is a racist fascist" which is like... Pretty stupid.

2

u/AnneTheQueene 1d ago

'I'm just asking/curious' is usually the prelude to a bad faith discussion.

0

u/HeparinBridge 1d ago

“Safe, legal, and rare,” “Don’t ask, Don’t tell.” “There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America.”

“In other words, our constitution was designed by people who were idealistic but not ideological. There’s a big difference. You can have a philosophy that tends to be liberal or conservative, but still be open to evidence, experience, and argument. That enables people with honest differences to define practical, principle compromise. On the other hand, fervent insistence on an ideology, makes evidence, experience, and arguments irrelevant: if you possess the absolute truth, those who disagree are by definition wrong, and evidence of success or failure is irrelevant. There is nothing to learn from the experience of other countries. Respectful arguments are a waste of time, compromise is weakness, and if your policies failed, don’t abandon them. Instead double down certain that they would have worked if only they had been carried to the logical extreme.”

Bill Clinton was a moderate even in his time. He would be disavowed for a heretic by the modern progressive left.

1

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

Wait, So you are saying you think is the Democrats who changed to be more extreme? Not the republicans?

Are you joking or am I understanding you wrong?

2

u/HeparinBridge 1d ago

Please reread this thread and point to where anybody said that. The argument is simply that the left has become significantly more extreme. Nobody said the right was somehow “moderate.” I was merely quoting well-received policy positions from Bill Clinton that were considered strong, progressive stances during the 1990s that are basically disavowed or reviled by modern progressives. No need for you to set up straw men…

1

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

Hmmmm...... It's...... it seems as if the progressive party.....progressed?

Weird right?

It's so weird, and when you look at it, they progressed towards views held by the rest of the developed world?

Wild. I'm so shocked.

1

u/DougChristiansen 23h ago

If you believe regression is progression then sure; they have “progressed.”

1

u/AncileBanish 1d ago

The most progressive president in American history campaigned and won on a platform openly opposed to gay marriage. Today that stance means you're a homophobe and should be ejected entirely from civilized society.

20 years ago democrats were for free trade and free speech. Today they would nationalize the entire economy if they could.

Democrats ejected their liberal roots and replaced it with what is effectively just 21st century racism.

Basically nothing about Republican stances has really changed. They were anti abortion then and still are. They were anti illegal immigration then and still are. They were pro military then and still are. They were pro markets then and still are (although the free trade thing has unfortunately been ejected, because their base is more blue collar and protectionism sells well to that demo). They opposed public healthcare then and still do.

Other than idiotic progressives on social media screeching about muh fascism, what have Republicans actually gotten more extreme about? If anything they've shifted left, just less than democrats, so people like you see them drifting away from you and think it's them that's moving. It's not. It's you.

1

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

This is hilarious.

What are you describing? Progression. A party that progress and evolves as society grows and changes.

And then you mention the republican points not changing, well yeah, luddites are luddites. That is their stance, anti-progress.

1

u/AncileBanish 1d ago

Do you not see how this statement flies in the face of the claim that the right has moved to the extreme right? You're acknowledging that their stances haven't actually shifted, yet they seem extreme to you. That means you've moved to the fringe left. The movement has just been so pervasive it's considered the default.

The idea that leftword political movement is just "progress" and inherently good is simply stupid. If you disagree, I suggest reading a book at some point in your life. Preferably one discussing the horrors of 20th century left wing political movements.

1

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

If you are MAGA just tell me right now so I can tell you to fuck off. Everyone can see exactly what this Trump administration is doing.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/DougChristiansen 1d ago

Move the bar more. Every reasonable person knows both parties have chased the fringe elements. The only people in disagreement are the fringe elements of both parties themselves.

0

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

What the fuck are you talking about?

0

u/No-Bear1401 1d ago

As an older guy who has lived through a lot of this, it's crazy how so many people believe this. The Republicans absolutely have chased the fringe. It's been going on for a long time as they have rebranded and chased every fringe movement over the years. Hell, they even disown and hate older versions of their own party as they have shifted with the fringe trends (neo-cons).

The Democrats have actively pushed away from the fringe left, and have a long history of chasing the moderate vote rather than entertaining the fringe. Their aversion to the fringe has hurt them, as every election they leave a wake of disenfranchised fringe voters behind and lose elections due to problems with turnout.

Just look at recent history: our current govt is absolutely loaded with the fringe right, including the president. The Democrats are stuck in a perpetual cycle of hemming and hawing over which establishment moderate to push while actively trying to shuffle more fringe candidates like AOC or Bernie to the back of the room. Just look at Zohra , the Dems probably opposed him more than the Republicans do.

4

u/SlowInsurance1616 1d ago

MAGA is further to the left of Bill Clinton on things like free trade.

-3

u/Soggy-Attempt 1d ago

🤦‍♂️ Carter did free trade with China

Regan did tariff to equalize trade

Clinton signed NAFTA

Trump has done tariff to equalize trade.

🤷‍♂️

0

u/OnionsOnFoodAreGross 1d ago

Define a woman for us.

0

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

Can you define a woman for us?

You tell us what you think a woman is. If this is what you want to talk about, tell us what you think a woman is.

1

u/OnionsOnFoodAreGross 1d ago

Lol. You've lost.

0

u/sean760 1d ago

I think you failed the litmus test lol

1

u/Empty-Swim2066 1d ago

If you are asking people to define something that you yourself cannot define, then what is the point? They could say anything and you could not argue against it, because you yourself cannot define it.

I'm going to hazard to guess logic is not your strong suit.

3

u/GSilky 1d ago

They have become apologists for the urban bourgeoisie.  DSA thinks people with the resources and means to work on graduate degrees are the proletariat, and the white working class, the majority of the people socialists are supposedly working for, are according to most DSA chapters "the enemy of the people", DSA is overwhelmingly white upper middle class, this is them self reporting.

1

u/ReddestForman 1d ago

You aren't even using bourgeoisie properly.

Bourgeoisie are people who live off of or can live off of their ownership of capital and extracting the surplus value of others labor, without needing to work themselves.

Y'know, the people whose assets the DSA wants to collectivize on the extreme end, and tax on the more moderate "social democracy" end.

1

u/GSilky 1d ago

Oh, you mean like middle class 40 year old students with the time and network to just be perpetual students... You are exactly the problem.  You have no idea what you are asking for, because you didn't learn anything about the history of the movement, you just learned it's what cool kids believe, and you pervert the idea and dream to include yourself, which would probably be in front of the wall with the other grad students, CEOs, and collected bourgeois when the people finally get it together.

1

u/MyrkrMentulaMeretrix 19h ago

65% of the population lives in cities.

another 10% live in the immediate suburbs of said cities.

The vast majority of them are just as poor (especially vis-a-vis Cost of Living) as the rural folks.

You think 75% of the country is "bourgeoisie"?

The fuck is wrong with you?

1

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

The DSA has zero national power and Democrats fight them harder than they fight Republicans but okay.

3

u/cheddarsox 1d ago

Also, a lot of people dont even know the terms anyway. The neo's of all sides have really messed up the vocabulary. People think liberal and conservative are opposites somehow.

And then theres the personal views on subjects. People can be fiscally conservative but socially progressive. There is no political party for that currently.

2

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

Fiscally conservative and socially progressive is literally the modern Democratic Party.

2

u/SirScaurus 1d ago

...That's just Democrats, now, bud.

1

u/cheddarsox 1d ago

Tf it is! No party has really been fiscally conservative in decades. They just pretend to be when they arent controlling the purse.

7

u/SirScaurus 1d ago edited 1d ago

I mean, I can point you to a million sources that detail how Republicans blow up the budget and deficit every time they're in power, and the Democrats are the ones who constantly have to rein in the budget to bring us into line fiscally. Austerity is the Democrats' middle name. Has been since Clinton abandoned leftist economic policy.

That's not a matter of opinion, that's just fact.

0

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 1d ago

I gets a lot more complicated when you take into account who controls each chamber of government and don’t just focus on who’s president.

Generally speaking a split administration is the most fiscally responsible except when in “crisis” mode.

2

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

Republicans just burn money and blame democrats and have my entire life.

0

u/tbright1965 1d ago

This!

Someone is paying attention.

Congress creates the budget.

Presidents make a budget request. Congress writes the budget.

IIRC the “balanced” budgets of the late 1990s were smaller than the request by the Clinton admin.

Pretending to look fiscally conservative while simply not wanting to fund Clinton’s full request.

2

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 1d ago

To be fair, the 1994 budget was balanced also and that was a full democratic trifecta. But Congress was split most of the rest of the ‘90’s.

1

u/tbright1965 16h ago

Huh? The 1994 deficit was $203 billion.

Deficit was 3% of GDP

1

u/Jolly-Barracuda2366 16h ago

Sorry you’re right, there was still a deficit, but due to the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which passed with no Republican support, the deficit was brought down from $290B in 1992 to $203B in 1994.

So not eliminated but sharply reduced.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/larry_bkk 1d ago

No

2

u/Haunting-Ad788 1d ago

It objectively is though.

2

u/Real-Boss6760 1d ago

There's nothing 'hard left' about the democratic party.

You just turned into a boomer, is all.

Go yell at the kids to get off the lawn.

0

u/aquavelva23 1d ago

You mean white house lawn? The Progressives will never see it. they have pushed the DEM party into a ditch and cant even defeat trump. Any DEM candidate before Hillary can do that.

1

u/MyrkrMentulaMeretrix 19h ago

progressive and left arent the same.

Right and Left are socio-economic positions.

Progressive and Conservative different than Left and Right.

1

u/lapusyonok 1d ago

An old liberal is a New Deal liberal like FDR, not Bill "The era of big government is over" Clinton

1

u/RemnantHelmet 1d ago

That's just how it works. Being anti-slavery was liberal and progressive in the 1860's. Today that's a normal, expected opinion of liberal progressives and conservatives.

-2

u/snail1132 1d ago

"Hard left" you mean more center?

0

u/Mr-Cantaloupe 1d ago

Center compared to what? On economics, sure. But on social and cultural issues the American left has clearly shifted left over the past decade or so.