Any Centrists?

[TheWhiteBull]

I would like this thread to be about building common ground and politely discovering what things it seems we can get a majority opinion on. Of course I realize that might be asking a bit much but hell, we can try can't we?

What things do you guys think are the most commonly shared opinions acroos the political spectrum?

If you're center-left or center-right, do you or would you ever consider referring to yourself as just "Centrist"?

 

[Yeomin]

IMO, I think most people view themselves as centrists until they look at the views of others. A centrist would be one to look at both sides and develop a compromise. Which sounds great in theory. However, compromises are only accepted on policy, not on solutions.

Take any hot button issue (gun violence, healthcare, taxation, deficit, first amendment). One side comes up with a policy to confront the problem and the other side presents their own policy, which is inevitably 180 degrees from the other policy making compromise impossible.

The irony on healthcare is that there is very little difference between the senate bill and the ACA, yet not a single Democrat will support the bill. If compromise existed in congress, it would be happening now.

Trump is a centrist, or was before the left tried a character assassination on him. The "never Trumpers" hate him because he's not conservative. The left hates him because he fights like they do, and we can't have that. His policies are almost exact copies of President Clinton's, but now they are racist, homophobic, xenophobic, islamophobic...

Unfortunately, centrists don't exist for a reason.

 

[oggbashan]

The most common complaint is that The President of the United States - pick any one from the recent past - is an appalling choice and a mistake.

The second complaint is that one (or the other) US political party is wrong headed, evil and destroying America.

The third? That all posters on political threads here and those posting on political topics on the General Board are wrong headed idiots.

Why am I posting here?

Dunno.

 

[sr71plt]

I think that the center of agreement in the United States is that there does need to be tax reform and a better health care system. What would be better on these issues, though, immediately scatters the opinions. More agreement, I think, can be gotten on there needing to be infrastructure renewal, which is only stressed by disagreement on where to get the money from other areas to feed into this.

(And I think I'm a whole lot closer to the centrist in thinking that the Trumpet wackos blasting out on this forum are.)

 

[nowisthetime]

The most common complaint is that The President of the United States - pick any one from the recent past - is an appalling choice and a mistake.

.

I'm not sure about that, you have quite a bit of his stans...I mean supporters on here and every where else thinking he is the best thing since sliced bread.

They are defending him to the max, or deflecting and whining about Obama or Clinton.

He still has a high approval rating from his die hard base for some reason and that is it.

 

[nowisthetime]

I consider myself center left, because there are some issues on the far left that I have to side-eye. There used to be a myriad of issues the left and right can agree upon but that is incredibly shrinking as time passes. The party of Eisenhower is no longer recognizable today, it has been hijacked by a bunch of bigots, fundies, and just plain grifters.


They stand by the four Gs-Genealogy (Race), Gays, Gestation(Abortion), and Guns.

The critical topics of education and the environment used to be a common ground between the right and the left and regrettably, that is no longer the issue. Though it was a Republican president, Tricky Dick, that helped create the EPA, he would be considered a centrist today, that's how far off the chain the right has become in this generation.

And now a fundie ignoramus has been appointed to the Department of Education, and she wishes to decimate public schools rather than fix them. It's much easier to dupe an uninformed citizenry.

Alas, there is nothing that brings the left and right together. The right wants to destroy this country due to their sociopathy and intolerance because they hate anyone that doesn't accord with their strict lifestyles.

 

[TheWhiteBull]

IMO, I think most people view themselves as centrists until they look at the views of others. A centrist would be one to look at both sides and develop a compromise. Which sounds great in theory. However, compromises are only accepted on policy, not on solutions.

Take any hot button issue (gun violence, healthcare, taxation, deficit, first amendment). One side comes up with a policy to confront the problem and the other side presents their own policy, which is inevitably 180 degrees from the other policy making compromise impossible.

The irony on healthcare is that there is very little difference between the senate bill and the ACA, yet not a single Democrat will support the bill. If compromise existed in congress, it would be happening now.

Trump is a centrist, or was before the left tried a character assassination on him. The "never Trumpers" hate him because he's not conservative. The left hates him because he fights like they do, and we can't have that. His policies are almost exact copies of President Clinton's, but now they are racist, homophobic, xenophobic, islamophobic...

Unfortunately, centrists don't exist for a reason.

I think the main reason they don't exist is because of our system which essentially forces a two-party set up. If our government had been built differently we might have something where two outlying parties would need to woo a centrist party/voters in order to form coalition administrations as opposed to wooing them to join their side to beat the other one.

 

[JackLuis]

I believe the issue that divides us is , MONEY, who gets it, who give it and why. Conservatives want a balanced budget, they say, but they always want to pump up Defense. Liberals want to pump up social programs, but can't pay for it or be accused of neglecting Defense, running up the debt and being mean to Corporations.

All the rest, abortion, Islamophobia and most of the other 'burning issues" just are just to distract us from the fact that our Congress is not looking after their responsibilities, they are sucking the country dry.

 

[TheWhiteBull]

I think that the center of agreement in the United States is that there does need to be tax reform and a better health care system. What would be better on these issues, though, immediately scatters the opinions. More agreement, I think, can be gotten on there needing to be infrastructure renewal, which is only stressed by disagreement on where to get the money from other areas to feed into this.

(And I think I'm a whole lot closer to the centrist in thinking that the Trumpet wackos blasting out on this forum are.)

I don't think there's an incredible amount of difference of what kind of tax reform is needed. Public opinion polls show that most of American support middle-class tax breaks and increasing taxes on the wealthy. It's just that not everybody ends up actually voting for politicians who agree with that.

As far as thinking you're reasonable, I'd take the same stance as Post #2, that most people automatically think of themselves as the sane and rational ones.

 

[TheWhiteBull]

I consider myself center left, because there are some issues on the far left that I have to side-eye. There used to be a myriad of issues the left and right can agree upon but that is incredibly shrinking as time passes. The party of Eisenhower is no longer recognizable today, it has been hijacked by a bunch of bigots, fundies, and just plain grifters.


They stand by the four Gs-Genealogy (Race), Gays, Gestation(Abortion), and Guns.

The critical topics of education and the environment used to be a common ground between the right and the left and regrettably, that is no longer the issue. Though it was a Republican president, Tricky Dick, that helped create the EPA, he would be considered a centrist today, that's how far off the chain the right has become in this generation.

And now a fundie ignoramus has been appointed to the Department of Education, and she wishes to decimate public schools rather than fix them. It's much easier to dupe an uninformed citizenry.

Alas, there is nothing that brings the left and right together. The right wants to destroy this country due to their sociopathy and intolerance because they hate anyone that doesn't accord with their strict lifestyles.

I agree about the general outward shift (of both sides) but as another center-leftie I feel that you could use alt-right and sjw's interchangeably in that last paragraph (note: not the majority).

 

[sr71plt]

I don't think there's an incredible amount of difference of what kind of tax reform is needed. Public opinion polls show that most of American support middle-class tax breaks and increasing taxes on the wealthy. It's just that not everybody ends up actually voting for politicians who agree with that.

Those making policy aren't really giving any weight to what public opinion polls are showing what the public wants (or needs).

 

[TheWhiteBull]

Those making policy aren't really giving any weight to what public opinion polls are showing what the public wants (or needs).

True, and in cases of overwhelming support the main reason that they can get away with it is because of being enabled by voters who get distracted into focusing on various issues. Which is why maybe if there was a centrist movement oriented towards temporarily ignoring partisan issues in favor of working on majority-opinion issues we could accomplish something/s.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Those making policy aren't really giving any weight to what public opinion polls are showing what the public wants (or needs).

Now that is so true.

(1) Health Care is a big one.
(2) Tax Reform
(3) Jobs
(4) Immigration
(5) Get out of NAFTA (see, 3, Jobs)

IMHO, those are the big 4 that there could and should be agreement on if we excluded the views of left and right wing extremists. And me, I do consider myself a small-c conservative centrist.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

The fact is a majority of Americans are for sensible gun control and for saving the damn planet.

Climate change is the most urgent, pressing issue. None of these other things even matter, really.

 

[TheWhiteBull]

The fact is a majority of Americans are for sensible gun control and for saving the damn planet.

Climate change is the most urgent, pressing issue. None of these other things even matter, really.

Oh, so Black lives don't matter. I kid though, that was a joke.

In seriousness I understand what you mean saying they don't matter but they really do.

 

[dan_c00000]

All of you are raising very good points. Now if you can get Exxon-Mobil, Wall Street, and other big money out of government (and generally reduce the amount of capitalistic insanity in the U.S.) then maybe you can have a rational discussion.

You can't have a reasonable discussion with (just as an example) Paul Ryan when four of his top five donors are big pharmaceutical companies and finance corporations.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

I would like this thread to be about building common ground and politely discovering what things it seems we can get a majority opinion on. Of course I realize that might be asking a bit much but hell, we can try can't we?

What things do you guys think are the most commonly shared opinions acroos the political spectrum?

If you're center-left or center-right, do you or would you ever consider referring to yourself as just "Centrist"?

I'm closer to the center than I am to the extreme left. Unfortunately we have been divided by design. Those who are really in power want division and confusion so that they can consolidate power and accumulate wealth. We all seem to have a tendency to assume that whoever disagrees with us represents extremists views on everything.

But at the root of it all is greed for money and power.

 

[Yeomin]

I think the main reason they don't exist is because of our system which essentially forces a two-party set up. If our government had been built differently we might have something where two outlying parties would need to woo a centrist party/voters in order to form coalition administrations as opposed to wooing them to join their side to beat the other one.

The two party system is as old as the Constitution (Federalists (modern day Democrats) and Anti-federalist (Tea Party is closest example today, though Republicans claim to be)). Federalists were all for centralized power (in 1787), and anti-federalists were against centralized power because we had just fought a war against a King, who epitomizes centralized power.

The federalist won the day and we got the Constitution. Ten years later we got the Bill of Rights added to the constitution because the federalist had already began encroaching on rights they had claimed 10 years before were unencroachable. Today, the right relies on the Federalist Papers, which were written by the Federalists to sell the Constitution, as the bull work of conservatism, and the left claims the Federalist Papers are irrelevant. The irony is very rich, for those with eyes to see.

The Allien and Sedition Acts, which are still law, were the end of the Federalist Party. In 1799 they controlled most of the federal government. However, they lost the election of 1800 and never recovered. By 1820 they were practically nonexistent.

Is the two party system the problem? Maybe. I see the problem as corrupt media, multi-national corporations, lobbyists and Senators who are all unaccountable to the electorate most of the time, if not all of the time. Term limits are a good start that the electorate agree on, but those in power don't like.

I'll get off my soap box now

 

[TheWhiteBull]

The two party system is as old as the Constitution (Federalists (modern day Democrats) and Anti-federalist (Tea Party is closest example today, though Republicans claim to be)). Federalists were all for centralized power (in 1787), and anti-federalists were against centralized power because we had just fought a war against a King, who epitomizes centralized power.

The federalist won the day and we got the Constitution. Ten years later we got the Bill of Rights added to the constitution because the federalist had already began encroaching on rights they had claimed 10 years before were unencroachable. Today, the right relies on the Federalist Papers, which were written by the Federalists to sell the Constitution, as the bull work of conservatism, and the left claims the Federalist Papers are irrelevant. The irony is very rich, for those with eyes to see.

The Allien and Sedition Acts, which are still law, were the end of the Federalist Party. In 1799 they controlled most of the federal government. However, they lost the election of 1800 and never recovered. By 1820 they were practically nonexistent.

Is the two party system the problem? Maybe. I see the problem as corrupt media, multi-national corporations, lobbyists and Senators who are all unaccountable to the electorate most of the time, if not all of the time. Term limits are a good start that the electorate agree on, but those in power don't like.

I'll get off my soap box now

Well thank you for the history lesson. Im actually a student of Early American history so thats nothing new for me, I'll skip to the bottom.

Sure all of those other things hurt tremendously as well but I think having multiple serious contending parties would alleviate it quite a bit.

 

[Yeomin]

Well thank you for the history lesson. Im actually a student of Early American history ...

It was an interesting time. I fear we are heading for an equally interesting time.

 

[ChloeTzang]

All of you are raising very good points. Now if you can get Exxon-Mobil, Wall Street, and other big money out of government (and generally reduce the amount of capitalistic insanity in the U.S.) then maybe you can have a rational discussion.

You can't have a reasonable discussion with (just as an example) Paul Ryan when four of his top five donors are big pharmaceutical companies and finance corporations.

God, I'm agreeing with you. I'm checking my temperature now...

But seriously, I think this is where "centrist" comes in and this is yet another issue most of us can agree on. I can't remember who it was who broke up the big, was it oil companies? Along with "Ma Bell" way back when, but that's pretty much what we need all over again. A break up of all these large companies and the closing down of some of the real evil ones like Monsanto.

The fact is a majority of Americans are for sensible gun control and for saving the damn planet.

Climate change is the most urgent, pressing issue. None of these other things even matter, really.

And those, right there, are two issues you won't find agreement on, ever. The first even more emphatically than the second.

 

[HadrianTuring]

In a sense...

I do generally advocate centrist politics, because ideological fanatics truly scare me.

But ideologically, that is not entirely accurate. I truthfully don't hold much affection for either the GOP or the Democrats, largely because I have an idiosyncratic mix of political views. I'm to the right of the Republican Party on some issues, to the left of the Democrats on others.

 

[EternalFantasies]

I would like this thread to be about building common ground and politely discovering what things it seems we can get a majority opinion on. Of course I realize that might be asking a bit much but hell, we can try can't we?

What things do you guys think are the most commonly shared opinions acroos the political spectrum?

If you're center-left or center-right, do you or would you ever consider referring to yourself as just "Centrist"?

Of course, there is something called a centrist, but you're right in questioning whether anyone really is one.

That does not mean it doesn't exist and only center-left and center-right do; I mean a true centrist - and one that is not just a passive independent - but an informed politics following centrist, would be alternating his/her leanings depending.

Rom sees me as a conservative nut, and 4est sees me as a hardcore leftist; for example


As to shared opinions, they tend to be basic stuff: human rights, what's a crime, ..., social contract stuff. Dunno. Maybe stuff like that.

My 2 cents.

 

[TheWhiteBull]

It was an interesting time. I fear we are heading for an equally interesting time.

It was an interesting time. Have you read Liberty's Exiles by Maya Jasanoff?

 

[TheWhiteBull]

And those, right there, are two issues you won't find agreement on, ever. The first even more emphatically than the second.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...sals-stark-partisan-divisions-on-many-others/

It would seem that there's major bipartisan support for restricting gun sales to the mentally ill or those on the no-fly list, as well as requiring background checks during gun shows and private sales. Also only a minority of Republicans even want carrying without a license, and are even 50/50 on banning "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines, and creating a federal database.

If anything I'd say the 2nd (climate change) has the bigger discrepancy in opinion.