Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Ask to an AI Persona
Athletic Chloe
Whether you need tips on improving your game, insights on fitness and nutrition, or just want to...
Advisor Smith
With years of experience guiding individuals in their education and career paths, I'm here to...
James The Foodie
From savoring Italian classics to discovering the bold flavors of Japanese cuisine, I explore...
Fashionista Amy
I'm here to inspire and guide you with a touch of latest trends or advice on personal style.💅👒
Cinematic Lily
With my rich background and passion for the arts, I share insights on films, TV shows, and...
Laura
Have questions about GirlsAskGuys? I'm here to help!
Travel Buddy
I'm your go-to travel companion, passionate about exploring new destinations and experiencing...
Love Doctor Brad
Welcome to the heart of understanding and transformation. I am your guide on this journey to...
Gamer Bella
With my passion and experience in hobbies and leisure activities, I'm here to offer personalized...
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
60Opinion
Yep.. The left has lost their damn minds.
They won't be happy until tens of millions, or more, people are being murdered to support their ideology.. again.. Just like Socialist Germany did, and Russia, and China etc..
It's called a "purity spiral."
Pretty soon, the last of them will be locked up in a bunker somewhere, killing each other with their bare hands over who's really the least racist.
This was an inevitability. The democrats, since the neoliberalization in the 80's, have not been left enough to satisfy their base or meaningfully different enough from republicans to satisfy their base or intrigue non-voters.
It's about damned time the Democrats become a more left party. I'm tired of having two right wing parties to choose from here.
Most people aren't liberals, even people who vote Democrats.
If Democrats want to win more voters, they need to be slightly liberal, not a true "left-wing" party.
@EnglishArtsteacher Democrats are sort of damaged by the idea of 'another McGovern.' Really that's fallacious.
When we go left, people come out. When we put up a republican-lite against a republican, the electorate seems to want the real thing every time.
If we want more success, we should head left. You know what gets people out to the polls? Medicare for All. You know what doesn't? "Access to healthcare".
The reality is that we are too big tent of a party right now, and we choose to spite our most reliable core base, the left, to appease the liberals and the centrists. How about instead of scraping the bottom of the barrel on people who like, what? 90's third-way neoliberalism? and tap into our best potential base, which are the disenchanted progressives who are barely get out to vote because the current system seems unappealing to them.
In the 60s the rank-and-file in the Democratic party were working class white males. The Democratic party then was a little more left-leaning than the Republicans, but not too different. Today, America is much more ethnically and socially diverse, and the Democratic party reflects that change. The Republican party, on the other hand, is still dominated by rich white males, which is why they haven't changed as much.
The Democratic Party is dominated by freeloaders, which is why they changed.
@Liam_Hayden - Every new generation of Democrats feels the need to go 'one up' on their predecessors. Hubert Humphrey was a fire-breathing liberal in the 50s. By the 70s, he was the stodgy old guard. Jimmy Carter would probably now get called a reactionary among current Democrats. The Democratic party is now dominated by hard-line feminists, SJW's, soy-boys, and Black Live Matter people.
Actio-Reactio. If one side pushes into a more extreme point of view the opposition will as well. Not surprised to see this - and it lowkey confirms that the agitators come fromt he extreme left-wing this time.
Well as I said in your other take the US political spectrum is skewed
The democrats are approaching centrist stances and the republicans are still extremely right wing
Yes of course there are actual left wing people on the democratic side but as a whole no
Had Obama run for office anywhere in Europe his politics would have labelled him slightly right wing
Sure? But I don't really get what that has to do with talking about American politics. If, for example, you and I were talking about chicken then you came out of nowhere and said "yeah but chicken isn't beef" I'd be confused as I am now.
The point is that you are painting them as far left but they are nkt
Left barely exists in American politics
The reason you perceive republicans as spanning more is simply that they haven't moved their right wing stance and democrats simply have become less right wing
But even that is not quite correct because conservatism isn't right wing per se liberalism is they are the oldest political theories and in modern times usually are on the same side left is socialism liberalism's polar opposite and there is progressivism which is conservatisms polar opposite and socialism and progressivism often go together
Now there was a political theory referred to as socio liberalism it is obvious from the name a hybrid inherently centrist which is what large parts of the Democrat platform is based but because socioanything is dirty words you still just refer to them as liberalism and then call actual liberals libertarians
The point is that your starting point is completely off so any argument you make based on that cannot work
Much of what you see as left is not left which again is socialism but rather progressivism
Perhaps the problem lies in the retention of the two party system it makes for a black and white type of political thinking
Well no. I think the Republicans span more of the spectrum based on the graphs you can see that I posted above. Look at the peak and tail ends of each side and you can see that the republicans span a broader swath of ideological positions. I think this is largely because many people who have always been on "the left" have been pushed to joining the republicans by the polarization of the democratic party. That's pretty much what happened to me, but I still wouldn't say I'm republican. I'd call myself libertarian or independent because I don't like the Republicans either.
https://goo.gl/images/BMeJ5x
Damn
XD Oh my...
That's too good.
That's amazing I'm stealing it.
I wonder what America would look like if it was over 90% left wing. Doesn’t seem like we’re too far from that reality.
Good take ☺️
Most Americans would be outa work and paying all the money they do get from the government just to survive or to prop up the millions of illegal migrants they want to let flow across the border like water. OK, I'm not a Trump fan per se and maybe the wall he is holding the line on isn't the best answer but we need to take our security seriously. (sorry I know that was off topic but I think it fit what your saying.)
"wonder what America would look like if it was over 90% left wing. Doesn’t seem like we’re too far from that reality."
We're extremely far from that reality. As a matter of fact, I doubt either "wing" will be composed of 90 percent of the country.
@EmmaStar if we were further left employment would be near zero, we'd all have healthcare, access to public education, there would be more people living in middle class households, the rich would be forced to actually pay their employees living wages and government would stop infringing on our rights to personal autonomy.
Y’all make it seem like it would be an apocalypse 😂
So dramatic...🍿
Unemployment would be near zero...
The first two letters really make all the difference.
@SirRexington i know
It’s just people in general automatically assume the worst
@SirRexington Such were the promises in Russia and China and Venezuela. The problem is that Socialism makes almost everyone equal - by making them ALL poor, except the ruling elite, who live well (similar to the American middle class).
Meanwhile, the vast majority barely survive, and there are literal famines where people starve to death by the millions.
Do a little research. Talk to someone who lived behind the Iron Curtain in the 50s-80s, or in China before the 90s, or Venezuela now. What changed in those countries? They eventually embraced capitalism, and their lifestyles have risen dramatically. 20 years ago, folks in China were lucky to have a bicycle - today there are millions of cars. The difference is night and day.
@MrOracle, it really depends which type we're talking of here. Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland and Finland have a form of socialism; social democracy and they turned completely fine. Not all socialistic ideologies are bad.
@MrOracle I study socialist theory as religiously as a priest does the Bible, so don't tell me to research. I already do and am more than willing to continue researching. It is for that reason I know what I'm talking about and you don't. Study socialism and the thinkers most often associated with it, David Ricardo, Noam Chomsky, Murray Bookchin, Robert Owen, Karl Marx. Then come back to me with a so called understanding of socialism.
In my country literally anyone can start a political party and be elected, so I don’t know why you guys are acting all difficult having only two parties. It is too few, and only causes two groups to be hateful towards each other. When there’s many political parties it doesn’t cause that much hate
Yeah that's part of the problem with a two party system
None of this shit means anything. There is no "left" or "right" or "center." There is simply following logic, reason, evidence, facts, and common decency in order to solve complex problems that require complex solutions. And either someone does that, or they don't. Period.
Political labels are meaningless garbage.
That's nonsense. Left/right up/down there are several descriptors of varying political ideologies.
Yes... I'm aware that people think there are. And, for the reasons I stated, it's nonsense.
It's a fact that ~13% of Americans live in poverty in the US.
How does that fact lead to any policy proposals?
"It's a fact that ~13% of Americans live in poverty in the US.
How does that fact lead to any policy proposals?"
... I have no idea how to respond to ^ this with anything other than "huh?" I'm not really sure why you just said that or how it's related to the matter at hand or to the point I made.
You said that following evidence and facts leads to policy. Ok, what’s the policy you derive from the evidence/ fact I presented? Nothing? Well that’s good because you can’t draw policy from a fact. You have to have some ideological framework to have a goal. Do you want to reduce the number of people below the poverty line? Are you fine with it? Do you think the government has any right to intervene? Do you think society and therefor government has a duty to provide for its citizens? These are ideological questions that have to be answered before you can address policy. Those ideological groups are signified by the label that you ascribe to.
Um... what you do is follow the evidence and reason and logic to try to help the most people possible... common decency. I already said that. You still aren't making any sense.
"Help the most people possible" that's a utilitarian perspective and can and has lead to devastating policies. Again my point about left/right describing certain ideological bases and as such having some value and not being "meaningless garbage" but this is certainly an unnecessary tangent. Thanks for the conversation.
No... it's entirely necessary. You're pigeonholing yourself unnecessarily.
How exactly am I pigeonholing myself?
By erroneously thinking the way you're thinking. "If this then that." No... it doesn't work that way. You said something about helping the most people possible, in most situations, being the "utilitarian" response, or something. And I'd argue that that label as well is entirely meaningless and beside the point. It's simply the decent thing to do. Either someone is concerned about helping the most people possible at most times when possible, or they aren't. Either someone has decency or they don't. Someone can say that's "right" or "center" or whatever bullshit; it's nonsense. Decency and reason shouldn't be political.
Jesus. All words are apparently meaningless to you then 😂
Noooo, I said *political labels* are meaningless.
Utilitarianism is an ethical/philosophical position which you said was meaningless.
I said that your response to my comment was misguided. It's not a utilitarian response-- it's a proper response. Morality is not a political label.
Utilitarian ethics is hardly the only morality. It also has massive problems. The communist regimes that lead to the deaths of millions in the 20th century were utilitarian. I presume that you wouldn’t say they were therefor moral.
No. I wouldn't. I also didn't say anything about utilitarianism-- you brought it up.
Well, the government had to give people a side to fight for. If both sides remained similar, no one would argue as much about who comes into power, and we wouldn’t have the heated, pointless debates we have today.
Also, it makes sense that they’re moving to the left (with the republicans now remaining in place), since we couldn’t really go more right than we were. And the liberals definitely needed to become more left if they were to own up to their name.
uuhh.. there is a VERY long ways left to move to the right. As things are now it's very slightly right of center.
This backs up many anecdotal experience every conservative has had out there.
Not just in politics, the entire world is radicalizing for some odd reason
There are plenty of political parties. People just continue to vote party line rather than on issues like it’s a match up at the Superbowl rather than decisions that need to be made to manage the operation of a business.
What?
You asked: Is Now The Time For A Third Political Party To Rise In The US?
Here's a list of political parties in the USA. Usually you have at least 4 of them running a candidate in national elections that make the ballot in most states and often 5 or 6 that make the roster in a handful of states including the large ones. The media focuses all the attention on Dem. vs Rep. Though and people rally behind one team or the other like it’s Green Bay vs New England yelling from the sidelines your team sucks no your mom sucks rather than evaluating all potential options and voting based on policy proposals...
en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States
I wasn't asking that here. Thanks for the input though.
You interlinked them, so fair game... The only other question you asked is who moved? The answer to that is obviously both the Democrats and Republicans have changed their marketing tactics. The major shifts started with George W. Bush with a large push to bring the religious right into the fold then piggy backing on 9/11 he utilized xenophobia to create a state of fear and push jingoistism. Policy wise he enacted a bunch of clusterffuckery to strengthen central government power with the patriot act and the beginnings of a transformation plan for the middle east (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran) via armed conflict wiping his ass with the constitution as he went.
Then Obama pulled some cult like charismatic hope train crap to confuse the worried masses that were backlashing to Bush’s over reach of power and pushed race politics into the for front. Policy wise he aligned himself with the jingoistic direction of bush and continued the plans for transformation of the middle east via arm conflict and enacted some neo-corporatism policies that forced citizens to buy corporate services or be unjustly and unevenly taxed.
Then Trump jumped on the racial politics initiated by Obama but played to the majority and increased the volume on jingoism and xenophobia while simultaneously adding protectionism to the mix. We’ll have to wait until his term ends to judge his over all policy.
As far as voters are concerned, in all the confusion and fear they’re taken to the extremes looking for answers from anyone that will offer them because the people in power are not representing them well.
I linked the question to show where this myTake came from. This myTake was just showing the evidence for my assertion from the other question. No worries.
I'm not American so can't vote. But I am not exteme left or right.
I don't beleive in abortion
I beleive in freedom to individual
I don't beleive the wall would help and we should help People but be sure it's safe so control.
I support LBGTQ but I don't support transpecies, transobjects and trancerace or transage.
I would say I'm more left.
Those are actually conservative positions.
@MrOracle Yeah some but not all. I wanna help immigrants just that we should be extra carefull and have control so we know the people coming in aren't dangerous. Ofcorse there are people from US that does crime too but it doesn't hurt to be sure
I feel like the only thing I relate to in the right side is abortion and not letting kids that are like 5 years old to be transgender in that age
The solution to people being poor or repressed in other countries isn't to bring them all into the US, but that's exactly what "open borders" would lead to. What needs to happen is for people in those countries to reject socialism and authoritarianism and embrace the rule of law. This would allow trade with the rest of the world, and TRADE is how their standard of living is improved in the long run.
As long as there is endemic corruption and socialists promising free stuff that they can't afford, they'll keep killing their economies and then wanting to flee to better places - where they'll try to repeat the same thing that ruined their own country.
@MrOracle i wanna help People and I want them to come in the country because there are really Nice People from middle east but ofcorse there are dangerous ones and those we should leave out of the country
Democrats are exactly the worse that could happen to the US now. They're so deep into the PC culture that if they came into power tomorrow, it would be a giant SJW shitfest.
You think what we see today is unbelievable? Wait until the Democrats have the power to force it everywhere.
I don't live in the US, but here we already have the same ideas spreading.
A liberal party or a centerest party would be nice. The left as we knew it became authoritarian and started painting the 'straight white male' as the same thing a 'Jew' was for Hitler... identity politics is a joke to most of us normal people.
This just seems obvious to me, I mean the point of conservativism is to resist change
And many liberals today identify as progressive. The whole point of progressivism is to try something different, even when things are fine already. It's like being a child and constantly asking for more and more candy. You know it will make you sick at some point and yet you still want that hope and change.
@Servus09 if by "asking for more and more" you mean constantly trying to perfect and mo settle for anything less, then yes.
I don't even consider myself a progressive. I focus much more on economic policies while most of them deal with social progressivism. I don't because I believe those ills either don't exist anymore or can be mitigated by economic reform.
@SirRexington
Exactly my point. You believe in all that loony Bolshevik communist bullshit. As though that's something new - it's not. I got it wrong, didn't I? You won't be like the Chinese communists, the African communists, or the Russian communists. Somehow you'll get it right. HA!
@Servus09 im not a communist...
Fucking idiot.
I'm fairly moderate in my political approach but I too have noticed the democrat party as a whole seem too radical into their liberal policies compare to what they were when Clinton was president which I really don't know what was going on anyways back then.
Two parties makes distractions so they can pass bills and laws. So john Q pubilc don't know whats really going on. By the time the public knows what happened its to late. It the same game plan that been going on since human started to form governments.