We Need More Moderates, and Centrists

There are numerous points in this article that will be ignored by the partisans no matter which side they are on. This is a right wing partisan site so one knows what their response will be just as if one goes to a left leaning site and posts the same article. However, the idea that the country needs less partisanship, and more moderates/centrists is nothing new. The Founders spoke out against a two party system, and, as is true in so many other issues they advised on, this was ignored. More then likely it is the fault of education in that the people are not taught the teachings of the Founders.

On a personal level, when I post to a site such as this I am automatically termed a “socialist”, or a “communist”, etc. The problem there is that the vast majority of topics raised in sites such as this are seen from a right wing slant. The same is true of the left wing sites save for the slant they support. And even though I oppose abortions, believe that the term “transgender” is nothing more then a new term for a “cross dresser”, oppose the rulings of the Courts in regards to religion, and the list goes on, there are those in here who are so shortsighted that they cannot grasp the concept. And when, which is very rare, I go to a liberal left wing site, and I support a right wing tenet I am then labeled a “fascist”, or a “war monger”.

This country was built on the ideal of a centrist, and actually heralded many left wing tenets. Social welfare, free healthcare for the poor, limited corporate powers and length of certification, limited involvement in foreign matters, trade with our surpluses not our production, staying out of war, taxing only the wealthy, etc. Consider the following:

http://time.com/5033395/nancy-gibbs-harvard-speech/

“Consider just a few trends that Bridgewater founder Ray Dalio, sees driving what he calls “the two economies.”

— For the lower 60%, real incomes are flat to down since 1980, to the point that the average person in the top 40% has ten times the wealth of the average in the lower 60, two thirds of whom have no savings.

–The lower 60% spend 1/4 as much on education, which sets their children up to fall further behind. Families of those who have not gone to college are breaking up nearly twice the rate of those who have gone to college.

–Premature deaths are up by about 20% just since 2000, driven mainly by drugs and suicides, which sets America apart from nearly all industrialized countries. Nothing about current trends suggests this will change.”

Then there is the culture:

“Cultural cognition research finds that people tend to be tribal when it comes to certain topics, like immigration or guns or climate change. “What people ‘believe’ about global warming doesn’t reflect what they know,” explains Professor Dan Kahan. “It expresses who they are.” To conduct an informed public debate, he says, “you have to change the meaning of the climate change. You have to disentangle positions on it from opposing cultural identities.”

Likewise any debate over regulating guns has to acknowledge, as a southern Democratic Senator once put it, that the gun debate is “about values” “about who you are and who you aren’t.”

In other words, we stand little chance of addressing these questions wisely and well if we are circled around our separate campfires. Progress on crucial, complex issues will only come when people don’t have to choose between freely appraising the evidence vs. being loyal to their tribe.”

As to Trump:

“He is outrageous with purpose: On the day he was elected, exit polls found that a large majority of voters said he was not qualified to be president (61%), did not have the temperament (63%), was not honest and trustworthy (64%). But a similarly large majority thought the country was on the wrong track, and of voters who cared most about change, 82% voted for Donald Trump, who if he had proven nothing else, had successfully proven that he could change all the rules.

Ever since, love him or hate him, no commander in chief has ever commanded the news cycle like this one. At times this feels like a strange kind of fixation, a rubbernecking presidency. In this he is a human algorithm, perfectly engineered to say or do whatever you are most likely to watch.

Herein lies one of many challenges to my profession: Trump is not at war with the press, nor it with him: This is a complex and co-dependent relationship. His presidency has been great for ratings, even in ways that are bad for journalism and bad for the country.

For one thing, his attacks on news institutions have damaged the public trust we need to function: fully 46% of Americans believe reporters simply make things up about this president.

In January and February of 2016, nearly the same share of Democrats (74%) and Republicans (77%) supported the press’ role as a watchdog, holding leaders accountable. Now roughly nine in ten Democrats support that role, vs. only 42% of Republicans; That 47 point gap opened up in just a single year.

When the press is derided and discredited and distrusted, it’s easier to ignore whatever it is discovering, even at a time when the investigative prowess of our best reporters has been extraordinary.

And what if they are investigating all the ways in which our adversaries are waging, literally, a war of words, driving our division, destabilizing our institutions in pursuit of their global agenda.”

 

I agree.

A central or third party would likely produce better legislation.

In Canada, when there is not enough opposition to get decent debates going, the ruling party assigns some of their members to the opposition.

A two party systems seem to ignore the will of the people more, as shown in the U.S.

http://www.upworthy.com/20-years-of...w1&u=94acbbeb6bbd6d664157009a896e71b014efbf27

Regards
DL

 

The US is not a centrist country at all

It has two main parties

One is right wing and one is very right wing

It’s the most unequal society on earth

It’s institutionaly racist

It’s religiously fundamentalist

It spends more on arms than everyone else combined

It wowhsips wealth

Socialism has been totally demonised by te right because they know it benefits the many not the few at their expense

So they get Fix news to sell their snake oil to imbeciles like Turkeys voting for xmas

 

Turkeys vote for Christmas? I would have thought it was Thanksgiving.

 

The ones that survive thanksgiving vote for xmas

 

Thanksgiving is only celebrated in the US.
The rest of the world eats turkeys at Christmas.

 

We had corned beef for turkey day, and ham for christmas.

 

Well as Turkey is traditional now Trump has better watch out

http://newsthump.com/2017/11/22/huge-stupid-hapless-beast-pardoned-by-thanksgiving-turkey/

 

I don't like turkey...

 

Well, I don't specially care for it either, and my daughter in law has a strong intolerance to it. So we usually make both a turkey AND a ham!

 

Too much waste in a whole bird, and the price has gotten too high. Now, back to the topic:


This morning I heard a recording being played of Steve Bannon trrashing the Vietnam record of Mitt Romney. And while I rarely agree with Bannon I had to on this topic. Romney was a coward during Vietnam that used his church to avoid being drafted into the service during Vietnam, and while he was sipping wine in France others were dying in his place in a war that few supported save for the right wing like Bannon.

Later I was watching Good Morning Joe, and while they were defending Romney they were trashing Trump for his cowardice during the Vietnam Conflict. His phony claims of “bone spurs” while he then played sports such as baseball.

And while both were true, they were both cowards as are their sons today, one other thing they both have in common is that they have sent jobs overseas, mostly to China, while destroying jobs here in America (Trump through his own manufacturing businesses, and hotel business, and Romney through Bain Capital), and become amazingly wealthy in doing so.

This also points out a major problem in todays politics. Both sides have claims they can make about the other yet neither side will acknowledge the claims made by the other. Instead they will defend their side (in this case wealthy cowards that bought their way out of serving their country), and believe the people are too stupid to see the flaws of their side. In the meantime, both sides allow their side to sell out America while claiming to be the one side that will save America.

Arte the people really that stupid?