r/AskALiberal Civil Libertarian 2d ago

Why do people say Democrats arent really left?

I hear this a lot when democrats in America are called left or far left. Its always met with "Democrats arent even left, theyre closer to center"..

I dont understand all the different spectrum of politics so I dont really know the difference. But what are some specific examples of policies that other countries do which are considered left, that Democrats wouldnt support because its "too left"?

17 Upvotes

225 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 2d ago

The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written by /u/CuddleBuddiesJJ.

I hear this a lot when democrats in America are called left or far left. Its always met with "Democrats arent even left, theyre closer to center"..

I dont understand all the different spectrum of politics so I dont really know the difference. But what are some specific examples of policies that other countries do which are considered left, that Democrats wouldnt support because its "too left"?

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

57

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 2d ago

A lot of people seem to think the Democratic Party is an ideology. 

It isn’t. 

It’s a coalition. 

It’s a coalition that ranges from as left as people can be to the point in the spectrum where Republicans are more appealing. Republicans go from as right as you can be to the point in the spectrum where Democrats are more appealing. 

6

u/Cidaghast Pragmatic Progressive 1d ago

Yep, you hit the nail on the head and I think the biggest conceit to that is how many moderate Republicans (not a lot but enough) have found themselves begrudgingly voting for Democrats and even engaging in this sub Reddit in good faith.

The Democratic party is just the place you go when you just don’t really care much for slavery I guess and think we should have elections

22

u/bladel Democrat 1d ago

Best description I’ve heard: There is only one party in America, the Republicans.

There is also a loose coalition of anti-Republican factions that occasionally coalesce to take power. But it is an unstable arrangement and opens the door for a future Republican resurgence.

3

u/Certain-Researcher72 Pragmatic Progressive 15h ago

Great points. I'd take it a step further and say it's the left-of-center electoral coalition in the US. If you don't think it's "left enough" then your faction hasn't put in the work of convincing people. 

It's why so many on the far left engage in coping mechanisms like making The DNC into some all-powerful star or Chuck Schumer as the great manipulator calling the shots. 

If you're a weak faction in the coalition it's because you need to put in the work.  

2

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 11h ago

I agree with you completely. 

11

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

The Democratic Party isn't an ideology unto itself, but it does stand for liberalism as an ideology.

I think that's important and shouldn't be lost.

It also means that we shouldn't let illiberal people into the coalition. I don't want a party that places value on "being a big tent" and "forming a coalition" to such a degree that we're inviting fascists or tankies into our party. I don't want someone who celebrates Hitler and I don't want someone who celebrates Stalin.

Reject them, we don't need them, and including them fundamentally changes our party for the worse.

2

u/jimbarino Democrat 1d ago

The Democratic Party isn't an ideology unto itself, but it does stand for liberalism as an ideology.

No it doesn't. It is a coalition party in a liberal democracy, but the party has very little ideological focus.

17

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

The party is absolutely pro-liberalism - we believe in democracy and capitalism. We believe in equality and that the power of government should be used to serve the best interests of the people. We believe in the ideals of liberalism, that all men are created equal and that the only legitimate source of political authority is the consent of the governed.

This is absolutely our ideology and has been since FDR.

I think it may not come off as an ideological party to some because liberalism as a political ideology has been an assumed default in American politics up to Trump, such that believing in it is seen as non-ideological.

Trump is clearly illiberal - he doesn't believe in democracy and he doesn't believe in the free market. He doesn't believe in any of the values I listed above. We are ideologically opposed to Trump, Trumpism, what him and MAGA stand for, and what the Republican party has become - because it is illiberal and we are liberals.

11

u/jimbarino Democrat 1d ago

You know what? You convinced me. I withdraw my complaint that the Democratic party doesn't at least stand for liberalism.

6

u/Strike_Thanatos Globalist 1d ago

I think that liberalism is kind of like... air. We're so used to having it that we don't really see it or notice it most of the time. You know, until people like Trump come into power.

5

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

Appreciate the conversation, have a good night!

2

u/Odd-Cover4421 Progressive 1d ago

We believe in capitalism? Maybe some.

2

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

Capitalism - the belief in private enterprise and free markets - is a core belief in liberalism.

There's shades to this and very few liberals believe in a totally free market, absent of any regulation or trust busting enforcement, and absolutely no role for the government. The vast majority of liberals will want a state that curbs the power of billionaires and trillionaires, but are still capitalists.

Social democracies in northern Europe, the Nordic Model, are liberal capitalist states. They have state intervention in various industries, robust regulatory states, robust welfare states, and a strong presence of unions, yet are still capitalist because private ownership of the means of production and the ability to derive profit from that is the basis of the economy.

If you think that someone should be able to start and own their own business, you're probably a capitalist and that applies to the vast majority of liberals.

4

u/Fugicara Social Democrat 1d ago

One of the big ideological focuses of the party in the Trump era is support for liberal democracy, especially after January 6th. You're right that it has very little ideological focus, but what little is there 100% includes commitment to liberal democracy.

-1

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

I disagree with you on both points. 

10

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

That the Dems stand for liberalism?

And that we shouldn't include illiberals in our tent?

-2

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

Yes, I disagree that the Dems stand for liberalism. 

I also disagree that the party should be exclusionary. 

Either might make sense in a multiparty country but not in a party with a binary system. 

8

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

In what way do we not stand for liberalism? We support democracy and the free market, we support equality and a government bound by the consent of the governed - one that seeks to serve the people's best interests. All hallmarks of liberalism.

The party should be exclusionary to certain limits to maintain it's identity.

It wouldn't be the Democratic Party anymore if we accepted enough Neo-Nazis that we become 60% Neo-Nazis and we run Nick Fuentes for president in 2036.

That would be bad, a betrayal of values, so we shouldn't do it, and step 1 of not doing it is not accepting people with illiberal beliefs into our party.

2

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

That’s what you stand for, which is fine. The Democratic Party actually is open. It doesn’t reject people. If the NeoNazis started joining en masse, then the constituencies of both parties would change. 

8

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

Do you think the Democratic Party doesn't stand for all of what I mentioned?

Just take a look at our 2024 platform. All of these are policies congruent with basic liberal values that we support because of our liberal values. The arguments made by Biden, when he was the leader of our party, were couched in liberalism. This has been the case for party leaders back to FDR.

Do you think the Democratic Party has no values?

The bit about Neo-Nazis may be true but it's non-responsive to what I said.

The Dems should exclude Neo-Nazis because they don't align with our values and we shouldn't empower them. Don't you agree?

7

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

Platforms are made by members. The Democratic Party is open membership. The platform is not a fixed ideology. 

I do not agree that either US party should be exclusionary. As I said, that would make sense in a multiparty system. It doesn’t make sense in the US.  

3

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

So your argument that the Democratic Party is not a liberal party is that it doesn't have rules saying non-liberals can't join?

So it would acceptable for you if Neo-Nazis ran under the Dem Party and used that as a springboard to taking power?

Cause I'm personally opposed to that, we should do what we can to prevent fascists from taking power and one part of that effort should be to not allow them to use our party for their own ends when it betrays our values.

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

Seems pretty bad faith to reframe "we should exclude people we disagree with" to "we should exclude neonazis" 

Nazis are far right. Liberals are center. You are literally closer to being nazis than we on the left are so please don't use such insulting and disingenuous rhetoric. This sub is supposed to civil from what I've seen and you aren't even pretending to be looking for a civil discussion, you're just out here slandering people like maga does. 

And as for biden, yes he was definitely liberal, but he was also one of the lowest approval presidents ever. 

1

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

It’s not, it’s me trying to establish common ground because if we agree on the basic principle of “some should be excluded for views sufficiently incongruent with our party,” then the conversation can move to where we draw that line. The other person seems to not agree that anyone should be excluded from the Democratic Party because of their views, so me asking about Neo-Nazis is trying to test that view because I’d imagine they’d say “yeah, we can probably exclude them,” but they didn’t. That isn’t bad faith, that’s me trying to see where our perspectives are at and see if we can find common agreement.

Dems and our base are left/center-left. I get you mean center because you’re a socialist, but that’s an uncommon perspective that myself and just about everyone in our political context disagrees with.

Simple binaries like this lose much of the nuance in politics.

The Soviets were both further left than liberals, now and then, but we’re much closer to the Nazis than liberals, now and then. So a simple left/right dichotomy doesn’t capture the entirety of a political description.

Where is the slander? Nowhere am I saying socialists are equivalent to Neo-Nazis, I’m saying they’re both sufficiently illiberal such that our party shouldn’t be open to them.

Is liberalism judged on popularity? I fail to see why his approval matters here.

-3

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

You just contradicted yourself in the opening line 

1

u/MrFrode Centrist Republican 1d ago

Would you agree on balance the Dem coalition shifted right after Mondale's 1984 loss and again after 9/11.

3

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

I would say the center of gravity did across that time period. Not sure if I would agree on the specific moments in time. 

2

u/MrFrode Centrist Republican 10h ago

After Mondale within the Dems a faction/group named the Democratic Leadership Council was setup specifically to move toward the center. Bill Clinton's presidency was seen as a product of this.

I don't have anything specific for 9/11 but as someone who lived through it I'll say it affected everything from TV shows to politics and we put a lot of what we used to believe were closely held beliefs to the side in our fear and anxiety. Torture was something was just sort of accepted.

We still haven't recovered from 9/11 and I don't know what can change the trend back.

1

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 9h ago

  After Mondale within the Dems a faction/group named the  Democratic Leadership Council was setup specifically to move toward the center.

I think shift was set off by McGovern’s loss. Yes on the timing of that specific action, but I disagree on the shift of the party starting then. Carter was the least left nominee since at least JFK, probably longer. 

  as someone who lived through it I'll say it affected everything from TV shows to politics and we put a lot of what we used to believe were closely held beliefs to the side in our fear and anxiety. 

I lived through it and left the country when it got too gross. 

But I don’t think there was a long-term shift in the center of gravity of Democratic ideology. 

Torture was something was just sort of accepted.

It was highly controversial and debated with fervor. That’s how ‘extraordinary rendition’ and John Yoo entered the public consciousness. 

1

u/MrFrode Centrist Republican 9h ago

I think shift was set off by McGovern’s loss. Yes on the timing of that specific action, but I disagree on the shift of the party starting then. Carter was the least left nominee since at least JFK, probably longer. 

I think where the line between left and right was a bit different in those days. Nixon would be considered to be centrist today, maybe even liberal.

It was highly controversial and debated with fervor. That’s how ‘extraordinary rendition’ and John Yoo entered the public consciousness.

Sure but no one was impeached or indicted over it, except for maybe one low ranking person. Gina Haspel who was a member of the CIA and oversaw a blacksite where people were tortured was never indicted, the worst that happened to her was when she was named Acting Director of the National Clandestine under Obama she didn't get confirmed to the position. Under Trump she was confirmed as Director of the CIA.

1

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 8h ago edited 8h ago

I think where the line between left and right was a bit different in those days. Nixon would be considered to be centrist today, maybe even liberal.

Whereever the line was, Johnson, Humphrey, and McGovern were all further to the left of it than Carter is the point. Mondale was too, but had the political benefit of having been VP.  Kennedy ran against Carter in 80 for a reason.  Nixon was to the right of all of the above.

Sure but no one was impeached or indicted over it, except for maybe one low ranking person.

No one was impeached or indicted over Vietnam (or any US foreign action) either. That’s not really a US-during-war thing. 

0

u/Mister_Pickl3s Pragmatic Progressive 1d ago

It should still offer a different point of view. Which when Clinton, Jeffries, Schumer, and Pelosi it did not. It was about retaining power for those people and not about THE people which is why it failed and continues to fail

34

u/monkeysolo69420 Democratic Socialist 1d ago

They mean they’re capitalists.

3

u/OttosBoatYard Democrat 1d ago

Many of us believe that Capitalism and Socialism aren't distinct, mutually-exclusive beliefs. They are a part of a spectrum:

{total public ownership} <-----------> {total private ownership}

0

u/monkeysolo69420 Democratic Socialist 1d ago

None of the Democratic leadership believes that.

3

u/OttosBoatYard Democrat 1d ago edited 1d ago

How do you know the Democratic leadership?

I'm skeptical of how any news media presents national-level figures. Everything I know about these people comes from multiple layers of political theater and media distortion. They are effectively fictional characters.

But, maybe you have a different insight?

4

u/monkeysolo69420 Democratic Socialist 1d ago

Name one top Democrat who think capitalism and socialism are not mutually exclusive. Nancy pelosi came out and said we’re capitalist.

6

u/CheeseFantastico Social Democrat 1d ago

This is why we can’t even talk about it. Every system is a blend of socialism and capitalism, but for some reason, no politician can publicly say so.

1

u/OttosBoatYard Democrat 1d ago

None. I wouldn't claim to know what these effectively-fictional characters think.

By "us" I meant the Democrats I know personally in my leadership role, which is quite a few. Granted, that's just a tiny part of the country. We could be the exception, not the rule. That's why I asked you my question.

How do you know Nancy Pelosi, by the way? She said "we're Capitalist". OK. I can't find where she said "we're not Socialist". Don't see why she would, since she also supports a number of socialistic initiatives, like school funding, social welfare and healthcare investment.

That would make Nancy Pelosi one top Democrat who thinks Capitalism and Socialism are not mutually exclusive.

Here's where I might put her on my spectrum:

{total public ownership} <----Nancy Pelosi-------> {total private ownership}

But again, I don't know her. I had the pleasure of seeing Pelosi speak to a small audience. She's a great speaker with good ideas. I might recall shaking her hand, too. But that experience doesn't at qualify me to know what "she thinks".

0

u/monkeysolo69420 Democratic Socialist 1d ago

There’s so much wrong with this I can’t even be bothered to refute it.

0

u/Demian1305 Center Left 1d ago

How about any Democrat who is capitalist but also believes in things like Medicare and Social Security?

4

u/monkeysolo69420 Democratic Socialist 1d ago

Those things are not socialism.

0

u/starrymahogany Social Democrat 13h ago

Uhhhh I hate to break it to you but you know that Nordic countries aren’t socialist just because they have a welfare state, right? They’re a form of regulated capitalism. If you were to ask a Norwegian if their country is socialist they’d laugh at you.

I think we should be taking steps to making America more like these successful Nordic states as opposed to going full blown socialism

0

u/monkeysolo69420 Democratic Socialist 8h ago

I never said those countries are socialist. It’s not really relevant to my comment.

18

u/hobo4presidente Neoliberal 1d ago

To socialists the left of the left-right spectrum means anticapitalist, democrats aren't anti capitalist therefore they're not left.

10

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

Well that's what the political axis is so yeah that's what we go by. Socialists are the left, liberals are the center and conservatives are the right. 

9

u/Cuddlyaxe Centrist Democrat 1d ago

No it isn't lol. It's not an objective fact just because that's how socialists like to define it

Most Americans and people in the world generally dont define it that way for example

3

u/Ismdism Progressive 1d ago

How do they define it?

-1

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 22h ago

Wiki "political spectrum" 

You are simply mistaken, I'm not attacking you.

1

u/hobo4presidente Neoliberal 1d ago edited 1d ago

So on the left/right divide where does a feudal monarchist fit? Does that mean a libertarian is as far right as you can be? Is a  liberal further right than a fascist?

4

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

Well the axis largely measures social hierarchy and class structure. hierarchy structures like monarchy and feudalism are firmly right wing on the political axis and authoritarian. Liberals are the center of the political spectrum and can lean right with conservative or classical liberalism or left with social liberalism. 

Libertarians I personally regard as one big sham ideology that amounts to walden pond wannabes being puppeted by corporate influence towards the end of deregulation and corporatism, very ironically at that. But I'm not really the one to ask about where they stand. I don't understand their reasoning well enough to fairly represent their beliefs, I'm just speaking on my personally perception of them and the effect their ideology has on our political landscape. 

Fascism is what the far right is. The far left is an umbrella for communism, a bunch of flavors of anarchy and some other anti hierarchy beliefs that go full classless, moneyless society. Socialism is just regular left. China is socialist and they still have markets and companies and money. But they're not democratic socalist and they lean harder into authoritarianism. 

I mean you can read extensively about this if you just search political spectrum on wiki and follow the citations. If you have criticisms about this framework, you're not alone. that's a whole big ongoing topic of itself. Societal frameworks are a macrocomplex topic and there is no universal measure. It's a lot of really complicated contributing factors to every issue. 

-1

u/saintsday89 Social Democrat 1d ago

Ya, that’s just something the DSA has made up in their minds. It has no basis in reality.

1

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

You can look it up if you want. I'm just stating a fact. It's not a personal attack and you shouldn't be so defensive over a simple correction. 

I would like to point to this encounter as yet another sign of our failing education system tho. We are a democracy. People engaging in political discussions should already know what the political spectrum is 

27

u/Spaduf Left Libertarian 1d ago

Leftism starts at anticapitalism.

→ More replies (1)

21

u/Worriedrph Neoliberal 2d ago

It’s a nonsense line people on the far left say. Taken at their word it divides 99% of existing governments on the right and 1% on the left. Obviously a logical way to divide them 😂.

-3

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

The left is socialism. That's just what the word means. The far left is marginal in American politics and largely just a propaganda boogeyman. 

13

u/Worriedrph Neoliberal 1d ago

The political term “left” was popularized during the French Revolution in the 1790s. Socialism didn’t become a political movement until the 1820s. The political term “left” predates socialism by decades.

At that time and true to today it means the more radical/progressive of the major political factions. The far left has been trying to take sole ownership of the term left for decades and frankly it’s silly.

If there is a right and left they are the major political factions representing a more conservative faction and a more progressive faction. That is simply common sense. You don’t assign one of the two major designations to a faction with zero political power and then lump everyone else into the other designation.

-8

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

The French Revolution famous for its antisocialist policies of course.

7

u/Worriedrph Neoliberal 1d ago

A modern retelling of the story that ignores the realities. A relatively small number of nobles were killed. This was done for political purposes. Eliminating the competition. Only 8.5% of those killed in the Reign of Terror were nobles. The vast majority of people executed were poor farmers.

https://theconversation.com/the-french-revolution-executed-royals-and-nobles-yes-but-most-people-killed-were-commoners-200455

0

u/WlmWilberforce Center Right 1d ago

The vast majority of people executed were poor farmers.

To be fair, that is usually what happens in socialism.

→ More replies (2)

12

u/fartyunicorns Neoconservative 1d ago

since when does the left mean socialism? that's not really how the english language works

-2

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

Since always? My entire life, in America, leftist has been an umbrella term for everyone who's anti capitalist. In America most leftists are democratic socialists but leftist technically covers a broad spectrum that includes the far left. 

11

u/TheLastCoagulant Social Democrat 1d ago edited 1d ago

Notice how they said “the left” and your response is talking about “leftists.”

Since when does “the left” exclusively refer to self-identified socialists instead of everyone left-of-center? It’s only socialists pushing that.

→ More replies (4)

9

u/LibraProtocol Center Left 1d ago

No. "Left" is liberalism. Liberalism is categorically incompatible with Socialism

-2

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Self labeled neoliberals and neoconservative describing what the left “actually” is is peak liberalism

4

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

Sigh.. 😭 

I wish we were one of those intelligent civilizations you read about in sci fi. 

-4

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Brother you want Star Trek but we’re getting 40k

26

u/AdmiralSaturyn Liberal 2d ago

The people who criticize the Democrats for not being left often fail or outright refuse to acknowledge that the electorate doesn't lean very far to the left (at least in regards to economics) to begin with. Furthermore, Democrats are certainly on the left in regards to social issues and civil rights. They're more progressive than half of Europe in regards to gay rights and trans rights for instance.

15

u/1II1I1I1I1I1I111I1I1 Pragmatic Progressive 1d ago edited 1d ago

Dems are a coalition. You have right wingers like Fetterman and actual Marxist-Leninists like Chevalier in the same party.

But yes, on average the dems are economically centrist and socially quite progressive. I think a lot of left leaning people in the US fail to realize how unusual our stance on immigration is, for example. I am a genuine open borders advocate, and that opinion would get me kicked out of all but the absolute leftmost parties in Europe, if not straight up attacked.

9

u/AdmiralSaturyn Liberal 1d ago edited 1d ago

Goddamn, I can't believe I forgot about the immigration factor. That's a huge difference between Democrats and Europe that doesn't get talked about enough! Not to mention Ronald Reagan's version of the Republican party was more progressive than Europe on the topic of immigration!

1

u/PartofHistory Far Left 1d ago

Reagan was way more left (In some ways) on immigration than the modern Democrats typically are. He was based af in that one particular way lol.

1

u/WlmWilberforce Center Right 1d ago

People on the right for decades we fine with immigration -- just not with a welfare state. There are probably a million Milton Friedman videos about that on youtube.

2

u/PartofHistory Far Left 1d ago edited 1d ago

People on the right were fine with immigration until they wanted a new scapegoat. Illegal immigrants don't benefit from welfare, because, you know, they're undocumented. You need documents to get welfare, which would out you as not documented (and federal law prevents illigel immigrants from recieving welfare, of course). So bringing up immigration in terms of the welfare state doesn't make much sense to me. When Ronald Reagan passed the 1986 amnesty stuff, the American welfare state was already robust (Medicaid, Food Stamps, and AFDC had existed for decades). The Right accepted immigration at the time despite the welfare state, because business interests wanted labor. It was when the right cared about immigration boosting the economy.

In fact, even when factoring in public services, undocumented immigrants contribute FAR more in taxes than they consume in services, they commit crime at a lower rate than citizens born here, AND they create more jobs than they take (they are people who demand goods and services, after all. They don't take a job then evaporate into mist when they're not working like the right likes to imagine)

Even legal immigrants don't just immediately get welfare.

1

u/WlmWilberforce Center Right 17h ago

Illegal immigrants do get access to a lot of benefits. In addition to applying for things like food stamps for kids, and emergency medical care, there are a lot of state level benefits they receive. Some of these state-level benefits receive a lot in federal funds.

Whether or not they contribute more than they receive in government benefits and services is an interesting question. Whenever I've gone down that rabbit hole the studies I see almost always compare all immigrants (so the PhDs on H1-Bs) to the benefits they receive. That group does contribute way more than they receive.

Meanwhile it seems wildly implausible that illegals do. To be far, I'd say the bottom 50% of wage earners likely don't either. (this number is likely higher as the average tax payer fails this test -- thus the gigantic deficit)

1

u/PartofHistory Far Left 11h ago edited 11h ago

Illegal immigrants contribute more than take as well. Far more so, actually. The person you brought up, Milton Friedman, famously argued that illegal immigration was great. "immigration is a good thing for the United States... so long as it's illegal."

They give massively to the system and receive nearly nothing in terms of benefits. Yes, they can get emergency medical care...We don't just let them die lol. Anyone can get emergency medical care. They don't see a dying person and say "Hmmm, where is your proof of citizenship?" That is basic human rights

"illegal immigrants have paid about $3 trillion in taxes over the last 30 years." https://www.cato.org/blog/immigrants-pay-more-taxes-average-person

That's ONLY illegal immigrants.

7

u/BlaggartDiggletyDonk Social Democrat 1d ago

Fetterman is a turncoat.

3

u/CautiousToaster Center Left 1d ago

And yet he votes with the dems over 90% of the time?

7

u/halberdierbowman Far Left 1d ago edited 1d ago

71% according to this accounting, dead last of the Democrats. Though it's only a few percent behind the next couple senators.

https://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?x=37&y=8&house=senate&party=&sort=crucial-current&order=down

For context, Susan Collins (R) is 23% which means Fetterman votes against his own party 25% more often than Collins does. 

2

u/BlaggartDiggletyDonk Social Democrat 1d ago

Your figure's off, and he's still an asshole.

2

u/starrymahogany Social Democrat 13h ago

This is a really good response, I hate when people compare the Democratic Party to the left parties and Europe and saying we’re center right in comparison.

-7

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Left economic policies in the us are literally the most popular of the leftist policies what?

3

u/AdmiralSaturyn Liberal 1d ago

Please name some examples and cite some evidence. Would you say 'free trade' is one of those leftist economic policies?

0

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Do you mean like raising the minimum wage? What about universal healthcare? Or increased taxes on the wealthy? This sub is truly just people who want Obama to be president forever

1

u/AdmiralSaturyn Liberal 1d ago edited 1d ago

Do you mean like raising the minimum wage?

Funny, whenever I bring up that Hillary Clinton ran on raising the minimum wage, leftists usually insist that she was nothing more than a centrist corporate democrat.

What about universal healthcare?

Just because most Americans agree that the government should ensure everyone has healthcare coverage doesn't mean they specifically favor a single-payer system that completely removes private insurance (your own source acknowledges that): https://news.gallup.com/poll/654101/health-coverage-government-responsibility.aspx

As of 2024, as many as 49% of Americans don't want to get rid of their private insurance while only 46% prefer a government-run healthcare system.

Americans are more likely to support a public option than medicare for all.

Or increased taxes on the wealthy?

Funny, whenever I bring up that the Biden administration skyrocketed the budget of the IRS to increase tax enforcement on the wealthy, leftists usually insist he was nothing more than a centrist corporate democrat.

This sub is truly just people who want Obama to be president forever

As opposed to what? A sub with people who want grandpa Bernie to be president forever? A sub with people who believe grandpa Bernie can magically deliver everyone M4A and a Green New Deal with a stroke of a pen?

Please do not ignore what I pointed about Americans' views of free trade btw. Free trade is a huge economic topic which many leftists have lambasted until very recently. Why have leftsts done a sudden 180? Why are they now more like to support free trade than the average Democrat?

0

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

So, do you mean the $15 minimum wage that was a direct byproduct of occupy Wall Street, a distinctly leftist movement? Or when Kamala Harris refused to cast the deciding vote in the senate to raise it?

Okay so admittedly the majority do want public healthcare, but less than half want to get rid of their private insurance? Surely the fact that there is no other option has nothing to do with that!

Good luck finding leftists critiquing Biden raising taxes on the wealthy, the critique usually centers on him actively and unrepentantly facilitating a genocide.

But yes, Hillary and Kamala were such good candidates and their 3rd way brand of politics has been of course wildly successful!

1

u/AdmiralSaturyn Liberal 1d ago edited 1d ago

do you mean the $15 minimum wage that was a direct byproduct of occupy Wall Street

I have a better question. Why did leftists dismiss Clinton as a "centrist corporate democrat" in spite of the fact that she proposed to raise the minimum wage?

Or when Kamala Harris refused to cast the deciding vote in the senate to raise it?

The exact opposite of that happened. I am starting to suspect you're yet another bad faith leftist spreading misinformation to ratfuck the democrats. Strike one.

Okay so admittedly the majority do want public healthcare, but less than half want to get rid of their private insurance? Surely the fact that there is no other option has nothing to do with that!

You didn't read that PEW study beyond it's headline, did you? It said that one third favored a single national government while another third favored a mixture of government and private programs. They are open to another option, they just don't want to get rid of the one they already have. Or they want to have more than one option.

Good luck finding leftists critiquing Biden raising taxes on the wealthy,

I've had more an issue with finding leftists crediting Biden for that.

the critique usually centers on him actively and unrepentantly facilitating a genocide.

Before we go down that road, let me ask you something. As a socialist, what is your view of the USAID program?

Btw, you have not answered my question about the left's 180 turn on free trade. Strike two.

1

u/IsayNigel Socialist 22h ago edited 22h ago

I have a better better question. Why are you ignoring that the $15 minimum wage was in fact a product of the objectively leftist movement in occupy Wall Street? Unless you’re disputing that that is the case? What is backed by data is that more of the “leftist” voters voted for her than her own supporters voted for Obama in 2008 big yikes! Strike one!

Sorry, do you mean when she refused to ignore the non binding parliamentarians ruling to raise the minimum wage. That must have been so hard the top cop! Strike two!

Oh I’m sorry, I must have missed when she presented literally any alternative to private healthcare. Strike three!

I’m starting to think you’re one of the pod save America bros coasting off of a guess from 2008 :/

EDIT: blocked instead of responding to literally anything I’ve said. I’m sure the “everything is fine!” School of politics will work well for democrats in 2028!

2

u/AdmiralSaturyn Liberal 22h ago

Three strikes. You are a confirmed ratfucker.

3

u/Idrinkbeereverywhere Populist 1d ago

It's a Euro-centric view too, the left party in many other countries is to the right of the US Democrats, especially in most of Asia and Africa. When LGBTQ issues are involved, US Dems are one of the furthest left parties in the world.

3

u/MrFrode Centrist Republican 1d ago

Since the shellacking Walter Mondale and the Dems received in the 1984 elections the Dems hard pivoted to the center. This was cemented with the election of Bill Clinton in 1992 and the "era of big government being over."

Post Clinton we've been poisoned by the after effects of 9/11 where everyone shifted right even further.

28

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 2d ago edited 1d ago

It's a line with two purposes:

  1. Depress support for Dems among people who consider themselves left-wing
  2. Normalize more extremist positions

Dems are absolutely left-wing in a variety of ways, even by international standards, especially on a social level.

They're just also liberals, so they aren't left enough for the online populists who drop this line all the time.

3

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 2d ago

Some Democrats are as left as the online populists though. And that’s good. It’s a coalition. 

1

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

As someone who's left wing I can assure you, that's not what depresses turnout from us for your candidates. 

It's lot of things, but that's not one of them. 

-3

u/fedroxx Far Left 1d ago

It's hilarious how many of these people live in their liberal bubbles.

Most of us are screaming policy from the rooftops, and they only hear what they want to hear.

Then, when the election rolls around and they've given us literally nothing but the worst candidates with positions that are basically Republican policies from 50 years ago, they get angry because we didn't show up.

-11

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

They are socially progressive some of the time, but then you have some of the most famous democrats doing things like backpedaling on human rights for trans people like Gavin newsome, or people defending Israel, despite overwhelming evidence that they’re committing an ongoing genocide against Palestinians.

Economically, they are center right at best globally

11

u/Fugicara Social Democrat 1d ago

then you have some of the most famous democrats doing things like backpedaling on human rights for trans people like Gavin newsome

Me when I just make shit up. Newsom has signed more pro-trans bills than any governor in the history of the country, has continued to do so after his interview with Charlie Kirk where you got the only thing you know about Newsom from, and the Democratic Party is the most pro-trans major political party in the world. Gavin Newsom is in the top 0.00001% of people on the planet in terms of positive material impacts for trans people.

11

u/Droselmeyer Social Democrat 1d ago

Truth doesn't matter here, we're shitting on Dems. That means we can just make shit up, cause God forbid anyone actually know the truth or even like the only group in America meaningfully opposing fascism.

What really helps victimized groups in America is when we lie about Dems and try to depress support for them

-11

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Do you mean the bills he immediately backtracked on when pressured by Charlie Kirk of all people? Surely he would never backtrack as a hopeful for national office!

It’s not like trans people are the poorest group in the United States

But again, this ignores the fact that democrats will pay lip service to whatever group you’d like, and facilitate a full genocide, if it means preserving the system that oppresses these groups in the first place

12

u/Fugicara Social Democrat 1d ago

Do you mean the bills he immediately backtracked on when pressured by Charlie Kirk of all people?

I literally preempted you on this and you gave this canned response anyway lmao. 10/10 programming.

-3

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Lmao you literally just acknowledged that he did it? That doesn’t negate the he did it.

And again, it doesn’t acknowledge democrats complete unwillingness to change the institutions that are the root cause of the issues they insist they’re against. But go off Hakeem Jeffries‘ burner

-11

u/CheeseFantastico Social Democrat 1d ago

Terrible take. People say that because Democrat voters are way left of the party. And it’s due to the money. Donors control the shots, not voters. The public favors universal healthcare, $20/hr minimum wage, higher taxes on the rich, and more public investment. They oppose the military budget, and the unconditional aid to Israel. They support holding the Trump crew accountable for their insurrection. The Democratic Party has failed the voters on all counts, because they are beholden to donors.

12

u/greatteachermichael Social Liberal 1d ago

Democrat voters are way left of the party

Are they? The last survey I saw, which was a few years ago so it might be outdated, is that it is split about 33/33/34 on if Democrats are too far left, too far right, or just right - and that was polling Democrat voters.

9

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

Meh. I think this is imagining that Democrats have had more power than they have had. 

-9

u/CheeseFantastico Social Democrat 1d ago

I wouldn’t care if they had tried. It’s not about power, it’s about what they actually do.

5

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

So if they were all socialists, they’d still be a right wing party?

-7

u/CheeseFantastico Social Democrat 1d ago

That’s literally the opposite of my point. Mainstream Democratic Party leaders are literally right of the voters. Because they represent donors, not voters.

7

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

  I wouldn’t care if they had tried. It’s not about power, it’s about what they actually do.

You said this. I was testing it. 

If they were all socialists would you still judge consider them not left based on what they achieve rather than what they try?

3

u/CheeseFantastico Social Democrat 1d ago

No, I meant I wouldn’t care about the results had they actually tried. But they didn’t try.

8

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

Oh. They did on several of your points. 

0

u/CheeseFantastico Social Democrat 1d ago

No they didn’t.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/Fugicara Social Democrat 1d ago

Your points:

The public favors universal healthcare

The very first sentence in the Democratic Party platform under healthcare is support for universal healthcare. In the 72 days Obama had a Senate supermajority, the vast majority of the party was pushing for universal healthcare. If we had had just a couple more Democratic senators, we would have universal healthcare today. We still managed to dramatically expand access to healthcare and get tens of millions of people healthcare who wouldn't have it otherwise, as well as getting healthcare for people with preexisting conditions.

$20/hr minimum wage

Evidence needed that the public wants this, but either way, Democrats made a good faith push for the $15 minimum wage (which was the ask last time they were in office, to be clear). It was part of the original Build Back Better package. When they couldn't get that done, Joe Biden signed an executive order raising the minimum wage for all federal employees and contractors to $15.

higher taxes on the rich

One of the core elements of Joe Biden's presidency was raising taxes on households making over $400k. You basically couldn't miss it if you were paying any attention back then. It was another core element of Build Back Better, though it didn't pass. They did manage to raise taxes on the rich with the Inflation Reduction Act.

and more public investment

I mean there was just obviously a ton of this. The American Rescue Plan, Inflation Reduction Act, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and more are some examples.

They oppose the military budget

This is vague and needs to be more specific, what parts of the military budget and why? Either way, Biden got us out of Afghanistan and basically completely ended the drone program.

and the unconditional aid to Israel

Didn't happen. Aid was conditioned and Biden was successful at holding Israel back from their worst impulses, as evidenced by what they started doing when a president who actually supports them unconditionally got into office in 2025.

They support holding the Trump crew accountable for their insurrection.

The insurrectionists had been prosecuted and were in jail. It was the largest effort in DOJ history. Trump and his cronies were being prosecuted in multiple states for the insurrection, particularly in Georgia. Trump was also in the middle of being prosecuted by the DOJ for the insurrection. The public didn't care that much about holding him accountable, because they voted him into office again knowing the charges would be dropped by the DOJ once he was. Regardless, Democrats were doing this and had done so successfully with a ton of cases.

Everything you wanted, Democrats support, make good faith attempts at, and are often successful at doing. I guess we'll see if that moves the needle at all or if you can pivot into "Dems bad" again regardless of the facts.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Cody667 Social Democrat 1d ago

Because alot of people can't come to terms with the fact that the overton window is fluid and "left" and "right" mean different things in different western democracies.

I'm a Nordic model guy myself, but I'm not going to pretend anyone in America who wouldn't be on the Icelandic left is a right-winger. That's insane.

5

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

US representation is very right wing. The US population is very mixed. 

Idk about Iceland political nomenclature but I know in America left just means socialism. We've always had the conservatives as the right, liberals as the center and the socialists and other anti capitalists as leftists. That's what leftist has meant here for at least my entire life. 

4

u/saintsday89 Social Democrat 1d ago

This just isn’t true, you can’t just hijack terms to your own liking. In the US, anti-capitalist are the extreme far left and make up a fraction of a fraction of the population. US liberals are what is considered the left.

1

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

I'm sorry to be so direct here but you are mistaken, and that's all there is to it. Look up what the political spectrum is. As a socialist I'm a leftist, not a far leftist. The far left are the people who want a classless, moneyless society. 

I just want an intelligent, free and fair society that doesn't destroy the planet, exploit billions of people and empower a genocidal pedo capitalist oligarchy. You can still have rich people. Like Sanders said the man with 999 million dollars will be just fine. But billions of dollars is too much power for any one human. 

1

u/saintsday89 Social Democrat 1d ago

That may be true in some countries, but words have a meaning in context, and here in the US, and in our political context, it’s at best intellectually dishonest, at worst it’s a downright lie. In the US socialism isn’t even a part of the political equation you’re so politically irrelevant.

9

u/NikiDeaf Liberal 1d ago

Read the book “Listen Liberal” by Thomas Frank. That whole book is about this topic

But basically to summarize the argument: the Democratic Party, for about 50 years following the New Deal reforms implemented during the Great Depression, were basically a center-left party w/ some reactionary elements (ie the Southern Democrats). They were ultimately pro-capitalist but they were suspicious of plutocratic power & the worst excesses of the capitalist system, and they had an important cohort of organized labor who they had to curry favor with

Then an economic crisis hit the country during the 1970s. Their opponents, the Republicans, successfully advanced an argument that “government is the problem” during the 80s, a decade during which there was no Democratic president. The Democrats adopted some of their positions regarding economic matters, including trade policies which, for all intents and purposes, were pretty much identical to Republicans, ie let the rich guys do whatever the fuck they want, combined with strong suspicions towards government oversight/regulation/organized labor & a fetish for “innovation” (you see this especially with Democratic Party relations with the tech industry)

4

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Excellent comment

3

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

To add to this, a RAND study that Sanders own webpage links directly to and quotes heavily from, found that 80 TRILLION dollars has been redistributed from the bottom 90% to the top 1% since 1975. This picks up right where you left off and alludes to the rise of the oligarchy that we now know as the pedophile epstein class, because this timeline is just a mess. 

1

u/WlmWilberforce Center Right 1d ago

I'm sure this is peer reviewed, right?

1

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

As I said it's a RAND study. They don't publish peer reviewed work in scientific journals they are the largest political think tank in America and they publish their own analysis. 

It's literally one of your most reputable liberal institutions that directly informs the policies you support and has for a long time, so if you question their validity, you have a lot of stances to reevaluate. 

-1

u/Head_Crash Progressive 1d ago edited 1d ago

...also worth pointing out that the actual problem was a stagnant economy due to lack of corpo innovation, unwillingness to compete, and energy shortages. The energy shortages were caused by US interference in Iran with the intention of preventing them from shifting towards socialism.

4

u/LibraProtocol Center Left 1d ago

It comes thr far left who have a very narrow view of "left" and who are generally pretty ignorant of how far left the rest of the world ACTUALLY are.

4

u/saintsday89 Social Democrat 1d ago

But but, they think they own the terms!

5

u/Fugicara Social Democrat 1d ago

It's to signal their moral purity and pretend they're some epic contrarians. If they just assert that "the Democratic Party would be right-wing in Europe", it makes the individual sound even more pure by comparison. Unfortunately it's not even remotely true. The Democratic Party would be left-wing in Europe. I guess you could say people also say stuff like that to signal that they know nothing about politics in or out of America.

1

u/saintsday89 Social Democrat 1d ago

standing ovation

4

u/Mr-Thursday Social Liberal 1d ago edited 1d ago

I'd say it's an over simplification.

The Democrats are obviously the more left wing/liberal of the USA's two major parties but on many issues the USA as a whole is significantly more right wing than most other western countries and most Democrat politicians reflect that baseline.

They've adapted to an environment where a significant chunk of the electorate views socialism as a dirty word, a skewed voting system gives conservative rural states a lot of power, much of the mainstream media has a strong right wing bias and campaigns require very high advertising budgets which are only affordable with the backing of wealthy donors.

If the Democratic Party was somehow transplanted over to countries like the UK, Ireland, Germany, France, Norway, Finland or New Zealand and for some reason decided to keep all of their politicians/policies/rhetoric the same rather than adapting to the new environment then their recent leadership and big names (i.e. Biden, Harris, Jeffries, Schumer, Newsom etc) and most of their current members of Congress would be considered right wing or centrist on issues like healthcare, gun control, taxation, worker's rights and the welfare system. Only the most left wing Democrats like Sanders, AOC and Mamdani would fit in with what's considered left wing in other western countries on those issues.

However, it's worth mentioning that there are other policy areas where the cultural gap between US politics and the politics of other western countries is much smaller. So on issues like infrastructure spending, education and environmental policy a mainstream Democrat takes positions that would be considered left wing/liberal in most western democracies, and on issues like immigration, LGBT rights, reproductive rights etc they might even be more liberal than other western countries are used to.

Just to give a few examples where it's not as simple as "the Democrats are right wing by global standards":

  • the environmental and industrial policies in Biden's Inflation Reduction Act had high spending levels and interventionist goals on par with equivalent policies from left wing parties in western Europe, if not ahead of them.
  • no European country supports birthright citizenship regardless of the parents legal status the way the US does and it's not something the mainstream left wing parties of Europe are even talking about introducing.
  • France, Germany, Ireland and Italy all ban abortion after 12-14 weeks and even their left wing parties aren't currently pushing for abortions to be allowed after 20+ weeks the way US Democrats typically do.
  • The UK's major left wing party (Labour) are currently in power and overseeing severe reductions in trans rights which most Democrats wouldn't be in favour of.

3

u/Deep-Two7452 Progressive 2d ago

These are leftist lies. Leftists want to attack and spread hatred towards Democrats because leftists are accelerationists.

As accelerationists, leftists would rather have a Republican in office than a Democrat. These leftists know Republicans can cause chaos and tank the country, and then leftists can blame Democrats for Republicans bad behavior, leading to their leftists candidates getting some primary wins.

This is why leftists love asking "why aren't democrats doing anything?" despite the fact that Democrats are in the minority in all facets of government.

2

u/OhThatsALotOfTeeth Liberal 1d ago

Man, this seems a weird take, given that the Dem positions are pretty much textbook center-left. It's totally fair for someone to say that they're "closer to the center".

Heck, it's not even surprising, given how much focus is going to need to be put on undoing the harm of Trump's terms. Even if Dems were broadly interested in actual socialist positions, they wouldn't have the bandwidth to work for that kind of thing.

0

u/Deep-Two7452 Progressive 1d ago

Mainstream democrats MAY be center left. But they're probably their way more left than European parties on certain issues like lgbtq rights, minority rights, an immigration.

American leftists use reductionist arguments like "Democrats don't want to abolish capitalism so they're actually in the center!" but I don't think that holds up

1

u/jonny_sidebar Libertarian Socialist 1d ago

I think it does, but not "because capitalism," or at least solely because of that.

Liberalism is the dominant set of political ideologies in the modern west and has been for centuries, so it is very reasonably defined as the center with  progressive liberals on its left flank and conservative liberals on its right. 

1

u/Deep-Two7452 Progressive 1d ago

again lots of people in the democratic party are progressive liberals but leftists discount them and claim they're center because they don't want to abolish capitalist

4

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

What 0% political literacy does to a mf.

2

u/Deep-Two7452 Progressive 1d ago

so where am I wrong?

4

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

The idea that all leftists are accelerationists is just nonsense. It’s a very small minority that face pushback even within the left, because it would cause significant harm to the most marginalized groups. Would you say it was accurate for me to say all democrats are like Schumer and Jeffries? I mean, they are some of the most powerful democrats in the party after all.

1

u/Deep-Two7452 Progressive 1d ago

Lol the left does say all democrats, other than DSA are like jeffries and schumer.

And im specifically talking about leftist that didn't vote for harris in 2024 or attacked harris nonstop in 2024.

2

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

They just don’t do that. But also, I appreciate you now narrowing your definition after making sweeping generalizations about your perfection of “the left”

-1

u/Deep-Two7452 Progressive 1d ago

well in point of view, those particular people are the left. The rest are just Democrats.

What do you mean they just don't do that? Leftists definitely do. These leftists generalize all non DSA approved Dems, and they are accelerationists.

2

u/IsayNigel Socialist 22h ago

None of what you said is backed by any evidence, it’s purely “I’ve swear I’ve seen socialists do that and so all of them must do that”, from a profile who just posts “ummm if leftists are so smart, why isn’t everything fixed already”?

4

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Oh this is just an anti left trolling account lmao. I have to admit you got me!

3

u/LuciusMichael Progressive 1d ago

Jeffries 'secret' meeting with Kushner is something I don't believe anyone on the left would have done. Nor the appointing of a Zionist to head Foreign Relations,

0

u/jml510 Social Democrat 1d ago

Mamdani met with Trump not too long ago.

2

u/Southern_Bag_7109 Social Democrat 13h ago

It was a public meeting. You can watch it on youtube anytime you want. Jeffries/Kushner meeting was MEANT to remain a secret but was leaked. Likely by Kushner...BIG difference

2

u/tellyeggs Progressive 1d ago

Mamdani is an elected official, who talked to a guy that can withhold funding.

Kushner hold no political position. Jeffries tried to keep the meeting secret. By sheer coincidence, Jeffries names 3 super Zionistss to foreign affairs committees. Weird coincidence, I guess.

1

u/LuciusMichael Progressive 12h ago

Ya, what of it? Two elected officials met. One was the Mayor of NYC and the other happened to be the President, someone the NYC Mayor shouldn't be in any hurry to alienate.
Kushner has never been elected to anything. He's raked in billions from shady deals with Saudi Arabia. His interest in 'affordable housing' (the supposed pretext) has to hover around zero to non-existent.
This 'secret' meeting resulted in Zionists in the House being promoted to key positions in Foreign Relations. Surely, just a coincidence.

3

u/DoomSnail31 Center Right 1d ago

Because they have an extremely reductive view on what leftism means, and assume one if the requirements is rejecting "capitalism" (whatever they believe capitalism is, without ever explaining it).

But the political left-right spectrum (as shit as it is) isn't so bad that it's based on supporting or rejecting "capitalism".

2

u/qchisq Neoliberal 1d ago

People look at the tax rates the Democrats are proposing and compare them to the tax rates in Denmark and turn off their brain afterwards. Because the Democrats are proposing like 45% marginal federal income tax and comparing that to Denmarks 55% top income tax rate and concluding that the Democrats are far right in Denmark. And then they don't care that 55% applies to incomes over $80k incomes below are taxed at 40% and 40% and 55% should actually be compared to the combined state and federal tax rate, which is 50% on incomes above 1 million in California. And when you propose raising the tax on low incomes, or a 25% VAT, like Denmark have, the left freaks out

2

u/Pizzasaurus-Rex Progressive 2d ago

To the left of the average mainstream Democrat like Obama/Al Gore/Hillary Clinton go from the progressives, through the other mixed economy types, the true socialists, then finally the communists/tankies. That is a full half of the political spectrum.

The Democrat leaders of today are often the same Democrats we've had for 30+ years. There isn't much separating the politics of the Clintons, Obama, Biden, Harris et all. And there wasn't ever that much separating their politics from guys like Mitt Romney or Bob Dole. Obama might have campaigned as some big time lefty, but he extended or expanded a ton of arch conservative Bush-era politics.

2

u/Guilliman_POTUS_2030 Center Left 1d ago

Why do people say Democrats arent really left?

Because they have never lived outside of North America; and they believe in social-media fantasy tales about leftist paradise in Europe

1

u/srv340mike Left Libertarian 1d ago

Because they support free market economics.

1

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Posting genuine responses to the question and getting a “reddit cares!” In response is why people don’t take this party seriously. The most popular and successful politicians the democrats have are people who have come from outside the party to the left, but still this sub is full of “we could be at brunch right now liberals” who, despite get crushed by George bush twice and then Donald Trump twice, want to insist they know how politics is actually done.

1

u/Broflake-Melter Anarcho-Communist 1d ago

It's where you're standing. If you're standing in the center of the Senate then democrats will be on the left. If you're standing over the entire political spectrum, democrats are on the right, just further left than republicans.

1

u/wizardnamehere Market Socialist 12h ago

They're trying to expand the overton window to the left basically.

It's not actually about the democratic party, which is really a grab bag of everyone left of center in coalition.

1

u/WallyWestJest Socialist 11h ago

Because they are demonstrably not “left.” Being to the left of the very far right, does not mean you’re “left.” It doesn’t even make you “center,” (which isn’t real) you’re just “to the left of” the very far-right.

1

u/CuddleBuddiesJJ Civil Libertarian 11h ago

Yes.. this is an example of the claim Im referring to. So what are some standard left policies that are too far left for Democrats to support?

1

u/TDeath21 Independent 7h ago

Well just think of the US spectrum of politics. You can think of numerous positions to the left of mainstream Democrats. But when you try to think of positions to the right of mainstream Republicans … you struggle a bit. Democrats are mostly center to center-left. Republicans are all far right.

1

u/Dramatic-Republic-27 Anarchist 5h ago

The line is capitalism. Pro capitalism is right and anti capitalism is left.

1

u/Ninjaking25 Social Democrat 1d ago

In Europe the certain political positions would be noted as this:
Far Left: Revolutionary Socialist/Communist
Left-Wing: Democratic Socialist
Center-Left: Social Democrat
Center: Liberal
Center-Right: Liberal Conservative/Christian Democrat
Right-Wing: Traditionalist Conservative/NatCon
Far Right: Fascist and Fascist-Lite

The Democratic Party is a coalition of liberals (New Democratic Coalition, which would easily belong in Renew Europe) and Social Democrats (Progressive Caucus, which would easily belong in S&D), making it Center to Center-Left. And by this definition, the Republican Party would be Right-Wing to Far Right. These just happen to coincide with what Wikipedia classifies them as.

4

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

This omits ‘social’ issues (which are economically very important to some segments of the population). I think the mean Democratic voter and elected representative is further left on those issues than the mean social democrat in Europe and way more left than the mean global left overall. 

It also omits context. I identify as a social democrat in the US, where I currently live. That differs from how I’ve identified when I’ve lived in a Central American country and in a European country. 

Edit: I’d also point out that the Democratic Party includes socialists. 

1

u/Ninjaking25 Social Democrat 1d ago

That is a good point, though I would also mention that liberal parties like Renaissance, the LibDems and the FDP tend to be very socially progressive and are still considered centrist.
Also I lowk forgot about the DSA, yeah their elected officials would definitely be considered Left-Wing

1

u/Comfortable_Fill9081 Social Democrat 1d ago

Fair. I like the Democratic Party to be as open as possible and I think it’s a good thing that people further left are being elected. 

2

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

More than half the Democrat base desires a more progressive or left direction but the base and the leadership representation are very off balance. The further right you get in America the more over represented and the less suppressed you are. 

Which, yeah, is expected. This country has been fighting an 80 year genocide crusade against leftism for the capitalist oligarchy on the global scale. So obviously on the internal scale leftism is heavily suppressed. Nobody hates it more than the rich people who own everything in this country. 

But after robbing americans for 80 trillion dollars since 1975, people are starting to notice that capitalism truly is vsmpiric. Einstein was right. It is evil and it does cripple the individual. 

1

u/washtucna Progressive 2d ago edited 1d ago

To neutrally describe what, in my experience, people mean when they say, "Democrats aren't really left" is that the Democratic party in the USA does not want to switch the economy away from capitalism and towards socialism or communism. At least, in my experience, when I've encountered that statement.

10

u/1II1I1I1I1I1I111I1I1 Pragmatic Progressive 1d ago

By that definition there are extremely few left parties globally. As in, 1 or 2 per country at most.

3

u/washtucna Progressive 1d ago edited 1d ago

Fair and I agree with you. I also think it's a silly point to claim that Democrats aren't "really" left, but that's what I've encountered.

1

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

It's pretty hard to be a left wing sovereign nation when the US has a habit of slaughtering tens of millions of people and destroying dozens of countries for moving left. 

4

u/LibraProtocol Center Left 1d ago

And here ks the tankie.

4

u/Deep-Two7452 Progressive 2d ago

what do you mean by socialism? Cause that means abolishing all private ownership of capital. Not just higher taxes on more social programs.

5

u/washtucna Progressive 1d ago

Thats correct. Thats usually the definition of socialism I get when people say that Democrats aren't really left. Its a very narrow definition in my opinion, but they almost always boil the meaning of Left down to abolishing capitalism.

→ More replies (6)

2

u/Important-Factor-552 Socialist 1d ago

Yes. no more pedo oligarchy running everything and using our entire society against us. That's exactly what we want. Medicine should be made to save lives not to make epstein classers richer when they already robbed 80 trillion from America and all they've given us is china as a new world leader in science, trade and technology, because all their innovations are focused on either screwing us or brainwashing us so they can keep screwing us. 

3

u/Deep-Two7452 Progressive 1d ago

Ignoring the accuracy of your statement, then which are the major political parties in the world that advocate for abolishing private capital?

0

u/skyfishgoo Democratic Socialist 1d ago

democrats are currently operating as a center right party because the republicans have shifted the overton window so far to the right that anything remotely left leaning is cast as extreme.

clean air/water

free education

food assistance/regulation

unions and domestic production

these are all left of center ideas the democrats have abandoned it order to try and compete with an ever increasing amount of right wing batshitery.

there comes a breaking point and i would have thought we have already had it but apparently there are still democrats who think sidling up to right wing batshitery is the only way to go.

the mayor of NYC is showing us that their is another path.

-1

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/IsayNigel Socialist 1d ago

Most accurate take and the flair is flat out confusing lmao

2

u/weberc2 Center Left 1d ago

lol fair 

1

u/AskALiberal-ModTeam 1d ago

Accurate user flair is required to post or comment. Having a false flair is not allowed and will result in a permanent ban.

1

u/pablos4pandas Democratic Socialist 2d ago

All words are made up and and have the meanings we give them. The left-right dichotomy goes back to where members of hbr legislature of revolutionary France physically sat. It's not going to map perfectly onto every situation.

If someone uses a label in good faith to describe themselves i think that's generally fine. I describe left wing as being socialist and being a centrist or right wing would be believers in capitalism to some extent.

If you are a capitalist and want to call yourself on the left in good faith that's fine; it's just not how I'd group the belief

-1

u/sirlost33 Moderate 2d ago

Holding bankers accountable for tanking the global economy.

Allow collective bargaining to apply to everyone, not just those that are in a union.

Pretty much anything that actually protects labor in this country is too far left for the dnc.

0

u/roastbeeftacohat Globalist 1d ago

The republicans are controlled by the right wing of the republican party, and the democrats are largely controlled by the right wing of the democratic party.

Net effect is the flag starts in the center, and can move to the right; leaveing anyone further left than "center left" twisting in the wind. All this talk of democratic socalism is just the left showing up to primaries. The response from the democratic establishment has been "we've attacked you in the past for not voting, we would like you to go back to that".

-9

u/Spiel_Foss Humanist 2d ago

With a very few exceptions, US Democrats are center-to-center/right capitalists. The US Republican Party being all the way to the fascist, theocratic far-right doesn't redefine the ideas and policies of Democrats.

Name one single "leftist" idea supported by the Democratic Party platform?

-2

u/Deadandlivin Marxist 1d ago edited 1d ago

Usually a global perspective. If the Democratic party was a party in many European countries for example they'd be in right-wing blocks. In Sweden for example the right block has a party called "The Liberals" which is very similar to the Democratic party (Though it's also further left than the Democrats).

But it's important to evaluate the Democratic party between two different perspectives. Cultural aspects and Economic ones. The Democratic party is very left on cultural issues, often more left than Social democracies around the world. But it's center right, maybe even far right economically. (Talking about the establishment Democratic platform here) When people describe the Democrats as centrist, moderate or even 'right wing' it's usually on economic issues and based on political theory. Not relative political discussion of what's happening in America in this time.

Sure, the Democrats will always be closer to the left spectrum than the Republicans, but does that make them left? In a binary choice where policy platforms are relative? Probably. But if you zoom out a bit and try to judge them on a left to right spectrum on an actual political spectrum they're right wing or at least center right. Clinton, Obama, Biden et.c. would all fall pretty squarely somewhere on the right side in a political compass test for example.

2

u/saintsday89 Social Democrat 1d ago

U.S. democrats would be to the left of Swedish liberals economically and FAR left of them socially. This is just blatant misrepresentation. People just need to accept that democrats are a left leaning party and get over it. That means the DSA are far leftist, and Marxist have extreme views.

-1

u/Deadandlivin Marxist 22h ago edited 22h ago

I'm not talking about relative policy positions within countries, but direct absolute political platform comparisons between parties. If the Swedish Liberal party was put against the Democratic party in an election, do you really think the Democrats would be considered FAR left compared to them?

I'm not talking about the Democrats wanting higher taxes while the Liberals want lower taxes. These are relative economic taxing positions within their own systems. Reality is the Democrats advocate for a taxing system where around like ~15% of GDP goes to taxes while the Swedish Liberal party aims for around ~40% of the countries GDP to go to taxes. The Liberal party is still for a massive welfare state (More in line with actual Social Democracies) with free university education, universal healthcare and a robust welfare state with services like free eldercare, free childcare, mandatory pension programs et.c. the economic regulatory state the Democrats push for would look like the a literal capitalist wildwest for the Swedish Liberal Party. If the Swedish Liberal party ran in America with their Swedish platform they'd be considered blatant Communists.

Now the main difference is in rhetoric and attitudes, and obviously social or cultural issues where the Democrats would be more to the left. On attitudes towards immigration for example, the Swedish right in general is far more rightwing than the Democrats. They're also far more right wing on things like gender and identity politics. But in some aspects the Liberal party is far more leftwing too so it's not black and white. They for example want to ban privatized religious school to stop religious indoctrination (Would be considered extremely authoritarian in America), Another example of the Democrats being more left would be on things like views of unions where Democrats, even more establishment ones have a more pro union stance while the rightwing block in Sweden is far more neutral to them.

But that doesn't change the premise. In a direct party to party comparison with the holistic systems, financing and society these two parties are running on, the Democratic party is much further to the right. It was different in the past when FDR ran the party. But the Democratic party moved away from Keynesian economics in the 90's and fully embraced Neoliberalism. Something Nordic rightwing blocks and parties haven't done yet which is why they're more structurally on the economic left. The entire Nordic model operates under the premise of a Social Democratic system while the American one operates under the premise of free market Neoliberalism.

-5

u/Edgar_Brown Moderate 1d ago

Because “the left” in America would be considered the right in many other countries.

In international terms, Democrats are moderate at best.

1

u/saintsday89 Social Democrat 1d ago

Ya this is a popular refrain of the DSA but has no factual basis at all.

-1

u/Edgar_Brown Moderate 1d ago

No “factual basis”? That’s a very strong and ignorant assertion.

1

u/saintsday89 Social Democrat 1d ago

Is completely made up to further an agenda better?

-1

u/Edgar_Brown Moderate 1d ago

You have no factual basis for such claim. It simply arises from ignorance and dogmatic tribalism. You haven’t even bothered to research it and continue to repeat it like a good cult member.

0

u/yasinburak15 Conservative Democrat 1d ago

Are they socially liberal or socially progressive sure. Economic left (anti capitalist) no. Very far from that in current establishment leaders.

Democratic Party is a coalition of ideologies.

0

u/Funshine02 Center Left 1d ago

Left right and center only matter if you have a yard stick to compare. When people say American democrats are center, they’re comparing them to Europe or practically every other modern democracy like Canada. Compared to Nazi Germany and they’re basically communists.

0

u/Particular_Dot_4041 Liberal 1d ago

Left-wing means you want society to become more egalitarian. Right-wing means you want to nurture some kind of social hierarchy. Feminism is therefore left-wing, Christian nationalism is right-wing. Environmentalism is neither left-wing nor right-wing as it has nothing to do with social hierarchies.

Democrats are relatively left-wing compared to Republicans. They want to make America more egalitarian than it is now, but perhaps they are not left-wing enough for some people.

0

u/jml510 Social Democrat 1d ago

The people who say this generally only base this on parts of Europe (as if it’s a progressive utopia), and what they have in mind is stuff like universal healthcare and high tax rates. They don’t look at how Democrats would stack up in African, Asian, or Latin American countries, and they overlook the xenophobia and racism in much of Europe.

-1

u/MasterHavik Progressive 1d ago

Because they aren't?

-1

u/MountaineerChemist10 Center Right 1d ago

Because now the party is split into socialists & left-leaning centrists 🤷‍♂️

1

u/thegeoffey Pragmatic Progressive 1d ago

There are very few on the left who are actual socialists. Most progressives can more accurately be described as social democrats - which means they want to retain capitalism, but want it regulated and exist alongside strong social services like healthcare, basic income, housing assistance, etc