Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, September 12, 2017

An extensive new Pew Research Center analysis released Friday finds that 48 percent of Democratic voters overall now identify as liberals. A decade ago, that number was 32 percent, and it was even less in previous years -- down to 28 percent in 2000.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Ronald Reagan demonized the word "liberal". It took a long time for the word to be rehabilitated. But actual political views remained the same regardless of the words used to describe them.

#1 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-09-12 02:00 PM | Reply

Are the 45% that aren't liberal clinton supporters?

#2 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-09-12 02:42 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

If I read it correctly, the respondents could pick either liberal or moderate or conservative?

and a lot of folks chose moderate. Not surprising. While to some, the term "liberal" can be a negative connotation, it's my opinion, that one can be a democrat and a "moderate" at the same time and it's not because they think liberal is a dirty word. It's because they were give the choice of "moderate" in their responses.

#3 | Posted by eberly at 2017-09-12 03:06 PM | Reply

Then there's the term Neo-Liberal. Which I gather, is the new term for a GOP Conservative?

#4 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-09-12 03:07 PM | Reply

Then there's the term Neo-Liberal. Which I gather, is the new term for a GOP Conservative?

#4 | Posted by BruceBanner

Also, "conservadems".

#5 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-09-12 03:19 PM | Reply

#1 | Posted by moder8

Reagan? It's been going on the past 20 years much more effectively than under Reagan - it really took off under Clinton IMHO. Karl Rove is personally responsible for much of that as well as Faux News and Rush Limbloat. They have created a monster on the right.

#6 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-09-12 03:31 PM | Reply

"Ronald Reagan demonized the word "liberal". It took a long time for the word to be rehabilitated. But actual political views remained the same regardless of the words used to describe them."

Reagan misused the term. In may parts of the world, the term "liberal" refers to people who would be most comfortable with Reagan's politics. I prefer the term "progressive" to refer to those on the left. The term "liberal" has too much connective tissue to the term liberty, something that many progressives are directly ad odds with. I'm a pretty staunch libertarian, and as such consider myself to very liberal. But I lack the tendencies present in many progressives to allow government the ability to govern and manage all aspects of society in order to achieve a desired political outcome.

#7 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-09-12 08:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I, for one, am liberal and damned proud of it.

#8 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-09-12 08:08 PM | Reply

And also, I cannot fathom how anyone can be conservative and proud at the same time.

#9 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-09-12 08:09 PM | Reply

Stinky libs, the whole lot of you!!

#10 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-09-12 08:11 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

But I lack the tendencies present in many progressives to allow government the ability to govern and manage all aspects of society in order to achieve a desired political outcome.
#7 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

What would that be? Socialism?

Such a scaremonger you are!

#11 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-09-12 08:13 PM | Reply

im a proud conservative. I'm sure there are tens of millions of us. I'm sure I disagree with tens of millions of them on a different subjects, even down to what a "conservative" is.

#12 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2017-09-12 08:37 PM | Reply

"I, for one, am liberal and damned proud of it."

Do you consider yourself liberal or progressive?

"And also, I cannot fathom how anyone can be conservative and proud at the same time."

Conservative is also a loaded term. The German National Socialism were very socially conservative (when they weren't gay), yet very left-leaning when it came to economics. Conservative or liberal? And many Libertarians, myself included, are far more socially liberal then progressives...and that was before many who consider themselves progressives began abandoning social liberalism in the name of political correctness and social justice.

#13 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-09-12 09:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"What would that be? Socialism?"

Socialism is certainly representative of a government regulating the economic behavior of a society, but many progressives (and conservatives, to be fair) seek measures that would allow government oversight of social behavior as well.

#14 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-09-12 09:32 PM | Reply

I, for one, am liberal and damned proud of it. #8 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

m.youtube.com

#15 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-09-12 09:40 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

i'm a liberal.
not a democrat.

#16 | Posted by klifferd at 2017-09-12 09:50 PM | Reply

"im a proud conservative"

duh... you are obese, emasculated and angry... you fit the stereotype.

#17 | Posted by klifferd at 2017-09-12 09:51 PM | Reply

I'm socially liberal. I consider myself a conservative overall with libertarian tendencies.

I feel my politics are principled, so I suppose a bit of pride goes with that.

I draw a big distinction between "liberals" and "progressives (SJW also applies)". On policy they may be pretty close on most issues, but man are they different on some key issues.

#18 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-09-12 10:05 PM | Reply

I consider myself liberal.

I believe in freedom and lots of it.

I believe in secular government.

I believe the proper role of government is to protect the lives of its citizens and promote the general welfare. I believe in a strong government role in the market and in public life-protecting those without means from those with power.

I believe government exists to alleviate the ills of society

I believe in equality for all.

I believe the government should stay out of the bedroom, but protect the rights of minorities in the public sphere (including the market place).

I believe in diplomacy over military action.

I am a peacenik

I believe arms races lead to conflict.

I believe society is a goal not a status, i.e. society's aims should be perfection, i.e. constantly evolving to meet emerging understanding.

I believe in science

I believe in education

I believe in the individual and the group's responsibility to protect the individual and the individuals responsibility to his group (i.e. community).

I believe in the sanctity of life in all its forms

I believe that no life is beyond redemption.

I believe that it is a woman's private choice to do with her body as she sees fit

I believe our country's greatest strength comes from embracing change including immigrants

I believe that mankind is effecting climate change and has a duty to do something about it.

I believe most crimes arise from either poverty or mental health issues, which can be solved with education, health care and a properly run economic system

#19 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-09-13 12:55 AM | Reply

And many Libertarians, myself included, are far more socially liberal then progressives...and that was before many who consider themselves progressives began abandoning social liberalism in the name of political correctness and social justice.
#13 | Posted by madbomber

bull crap

negative responses to calls for social justice are simply conservative (i.e. reactionary) knee jerk actions.

Social justice (as envisioned today) is the cutting edge of liberal thought.

Social justice is revolutionary in spirit. The revolution is bringing attention to the marginalized in our society, which doesn't just mean minorities. It is giving voice to those who still suffer injustice, gives a platform for those whose voices haven't been heard or whose voice is being found in new appreciations of the roles that people play and providing new opportunities to everyone.

Or course reactionaries, re. conservatives, will respond negatively to that message. It disrupts their narrative and perspective on life. It challenges their mores. They don't want change, that is what makes them conservatives.

Change is what revolutions bring.

#20 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-09-13 01:03 AM | Reply

Anybody's who's studied history knows that Revolutions quickly become meet the new boss, same as (or worse than) the old boss

#21 | Posted by sentinel at 2017-09-13 05:34 AM | Reply

Oppressors change; oppression doesn't.

#22 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2017-09-13 07:02 AM | Reply

"negative responses to calls for social justice are simply conservative (i.e. reactionary) knee jerk actions."

Not when the calls for social justice are little more than calls demanding special recognition. Which is absolutely the new hotness on the left. And if you're being honest, you'll admit that social justice isn't universal. It's selectively applied. You're not going to support those marginalized members of society unless they agree with you. So stop pretending you're some sort of cutting edge visionary. You're no less accepting than those who you deride.

Anybody's who's studied history knows that Revolutions quickly become meet the new boss, same as (or worse than) the old boss.

I think that many people don't see themselves as the animals living under the thumb of Napoleon the pig, but Napoleon the pig himself. Or at least one of the pigs.

#23 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-09-13 10:08 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It means that half the Dem party, liberal or moderate, can't win elections. They have to compromise, at least among themselves, and werk together. When either half thinks they can win national elections, they lose.

I've been a liberal since my first vote in '72 for George McGovern. But I've advocated for policies that are also acceptable to moderates to try to, "get things done". Small steps forwards being better than no steps at all, or backward steps such as we have taken with GW and Trump.

Canned Heat

www.youtube.com

#24 | Posted by Corky at 2017-09-13 10:22 AM | Reply

"I feel my politics are principled"

they aren't. liberals of today share more values of classic conservatives than today's republican party, but you keep apologizing for their unprincipled mistakes.

#25 | Posted by klifferd at 2017-09-13 10:55 AM | Reply

i'd love for JeffJ, who i can tell is pretty intelligent, to get over his cognitive dissonance and move over to the side he belongs... the left.

#26 | Posted by klifferd at 2017-09-13 10:56 AM | Reply

"i'd love for JeffJ, who i can tell is pretty intelligent, to get over his cognitive dissonance and move over to the side he belongs... the left."

I cant' speak for Jeff, but for me it's the left's unwavering devotion to using totalitarianism as a means of molding society...the unwillingness to allow people to participate in or reject social or economic relationships based on their own wants and desires. Which is pretty much the same reasons I reject a lot of conservative ideology. Traditional American conservatives and progressives have a lot in common that I dislike, even if they execute those similarities in different ways.

#27 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-09-13 11:02 AM | Reply

#28

What a racist MF'er.

#29 | Posted by Corky at 2017-09-13 11:10 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The next time I'm in NYC you can show me the kabob stand your dad runs, then I'll take you for a walk and let you rummage through some dumpsters so you can feel like you're back in ---------. "

sure buddy, if you can fit into an airplane seat with that huge rear end of yours, AND you're woman pays for your ticket since you are broke, and make it to NYC, i'd love to show you around. I don't know how your fragile ego could handle being shown how to be a real adult, with skills, education, and that looks great. I'll even buy you a beer cause I know your woman keeps a short leash.

#30 | Posted by klifferd at 2017-09-13 11:12 AM | Reply

"the left's unwavering devotion to using totalitarianism as a means of molding society"

You mean like when the GOP crushed the slaver's rebellion, that kind of thing?

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-13 11:14 AM | Reply

your***** for all them spelling/grammar nazis

#32 | Posted by klifferd at 2017-09-13 11:21 AM | Reply

Anybody's who's studied history knows that Revolutions quickly become meet the new boss, same as (or worse than) the old boss
#21 | Posted by sentinel

take your cynicism elsewhere

American Revolution
US Civil War
Civil Rights revolution of the 60's
Gay rights revolution of the 90's and 00's

#33 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-09-13 11:29 AM | Reply

"negative responses to calls for social justice are simply conservative (i.e. reactionary) knee jerk actions."
Not when the calls for social justice are little more than calls demanding special recognition. Which is absolutely the new hotness on the left. And if you're being honest, you'll admit that social justice isn't universal. It's selectively applied. You're not going to support those marginalized members of society unless they agree with you. So stop pretending you're some sort of cutting edge visionary. You're no less accepting than those who you deride.
Anybody's who's studied history knows that Revolutions quickly become meet the new boss, same as (or worse than) the old boss.
I think that many people don't see themselves as the animals living under the thumb of Napoleon the pig, but Napoleon the pig himself. Or at least one of the pigs.
#23 | Posted by madbomber

again, typical reactionary response, negate the message by focusing on the extremes of the movement. revolutionaries tend to be dogmatic idealists who act beyond the norms. That's what makes them revolutionaries. It is also not an organized movement, thus competing messages. But the revolution is right before your eyes. Change has already occurred (look at the reaction to Trumps bans on transgendered in the military-a tectonic shift in public mores), more change is coming, often at a glacial pace which you wont even notice, often in leaps and bounds.

And you are seriously ignorant if you think all revolutions fall under the Communist model, of course, that is simply reactionary fear mongering.

#34 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-09-13 11:35 AM | Reply

"again, typical reactionary response."

Again, typical totalitarian progressive response. And congrats, Using the term "reactionary" pretty much solidifies your place on the Bolshevik side of the political spectrum. That was always one of their key phrases used to deride those who questioned their favorite narrative.

"But the revolution is right before your eyes."

I agree with you. We're seeing society become less and less concerned with how people choose to live their lives. Being gay is no longer that big of a deal. My wife and I have some very close gay friends who come over and play board games with us and our kids. They don't look upon them as being any different than anyone else. Drugs are being legalized. That's great. But none of these things would have been successful were it not for the fact that society really doesn't care about gay people or pot smoke. Where you run afoul of free society is when you force them to accept something they don't want to.

"And you are seriously ignorant if you think all revolutions fall under the Communist model, of course, that is simply reactionary fear mongering."

There's that term again. I don't think all revolutions fall under the communist model, but yours sure as hell would.

#35 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-09-13 11:53 AM | Reply

I shouldn't say that your preferred revolution would be based on communism-I don't believe that. Only that it would be left-wing in nature and include totalitarian methods of enforcing the revolution. Probably carried out by foot soldiers wearing black hoodies and facemasks. Destroying ATMs, restaurants, banks, mansions, and any remnants of the old Bourgeoisie order.

#36 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-09-13 11:55 AM | Reply

"Only that it would be left-wing in nature and include totalitarian methods of enforcing the revolution."

And this is different from say the American Revolution how, exactly?

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-13 12:32 PM | Reply

"Probably carried out by foot soldiers wearing black hoodies and facemasks. Destroying ATMs, restaurants, banks, mansions, and any remnants of the old Bourgeoisie order."

And this is different from dressing up as Indians and destroying a tea shipment how, exactly?

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-13 12:33 PM | Reply

I'm a proud moderate not bound to any party.

#39 | Posted by Billjohnson at 2017-09-13 02:30 PM | Reply

I vote for the person I believe best represents what I consider the most important issue at that time.

#40 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2017-09-13 02:31 PM | Reply

Hey madbomber, the 50's called. They want their bogeyman back.

#41 | Posted by jpw at 2017-09-13 02:38 PM | Reply

I'm not carrying a prideful attachment to any political affiliation. I feel I'm a moderate. Pride? over political affiliation?

I'll let the other guy drag that worthless bag of ---- behind them their whole life.

#42 | Posted by eberly at 2017-09-13 02:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I'm not carrying a prideful attachment to any political affiliation."

Yes you are.

Your pride is "I'm smarter than one-party voters."

Just bask in the warm glow of how much better a person you are than everyone else.

But most importantly, do it silently.

A big ole dog like you shouldn't have to bark, Eberly.

So don't.

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-13 02:50 PM | Reply

"And this is different from dressing up as Indians and destroying a tea shipment how, exactly?"

Did the tea belong to private citizens and members of the community?

"Hey madbomber, the 50's called. They want their bogeyman back."

I wasn't alive back then. Was there a big problem with gangs of degenerates wearing hoodies and black bandannas burning cars and trashing businesses back then?

You would have been more accurate to say that the 1920's wanted their bogeyman back, as the ideology of the current crop of violent leftists most resembles the anarchists and radicals of that era.

#44 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-09-13 02:58 PM | Reply

"Did the tea belong to private citizens and members of the community?"

Do ATMs???

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-13 03:02 PM | Reply

I don't think they belong to the government.

#46 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-09-13 03:43 PM | Reply

Okay. So what's that got to do with anything?

#47 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-13 09:54 PM | Reply

43

I suppose it's pride I have but I have no more pride than anybody else here.

Mine just isn't attached to political affiliation or ideology.

I see no superiority in either major party.

I prefer balance in govt and right now there isn't enough balance so I'm inclined to vote dem at least until there is balance.

I think there are smart people here who are strongly tied to a party.

Where I differ is where I feel zero obligation to stump for a party even if I vote for it's members.

#48 | Posted by eberly at 2017-09-13 10:03 PM | Reply

"I see no superiority in either major party."

That's why people look at issues.

Which party is better on abortion?
Which party is better on not starting pointless wars?
Which party is better on health care?

Add it up.
It's pretty clear that unless the issue is paying lower taxes, the Democrats are superior.
Or if you're anti-abortion, then the Republicans are gonna be your cup of tea.

I'm just trying to imagine the life of privilege you must lead for neither party to be selling anything you'd like to buy. Seems impossible; even the Republicans had something Trump wanted, which is access to power, which he wrest from them against their will.

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-13 10:26 PM | Reply

Well, if nothing else this thread highlights the self-righteousness most everyone has in their political beliefs.

To the extent that someone like Eb get's pissed on for being somewhat modest.

#50 | Posted by jpw at 2017-09-13 11:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

the only way to be a theocrat or a neonazi is to be called a "liberal."

#51 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-09-14 01:28 AM | Reply

I'm not liberal, I am a moderate. I will vote for a liberal if I find one i like. If there happens to be a moderate in the republican party, the goobers find a way to drive him out.

I am just against right-wing-extremist-nut-job-nazis. In other words, almost without exception, I am against whatever the Trumpians are for.

#52 | Posted by kudzu at 2017-09-14 05:35 AM | Reply

"That's why people look at issues."

No, that's why I look at issues. Others, such as yourself, only look at parties. You're a fool for even pointing out those issues.

You're just convincing yourself of your superiority over anybody else over what party they are shackled to.

It's an old argument and quite frankly, too complex for you to understand. Let it go. It's obvious you'll never understand why I am they way I am.

As JPW posted in 50....... "this thread highlights the self-righteousness most everyone has in their political beliefs."

couldn't have said it better. NW

#53 | Posted by eberly at 2017-09-14 08:55 AM | Reply

"It's obvious you'll never understand why I am they way I am."

That applies to you just as much as it does to anyone else.
Or maybe you'd like to take a stab at explaining why you are the way you are?
No. You'll pass. I "wouldn't understand." It's above my pay grade or something.

#54 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-14 12:54 PM | Reply

"You're just convincing yourself of your superiority over anybody else over what party they are shackled to. "

You think you're better than Corky, even though you both voted for Hillary, because his horse is a little higher than yours, right?

#55 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-09-14 12:55 PM | Reply

55

What makes his horse higher?

Because he thinks it is?

To answer you....no, I don't think I'm better than corky.

You're right. On Election Day we did the same thing.

What he does here is for nothing. He thinks it's for something. He must think what he does here serves a purpose.....but it doesn't.

And it's not that he is any bigger ------- than anybody else here.

He just has a license to get away with it.

#56 | Posted by eberly at 2017-09-14 08:03 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort