Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, November 02, 2017

Eric Levitz: In truth, the Republican Party's dominance has little to do with the American electorate's "center-right" ideology. We know this for two simple reasons: First, the vast majority of that electorate has no ideology, whatsoever. And second, when polled on discrete policy questions, Americans consistently express majoritarian support for a left-of-center economic agenda. ... When we look past ideological self-identification to polling on discrete public policy questions, America appears to be far more center-left than center-right. In a recent analysis of Democracy Fund Voter Study Group survey data, the political scientist Lee Drutman found that 73.5 percent of the 2016 electorate espoused broadly left-of-center views on economic policy.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

That finding is supported by polling on individual fiscal issues over the past year. Recent surveys have shown that most Americans -- including majorities of Republican voters -- support increasing federal financing of health care and oppose cutting taxes for the wealthy. And there's little evidence that the Democrats' left flank is exhausting the public's tolerance for government intervention in the economy: Recent polls have found that over 60 percent of Americans support tuition-free public college (a majority that includes 58 percent of independents and 47 percent of Republicans); that over 60 percent of all voters favor Medicaid and Medicare buy-in programs, while a slim majority likes the sound of single-payer; and that 82 percent of voters, including 70 percent of Republicans, support new legislation expanding access to paid family and medical leave.

Comments

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

Yes, but Democrats are idiots who run on small group wedge issues rather than broader economic messages.

#1 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-11-02 12:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

BS. The country will always be center right. I guess this guy is just trying to talk himself into an alternate reality, as liberals always do.

To say something so blatantly that's a lie is concerning to me about this man's mental state.

In a recent analysis of Democracy Fund Voter Study Group survey data

Yea, now that's a left leaning organization, what do you think the results of their polls would be? Why didn't you just get a poll from the Huffington Post?

#2 | Posted by boaz at 2017-11-02 12:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

Hooray for the centrists who are slightly less evil that the other centrists!

#3 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-02 12:16 PM | Reply

Hooray for the centrists who are slightly less evil that the other centrists!

#3 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM AT 2017-11-02 12:16 PM

Damn the centrists who are slightly less evil than the other centrists! Lets vote for the slightly MORE evil centrists!

Or not vote at all and let them decide which centrists control the country for me!

#4 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2017-11-02 12:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

BS. The country will always be center right. I guess this guy is just trying to talk himself into an alternate reality, as liberals always do.

#2 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Or...and hear me out here...he actually conducted scientific surveys to gauge accurate public opinion rather than simply sticking his head of Sean Hannity's ass.

#5 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-11-02 12:19 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 7

BS. The country will always be center right. I guess this guy is just trying to talk himself into an alternate reality, as liberals always do.

#2 | Posted by boaz

You sir are full of crap. JFK could not be elected today because he was too conservative.

#6 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-11-02 12:21 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

I'm kind of impressed how Sheeple never gets tired of crowing how much better he is than us because he threw his vote away on a candidate with no chance of winning.

#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-02 12:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

BS. The country will always be center right. I guess this guy is just trying to talk himself into an alternate reality, as liberals always do.

#2 | Posted by boaz

You sir are full of crap. JFK could not be elected today because he was too conservative.

Posted by Sniper at 2017-11-02 12:21 PM | Reply

WOW

#8 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-11-02 12:24 PM | Reply

#7 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I'm impressed you're up at noon. Your mom's laundry day?

#9 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-02 12:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

It's actually quite simple. Societies all go in phases. It starts with liberalism because the people want and there is nobody to take from yet, so everything is open. Then, as time goes by and people start having, it becomes more conservative because those people don't to liberalism to take what they have. Then, when too many people have, conservatism thrives and liberalism dies. But then, and this is where America is right now, the masses stop having. More and more people stop having because conservative values and legislation cause it. As the number of people who don't have start to rise above a point, liberalism starts taking over again because the people who don't have want to have, and the only way to have is to take what others have because it's too hard to get again because conservatism has made giving too difficult.

If you followed all that, you now know the repeating pattern almost all societies go through, unless societies decide on Socialism and keep it. Then, having isn't as much of a priority as the giving. Unfortunately, it also means innovation crashes and motivation dies, because those are conservative values; it's just too bad other conservative values like greed get in the way of an otherwise decent system.

#10 | Posted by humtake at 2017-11-02 12:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

Yes, but Democrats are idiots who run on small group wedge issues rather than broader economic messages.
#1 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

Hahahaha yeah the "democrats" focus on wedge issues like banning abortion, banning gay marriage, gun control, etc. etc. etc.

That isn't true in the least, psycho. Republicans are the fools dumb enough to vote against their self-interest because of wedge issues.

#11 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-11-02 12:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Where is "the center"?

#12 | Posted by TheTom at 2017-11-02 12:36 PM | Reply

#2 | Posted by boaz

usually whines on about how everything is now liberalized. suddenly changes tune, because you know, freedummbzzz and all that
confusing

#13 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2017-11-02 12:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

12
Exactly.
We have people here who claim they're liberals and others aren't.
We have people that say they're conservative and others disagree.

People that we'd call the "center" may not agree with that label.

What about people that are socially liberal but econimacally conservative?

It's all a big -----------.

#14 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2017-11-02 01:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If it's all a big ----------- I don't want to be center in any way whatsoever

#15 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-02 01:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

#14 | Posted by 101Chairborne

The "middle" is pretty easy to find you just have to categorize things scientifically. Vast majority of ideas are either Conservative or Liberal just by their nature. The center holds views from both sides and isn't particularly extreme which is pretty normal. Whether people agree or not isn't the point, you just have to use a scientific process to categorize things and then get honest responses.

#16 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-11-02 01:23 PM | Reply

America is left of center in economics, law, and foreign policy.

It is right of center in cultural concerns.... "culture IS policy" is a favorite saying among rwing pols because they know that despite voter's rationality on left of center policy, many of them can be fearmongered into voting for Republicans by threatening their comfortable cultural views with minority demographics.

It's quite like telling the poor white people in the Civil War south that the slaves would cut their throats were they to ever be freed from the plantation.

---- werks.

#17 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-02 01:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#2 | Posted by boaz

I really had a good chuckle at this. This country isn't right or center right. When you conduct a poll in this manner - striping out partisanship and asking stripped down basic questions, the truth comes out. There are a lot of hoodwinked people right now is the bottom line. Just like I when I run into a clueless conservative that has no preformed ideas of me and we have a discussion on economic issues. It actually happens quite frequently. Most of the time they broadly agree with my views and lately then I find out they voted Trump and I shake my head.

Take "tax reform" that is coming up for vote soon. They are all pro tax reform. Get rid of this and that but most of them are clueless on what is purposed. When I explain some of the deductions the proposals are looking at taking away from them they fill their pants. I know there is some backing off on a few items but I would think you would be too at this point. This "tax reform" is screw the guy working for a living and the retired but give big savings to the wealthy.

#18 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-11-02 01:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Imagine if people stopped worrying about this imaginary political spectrum and just started looking at candidates based solely on individual merit.

#19 | Posted by Sully at 2017-11-02 01:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#8 It's true, Laura. JFK's politics wouldn't get him on the Democratic ticket today. I posted something on that a few weeks ago. There's no reason to repeat myself when others have recognized the same thing, though:

www.forbes.com

- - - - -

Americans consistently express majoritarian support for a left-of-center economic agenda.

That's the problem with the poll: it was focused only on the economic policy and not their social wedge platforms. What the progressives haven't figured out is that the social wedge is pushing more people away than it's bringing in.

#20 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2017-11-02 01:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"The right's JFK myth: Now they claim he was conservative

To capitalize on President Kennedy's record popularity, the GOP is now embracing him. Here's why that's ludicrous"

www.salon.com

www.realclearpolitics.com

"Stoll's case for JFK's domestic conservatism rests heavily on his commitment to a tax cut passed three months after his death. On November 22, Stoll notes, Kennedy was en route to the Dallas Trade Mart to stump for reduced rates: "he was fighting for a tax cut to the end" -- the martyred Christ of supply-side economics (or military Keynesianism, depending how you look at it).

Tax cuts weren't a conservative litmus test at the time, however; as Stoll notes, Goldwater feared that the Kennedy cuts "would lead to deficits, inflation, and even bankruptcy."

www.theamericanconservative.com

Even "intellelctual" rwingers don't believe this nonsense.

#21 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-02 01:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

... he threw his vote away on a candidate with no chance of winning.
#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-02 12:21 PM

History shows us that only 1 candidate had a chance of winning, or they all did. Not 2, not 3. 1 or all.

#22 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-02 02:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Yes, but Democrats are idiots who run on small group wedge issues rather than broader economic messages.
#1 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT
Hahahaha yeah the "democrats" focus on wedge issues like banning abortion, banning gay marriage, gun control, etc. etc. etc.
That isn't true in the least, psycho. Republicans are the fools dumb enough to vote against their self-interest because of wedge issues.
#11 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES

Those are large wedge issues. I mean small ones. Like transgender rights. While I am in favor of them, focusing so much on issues outside what effects the vast vast majority of voters, especially middle class voters, is what is killing us at the voting booth. It allows us to be marginalized because instead of merely supporting such issues, we put them out front as leading issues.

#23 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-11-02 02:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The right's JFK myth: Now they claim he was conservative

He wouldn't get a democrat vote in todays far left democrats. Everyone was conservative 50 years ago, that's why there was most of the time consensus on issues.

It's only after the 60's liberal BS that this country started going downhill...

#24 | Posted by boaz at 2017-11-02 02:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"History shows us that only 1 candidate had a chance of winning, or they all did. Not 2, not 3. 1 or all.
#22 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE"

What "History" are you looking at?
Which "history" gave Stein and Johnson a chance in November of last year?

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-02 02:11 PM | Reply

"There are a lot of hoodwinked people right now is the bottom line."

See www.drudge.com for further details.

#26 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-02 02:19 PM | Reply

"It's only after the 60's liberal BS that this country started going downhill...

POSTED BY BOAZ AT 2017-11-02 02:10 PM | REPLY"

Yeah, allowing you to vote was a terrible idea.

#27 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2017-11-02 02:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

Imagine if people stopped worrying about this imaginary political spectrum and just started looking at candidates based solely on individual merit.

#19 | Posted by Sully

They are damn few and far between. Most self respecting people wouldn't put up with the BS associated with being friends with a lowlife politician. They are the bottom feeders way below lawyers.

#28 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-11-02 02:39 PM | Reply

"The right's JFK myth: Now they claim he was conservative

#21 | Posted by Corky

WOW!!!! Who was the last politician that actually had a balanced budget, not just a projected one. He was the last president that didn't increase the national debt. He was for a strong military. He cut taxes. Need I go on?

#29 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-11-02 02:43 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

It's only after the 60's liberal BS that this country started going downhill...

#24 | Posted by boaz

And that is a fact you can take to the bank.

#30 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-11-02 02:45 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 1

Yeah, allowing you to vote was a terrible idea.

#27 | Posted by Alexandrite

And you are the one calling people a racists. WOW!!! Maybe it was a mistake to let you women vote.

#31 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-11-02 02:48 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Siper,

Alex was being sarcastic.

He was pointing out to Boaz (who is self-admittedly black) that people of his skin color greatly benefited from the political movement Boaz was deriding.

#32 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-02 02:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

If United States haters Sniper and Boaz think the country is going downhill, we are objectively going in the right direction.

#33 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-11-02 02:53 PM | Reply

Imagine if people stopped worrying about this imaginary political spectrum and just started looking at candidates based solely on individual merit.
#19 | POSTED BY SULLY

Too much thinking for the American electorate.

#34 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-11-02 02:54 PM | Reply

It's only after the 60's liberal BS that this country started going downhill...

#24 | Posted by boaz

And that is a fact you can take to the bank.

#30 | Posted by Sniper

So if we could just go back to the 50's America would be great again?

And the 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's had nothing to do with any of the problems we are having today?

umm ok sure, Comrades.

#35 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-02 02:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

While I am in favor of them, focusing so much on issues outside what effects the vast vast majority of voters, especially middle class voters, is what is killing us at the voting booth. It allows us to be marginalized because instead of merely supporting such issues, we put them out front as leading issues.

#23 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

Transgender rights is a wedge issue on the left? Newsflash; only conservatives give a ---- about transgender anything. Liberals don't care, we just support equal rights. Why do you think the only people making a big deal out of transgenders are the opposition?

Once gay marriage was legalized, the left lost the only true wedge issue that would sway some of its voters. The rest are all right-wing wedges.

#36 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-11-02 05:18 PM | Reply

#36 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES

That post is utterly detached from reality.

#37 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-02 06:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"left-of-center economic agenda" Your kidding right.
Thats the same poll that said hillary would win. Its bogas the only people answering these polls are liberals. Everyone else hangs up on them.
You should base nothing on this failed out of date polling system. It no longer works and should be abandoned. The only poll that matters is how people vote and they are not voting for "left-of-center economic agendas"

#38 | Posted by tmaster at 2017-11-02 06:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

To say something so blatantly that's a lie is concerning to me about this man's mental state.

Now you know how it feels reading your posts.

#39 | Posted by jpw at 2017-11-02 06:45 PM | Reply

Everyone was conservative 50 years ago, that's why there was most of the time consensus on issues.

Ho boy is there a lot going on here. 😂

#40 | Posted by jpw at 2017-11-02 06:53 PM | Reply

Whether non-ideologues get screwed from the right or the left, they're still getting screwed.

#41 | Posted by Ray at 2017-11-02 07:18 PM | Reply

#37 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Just detached from your FOX-fed "reality".

#42 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-11-02 07:25 PM | Reply

#42 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES

Actually, it was a big straw man.

Also, I haven't watched Fox News in years. Wait. Strike that. I watched the '16 election night coverage on Fox.

#43 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-11-02 08:45 PM | Reply

Which "history" gave Stein and Johnson a chance in November of last year? - #25 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-02 02:11 PM
The same one that gave Clinton a chance.

#44 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-02 09:38 PM | Reply

How is that an answer?

Let's try again. When did a minor party candidate ever win the Oval Office?

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-02 09:40 PM | Reply

When did a minor party candidate ever win the Oval Office?

Offhand, I would say Lincoln. He was the first Republican.

#46 | Posted by Ray at 2017-11-02 09:47 PM | Reply

Oh sure, Lincoln.

I'm sure he was polling at five percent, like Stein wand Johnson combined.

#47 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-02 09:53 PM | Reply

You misunderstand my point, Snoofy.
Evidently, Clinton had no chance whatsoever. The results of the election tell us so (that history). The only way for her to have had a chance were if you go change vote numbers. If you're doing that, then anyone could have won.

#48 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-02 11:07 PM | Reply

"Evidently, Clinton had no chance whatsoever."

She had a pretty good chance.

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-02 11:08 PM | Reply

"You misunderstand my point, Snoofy."

One of understands that you don't actually have a point.
And it's not you.

#50 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-02 11:08 PM | Reply

Ok Snoofy. What chance would you give Sec Clinton of winning the 2016 election based on everything you know to this point?

#51 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-02 11:49 PM | Reply

About 2/3, maybe a little higher.

What chance would you give Jill Stein or the Aleppo Whisperer?

#52 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-03 12:31 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Seriously? You think she has (nod had) a chance at winning the 2016 election based on everything you know to this point? Are you not aware that she lost the election? You KNOW she lost, but give her a 2/3 chance of winning?

Let me help you. The chance of Clinton winning the 2016 presidential (which she lost) are zero. We did not understand that a year ago due to imperfect polling, but there was no element of chance involved. Millions of people made individual decisions on where to put their vote.

If we had perfect polling 1 year ago today, we would know who would vote and how they would vote. We'd know that Trump would be president. There was no dice rolling or coin flipping involved. No element of chance. The chance for Clinton to win was precisely zero percent; coincidentally the same as 'Jill Stein or the Aleppo Whisperer'.

Maybe it is too advanced in the method we're discussing it. Try this. Take out a coin and flip it. Did it end up heads or tails? Now, don't touch it. What are the odds (now that it is sitting there not moving) of the other side being 'up'? Not after re-flipping. Based on all the knowledge you have about the current position of that coin, what are the odds that it is not the current position of that coin?

#53 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-03 07:29 AM | Reply

nod = not

#54 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-03 07:29 AM | Reply


He was pointing out to Boaz (who is self-admittedly black) that people of his skin color greatly benefited from the political movement Boaz was deriding.

#32 | Posted by JeffJ

Jeff,

While I can agree with some of your post, here is where I'm coming from.

Yes, blacks made huge strides during the 60's, which was mostly good. I'm speaking more of the cultural aspect of the 60's forward. The loss of personal responsibility, the "do anything that feels good" generation, the reduction of the family, etc...

Blacks, while we have made strides to be viewed equal in other race's eyes, we have only hurt ourselves culturally, by continuing to be shackled to the democrat party's promises after equality was achieved. Once equality was achieved, we needed to be seen through actions and not affirmative action. Instead of concentrating on individual merit and melding into the American population, we are focused on pride based actions, black only this and black only that. And now, the liberal establishment, in order to kowtow to the black lobby, has taken to degenerating it's own white race to curry favor with blacks. So now we have a situation where progressive whites are putting the black race on a superior pedestal and requiring those of white heritage to be ashamed of their heritage and speak badly about it. You cannot artificially raise the profile of one race and try to humiliate another one and expect a good outcome. What did anyone expect to happen except a revival of White nationalists and true racists? Progressives have given them all the ammo they need to feel like victims. If we stop focusing on race, this could have been avoided long ago..

#55 | Posted by boaz at 2017-11-03 08:15 AM | Reply

I did one simple thing. I clicked on the article, and did a search for "security". 0 instances found.

You can't quantify America as "left", "right", or "center", by limiting criteria to a slice of economic issues, and exclude security politics, that's dishonest.

#56 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-11-03 11:34 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

In the past 45 years, I have seen the mood of the American public swing from openly progressive to reactionary conservative and back more than a few times. In 1976 the Republicans could have run Jesus Christ and still lost. Because of Watergate, we got Carter, and because of his disastrous administration, we got Reagan. 12 years of Rs and we got Clinton who gave us an equally disastrous Administration under W, which gave us an illiberal Obama. Obama has basically tore the Democrat party to pieces. When you have 80% of the public believing the country is on the wrong track, you get someone revolutionary, now you have to deal with the reality of Trump. Do people dislike Trump? Absolutely, but they dislike his opposition more. He is winning. He is the first non-establishment president we have had sense Reagan. In the last year every special election (4), has gone to the Republicans. The Democrat brand seems to be poison. I suspect that unless the economy tanks the Republicans, and especially the Trump supporters will increase their majority. If the Democrats are going to recover, they need other spokespersons than Nancy Polosi and Sheela Jackson Lee. Additionally the old guard, the establishment of both parties is getting old- well past 70. the leadership will change if for no reason than simple mortality. Don't blame me, I voted Libertarian. What I have noticed in the last half century is what ever government does, they do it poorly, and spend an inordinate amount of our money failing to do it.

#57 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-11-03 12:43 PM | Reply

"In 1976 the Republicans could have run Jesus Christ and still lost."

In 2016 they ran the AntiChrist and won.

"Don't blame me, I voted Libertarian."

I can't believe I'm saying this to you of all people:
"All it takes for evil to triumph is good men to do nothing."
Voting libertarian = doing nothing.
You might as well have just sat on your hands and farted that day.
Because sniffing them in the ballot box is all you did with that vote.

#58 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-03 12:51 PM | Reply

#58 | Posted by snoofy, the number of Libertarian voters has grown every year sense 1996, a protest vote is not a vote wasted. As far as Trump being the Antichrist, we must wait and see. Tomorrow I think the hard left will give Trump a gift in the long awaited 4 November revolution. As Noam pointed out, Antifa is a tailor made gift to the Republicans. They paint other's perception of the left, and that image is not flattering. Those black clad idiots are going to increase his power.

#59 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-11-03 01:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"a protest vote is not a vote wasted."

LOL.

You ever notice you have a much higher opinion of your meaningless protest scribble on a piece of paper than you do actual flesh and blood protesters?

#60 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-03 01:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#60 | Posted by snoofy, I respect effective protestors, the latest batch seem to be empowering the very things they are supposed to be fighting. Nothing irritates the average Joe more than idiots waving a hammer and sickle flag- If the Nazis were evil for murdering 20 million innocents, how much more is governments that murdered more than 100 million?

#61 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-11-03 01:37 PM | Reply

"I respect effective protestors..."

So you must really be ashamed of yourself.

Your "protest vote" had no effect other than to allow The Dotard to drive the ship of state toward the rocks while cackling crazily and tweeting nonsense into the wind.

#62 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-03 02:07 PM | Reply

Nothing irritates the average Joe more than idiots waving a hammer and sickle flag-
#61 | Posted by docnjo

Youre still thinking pre 2016 election.

Now average Joe's love Russia and Putin for some reason.

#63 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-03 07:58 PM | Reply

What I have noticed in the last half century is what ever government does, they do it poorly, and spend an inordinate amount of our money failing to do it.

#57 | Posted by docnjo

Must be nice for republicans to be allowed to sabotage government functions and then use that as proof that government doesn't work.

How successful would PepsiCo be if half the board members were anti capitalists trying to prove that corporations can't do anything right.

The fact is, government can do plenty of function great when they don't have a republican party trying to ruin everything.

Conservative parties in Canada aren't trying to blow up their health care system, therefore it works great.

#64 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-03 08:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"You can't quantify America as "left", "right", or "center", by limiting criteria to a slice of economic issues, and exclude security politics, that's dishonest."

That's true. Using the logic applied in this article, Nazi Germany was further left than any modern-day European country. Maybe any modern country.

"Voting libertarian = doing nothing."

It would seem that voting Dem was equally pointless. Maybe you should have voted Libertarian.

"The number of Libertarian voters has grown every year sense 1996, a protest vote is not a vote wasted."

The thing I find interesting is the increase in support for a more libertarian ideology from traditional democrats. Historically, it's appealed to Republicans who didn't like the party's social conservatism. In reality, it makes sense though. There are probably many Dem voters who support the party's socially liberal policies, while holding their nose when it comes to economic policy.

"Your "protest vote" had no effect other than to allow The Dotard to drive the ship of state toward the rocks while cackling crazily and tweeting nonsense into the wind."

You could have voted for Johnson as well.

#65 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-11-04 07:22 AM | Reply

The polling data sounds the same as the one that had HRC winning by 50 points. More than half of the voters did not vote for HRC and a liberal agenda. If we drill down to what matters to voters I bet it's still "the economy stupid ". Unless you have 5 viable parties, 25% ain't gonna win jack.

#66 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2017-11-04 07:34 AM | Reply

Hillary won the popular vote, which doesn't count and lost the electoral college by the thinnest of margins in critical States. An outcome like that can be engineered with just a few tweeks on a computer.

The popularity of Bernie in spite of the MSM relentless war against socialism is solid proof that a solid majority of Americans are left of center. A truth which the 1% will never acknowledge.

#67 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-11-04 10:02 AM | Reply

Hillary had less than half of the votes cast. Deal with it. A plurality is not a majority. I can see how socially liberal and fiscally conservative has a place at the table in the future.

#68 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2017-11-04 10:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"More than half of the voters did not vote for HRC and a liberal agenda."

Jill Stein and the Green Party aren't liberals? Who knew?

Third party candidates always have the effect in an election of syphoning off votes from whichever of the major party candidates supports the closest policies.

#69 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-04 10:35 AM | Reply

"The popularity of Bernie in spite of the MSM relentless war against socialism is solid proof that a solid majority of Americans are left of center."

This is a myth that left wingers yell at each other from opposite sides of the circle. The truth is that even many Democrats wouldn't have supported Bernie. Those who do support him regard him as something akin to the way Christians regard Jesus, but for everyone else he's just another out of touch 1960's relic.

"I can see how socially liberal and fiscally conservative has a place at the table in the future."

Maybe. The problem is that progressives have done a really good job at perpetuating the cult of entitlement, which is pretty much antithetical to fiscal conservatism. How do you reverse years of people being instructed that they need not be economically responsible, as that is a role better left to government...not that we've seen a responsible government in a long time.

#70 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-11-04 10:35 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Jill Stein"

She was Putin's alternate puppet, right?

#71 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-11-04 10:36 AM | Reply

"Hillary had less than half of the votes cast. Deal with it."

So did Trump:

Clinton: 65,844,610 (48.2%)
Trump: 62,979,636 (46.1%)
Others: 7,804,213 (5.7%)

#72 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-11-04 10:52 AM | Reply

"The problem is that conservatives have done a really good job at perpetuating the healthcare industry as a for profit industry concerned about stock holders profits as their primary duty instead of providing healthcare to patients as their primary duty."

Same thing on other subjects like wages, etc. Capitalism is not designed to enable people to get ahead, regulated capitalism is but conservatives oppose regulations.

#73 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-04 10:55 AM | Reply

"Poll: Majority supports single-payer health care"

"A slim majority of Americans support a single-payer health-care system that is funded and administrated by the government and eliminates private insurers, according to a new poll.

The latest Harvard-Harris Poll survey found 52 percent favor a single-payer system against 48 who oppose it. A strong majority of Democrats -- 69 percent -- back the idea. Republicans oppose single-payer, 65-35, and independents are split, with 51 percent opposing and 49 supporting."

America is a center left nation, we have a right wing government due to gerrymandering, voter suppression and the Electoral College.

#74 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-04 11:50 AM | Reply

"Capitalism is not designed to enable people to get ahead"

Neither is socialism.

A lot of people, seemingly yourself included, conflate Capitalism with the free market. It's not Capitalism that determines wages or other forms of economic distribution, it's the free market. It's people acting in their own best interest. And to limit wage and wealth inequality, you'll inevitably need to limit the personal freedoms that are the root cause, really of all forms of inequality, economic or otherwise.

"Poll: Majority supports single-payer health care"

If they do it's because they haven't experienced single-payer healthcare. In fact few people actually have. Most countries use a hybrid system.

The first time a USan had to bring their own sheets to the hospital or have their kid spend the night in an open bay ward with a bunch of other patients, bringing them food because it wasn't part of the package, they would realize that there's a big difference between the low-cost, no frills healthcare offered by government and what they're used to now.

#75 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-11-04 12:03 PM | Reply

"The problem is that progressives have done a really good job at perpetuating the cult of entitlement"

Conservatives has done a really good job at perpetuating the cult of entitlements, but only for the rich.

#76 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 03:34 PM | Reply

"If they do it's because they haven't experienced single-payer healthcare."

Half of America gets its health care paid for by the government.
Including you.

#77 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 03:35 PM | Reply

#77 | Posted by snoofy I agree it will probity come to that, and we will see rationing and a serious drop in the quality of care. As has been the case where ever socialized medicine has come into effect.

#78 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-11-04 04:47 PM | Reply

#65 | Posted by madbomber, I said I voted Libertarian, Johnson included. Elected officials study election results closely. Protest votes are actually taken seriously and effect policy.

#79 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-11-04 04:52 PM | Reply

"Conservatives has done a really good job at perpetuating the cult of entitlements, but only for the rich."

Like being entitled to pay everyone else's fair share of the taxes?

"Half of America gets its health care paid for by the government."

In a fashion very different from single-payer.

"#77 | Posted by snoofy I agree it will probity come to that, and we will see rationing and a serious drop in the quality of care. As has been the case where ever socialized medicine has come into effect."

Not if it's done right.

I really think that the average USans vision of single payer is the same quality of care currently available, but paid for by someone else. If that turns out to be the case, the US will have achieved the Holy Grail of healthcare. Because while it's true that you can get government-provided healthcare overseas, it's also true that if you want quality care you pay out of pocket for it.

For example, if you're an American who is required to relocate to the UK for work, it's standard for the employer to provide a supplemental healthcare plan that will provide a level of service that USans are used to. France and NLD do a better job overall, but they are still hybrid plans.

Having spent a lot of time in Europe recently, my perception is that USans who view the European systems as superior to the US system are viewing through a rose colored lens. It is true that the governments provide more social services, but it's just as true that there is a greater sense of community, and a greater sense of responsibility that's tethered to those services. Which I'm not really against. But you can contrast that to the Snoofy's of the country, who feel that they are entitled to quite a lot, but don't really owe anything in return. I've never got the vibe that the Europeans were any more accepting of that attitude than we are here.

#80 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-11-04 05:15 PM | Reply

And for what's it's worth, I'm not a Europhobe. It's more likely than not that I'll be moving to DEU in the next few years. In many ways that I feel are important, Germany is far more laid back than the US.

#81 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-11-04 05:36 PM | Reply

"Because while it's true that you can get government-provided healthcare overseas, it's also true that if you want quality care you pay out of pocket for it. "

No, that is not true. In the more advanced European nations you get quality care guaranteed. This kind of false claim has been made for years about Canada's health care system and for just as many years, when you asked a Canadian, they'd tell you it's bull ----. Same is true for Germany, Scandanavia, etc. Now let's compare that to no healthcare at all because that was, and still is, what poor Americans in many red states have to depend on. Literally, nothing. Medicaid expansion helped millions....in blue states only. In red states, ideologues blocked Medicaid expansion and thus, if you worked but earned too little to qualify for Obamacare you got nothing. Medicaid expansion was created to fill in that gap but ideologues care more about pleasing rich donors than they do about the health of their constituents.

#82 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-04 06:04 PM | Reply

This kind of false claim has been made for years about Canada's health care system and for just as many years, when you asked a Canadian, they'd tell you it's bull ----.

Pretty much.

#83 | Posted by REDIAL at 2017-11-04 06:06 PM | Reply

"quality care"

Is a thing that MadB refuses to measure at a national level.

#84 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 06:24 PM | Reply

"But you can contrast that to the Snoofy's of the country, who feel that they are entitled to quite a lot, but don't really owe anything in return."

What do you mean, don't really owe anything in return?
Have I said my taxes should be lowered or something?
No I have not.

#85 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 08:08 PM | Reply

#80 | Posted by madbomber, German health care works until it deals with cancer or a serious heart condition. Then your out of luck. Same with most other countries that control medical care. BTW, you can not sue a German physician for malpractice no mater how badly they screw up.

#86 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-11-04 08:26 PM | Reply

" German health care works until it deals with cancer or a serious heart condition. Then your out of luck."

You'll do a few percentage points better here on most cancers.
Unless you have childhood leukemia, then you'll do a few percentage points worse.


Five-Year Survival Rates for Patients Diagnosed with Five Common Cancers in Seven Countries, 2005–2009
www.cdc.gov
Country ........Female Breast Colon Lung Prostate Childhood Leukemia
Canada* ...............85.8 62.8 17.3 91.7 90.6
France** ..............86.9 59.8 13.6 90.5 89.2
Germany ..............85.3 64.6 16.2 91.2 91.8
Italy ......................86.2 63.2 14.7 89.7 87.7
Japan ....................84.7 64.4 30.1 86.8 81.1
United Kingdom*.81.1 53.8 9.6 83.2 89.1
United States ........88.6 64.7 18.7 97.2 87.7

#87 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 10:58 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 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort