Libs, progressives, and "above the fray" moderates, a question for you...

You are not going to get any solid answers from them. I think the main issue separating the center-left from the center-right is multiculturalism. There are a host of public policies - from immigration to law enforcement - that hinge on our understanding of multiculturalism.

The center-right believes that, while diversity is tolerable, multiculturalism is not. That we should be careful of whom we are letting into our country, and we should let them in under policies that strongly encourage assimilation into our common culture.

The center-left believes that multiculturalism itself is a good thing, and that “diversity is our strength”. This has proved to be horribly wrong and has come to be an Orwellian chant.

The far left are a bunch of Marxist-trending loons, and the far-right is Hitleresque in their racial hatred. A harmonious polity would see each of those reduced to about 10% of the population and the two centers contending for control. But gerrymandering has unintentionally given power to the extremes, especially on the left.

quote:

---

I'm largely trying to understand your goals and how you can advocate for what you do.

---

They are the way they are because they or no one in their immediate family has ever been mugged or threatened. Their life is Shangri-la, until it isn't.

quote:

---

But I want to know, what current realities/outcomes can you point to, say, in Dem strongholds, and go "this is what I want more of across the country?"

---

I like that democrats actually talk about public transportation, public parks, the benefits of urban density, walkability, etc. I think democrats were early adopters of mixed use development and opposing the stark euclidian zoning which was really bad for our cities in the latter 20th century.

I like that democrats understand the importance of public spaces and focus on quality of life improvements for people living in cities. On the flip side, I hate that democrats then turn around and cede those public spaces to violent vagrants and criminals.

Comparatively, I prefer republicans’ focus on public safety and law enforcement. However, I find they often over-correct and excuse law enforcement misconduct and graft, support invasive surveillance, and police morality and behavior far more strictly than I would prefer on things like social mores and HOA’s. Like, literally, just please arrest the homeless dudes shitting on busses and pissing on door steps, arrest the guys outchea shooting people every night, and stop setting up speed traps to fine commuters and fining me for not bringing my garbage cans in from the road on time.

I hate the democrats on social issues of gender and racial identity. I hate the republicans on how they always overrun their mandate and play right into the democrat’s hands by trying to criminalize consensual acts between adults.

I’m also not sure that if we couldn’t control fraud better that the democrats aren’t right about healthcare. Our current system appears to be the worst of both worlds of the socialist and monopolist systems. They may be right about the need to eliminate health insurance and cut out the middle man entirely. Healthcare doesn’t function like other goods. You don’t have elastic demand, you don’t have the ability to price shop when you need it, and you don’t really have the option to just say no other than you die. It doesn’t really work well with the free market consent philosophical framework. We may be better off treating healthcare as a utility.

I also mentioned treating healthcare as a utility rather than as a three tiered model of competing quasi-public/private businesses.

I also mentioned public transportation.

Democrats do a very good job of framing discussions around personal experiences in how actual people interact with their world. That is why democrats often win messaging on issues like affordability. Republicans often get so removed from actual people (I would argue this is due to the tendencies of republicanism to be directly correlated with lower population density), that they lose the ability to communicate how their policies will actually help someone get to work, go to school, and pay for their food, housing, medicine, education, etc.

For being the party of individualism, they sure don’t understand how to communicate how to benefit individuals who live in communities with higher population density than their own.

Unfortunately, the learned reality is that no matter who you vote for, you get:

Public schools who graduate kids who cannot read.

Endemic violent crime in urban areas.

Massive populations of violent homeless addicts occupying public spaces.

Expensive wars in the middle east.

Warrantless surveillance of American citizens in all facets of their lives.

Exploding costs of education, healthcare, and housing.

Massive importation of laborers from third world countries.

Embezzlement of taxpayer dollars for healthcare and education.

Funding radicals who campaign against your values and commit terror attacks against you.

Regulating small businesses out of existence to empower an ever shrinking number of multinational corporations.

Giving money to Israel.

NOT building highways with your highway dollars.

This is moot, as if you get down to it, there is no basis for their beliefs. Their morals are completely subjective. Thankfully, they have some backing in Christian ethics because of western culture, but they cherry pick what they don’t like.

quote:

---

But I want to know, what current realities/outcomes can you point to, say, in Dem strongholds, and go "this is what I want more of across the country?"

---

quote:

---

Libs, progressives, and "above the fray" moderates, a question for you...

---

I am none of those... I am a Social Conservative first..... It is Christ above all and that is the way I move. If it goes against what God commands than I am against it... The Iran war for example goes against this. Blessed are the peacemakers.

quote:

---

what the end result would be if the left ever did become the majority here.

---

The left would become more right and split in two.

You cannot have left without right and vice versa. The left over-extended and got Trump as a result.

quote:

---

I agree with your statement here, but if I am thinking honestly, as a conservative, I believe that the far right numbers as much smaller than the far left numbers.

---

Ten years ago that was absolutely true. I think it’s still true, but right wing hatred is growing as reactions to the left wing provocations. The left are like the Dwarfs in Lord of the Rings. They dug too deep and unearthed the Balrog. Similarly, the left screwed with us so much that we finally awoke and the reaction is starting to get scary.