Who cares. Better to stand for something than to stand for what wins.
15
What a lot of hooey. WHY, or WHY do you insist on ignoring a generation even larger than the Babyboomer Generation? Do so at your own risk - and keep hanging yourself while you're at it! The "center" you're rambling on and on about doesn't exist, and hasn't since at least 1994, if not before! We've got several new generations of voters and potential voters on the scene now, and trust me on this, 80 year olds are no longer calling the shots. If they were, the Republicans wouldn't be continually making noise about gutting Social Security and Medicare! How about giving some deeper thought to what you write about in the future, please!
8
Yes, they do have a culture problem. They lack it.
5
The only reason you personally don't see moderate liberals is that you've accepted the conservative shibboleth that anything left of Bush I is socialism. It's not.
21
New rule of thumb: Take whatever Ross writes, substitute the word "Republicans" for "Democrats". Suddenly it makes much more sense.
15
The problem is that voters like to be energized, lifted, rather than just being apprised of the reality of our choices all of which are somewhat boring and somewhat painful. But heck, we've been taught to insist that there is a bright side to everything in life, in fact, we're entitled to it. Thus everyone demands something wholly unrealistic and unachievable. And thus our nations leaders focus on energizing, passion-inducing but somewhat irrelevant items like transgender bathroom rights and building a wall along our southern border. Add mountains of corporate lobbyists, donor money, and you're left with a majority that feels disenfranchised and alienated.
5
I disagree with DeLong...too cerebral. It’s really simple, we lost because of the Electoral College, and dirty tricks. If we were a direct Democracy, we would have won.
13
Racism is cultural extremism. Xenophobia is cultural extremism. Lead paint eaten by children is cultural extremism. Misogyny, homophobia and gender hostility are cultural extremism. White supremacy is cultural extremism. Imposition of religious bias is cultural extremism. Tearing babes from their moms is cultural extremism. Fox News and National Enquirer are cultural extremism. Pence's belligerent religiosity is cultural extremism. Thomas, Kavanaugh, Alito are cultural extremists. Republicans are cultural extremists.
If you glance at Douthat's picture by his byline you'll notice he faces stage right but his eyes are peering sharply to stage left. From the audience's perspective he faces right while looking off to the left, somewhat askance. One might think he's confused about left or right. Like his column.
Democrats aren't cultural extremists.
Democrats are the American voice of reason, rationality and responsibility.
19
The leftist keyboard warriors of the internet will noisily demand all their fantasies come true and that all their opponents be branded as fascists and racists who don't have to be listened to.
But can any item on their wish list get 60 Senate Votes, 50% + 1 in the House, and no Presidential veto?
If, and when, the Dems are in a position to move actual legislation forward -- as opposed to meaningless virtue signaling -- the "center" will control the outcome whether they like it or not.
7
If the young Democrats have pushed too far to the left, who can blame them? They have seen what the Republican party has become over the last ten years. It was a party that for eight years could only say "No," but offered no alternatives to critical issues (health care, gun violence, immigration reform to name but a few). And in the past two years, it sll has put forth nothing on those issues (and where is anything on infrastructure?). Its only claim to fame is spending that is blowing massive holes in the debt with out-of-control deficit spending.
I applaud the push the liberals are making. They are at least putting potential solutions on the table. They (and me included) are sick to death of "no" from a brain-dead party.
17
I think the dems need to run an Uber Lefty in 2020 and see what happens. If that candidate wins, the party will need to decipher if it was a move towards the left in this country or a repudiation of the Donald. That question gets answered if they pick up gains in the house and flip the senate. If so, the perhaps the era of small government is over.
But what if that candidate loses to an awful president? Then what? You tried a centrist and lost and a lefty and lost. What do you do, go leftier? Go full Clinton and triangulate?
I think the best thing the dems can do is run heavy lefty and see what happens. At least they will get some kind of answer.
1
By once again demanding all accept a culture which demonizes whites, males, and the very traditional Western culture which provides extraordinary equality and freedom for all; while celebrating illegal aliens, criminals, and malingerers - the Democrats are guaranteeing Trump’s re-election.
9
Transgender this. LBGTQ that. Boys winning championship titles in girls sports - let’s scrap Title IX!! Socialism for all but only money for the elites. Double standards this. Hypocrisy that.
Yes. Democrats have a culture problem. They actually have many, many problems.
16
Seems to me in Douthat's world, acceptable Democrats (i.e. those in the "center") allow Republican ideas to define public discourse. No rocking the boat (finger wag!). Those who fight back against radical republican nonsense are too radical, clearly socialist!! Democrats with a spine will never be acceptable to Republicans, whatever their inclination. Grow one, stand up for you constituents and stop letting Republican lunacy define what is acceptable.
9
Yes, and the party that gave us the Trump disaster have struck upon cultural gold.
4
"what's left of the center-left?"
Easy answer
Not enough voters in that category. Not enough voters to propel any Democratic presidential candidate to victory in 2020 if that candidate overly panders to that group.
7
The whole definition of “center” or “leftist” has changed. Recent surveys show that large majorities of Americans want ostensibly “leftist” policies such as Medicare for all, paid college tuition, and a minimum wage that can support working families. These are now actually “centrist” positions for normal voters. They’re only “leftist” to disingenuous Republicans who, having paved the way for the destruction of their own party by allowing its endemic racism to fester unchallenged for years, now want to dictate the terms of the conversation to the only decent and humane major political party remaining. No, thanks, Ross. Time for you to listen to us for a change.
11
Rarely, outside Thanksgiving with “that uncle,” are we given a glimpse into the delusions of the right wing mind. The Republican Party was "internally divided" or "too far away ideologically"! Sure, in a right wing world where up is down, “internal division” explains their cynical 6-years of absolute, impenetrable obstruction. Compromises were unpopular! Am I alone in remembering 8 years of pundits lamenting that all people wanted was compromise? It was Clinton's fault Gore lost! He didn’t, and the narrative that he did is like the football coach whose team lost on a bad call making excuses about how they should have done better in other "facets" of the game. Democrats kept going farther and farther left! So much that Obama, sometimes to the point of negotiating with himself, bent over backwards to govern to the right of Nixon. Mr. Douthat does not entertain just how far the right the Republican Party has gone. I believe the distortions of the Republican mind ought to be front-page news in every paper. Sure, the left has its issues, especially among the young. Can you blame them? Their formative years were spent watching Republicans play cynical mean-spirited politics in a 30-year era in which they’ve won one popular vote yet flaunt a 5-4 judicial majority that is woefully close to becoming 6-3 and possibly even 7-2. And in that spirit, he is right about one thing: Democrats have a problem. And Tim Wu writes about it in the Oppression of the Supermajority.
10
Liberals and conservatives have much more in common in 2019 than do liberals and leftists. We share the goals of a society where color is as important as your shoe size, where equality of opportunity matters more than equality of outcome, a powerful First Amendment, equal justice instead of social justice, and the belief that capitalism and our system of government helped make our nation great. We differ on the size and role of government. The far left agrees on none of these things, and is taking over the Democratic Party. As a result, the GOP is becoming our reluctant home. Were the president anyone but Trump, it would not be so reluctant.
5
We need another FDR - with a strong dose of environmental science thrown in for good measure.
11
I am a centrist Democrat -- right down the center (and a bit to the left). I think sometimes that that really means I am a Democrat willing to compromise with my (reasonable) Republican counterparts. Unfortunately, I sense that the in-your-face Republicans of recent history (starting with Tea Party, and maybe Newt Gringrich) have basically empowered a more in-your-face Democrat party. Meaning to say, very left wing. The only consolation is that I think they are not as demagogic as Trump. In less polite terms, that would be fascist.
5
But Al Gore did win the election. It was the Supreme Court who took it away from him.
13
Douthat, as usual, depends on dreaming to make his points.
he writes, "If Clinton had matched this cultural conservatism with decency in his private life, Al Gore would have won re-election as his heir."
The big mistake wasn't Clinton's. It was Gore's. He didn't want Clinton's help.
1
Yeah, right, Ross. I'm not interested in a cultural "centrism" that denies the basic humanity of gay people. It's simple: we're right, and you're wrong.
4
While the Republican party has been taken over by populists, white nationalists and alt right figures, the Democrats, as far as I can see, have fallen victim to division, tribalism, identity politics and virtue signalling...in a way almost the same as the Republicans but with a tilt to the left.
To most voters that means that the Democrats as of now, look weak, scattered, leaderless and unable to create a unified vision behind which all or most of them can get behind. The longer this goes on, the harder it will be to challenge Trump (provided he makes it) in the 2020 Presidential elections.
The inability to articulate a credible and desirable alternative to someone like Donald Trump, tragically and unfortunately, makes him look increasingly like the more stable choice...if stable is even something that can be associated with an administration where mediocrity, chaos and casual corruption seem to be the default settings and modus operandi.
As bad as it may sound, if the Democrats don't shape up, come 2020, a lot of people who may not want to vote for Trump, will hold their noses and go with "the devil they know" , in lieu of a disastrous Democratic hodgepodge...
2
The Democrats are setting Trump up for a second term.
Protestations that the Democrats haven't moved too far left are voices from heads in the sand.
Barring an economic collapse between now and November 202, a Democratic centrist is the only way out.
2
The Democratic Party don't need "centrists", we just need Democratic candidates that don't mind teaching the electorate that all those benefits they hold near and dear were spawned out of the auspices of the liberal branch of the party. The word "liberal" is only deemed a bad word because the Republicans choose to make it so. Liberals care about all folks, Democrat and Republican, from birth to death with Planned Parenthood, Medicare and Social Security, not so for conservatives. What one thing has the conservative done for anyone other than the top 1%? Nothing!!!
4
If our healthcare system is so great, why is it the citizens of other nations aren't clamoring to transition to one just like it?
5
Labels imposed upon positions that the labellers don't share may end up deterring some voters. But this kind of generalized description does not end up drawing them in.
No matter where the next Democratic nominee falls on the left-right spectrum, the GOP will call him or her a dangerous left winger with radical ideas; use bogus math and anecdotes to invoke assorted boogeypeople; and generally avoid facts and logic.
Instead of calling for a Democrat to define him or herself as a "left centrist" or any other shade of blue, Mr. Douthat could use his moral authority to demand a nominee who will promise truth, facts, intellectual honesty, and competence.
5
There is a single indisputable fact that belies Mr. Douthat's premise. With regard to the many special elections that have occurred, and been won by Democrats, since 2016, all but a couple were won by centrist Democrats, even when a more" left" Democrat was running as well. In fact, Republicans who won in some of those elections were beating "progressive" Democrats, not centrist ones. And although the media has focused on the new, progressive Democrats who won in the midterms, they actually represent a minority: most of those who won are centrists, not only in the House, but even more so in State legislatures and other State and municipal offices. Mr. Douthat (and apparently many of the commenters here) needs to stop believing the hype about the "new left": even though it is a good thing that many left-progressive Democrats are winning, as noted they still represent only a minority of those who actually won elections in the past two years.
2
@Maani Rantel According to 538, it was a wash. I expected the midterms to settle the debate about moderates versus progressives, and we got nothing convincing either way.
1
"...If Clinton had matched this cultural conservatism with decency in his private life, Al Gore would have won re-election as his heir and the larger story of the center-left might have been entirely different..."
Al Gore won the election in 2000; he failed to win re-election because the Supreme Court threw GW Bushe the election by stopping the recount in a state with a long history of electoral irregularities where his brother was governor. And if you want an example of the least decent human being ever to occupy the White House, cast your eyes on 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
3
Ross, it's your beloved Catholic Church that has the culture problem (to tolerate pedophilia or not to tolerate, that is the question).
5
Who knew that all the Republican and rightwing opinion writers in The Times are actually gymnasts! Tying themselves in knots with every disingenuous or factually wrong article they write.
4
centrist = lets not be too forward thinking, lets not try to catch up to the rest of the developed world too much.
2
Dear BobS, you are right that the Reps have purged moderates, and now the Dems are doing that. Where should we go? Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes said, and she is the new leader of the Party in the House, hands down, that anybody who votes with Republicans on anything should be primaried. So, here we centrists are. There will be no centrist candidate. Don't kid ourselves. The only question is where we go from here.
@Francis Walsingham, you need to learn quite a bit more about your options, and about the wide range of democratic representatives and senators, both national and local, that you can choose from. One person, popular with some, whom you apparently have decided is "the new leader of the party" is not in fact that leader. Nancy Pelosi is, and many others have more clout in the House than does Ocasio-Cortes. Please learn more, and refrain from deciding important issues on a misperception of reality. The issues are too important for us to do that.
2
@jb I don't live anywhere else, and can't choose among 100 senators or 435 representatives. Sorry. My options are limited - one representative and two senators. So, I understand, are yours. Ms Alexandria has said what I quoted. If any representative crosses the aisle, they will be primaried. That may not be the case, but you will not object if I say that she has a lot of influence and people are afraid of her. One of those who is afraid of her is Nancy Pelosi. Nobody doubts that. If she had the power, Pelosi would remove her from a committee. Pelosi has not removed Rep Omar. She has supported a toothless resolution. She is afraid.
1
@Francis Walsingham, neither of your senators are Representative Ocasio-Cortes, your representatives are not that lady either. Nor are mine. We have our own choices to make. You continue to exaggerate the power of a freshman representative, even though she is popular among some of the democratic base. And no, Speaker Pelosi is not afraid of her; the idea of this new representative as a monster and dragon is a falsehood that does not deserve to be bruited about. False hysteria from unreasoning minds, I fear. There are many other democrats, many ideas and suggestions too. Again, if you will examine issues more thoroughly, you will come to a more reasoned understanding of how political power works, rather than a knee-jerk reaction to one representative's comments, whatever those may be.
1
This outmoded labeling by the media: left, right, center left, center right, does not help in discussing our politics of today. The majority of Americans would like to see Medicare for all, affordable college, and the wealthy paying a lot more in taxes. I think it would be very helpful if the media stopped with labels and stuck to issues.
5
Some nice, well thought out comments, BUT, the kicker is the question: In how many years will Miami be underwater. Philly? Brooklyn and lower Manhattan? Houston?
You get the idea.
2
@follow the money, let me know when the ;panicked wave of selling by Democratic apartment, condo, and homeowners starts in Brooklyn. I'm ready to buy.
Mr. Douthat, look to your own house.
4
I am a lifelong no-party-preference centrist. Having watched the Republicans purge nearly all moderates, I was "leaning" towards the Democrats. Assuming Mr. Douthat's analysis proves to be close to accurate, I will be prepared to support a new centrist coalition. This may have a very low likelihood of near-term success, but independent voters outnumber either Republicans or Democrats. Independents are certainly not a homogeneous group, but neither are the Democrats or Republicans.
2
Why do you assume a centrist would not be persuaded with convincing arguments to move leftward. We don’t always have to wait for the more liberal “young folks” to grow up. How do you think the Democratic Party has moved to the left so far? Even if you are completely set in your ways, Ross, other people can listen to reason and change their minds.
2
I read that the GOP believes its greatest chance of winning 2020 is pushing the Democratic Party as "socialist" and baby killers. C'mon Ross, you're simply advancing the narrative for them, gratis.
4
It you like your Social Security and your Medicare you like two
programs that are aspects of SOCIALISM.
If you don’t like socialism but still accept your Social Security check every month and your Medicare coverage then you are a hypocrite for not buying private health insurance and not giving the government back your check.
Most middle class voters don’t understand socialism which they identify with the USSR and that’s the way the Republicans like ‘em: strongly opinionated and dumb as dirt. Keep voting Republican and you won’t have Social Security or Medicare to kick around anymore because that is the ultimate goal: elimination of all government support for all things pertaining to humanity in the nation. Just follow the money and the destruction of agency regulations on business, the environment, education etc.
Republicans for Reversal of society and Democrats for Development of Humanity.
7
I must have missed the part where Douthat explains what centrists want. A little less pollution? A little less misogyny? A little less homophobia? A little less corporate domination of every aspect of our lives? Or just not Trump?
Before we talk about centrists, we need to identify what policies they want.
3
The left wing of the Democratic party is responding appropriately to realities, as they present themselves. That we are still called radical by folks like Douthat shows just how tone deaf the media is to these changing times.
6
Considering that Bernie's and AOC's major positions are those most Americans agree with, how is she not a centrist?
4
Mr. Douthat, you begin your essay by drumming into the stubborn heads of your readership why The Democrats have a Culture Problem. "Since at least the middle of the Obama era, all the energy and activity and creativity in the Democratic coalition has been with people pushing the party away from any kind of centrism...". All the energy and activity (by the perverse political donkeys)? Pause.
Since you are in possession of an elephant memory, perhaps you omitted to add that the former president, the inheritor of two wars and a global financial melt-down, was given an obstacle course that would have challenged Alexander The Great's Bucephalus, and the latter was hardly a hack.
When it comes to culture, knowledge and perseverance, the president was beyond extraordinary, and he rarely veered off to another planet. The Republicans appear to have found this rather disappointing and spent a few hours, days and months trying to block any attempt, any suggestion, any effort on his part, to enhance the well-being of our Nation with a vision to the Future.
Socialism in America? Where is Orwell when you need him, and 'Wilbur' is caught in a political spider-web? It might be of interest to contrast the writings of DeLong with those of Ingersoll. Keep in mind that God, according to the latter, has little to do with our political choices.
Some of us are in need of a sense of balance and steadiness to go forward and not west of the moon. Americans are growing rarer by the day.
5
Many, Many Millions are left
2
This is a remarkable piece of hack journalistic opinion. The US has a culture problem, and it is spelled TRUMP and is also known as a group of lackey Republicans who have literally sold their souls for a group of right wing judges. It is the Republican party that routinely differs from the majority opinion in the US and only manages to maintain power through cynical gerry mandering and the "failed" electoral college.
4
Hmm. It seems that the next presidential and congressional election is between Donald Trump and Socialism, with Social Democracy dead in the water. We have already seen that this is true, and any center-left person is totally lost. There is and will be no candidate, and all congressional candidates (including incumbents) who call themselves center-left are going to lose. The only choice is Socialism (there is no such thing as democratic socialism, I lived there) and Trump and the Republicans. There is another answer to Trump. He will not run a third time, and Republicans will be forced to move towards the center. But, if Socialism wins, it will be permanent. Ugh! Terrible choice, but we will have to make it.
Here's a thought. Don't worry about who stands where on the Democratic party spectrum in terms of labels, which are a journalistic invention anyway, worry about getting passionate about how to improve the lives of Americans (tough gun control, universal health care of some sort, lower taxes for middle class and lower, much higher taxes on the 1 percent for starters, a guaranteed living wage, a return to affordable housing and so on) and cooperating with the rest of the world and taking a leadership role on Climate Change. If that's Socialism (it's not) count me in. If that's Center Left (maybe, but who cares) count me in. Liberal? By today's standards, but again who cares. Seems to me those are pretty conservative issues to fight for and not in the political analysis sense, which has little to no value most of the time. We need someone to fight for what's right - and not the right, which seems to hate people.
2
Something about that word "socialism" might well cause a loss to Trump in 2020.
Why can't Democrats cry out " We are not Communists! We aren't Socialists! We aren't Marxists either.
We are" Progressive Conservatives".
Meaning we want to conserve the environment, fair wages for the people, the health of the people must be conserved, racial equality must be conserved, anti-trust laws must be conserved, controls on campaign financing, proper voting jurisdictions must be conserved, and most importantly our Democracy must be conserved and protected.
As Progressive Conservatives we must protect the country from robber barons, tax evaders, insider stock fraud, etc. etc
A kleptocracy is not conservative. It is criminal in aspect and intent.
Our Democratic candidates ought to fly in the face the socialist label and accuse the GOP name callers of false branding and attempting to incense the public with the "SOCIALIST" label. Shun it,. Do not use it!
Let the people decide on the issues; not on the inflamatory name calling that is forming.
Watch Trump in Venezuela and Nicaragua over the coming months.
He has a game plan. Look how he created a border crisis.
He gonna make a socialist crisis and keel haul the Demos who can fit the moniker.
We don't need to cooperate.
2
According to Douthat, the only faction the democrats have right now is the far left. Notice he takes aim at AOC right away, in paragraph 1. While there is an element of extremism, Douthat may be exaggerating as many others are, perhaps we should remember what Nancy Pelosi said on election day: "relax", in response to AOC's victory.
The centrist electorate has been compromised for awhile now but this president has brought it to a new level of divisiveness. But there is still little difference between the goals of both centrists and extremists, number one being to take back the white house, next being healthcare. Women's rights, economic equality, the environment, LGBT... both groups share the same goals. "Culture problem"? Douthat has the problem...
1
@Eddie
Mr Douthat is, sadly, at best a 'complementarian' (women are natural 'helpers', 'carers', 'nurturing' etc). Not suited to IT, science, executive leadership...
2
A little sharing is not Socialism
2
So, what's the measure of left, center left, center, right, etc.? Is there a questionnaire somewhere that stratifies a person's/candidate's position on the universe of current issues and assigns their overall average position accordingly? Too many yes's or no's one way or the other and the individual gets branded as one or the other (even with the dreaded "Socialist" label? Eek!). What about leaving the absurd labels behind and concentrating on what our representatives actually deliver for their constituents (the voters they're supposed to represent, not the paying sponsors)?
Socialism is a sure loser in this country and beating Trump in 2020 is too important to throw away in an ideological hissy fit.
Run, Joe, run.
2
I would propose that there are far greater numbers of the center left and center right, than there are of the extremes of either party. These are the citizens with common sense and when it comes time to vote they do so. They are not ONE ISSUE VOTERS. I am sure there are voters on the left who embrace some issues from the so called right, and vice versa.
In my estimation we are getting quite close to 4 political parties in this country: 2 on the left and 2 on the right.
The two in the center will always win.
1
what pundits and Republicans call "center" is way too far to the right from the past. We need to go back to the days of the Warren Court when our country made real progress. And Eisenhower when Republicans created job programs and built infrastructure that would be called socialism by the right today. And the EPA. And anti-trust. And the minimum wage as a real living wage. Sorry Ross. Your "center" is so far to the right that it doesn't appeal to anyone but Republicans.
1
It seems pretty clear that the more urgent culture problem isn't on the left.
3
How about starting with a new New Deal with the goal of making changing jobs possible, rather than lock-in by an extractive health "care" industry?
4
If only they were better Catholics, the center left might have a chance. Oh please, Ross!
3
'The Democrats Have a Culture Problem"
And Republicans do not? Really Ross, you can do better than this.
1
I have been hoping that Beto O'Rourke might grope his way into some of the center-left positions, or at least sensibilities, Douthat favors. I hope so but it is too early to tell. Perhaps vagueness and ambiguity is a winning path he might carve out?
Too funny. "Does the Democratic Party still have centrists?" Asked by someone who's party is now wholly the party of TRUMP.
6
@chad Trump is NOT an extreme Republican. He is not for dismantling SS and Medicare. He isn't for abolishing the IRS.
Tax the wealthy? Richard Nixon
Enlist government in a massive effort to save the environment? Richard Nixon
Expand Medicare and Medicaid? Richard Nixon
Codify women's rights? Richard Nixon
For anyone willing to review history, it's pretty obvious l these 'radical left wing Socialists' are actually aligned with a middle of the road Republican President.
The hand wringing shouldn't be about the 'left' or its agenda, but on how the lens of the national media has been pushed so incredibly far to the right, Nixon's actual accomplishments now look impossibly progressive.
3
Douthat just got suckered. The Times really should not let him out of the apartment without a nanny. The moderate liberal center of the Democratic party (how many times have you read all those words together, recently, with out scare quotes and sneering misspellings of the party's name?) is finally in a great position to lead from behind, partly by virtue of its experience at a trade that is not beanbag, and partly because once it's no longer a junior partner in a majority run by a mixture of conservatives,reactionaries and simple crooks, the moderate wing of the republican party might be able to make deals, again.
That means the two moderate parties can deal with each other, and make deals with their ideologically driven brethren when that suits them instead. A strong socialist wing of the democratic party will have the effect of returning the moderates at the center to power. This would work best if the republicans could produce a moderate leadership that is not tainted by McConnell's racism or Trump's absolute lack of principles. Congressional conservatives would also have to learn how to make deals instead of constantly threatening to primary their own allies.
All this talk about how the liberals failed and it's the new kids' turn to lead for a change is a ruse that will result in the very centrist government that Douthat has said he wants, while smugly confident it will never happen.
1
Right there the article premises are flawed: there is no such a thing as "left" or "right." The true and relevant American question is: Do you stand for democratic values and principles, or do you side with fascism reborn?
To politicize women's bodies -and that's the one key reason why the far right supports Trump and his Supreme Court appointees- , to racialize American identity, to humiliate the poor, and so forth has become the real Republican platform. What are you going to do about it? Cowardly go with the flow, or fight back and bring reason and ethics back to the table?
The "center", if such thing ever existed in this century, has sunk with all hands. Just look at Senator Susan Collins, allegedly a moderate, who voted for juge Kavanagh...
2
@Dauphin And hating whites is not "racializing" ?
1
We have become too linear in our description of political positions. That neat "left" or "right" classification with a convenient centrist position no longer exists as many traditionally liberal positions are embraced by some conservatives (e.g. deficits and trade restrictions) and vice versa. I suggest we look at it from a multi-dimensional perspective and find a zone that fits the bill of representing a pragmatic approach, one without regard to the origin of those viewpoints.
The fringes on both sides lack reason, discipline and an objective view of the role of government. So just ignore them and let them wallow in their extreme ideas on the sidelines while the rest of try to find a way to get along and get things done. Otherwise, China and others will soon be kicking our butt.
1
No. What we don't need are more centrists. Let the will of the people be heard!
1
I kind of agree with Douthat, though I think he overstates how far over our skis we are on social issues (disclaimer: I consider myself pretty far to the left on these types of issues, more so than on fiscal issues).
Again, I think Douthat just can’t let go of abortion. The left’s position has not changed. While this may no longer be the legal framework, liberals (and most of the country) largely agree that abortion should be allowed with very few exceptions in the first trimester; only in serious and unusual cases in the second; and only in the most dire of circumstances in the third.
Douthat and others have whipped themselves up into a frenzy over Virginia’s completely unexceptional formalization of those rules in the third trimester. If a woman’s life is threatened by her pregnancy, she has the right to terminate. It’s not at all controversial to say that if a woman is dying in labor, doctors will prioritize her life. If anything, it seems to me that “pro-life” advocates are opting for ever more extreme measures, to the point where they are saying a woman should be legally mandated to die if necessary. Not very pro-life.
And of course, if Douthat genuinely believes abortion is evil, which I believe he does, he should support the #1 best way to prevent it: free, fully available birth control with no side effects. And Plan B. I’d think some smart pro-lifers would have figured this out some time in the past forty-six years.
3
Given Mr. Douthat's presence on the political right, perhaps he should stick to critique of "his own" part of the spectrum.
That's right, stay in your lane, bro.
3
This paper is enough to make you love America for ever.
How Great the USA are and how greater they are going to become with this sort of elaborate thinking. What a culture !
You need to read yourself some history. Catholics were anti-abortion forever, but mainline religions Were Not. Not until the early 80's, when Frank Schaeffer convinced his father and the evangelical movement to oppose it, and that push subsequently pushed the Republican party to crusade on the issue AND other culturally reactionary causes. Women's equality! Republicans were fine with ERA (passing easily) until Phyllis Schlafly et al and Republicans turned 180 degrees the other way AGAIN.
Society pushes politicians and parties to adopt these cultural positions, not the other way around. So it's absurd to pretend the Dems pushed cultural changes "too fast" for society to cope.
Change is always "too fast" for *conservatives*, not *society*, to cope. Conservatives are allergic to progress. They're forever the last to the party. Last to accept Every Advance of Civilization since the beginning of time. And if we were to wait until they gave the go-ahead before making a change, we'd still be stuck in the Bronze Age.
2
As another poster elsewhere said, open any world history book to any random page and conservatives are on the wrong side of the conflict.
3
What is a "centrist"? A Democrat who is "socially liberal" (i.e., not a racist or misogynist) but happy to carry water for Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma, Big Oil and Coal? A Democrat who funds his/her movie star life style by making $250,000 an hour speeches to Wall Street megafirms? We've had enough "Centrism." It has brought us the end of Glass Stegeall and the incarceration industrial complex (thanks Bill Clinton), and a $700 Trillion bailout for the big banks rather than desperately needed infrastructure jobs for former industrial workers who have been left behind by both parties. I won't vote for any more "centrists." I want progressives who will address our steeply increasing inequality of income and wealth, our pathetic and parasitic health care system, our racially discriminatory "justice" system; our pay-to-play political system. I want the progressive left. I'm 70 and a Vietnam vet. I get the feeling, however, that the young people get it. I hope so. Their futures are at stake.
7
Typical Douthat sleight of hand. He must be too young to remember when Democrats with centrist candidates at the helm regularly lost the presidency in 400-500 EV landslides.
Liberal Bill Clinton changed all that.
And what is this new alternative reality the MSM is spewing akin to the Bush 43 and Trump administrations? What is the difference, pray tell, between a "socialist" and a "Socialist"?
I read an article in the MSM that claims the definition of socialism has changed and that is why many people are more comfortable with it. Really? Has the definition of capitalism also changed?
The MSM conflates "Democrat" with "Socialist" in a number of ways (Social Democrats, Democratic Socialist, Socialist Democrat) to continue with the attempt at creating an alternative reality favorable to Trump and the GOP.
I'm even seeing the MSM claim impeachment is creating a dilemma FOR DEMOCRATS!!
2016 all over again.
1
There is so much wrong about this column that it is hard to know where to start:
"the Republican Party was either still too far away ideologically or too much of an internally divided mess to make a lasting deal on any issue"
No. The Republican Party, exemplified by Mitch McConnell, explicitly stated that defeat of any of Obama's proposals was more important than consistency with the GOP's prior principles and policies, the health of the nation or anything else. Power and politics over EVERYTHING else.
The GOP has gone off the deep end. Perhaps members who consider themselves amenable to science, facts and rational thought can leave that sick body and create a new "centrist" based party that would attract some Democrats. Just don't count on the Democratic Party holding out for positions that might attract some never-Trumpers - that football got pulled away at the last minute too many times.
5
I wish someone would enumerate the beliefs of "cultural centrism." What are they?
Privately deploring racism, but preferring not to confront it? Privately accepting gay love, but not wanting to see it in public or defend anyone's right to feel it? Feeling concern about the environment, but not to the point of making any big changes? Privately feeling sad about the occasional necessity of legal abortion, but not wanting to deal with the right-wing zealots who are changing the law? Private anguish at police shootings, but an unwillingness to do anything about them?
Sorry, but the right-wing's hard dogma on these issues means there's very little cultural space left that isn't contested. What's the compromise position on racism? Where's the middle ground between wanting to stop school shootings and not doing anything about them?
The right got organized around cultural issues decades ago and got a lot of what they want. The rest of the country is finally getting fed up with it. Let the supposed "left" lead the way by getting organized and pushing back.
3
@Jeremy What's wrong with just letting other people feel what they feel and live as they want to live?
"the rhetoric of “safe, legal and rare” on abortion"
And here I was supporting the rhetoric of unsafe, illegal, and common abortions. Oh wait, that's literally what would happen if the morons who want to control half the population's reproductive systems would do.
3
Mr. Douthat's centrist position on abortion involves a complete ban in return for women not being called "sluts" any longer. In other words, not a compromise at all.
5
Stop fractionizing voters into Center left or right. If you are lukewarm (other than right or left) we will split you from our vote.
The Rubin Wing... ya mean the guy who weakened our banking and finance laws and then pocketed over $100 million from the banks, probably not the best role model.
1
@Geoffdorn He ran Clinton and Obama.
Today’s Republican party is “winning” with a platform of blowing up the debt with foolish tax policy, denying healthcare, increasing environmental pollution, promoting conspiracy theory and protecting a phony President. It’s a house of cards, so I understand the reluctance of Douthat to write about the failures or discuss what he sees as the future of the Republican party’s coalition. After all, what exactly is *their* coalition? Democrats? Independents? Racists? Bigots? Long term not very rosy. Win the battle, lose the war.
Center-left… Yeah. That’s the problem. /s
3
Far from moving to the Left, as everyone knows, the Democratic Party has been galloping after billionaire & corporate donors for decades, forsaking organized labor and the working class that was once its base. . . . In response to the impoverishment of the working class, the Democratic leaders offer a bold Progressive program for same sex bathrooms, less unfairness in show biz awards and military confrontation with Russia . . . In other words, anything but the economic reforms their base cries out for--but which are anathema to the "centrist's" billionaire backers. There is no way around this contradiction. . . .
If Senator Sanders wins, like Jeremy Corbyn in the UK, the rank and file of the Democratic Party will have the opportunity to turn the Democrats into a Socialist Party. On the other hand, if the Party leaders succeed in denying the nomination to Bernie, in favor of a corporate spokesperson such as Biden or Harris, then President Trump will be re elected, and the Democrats will split. The Clintonites will go the way of the Blairites, shouldered aside by the new, younger leaders who will give young voters a pro-worker, Socialist Democracy!
2
Those 'intersectional types' are people.
1
RD takes advantage of liberal progressivism every day but is clearly ungrateful because he prefers to hang out with cool conservatives (and the think tank/media money) in thought and deed. It's the same way that conservative Catholics and Protestants prove to be no holier than the rest of us because they freely indulge in sin (according to statistics and organizational scandals) due to the religio-progressive magic of confession/born again-ness. Rhetoricians, heal thyself.
2
"...capital-S Socialist"
C'mon Mr. Douthat. There is no such thing in the USA. OK, maybe a dusting, maybe. What passes as center-left in your country is nowhere near socialism, cap S or none. It would barely register as center anywhere else in the world. Why can't the USA adopt the same meaning of the word as the rest of the planet. Maybe it has to do with maintaining miles rather than kilometers, ounces rather than grams, F degrees rather than Celsius.....
2
Huh? The majority of Democrats are centrists. Perhaps the GOP’s decent into madness has caused Douthit to forget where the middle is.
4
What's left of the Center-left? The new arrivals - the millenials and Gen Xers. They will outnumber the baby-boomers and out will go center - left/right. The fringe right will be pushed into extinction, the country fed up of their extremism, racism, bigotry and misogyny. The will be a burgeoning of the left and we'll have Trump to thank for it.
2
This is typical "wish is father to the thought" reasoning by Mr.D. His own side of the political ledger has rapidly morphed into a nasty collection of nationalists, conspiracy nuts, racists, xenophobes, cranks of every flavor and variety and is headed by a carnival barker/con man of dubious emotional health and no moral center.
That leaves Mr. D adrift as a conservative left on the platform with his Catholic catechism and moral sensibilities as the Trump train has long ago left the station. How better to deal with this then project onto Democrats the feebleness of the old conservative establishment left with its verities in tatters.
Democrats realize they cannot win without two things coming true. They need independents and they need to hold down the GOP pluralities with white voters. Moderation is not passe'. To do this they need to convince persuadable voters of all races, creeds and areas. Ideological heresy hunting by the hard left is a way to lose big.
3
@Unworthy Servant It's clear from comments that the Democrats hate working and middle class whites so much that they can't bring themselves to even pretend otherwise. So, I'm not sure how this "reaching out to all races and creeds" thing is going to go.
I largely agree with the column. Case in point, we in Washington State had two referendums on a carbon tax. Both failed. The fist was a revenue-neutral program under which sales taxes would be reduced to dollar match the increase in carbon taxes. This was opposed (yes, opposed) by environmental organizations despite it meeting their professed paramount goal of reducing greenhouse gases, since it failed to meet their covert goal of allowing them to “wet their beak” in the public trough. The second would have allowed them such beak wetting, and was a huge tax increase. It was advertised as a war on the bad polluters. Those promoting it of course drive cars and heat their houses like the rest of us, and thus consume the products of these “pollutors” (aka refiners). Self-proclaimed moral purity lost. What they saw as “the best” became the enemy of “the good”.
1
I daresay that if Hillary or Biden had won in 2016, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Regardless, I think it is fair to say that the far left is LOUDER than the center-left, and journalists (like this one) who spend all their day on Twitter seem to think that LOUD AND ACTIVE translate into majority voting blocs. They don't. A lot of us never tweet, but we vote.
Please Democratic party: Don't give us another Hillary. Don't give us Elizabeth Warren or any of the other moonbats on the far left. Tell AOC to stand down. Put forth Biden-Beto, slay the dragon, end the corrupt authoritarian rule, and reset the trajectory for the country's future. Just get it done in 2020, and we can all figure it out again in 2024.
1
@A.T.G. With Biden-Beto, we get two Clintonian Rockefeller Republicans. Again.
Bret Stephens, Ross Douthat, David Brooks, et al and their tearful, endless columns of concern about poor Democrats and their shift away from the GOP's magical political center have by default created a new and dark and magical political theater section in the NY Times. However, the Times' endless right wing columns of concern over the lost 2020 victory they envision for Democrats has become a bit overwrought and stale. May I sincerely suggest the Times adopt a new pity party theme for Democrats. Spice it up a bit.
6
Now, it’s Democrats who want to repeal and replace ObamaCare; times change.
"because the country as a whole has also shifted left since 2000"...it has? then how did we become so fascist? i mean like WAY more fascist since 2000. the country "moved left" because people have come to their senses about gay marriage and marijuana?
so fine, the left gets to dictate the party now and nominate a socialist. won't be the first time in our history that a socialist runs and loses. probably won't be the last. the only hope democrats have is that the corruption under trump is so vast and beyond anything we know currently that the country decides to elect another peanut farmer. not like a man as devoutly religious as jimmy carter would ever get nominated today though, but i digress.....
And that's the worldview from Rome! (Probably Benedict's Rome rather than Francis's...) I knew abortion would creep in their somewhere!
Douthat's political myopia reflects the artful sleight-of-hand Reagan pulled off in tugging rightward the perceived center of the political spectrum. Clintonism is hardly center-left in any rational person's mind: Bill Clinton was a charlatan, a Street-hugging Rockefeller Republican - even Nixonian - in drag, and that was reflected in the substance of his legacy - the substance: not his high-rhetoric talk, but his walk - financial deregulation, telecom deregulation, NAFTA, mass incarceration, draconian welfare reform, DOMA, late to the party on gay rights, drone warfare...
With few exceptions, mostly in the area of civil rights, the Clintons and Obama are fifth columnists of the Reagan Restoration.
The nation doesn't need any more charlatan "Democratic" "centrists." (Lookin' at you, Joe Biden. Howard Schultz: Need not apply.) Now, let's get to working on sorting out these lightweight, poorly thought-out "progressives" and whatever else we're presented so far by this motley crew of declareds. Now that Amy Klobuchar has imploded, where does one look for stability and sanity? I like Sherrod Brown, but he has an Achilles Heel with that restraining order. Steve Bullock? No foreign policy experience. Same for John Hickenlooper. Man, the D's have a thin bench. Might be due to the sclerotic jam at the top in the congressional ranks... just might.
1
I find it amusing that conservatives are pretending to care about the future of the Democratic Party. The GOP has turned this country into a joke with a mentally ill clown in charge.
5
Ross is so very busy analyzing everything from his perspective (which has about as much to do with real life as does the liberal university thinkers) that he forgets that NO ONE CARES. People are simply fighting now, fighting for hard won equality, fighting for economic fairness, fighting for the soul of our nation. Ross, take your head out of the sand. You're talking about people...not widgets.
6
This is not new-- it's just a normal part of the American political cycle. We emerged from the Eisenhower/Bush lotus-years. We had the Obama/Kennedy Camelot fiction. That experience energized enough NeverAgain-ers to elect Trump/Nixon. Now we are about to enter the McGovern Phase, where Democrats nominate someone so far off-center that s/he has no prayer of winning. Which makes center-minded voters go again for this generation's version of Tricky Dick. Next TD will flame out and take the country down with him for awhile... and on and on. Americans don't compromise; we see each election (primaries too) as MyWay vs. HiWay; that's the root of our problems. If we could only learn not to vote our tantrums.
Gore won the 2000 election, or have you forgotten Ross?
2
The Left is arrogant, contemptuous of the masses because of its elitist nature. It will lead the Democratic Party over the political cliff destroying it.
The right is stupid anti anti American and has already ruined this country.
1
Once again Mr. Douthat, you have pulled a don't look there, look here gambit to what ails this country. The real problem is that both Gore and Hillary Clinton were elected president, but neither were allowed to take the office, one by the Supreme Court, the other by the electoral college. The structure of our democracy is denying rightful leaders to take office, not just the president, but senators and representatives as well. Unless that is addressed, our democracy will continue to fail the majority of Americans who vote one way but are denied power by a powerful minority. To be honest, I don't think our democracy can withstand another minority victory. Maybe you could write about that before it happens.
2
Apparently, Mr. Douthat didn't read Tim Wu's opinion piece on the same day as this column. The country is far more to the left of where the Congress is, to say nothing of the so-called president.
From taxes, to guns, to infrastructure, to trade, to voting rights, to electoral campaign finance, to wars, to the military-industrial complex, to child care, to health care, to education, to the environment, to climate change, to sustainable agriculture, and on and on and on, the country yearns for real discussions of policy on science, facts, and the merits. What do we get instead? Mitch McConnell, the guy who met on the eve of the Obama inaugural to get agreement -- and publicly declare -- from other GOPers that their number one priority was to block anything and everything that Obama might propose. We'll just note here that his number one priority should be the general welfare of the people and to secure for our posterity the blessings of liberty, not to mention a habitable planet.
4
Finally, this resembles a sane description of truly important issues facing us today! Welcome back to reality!! This article is a welcome shift from a fixation on Russia for more than 2 years, which was unproductive and misleading, taking the focus away from discussing, you know, REALITY - economics, politics, environment, health care, education. And what needs to be done to improve them.
2
Bloomberg reports today that credit card debt has reached a record $870 billion on par with pre 2008 economic collapse. So, the economy is floating on quick sand. In the mean time, Bob Rubin and his “centrist” friends have accrued billions in personal fortunes manufacturing nothing, just speculating, seeking alpha or architecting “corporate value”, whatever that means. The dismantling of smart regulations by the smartest people in the room, on the other hand, has sank the country’s future.
That so-called “populism” is on the rise is not shocking. OCA doesn’t define socialism as Soviet era penury, nor capitalism as the central problem. The fact is that the current capitalism is really klepto-socialism for the few neo-wealthy & their wealthy to be friends. Period. The discussion should be how to retool the economic system and the press to ensure less public manipulation all around.
2
I think part of the problem is taking Twitter as seriously as Mr. Douthat seems to take it.
Regarding a "cultural center," can we please place less of an emphasis on elected officials' personal beliefs about race, sex, family, religion, and gender? These people work for us - they're not "thought leaders," they're not professors, they're not members of our family or social circle. Their job is to allocate funds and pass legislation in ways that promote the material interests of their constituents, donors or not. Their personal opinions should hardly matter—and frankly should be kept private—as long as they are performing these basic tasks, i.e. their job. (And regardless of what the Left may have us believe, we do not need *any* legislation in which race or sex is an explicit factor. Focus on equality of opportunity instead -- in school & the voting booth.)
Please, for the love of God, do not try to re-build a "cultural center" in politics. Please *shut up* about culture and focus on money. Turbo-charging cultural issues is simply a way for the economic elite to divide the rest of us, to convince us that we are each others' enemies; we're not. The enemies are those who treat our government as an investment vehicle and the politicians who thrive on and sustain that very system.
Cultural issues are a boogeyman. Money in politics is the problem. Bernie gets this, and I pray every day that the extremist left won't bury him with their loud whining and ID politics.
2
Well Russ...all I have to say is...with the Democratic Party moving drastically left, it's a good thing the GOP is avoiding any extremist tendencies.
2
The shift left may well cost the Democrats the 2020 election if the face of the party is AOC and Omar. The independent voters still decide elections and the if two prongs of the Democratic spear are socialism and anti-semitism get ready for President Trump's second term.
2
Ross this is ridiculous. The reaction that you call left with an absence of a strong center-left strategy is a reaction to Republicans being the do-nothing, anti-progress party relative to intractable challenges such affordable accessible healthcare and climate change that have gotten worse. Center-left proposals like ACA and balanced fiscal plans like Simpson Bowles are vilified and or labeled as socialist, as McConnell declares his #1 goal is to make Obama a 1 term president. The only "R Party successes" are obstruction of justices like Garland and passing a tax cut for the wealthy, The center left tried watered down versions of progress and all they got were state and special interest sponsored candidates attacks and propaganda TV like Fox News that tears down anything that resembles compromise. They seek to divide our country and fights basic norms of decency. This is not about left or right it is about having a government working the people. My god the R's can't even get behind background checks and laws that afford all citizens regardless of gender, color or sexual orientation equal rights...
4
"What’s Left of the Center-Left?" Millions upon millions of us.
136
@Joseph
And not a single seat at the table
8
@Joseph Wouldn't "Medicare for everyone who works for a living" have been simpler? The Democrats have betrayed their labor base, big time. And for what? A higher cause? What cause?
4
I think this piece fails to get away from the easy stereotypes of the "pragmatic center" and the "pure but unpragmatic left." The left seems very practical to me: do we want health care? Then provide it, don't just incentivize it. Do we want to slow climate change? Directly invest in green energy, don't just prod corporations with cap-and-trade. That sounds practical to me! And for those worried about the bill, have you really examined the future costs of not investing this money in a renewable society?
Young people like myself believe these things because we think they're right, not because they're politically convenient.
4
Hillary was so centrist that she thought she could get away with refusing to release her anodyne speeches to Wall Street when Sanders demanded it. Her confidence in the strength of the "old order" was demolished by the unrestrained demagoguery of the realty show super salesman.
Now the Democrats are on Trump's channel, and will never nominate other than a thrilling charismatic personage, with a bit of political chops acceptable, but certainly not required.
Our world changed on election night of 2016, never to be the same in our lifetimes.
1
Democrats being Democrats, they're going about this all backwards.
On economic matters, poll after poll show that the public largely supports what are still considered 'radical' positions by the punditocracy and the Dem establishment. Medicare for All, tuition-free college, bold action on climate change, higher minimum wage. And yet, more and more Dem politicians, from Pelosi to a good number of the presidential candidates, seem skeptical about these approaches, opting instead for the same old timid policies that won't move the needle (for instance, Amy Klobuchar's solution to the healthcare crisis is "expanded tax credits for health savings accounts." I'm not joking).
And, as Ross points out, on cultural issues Dems are taking a maximalist approach that risks alienating large portions of the public. We're suddenly at a point where using the "wrong" pronoun or questioning left dogma on gender (much of which is not supported by science) risks getting you branded as a bigot and permanently excommunicated.
We're living through a moment where the country is led by an unpopular and breathtakingly corrupt president, and where working people are falling further behind in an economy rigged for the rich. And Democrats are going about how to face these challenges exactly backwards.
3
@Vin
The truth is that the Democratic Party establishment would rather lose to Trump than win with a Socialist. . .
1
Wait a minute, I thought I was part of the center-left! I don't believe in the government owning everything. But the movement toward economic justice in this country is embarrassingly behind most of the developed counties in this world. As for social changes, we need to understand that many of us are born every day, in this country and in the world, that need a great deal of help to become contributing members of society. I am not particularly religious but I do know that Jesus said something about whatever you do to the least you do to him.
8
The supreme court has shifted right, and may shift more right in the next two years. This will supply protection for cultural conservatives and make it easier for them to vote far left if that's their economic perspective.
What is so "far-left" about the democratic policies being discussed? I don't see that they're any different from what they've always been about! FDR discussed these policies well before most of us were born. The democrats have not gone farther left. What has happened is that the Republicans have gone so far to the right that they've exited the page of democracy altogether!
Relatively speaking this makes it appear as though the dems have gone left, but they have not.
I agree that the baby boomer democrats have ignored their responsibilities in preparing to pass the torch to the younger generations and have not prepared these young people to led this party. If they had, they would have more young people who believed in their ideas.
2
I don't mean to be flip here - but I just have to answer Ross' question here without reading the article - which I know is bad practice. "Centrist" was long ago rendered code for "let the market do what it wants and we'll throw a symbolic bone to the masses now and then".
That was a workable paradigm in the era of impossibly cheap energy and the belief that consumption always bails us out and keeps the gears churning.
Well guess what - that game is 100% over. If there is a centrism, it needs to redefine itself. The "left of center" isn't left of anything - it is just attempting to ask us questions that our culture has been avoiding like the plague for decades.
4
I still have yet to hear any Democrat contender or elected official advocate for an economic system in which the production/distribution of goods is controlled by government fiat rather than by private enterprise, AND in which cooperation, rather than competition, guides economic activity.
Socialism IS such a system...
Left of the center-left is NOT socialism. It is progressive and inclusive, not regressive and restrictive. Left of the center-left allows for personal choice, not fiat.
Left of center-left does not worship a mystical past, nor does it fear the future.
6
No, the Democrats want to be centrists. It's just that inequality and the continuing predations and abuses of Capital, especially since the crash in 2008, keep driving America towards populism, both left and right.
The difference between now and the Clinton years, is that the Clinton wing of the Party, which includes Barack Obama, was active in promoting the rise of Finance Capitalism and reaped a short term gain from it, both politically and economically. But when Finance crashed the economy in 2008, it was revealed as a giant scam designed to deliver consumers to the beast. And people, including many Trump Republicans, are just sick of being munched on.
If the Republicans want to defend the current system, from my point of view, that's great.
Forget Socialism; and for that matter, forget Trump; if the Democrats are smart enough to make the continuing predations of criminal Capitalism the central issue of 2020, they will lunch on the remains of the Republican Party.
3
Depends on your definition of centrist. If you mean people who hold views that have wide support across more than half of the American electorate, then they've got plenty of centrists, including AOC, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
If you mean people who hold views half way between the average elected Democrat and the average elected Repubolican... then no. Not many centrists left.
3
In cosmology there's a theory that immediately after the big bang everything looked exactly the same in all directions.
As the universe expands, things differentiate.
Now the same is happening in our politics. There will come a time soon, when we look backward past Obama the Democrats and Republicans will look exactly the same.
Under Trump Republicans fractured, and are attempting to re-heal themselves as a party unified with far right ideals that toy with, some would say (I would), fascism.
The left has always been fractured, but we see an even greater divided steady-states around socialist ideals.
And it is a tendency of the left to remain fractured around many varying ideas as it is a tendency of the right to unite around gross central themes.
It is utterly unclear whether or not what is reconstructed from this mess will resemble American politics of the past.
At the macroscopic level - nothing has changed. The right is convinced that all reality matches its internal dialog (how else could conservative Evangelists and those claiming to be observant to any religion - accept the Trumpian model of behavior displayed to their children in all media?), and the left is convinced that no matter what reality they face, it's objectionable to some person and thus needs modification.
What we need to arise out of this is not a center left, but a party of logical, educated people, willing to step away from these emotional tirades that constitute politics today.
2
The country needs a leader who promotes bold progressive policies, like the Green New Deal and Universal Health Care.
The country also needs a leader who is clear in his/her opposition to identity politics and the self-righteous moral absolutism paraded by the far left today.
Yes to progressive politics that unite.
No to identity politics that divide.
That's the winning combination.
2
The problem with the "center-left" is that they were/are ruthless in dealing with members of their own coalitions that are to the left of them and far too eager to compromise with the right to prove that they are "moderate." They didn't/don't use the far left as cover for trying to move the country in "our" direction but as a foil to prove their worth. While the "center-right" is far more eager to recognize the value to them of having a "far-right" (which is much more extreme and dangerous than the supposed "far-left", at least as it exists in this country.
The other problem with the "center-left" is that it is really only moderate on social issues and is really to the right of "fair" on economic issues.
All you have to do is look at the average age of those in various places on the political spectrum and you can see the future: the country is moving left; It's just a matter of time.
I for one welcome it. Centrism and compromise has never really worked well for the average American. Time for ideas that just might help the little people.
4
I think I'll just vote for Trump in the next election.
Yes, I would support impeaching Trump and removing him from office, if that could be arranged. But that would mean the Republicans in the Senate agreeing to convict with a 2/3 majority. That looks unlikely.
And Democrats are taking strides to the left, as described by Douthat, that are even more frightening.
I refer of course to the Me Too movement, which holds up men for public shaming before the facts have been determined, with no due process. An actual trial is usually unnecessary.
Al Franken was removed from the Senate. I still am not sure why.
I would have opposed the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh because I believe women should have a right to an abortion. But the confirmation hearing was not about abortion. It was in effect a media trial on a charge of attempted rape for which the only credible evidence was the testimony of the accuser. The attempted rape presumably occurred in high school decades ago, and nobody could actually remember details of the party except the accuser. Since the presumed event occurred so far in the past, the actual facts were unknowable.
Yet Democrats voted to convict, essentially along party lines.
I cannot vote for Democrats again until they renounce the Me Too movement which convicts men of vague charges with no trial.
To get my vote, politicians must adhere to the Bill of Rights. That means actual trials with a chance to confront the accuser, not media lynching.
4
I'm still here! Still voting, still raising money, still knocking on doors. But I truly hope the Democratic party doesn't leave me behind. (IMHO, it'd be a big mistake....there are millions of us).
1
Just get 273 electoral votes and give Democratic Senate and House candidates all the ideological and political freedom they need to win their home seats.
1
As someone onboard for all the changes going on today, I'm more hopeful than I've been in decades. On the other hand, if Ross has any valid points here, it is the speed with which the cultural left is trying to move the rest of the country toward progress. We shouldn't forget that it was the power of pushback from the frightened members of the "mainstream" that stymied progress during the Civil Rights and Vietnam War protest eras. People can be lead to drink, but typically not from a firehose.
Nonetheless, if I have to choose between vigor and timidity, I'll choose vigor and hope for the best.
3
@Marx and Lennon
As someone with a similar outlook, I hear you. But, I ask you, just how long are we supposed to wait? It took 100 years after the Civil War to get Civil Rights codified. What were we supposed to do back in the sixties--write polite letters asking people to please let black folks sit wherever they want on the bus or drink from whichever fountain they wish, or maybe, just maybe, stop lynching them?
People need a good hosing sometimes. I'm sick of tippytoe-ing around bigots because I might upset their delicate sensibilities. They're not going to change their minds--we need to move forward without them.
The globe is small, and we've got some big problems to address. These people need to grow up and be part of the solution instead of part of the problem.
So, yes, I'm on board with vigor. Brad DeLong has it exactly right--we tried the tippytoe approach, it hasn't worked, time to pass the baton.
This is bull. The problem with centrism in general and the plight of moderate Democrats in particular is that they have no actual platform--cultural or otherwise--to promote or defend. Centrist positions come down to little more than "yes, that way...but not so fast!!" There is no coherence to such a position, no defining philosophy, no competing vision.
When I hear the "yes, but" mantra of the American center-left, it sounds to me like the elderly passenger in the old Fairfield Inn commercial: "You're driving like a bat out of hell!"
If it's not the direction or the destination you object to, Ross, don't expect us to pay too much attention to your backseat driving.
1
Wasn't it the these Democrats, that you speak of, that helped us get the majority in the house? So how are their views invalid?
1
Forgetting lots of details and digressions, Ross is basically correct.
Abolish primaries and institute ranked-choice voting, and both the center-right and the center-left will reappear. They are what we used to refer to as "Republicans" and "Democrats" before the primaries were democratized after 1968 and Citizens United took advantage of that extremist-favoring disaster.
This article is completely out of touch with reality. What all these so called centrists go out of their way to ignore is the fact that the democrats they label as socialists hold policy positions that are in line with the policy positions of a very large majority of the american public. These "socialists" are the real centrists by any serious political scientific definition! Commentators (that always somehow manage to make it into the NYT) who ignore this reality are just talking heads of the standard state doctrinal assumption that the opinions of this large majority of the public don't actually factor into political decision making. Just another journalist who doesn't believe in democracy. Sadly not surprising at all.
1
I'm afraid that Mr. Douthat is correct. This great list to the far left of Democratic presidential candidates will probably result in a Trump reelection. I'm more than sympathetic to this far leftward shift. But if enough Americans were willing to shift so far into Trumpworld, there's certainly less than wiggle room for a Democratic presidency rooted in the far left.
If the goal is to defeat Trump, I see trouble ahead. Big trouble.
2
A cultural centrism keeps openly gay people off mainstream TV, abusive priests still being quietly transferred to other parishes, Bill Cosby still a respected figure, Harvey Weinstein still pursuing starlets, and blacks still largely in their place. It gives lip service to ideals while keeping secret their violation in practice.
1
Canadians won’t soon forget that the US imposed tariffs on Canadian exports because we posed a security threat, while we watched the US president fawn over the Saudis: they of the bone saw and 9-11.
4
Good Americans will remember with you. GOP apologists like Douthat will forget that they supported a coming criminal playing at president when he falls.
1
All this "cultural" stuff the "conservative" Times columnists keep harping on doesn't figure in the current debate we Democrats are having about "practical centrist incrementalism" of the past vs. more left leaning "democratic socialism".
The "cultural" debates are more a function of rightist trolling to promote diversionary wedge issues that gin up their base.
Please read the source of the discussion being debated here: the interview with Brad DeLong, an Obama era Treasury official now professor, who said Obama and other incrementalist, free market tinkerers espoused a REPUBLICAN policy line in the hopes of "reaching across the aisle" to get a broad coalition on issues and were met with "scorched earth opposition".
He concluded there is no "middle" to occupy with the Republicans, it's "rubble". So he believes the centrists should follow, not lead behind the progressives and their wildly enthusiastic base, instead of fighting the tide of history.
Good reading. http://tinyurl.com/y5olekq3
Nothing whatsoever to do with anything Mr. Douthat has discussed in his column.
1
interesting analysis. I will say that in the case of Obamacare vs. single-payer health care, Democrats caved because they had to make painful concessions in order to get any bill passed at all, especially after Kennedy passed. It's telling that Obamacare was awfully similar to Gov Romney's healthcare plan in Massachusetts, yet, despite the omission of a single-payer option, the right was effective at portraying it as socialism by stoking people's fears. I still recall talk of "death panels". Ugh.
5
Arguably, the majority of the country has been to the left of the Democratic Party for quite some time. Part of the problem the party has had was tacking too far to the center-right and alienating voters who figured they had a choice between Republican or Republican-Lite.
As for the Democratic Party turning into a pseudo-church, looking at how the various factions in the party are fighting to prove their facts and analyses, I consider that a specious argument given the Republican Party's full-throated endorsement--veering close to worship--of Donald Trump.
3
Ross needs to read Tim Wu's incisive column in the Times today. How many of these are "leftist" positions too? All of them! Wu: "About 75 percent of Americans favor higher taxes for the ultrawealthy. The idea of a federal law that would guarantee paid maternity leave attracts 67 percent support. Eighty-three percent favor strong net neutrality rules for broadband, and more than 60 percent want stronger privacy laws. Seventy-one percent think we should be able to buy drugs imported from Canada, and 92 percent want Medicare to negotiate for lower drug prices. "
5
@Steven Sullivan
Agreed, but it's important to recognize that all of these are center-left, mainstream Democratic positions. Many leftists seem to forget that Obama went right to the "fiscal cliff" refusing to renew the Bush tax cuts for high-income households, and his brinksmanship ultimately raised effective tax rates on the ultrawealthy by about seven percentage points. Obama also made significant strides on climate change, but the intransigence of Republicans left those actions vulnerable to reversal. Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren would have been no more successful in pushing the envelope on those issues and probably less so.
1
Just because the world is turning too fast for you doesn't mean everyone else is being left behind. Polling simply doesn't support you on what you consider "extreme." The positions you complain about -- support for marriage equality, abortion access, compassionate immigration reform -- are not only majority held, but issues on which it should be obvious by now that opponents are on the wrong side of history.
6
As a moderate liberal, I have little love for the Intersectional Feminist Left, and I do agree that their positions on many issues are rather extreme.
However, the elephant in the room that is missing from Ross Douthat's analysis is called Donald Trump.
Campus radicals and media studies mutcases have always existed in the Left. But the only reason they gained tremendous ascendency in the last few years is the rise of Trump and the alt-Right.
Action and reaction at work, friend Ross. How can you expect moderate Liberals to have a voice in the left when the right is courting white supremacists? When the other guys are bringing guns to the fight, it's very difficult to be the voice of reason and preach your own side to disarm.
3
Feminist Left? Where did you get that one, Fox News? Are you Liberal or Republican?
1
The actual reality of the last 40 years is this:
When they have been in power, Democrats have governed from the center-left. This has been pretty good for the economy and the country.
Except for the fact that when Republicans have been in power, they have consistently undermined the fairness of the economy to the point where the 90% live on a spectrum of a kind of indentured servitude.
Republicans have won power by obstructing and demonizing Democrats, and suppressing votes from those who would support Democrats.
This Republican approach has worked great, reaching its zenith in 2016. That election, and the following 2 years of Republican rule, have exposed Republican cruelty, corruption, and fecklessness.
It's time to take our country back from the billionaires and their lackeys.
6
"If Clinton had matched this cultural conservatism with decency in his private life, Al Gore would have won re-election as his heir and the larger story of the center-left might have been entirely different." This "cultural conservatism" amounted to fronting for various kinds of racial discrimination--housing, schools, jobs--militaristic foreign policy, and the wasteful budget and corrupting jingoistic culture it creates, and union-busting. No self-respecting Democrat could abide such a betrayal of the spirit of the New Deal and Great Society. So this so-called Clinton approach was never a real path for real Democrats.
1
The issue is abortion. Period. If the dem's were not such passionate defenders of it they'd win more. Every poll I've seen validates this. A majority of Americans favor a woman's right to an abortion early in pregnancy. A large majority of Americans oppose late term abortion.
Look up the polls if you think I'm making it up. You might not like it, but there it is. The democrats need to approach this as a serious issue with moral implications, rather than treating it with the same regard as a tooth extraction.
The GOP has honed in on this which is why they keep winning elections. Does anyone really think the GOP takes this position for any other reason? Their stand on other social welfare issues makes it hard to believe they think "all life is sacred".
3
@Scott
Abortion is the issue for cultural conservatives. Democrats and Independents do not vote on abortion. That's why they focus on it and we just "check the box" pro-choice.
5
@Scott
The real issue is not abortion, nor same-sex marriage. This is what really needs to be done and what we should focus on doing:
- reform the tax code to make it fair -- it is not fair now (and please forget tax cuts; they "sell" well at election time but they achieve nothing);
- take money out of politics, i.e. overturn Citizens United, and limit the amounts that individuals can give to support politicians; that's the only way to eliminate, or at least reduce corruption in Congress;
- provide universal health care; that probably means "Medicare for All" (are there any other ways?);
- fix our roads and bridges before they turn into a real public-safety problems.
- instead of trying to send every child to college, make sure that they learn in high-school what high-schools are supposed to teach them -- I mean all high-schools, not just those in "good neighborhoods". (In this respect, the children themselves -- with all due respect -- might want to work at it a bit harder)
If we can do all this, abortion, same-sex marriage, the electoral college, and the rest will take care of themselves or can be taken care of later on.
-
3
@Scott
Let's say for the sake of argument that legal abortion were completely banned. I think that eventuality would only encourage the zealots to go after effective contraception, maybe no fault divorce...they don't like the societal changes that have occurred since the 1950's, especially women gaining economic and social independence.
If abortion were the real issue they would support sex ed and accessible contraception - but they obviously don't.
1
I see that Ross got the new corporate policy memo from the RNC, to yell " socialism" rather then discussing the real issues facing our nation. He is clever enough to disguise it as the New Left.
I would point out that during the 50's and early 60's, when this country was in near hysteria about the threats of communism and socialism, the top individual tax bracket was 92%, but we still considered ourselves the defenders of capitalism. And we were.
Now when a newly elected congresswoman suggests a tax rate of 70%, that is called socialism.
6
You say " . . . it probably won't prevent them (Democrats ) from beating Donald Trump" (in 2020).
Maybe so, but the radical new members of the House (Ocasio-Cortez from N.Y. and Ilhan Omar from Minnesota) ate doing their level best to tear the Democratic Party apart, forcing it to renounce and backtrack their extreme positions. Speaker Pelosi will need to take these two to the woodshed more than once in coming months to shut them up, because they're embarrassing the things most moderate Democrats stand for and are playing directly into Trump's hands.
2
@Bob Orkand AOC was the finest interrogator on the Dem side at the Cohen hearing, absolutely laser focused. The GOP is terrified of her. I see a bright future ahead of her.
4
@Bob Orkand
Those two are my heroes.
I'm a tired old woman. I've watched my Democratic Party get pushed to the right since Reagan. I was once a big supporter of Israel, now I'm tired. They've taken too much land, built too many settlements--but I'm an anti-Semite if I say that out loud.
I'm a tired old woman engineer. I believe in science. It's obvious the weather is changing, and although it's not entirely clear how devastating the change will be, I am concerned that half the world's population of insects have disappeared and our coral reefs are dying along with a lot of the fish. So, I feel we should be taking this seriously but instead I get an imbecile who calls the whole thing a Chinese hoax.
I'm a tired old woman who is just fine with two young women who are speaking up. Are they being extreme? Not toeing the nicey-nice line drawn by their wizened elders?
Fine by me. If Trump gets re-elected, we'll just have four more years of him saying how great he is while the evidence is very much to the contrary. Eventually, America will figure it out. If not, oh well, America was nice for a while.
4
@Bob Orkand
In my opinion, the Democratic Party, if it is to survive and be of any use, should be torn apart and the worst parts (those who advocate "compromise") thrown into the Republicans' lap.
People are defined by events in their youth/childhood. The baby boomer’s opposition to “Socialism” is defined by the defeat in the Vietnam war. The generation before that built the freeway system and a pure socialist extravaganza called space travel.
Today, under Capitalism, we do not have a spaceship that can take us to orbit. Apparently, under “Socialism”, we had spaceships to take people to the Moon and back.
Today generation sees this and 2008. They realize that “centrist” policies like repeal of Glass-Steagall act brought them disaster. That is why the new generation will drive them to (some definition of) “Socialism”.
1
The middle of the road is for yellow lines and dead armadillos. - Jim Hightower
3
Mr. Douthat seems to imply how important it is for Democrats to embrace culfural centrism and with the usual right wing flair for abject cynicism ignore the rightward lurching GOP whose public policy goals are blatantly anti-democratic. Clean up your mess on right wing extremism in the Republican party and the country can get back to normal instead of enting another alternate universe of facts not relevant to the public conersation.
I must disagree with Douthat's premise.
There is no way for Democrats to compromise with a Republican party that:
1. Has demonstrated an unwillingness to accept facts on every level that disagree with its ideology. 2. Refuses to accept science. 3. Is cynical to the point of raw malfeasance, the country be damned.
Like it or not, social matters are inextricably linked to these three points. Climate science, the nature of sexual orientation, the legitimacy of what is considered by the faithful as religious "truth" (and therefore pushed on the rest of us through cynical "reforms"), etc. are all salient matters where the right's position can no longer be compromised with. Perhaps if the outright cynicism did not exist on the right, something closer to Clinton's version of liberalism might be possible. Not today. The gloves have come off because there is no way to compromise with the GOP in good faith.
Now the truth must be told, no matter how much cognitive dissonance it causes GOPers. Too bad.
5
Very well stated.
1
@Jason Vanrell
Yes, you have distilled our country's conflict to its base level - science/humanism vs old time religion/superstition, modernity vs an idealized past 'golden age', equality vs traditional patriarchy, innovation vs custom...
1
Whenever I read Douthat's take on the left (which seems to be a preoccupation of his), it always strikes me that he's like a color blind person describing a sunset. He simply doesn't get it. Whether he really wants to get it, I can't say. I do know is that he always paints with a broad brush, and always in a way that casts the democratic party in an extreme light. He's like that guy who says "just sayin'", as if to appear neutral, when in fact, they're anything but.
7
Things are never quite so simple as they may seem. A Bernie Sanders or similar Presidency would likely fail to get much accomplished in congress. A moderate would have a chance of passing some form of high income tax increase along with improvements to the ACA.
1
1) Joe Manchin has one of the worst voting records of any democrat serving in the government right from the climate to women’s reproductive rights, and is essentially bankrolled by coal. He’s not “eccentric”, he’s “abhorrent”.
2) "Cultural conservatism” does not exist. People cannot be "centrists" of culture -- one either supports civil liberties that extend to women, LGBTQ+ and BIPOC or not. One is either for economic justice for the majority or not. The act of agreeing is good, but actual activism in daily life is better (no matter how seemingly small). Demanding that of politicians is the bare minimum for representing the interests of the full population. I agree that reactionaries are damaging, and identity politics aren’t the most effective way to confront all the political ills of the nation. However, higher levels of discourse are needed to generate any material changes for these groups. This country is still discriminatory & classist, evident by mistrust of female assault survivors & female voices in general, voter disenfranchisement, violence against the queer community, resistance to significant social welfare reform by political leaders (something supported by most ordinary citizens, by the way), apathy for our rapidly degrading environment & wealth inequality etc. There is nothing to gain by continuing down the ho-hum path the centrist democrats tout as the standard. Deeming demands for basic human rights “cultural extremism” is irresponsible.
4
I'm not sure about all this "left" shift banter. Most people want:
1. Affordable health care.
2. An end to the pernicious student loan debt trap.
3. To be treated decently and fairly, regardless of: race, religion, etc., etc.
4. An end to corporate hegemony, and its twin political corruption.
What about that is "leftist"?
Ross does acknowledge that the "GORP"....i.e.Grand Old Russian Party, has shifted so far to the right that they have lost any form of political identity. The press seems intent on stoking fears of "Socialism". I refer back to the "GORP" acronym and rest my case.
5
I am centrist on many issues and strongly resist the current demagoguery about the "radical left" with its echoes from the 1960s or somewhere.
The fact is that the Affordable Care Act would not have passed without compromise. People wanted universal healthcare as one of the options, but Republicans refused to consider it.
In a large country like the United States, policies appropriate for one geographic region and group might not work for another. The idea is to find a happy medium. Or an unhappy one. But get it done so that the maximum number can benefit.
Politics is the art of the possible. Trumpism is the cult of the day and yes, pseudo-churches are indeed involved.
1
Ah you Republicans, always projecting and deflecting. What's left of the Republican Center? Nothing. What's left of the staunch conservatism of old? Nothing. What's left of the disciplined, hard-working, patriotic members of the GOP who put country first, party 2nd and personal enrichment third? If they have ever existed, they have all left the building. Every. Single. One. America is left with nothing but the dregs; a gaggle of corrupt, self-serving charlatans who put party over country and value their own selfish hides over everything and everyone else. What's left of the GOP center right? There is no more GOP. There is only Trumpism.
8
Yep. I started voting Republican when "business friendly Democrat" became an oxymoron and the SJW wing of the Democratic Party supplanted the church lady wing of the GOP as the bigger bully in the culture wars.
1
Some more oxymorons for you - compassionate conservative, populist billionaire, honest Republican, intellectual Trumpist. Good riddance.
2
Good. The New Deal Democrats of the FDR era had a coalition greatly influenced by Socialists like Vernon Debs.
Their policies made America a much better place for decades and decades.
Let the socialists lead. Otherwise it will be the fascists.
6
Almost the entire Democratic Party is relatively centrist. The crypto-fascism of today's GOP makes that hard to notice.
8
Week after week, Ross Douthat descends from the mountaintop with tablets of revealed truth that I try very hard to attend to, busy as I am cavorting before the sacred cow of hopeless leftist confusion and bankrupt ideologies. This morning, providentially, Tim Wu's column (now appearing immediately above Ross's, and rightly so, in the on-line version I see) is all the salvation I need. In other words, practically every oh-so-sophisticated political judgment of Ross's here is undone by the plain truth according to Wu: the broad American public, by substantial margins, is WAY more "socialist," WAY more "left of the vanishing center" than our broken and self-serving political elites--or Ross--will admit. Dust and ashes for you, Ross?
7
Wish I agreed with you about Wu’s conclusions. This is actually a center- right country, as David Brooks and others have said repeatedly. We Dems neglect this hard fact at our peril. A hard swing to the uber left will result in an equally disruptive hard right swing that will resemble Mr Trumps victory ( such as it is) .... not something I ever want to repeat! Long live centrist positions and the gradual arc of justice that may bend us towards a more equitable and compassionate future.
1
@Andrew Sweet
I appreciate very much the Times providing "reply" options for genuine dialogue! And I appreciate your considered response.
I would not contest your view that we are a center-right country, if by that you (and Brooks, et al.) mean recent voting patterns/prevailing political party affinities. But the point Tim Wu is making, and I was commending, was that there are MAJOR policy frames (and yes, I would concede that the devil is often in the details) that sound--or are made to sound by those who want to throw shade at particular candidates--remarkably "socialist" in both conception and in practical effect. Call it American schizophrenia, if you like. I'm gonna lean slightly left of where you have characterized yourself, and be very glad that our visions are symmetrical!
Please read your colleague Tim Wu's editorial.
2
Let's see; Bernie vs. Trump, 2020?? After the 2016 debacle, another great set of choices! It's truly, absolutely time for a third party, now more than ever (oops, that was Nixon's 1972 campaign slogan... I take it back!! Oh, no, "Take it back" has a Trumpian ring to it... maybe I should move to Nova Scotia or Denmark. I need a big hygge! Help!!)
Wait Elisabeth Warren is not a centrist?
I just ask for more than slogans, for more than the wish list that is called the Green New Deal. The only candidate with actual policy proposals that could be introduced as legislation is Elizabeth Warren. Everyone else just says "Green New Deal" and "Medicare for All" and "Jobs Guarantee." Heck, why not throw in "World Peace" and "Everyone Gets a Pony!"
1
Do not need reps demsplaining. Fix your own party.
4
There is no center
Bill Clinton is Center-Left?!!
2
Much as I appreciate this thoughtful piece by a man who used to be a right-wing brigand (:-)), I don't entirely agree. The center-left in the Democratic Party is not dead. Remember that Dianne Feinstein handily won re-election last year in leading-edge California. Nancy Pelosi is no bomb-throwing leftist either. I think there ARE plenty of voices in this party who caution against going too far left. There are plenty who cringe at AOC.
More to the point: I don't think Democratic positions on reproductive rights and other social issues are the left of where they were in the 80s. We're just trying to prevent erosion of those rights in the Trump era! According to polling, the vast majority of Americans agree with us. The GOP is only in control of the White House and the Senate due to the weirdness of our electoral system (and is scheduled to be rectified in 2020).
2
So the real problem with Democrats is that they decided to support women's equality and gay-marriage and not tolerate blatant or systemic racism. Thank you once again, Mr. Douthat, showing the true colors of today's conservatives.
8
As demonstrated in this article, the GOP has been so effective at propaganda that even the Democratic Party forgot what "left" and "right" mean! It's both impressive and depressing all at the same time. The current Democratic Party isn't left at all: Since Bill Clinton it's actually been a bit to the right of Ronald Reagan. And its policies, like any historically right-leaning party, tend more towards the interests of businesses and the rich more than the interests of the blue and white collar population it mistakenly thinks it represents.
However, while the party may be deluded, the public knows how they are being treated/ignored, which is why voter turnout is so low. Why bother when your choices are "Republican" and "Really Republican"? There was a brief moment during the first Obama campaign when the voters thought that things were going to be a bit more centered and so they came out to vote. However, he turned out to be a traditional conservative as well, and so the people once again stayed home in the next election.
I suspect that Trump's subsequent win wasn't nearly so much a vote for him as a vote for "anything that isn't the status quo." In the world of gaming, this is known as "flipping the table." Now, if only either party woke up and got the message.
Sadly, articles like this, combined with the lack of change in Democratic leadership, tell me that no change will be coming for many years yet.
2
I wish Douthat and others bemoaning the death of moderation among Democrats would outline what they see as a "moderate" platform on healthcare, climate change, immigration, voter rights, income inequality, consumer rights, an equitable tax policy, special interest money. I could go on. In the past Democratic moderates - like Presidents Clinton and Presidents Obama - attempted to address these issues through clearly moderate measures ( both through attempts at developing bipartisan policies or adaptating Republican policies - Romneycare and Obamacare). We know where that has gone.
So, Ross, what is a "moderate" policy on the climate crisis? What is a "moderate" policy addressing voter repression? A "moderate" policy that protects consumers? Who are these "moderates" voters. Are they among the 76% who support taxing the wealthiest American? Is the moderate somewhere between the 46% that support the Ocasio-Cortez proposal and the 61% that support Warren's plan. Or take healthcare. Let's assume that the cited numbers of 70% don't take into account raising taxes or complete elimination of private insurers. Is the "moderate" position then the 56% that still want expansion of medicare to those over 50.
So, what are the outlines of "moderate" policies? What do "moderate" voters want? I would suggest it is anything but what either Dothat and others would propose or the half-measures that Democrats have so far offered in the spirit of "moderation."
3
@tomg
The climate crisis is easily solved with CO2 free nuclear power and carbon capture technology
Voter repression is as much of a minor problem as voter fraud, but both easily could be solved with a national ID that documents both citizenship and precinct of residency.
Allow health insurers to sell plans across state lines, allow healthy people to purchase bare bones policies. Make it easier for the self employed to obtain group policies. Set up high risk pools to help cover the fraction of people who cost the system the most.
Improve access to abortion in the first trimester in exchange for severely restricting it afterwords. i.e. from the second trimester on the rights of the child are taken into consideration.
End welfare support for able bodied people who are unwilling to work, so that it can be maintained for those who are unable to.
Make it easier for people to come here legally, work hard, assimilate, and make better lives for them selves as Americans. Complete the physical barrier at the Southern border where the border portal has testified that it's needed. Jail employers who hire illegal immigrants.
Leave people alone to live their lives as they see fit, while recognizing that people who disagree with their choices shouldn't be forced to facilitate them. e.g. Require the plaintiffs in civil rights law suits to show definitive fiscal or physical harm. I was offended will no longer cut it. Leave women's sports alone.
I'd go on but I'm out of space
@I want another option
Most serious fetal defects cannot be detected until second or third trimester. It is a mistake to invite the intrusive snout of the criminal justice system into healthcare decisions.
The problem with Centrism is that the GOP keeps accelerating as it moves to the right. So the Center moves right, right, and further right. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad to watch Establishment Democrats joining exiled Moderate Republicans wringing their hands about "too far left" when the most popular politician in America is New Deal Democrat Bernie Sanders with his young followers. Bill Clinton turned the Democratic Party to the right, threw their traditional base of workers and small business under the bus, adopted Republican economic policies like deregulation and NAFTA and Democrats became another corporatist Party. They went too far Right and stopped being the Party of FDR.
Healthcare won them the midterms. The new Center is courting voters more and donors less. A Republic has a duty to the citizens. It can't just watch the economy losing the middle and lower classes. Bread and Trumpy Circuses aren't the solution. A living wage brings out the best in workers.
3
One would think, Mr. Douthat, you were sprawled on the ground somewhere. Fiendish "leftists--grinning malevolently--are shoving you leftwards, ever leftwards--
--toward an abyss with a sign posted: THE LEFT!
I think (in all honesty) our country has been moving "leftwards" ever since its inception.
An example comes to mind.
You will remember that banner year 1896. William Jennings Bryan--the Democratic nominee for President.
And that classic bit of American oratory--the "Cross of Gold" speech.
"You shall not press down this crown of thorns upon the brow of labor!" he cried. Addressing the financiers, the bankers, the big money that flocked to the GOP.
(Plus a lot of other people as well.)
"You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold!"
Strong stuff. Conservatives throughout the land turned pale--shrank back in horror--nervously fingered their bulging wallets.
Thirty seven years later, FDR called in all the gold coins floating around--
--and went off the gold standard. Other nations were doing the same.
The Republic still stood. It stands to this day.
It seems to me, Mr. Douthat, the question is not "Is this liberal? Is this conservative? Would the right wingers approve of this? How about the left wingers?"
This question is, "Is this good? Is this fair? Is this right? Would this benefit the people of the United States?"
So it seems to me anyway.
You are welcome to disagree.
3
It’s like watching enraged lemmings stampeding towards the edge of a cliff.
2
You could see this coming. The daily deluge of articles on "socialist" renegades in the Democratic party has now created a new "reality." It is fitting that this columnist is the first to proclaim that there are no moderates left in the party.
Talk about fake news.
3
"The Rubin Center." This is the Rubin-theory which alienated union members, advocated wholesale globalism without a thought to the disenfranchised in the Mid-West, who locked up half the Black men in America, which -God forbid! - failed to lock up the criminals of the 2009 slump precipitated by Wall Street criminals (maybe even Mr. Rubin himself?). A mere bagatelle? No! It made Democratic "centrism" and "third-way"ism toxic. Apart from Hillary Clinton's very own many "negatives," she was dragging all that old Clinton-Gore baggage behind her, and nobody wants it! I personally agree with Doutat that P.C.ism run amok is harming the left immeasurably, and SOMEBODY has to stand up and say it's nuts... and even BAD. But the answer isn't to go back to Rubinism or give those ever-so-wise people the lead in the party. They failed! And apparently somewhere they know they did.
2
"Which suggests that to reckon with the possibility that making liberalism a pseudo-church might be a problem, not an aspiration...."
Ross must not have read the Wu column. We are living in tyranny.
Sic semper tyranus.
2
The probability of the 2020 election resulting in a change in the tax code that reverses the massive shift in the in the tax burden away from the rich is still very probably low as long as the Democrats continue to combine such tax proposals with plans to spend the proceeds.
However, a plan to raise taxes on those with assets above $50 million and/or incomes above $10 million and use all of the proceeds to reduce the taxes on everyone else might have a much higher probability of being enacted.
It is hard to envision the Democrats being politically savvy or ideologically flexible enough to embrace a policy of directly shifting the tax burden away from the middle class and onto the rich. Rather than using the proceeds of taxes on the rich for spending programs.
The Democrats have generally been deluded in their belief that the current level of taxes on the middle class is politically sustainable. In Hilary Clinton's speech announcing her candidacy, she said that the middle class pays too much taxes. She never mentioned a middle class tax cut again.
Most Democrat politicians are not aware that, by far, the best thing government could do for most middle-class households would be to lower their taxes. Thus, in many cases, middle-class voters have been willing to grasp at any chance they think could lower their tax burden, and thus support candidates who promise them a tax cut, no matter how odious the candidates might be otherwise..."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4246328
1
Amy Klobuchar is moderate.
I'd like to think Mr Douthat cares about the future of the Democratic Party. He doesn't. A traditionalist Catholic and obdurate conservative, his prescriptions are poisons in disguise.
1
It's a serious and, perhaps, intentional mistake to put Bernie Sanders in the "cultural liberal" category - conservatives do it ALL the time. A boogey man can't have nuance. Bernie is an ECONOMIC liberal. Social justice and environmental sustainability will, in fact, follow AS A CONSEQUENCE of economic justice (and probably more likely than if they were primary objectives). MLK knew this. And concerning the environment, globalization is probably enemy #1.
As a former VTer, I believe Bernie thinks cultural values are similar to religious values - and he firmly believes in the separation of church and state. IMO, he's not so unlike many people in my state now who are OK with L's and G's and B's and Q's, all down the line - afterall, it's none of their business. They just don't like it being imposed upon them from some outside authority. It seems, there IS some societal pressure for us to find EVERY cultural and sexual variation of the human race attractive - and this can be oppresive and is probably unnatural.
2
@carl bumba
I should remind Democrats who are culturally liberal and believe they will be politically represented at the NATIONAL level that Democrats make up only about one quarter of the voting public. Republicans make up another quarter. Independent affiliated voters maker up the other HALF - and they are NOT particularly liberal, culturally. Economically, however, is another story today! IMO, the most likely way for liberal social and environmental values and policies to advance in America is THROUGH economic justice... sort of as a byproduct.
1
Douthat, a conservative, just gave the most critical and incisive advice the Democrats could possibly read.
Whether most Americans are ready for full blown OAC or Bernie style socialism, they are ready for a significant shift to the left on economic and economic fairness issues. That goes for the guy who drives a pickup in a red state.
But because that economic policy is now being fused with:
"... an activist base that brands positions that many liberals held only yesterday as not only mistaken but bigoted or racist or beyond-the-pale."
and because moderate, normal, sane liberals and Democrats have been bulled into submission along with the rest of the nation, a Democratic win in 2020 remains precarious and a “durable governing coalition” for the long haul is unimaginable.
In effect, the Democrats's social agenda is being defined by college aged activist Twitter mobs.
“It’s the hard left’s cultural bullying and authoritarianism, stupid!”
1
Does Ross Douthat still have centrists? Does he need them?
It's the media that's moved the Democratic party to the left, as they have mainstreamed the Right Wing towards the center.
Fox and CNN have been repsonsible for much of that. CNN's poltical balancing act pits the Right Wing vs everybody else.
2
Ross Douthat shows his bias by using the word socialism to describe the current Progressive and Democratic Socialist ideas now enthusiastically embraced by the great majority of Democrats.
Douthat contributes to the dumbing of citizens when he refuses to use the term democratic socialism, that is the correct term.
I wonder how Al Gore would describe himself today?
2
Ross Douthat doesn't know what the center is. He is too young. He''s lived his adult life in the shadow of Reaganism. It is bizarre for him to even attempt to address this question.
3
today's so-called "centrist" Democrats are indistinguishable from traditional postwar Republicans. we certainly wouldn't need them on the political front if we had any standing Republicans, instead of the RHINO neofascist racists who welled up like an overflowing cesspool from the Old South to subsume the GOP to the benefit of giant corporations and extreme right donors. the Democratic Party is returning to its roots these days, instead of trying to fill the gap as Republicans light.
2
Ross wants a return to 1950's culture but without 1950's economics.
Anything to keep the rich in charge...that's what Jesus wanted after all.
3
@Matt
Very well put! Accurate and concise.
Stop trying to define the Democratic Party. You have more than enough to write about on your side of the gop
4
Actually, the center left is doing fine, thank you, and would today be sitting in the White House but for the Electoral College, a system set up to protect the slave owners. Millions more Americans voted against the extremists of the right.
Most Americans wanted the center left Clintons, both Bill and Hillary.
No, it is the fascist, racist far right that has driven our electoral politics into the ditch. It is the rightest Corporations that fled to Mexico or China to the cheers of the rightest coupon clippers of the upper middle class, and split us up into those with wealth, and those of us with despair.
Hugh
2
This reads like a “concern troll” post.
The GOP, having become the party of Trump/Bolton/Miller/McConnell, now clings to power only for power’s sake.
Everyone else has been forced into the Democratic party by the GOPs abdication of its own governing philosophy and simple decency.
The 2018 election added more swing district Democrats, people who would have been Republicans 30 years ago, and later derided as “RINOs” during the heady days of Karl Rove’s “permanent Republican majority,” than it did leftists to the party.
Ross’ big issue is that Americans care more about addressing climate change and economic inequality than marginalizing ever-shrinking minorities of the nation. He fears it’s offputting, but to whom?
The religious right today is worried mainly about its right to deny employment and services to homosexuals and transexuals, and about its rights to be employed and served by homosexuals and transsexuals. It demands for itself what it refuses to give to others, a stance that violates any sense of fairness.
Being concerned that Amricans might actually address real isdues instead of falling for the wedge issues of what remains of the Republican party is sweet, but Ross’ real concern should be for the GOP, which is busily committing suicide.
2
@cp
I think the 'social conservative' Republicans are outraged that non whites, LGBTQ, single women, and families with medical issues refuse to be shamed and returned to the subordinate 'place' they think we should have in their fantasy hierarchy. Time's up.
“We have a swelling Democratic 2020 field in which a capital-S Socialist is arguably the front-runner, ...”
I stopped reading when Ross conflated “socialism” with “democratic socialism”
I guess he knows the difference?
1
"...Democratic Party as a whole will have moved to the left on every front, writing off not only the possibility of compromising with Republican politicians..."
Given the likes of Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan. the Steve King types and Kevin McCarthy leading the current iteration of Republicans as compared to the Genghis-like Newt Gingrich Republicans of the past, it is a remarkable achievement in illusion, delusion and deduction for Douthat type pundits to have finally figured out the obvious, that Democrats will not soon be making policy compromises with Republicans.
Nonetheless credit must go to Mr Douthat for his excellent piece here on handling the signature effort of Republican everywhere - blame Democrats for THEIR failure to compromise with Republicans.
An excellent example of the left's abysmal failure to compromise with Republicans was its opposition to G W Bush's efforts to privatize Social Security. That was an epochal failure of Democrats. No wonder concerned Republicans and Mr. Douthat are disappointed. Still, Bill Clinton's NAFTA and the great sucking sound of jobs going South was a great example of compromise with Republicans. So please don't give up on the left leaning Democrats, Mr. Douthat. Just concoct another NAFTA like wunderkind compromise for 'moderate' Democrats.
4
I have been a centrist Democrat (a Hubert Humphrey Democrat) since the 1950's. But with every new tax cut for the rich, every new assault on voting rights, every additional Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, with the democratic process losing out to Fox News and Citizens United -- I become more tolerant of the guillotine.
4
Center? Where is that? The neocons have moved the gop so far to the right,that their mail is delivered to Italy. That would put the center somewhere in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. Some of these pundits are so obsessed with the "Holy Center", they resemble toddlers playing with their navels.
3
To say this column is disingenuous is to be polite. Mr. Douthat seems to have forgotten most of 20th-century history. Well, not really. It’s surely a conscious effort. Does the Democratic Party have a center? Sure, it had one for a very long time and it still does. The center was made up of people like FDR, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson. Do you remember them? They’re the ones who passed Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid and aid to higher education and child care. That’s what we used to call the center. Until Lewis Powell wrote the plan for fascists to take over the Republican Party. (You may remember he was rewarded for this effort with a seat on the Supreme Court.) The takeover of the Republican Party is now complete and they will stop at nothing to establish one-party fascist rule. If the Democrats can find their center again, they might have a prayer, but with gerrymandering and vote stealing, probably not much of one. Welcome to the United States of Amerika on the new Perón-Stalin-Hitler model. Trump is Perón. McConnell is Himmler. Think that’s an exaggeration, the crackpot view? Read Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann and you might not think so. Oh, by the way, they work for Republicans. Read Christopher Browning and you might give up hope altogether. It’s pretty hard to sustain.
1
To turn a phrase, it's the gerrymandering, stupid.
Any analysis of who won and who lost and why that focuses on intangibles like a party's appeal to one group or the other and ignores the glaring structural imbalance at the heart of our democratic process is going to be nothing but mumbo-jumbo.
Your colleague, Timothy Wu seems to get it. The most charitable reading I can give this column is that you've bought into the hype. Or perhaps you're fully aware that you're doing nothing but obfuscating a decades-long naked power grab on the part of the right-wing minority.
You're foolish to promote this nonsense, and, sadly, it looks like a lot of Times readers are gullible enough to believe it.
2
I had a feeling if I scrolled through the NYT picked comments and found the most recommended post, it would attack Ross and refuse to self evaluate the Left. Sure enough, though the comment makes some valid points, it meets the criteria.
I’ll tell you what Democrats don’t need - a Republican columnist for the NYTimes telling democrats what we need.
2
The "conservatives" - like Mr. Douthat - who seem more like insurgents to me these days, are very worried about "The Left," in the Democratic Party which according to them - in their wisdom - is dangerously in the ascendancy.
The S-word is being bandied about hither and yon. All kinds of terrible things might happen if an authentic liberal got elected president (not to mention to the Senate). The new president and reconstituted legislature might actually raise taxes on the rich and lower the deficit!
Anathema...
No need to wring your hands, Chicken Little. You should know that the 'sky is not falling' when some few visionaries are merely seeding the clouds. Wait for the rainfall of next year when candidates get down to the ground level work of campaigning among real voters......
1
Bring it on lefties! More socialism, more green new deal, more wacky! We love winning! So much that you’re going to be tired of us winning! MAGA!
1
It's tough to craft reasonable centrism into a sexy vision. Clintons-Gore-Obama failed to do so. Now we have children leading the Dem zeitgeist. When their 40-trillion-dollar castles in the air collapse, it will be centrists who save us from Republican extremism, if anyone does.
In a cunning bit of sleight of hand, Ross Douthat transforms a column about the energy on the Democratic Left into yet another of his polite rants about liberal moral anarchy.
If only Democrats had foresworn civil rights, birth control & abortion, gay marriage, and--especially--feminism, then Democratic centrism would have triumphed. How this version of Democratic centrism differs from reactionary Republicanism Douthat is too discreet to say.
I'm not sure where the Democratic Party is headed, but I very much doubt I want a dogmatic white male conservative pundit as my guide.
If you are a Democrat and you believe Ross Douthat is on your side, I wish you well. Please don't let the door hit you on your way out.
2
Compared with the rest of the world, "the left" has never been a strong suit for the United States, for reasons that remain mysterious to me. I think a more interesting question would be why that is the case. There is virtually no such thing as truly far left in this country. Douthat rides a favorite but imbecilic hobbyhorse of the right—take cover! the socialists are coming for us. Venezuela is just around the corner!
Nonsense.
I have a 20-year-old who is strongly for socialism. I am to the right of that, probably toward the center. I want fair wages, equal rights for women, cannot for the life of me figure out how we can have such an expensive, wasteful and unwieldy healthcare system that's overburdened by administrative costs, chiseling pharmaceutical middlepersons, venal pharmaceutical companies and consider "socialized medicine" as a nonstarter.
There is a lot of Overton Windowing going on in the Democratic Party at the moment, and good thing, too. Too long have we been stuck with the right's version of things. Pushing to abolish ICE is dog whistle politics that immigration and customs enforcements needs serious work. But isn't that a kinder, friendlier dog whistle politics?
3
Here is the fundamental problem with the "Center-Left":
"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time" H. Truman.
1
DeLong doesn't concede policy-wise to the Left. His point is that the Left is right (and the center-left is wrong) politically. Obama was wrong to seek compromise with what we now know is a Trump-Gingrich party. As the most recent CPAC demonstrated it is a party dominated by nutjobs, bigots, and meatheads. There can be no compromise with such a party..... only opposition.
1
You write: ".. the center-left establishment in the United States separated itself from the Democratic base on ...its support for the Iraq War in the early 2000s..." Really? Brad de Long supported the Iraq War? I seem to recall that some "moderate" Democrats, affluent allies of the Great and the Good, were Iraq War supporters, not anyone who would label his/herself "center-left".
"Does it need them [i.e., centrists] ?" -- Definitely yes, and more than ever.
The centrists should adopt a more agressive stance in the face of the assault by the leftist, radical, socialist-wing of Democrats, and all the militant vegans, anti-tobacco, pro-canabis, and proponents of homogeneric "marriages" attached to their coattails and wallowing in their spiritually muddy wake.
In a 2003 interview for ‘The Atheism Tapes’, the late Arthur Miller quite presciently stated that, “America was aching for an ayatollah.”
Well, we’ve got one. Interesting how a Christian nation would elect ‘The Adversary’.
2
Democrats have a moral center, something the Republicans lack.
They also have informed minds capable of understanding the issues and the ability to adhere critical thinking before they vote - something the Republicans lack.
And they don’t need apologists in the NY Times.
1
It is always amusing when a right of center Republican diagnoses what is wrong with the Democratic Party. Mr. Douthat: "Clean up your own party."
1
Ross: Robt Rubin led the destruction of Glass-Steagal en route to the global catastrophes of 2008 financial collapse.
You liked that??
1
Centrism = DINOS (on their way to extinction.)
Dem candidates are chasing the millennial vote, which is understandable. Get on the wrong side of them and you're Twitterbombed. But Dems should know, if millennial history is any guide, they'll have to be driven to their polling places.
"Left", "Right" and "Center" are not such useful labels anymore, not like in the past. This is due to the rise of Populism.
Case in point: At the height of the 2016 primaries Quinnipiac polled in several swing states, comparing a Trump/Sanders race to a Trump/Clinton race. In every case Sanders had higher winning margins than Clinton, this despite calling himself a Socialist. These were swing voters, some of whom went on to vote for Trump or Johnson.
We've seen unprecedented economic growth over the last 30 years. But all across the country people sense they've gotten the short end of the stick, with the benefits of all that growth going to the elite, the so-called 1%, but actually more like the 0.1%.
Various gender/ethnic/sexual identity groups have felt that this economic justice was carried by them. And various politicians have tapped into this "identity group politics" to build support centers.
But the reality is that the economic injustice has extended deeply into white, "traditional" groups as well. Sanders, by focusing on economic injustice (unlike Clinton) and NOT focusing on specific ethnic identity groups, was able to speak meaningfully to white "swing" voters in those swing states, people Clinton wasn't able to reach when November 2016 arrived.
The DEMs need to focus on economic injustice of ALL Americans.
Society all across the western world is evolving towards more liberality. It's inevitable. DEMs don't need to run on that. Instead, focus on the money.
1
The farther Left attempting to transform the Democratic Party have accomplished one good thing:forced the Party to evaluate what it really stands for. Obama's priorities repelled the middle class base.
In answer to Cal Prof below, we have seen mutliple counter- culture swings in the last 100 years, and socialism has failed miserably almost everywhere it has been tried. It sounds nice in theory. Scandinavian socialist benefits are more costly than most Americans are willing to spend, and the benefits are meeting heavy challenges lately since other populations have entered the once-homogeneous societies.
When the federal govt tries to correct inequities, such as was done in the 1970's with Johnson's Great Society, these efforts invariably fail.
Another major problem is the inevitable piggy-backing of anti-Semitism on far Left ideologies.
And further to socialism being too expensive as you commented about Scandinavians you might want to look across the border to your “half brothers” in Canada. We seem to do quite nicely thank you and we have “socialized medicine”
1
If there’s any side it’s anti-semitic it’s the far right -remember Charlottesville
1
The progressive argument is that the centrist approach failed, bringing the Great Recession and inequity. Therefore the solution is to swing to the left, often to the policies that already failed in the 1970s.
But the Democrats can only win the Presidency and the Senate if they flip states and seats which the Republicans held in 2016 and 2014. To do that, they need moderates like Conor Lamb and Mike Sherrill in order to win. To my mind, the moderates prvided this in the midterms. Beto and Andrew Gillum may have got people excited, but they lost.
So the center must hold or the Democrats will lose.
2
Ah yes, Ross, if only the center left had been willing to continue discriminating against marginalized communities, then surely they would have attracted Republican partners in their plans to make health care and the environment better for all of creation.
All things stated in this opinion piece aside for a moment, the sad reality is if the Democrats nominate any far left candidate or anyone with the word "socialist" associated with them, it just guarantees another 4 years for Trump. There are millions of moderate Republicans who regret voting for Trump and are looking for a reason not to vote for him again. A center left candidate like Joe Biden would give them the reason to stay home on election night. They won't vote for him, but they can stomach him enough not to vote for Trump.
I fear the Democrats will repeat the same mistake of 2004, when they nominated a liberal from Massachusetts, who was the only candidate of the field who couldn't beat the then vulnerable Bush. Can we please this time choose the best candidate to actually win the election, instead of whom we may prefer idiologically that will just galvanize the GOP voters?
1
Strange to refer to "shining city on the hill" when talking about the center-left. Reagan wasn't the solution, Reagan was the problem.
1
The "hard" Left can definitely be a turn-off for many voters. It can be preachy and moralistic.
Obama showed that there can be broad appeal in a positive message and consideration of others' perspectives.
However, the GOP obstruction of Obama drove a wedge in this country and punished compromise. It is difficult to see a path forward, because compromise is the only way to achieving legislation of substance. We are left with an ineffective Congress, and de facto legislation through the Supreme Court and Executive Branch.
Is there a way to develop broad appeal, and maintain this power in the process of governing? This is a serious challenge with gerrymandered districts, the electoral college, money interests, and media echo chambers driven by clicks and views.
1
Here's a pale version of an earlier comment that still refuses to appear....
The country is not looking for a "centrist" or "moderate" liberal on both economic AND cultural matters. IMO, what our country overall is looking for (whether we really know it our not) is a SERIOUSLY progressive liberal on ECONOMIC issues, but a fairly conservative liberal or "centrist " on cultural matters, i.e. the opposite of a Rockefeller Republican. The good news is for social and environmental liberals is that economic justice in America, the prime mover of globalization, would do MORE for social justice here (and overall) AND environmental sustainability here (and overall) than would liberal agendas specific to each of these realms (and which would unlikely have wide support, in any case).
2
The most important election will be the choice of the Democratic candidate for president. The perspectives of that individual will display on full view the issues and values of the Democratic party through the voters. There is an enormous gulf between Biden and Warren and hours of debate to be digested. Half of the party is attempting to lurch to the left rather than gracefully, more slowly move and in so doing take others along. People are fundamentally change averse but can be convinced and cajoled when thoughtfully discussed. Whether this internal dichotomy will create useful debate and an ultimate concensus and coming together or a tearing and splintering will ultimately decide whether the next president will be Democrat or Republican.
1
We of the Democratic persuasion are in a spot of bother. On the one hand, we want to institute real progressive changes to attenuate the damage done to our democratic republic by the Republicans of the last half-century. Ideas and inspiration for doing this come from all suites of the party, from the center-left to the "extreme" left. From universal healthcare to nursing the relationships with our allies to ensuring the uber-rich pay their fair share of taxes, these and many more are urgent actions.
On the other hand, we (and many independents and some Republicans) have another urgent need that trumps (pun intended) any other: we must rid ourselves of the most horrible and dangerous president in our country's history, along with his sycophants. To that end we need a different strategy. We must educate the constituency that elected him. We need to continue to point out his excesses and overreach. We have to continue to pursue, through the legislature, evidence of possible crimes. In short, we have to out him as having dangerously attacked and diminished our democratic institutions in his pursuit of autocracy.
Which road should we take? Or should we try both? The coming months will tell us how.
4
Harry Truman said "Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time." I include in that Bill Clinton, the perfect politician for muddled politic and wrong policies.
There was never a center-left, just a Republican-lite. It was never needed. The Democratic party is discovering its roots. I hope the GOP does too. Then there can be a political debate.
2
With the Republican party running for years on overturning Rowe vs Wade, eliminating unions, eliminating or privatizing social security, I think that it would be difficult to view Roosevelt or Tru man as anything but socialists. Every Democratic president since Roosevelt has sought universal health care. Does that make them socialists? Apparently so. I would argue that the right has drifted further right over a long time and that those who are center left have been castigated as being socialists for quite some time. After all, any advocacy for universal health care across my 60 years on the earth has been met with the term "socialized medicine." Doesn't that really say it all?
3
they didn't drift, they were pushed.
If we are going to have an honest discussion we need to take into account the Overton Window race to the Left over the last 20-30 years. What was a Left platform then is now far Right today. The "Progressives" of today are way off the map. The Right is probably the closest thing the country has to a center left.
Actually, the "Right" is the closest thing America has to totalitarianism.
2
Is it radical Left to want the following
#1- A reasonable affordable health plan?
#2- Reasonable cost of education?
#3- Recognizing and combating Climate change?
#4- Reasonable fair taxes that allow us to pay our bills and not go deeper in debt?
#5- Doing a living wage?
#6- Arranging a long term infrastructure plan?
#7- Reducing a overblown defense budget full of corruption?
If these are radical left socialist plans then count me in.
4
@RichardHead
Radical left?? You are just describing government of the people, by the people, for the people.
2
This current notion of the "extreme left" taking over the Democratic Party seems to be an extension of the Fox News driven propaganda to scare the electorate against the "crazed", socialist take-over of the Democratic Party. This analysis was wrong in 2016 and it is wrong now and it will be wrong again in 2020. HC lost to Trump, not because her ideas were off (her ideas and her qualifications were excellent), but because she was the less likeable candidate - it's sad, but mostly true. People voted with their gut. The majority of the US voters are "center" and the extreme candidate (Bernie, etc.) will simply lose in the general election. The progressive ideas need to pause for a while. A much greater danger awaits this country - a second term for DT. It's kind of like worrying about the dust in your house when the entire house is on fire and about to be destroyed.
3
I'm not seeing much here on the climate.
There is one, and only one, proposal on the table that's anywhere even close to answering the problem, and that's the Green New Deal. If the Douthats and the Acela Moderates can point to something else that isn't just, well, laughable, please do so.
Short of that, this discussion is about moving deck chairs on the Titanic. The desperate urgency is right there in the climate science, isn't talking about party labels beside the point?
If you insist on labels I think the Left - which for this purpose seems to include AOC and Bernie, the other declared Democratic Presidential candidates, about a hundred others in Congress, cumbaya liberals, socialists, and God knows what all else - has the moral high ground on this. (Note that Feinstein and even McConnell have backed down when challenged on the GND.) I hope and pray that enough of the American people can shuck their tribal-cultural political armor long enough to get the point and vote on it next year.
2
“If Clinton had matched this cultural conservatism with decency in his private life, Al Gore would have won re-election as his heir and the larger story of the center-left might have been entirely different.”
Clinton’s “indecency” is like a candle compared to the raging wildfire of trump, destroying the nation from coast to coast. In retrospect, from today’s perspective, clinton’s affair is quaint and meaningless. If Douthat appreciated the center-right so much, why doesn’t he condemn the republican effort to ensure the courts ruled against gore.
1
The terms "center-right" and "center-left" have lost any real meaning in my lifetime. To call Bill Clinton center-left is just nonsense, IMO. What he and Obama did was try to govern THE COUNTRY, not just the partisans w/in their own sphere. And because the GOP has moved so far to the right, they ended up governing as center-right presidents (cap and trade, Obamacare, etc., are all Heritage Foundation conceptions).
Reactionary Neo-AynRandism has become the "the right" while real conservatives like you (I do not mean that as a disparagement, as a liberal I want a conscientious conservative voice in America) are considered "center-right". I'm sorry, I admire you, but I would not call you a moderate conservative (just an an ethical one).
Trying to work with the increasingly corrupt (the GOP is effectively the creature of large monied interests at this point) and radicalized Republican Party has been the great failure of the last generation. We (all Americans) are going to pay a heavy price (climate change, i.e.) for that laudable but, ultimately, misguided desire.
Democrats have to move forward with principled policies that benefit the country (which is where the Dems are in terms of policy), not appease an out of control GOP that has effectively become a Trump cult.
There's really no downside; even if we compromised and ran on a center-right platform (what you call center-left), we'd be labeled as "socialists" anyway.
2
Douthat and some readers' comments suggest that Dems are not always as precise with our terms as we should be.
First, left and liberal and not synonyms. They only seem to be so if one looks at the world from the extreme right end of the political spectrum. Marx and Mill were not remotely on the same page. Indeed, Marx and Rawls were not on the same page. Liberalism, in all its forms, is a centrist position. It stands first for an open mind (thus distinguishing it from the hard right and hard left). Beyond that, it stands for individual rights within a market system governed by the rule of law. The hard right (i.e., not the libertarian center right, actually a species of liberalism) elevates authority above all. It assumes that ordinary people are incapable of intelligent self government, and so must be told what to think (see Plato, the Republic). The hard left elevates equality, particularly equality among groups, to the detriment of individual liberty.
Thus my second point: when the hard left makes clear that it really only cares about the interests of women and minorities, it tells white males (and those who care about them, like the 53% of white women voters who supported Trump) that they don't want their votes.
Going forward, I hope the Dems focus on economic class, not race and gender identity politics. Those in the working and middle classes are a far larger percentage of the voting public than those who care only about the interests of women and minorities.
3
As a business owner I bristle at socialism, but the fact of the matter is we have A.I. and robots doing much of the heavy lifting in this country and there aren’t enough good paying jobs. As a society it’s time to redistribute the wealth created by our collective investment in this country. We should all reap the rewards of our advancements. At the very least have medical care, higher education and housing. Although higher education will become obsolete when the A.I.’s come online. There is plenty to go around.
1
I support progressive policy, but agree that lately the left's abandonment of the cultural center has become problematic. When I talk to conservatives it is almost always cultural issues rather than genuine policy issues that define their opposition to electing Democrats. I feel this is due, in large part, to the efforts of leftist culture warriors to adopt the methods of those on the extreme right, thus ensuring mutual alienation rather than developing consensus.
However, while it may be correct to refer to an incremental shift toward the left for the country as a whole in recent years, the overarching trend since the 80s has been for the country to move right. The country has moved so far to the right since Reagan, that most of the economic policy positions now identified as "extreme left" are simply reiterations of policies that were the accepted norm during the Eisenhower administration: greater financial regulation, higher taxes on high earners, greater public support for education, etc. In this regard it is more correct to state that on issues of policy, the new left is not extreme at all. It is simply defending the center as it was defined for the most productive years of the twentieth century.
2
Where is the center?
Is it the 50% approve/disapprove point in an average across all polls of all issues?
Who is the hypothetical centrist politician, and to which party does he/she belong?
1
Douthat is geometry challenged and playing with words to add profundity to an otherwise lame column.
The center of anything (e.g., a straight line) depends on how far the opposite edges are from each other; the center shifts with the expansion/contraction of the line, circle, etc. E.G., A line or a circle can expand either to the right or the left and the location of the "center" shifts in a like direction. Therefore, in either Party, the center -- and centrists -- will always exist, but not in the same place it was before the party expanded in whatever direction did. Take the GOP for example. As more moderate members have abandoned it, its 'line' has shortened from the left because there are no longer as many left-thinking people in the GOP. This doesn't mean there are no GOP centrists; it simply means the center of the GOP has shifted toward the right, so much so that it is now frequently labeled the party of racists and fascists, because many holding some or all of those views now occupy the geometric 'center' of the line. They have become the GOP's 'centrists' by simple staying 'right' where they are (pun intended).
2
One of the things that really bugs me is when someone shows support for some necessary program, & some smug conservatives says,"But how will we pay for it?"
I once read a book where it was said about a character that he combed his hair over his bald spot just to make sure you knew he was a smuck.
A person who asks how the federal gov will pay for something is a person who wants to make sure you know he is an economic ignoramus. He wants to make sure you know he thinks the federal budget is like a family budget. It is a zero sum game. It you spend X dollars you have to find X dollars through a combination of revenue or borrowing.
This is obviously false since:
The federal gov can create as much money as it needs out of thin air.
I am fond of saying the US will run out of dollars the day after the NFL runs out of points. The federal gov NEVER lacks money to pay for anything.
The right question to ask is:
Will the spending create too much inflation?
Since increasing the number of widgets for sale lowers the price of widgets, a more insightful question is:
Will the spending increase the GDP enough to prevent too much inflation?
A dollar spent by the federal gov may increase the GDP by 50¢ or $1 or $2, say. It's economic multiplier would be 1/2, 1, or 2 respectively. So if we don't want a lot of inflation, we should spend money on stuff with a high multiplier. The stuff progressives want to spend on tends to have a high multiplier.
That's how we would pay for it.
3
that may make sense in Princeton, New Jersey, but it's a hard sell in Nowata, Oklahoma. at the same time, no matter what foreign opponent, real or imagined, is seen on the horizon, there is never a question of finding the money for a military solution because the well for the common defense is bottomless, and funds can always be siphoned from other programs, all of which are deemed less important. run that up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes.
@Len Charlap
And notice that the people who ask "how are we going to pay for it" NEVER ask that question when it comes to waging war - no matter how silly and unnecessary those wars are.
For warfare the US always has an unlimited amount of money.
But when it comes to feeding an American child, suddenly we're tight on cash, and have to make "tough" decisions.
Just once, I would like to hear a Republican say "how are we going to pay for it" when it comes to War or give-aways to the rich.
2
Like so much commentary on global politics, this op-ed suffers from the lack of a global perspective. Never mind the European social democracies, just look at the Anglosphere: by those standards Clinton and Obama are center-RIGHT politicians. Neither was in support of single-payer or ending austerity to goose the recovery. Among the current crop of Democratic Presidential hopefuls it's not clear that any but Sanders and Warren actually count as center-left.
It’s really simple: we D’s need a candidate who can win Ohio and Pennsylvania, two Rust Belt states with high proportions of blue collar voters who used to be staunch Democrats. Who voted for Obama in sufficient numbers to give him their electoral votes, but who voted for Trump to do the same. Anyone who believes nominating a “Democratic Socialist” will obtain that goal is kidding himself or herself.
I do not want to wake up on the second Wednesday of November, 2020, to see us again to have won the popular vote while losing the White House.
4
Labels? I just want a candidate who agrees everyone should have health insurance, that the warming climate needs to be addressed, that kids should get vaccinated, and that rich people should stop being the only ones who benefit from productivity gains.
I don't care whether that makes me a centrist, a socialist, a Democrat, a liberal, or a member of the Jovian Ptyalist League. I leave those thorny questions to you.
2
noted: the word "Republican" does not appear on your list.
Like it or not, young people (think AOC, etc.) are the up-and-coming political leaders of the U.S.A., and in their world view (burdened by student debt, stuck in low-paying jobs, with poor health care, and the prospect of an insecure future retirement) "socialism" is not the boogeyman. They've seen what the centrist, what the radical right have to offer and they have no taste for more of the same. And who can blame them?
8
@Jackson Those who dismiss the threat "socialism" need to do some history education. And I know, all those millions dead under socialism/communism are not representative of "real" socialism. But this is how it will always end. It is just a buzzword for those who want to take power under a different premise. If we let the far left get power I predict death and destruction on a scale we have not seen since the Holodomor (for those who have done there history).
1
@Mystery Lits
Allowing a public option for health insurance alongside the current private options is not going to ruin the country.
As if howling against Republican fascism is such a petty thing.
3
DeLong recognizes something that centrist pundits (both right and left, including Douthat) have yet to fully internalize, most likely because it cuts to the core of their relevance and purported expertise/savvy: the "center" has no constituency, save for a small, insular class largely confined to spaces such as these. Centrism, neoliberalism, whatever you want to call it, has brought our world to the brink, and those who have long endorsed this vision have no way to account for its spiraling chaos.
This country has been ravaged by economic inequality, something like environmental apocalypse may be imminent, and fascism is on the rise throughout the globe. In the face of this, the sensible response is...rebuilding a "cultural center"? What does that mean, making nominal concessions in the "culture war"? The task of a real (or sensible) politics now should be building something: a new, hopeful, durable constituency in favor of a just and sustainable world. For lack of a better world, the punditry's nostaligia for the 90s and early 2000s is insane.
5
Can you stop calling AOC and Bernie Sanders fringe and too far left. A top marginal tax rate of over 70% was readily accepted in this country for over half a century, and during the administrations of eight presidents including Republican presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. We had a top marginal tax rate of 90% and above for 14 years. Coincidentally, these were the years that were considered the Golden Age of America. Universal healthcare in one form or another has been in place in nearly every civilized country in the world except the United States. These ideas are far from radical. They are tried and true policies that curb wealth disparity and are just humanly decent.
4
@Hope, left to Ross our entire millennial and younger crowd will be labeled leftist and fringe. Who owns the future, Ross? Your kids not your parents and grandparents.
1
Hi , NYT readers out here in Seattle rents have skyrocketed and a center-left mayor and city council majority have sided with landlords and real estate interests. Centrisim, on the crucial issue of housing has resulted in a policy that is identical to Ronald Reagan's trickle down tax cuts. The center has lost all its credibility with me. I'm voting Jill Stein unless the Demos go Bernie. Outside of America's borders there is also the issue of endless war in the Mideast. A Clinton acting as your senator and a centrist Democratic senator in WA voted for this.....
3
Left, right, center-left, left-leaning, moderate, right-wing...
What use do all these labels --and the media obsession with labeling (often-complex) political positions -- really serve?
Somehow applying labels has become a journalistic short-cut for analysis -- especially in opinion columns -- instead of actual analysis of issues, positions, and consequences of these, using *facts*, not more opining about the opining that's the spring-board for the column in the first place...
Who cares what the labels are? The *issues* are what matter. And what parties and politicians will actually DO about the issues! All the rest is really just blather.
PS As an aside, seeing the picture of Clinton-Gore in 92 reminded me just how hopeful we all were then. It really seemed as if things would improve in our nation.
Fast forward to 2016 and 2018... Does ANYONE have the same sense of optimism and hope we had then? Who possibly could? Climate change, assault on nature and other living things, soaring income inequality, trashing alliances and stability in the world, endless wars, deceit and illegality...
Trumpism and right-wing politics has largely killed off hope. It's actually based on negativism and the destruction of hope.
And what does it offer?
Cynicism, lying, trashing the government and even the legal system, and, of course, utter and complete criminality.
Where does "law-flouting demagogery" fit in on Mr Douthat's political spectrum?
3
Of course the Democratic Party has centralists, its a silly question or more aptly a straw man argument presented by a religious conservative who delights in exaggeration for effect. For a long time political discourse moved more and more into rightist territory. So much so that the very idea of centralism became a parody of itself. The liberal side of the Democratic Party wouldn’t pass for centralists in Europe much less flaming liberals. Ross knows this and like many religious conservatives finds even a hint of realignment threatening. Liberals (progressives, whatever) will pull the center back where it belongs and we may get some reasonable balance back again. We’ll see.
1
Ross Douthat, look in the mirror:
"This is harsh but (somewhat) fair; if more members of the Western political elite (or NY Times Republicans) were this self-critical, the Western political elite (NY Times) would be in (somewhat) better shape."
What Ross and his fellow hired Republicans mean by "extremism" is to raise taxes on themselves from about 30% to about 40%. It is only extremism to Republicans.
Also, "extremism" means men should not pass laws dictating women should get pregnant more often (by not covering contraception) and then be forced to have babies they aren't prepared for (by not covering or even allowing termination of pregnancies).
Ross, you are surprising young to be left on the dustbin of history, but your "extreme Catholicism" has closed your mind prematurely.
Here is the truth: what are acceptable policies change with the times, just like the interpretation of the Bible and the Constitution.
The "middle" has moved, and now includes basic human rights recognized by the U.N. over 50 years ago. The US fought for those rights in WWII, and we led the writing of the Declaration. But we are only now realizing that it applies to us as well.
Saying that all Americans deserve health care, and that includes contraception if they want it, is not "extremist."
From now on, it should be the responsibility of lazy writers to explain what they mean by "extremist' and why. The burden of proof should be on people who resist change and defy progress.
3
I prefer to look at the parties this way at this juncture:
The Republican Party: Insane and irrational. With the exception of three people in this GOP Senate, even Lincoln would be called a socialist or a leftist by Trump and his toadies.
In other words, you can count the amount of sane people left in the current Republican party on one hand.
Democrats: Sane. Rational. They are referring to their core values, which are the values of most people in our country.
Republicans like to claim that Medicare is too costly while they have a criminal in the White House taking away exports in soy, corn, and pork products from US farmers and giving that business over to Russia.
Now that he's in the process of breaking every nuclear arms deal (please explain what Lavrov was doing in Vietnam), Russia is going to be exporting a lot more than just soy, corn, and pork products.
And Russia will not care about the sanctions the US imposes once Russia does.
And so what if Trump is running up the deficit and throwing children from south of the border into cages.
Hey - so what. We've got leftists! Hey look at the leftists! Socialists they are! Yeh, that's the ticket. Let's get everyone occupied in referring to the the Democrats as "leftists."
Why can't people use the words "liberal" "leftist" and "socialist" correctly? They're not the same.
There's both insight and misdirection here. Simply put American democracy has gone off the rails - and Western civilisation and human existence have become imperilled - because when Ronald Reagan said " Government is not the solution to the problem - government is the problem." somebody really should have said "Hey Ronnie, this is the US government you are talking about - and a democratic one at that." and when Bill Clinton said "The era of big government is over." somebody really should have said "Hey Billie, how big is "big" exactly? I must have missed the US's totalitarian phase - when was that?" - but apparently nobody did.
In reaction to the extreme of Marxism beyond the bounds of respectable democratic politics to the left, Reagan and his supporters blithely placed the Republican Party and the US on the path of adoption of the extreme of Randism beyond the bounds of respectable democratic politics to the right. The Republican Party moved right and "Slick Willie" stupidly moved the Democratic Party right in concert - so the centre of American politics moved right. This is the fake "center" Ross (and so many other American pundits) love so much. It's the "center" where neither major American political party represents the will and economic interest of the majority of the American electorate.
If it's the true "center", why is the Republican Party the only major nominally centre-right political party in the Western world to not believe in human-caused global warming?
3
Anything not Republican is considered extreme. Anyone that doesn’t agree with them is the enemy of the people.
It’s insane that to even discuss medical for all or climate change or finding ways to pay our bills through taxation is extreme. That even protecting liberty and justice for all is extreme.
There is a belief that certain people should be denied such respect because they sped on the highway to get away from someone shooting at them. That these people need to be shot at by our own law enforcement agencies along side the thugs we ourselves may have likely enabled that shot at these people.
That people who try and ask for help from those that shine the light on the hill for liberty and justice for all is wrong. They need to go home.
The light of liberty and justice for all is off. Go home. It’s over. Go back to the tyranny you lived in. We have our own tyrant we love who believes greed is God. And Trump is his representative.
Don’t worry. It’ll all be okay. Your liberties are safe.
As usual, this is just another attack on the Left from professional member of the Republican Commentariat Douthat. Also as usual, it incorporates dogma from his two nicely dovetailing religions. On the one hand, there is his cult-within-a-cult right-wing reactionary and oppressive version of buffet Catholicism, and on the other is his reactionary, oppressive and blindly bigoted against anything/ anyone different Republican Party. Using Party approved terms, he projects onto the Left the sins of the Right. Clinton has a #MeToo reputation? Your President has a record of assauting women, and bragging about it, that makes Clinton look like a choir boy. Democrats are moving far left? It only looks that way to someone on the Republican high speed train to the right. As for Democrats’ struggles over the last fifteen years, that has more to do with wealthy Republicans buying State Houses that gerrymander districts so Republicans win with many fewer votes than their Democratic opponents, massive disinformation campaigns by the Republican Commentariat, and an Electoral College that gives greater weight to uninformed voters in red states. Trump lost the popular vote by nearly three million votes. Hint: that means voters preferred the Democrat. The Right has fallen so far, and has so little to offer America, that all they can do is spin projecting fabulist tales about the Left and hope some of them stick.
2
Seriously? This Op-Ed is the product of successful conservative messaging (lies) over the years. Yes, the Democrats have a left-wing...but it's the wing of the party. The Republican alt-right is the middle now. Most of America and most Democrats are in the middle folks. Just because Fox News highlights AOC, doesn't mean they're the Democrats. For the record, her stances aren't very far off the middle. But cult of personality wins out I guess. Socialism is the new Obamacare...
Steve Bullock?
Ross well describes why Americans overall so often end up with what they secretly want: divided gov't. We don't trust either party to run the country unfettered. And explains while I'll likely split my vote btwn whoever the dems nominate for Pres, to get rid of Trump, and whoever the repubs nominate for the Senate and House, to keep check on the nutso ideas the likely dem Pres will have.
I'm a 75 year old white guy, a progressive, who has lived through afew cultural shifts. In some ways i can better understand (not sympathize with) the right wing critics of "political correctness" than I can understand, or sympathize with the culture warriors on the left who, when they fail to gain traction with the targets of their rage, are perfectly willing to crucify their allies.
All cultural revolutions begin with a period of excess that eventually, like ignorance, "toboggans int know."
I'm thinking now of what we called in the 60s, the sexual revolution. At the time there were extreme behaviors where inhibitions were cast off with our clothes, and all manner of couplings were displayed as a political statement. %0 years down the road, most of those behaviors have been tempered by better judgement, but we are now a society where single parenthood is no longer stigmatized, couples can choose to live together without marriage, and being gay is no longer seen as a mental illness.
I hope that we will see a similar leveling of the current wave, and we are left with a society that has a single payer health care system, living wages, and affordable education. We'll see that. like Social Security and Medicare, that Americans will not want to give up these advances.
We are in no danger of becoming a Socialist country, but the investor class may have to set their sights a little lower, and finally admit a little more breathing room for those who create their wealth.
1
nah, who need realism? Realistic policies are a thing of the past, a vestige of capitalism which failed us.
Today's Dems want to follow in the footsteps of Hugo Chavez and Mao.
Oh Lordy, Mr. Douthat. The center left of the Democratic party in the US of A would be called smack in the center of all other advanced nations, whereas the oh-so-socialist ultra left is considered center left.
When it comes to the Republicans though, there is no "center" right anymore. They have marched in lockstep to the abyss of fascism pure.
And not liberalism is a pseudo-church, but the oh-so-pious arch right winger complaining about same sex marriage and everything else that doesn't fit into their antiquated world view.
2
@Sarah
I would rather belong to the liberal 'pseudo-church', which accepts science and extols humanism, than the cruel conservative evangelical/Catholic variants that Ross idealizes.
Current politics are going about this all the wrong way. How about starting what what we SHOULD be doing if we really are a nation guided by morals, by doing what is the appropriate thing for all of our citizens - and actually making those who break the rules pay for them (I am talking about the crimes being done in full daylight on a huge scale - pretty much all of the acts of this entire presidency and its republican congressional enablers).
We have totally lost our way, which is borne out by where we as a country stand on numerous parameters indicating quality of life. We have become a reality TV country, an intellectually lazy, apathetic country, and one who generally seems to be made to enrich the already obscenely wealthy. There is a label for the kind of government that enables this horror.
This article represents the failed thinking of the ideologue.
Remember, Bernie Sanders lost to Hillary Clinton.
And Hillary Clinton lost the election.
You really have to have some alt- thinking to believe that the way to go is to push to the more radical side, which is what some of the far left dress up as 'progressive'. There's a difference between having ideals, and then being out of reality. No election for the presidency has been won without the middle. Arguably, the extremes of the left and right might have a lot to do with who a candidate is, and near nothing to do with them winning the final election.
I just think these articles are self pats on the back. The author wants to feel better about himself with his case, and far lefts are just like far rights in that they don't really want to talk to anyone outside of people who agree with them. And that's not how you win.
Would rather have a person with the right ideals, and who is intelligent enough to know they have to work with people who don't think like them to actually get something done. If anything, this Trump administration should show people the failure of being obstinate.
Mr. DeLong's apologia is overly self-congratulatory.
That he was at any time proud to associate himself with Robert Rubin tells you all you need to know about him and these so-called "center-leftists".
Robert Rubin was a central architect of the deregulation which led directly to the economic devastation of 2008, from which many of us still have not and never will recover.
And that's the real problem with these "center leftists".
It's not that they are more "moderate" than real liberals.
It's not that they are liberals who understand the science of economics - as they present themselves.
It is that so called experts - like Mr. DeLong - have bought wholesale a type of Economics which is really a neo-liberal ideology.
And this is not debatable.
The fact that no one in mainstream Economics saw 2008 coming is proof that whatever they claim to be experts on - it's not a science.
These are the same people who engineered the disastrous Euro - from which southern Europe still has not recovered.
It is an ideology masquerading as a science.
And all these people are still tenured professors and so-called policy experts, just waiting for their next opportunity to serve the rich.
Don't believe them.
They believe they are experts on a science, when we all know it is an ideology - with lots of math to make you feel stupid and shut you up.
1
We already have socialism in the US so to say the Democratic Party is running on socialism is ignorant. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, farm subsidies, farm tariff checks and farm crop insurance, and many more examples.
3
whither the voter who abhors socialism, big government and open (or non-existent) borders on the one hand and abhors anti-abortion, pro-gun, evangelical conservatism on the other ?... there is no viable alternative to the two major parties...Libertarian might be one, but never produces a strong candidate or campaign... so is not voting at all the only purist thing to do ?... that's a waste of the colossal blessing of living in a democracy ... guess i'll just go for a walk and watch the clouds float by...
What Ross refers to as “Socialism - with a capital S,” would usually be referred to in European countries as “Democratic Socialism,” if that appellation makes the GOP feel less unnerved, and it scares no one. In the US we now have president who proudly embraces the term “Nationalism- with a capital “N,” and that really is something to be scared about.
1
From Nixon on Republicans were able to depict Democrats as socialists. As a result Democrats needed racially liberal southerners who were seen as economically conservative. This even as Democrats gave America Social Security, Medicare, Headstart and more. Obama has then given America ACA. What Douthat is doing is picking up the Frank Luntz propaganda. Call policies Americans like something they don't like. This is a column of propaganda.
Mr. Douthat spends a disturbing amount of time looking over the fence. Probably because of the disaster in his own backyard.
2
Yeah, not going to compromise on equality, racial justice, and women's rights. There is no "centrist" position on those issues.
There is no excuse for not treating LGBTQ+ Americans with the same respect and lack of discrimination any other American enjoys. If your religion says it's ok to treat these people different legally - your religion is the problem.
There is no excuse for not recognizing how the sins of our past - slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, etc... still affect African American communities to this day. If you think that "their culture" is the problem, and not systemic racism, you are part of the problem. Either educate yourself on the issue, or stop being a coward and say what you really mean instead of dog whistling your racism. One last thought on this issue: a quick study of the history of these issues, and the "justification" for their perpetuance at this time, was scriptually based. Go look at photos of racists picketing from the Civil Rights era - lots of signs quoting the Bible.
Finally, there is no excuse for telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies. Let's get a few things straight. First, for most of recorded history, cultures oppressed women. They were property. They were sold. Second, this treatment was steeped in, and sanctioned by, religion. It is no coincidence today, that opposition to abortion, is 99.999% driven by religion.
We're done letting religion make the rules that the rest of us are forced to follow.
2
I would frame the question quite differently from the hard right, religious/corporatist/plutocratic conservative columnist: Does the Republican Party still have “centrists”? Obviously, NO! The G.O.P. is now unalterably the Trump Republican Party, a fetid swamp stuffed with hucksters, plutocrats, grifters, monitizers, sycophants, and opportunists solely concerned with unbounded self-promotion and material enrichment to the complete disregard of the real problems confronting everyday Americans. Any common sense, rational person would have predicted, and embraced, the energized, widespread societal backlash presently occurring to this obscene New Gilded Age in which the country finds itself. The progressive train has left the “station”, bound for a shared, equitable and just glory.
I'm of "Baby-Boomer" age --
Back in the fifties - my mother attended Communist Party and Socialist meetings here in New York City - when to do so was not without peril --
Pro-workers - Pro-Union - Pro Labor - Pro Education - and very strongly Pro-Civil Rights and Pro-Equality for all --
Rather than just talk the "Feel-Good" liberal talk - my mother walked the walk - attending civil rights meetings - and even hosting them in her home -- where I - as a six-year-old white boy - learned how to be comfortable in a room filled with Black people --
The sense I had was the work and effort was being directed at achieving and realizing their liberal, humanist goals -- rather than worrying about what the "other side" was trying to do - and cut them off at the pass --
Unfortunately - the extreme polarization we see in today's political climate is due, much less, to the interest to realizing the goals - than it is out of sheer hatred and contempt for the "other side" --
Many rightist conservatives hate liberals - simply because they are liberals - and they hate liberals --
And yes - many liberals - as we can see from many comments in the Times' political articles - detest conservatives - with a passion --
As the haters - on both sides - continue to hate - and tighten the circle of their wagons - we - as a society - move farther away from realizing any goals or visions at all -
Except maybe by forcing it down the throats of the "other side" via court orders --
What a shame...
1
And this wishful center-left is supposed to collaborate with exactly which center-right members of today's GOP? Mythical creatures like unicorns and Nessie.
This is a false narrative that attempts to put the thieves and the Sheriff on the same scale.
The author should pause to wonder why republicans have lost the popular vote in 4 of the past 5 presidential elections and a majority of the congressional elections as well. Why their tenuous hold on power relies on the poorly educated and the basket of Deplorables.
There’s one party that represents a majority of the voters. I used to think the other one represented good old American money, but now it looks like they favor the racists who would trust the Russians before they give a break to a Latino or Black man in their own neighborhoods.
1
These moderate NYT conservatives keep treating us to breathtaking displays of intellectual dishonesty. First off, Douthat needs to read Tim Wu's editorial in this same issue. Economic and social justice ARE centrist positions -- it's just that Douthat's conservative buddies have conspired to thwart them, in part by calling them socialist (they're not). Despite his pretended reasonableness, the purpose of this editorial is to repeat and reinforce the meme that the Democratic Party has been taken over by radical bomb throwers. That's the lie the Republicans have settled on, and we will hear it repeated constantly over the next year and a half until most people believe it. Mr. Douthat has his marching orders, but of course if he publically embraces Trumpism, NYT readers will cease to take him seriously. So expect more cant like this.
Taking advice and insight from Ross Douthat on center- left Democratic Party political failures is akin to chickens asking weasels for advice.
The Republican Party is the party of Fascism, white supremacy, evangelical Ku Klux Klan Confederate reactionary science denying heathen hedonist paganism, capitalism militarism and racism plus misogyny and patriarchy. Trump's Republican America is first in money, arms and prisoners.
Cultural wars is a euphemism for believing that black people are innately and uniquely ignorant, immoral, lazy and violent. While identity politics is a euphemism for the imagined superior virtues of white European Judeo- Christians in every phase of civil secular life.
Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were well to the partisan political right of FDR and LBJ as expected. But Ike and Nixon as well. Their moderate center left politics was a duplicitous ruse cover for Goldwater Reagan in blue. Their rhetoric was center left. While their practice was conservative right.
2
These days, even George Will is a "leftist" according to Trump's GOP.
I honestly do not care what Trump and his toadies are saying about what I - a voter will vote for the Democrat in 2020 - have to say about me.
2
As a lifelong Democrat I am truly afraid that the extreme left wing of the Democratic Party will push us into another 4 years of Trump.
Look at all the reasons Ocasio-Cortez and her merry band of socialist Congresspersons (and quite a few announced Democratic Presidential candidates) are giving the electorate to vote for Trump in 2020: free Medicare for all, free college for all, confiscatory taxes, open borders, late-term abortions, anti-Semitism, a Green New Deal, reparations, the list goes on and on.
The ultra-left Democrats (socialists) seem to think that those in fly-over land (and quite on few on the elite coasts) are dumb as a stump, and won't realize that these pie-in-the-sky opium dreams are fiscally and politically impossible.
The old-guard Democratic leaders (the really old ones, you know who I mean) seem totally flummoxed by the likes of Ocasio-Cortez; I sincerely hope the centrists can take back of our party's platform and return the Presidency to the Democrats.
Isn't it time we should all admit that "progressive" really means "socialist?" And, as Margaret Thatcher so aptly put it, "The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people's money."
Like it or not, that Bill Clinton is the most successful president after FDR. Most of the American voters are at center right politically. The extremists in right and left are the big mouth with the bull horn. They are vocal and controversial and get more media coverage. They are active in social media. They vote in primary election. Only handful voters vote in primary and the result is nominating only the extremists. That is the reason America is divided two polarized nation. It is not good for the country. The GOP voters are active and regimented. The liberal voters are lazy and may or may not vote. The African American and Hispanic Voters are not that much interested for good reason. The blue states elect GOP governors, senators, mayors and lawmakers. But the red states never vote for the Democratic candidates. To win elections in 2020, the Democratic Party can not ignore the center. America is not ready for self declared socialist in the White House.
Mr. Douthat:
John Hickenlooper
Sherrod Brown
Amy Klobuchar
Jay Inslee
&&&
The Democrat who occupies the Oval Office in 2021 will wrap him-or-herself in the flag of Teddy Roosevelt, use the word 'billionaire' more in their campaign than the word 'oppression' and teach uneducated Trump supporters the definition of 'malefactor'.
Dan Kravitz
"or in the probing, evenhanded culture-war reportage of the magazine writer Jesse Singal (whom I hesitate to even praise because it will do him no favors on the internet)"
You do him no favors because you mention the v-chip in one breath and him in the next as if you are an "ally" to his attempts to follow social science evidence seriously. Likewise Heterodox Academy which is not Quillette yet get equated in your mind, apparently. The only reason they're concerned about the excesses of left progressivism is it's relevant in academia, activism, and in evidence based journalism. If your Catholic conservatism had any influence Jesse would be bagging that on Twitter instead of that other nonsense.
A column about extremism in which the words Trump, Pence, Steve Bannon, Stephen Miller, Freedom Caucus, Steve King, Tea Party, and Republican don't appear is bogus.
1
The problem is not that there are no centrists, it's that the center - as identified by out of touch journalists & pundits - has moved far to the right of the people. Most of the "socialist" ideas that you & your ilk love to call radical or far left actually poll very well outside the bubble of status quo journalism.
Interesting that a conservative would write this article. Ross, best you stick to what you know best and write about the demise of the moderate Republicans!
This is a veiled attempt to demonize social justice! Which, by the way, Ross, as a good Catholic you should know about! Democrats know that our nation is heading in the wrong direction, and We, the People do too! Hint....midterm elections in 2018...Blue Wave!
We, Democrats have Liberals, socialists, fiscal-conservatives and ....yes, moderates! My husband is one. We, also have a very diverse field of brilliant candidates, which will give Americans a great debate and choice!
Ross, I detect fear and jealousy coming from the Republicans! Blue Wave 2020!
You have to give Douthat credit for this masterful attempt to use the word "socialist" as many times as possible to describe what isn't far-right policy.
1
All that I know about this new class of leftists is that they agitated and cost NYC 25,000 middle-class jobs and gave us a black eye. It's a heck of an achievement, and a gift to the GOP.
Amazon may not be an angel, but obstructing and denying people opportunities has a seriously rotten odor to it. I think a bit of moderation would serve us well right now.
1
Absent a cogent Republican identity other than Trump, Mr Douthat resorts to attacking the tired tropes of ‘socialists’ storming the political gates of America.
A sad state for someone who portends to have a semblance of political insight.
Douthat continues to amaze me. He uses Brad DeLong as a paper tiger. As stated in Wikipedia, "According to the 2016 ranking of economists by Research Papers in Economics, DeLong is the 740th most influential economist alive." Clearly DeLong is an important voice of the Democratic Party and what it represents. And why bring religion into the discussion?
Liberalism as a "pseudo-church". Pathetic.
This is a rather interesting premise because the fact is that Democrats are largely center, even center right in many cases (as Obama was). The ONLY reason that anyone can consider dems as "left" of center is that the republicans have become so fanatically ultra right wing that they cannot even see the center anymore. Therefore, ANYONE to the "left" of the current fanatical ultra right wingers is said to be "left wing." but, of course it is a another right wing lie to try to get actual normal people to accept ultra right wingers as normal people. Nut they are not. They are delusional in the extreme. Too bad you are falling for it Ross. I therefore have to assume you are ultra right winger yourself.
I always have to check myself when I agree with Ross, and I mostly agree here. But, I also don’t see any negotiating partners in the Republican Party. I’ve tended to agree with David Brooks that America is a “center right” country, probably best represented in recent Presidents Bill Clinton and George HW Bush. Bill Clinton was dogged by his own avarice (“Bubba Clinton”) while HW was chased by his right flank for not “doing enough” to be like Reagan. The “Contract with America” and the rise of the Gingrich Congress left both sides unwilling to negotiate because they’d be tattooed by their “adherents” as “caving’. We see that still with the right wing media forcing a government shutdown, only for Trump to take less than the original deal offered by Congress.
The only members of the D Prez field who can maybe get us back on a “governing track” are John Hickenlooper (I think a Westerner would have an excellent chance next year) and Amy Klobuchar — who I really do think gets a raw deal because she’s “a mean woman”. Let’s go interview all the staffers of all Members of Congress and see who the other prima donas are (both R and D). I think anyone along the I95 corridor really doesn’t understand the day-to-day travails of most working Americans (and that includes Sanders, AOC, Biden, Booker, etc).
I am a center-left Democrat who daily feels that the Democratic Party has left me behind. My only hope is candidates like Pete Budegieg and John Hickenlooper can somehow emerge with the nomination and prove that we aren’t the party of “anti-job” socialists like AOC and Bernie Sanders.
If someone like Bernie emerges as the democratic candidate, I honestly do not know how I will vote. I hate Donald Trump, but I truly abhor socialism even more.
1
The centrist Democrats gave the Democrats control of the House. The Democrats ran the table in purple districts thanks to suburban women and some men offended by the boorishness of brazen misogyny and racism. AOC was inevitable after the primary, that does not make her a symbol of the center shifting left. I like her, but she is the product of a safe blue district.
So to let the left wing of the Democratic party have control of the destiny of the House, Senate, and Oval Office and therefore the Supreme Court for TWO generations is to hand it all over to Freedom Caucus Republicans on a solid gold platter.
1
Thank you much for your article. You seem to hold within today's climate of stating your thoughts on creating the present scholarly manipulation trying to create battle zones among the American people much like CNN+Fox cables jockeying minds creating record profits. CNN just had record profits.
But America and the good Americans who want to support the points that make America better for the common good of all in the future only need one label and that is Revolutionaries.
Revolution! Put the constitution aside and put it on pause; we'll get back to it later. Our government has failed us and continues to fail us daily just as King George III did so we must consult the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. It is there where the true American's heart is.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Read FACTION-FREE DEMOCRACY at Amazon books! Join the KEYBOARD REVOLUTION!
Is it just me but I found the column unreadable. It's beyond obtuse and more deconstructionist than anything.
The socialist threat is a convenient trope which Douthat takes more seriously than the electorate.
But Douthat missed the most important element as the Democratic Party evolves: character. People will consider and accept a lot of ideas if Democratic leaders are honorable and bound to the Constitution . It is why Obama won twice and continues to be so popular. The Republicans are a lost cause which is why Douthat would rather analyze the Democrats.
" ... rather than pining for moderate-Republican partners who don’t appear to be in evidence."
I guess Mr. Douthat is referring to Vlad the Impaler?
The "creative energy" you claim that pushes the Dem party left is a product of parasitic advocacy groups. The Dems who claim to have a large umbrella actually over the years have reduced the size of their umbrella to include only aggressive groups willing to pay the Dems to support their issues with money and votes. But that price usually eliminates any equivocation or opposing thoughts on their issue. I point to the example that was reported last week in the press where Ocasio-Cortez supposedly threaten centerist Dems to stop voting with the Rebubs or her group will try to primary them out. I have to remind you that in 2016 HClinton won 20 states. Trump won 30. How do the Dems pick up those center-to right leaning states with an a Dem/Socialist agenda? And they have to remember that many candidate that won House seats were pro gun and pro life. The 2020 fight is for the middle of America... not for the east or west coast. And it shoul;dn't be lead by the parasitic advocacy groups.
1
All roads lead back to the takeover of the Republican party by anti abortion extremists, gun nuts, and xenophobic immigrant haters. There can be no "center" coalition without the interest and cooperation of one of the major political parties. When Republican moderates start to exist again only then can we think about a political center once more.
This is such a false narrative. The only reason the right sees the ideas being put forward by the left as "extreme" is 1. for political gain and 2. because the right has moved so far to the right to embrace racists, pedophiles and criminals. What exactly is extreme about protecting the planet for future generations, insuring Americans have healthcare and restraining capitalism to make sure it works for everybody?
Ross Douthat's concern for Democrats and the mistakes he sees them making is a regular feature at the Times. But then, Mr. Douthat is a professional concern troll, and part of the Times effort to keep Democrats from going too far left.
Part of the film-flammery at work here is what exactly this 'center' is that he is so concerned about. Tim Wu has a rather different take on that today:
"About 75 percent of Americans favor higher taxes for the ultrawealthy. The idea of a federal law that would guarantee paid maternity leave attracts 67 percent support. Eighty-three percent favor strong net neutrality rules for broadband, and more than 60 percent want stronger privacy laws. Seventy-one percent think we should be able to buy drugs imported from Canada, and 92 percent want Medicare to negotiate for lower drug prices. The list goes on."
https://nyti.ms/2SJ5b6H
That's the center the Democrats need to chase - not the Republican Party, not some vision of 'Clintonian triangulation'.
Mr. Douthat would better serve his readers by spending more time on urging the Republicans back to the center. Of course, that would mean admitting they (and he) have been heading in the wrong direction for decades.
Not going to happen. It's why they are an authoritarian cult these days. They have nothing left to offer but fear and division.
Brooks and Father Douhat in full panic mode about the eclipse of their favored Republican-lite, No Labels, Wall Street-financed “center-left” (read “centrists”). Sorry, boys. The left-wing radicals are now a majority of the country. Deal with it.
1
If you’re writing an article where feminists are part of the “cultural extremists”, maybe rethink your thesis. Also, didn’t you write a thing decrying the loss of super rich, white, Protestants as our political leaders?
1
I want affordable secure health care, urgent action on climate, infrastructure improvements, and a tax system that doesn’t promote a worsening income disparity. I don’t care if it comes from a centrist or a socialist. The GOP would like us to think these very reasonable policies are extreme and will cause the sky to fall which is complete poppycock. These are policies supported by a majority of Americans.
1
I’m a Democrat, and I approve this message.
A portion of the zealous base demands that the party give them something to vote for. But a much larger portion of the country, Democrats included, finds that zealotry something to vote against. The evidence I’ve seen over the last few years is that the left can match the lunatic right tick for hate-filled, totalitarian tock.
1
"ideologically maximalist on everything touching gender or race or sexuality or immigration"
Right, I keep forgetting it's a dangerous time, above all, for (white) men.
Ross, tell us what you really think.
Douthat loves to criticize the so-called left for not accommodating his Catholic-inspired social views, but he never just comes out and admits what a society operating on HIS cultural principles would look like: no abortion, ever; no sex outside of marriage, including masturbation, and no sex in marriage except to make babies; no gay marriage or LGTBQ rights whatsoever; no contraception, ever; patriarchy everywhere, including an obedient wife; anti-science (ask Galileo); treat the environment as the plaything of humans, created in God’s image and set over all other creatures; a central, defining role for a cadre of unmarried, supposedly celibate, all-male misfits who “talk to God”. Is the Left hostile to Ross’s cultural views? Why, yes. It’s why we have fought for a better world against his cultural views since, oh, the Enlightenment.
2
The obstruction and demonizing by the GOP of the moderate Obama was toxic to our politics and affects us to this day. Trump is an abscess on our Republic, and right wing propaganda and internet manipulation is pumping poison in our veins.
Personally, I find the stream of articles about the Democratic party's shift to "the Left"(??) tiresome. Especially coming from critics of the party like Ross Douthat. I remember clearly when the Republican party invented a term "RINO" to punish and ultimately remove members who sought to govern via compromise. I remember when a bomb throwing radical Newt Gingrich rose to power b "nationalizing Congressional politics", thereby ending local representation in DC other than in name only. I remember this same RINO-castigating party repeatedly calling Bill Clinton and Al Gore and John Kerry and Barack Obama 'radical left wing idealogues'.
Clinton and Obama tried to compromise with the GOP. In fact, the ACA included more than 20 GOP ideas voted on in subcommittee and presented to the House floor in final form. The GOP responded by voting, to a member, NO on the entire proposal.
Meanwhile, the GOP has self defined itself as a hateful, fearmongering racist political party whose champion is a mentally unstable carnival clown whose criminal past is just now coming to light.
So, spare me the self righteous faux analysis of the Democratic party. Put forth ideas, not slogans, and see where you get, Mr. Douthat.
3
"We have a swelling Democratic 2020 field in which a capital-S Socialist is arguably the front-runner..."
No, a Democratic Socialist. There's a big difference and RD knows it.
2
Sadly, it hasn't occurred to this columnist that the democratic party is in fact a centrist party--being so right wing, he is unable to make the distinction.
2
I used to vote for Democrats. I stopped in 2000. That's not to say that I voted for Republicans, I just stopped voting for Democrats. (I voted for Trump because he was not HRC, not because he was running as a Republican). At any rate, it sickens me to see what the Democratic Party has become, what is evolving in to. Democrats of the past - Jefferson, Jackson, FDR, JFK, LBL - must be rolling over in their graves right now.
Especially FDR, whose New Deal brand is now being trashed by a political novice calling for a "Green New Deal"! It may be a catchy phrase but it's going nowhere, nowhere fast, because it would involve an enormous increase in taxes which me and thousands of Americans do not want to pay as we are taxed enough as it is! And besides, the New York Post recently exposed AOC for the hypocrite she is by leaving behind a huge carbon footprint evidenced by over $20,000 in taxi, Uber, Lyft, and other fares.
https://nypost.com/2019/03/02/gas-guzzling-car-rides-expose-aocs-hypocrisy-amid-green-new-deal-pledge/
The Democratic Party is becoming an Orwellian Animal Farm, in which the rules apply to some pigs not all. Cheers!
1
That's right Ross. We've had it with Republican-Lite; Clinton's willingness to give in to reactionary Republican crooks and liars discredited the Democratic Party for the past five elections; Obama was, regrettably, too much of compromiser and ended up with almost nothing; and what he got was watered down. We're not tolerating that bilge anymore. We have had it with that bipartisan kumbaya nonsense that gets us nowhere. There is no compromise with bad faith Republican criminals and neo-fascists, and this has been true since that fiend Gingrich trashed our political rhetoric and equated compromise with surrender for GOP obstructionists, liars and seditionists. We want the Republican Party totally and utterly defeated, investigated and tried and jailed for their 40 year campaign to destroy American democracy, and consigned to the ash heap of history where they have long belonged. And we want REAL Democrats - not Centrist Democrats, not Democrats Lite -we want Democratic Socialists, FDR Democrats, Progressive Democrats - whatever the Times wants to call them when they inevitably throw shade on them - defeating Republican criminals and ushering in a new era of a government that works for the vast majority of the people - not the Koch Brothers, the NRA, banksters, insurance vampires, Big Oil Big Pharma and the plutocrats who with their Republican stooges, have all but ruined this once great country.
1
Every day another NY Times columnist (3 in the last 3 days) writes an op-ed piece telling the Democrats to move away from the bad, bad lefty types like AOC and closer to the "center." The center being far to the right of Richard Nixon.
And let's make some incremental changes to our health care system, so that the insurance and pharmaceutical companies don't have their obscene profits cut too quickly. Never mind how many of us die in the interim.
1
"...and consistently overread victories — on same-sex marriage above all..." The left thought gay people deserved just as much right to be married as straight people; the Supreme Court agreed. How have we "overread" this?
"...a new feminism that’s pushing the party ever-further from the center on abortion..." The Democrats have been pro-choice for decades. How has this changed?
"...a new cohort of white liberals who are actually to the left of many African-Americans on racial issues..." Name one!
Douthat is great at scare-mongering and concern-trolling about the ascendant left, but weak indeed at addressing and rebutting our actual policy positions—and weaker still at understanding how the right wing's intellectual and moral failings have helped make these allegedly far-left positions more and more palatable to the American public. Remove the plank from your own eye, Ross, then you can criticize the speck in ours.
1
Yes, the Democrats still have a center. It is the Republicans who do not.
239
@JMartin Clearly you are not familiar with the Overton window shift that has occurred in the last 20 years. The Left has plunged ever further left while the Right has actually moved to the Left. If there is a center Left is it most likely what you folks consider Right Wing at this point.
5
@Mystery Lits
The above comment is an example of someone seriously living in an alternate universe. Sorry, no way to sugar coat this.
33
@Mystery Lits
What? This is nonsense. The American right has moved so far rightward since the 1980's that today it toes the line dangerously close to fascism. Meanwhile, the American left, prior to 2016, had moved so far rightward that it had become nearly indistinguishable from the Republican party of Ronald Reagan. Since 2016 a new left-wing movement has gathered strength, and is ascendant within the Democratic party. However, even that movement's most leftward policy positions (Medicare-for-all, the GND) are largely still rightward of the center in every other major developed nation.
Based on your comment I suspect you are likely a devote viewer of Fox News. It's the only way I can explain a view so divorced from reality.
57
There is a time for the stability of consensus, but there is also a time for the clarity of rupture. At the moment, what many Americans and Europeans want above all is clarity in politics; and they find it at the ends of the political spectrum. Another time will come when the centre will become appealing once again; but it will be a different centre from what we have now: a centre that will have found convincing answers to the legitimate and plausible concerns of today's radicals.
While some of the commenters have disparaged the current crop of Democratic potential nominees, I applaud them all. They bring many important discussions to the table. This is real democracy.
The people will sort out what they are ready to embrace.
Look what Sanders did last time! He mainstreamed a series of issues - especially healthcare and education.
Each one of these contenders brings a fresh look at the issues. Delaney brings a benevolent business attitude, Warren brings income inequality issues, Brown (my favorite so far) brings a progressive posture to a practical platform, Buttigieg is eloquent in his effort to be inclusive and not dismissive of those who may have supported Trump. Booker wants to be a uniter. Harris wants to fight hard to protect us from intolerant right wing meddling in our personal lives.... and so much more. It's all good!
Ross, we don't care what the labels are. Slightly left, way left, centerist...so what? We just want someone we can trust. Someone who can complete a sentence without mocking others. Someone who might use Twitter maybe once a week to congratulate someone doing something right or nice. Someone who will gather experts around her and believe in science.
Someone who could be a role model for our kids. Someone who respects the office and the law. Someone who doesn't lie many times a day. Are we being too fussy?
Labels, schmabels.
2
The whole right wing hysteria over "socialism" in America would be laughable if we did not already know that the right wingers have been proven to be the most uninformed people in the country. Let's face this fact: there is no socialism in America (unless you want to count the VA medical system, the Post Office, etc). And there are no real socialists - ie, not a single politician is promoting state ownership of the means of production (ie. the definition of Socialism). Even that supposedly socialist proposal of Medicare for All is simply a government run insurance program. All the medical care is delivered by private institutions. Even that would not prevent private insurance for those that want more coverage for whatever.
So, please all you right wingers, please learn something: taxing and spending is NOT "socialism." It is simply a society deciding how to spend money. And yes, some will pay more in taxes, some less. It's just the way the real world works.
1
Since the election of Regan,Democrats have moved to the center to try to win elections. In doing so they left behind the middle and lower segments of the economy. They also let the conservative movement continue to privatize health care, ignore income inequality, and call climate change a hoax .the newly elected have been given a mandate for radical change. It is their job to convince the electorate that this change is needed. Only time will tell if they can succeed. But a moderate approach of the last 40 years has only led to the frustration that gave us Mr. Tump.
4
It took the election of Trump to return the Democratic party from a center-right party to a truly centrist party.
Hopefully in the coming years as the younger generation comes up, we can finally move the party a bit left of center.
1
Ideally the Dems should find a candidate that can articulate for the masses the position that we don't need more or less "government" but a government that WORKS for "the general welfare," not the broken kind we have now. However, in these tribal times, that may not be possible anymore.
1
This is exactly right. The so-called centrists stand for the worst of both worlds: Maximalist social liberalism and 'conservative' economic policy - a misnomer, it really is just reverse socialism, redistribution to the top. That is policy for the donor class: Those 3.5% of Americans who are socially on the left and economically on the right.
The vast majority of the voters however are exactly the opposite. And in a multi-party system a party that is socially conservative and economically liberal would blow the competition out of the water. Unfortunately the entrenched system blocks the rise of such a third party, and the radical activist fringes have a stranglehold on both existing parties, so nothing changes.
3
There are only centrists in the Democratic party. Bernie Sanders is a centrist. No, seriously. Sanders supports universal health care, along with the Tories in the UK, Merkel's Christian Democrats in Germany and every other right-wing party, whether far or center, elsewhere in the western world. Sanders wants action on climate change, along with these right-wing parties. Sanders supports affordable higher education without crippling fees, along with these right-wing parties. Sanders wants a stop to corruption and outlandish donations to buy favors from politicians, along with these right-wing parties. The economy is the only area where Sanders maps slightly to the left from typical right-wing parties, so I guess that would make him a centrist.
The only extremists in the US are in the GOP. They map to the far right of all center-right parties elsewhere, on the economy, social issues and immigration. Mr. Douthat, our closeted Trump supporter, need not worry about "centrists" in the Democratic party. He should worry more about the fact that the US apparently is no longer a western country, thanks to the GOP.
7
No one who endlessly supports the Republican Party and the Catholic Church can credibly speak of "cultural centrism".
This is the reality that the GOP - and the Pope - have danced around, trying so hard to deflect, dissemble and distract.
No one but zealots with blood in their eyes can fail to see that neither institution is compatible with "cultural centrism" or even common every day decency.
As far as left of center 'taking over', the Democratic Party has moved rightward over the last forty years while the country has moved left. After all, MediCare was passed in 1965 - 54 years ago! - and Democrats are only now getting back to the place they were when LBJ shoved it through massive Republican resistance.
The GOP is so incredibly far right that even decades-old policies like civil rights and universal health care seem 'radical'.
2
What America needs is not centrists, leftists, or right-wingers. It needs politicians who are fully committed to the flourishing of everyone in this country - physical flourishing, emotional flourishing, social flourishing, intellectual flourishing, cultural flourishing and every other kind of well-being that the social sciences show to be part of our human condition at best. As it happens, the unfettered market is great at helping a relatively small percentage of us flourish but not all of us. Those who would regulate the market are not raging leftists but ethical moralists. Similarly, those of us who support full rights and autonomy for women, people of color, LGBTQ folks, Muslims, and other devalued groups don't hate men or religion (many of us are men, religious, or both); we simply think members of those groups have the same inherent worth and dignity as men, white people, heterosexuals, Christians, and other valued groups. This is not about labels; it is about morals. I encourage all of us to avoid weaponized words and labels and instead ask what we would want for ourselves to have good lives and the commit to love both our neighbors and our enemies as ourselves by supporting their flourishing.
4
Amen, Ross.
Let us not forget one of the legacies of the last "progressive" era--the end of the "smoke-filled room" and the creation of primaries.
As primaries became universal, the quality of candidates declined, culminating with Donald Trump. Not to mention Hillary, who couldn't beat a candidate who didn't actually want to win.
Primaries are now akin to a lottery--with huge fields of wanna-be's, the chance that an outlier will slip through increase exponentially. California's system turned tragedy into farce.
The brilliant progressive idea of the primary has been the main engine of the rightward lurch of the Republican party. It is re-infecting the Democratic party--remember George McGovern?
Primaries cemented the power of money in politics--it was always there, but has never been more decisive. The cost of entry into the political arena is now firmly beyond almost any individual's means and, it is becoming apparent, beyond any party's.
What was designed to enhance democracy has, instead, brought it to a point of stasis.
This is the dilemma of the left: think big, make big mistakes. Devise sweeping, collective solutions; create unintended consequences. Give government new powers; discover the universal truth that those who govern always, always want to govern more.
1
Douthat desperately attempts to keep the focus of the political debate on identity issues, whereas social-economical issues are taking the upper hand, and rightly so.
3
The tax rate on the wealthy in the 1950's was extreme by today's political spectrum lines. Today that rate would be a type of "socialism". So what has changed? Could it be that the powerful/wealthy class changed the lines, the definitions, as to rig the system to benefit their pocketbooks? They got wise to the system, bought media, and defined how socialism is defined today.
4
Some truth and a lot of hyperbole. Yes, there are as many centrists as progressives- Sinema, Klobuchar, King, Tester, Jones, need I go on ....
In every poll I have seen, the moderate Joe Biden is the Dem frontrunner and beats any other Dem in a head to head with Trump.
Perhaps energy and activity and Facebook posts mean something, but ultimately candidates get elected in primaries and general elections and though Sanders, OAC, Warren can win, so can Conor Lamb, Tester, and Klobuchar.
If the progressives manage to emulate the tea party and force moderates out of the party it will only advantage the GOP. Keep the big tent. I will support your progressive winner and you support my moderate. The GOP and ?Douthat want to see the internecine war.
1
This article should be retitiled “What’s left of the CULTURAL center-left.”
While the Democratic Party has definitely lurched to the left on social issues (to some extent as a rebuke to trump), its mainstream remains solidly center left on economic issues. The perception that they have moved far left economically is a result of the intense press coverage that AOC and company receive; a large majority of Democrats in government are firmly pro market, are weary to tax the super wealthy, etc.
Warren and Bernie are the only two current major candidates that are true economic lefties. Those like Booker, Harris, Beto, and Gillebrand tout their socially left chops, but most certainly are center left on economic issues.
And let us not forget that Joe Biden is a front runner for the nom. That alone should prove to you the center left is alive and well.
1
DeLong argued in a Vox interview that President Obama governed with Romney health care, GHW Bush foreign policy, McCain climate policy, and Clinton tax policy. And in spite of his policies being weighted in favor of republicans, he received no cooperation from them because your party had moved to the radical right by that time dragging the "center" with it.
So one could argue that President Obama was a centrist, or Republican lite, if you prefer. You can see what that got us. Beginning now, if you want a centrist government you'll have to dig up (perhaps literally) some centrist Republicans who think for themselves and cooperate with the Democrats for the good of the country instead of power for the Republican party.
2
I wonder how loudly those of my fellow seniors who claim to abhor all things socialist would scream if their Medicare and Social Security were taken away?
4
Centrist Democrats finally realized that although their policies and philosophies were necessary and effective for governing and working with Republicans to do what is best for the country, they are completely irrelevant now. Not because the Democratic Party as a whole has taken a decidedly left turn but because Republicans started running ads attacking other Republicans for daring to compromise or work across the aisle for the common good. And it has only worsened under Trump. I only hope that increased voting access and decreased gerrymandering will someday give voters a choice among reasonable, open-minded candidates of all parties, but especially Republicans and keep the fringe extremists with their litmus tests and lockstep, monolithic thinking out of government.
It's my theory, not accepted by anyone except me apparently, that if the middle class and working class were doing ok economically, the rest of the social issues would recede a lot further into the background. Since our leaders simply REFUSE to do anything to ease the 40 year economic strangulation of the lower half of our society, social issues have become flash-points for our anger. The powers-that-be know this, and it is one more mechanism to keep the people distracted, while they plunder.
8
There is a form of anosognosia (lack of awareness of illness) resulting from damage to the right cerebral hemisphere in which the person has no awareness of the left side of their body and indeed the entire left side of the world. It is called left hemi-neglect. These people, when asked to make a mark at the midpoint of a horizontal line, place the mark all the way towards the right end of the line. I believe that Mr. Douthat should see a neurologist and be tested for this disorder.
4
All of the centrifugal forces that Ross describes in this article are playing out in mirror image, on both the right and the left. That's why we have such a polarized and divided country.
In theory, centrism is the answer to this problem. The left and right deeply mistrust one another's political leaders. Hence, re-unifying the country would require voters to start judging candidates differently: not just by how much a candidate appeals to their own political views, but by how widely respected and trusted the candidate is to voters of all political stripes (not just their own). By this measure of a candidacy, a Clinton or a Trump or a Warren or a Cruz would score very low. A Hickenlooper or a Kasich would score higher.
But in practice, the centrist solution to polarization seems far from reach. Both parties have been too successful at scare mongering, so that voter choices are driven more by loss aversion than by hope for the future. But as a centrist, I still hold out hope that decent people who want a unified country will eventually rebel at the ballot box, and vote out the extremists on both sides.
One hopeful sign is that the Clintons appear to be done in politics. It is doubtful that any of them will ever hold office again. The sooner the same can be said of the Trumps, the better.
1
I suppose one could just let each party be what it will be, district by district, state by state, representative by representative, Senator by Senator, and Electoral College and Supreme Court appointee to boot.
Then, let the crucible of the Constitution itself forge, and meld, and temper whatever amalgam or alloy it can to create some kind of policy, however transitory it may be.
This may be what normal looks like now.
Still, an aspiring Democrat congressperson, in a swing state, would be wise to propose “safe, legal and rare” abortion stances, and even let guys keep most of their guns, and perhaps a cap on how many children an unwed mother can get welfare for, and try Medicare for More, (allowing coverage of more chronic diseases, such as kidney disease), rather than Medicare for All. And still be tough on China, but protect our soy farmers.
As a person from one of a handful of districts, in a midwestern blue state, that flipped back from Dem to GOP in 2018, I know that, in the hearts and minds of folks in the heartland, the center is very much in play.
Both parties need Centrists. If we elect an Warren, Castro or Sanders, the pendulum will swing too far left, and the Right will dig in its collective heal. More will be accomplished with the reasonable minds that tend to be located in the Center.
1
I believe I am a non-partisan, centrist right voter. Will the Democrats do everything possible to deflect my vote? I worry....
I'm a left-leaning democrat on most issues.
There are fair points here about the past failures of the center-left, but the problem with the "socialist" wing of the democratic party is less about their goals and more about their practicality and ability to deliver.
I agree that climate change is the biggest issue we face. A Green New Deal sounds great. So how do we fund it?
I don't trust for a second in the "tax the wealthy at 70%" solution that comes up. We tried that already, and real revenue hardly budged. We need a better, clearer answer for how we fund these dream initiatives.
Further, how does the far left imagine anything getting past a senate which, let's face it, isn't flipping democrat anytime in the near future? How do they intend to keep moderates on board by further alienating them on Healthcare? They can form a coalition with the center or leave them behind. They're not winning 2020 without the center on board.
Terms like "centrist" and "left-wing" can be counterproductive if the desire is to achieve a lasting unity among the electorate's disparate parts, if the desire is to solve problems for citizens on Main Street. Refreshing candidates like Andrew Yang seem to be what the nation needs to move forward and progress in the digital era, given the anxiety about automation. The others, like Sanders, whom I credit for saying what needed to be said in 2016, are still divisive in their constant identifying of a boogie man ("the billionaires"). According to the laws of karma, that just inspires greater conflict and division.
There is a lot to say about Mr. Douthat's definition of the 'center,' as well as the hilarity of a Republican calling out the left for allowing extremists to take over the party. However, I couldn't really get past this: "It’s a story of a new feminism that’s pushing the party ever-further from the center on abortion."
If feminists are getting louder on abortion, it's not because they are trying to push the country to the left. It's because they're desperately trying to preserve the rights granted 40+ years ago by Roe v. Wade, in the face of a long and successful campaign by an extremist pro life contingent to chip away at that decision and restrict access for millions of women across the country. Crisis Pregnancy Centers masquerading as real clinics, absurd regulations restricting the operations of clinics and the information (or misinformation) doctors are required to provide, waiting periods based on non existent science - this is NOT 'the center' and fighting against these things does not make a person a radical.
1
The 2018 election was largely a referendum on Trump, and the Dems won that election.
Trump is eager to change the subject from his possible collision with Russia, his dishonesty and corruption, in 2020.
The Dems would do well to stay on message: Trump's corruption.
Socialism, Medicare for all, etc. are highly controversial policies where honest informed people can differ, and they are off message
for the Dems.
The arguments on left wing policies distract voters from Trump's corruption and incompetence, and therefore these policy proposals help Trump and hurt the Democratic Party in the 2020 election - by being "off message" for the Democrats.
The key aim of all Democrats - whether far Left or centrist - should be the elimination of the Electoral College.
2
Good luck with that. Meanwhile the EC prevents dictatorship by the majority. That’s a good thing as we’re finding out sadly in Democrat-soaked Oregon.
The GOP has become a parody of a political party. Listening to affluent, white, Protestant, college-educated, heterosexual males, explain to all who do not check those boxes, that aboslutely everything we seem to want is quite beyond the pale and impossible to provide, sounds like nothing more than the monotonous sound of privilege droning on and on.... far from being an aberation, Mr Trump and Mr McConnell, for the first time in years, may very well be the epitome of Republican transparency.
3
Funny, but last time I checked, the GOP is now run by a white supremacist who isn't tearing down walls, he's building them, and even Lincoln would be referring to him as the leader of the Know-Nothing party since the GOP has veered so far to the far right, they'd call Lincoln a "leftist".
Does the GOP still have centrists?
No, it does not. Except for perhaps three individuals in the Senate who probably won't last longer than 2 more years, it does not have centrists.
Even George Will voted for Democrats, so Ross, I don't care what you call me.
2
I feel myself a moderate or centrist Democrat. I would be willing to vote for a moderate republican, if the Republican Party could ever put forth one on a good ticket. However, it seems to me that Clinton was the last of centrist democrats and she was shredded by moderates.
It IS time to past the baton left. I would not have supported Bernie Sanders because he was far too liberal, but now I have started to listen to him closely. I embrace the WOKE young generation.
It is too late to make a deal with the devil. The new Trump GOP has gone off the deep end. I would take an honest socialist over a corrupt mob faction. I cannot stomach anymore Trump type politics.
2
I'm an old Clinton Democrat. It's not me that has changed. It's the climate. We're in a climate emergency, folks.
2
@steckelj
We do have a climate emergency. The global temperature is climbing, global greenhouse gas emissions are increasing, the oceans are warming, the ice sheets are melting, the coral reefs are bleaching, the flying insects are disappearing, extreme weather events are increasing so you would think that it is time to set aside all the bickering about health care plans, etc and come together so try to save civilization before it is too late but it still isn't happening. If not now, when?
1
If this country is to survive, let us pray that the neoliberal frauds (like the two pictured here) are pushed aside forever and a brand new, authentic democrat party (or another party) emerges to take on the wealthy. Note that I did not say the "republicans". That party is dead. We need to clearly see who the opposition really is. The opposition isn't the criminals pretending to be an opposition party. Like the Progressives of the early and mid 20th century, see the real opposition.
The wealthy, and all they control.
I eagerly await Douthats next column about how the Republicans have been eagerly and swiftly abandoning the center since 2002 and championing division and hate and embracing rascist and sexist policies while restricting voting rights.
Because he’s a centrist, right?
4
No the DEms do not have centrists. They were thrown out with Bill Clinton's move to the right of reagan.
No one in the DEM party is anything but a right winger. the only reason they seem leftist to some is how far right the GOP has gone.
I really couldn't agree more with Douthat about this. (And, if it matters, I'm a long-time Democrat who donated to and volunteered for Obama.) The left's spastic swerve toward socialism is worrisome--but not nearly so worrisome as its lurch toward cultural and political anti-liberalism.
The illiberal left is now fairly open about its opposition to free speech, its opposition to regulating immigration, its anti-white racism and anti-male sexism, and its desire to ruin all who disagree. It sees the USA, capitalism, the Enlightenment, and, indeed, the West in general as the roots of all evil (all not caused by whiteness, maleness, or masculinity, at any rate). It sees itself as pro-science (and the right, of course, as the opposite), but, in fact, it has co-opted science that impinges on its political goals and bent that science leftward (see, for example, the left's ostentatiously anti-scientific views on transgenderism).
Whatever liberals remain should, IMO, be more alarmed by the left's illiberal trajectory than about anything currently happening on the right. Trump will be gone in less than two years. The antiliberal madness that's gripped the left comes with no discernible expiration date, unfortunately.
Who cares? There is no center-right to hold hands with anymore, and there hasn't been for a long time. Reagan was the beginning of the end -- you can draw a straight line from 1980 to Trump. This right-wing radical descent has been going on for nearly 40 years. Why should progressives, who typically care about the poor and the dispossessed, bend themselves into a pretzel waiting for conservatives to come to their senses so that meaningful compromise and progress can be made? The only sensible path for progressives is to be true to their values and persuade enough of America to join along and halt this slide into the abyss. What Douthat is pointing to is pure fantasy.
4
I am so bloody tired of labels. It’s policy I care about and an atmosphere where options can be debated.
Centrist and liberal and progressive mean different things at different times.
Let’s talk ideas, solutions, even identifying problems like dying because you are just poor enough to not qualify for Medicaid. Or whether the government should provide a safety net for sick people at all.
Then let’s hold the politicians to solutions the majority favors and I am not writing about the majority of rich white regressive people who fund the GOP and so called think tanks or the Federalist society.
1
Nowhere in the world is any of the democrats' proposed policies considered "far left" unless you're getting your definitions from autocrats and dictators. Heck, Ronald Reagan would be seen as a raging lefty by today's pseudo far right definitions. Most of the neutral ideas they propose are already implemented in modern successful countries.
The leftward drift of Democrats may be louder but that does not mean there aren't large number of those who will vote towards the center once the smoke clears. Run Biden run!
Hilarious. In Europe these so-called Leftists would be considered to be vanilla centrists. Similarly, when a Republican witters on about "Socialism" from the Democratic party my eyes roll heavenward. Socialism? Really?
I prefer to describe the left wing of the Dems as progressives, because they are, but they aren't Left Wing. No, Sir.
2
Again with the Democrats. Is Ross changing his stripes. There is so much wrong with Republicans and conservatives theses days that I am sure Ross has plenty of topics to work with there. We don’t want or need His input into Democrats. For all we know he is trying to sow discord among us. So Democrats ignore this column. A conservative columnist should write about those he knows not about something of which he knows little.
I wonder if Ross recognizes that American right-wing political conservatism that very expressly claims to be God's manifestation of heaven on earth is theologically much more pernicious than what he worries is a pseudo-church of center-left liberalism.
1
I cannot for the life of me understand why people call the current Republican Party “right-wing conservative.” Adding trillions in deficit spending and supporting abuse of presidential power are not conservative goals. Let’s just call them Limbaugh Loonies. Dedicated to coarsening every aspect of our public life. The stuff they do, the stuff they support, have nothing to do with conservatism.
The wing part is correct —- they are way out there. But it isn’t conservatism.
2
OMG! Has nobody read Tim Wu's good article on "The Suppresion of the Supermajority"? I would argue that the statistics shown there define the center. Those against those policies (to numerous to mention) are in fact on the fringe.
The Republicans and their conservative backers want to call those policies socialistic because it polls good for them. President Trump and I would argue the Republican party like "dumb people". It is easier for them to scream socialism rather than sustantively discuss actual policies that affect all Americans as well as their base.
There are no statesmen/women left in the Republican party. That is the problem in America-not the canard of what is socialism or not.
1
Strange how so many see the possibility of a Trump win in 2020. The man lost the popular vote in 2016 by a fairly large margin, and the 'sunny ways and sweet nature' (sarcasm!) of his administration is not likely to draw much support outside of his rabid base. The man is toast in 2020. My mouth to God's ear!
2
The most progressive, most liberal of Democrats, would not have much difficulty fitting in with Chancellor Merkel's right party, the Christian Democratic Union.
On matters social, the US remains behind Bismarck!
1
Didn't Democrats just win 2018 elections by a landslide? It seems most voters like the Democratic party just the way it is, Ross.
2
It is amazing just how obsessed Douthat is with the culture wars. Virtually all Douthat columns are based on his opposition to abortion, feminism, gay marriage, LGBTQ rights, more open sexual behavior (per Douthat’s Catholicism). For Douthat, everything that’s wrong with the country can be explained by his side losing the culture wars. Apparently, the decline of center left Democrats can be, at least partly, explained by the left setting the agenda for cultural issues in the Democratic Party over the last 15 years. Per Douthat, if the center left Democrats had simply opposed gay marriage, LGBTQ rights, feminism, more open sexuality, then centrist Democrats would win every election. It is the insane “analysis” of someone obsessed with ensuring that everyone follows the teachings of their conservative version of the Catholic Church - that’s all Douthat writes about.
Clinton, Rubin and company - the neoliberals, the Democratic corporatists working with Republican corporatists - dismantled Glass-Steagall and banking regulations in the 90’s, that laid foundation for the Great Recession. The poor and middle class have been left behind for 30-40 years by the corporate wings of both parties. The Democratic Party is still far better - on cultural and economic issues - than the Republican Party - the current Trump version has totally lost its mind, but the McConnell/Ryan version blocked everything also. That’s why centrist Democrats are in trouble. Not because of Douthat’s obsessions.
2
Ross, Ross ... gosh are you missing the obvious; OF COURSE the Democrats have a "center left:" fleeing Republicans. There just aren't very many of them.
Your problem is that you refuse to see that Hillary Clinton is pretty close to a "Rockefeller Republican," and that Obama was only a little bit to the left of HRC ... and that DeLong's "Rubin Wing" was thoroughly demolished by the demographic extinction of "Rockefeller Republicans."
At the moment the United States is dealing with the question of whether we will become a Putin-style authoritarian oligarchy /kakistocracy riding on the resentments of LBJ's "lowest white man."
I am enough of an optimist to believe Trumpism will collapse of its own internal disasters, but the question of whether there can be a "center" afterwards remains to be seen. Trump's people won't be happy, and the question who their next leader is will be very interesting.
Ross, you’re now attacking the Democratic Party with assumption and innuendo (which you’re good at), and ignoring the reason for the leftward shift in politics due to the rise of fundamentalist, over reaction by the right to a black man in office (which you should be ashamed of). Obama’s biggest fault was thinking he could convince people through making them think and act with purpose for the better of the nation; that healthcare for even the most underprivileged was a good thing for society (which it is), instead of its death knell (which is wasn’t). A national debate should be about what helps a society, not what one side or the other views as detrimental to business or their religious beliefs. Have any of the recent rollbacks in education, environmental laws, banking or immigration helped propel us in a positive direction? Have the lies of this president and his propaganda arm Fox, or any of his subordinates and enablers in the Senate put a positive and forward thinking spin on our daily lives? Have they helped control costs and rents, increase production and consumer satisfaction? The rapidly rising left of the Democrats is the overreaction to years of continual backtracking and blocking of anything good for this nation because of reactionary politics by the republicans. If they care about this country it any form, they need to stand up to the rot at the top and say “enough”, and maybe that centralist your seeking will emerge.
2
Relativity: The Overton Window.
This far left, far right equivalency is so tired. There is no real far left at this point. Who are these far left radicals? It seems that if you are young, a Democrat, a and win office, you will be labeled far left. The far right is alive and well and were hanging out this week at CPAC. I guess the press needs a bogyman from the left to counter a real alive and well far right front.
The descriptions here of the Left's current extreme positions are under played. The whole tenure and projection of what they advocate is both extreme and severely irresponsible. Couple this with the Soviet style zeal that almost all of their "stars" seem incapable of hiding, and it all adds up to a dangerous problem.
Is it a lack of real life experience that fuels such foolishness? Or, maybe, they are true believers. The current leadership of the democrat party seems to caved in to them.
Democratic party is - right of the center in the true world.
GOP is a radical party by any definition.
1
The GOP drove American conservatism out of the right lane and into the ditch of authoritarianism (with a distinct whiff of Neo-Nazism). Excuse me, but this does NOT redefine what a "centrist" is! In the context of world democracies, the Democratic Party is staunchly centrist, and its "socialist" wing is just a regular left, the kind in power in many flourishing democracies. Many Americans are growing tired of our 19th-century "exceptionalism" and would like to join our European brethren in the 21st century.
1
Yes, there are centrist Democrats: me. But it's the young who elect a Democratic president. But they are so beaten down by the problems the baby boomers caused -- climate change, cost of college, income inequality -- that they believe the only solution is socialism.
1
This is hogwash. And I am tired of Mr. Douthat giving advice to the Democrats.
A majority of Americans want universal health care.
A majority of Americans believe that climate change is man made and a threat to civilization.
A majority of Americans want women's right to choose protected.
A majority of Americans want humane immigration laws. At the very least, a large majority of Americans do not want to see immigrant children detained and brutalized by our government.
A majority of Americans want sensible gun controls.
A majority of Americans believe that this country is a secular republic.
And why are these not acted upon in good faith? I think we know why and it's spelled G-O-P and it is empowered by obscene amounts of corporate cash.
Instead of diagnosing the oppositon's problems, perhaps Mr. Douthat should examine why his party of choice is dooming this country to failure for thirty years in the name of the holy dollar.
2
Why is the right so very concerned about the center, center left? So much of a mess to clean up in their own scorched earth party barn. As soon as any one of them opines over long lost 'compromise' dreams, I know a foolish fellow is writing. Who could ever trust a GOP talking head, who invokes 'compromise' as a desired space? Like we simply forgot the eight years under President Obama, and the last two under Ryan and McConnell.
What Douhat ignores is the behavior of current Republicans. It is not that, in Douhat’s words it’s an “internally divided mess”.The fact is it wants no dialogue with Democrats. It’s not a Trump issue, though clearly he has exacerbated it, but goes back to the very beginning of the Obama years. In the Clinton years it was possible to work with Gingrich.
However it’s not coincidence that the TeaParty started within weeks of Obama’s inauguration, with its message of no deals, no how! It’s no coincidence that McConnell opted for total obstruction, no matter the cost to the economy and to the nation,in his expressed aim of making Obama a one-term President.
Sadly, on issue after issue, the Republicans told Obama he was wasting his time trying for a deal. And their servile defense of Trump, a man they know to be a stain on our polity has shown anew that there can be no centrist consensus between Democrats and “Moderate” Republicans, since they, for all intents and purposes, are extinct!
So centrist Democrats know that if they win in 2020, the compromises will be between the various strands of the party, ignoring the GOP.
In the “culture wars”,where are areas for agreement? Clearly not on abortion, as may be judged by laws from Red States, repudiated by the SCOTUS. Not on LGBT rights denounced as if inspired by Satan. Not on women’s rights. And in the end not anywhere.
The Republicans have made it clear they want no part of a deal. So be it. The deals will be maybe towards the left
1
Dear Ross, this is a very key statement “Because the country as a whole has also shifted left since 2000, that kind of writing-off will not prevent the Democrats from winning elections; it probably won’t prevent them from beating Donald Trump. “ I agree that the country as a whole has shifted left since 2000. The stupidity of our wars, the Great Recession, the impact of foreign economic competition and the robotization of production have left many yearning for progressive solutions. Yet, the Republican Party and the so called center left offer nothing new in the face of dire problems and in fact have moved to the right. The Republicans offer trickle down economics and roll back of the ACA and environmental regulations as the way to achieve prosperity as if it was 1980. What do the Center Left Democrat’s offer? More compromise with Republicans? The Center Left leaders are Pelosi and Schumer. What alternative do Pelosi and Schumer offer to the Green New Deal and Medicare for all? Pelosi mocks GND and Schumer’s brilliant strategy in the Senate vote is to have all the Dems vote present. Where do they stand on Medicare for all? The country desperately needs solutions for so many problems. The old Center Left has no ability to create or deliver them. Just like the Never Trumpers have nothing to offer. This will and should be a fight between Progressives and Conservatives. Do nothing or evolve. The Center will have to choose sides.
Do we need a center left?
The answer is no.
Trump is never going to go away voluntarily.
The craven, gutless Republicans who are now disgracing this country will never allow him to be impeached.
He can only be defeated at the polls.
I believe Nadler is playing this correctly.
Investigate Individual-1 day and night for the next two years.
Drag his and his family’s criminalities including those he committed in kindergarten into the bright light-of-day.
Speak to us again of his visits to the dressing rooms of teen-age beauty contestants,
Call upon every graduate of Trump University, elderly person he has evicted and woman he has wronged on an airplane to testify in open session.
Count every hour not spent attacking him an hour irretrievably wasted.
The object must be to make just enough Republicans sick-and-tired of hearing another word about him to carry the Democratic nominee in 2020 -- whoever he or she may be -- to a clean and decisive victory.
Getting rid of him this way also rids us of Pence who -- if Trump is successfully impeached -- could be plaguing the nation until 2028.
3
The Blue Dogs held the Ideological Center in American politics.
They went to the Wall for Obamacare. Now AOC threatens them with primary challenges.
Having said that, I do think we Old Blues have one more win left in us. And we shall see what happens in the Primaries.
having said that, if a Left-ish candidate gets the nomination, we will vote Blue. Will the Young radicals reciprocate if Klobuchar or another Centrist [prevails??
the dems have no centrists left and no one who is willing to compromise or work across the aisle.
Certainly true that if Clinton had matched his personal behavior to his stated center-right values, we would have had President Gore and hundreds of thousands of maimed, damaged, and dead Iraq war vets would be alive and well. But guess what, he was no more sincere about his "christian values" than the GOP he borrowed them from...
And the point that Douthat quotes that is MOST convincing is that dialing back liberalism to seek common ground with the GOP has yielded NOTHING, and damaged much, like Obamacare and the Supreme Court, to name a few enormous failures.
1
We had had centrist democratic leadership under the Obama Administration. The GOP was intent on thwarting that by any and all means, culminating in the election of an unhinged criminal enterprise to head up our nation. The institutional and personal abdication of power and autonomy by the GOP has been stunning. The chickens are finally coming home to roost. Ya boys brought this on themselves.
1
The cleavage among Democrats is NOT between center-left and far-left, as Douthat and many readers argue. That is an outdated taxonomy. The real division is between those who espouse economic issues that are important to most American families, regardless of color, and those who continue to push identity issues important to urban liberals, issues concerning race and gender.
Democrats cannot win the Electoral College with votes from the urban liberals, alone. They need broad geographic support to win the White House. That is widely understood by political professionals of every stripe.
To that end, Democrats must focus on kitchen-table issues that affect most American families, regardless of color, and put divisive identity issues aside, at least for now. What are those kitchen-table issues? Jobs, wages, taxes, retirement security, health care, child care, children's education, the opioid crisis, and climate change. That covers most of them. They broadly fall under the rubric of "economic" issues.
If Dems want to win the White House in 2020, they have to play down the issues of race and gender that divide Americans, and play up the economic issues that unite Americans.
It’s not that those social issues aren't important. It’s just that winning the Presidency and saving our democracy are MORE important. And economic issues are the key.
1
The problem with this piece is that it scales the political/social position of individuals along a single dimension from right to left.
Although it has the virtue of simplicity, it lacks substance because, in assessing political figures, people instinctively map them in at least two dimensions. In addition to their right-leftness, we consciously or unconsciously are all concerned about the wiseness of individuals to handle the complex responsibilities of consequential political positions that call for wisdom.
The important point is that any useful commentary about candidates for political office should include their attributes on a second scale--wiseness.
What is a wiseness scale? To be wise requires (a) experience relevant to the position, (b) emotional maturity, (c) selflessness. But what is the opposite, the antonym of wise? The best behavioral adjective is "adolescent", that is, individuals who are inexperienced, self-absorbed and unrealistic.
Where this is going is that any sober multidimensional analysis of prominent political figures would position, say, AOC as far left and quite adolescent.
Are the right-left and wise-adolescent dimensions independent of each other? Experience says no? Socialism and adolescence often are conflated. In their inexperience, adolescents have not absorbed the lessons of history: socialist leaders turn to demagogic blame-laying and state oppression in their frustration to achieve their immature agendas (e.g. Green New Deal).
As always, one can count on Mr. Douthat to bring out the most important issues facing the nation. Gay marriage, African- American resentment, transgender bathroom choices, etc.
Let me suggest that the “new left”, doesn’t give a fig about these issues. Only the “center-left” still does because it is afraid of the labels thrown at them by Republicans on these same issues. They have listened to the Republicans for so long, they have forgotten what they stand for. The 2020 left is back to its roots: to the fight of labor vs. capital. It is where it should be. And it is where it will prevail.
1
It seems that the geometrical position of the center has moved to the right continuously for some years, so for Mr. Douthat the present push for the center-left feels like a push for the extreme-left. Workers' values like a living wage, right of health care, etc. have always been center. There is nothing extreme here.
I take issue with the thought that feminists are pushing the country toward some scary place relative to abortion rights. Most of the feminists I know are simply trying to ensure that the modest protections secured 40+ years ago are not eroded.
408
@Kim
Yes. Believing that decisions about abortion belong only to a woman and her doctor is far from radical. In fact, if republicans had not discovered that twisting the truth about abortion was effective demagoguery, they would have adopted this as a conservative position.
47
If you've heard the heartbeat of a fetus and been assured of its healthy viability, as well as that of the mother, and you still end that pregnancy...that is indeed radical.
9
@Kim You have to remember Douthat's a convert, and thus brings a convert's blind zeal.
16
Socialism will come to America only if the capitalists continue to ignore the needs of the common people. High health care costs, poor schools, pollution, and the gig economy, are all just building towards the change.
Most self described socialists are young. They have seen what their parents's moderation has gotten us: income inequality, outright purchasing of legislation, a deteriorating environment. And also college grads driving Uber because that's the best work they can get. You can, like Douthat, say "socialism is bad electoral strategy." But young people don't care, their parents's electoral strategies helped create our current situation. Instead of lecturing young people about why's they're wrong, try listening to them. They are sick of the status quo. Ignore their anger, their worries and their energy at your peril.
380
@Cal Prof I would add to your assessment of this generation the impact of expense and debt associated with a higher education that no longer brings the employment opportunities it used to. Small wonder they're impatient and questioning the inertia of their parents' centrism.
38
@Cal Prof
You seem to have missed Ross' point, that a shift to the left economically is needed electoral move, but what is undermining the Democrats is their lurch to the left on social issues.
13
@Livonian - In which case, Douthat has missed the boat. You will not get the economic shift without the social shift. The fundamental change I see in right-wing politics (and I dropped out of the GOP in 2011) is a complete abnegation of the social contract.
37
Great analysis of the Moderate Dilemma! As a transplant from the Northeast, I’ve cast my vote for Dems and Repubs over the past 40 years. I’ve been a registered Dem, Rep., and Independent over those years. I’m currently sitting with the Dems as any association with the Republican Party would be traitorish to my personal ethic and sense of human decency. I abhor the far left and far right equally. As a centrist I’m not ready to throw in the towel. I agree it’s time for new ideas and faces. “Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi. You are my only hope”.
79
@TF Beaver Whenever I read a commenter writing that they "abhor the far left and far right equally" I have to wonder what the heck they are talking about in the American political context. The so-called "far left" in American politics is essentially European or Canadian social democracy, not the elimination of the kulaks or the collectivization of agriculture. The far right, on the other hand, is an active flirtation with white nationalism and fascism.
This type of false equivalence is why many of us on the (not really far) left of the Democratic Party have serious questions about so-called "centrists'" judgment.
47
@Hank Hoffman The "far-left" in American politics may in policy terms be European or Canadian social democracy. Fine. But they unite that with a sanctimonious belligerence that makes them abhorrent to ordinary, decent human beings. They preach diversity but label bigoted anyone who thinks differently from them. They prefer mob rule to due process. They deplore the Republican party line, but anathematize anyone on their own side who departs a inch from theirs. They deplore all hate except for their own; they deplore all stereotypes except for the ones that are useful to them. They lambast their opponents for ignoring evidence even as they ignore any evidence that doesn't serve their utopian narrative.
They are, in short, smug, hypocritical, puritanical, hectoring, unreasonable, zealous, and just plain nasty. Many of their policies are just fine. But no-one who thinks Trump unfit for office on account of his character should be voting for them either.
23
What policies of what far left do you abhor?
10
I am among those --don't know what percentage we are-- who have shared most of Douthat's cultural conservativism while adhering to left/progressive/social democratic positions on economic and foreign policy matters. There have been no Dem politicians capable of building such a force, although there were hints of this in Sanders 2016 when he dared describe Planned Parenthood as an Establishment lobby and before our "justice" activists laid into him. So that corner of the 2x2 box --economically progressive/socially moderate is empty, and politically iot may be just as well.
1
There seems to be a lot of parsing here without acknowledging how corporate the Democratic Party has become. It seems to me that the "average American" - one who is not wealthy or beholden to a corporate interest - wants decently funded public schools, healthcare that doesn't bankrupt, a roof over his/her head, roads that aren't crumbling, and a job that pays the bills. Where is the candidate who can push for that - if he/she takes all those corporate campaign contributions, how can that person be believed?
1
The Canadian born John Kenneth Galbraith said of conservatism
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of mankind's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the superior moral justification for selfishness."
It is 2019 and the greatest nation that ever was, is engaged in its death rattle.
Here in Canada we are due for another Federal election and for those that think in terms of left right and center the last Federal election shows us that pragmatism and policy are more important than ideology. Six weeks before the last election our democratic socialists were set to assume power. The Liberal Party of Canada swept to power because it sensed where Canadians were and understood after being too long in power our conservatives who were a center right party like American Democrats were no longer popular outside their base.
Our liberals whose forte was always knowing the right narrative moved to the left of our democratic socialists. The labour unions have always been an important part of our social democrats made sure our democratic socialists could not move to the left and the liberals swept to victory.
It is 2019 and I do not believe that America can temper its greed to accommodate the understanding of a small interconnected Global village that realizes the ravenous greed of the World's richest and most powerful can give our children a more secure and fulfilling future.
If there is a future it is truth and understanding that will permit it. Conservatism means death.
1
I'm very much a centrist. I think that Bill Clinton was the most successful recent president from an economic and international political point of view (and I was not and am not interested in his personal follies). Hillary was a disaster as a politician - she failed on her own account; I voted for her anyway as a "least-worst" choice. The current Democratic candidates are frankly appalling and so is our current president. I hope that there is a centrist from either party out there who has some grasp of economics and the world situation.
119
@Kim from Alaska - Anyone who has some grasp of economics is a progressive.
15
@Kim from Alaska Hillary Clinton was a dyed-in-the-wool centrist, and took hits for that. Yet you, 'very much a centrist' considered her merely 'least worst'? Right.
All just reinforces my suspicion, that a 'centrist' is just a conservative by another name. It's a plain fact , for example, that a US 'centrist' would considered quite right-wing in Europe.
31
@Steven Sullivan this is very true, for the longest time the Democrats have been seen as right of center, in relationship to where they would be placed in the European political landscape. Even today they still are for the most part, even Berine and AOC are maybe left of center, but not by much, Americans have a lot to learn about what real "lefties" or proper social democrats really are :)
18
The attention that the left wing of the party is receiving is in part is a decision of major media outlets. Since the November election, Representative Ocasio Cortes has received far more attention than that briefly given to moderate Democrats who succeeded in far more challenging political environments - Does anyone remember Conor Lamb from Pennsylvania and have there been even two or three articles about the Democrat who captured an eternally Republican district in Houston? Much of this movement is a case of the leftists admiring themselves and I fear we are in for a repetition of 1972 with the George McGovern candidacy - loved by the party and rejected on election day,
Instead of saying "cultural extremism," "cultural moderation," "fiscal conservatism," all these generic, amorphous phrases subject to personal interpretation, the lines always moving, it's essential to define exactly where center leaves and encroaches left of center; or center leaves and encroaches right of center. A hyper-link to Kamala Harris' stance on abortion is one attempt to define where Douthat believes cultural extremism is taking root. But who is defining her stance as extreme other than hard right pundits like Douthat and Tucker Carlson. Who gets to draw the lines? Pundits with a mic and a pen?
Center left's lurch to socialism is largely motivated by facts on the ground -- student debt, the wake of destruction after the Great Recession, lack of sufficient healthcare, the price of housing, livable wages, affordable college. It seems AOC's and Sander's and Warren's attempts at tackling these real issues have been ridiculed as off the grid, hyper-left, and, if you ever watch Tucker Carlson, crazy. Perhaps the problem is NOT politicians trying to solve real problems, but pundits who define the terms of our political spectrum with lazy one-liners and outright ridicule. People need solutions. Stop catering to the some pie-in-the-sky undefinable political spectrum and start talking about real problems, real problems. Most people identify with problems AOC, Warren and Sanders want to solve. Maybe their ideas are direct center on the real political spectrum.
3
Ross Douthat’s reference to radically leftist social views only make sense from a radically right perspective. That is where the GOP has gone since the party was taken over by the religious right. That is why there are no partners in the GOP for any moderates, with Democrats or independents. Trump has usurped the religious right despite being irreligious himself and he has added a distinctly ugly and mean-spirited personal slant that can only be described as autocratic.
I don’t think that most Democrats will embrace the left fringe of their party, but then again, I don’t regard women’s rights, tax policy fairness, a broad healthcare mandate and a strong defense of voting rights as being left fringe positions.
2
This column by Mr. Douthat defines the irrational right wing bias that seeks to paint 21st Century progressives as 'pinko's'. Given that contemporary living standards and purchasing power for most millennials has dropped markedly below those of 'Boomers' and 'Gen X'ers', it's only fair that they demand a more equitable share of the nation's wealth. The cutbacks in funding for basic 'quality-of-life' programs is a disgrace shared by both political parties, but moreso that of the Conservatives and the GOP.
Where Ross Douthat misses the point is that his so-called 'leftists' have actually become the new centrists - and as difficult as that might be for him and his fellow reactionaries to accept - they are just going to have to deal with it. The Times are most definitely Changing. The USA is a nation that thrives on innovation and change - and the sorry state of the GOP and Conservatives alike is evidence of their failure to not only accept change - but their abject failure to embrace it.
2
Centrist by whose definition? It is a bitter fact American History that the right wing...those intellectual heirs of the Constitutional compromises to protect slavery (in the name of "small States"), those who instituted and maintained Jim Crow for 100 years after the Civil War, those who fostered moral panics that brought about Prohibition and so fostered the rise of organized crime in the US, and promoted the "Red Scares after both World Wars in order to punish "Premature Antifascists" and FDR liberals, alike...Those people are always allowed by mainstream journalism to define just who and what is "Centrists, Left and Right". Look at the rest of the developed world, and you will see that the economic policies of Clinton and Gore, and Obama would be to the right of center (who and what institutions were bailed out after the last financial crisis...the people who suffered from the economic disruptions or those who caused them?). I would respectfully suggest that Mr. Douthat broaden his reading beyond the AEI approved list...he might even try reading some of his colleagues in the Times Opinion Pages for a few new ideas that might temper his quest to preserve the objectives of Trumpism without the unfortunately problematic personality.
1
Conservatives like Ross fall all over themselves these days trying to portray wanting a decent job at a living wage, portable health care, a secure retirement and access to education without facing bankruptcy as extreme left or socialist policies. There is nothing extreme about them and as to socialism who has practiced this better than the Republicans in the last 40 plus years with deregulation of industry and Wall Street and the shifting of the bulk of the nation's wealth to the very few. Democrats could take a few lessons from their tactics.
2
The Democrats only need centrists if they hope to win a national election. Say, the 2020 Presidential election for example. I’m a moderate Republican voter who voted for President Obama twice, and HRC in 2016. If the Democrats drift too far left, I will simply sit the next election out. I’m 61, and haven’t missed an opportunity to vote in decades. That’s not a threat. Just a reality. Do the math Democrats.
What’s more important? Ideological litmus tests to see if you are “left enough”, or defeating Donald J. Trump in 2020.
We have a strong center-left: The Green New Deal is centrist. It doesn’t nationalize a single industry, it relies on incentives to move the needle within a securely capitalist context, and its end result will be a boon for today’s American oligarchs. Medicare for all is centrist. Its adherents tear themselves apart to protect the low- to no-value-add private health insurance industry, it does nothing to curtail the success of private-sector hospitals, and it promises huge increases in efficiency—again, within a securely capitalist context. And Elizabeth Warren’s Accountable Capitalism Act and Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act are both centrist. The former works within the well-worn framework for chartering new businesses, and literally has “capitalism” in its title, and the latter focuses entirely on the government side of the notorious “revolving door,” leaving private-sector lobbying and influence firms largely untouched.
The bottom line is, labels and arbitrary dots on an arbitrary continuum do nothing to solve the problems facing this country. There are great solutions to those problems being proposed right now, and all of them are being proposed by progressives.
2
How can you say that any of these policies are centrist when you don’t take into consideration the costs necessary to pay for them? Just because you say something especially something proposed by either extreme doesn’t make it into something it isn’t.
@Bruce--the GND is centrist? maybe to a true communist. by all American definitions is pure socialism.
Are we pretending that other countries don’t exist in our definition of centrism? The current Democratic Party in the US is more or less aligned with the Tories in England, Christian Democrats in Germany, and Macron in France on most substantive issues. That sounds pretty centrist to me. The Republican Party of the US has more in common with fringe parties UKIP in England, Lega Nord in Italy, AfD in Germany, and is to the right of Marine Le Pen’s National Front.
1
The tax cut is a fraud -- everyone's taxes went up save the superrich, who got huge cuts. Structural reform of the healthcare system to improve quality and reduce aggregate cost is long overdue. It's common sense, regardless of whether labelled centric, leftist or fascist or communist blah blah blah.
1
Does Ross' center-left mean the political power to the rich with some compassion for the have-not?
Great column - why I enjoy reading Ross's columns more than any other NYT columnist on the roster.
Would be very interesting to put down in writing what this cultural left of center positioning is, on immigration, affirmative action, issues involving sexism in the workplace, language, and so on.
Perhaps Ross could give it a go??
1
I place myself in the social democratic section of the political spectrum but routinely admire Ross Douthat’s opinion pieces for their clear arguments and solid conservative backbone. However, I wish he — and every other informed commentator — would stop referring to “socialism.” What the likes of Senator Sanders and other Democrat progressives are advocating can in no way been seen as meeting any fair definition of true socialism, a vital part of which is the state ownership of means of production in critical areas of the economy. American progressives are social democrats, seeking the kind of mitigation of the excesses of market capitalism that have been the hallmark of European social democracies for a century.
2
Gerald, the reason the term socialist is used is the old there’s a Commie under every bed trick. Repeat the lie over and over and over again and eventually some people start believing it
If the Democratic Party decides to focus voters' attention on a green new deal agenda, why not stress the lower utility cost, energy independence and new technologies/new industries and good paying jobs that will result? Think back to the moon program and its profound derivative impacts.
Basically, Ross, you inadvertently admit that conservatives can’t vote for decent centrist policy because they can’t get past candidates who aren’t in line with a conservative Christian ideal of behavior.
In addition, the problem with the version of center represented by Bill Clinton is that it was a hodge podge, trying to combine a liberal social approach with a market driven fiscal one. But aside from Clinton‘s good fortune of a tech boom, his approach was simply a delusion. You cannot separate human rights from economics. You cannot now to free market capitalism without addressing the way structural problems exclude people from the economy.
That is why centrism fails. Because it is not an ideology, or an approach to government — it is nothing but a campaign strategy. And an empty one at that.
2
I am getting tired of all the haggling over what people should or shouldn't want. There are a lot of us out there and we all want a lot of things. Who was it that said "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" ? Whoever said it was onto something
1
Let's be real. The Democratic Party IS centrist, with a few on the left and a few rather right-center. Only in the context of the Reaganization/Murdochization/Limbaughization of U.S. politics and the Republican Party could the Democrats be called anything else.
4
@Thomas Zaslavsky
I guess if the center is defined as Leninist then yes the democrat party is centrist.
Center-left was always something of a sham. The word "liberal" has been so successfully tarred-and-feathered that people claimed to belong there if only not to be dismissed as a communist.
The truth is many of these ideas have broad appeal, always have and always will. It just a little easier to identify with them when elected officials actually propose legislation to identify with.
What Ross means by “cultural extremism” is treating everyone else with the same respect the country has long reserved for men, whites, Christians and straights. He’s right that equality for all will be opposed by those accustomed to privileged deference. White, male, Christian and straight practically defines the Republican voter. But he’s wrong that Democrats can or should back off on “cultural extremism,” or more properly, cultural respect and acceptance. Wrong politically. Wrong economically. And most crucially, wrong morally.
3
"If Clinton had matched this cultural conservatism with decency in his private life"
Bill Clinton did absolutely nothing wrong in his private life. He entered a *consensual* sexual relationship with a colleague which millions of people have always done. Who are you to pass judgment on people's private lives? Your Puritan personal values (on sex or marriage) are your own, and not necessarily shared by others.
What right wing extremists like Douthat call "the far left" is actually dead center for what Americans want. It is objectively dead center of the political spectrum
Affordable health care and education, fair taxation of the rich, repaired and modernized transportation energy, a cleaner environment, a safe and healthy food supply, multilateral foreign affairs.
All centrist positions. All Democratic positions. All decried as "far left socialist extremism" by the reactionary right who want us to stay sick, stupid, and poor.
4
Right on! Enough with trying to scare us away from common sense legislation. Why should we feel guilty because we prefer one permanent job over 100 temp jobs, funded education over hidden fees, clean water and air over billionaire CEOs and driving on smooth roads instead of pot holes. Jeez I must be crazy!
So it’s all about the gays, when you get right down to it. Abortion kept a slow boil, guns were always handy. But those 2 alone were not always enough to tip the balance. Apparently fully enfranchising LGBT was just enough.
1
Where are the Republican centrists? There are none. There are only Trumplicans.
3
The reality is that the Democratic party has moved to the right over the past 20 years as the GOP has moved to the fringes. The more liberal have been marginalized and are now pushing back. This is healthy for our country and democracy. The democrats need politicians to throw out very progressive ideas to counter the authoritarian policies of the right. The goal would be that through compromise and discussion the politicians would meet in the center at the more moderate policies. But, following the lead of Tom Delay, Newt Gingrich and now McConnell, the right has decided to try and play all for us or obstruction. They are trying to have the minority steal our country. The only question is if the hatred of Trump/GOP will be enough to create a wave where the liberals will get too much power. If this happens, the GOP will have created there worst nightmares filled with higher taxes, medicare for all, consumer protections, no more subsidies for the rich and wealthy people and companies taking responsibility for their actions.
2
The "center left" has not "compromised." They were hoodwinked by the plutocrats. Rubin is a gonif. The Clintons are arrogant and self-serving. Condescending towards everyone. There is no shining city on a hill in which the average wage earner can survive. Feudalism is oppressive whether it comes from the right wing or not. I always laugh when I encounter Democrats who think that being "pro-choice" is the criteria for liberalism or that it makes you "center-left." I guess the more important issue is where is this so called "center" line drawn.
1
Another one of my 1500 word comments put on ice (maybe permanently). It's frustrating.
Writing for me is something of chore (in lieu of my chores).
4
Does the Republican party have centrists? I see Mark Meadows and Steve King in the Republican party that is almost exclusively all old white men.
I see Republicans embracing White Supremacy and love for dictators.
If you cannot see who is evil and who is trying, you are a great water carrier for your billionaire Republican overlords.
1
Ross,
First this: Matthew 7, Verse 4-5.
Then, perhaps the Dems have moved left because the Republican party has too?
Apparently, according to your fearless leaders,
1) deficits/debts don't matter
2) respect for the judiciary doesn't matter
3) respect for law enforcement agencies doesn't matter
4) foreign policy doesn't matter
5) international alliances and treaties don't matter
And so on...
Sorry, just had to get that dig in there.
Actually, several times in this article you use an obsolete phrase: the Republican Party. That party doesn't even exist anymore.
There's a small group of whack jobs, n'er-do-wells, and nincompoops that currently occupy that space. (yourself not included).
So there's a huuuge space to define what's left. It might take time. But that definition will include what the actual populace really wants. (reference Tim Wu's op ed today).
We'll get there. And, OMG, there will be differences of opinion within that realm!
But that's what will separate us from that other small group I mentioned. There will be actual thought and debate going on....
1
I don’t know about all the blab blab blab in this wordy piece, but this is one centrists who left and became a independent. Freedom from the platform I figure. But I still lean left. I truly believe we must defeat Trump to keep our republic alive (because republicans in congress refuse to do their job)so at this point it’s anyone but Trump. But once the threat is removed I hope we can set the course back to the center. And I will vote accordingly.
Re: Iraq
It seems likely that the Democrats who voted to support Bush's war in Iraq were trying to honor the patriotic imperative to unite behind a president--in the wake of 911. This attitude of civility & good faith probably didn't represent a true policy position.
Re:centrism
The mobilization of billionaires' propaganda and the determined march of right-wing organizing (i.e. local elections & the courts) has pushed America to the right - accounting for a wild and destabilizing redistribution of wealth to the top .01% Projects that require national efforts (like NASA & war once did) involving health insurance, gun reform, environmental sanity, infrastructure investment have stalled as the right demonized common sense legislation. McConnell became a rigid partisan throughout Obama's 8 years.
Few of the 'left' Democrats' proposals are actually so radical. Our current posture on most substantive issues cannot be solved by Market forces.The problem for Democrats is packaging to counter the ferocious reactionary machine that now energizes the 35% of Americans who are the Trump base.
1
Did you not notice what happened in the last election? The Democrats nominated a centrist. She lost. People want real change, and the Democrats better understand that or they'll lose again.
1
Center right republicans squashed and blocked the last centrist Democratic President at every turn. Now you weep for the lack Democrats who will play ball with republicans. Most Democrats learned their lesson. Mitch McConnell is not to be trusted. Look down Ross. The ideological ground you stand on is not the center. Your party, the party of Trump , has gone way wide to the right and you have been pulled with them.
2
@Mark
“… way wide to the right...” is a generous way to put it. Try “… way wide toward fascist one-party rule, which has been the goal of your party since Reagan.” Trump is just the logical, if early, confirmation.
1
The Iraq war prevented Saddam from acquiring nuclear weapons, as he planned to do after the inspectors left, and from dominating and oppressing the Mideast. It was mismanaged, but it was necessary. We don't see the disaster it averted because that disaster didn't happen.
I fail to see what is so radical about people having affordable healthcare, the rich paying their fair share of taxes, a decent minimum wage for workers and protecting our planet from climate change? Am I missing something here?
3
The problem is the left is too often mimicking the rights projection of victimization as opposed to understanding the their proposals actually articulate grave problems in this country and have solutions to them. For instance, national healthcare is not merely an attempt to create "unfairness" in our society but it's also inevitable and everyone knows it. It's cheaper, better, more efficient and dare I say, tactical, than any other alternative. Same with climate change where doing nothing (the republican view) is not just not an option. The democrats thing addressing these issues with a "what about me" perspective instead a "what about US" is the way to go. The issues however are not left-right, for the most part it's one half of the electorate at least acknowledging the world as it is and the other not.
1
That Ross bemoans a loss of the center-left in the Democratic party is quaint. The Republicans could spend two decades trying to get back to the center after Trump and they'd still find themselves a mile away from the edge of the cliff they threw themselves off of.
1
The left of the Democratic party would be centrists in most of the democratic world -- their advocacy of fairer distribution of wealth, access to education, access to healthcare, a living wage, policies to reduce global warming, and protection of minority rights are all widely held positions throughout Europe, Canada, Japan and Australia. The same views are held by the majority of Americans. If it were not for the distortion of political power that gives small rural states far more control over our domestic agenda than a true representative democracy would give them, the US would be more in line with other developed democracies.
5
OK, this is a little overblown. Yes, the freshman class of the House of Representatives has a number of left leaning people, but they are a small number. But is it time for the Dems to go left? Yes. However, today's idea of left is actually fairly moderate if one looks at our history from the post WW2 years. So let's keep our panic levels down, OK?
4
The answer is in Tim Wu's NYT column. If the Democrats put the economic issues front and center that the supermajority supports instead of expending massive amounts of energy battling "diversion" issues like immigration or trans gender restrooms, they will be in the driver's seat.
It's not that these diversionary issues are unimportant - it's that they are not the elephant in the room. In fact, the solution to much of the anger the diversionary issues stir up is actually economic reform so more Americans get a fair shake.
Up to now the Democratic Party has been in a willing partner in the diversionary issue game. Perhaps that game is up now?
3
The biggest mistake we are still making in this country is confusing and conflating political expediency with doing the right thing.
The greatest politicians are not the ones that get re-elected for compromising in ways that hurt the country, they are the politicians that make the difficult vote for the good of the country, and then suffer the predictable backlash. The horse race has become a joke, and no one has told the pundits that yet.
1
The pundits know that. That’s why they helped get a rid of Al Franken. It was too hard to deal with a real intellectual politician.
The problem is that the so-called center has been yanked so far to the right over the last four decades that the only effective counterweight to bring us back to a truer center — the one that existed forty years ago — is the left we are seeing emerge as a reaction to and cure for Trump and his radical conservatives today.
1
The writer needs to do a little self-reflecting about how he defines the center. The Reagan Revolution was a radical departure into extreme right wing policies that favored the rich and corporations. The writer seems to think that that is center. It's not. Words like Center, Right, and Left are relative. A 70% tax on the ultra wealthy was a center policy during the FDR era. It's much more constructive to talk about how we are moving out of the 45-year-Reagan Era in which Dems had to veer right to even survive. Historical eras move like a pendulum. The extreme right swung way too far against the people and for the rich. The pendulum is now simply swinging back. There's nothing extreme about wanting to provide health care to every citizen, lower prescription drug prices, pay teachers a living wage, etc. etc.
3
Mr. Douthat you glaze over an important trend--the shifting of the debate. What is now considered "socialism" by those that favor labels would be solidly center by past standards. The current crop of republicans would shriek "socialist" at Ronald Reagan were he to run today.
2
Douthat is specific when quoting DeLong on the policy failures of neoliberalism. He’s equally vague on the meaning of cultural liberalism or what policies moderates object to.
He names abortion, which 60% of Americans believe should be legal. What else is there? Gay marriage? Transgender rights? Prayer in schools? It’s hard to see much daylight between progressives and moderates of either party on those issues.
But, of course, we can only guess, because Douthat’s muddle-headed would-be advice to Democrats finds no expression in his 800 word so-called essay. I’d say he’s phoning it in, except this miserable performance is typical of his best effort.
A slim majority of the country is for some form of universal healthcare. A slim majority of the country is for sweeping environmental reform to at least try to curb climate change. A vast majority of this country thinks the rich are gobbling up everything and need to be curbed, pronto. A vast majority of the country are only a paycheck ahead of financial ruin... so what, exactly is the "moderate" path?
It used to be that being a moderate meant you were able to negotiate and compromise with the other side of the aisle. However, ever since 2009, when the GOP slammed it's fist down and PUBLICLY stated it would reject any and all things supported by President Obama (for... something, something, commie-socialist-fascist-authoritarian etc.) there has been no ability to negotiate across the aisle.
Moderation? I think most of us, on the left, are tired of moderation.
2
If one reads Timothy Wu's column in the same op-ed page as this article, he or she will find that much of what Mr Douthat and other conservatives calls "radical" and "leftist" are supported by a majority and even supermajority of Americans. In that sense, the majority the Green New Deal is very mainstream and none of it is "radical." I cannot understand how Mr Douthat, being a columnist for the nation's premier newspaper, is not aware of this.
1
Most of the many comments I’ve read in response to Mr Douthat’s column are missing his point. The sweet spot of the activist left has become cultural issues, and these are inherently divisive. Sanders, Warren, Brown and others offer a progressive economic vision, but as a general rule Democrats too often seem to elevate cultural/identity issues over bread-and-butter issues that have far broader appeal. In this regard, Hillary Clinton’s disastrous 2016 campaign, which seemed most concerned with clicking off enough demographic boxes to get to 50% plus one, can be compared to the extraordinarily successful mid-term campaign, which primarily emphasized health care. Regardless of how far right the GOP has travelled ( and it’s a fur piece, as the old folks where I grew up might say) and how preposterous Trump’s blather about socialism might be, the Dems still need to come up with a platform that has broader appeal. Running on a platform of leveling the economic playing field for all, getting the corrupting effects of big money out of politics, re-investing in communities that have been left behind (ranging from white communities in Appalachia to urban minority communities with severe structural unemployment and underemployment), and loudly championing organized labor as an antidote to oligarchy is more appealing and sustainable as a political strategy than running on bathroom access, wedding cakes, and third-trimester abortions.
@Bamanyc
'Bathroom access', et al are symbols in the fight for equality for all. From a Republican point of view they are symbols in the right to discriminate against certain groups even when offering a public service - this, they term 'religious liberty'.
'Social conservatives' are cruel people - saw this growing up in rural America and sadly it is growing worse.
A version of Medicare for All (not UK NHS version), but a public option phased in slowly, plus drug price negotiation would be a welcome addition to the Democratic Party agenda.
I don't see any international movement to try to emulate the 'great' US health care system...
I don't think the question is, "Does the Democratic Party still have centrists?" The question is more like, "when was the last time the Democratic Party had candidates that were unabashedly Democrats?" Since Reagan, the Democratic party has been a neoliberal organization, taking corporate dark money, playing to the center, terrified of the Republican "tax and spend" label.
For the first time in a long while there is a crop of Democrats and Democrat candidates that are actually not afraid to talk in an honest and realistic way about workers or unions or gender rights or billionaires actually paying taxes. Frankly, it's so shocking for the public to read about and hear about that the GOP thinks the Bolshevik Revolution has landed on American soil in 2019. It hasn't. Maybe, however, people might end up getting a fair wage, representation regardless of income level or background, and existing Social Security benefits in 20 years if these new Dems succeed.
3
Can't vote Democrat any more; can't vote Republican. Can't vote Trump; can't vote H. Clinton.
I'm with Democrats on (many) economic issues; with Republicans on (many) social issues. I can't see how late term abortion (or any abortion really) and physician assisted suicide build a better republic. They just extend the culture of death and killing to a broader base. We need compassionate community, not atomized individualism. We have to ask what kind of a nation we want; I prefer a civilization of life rather than a culture of death.
3
Douthat's straw-man playing field is bounded so rigidly by the labels he needs to spin his political fantasies that his parsing of the electorate into factions can seem to reflect reality. He can pretend that "far left" means what he says it does -- and his claims for it are always exaggerated and false -- when in fact if the polls on specific issues are as solidly reflective of popular opinion as they seem, his fetishized "center" IS actually what he decries as "far left". It's clever to pretend his own labels are definitive, but they are not. But using perjorative labels is a speciality of writers seeking to persuade us that reality doesn't feature that famous "liberal bias". Which, as many here remind him, it does.
2
Ross, this is a well-written essay. You have pinpointed the problem: Dems' obsession with cultural battles mixed with unrealistic, big government taxation and programs--all of which the electorate rejected. The final sentence summarizes what I've been saying for a long time (but nobody is listening!): "we need a very different center-left from the one surrendering today."
As a center-left person myself who remains frustrated that vital, self-induced, controllable problems in this country are not being solved--overpopulation, fossil fuel dependency and environmental unsustainability, excessive consumption of unaffordable disease care by an unhealthy population, rampant militarism, gun violence, drug-induced destruction of inner cities and our vital neighbors in Mexico and Central America, unfair taxation, excessive government spending...the list goes on and on.
However, as a center-left independent, I can firmly state that as much as I deplore Dump and the Republicans, at least they accomplish nothing. But I won't be voting for Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren--and that's a sure vote the Dems otherwise need. Many in the silent majority who don't read or comment in the NYT will be in the same boat.
1
Freedom suggests that the government should play no role in social or cultural issues. That philosophy leaves private actors (individuals, businesses, religions and other groups) with diverse ways to love and hate.
The left is obsessed with having the government and the courts impose their cultural and social norms on all. In our system, executives and administrators are vested with discretion which should be given a wide berth. Let President Trump run the country as he was elected to do.
1
It's important to remember:
Republicans campaign on social issues, then pass economic legislation that benefits the rich, while never actually changing anything that affects those social issues, which means they get to run on them again in the next election.
Democrats campaign on economic issues, then pass social justice legislation that benefits various minority groups, while only tinkering on the economic front, which means they get to run on economic issues again in the next election.
Don't accuse me of false equivalence; I'm not saying both sides are equally bad. What I'm saying is that when Democrats have found themselves in power over the past generation, the party was unable to come to enough of a consensus on economic issues (universal healthcare vs. Obamacare, for instance) to enact major reforms. By the time there's a Democratic majority in the Senate, that may well be true again. The Democratic centrists may again have the controlling votes.
2
At present Trump would be the underdog against any Democrat but things likely won't be the same in 2020.Another Republican nominee would be competitive against most democrats.. The country is left on economic related issues but cultural conservatism is a dtring factor with swing voters Better not to go far left on cultural issues during the campaign. Wait until after the election if votes in congress and the senate are there
I have thought for some time that the Democratic Party is divided into Liberal and Progressive wings. Progressives tend to think of Liberals as the enemy, the agents of Wall Street and do-nothingism. Liberals tend to think of Progressives as forward-seeking, but too apt to hasten toward untested proposals and too idealistic (read "unrealistic") to accept the good when only perfection will do. It's necessary for these wings to fly together in 2020. If not they'll be flying in circles or, worse, grounded by the Trumpistas.
1
Hey, folks, the world is on fire! This kind of discussion is so out of date, it's almost surreal.
Two forces are already beginning to disrupt everything. One is climate change, the other is AI / automation. Our focus needs to be on responding to them. The really important distinction in politics is between those who recognize this and are trying to figure out how to respond and those who are obsessed with politics as usual.
The world is changing too fast for most Republicans, old-style conservatives and centrists to adapt to new realities. Ultimately, they are irrelevant. Worrying about fine distinctions between such groups is like discussing eastern European politics in 1914 -- interesting and instructive, but not a front burner issue.
End of rant.
2
From a policy perspective this may well be prescient. But in a world in which the Trumpian narrative of Anger/Fear/Tribalism currently holds sway, it is so far wide of the cultural mark as to be practically irrelevant. While the Center-Left gazes at its collective navel, and while the Socialist-Fringe marches blithely off the electoral cliff-edge, there is just enough hard core base GOP support out there (34%, maybe?) to ensure a Trump 2020 win. And if THAT doesn't give us pause...? Well, heaven help us all.
And yet more and more voters pull the lever for Democratic candidates. It's almost as if their ideas and policy proposals are more popular. Mr. Douthat also spends little time on one of DeLong's major points about recent American political history: congressional Republicans rejected every single 'centrist' overture offered by moderate Democrats since Al Gore ran for president.
4
This talk about "centrism" and "moderate" is getting a bit tiresome, actually. Almost to acepted the framing of the Republican right-wing on every issue. By any logically coherent criteria, they are indeed right-wing, not center, or center-left.
Also, Mr. Douthat clearly hasn't considered that "the center" for most of America might be well to the left of where even the Democrats were in 2008, far less in 2016.
2
Most of the centrists from both major parties are now independents. There really seems to be no place for us in either one.
5
Another example of Mr. Douthat falsely explaining reality, just as FOX falsely represents it by omitting those details that don't support its ideology, or Trump does so by simply lying, but over 8,000 times.
I know a lot of Democrats, Ross, and extrapolating from those known samples, as well as my own position, none of which information is represented in your inquisition, I can safely assert with an acceptable margin of deviation, that the Center Left, and Right Left for that matter, are unchanged.
You need to get out more.
2
Biden is considering not running in part because of his dealings with conservatives? Really? Mentioning that oversimplifies Biden’s thought processes.
Of course his history is part of the calculation, every error he’s ever made.
But his age, the stresses of a third run for the Presidency, raising the money, and a myriad of other matters weigh more heavily on his mind.
1
"... and then discovered that the Republican Party was either still too far away ideologically or too much of an internally divided mess to make a lasting deal on any issue"
If the Republican Party was internally divided, then there would been something Obama could have offered in to pick off a few members of the Republican caucus. Instead, even the so-called moderates like Collins, acted as good soldiers to realize McConnell's wish of not allowing the label "bipartisan" to be slapped on anything Obama proposed, no matter what amendments he would allow the Republicans to make.
3
Let's not write off a carbon tax so quickly. Canada last year introduced a carbon tax with British Columbia's successful experiment serving as the model. OK, we're not Canada. But we could still try a distinctly American take on a carbon tax. The most elegant and politically palatable implementation is one that's revenue-neutral where all the proceeds get rebated back to citizens.
Then again, perhaps today's liberals are just as unserious and susceptible to magical thinking about climate change as conservatives have always been. Maybe there is no appetite for a market incentive to wean ourselves off fossil fuels; the only appetite is for having your cake and eating it too; and the Democratic constituencies are all about taxing the other guy anymore.
If that's the case, I see it as the natural end point of conservatism and corporate America's all-too-successful decades-long project to carve out the American middle class, a project that the middle class has been all too compliant in. Once you have a critical mass of citizens who cease to see the fairness in paying any more taxes for the programs we need and we have no path to more wisely spend the taxes we're already paying (see our bloated military and foreign adventurism), then welcome to the realm of post-middle-class politics.
In this respect, America will become a more normal nation in the Americas, and we can look forward to swinging between Pinochet-style fascism and Chavez-style "socialism," or whatever -ism it is.
2
Ross, do you even read what you write? You say the country has shifted left since 2000 (I agree). The "Center" isn't some fixed location: it depends on where the country is. The policies espoused by all those "left-wing" people you cite are, in fact, met with approval by substantial majorities of the US population. Doesn't that make them, well - centrist?
4
The premise of this article is that the Democratic Party has moved to the left on all issues. The does not seem true. On issues of interventionist foreign policy, for instance, it seems that the Democratic Party has actually become more hawkish, a feature of the Neocons defection from the Republicans following Trump's election.
The Democratic Party has, though, definitely moved to "the left" on cultural issues--although it is not a "left" that is recognizable in many other places. Rather, it is more of the Democratic Party fully embracing the cultural politics of a certain sliver of the managerial-professional elite. Senator Gillibrand, for instance, a while ago tweeted something to the effect that "the future is female, intersectional" and "powered by our belief in one another." It struck me as the sort of cultural pandering that you'd often see both Republicans and Democrats engage in in the 90s, though now instead of choking down fried butter at some midwestern state fair while pretending to be really interested in the size of the cabbage, Democratic politicians feel the need to talk as though they were tenured at Swarthmore.
2
First, it is mistaken, as your column actually demonstrates, to revere the center. It doesn’t exist. You share with your colleague David Leonhart an irrational nostalgia for the outdated formulation of left, right, and center. Consider the fact that polls consistently show that a clear majority favor policies and programs that you would characterize as “left” (think Social Security and Medicare). Or that some voters deprived of the ability to vote for Bernie Sanders for president voted for Donald Trump.
Second, Bill Clinton was actually right of center if you insist on using that formulation—he sold out the left entirely (think welfare reform and DOMA).
Finally, I think it is woefully unfortunate that you rely on the Catholic Church (which has shown itself devoid of any moral sense whatever) for guidance on universal human rights, such as those relating to women and sexual minorities, which you like to characterize as social issues.
3
The definition of political groups of similar nature is one of the most contrived bits of information that pundits have at their disposal. Defining what it means to be left or centrist is typically just a form of manipulation. Ross' intent is to sway people to his thinking, but people who want to return to the dominance of white cults are becoming fewer, which is why it typically doesn't work very well.
The DFL has historically been progressive towards more socialistic policies. What had changed was that the democrats were temporarily taken over by the view that they needed to be inclusive of people on the right. Well, that is what got them Trump as president. Because they did not represent their true base, they lost the last presidency.
Democrats don't need centrists. In fact, it is the centrists that make them weak. DFL policy is weakened and the party neutered by the centrists in the party.
Keep the lies coming, Mr. Conservative. Talk about the "capital S socialism" WHICH IT IS NOT.
Democratic socialism is, in fact, capitalism. It's the form of capitalism that is sustainable - as opposed to our form of capitalism which is NOT - because of the run-away inequality that naturally arises from unfettered capitalism.
RAISE OUR TAXES AND SAVE US BILLIONS.
3
Old Democrats (who vote) are centrists. You can't win an election appealing only on college campuses. Bernie won most of his delegates in caucuses, not primaries in 2016. He'll have the same problem this time around. Hilary's failure leads to one of two conclusions: a) We need somebody further left, or b) we need a better centrist. Answer b isn't necessarily wrong. If we don't see Biden run somebody like Hickenlooper may become a front-runner. I'd rather see him in the White House than any of the senators running now. I'm a disaffected Republican, and I'm not going to vote for Trump (and didn't), but I'd rather vote for a third party candidate than an AOC Democrat. I realize that may re-elect Trump, but that is not the only possible bad outcome.
@Tom
Except for the legions of FDR style Democrats like 72 year old me!
I disagree. Republicans won with nuttiest and most divisive politics ever. Time for Democrats to speak to their base. Hilary did not lose because she is corrupt. Trump is corrupt. She lost because some people are sexist, bigoted, greedy, anti-abortion, religious, anti- immigration, and want to be lied to about coal. Like it or not Trumps message resonated with a diverse group of angry rejected. It still does.
We won’t win these people but we can unify.
What's left of the center-left? All of it, encompassing most of America. Why do you ask? To spin more fiction?
America was never a center-right nation, as the post-Reaganites would have had the world believe. A whole lot of Americans even got confused to hear the repeated lie. But try to cancel Social Security and you'll hear the center-left's mighty voice.
The head-smashers for the right, with their media ins and corporate money, have confused people long enough. Even the American left-left is fairly centrist. No one is calling for the nationalization of industries, or collective farming, or kibbutzes.
Most people want the government to protect the environment, workers' safety, freedom of the press, to make healthcare accessible and affordable for everyone, for accessible education, net neutrality, all kinds of center-left causes that the right and its owners would like to forego and call it freedom. The right has discovered racism to keep itself with a pulse, but otherwise America has had enough of its lies. Of that I feel quite confident. Good luck in your efforts to confuse the world but don't feel too badly if you only succeed with some of the people some of the time. That's better than you deserve.
Douthat could profit from reading Tim Wu's column--as Wu points out, many of the policies that Douthat evidently regards as wild eyed radicalism in fact enjoy substantial majority support. There is moreover a bit of baiting and switching going on--I have seen no indication that what he characterizes as extreme positions on feminism and race are reflected in the policies advanced by the Democratic presidential candidates. Their proposals for addressing, for instance, economic inequality in fact also enjoy widespread support, red-baiting from the right notwithstanding.
4
The country needs centrists, but without the push and pull from the newly empowered far left, the fulcrum for balance in our government (that would serve ALL Americans) would put the start of any negotiations off-center to the Right.
Bernie Sanders' presence in the 2016 election helped push the overall Democratic platform back up out of the slippery slope that was making the party look like the GOP of Eisenhower and Reagan.
I celebrate the new energy in the House which seems to be succeeding in counteracting that radicalism of the extremists on the Right and the acceptance of an unqualified and out of control executive in the White House.
So keep the fires burning in your hearts, America. Only by our citizen participation can we return to a nation that is governed by policy, reason...and reflects the intent of our Constitution for a government that is "by the people and for the people."
1
We have had over 35 years of conservative to neoliberal politics? How are we doing? Anyone you know even slightly positive about the state of affairs (except the Trumpsters?) Ready for real reform this time? Where do most of us believe that will originate? The left has the ideas, the more intelligent and exciting new leaders and the folks can feel it.
7
It is fun watching the Democrat party self-destruct. The new far leftists who want to confiscate wealth to advance their Green agenda will be the death of the party. They espouse an "our way or the highway" political ideology, and they refuse to negotiate any compromise with the shrinking middle ground element of their party. Sanders, AOC and Warren are leading the leftist charge. Watch them lead the Democrats into the desert of American politics.
2
@paul
Much to respond to here. But the big bogus idea you suggest is "confiscation". Balderdash, dude.
The oligarchs have been confiscating for too many decades. It is time for a significant redistribution and a plan for the rest of us to enjoy some real gains in income and equity.
signed,
Tired of being a serf.
You mean like Reagan and Gingrich did on the right? Your comment is the same as the Republican centrists said about the far right ( neocons) And we all know who was elected, don’t we? By Your logic only the left can lead the democrats to power.
We are not Left and Progressive enough. Climate regulation of the 70s saved millions of auto jobs by forcing achievable emission and mileage goals.
Climate legislation will create jobs.
You can't outsource air.
4
Make America Great Again! The Dems are the ones who can! Ross, I believe your beliefs are rooted in societal cohesiveness and cooperation. Old Fashioned community support systems. Family values and all. All I have ever been able to derive from the Republican party, is a fear of government. Or more exactly, taxes. That's it. That is all. I'm 58 years old. And that is all I can figure. I suppose I should be able to appreciate something else that they stand for....Fear of over reach by the Federal government. A scare tactic. Also ironic, since it is only scary when the Republicans feel the need to impose their religious control. (And yet, they rally behind a lying bigot). I get the Make America Great Again sentiment. It is understandable to reminisce about the past of our childhood and youth. It is human nature. I do not have to point out that not everyone's past is as good as mine, or yours, or Trump's (cringe). But, for those who truly want the closest ideal to the strong, patriotic, flag flying, opportunity within reach, democracy of our past and FUTURE, look to the Democrats.
As a footnote, Bernie is brave to speak the truth. Democratic "socialism" is a good thing. People can't handle the truth. Too many Fox news entrenched. Bernie, is experienced, has been in politics a long time to see and know how it operates. Not self serving, he genuinely seems of the people, by the people, for the people.
2
Of course the Democratic Party still has centrists. It’s just that the party less willing to have its political spectrum defined (and pulled right) by the GOP.
3
American access to medical care for and free tuition for college students are just 2 of the conversations that the "new" Democrats are promoting. How are Americans going to pay for those programs? Whose wallet must open for this to happen? If the Democratic candidates would focus on the obvious issues of education, job creation, living wage and whatever else it takes to bring back a strong middle class and move citizens out of poverty, then the problem of affordable medical care and college tuition will be solved. We need a Democrat that can define the steps needed to help everyone, not just the wealthy. The 2018 Republican Tax Reform made me sick to my stomach.
@M. Jones: Why is it we always find money for war and war toys but act like it's somehow impossible to pay for things that help (rather than kill) people?
Let's look at the post Trump landscape: Both fiscal and governmental chaos, a group of people (millions) who are disillusioned by the fact that Trump conned them, but they are still center right. Until we get our house in order, this is not the time for radical swings in government policy. This is a time of rebuilding and bringing people together. Of showing people that there is a place for them and with good faith they can contribute. If the Democrats swing hard left, they will be asking millions to join with a party whose policies, if enacted at this time, could wreck the economy. An economy that is the single largest selling point for Trump.
I would suggest that showing the nation that Democrats are capable of good governance, will earn you much more credibility when the time comes to begin bringing some of your dreams into the world.
1
It's simple: Public rage grows by the day as demagogues exercise power out of all proportion to their numbers. So it's time to take a page from the Republicans and double down, something the right has been doing for years with more than a little success. If and when the Dems have the courage to do so, they will be amazed at the positive response they get from a public that's been waiting a long time for them to shine.
1
I'm sure if Hillary had been elected, by now, many of those pining for a centrist Democrat in 2020 would be kvetching over her tepid "incrementalism" and how we needed to move further left. Had she been elected, her cabinet would have been Bill Clinton redux, with the same Goldman Sachs and City Bank alums in attendance, the same capitulation to Wall Street and the same kicking of the can on health care.
I think its great that the Democratic candidates for 2020 are actually talking about issues this early, and not just in gauzy generalities. The sooner the country is exposed to these ideas, the more inoculated they will be against the inevitable GOP hysteria.
2
The article makes a good case for the current state of politics, but let's focus the problem a little more. If Dems have moved farther left, it is the direct fault of the party's leadership. For years they have peddled a holier-than-thou stance in place of real information, a move which alienated centrists rather than persuading.
The attitude that we are somehow more moral than conservatives in our concern for various population segments may make Dems feel good, but it just creates a more determined core in the Right that places the abortion issue above all other American issues; they challenge, "Do you really think you are more moral than us?"
Meanwhile, Republicans see only expenditures without results because the Dems, in concentrating on morals, fail to make the economic case. For example, I have never heard the Dem party leaders explain that affordable health insurance will lower the burden on people who already have health insurance. There is a relationship between people with no insurance and the use of emergency rooms as primary care providers, especially once a neglected health issue moves into critical, and expensive to treat, stages. The rest of us pay for this through higher premiums. (We have seen this in our own city.) But no one in the party is explaining how redesigning health coverage would help us all. Some Medicaid recipients who hate "Socialism" don't even know who is paying for their health care. Make the economic case, not the moral one.
2
Here in Canada which is a flourishing liberal democracy Bernie Sanders would be closer to our political center than Hilary Clinton.
We have flown by the post Reagan USA and now have a higher standard of living and better health, education and welfare and believe there can be a better future.
Nations that occupy a reality based world know there is nothing to learn from American conservatism except how to kill the great , most powerful nation that ever was.
8
We'll be better off by framing the issues and not the labels.
9
What is considered "left" or "far left" today, used to BE the center.
5
From where I stand, the Democratic party may have moved too far leftward on some cultural issues, but remains right of center on economic and most social issues. Obama governed from right of center. His signature legislative accomplishment, the ADA, echoed what Nixon had supported decades earlier. His policies on immigration and criminal justice were regressive. His foreign policy was exceptionalist, relying far too much on the military. His drone strikes were clearly immoral. He was far better than the Republican alternatives, but that's saying too little.
Perhaps rightly, Douthat uses the label "socialist" pejoratively -- but it really doesn't fit Bernie Sanders, AOC, and others who have unfortunately claimed it, perhaps to distinguish differences between themselves and the neo-liberals. Their economic views and policies are hardly extreme. Current disparities in wealth are unprecedented for our democracy, and must be addressed for any meaningful democracy to persist. The Green New Deal is an aspirational statement laying out what is required for civilized society to continue to exist on the planet. Nothing extreme about that, except the urgency of our circumstances.
The progressive movement within the Democratic party is a refreshing emergence of realism and seriousness where political involvement is an instrument for securing survival and seeking the common good, rather than gamesmanship and a means of self-aggrandizement. If it does not succeed, we all fail.
1
It was Bill Clinton who did enough to overcome Reaganism to win the presidential election, twice. Is it now possible for the Democrats to return to an agenda more on the left, more like the New Deal and Great Society and still win presidential elections, or are Reagen's views on taxes and the role of government still in force? If Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren wind up being the Democratic Party's nominee for president that question might be answered.
1
Somewhere in there I’d the key phrase about compromising with reeps, for now. I defy Ross to point go somewhere in the last ten years they compromised on anything. When unemployment in his home state exceeded 8%, McConnell said his number one job was making Obama a one term president. Ross is doing that old man thinking thing. Let’s try electing a liberal.
1
Thanks to Bernie voters who could not condescend to vote for Hillary, we got Trump. Now these same progressive voters think they are entitled to call the shots as to who heads the ticket in 2020.
No thanks.
Trump and Republicans are literally salivating at the prospect of labeling a Democrat as a socialist. Funny because a moderate Democrat is exactly what Democrats need to prevent 8 years of Trump.
We won't even recognize our country if that should happen.
2
@Babel, false. Majority of Bernie supporters came out in full force to vote for Hillary. Please get your facts right.
A lot of voters who don't necessarily agree with Bernie would vote for him because he is viewed by many as very honest, least likely to pander, and hope to contain him on positions they disagree with by how they vote on the rest of their ballot. With a stampede by the rest of the candidates to go the furthest to the far left and abandonment of positions that leave centrists in the Democratic party and Republicans who can't stand Trump without an alternative that doesn't sicken them with their pandering (the sole exception might be Bernie), I would speculate that a lot of people may sit this one out if there is no centrist and Bernie doesn't get in either. You conceivably could see more people decide not to vote for a presidential candidate or cast a protest vote to a third party candidate if the choices are viewed as Trump and someone else unacceptable. Conceivably that could generate the sickening result of re-electing Trump and for certain those people would be blamed for that result, but the truth of the matter is those shoppers entered two stores and looked around and they either decided not to purchase or they decided that they would rather buy something else.
1
When we have such grave inequality, corporate welfare rampant, Wall Street interest above the interest of the average American, voter suppression, crazy gerrymandering, the pendulum is bound to swing pretty far in the opposite direction.
In fact, we don’t have much of a center right anymore, but the extreme right. So it is natural that the other side would emerge.
3
I'm scratching my head. Who better defines the "centrist left" then Hillary Clinton who only a short two years dominated the candidate field of the Democratic party? And who other than Joe Biden, if he abandons his policy of coyness and hesitation, is the "presumed front-runner" for 2020?
So Douthat apparently speaks of Bernie Sanders as the capital-S Socialist but there is a pachyderm in the palace bearing mention. Sanders is a Democrat of convenience straddling the line of independence and party affiliation, only hopping to one side as necessary. It's enough to make your eyes cross.
The insurgency in the party is far from over and what becomes of the new Democratic Socialists after they are suborned in the 2020 primaries is anyone's guess. They cannot and will not find a home among the aging and increasingly irrelevant party stalwarts.
Al Gore did win the 2000 election. Republicans, with conservatives on Supreme Court, stole the election. The primary mode for Republicans to win is to lie, steal, cheat, hate/fear monger - Trump represents the archetype of this mode/strategy. In the seven presidential elections since 1992, the Republican candidate has won the popular vote just once but has prevailed in the Electoral College three times. George W. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 - and would have lost the Electoral College vote if all votes in Florida were counted (blocked by Supreme Court, handing Bush the victory).
In 2016, Trump got 62,984,828 (46.1%) of the popular vote vs. 65,853,514 (48.2%). Clinton received 2.87 million more votes nationwide (the largest margin ever for a candidate who lost the electoral college), a margin of 2.1%. Trump won the Electoral College by winning Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin by a combined total of only about 80K votes out of 138.8 million votes cast (55.7% turnout).
If there was no voter suppression, no gerrymandering, higher voter turnout closer to that of most democracies, a more truly democratic system of no or just modified Electoral College system (current system is way out of sync from even 12th Amendment; it’s been modified before and there are some excellent proposals for more proportional votes), Democrats - center left/right, centrist, left, liberal, progressive - would win virtually every election.
Douthat could still obsess about his culture wars.
4
Excellent analysis. Just when so many Republicans were ready to abandon their sinking ship, they look over and see the Democrats' ship on fire.
2
I have to disagree that the Democrats ship is on fire. Frankly in the last election all the Republicans, save perhaps John Kasich were singing from the same hymnal, allowing the loudest and best-known voice, a certain DJT, to gain because his “answers” suited the angry radicals who vote in primaries. The Democrats are fielding a great range of political ideas and as the campaign continues, for the next twenty months (!), each of the multitude of candidates will have to defend his or her plans. Unlike the writer to whom I reply, I am delighted with a plethora of differing solutions to our many problems. I see not a ship on fire but a ship aglow with a range of solutions. We can actually have meaningful policy debates, unlike the sham “debates” offered by the Republicans in 2016.
Wrong! Republicans are on a fast sinking ship. Democrats.....well...stay tuned! Remember 2018, Blue Wave? Ditto, 2020!
We know what has happened to the center-left (a group that includes me, a 74 year old progressive male): the radical right wing conservatives that booted out nearly all of the center-right moderates of the Republican Party.
Sure, Reagan ramped up the anti-big-government rhetoric in the 1980. But it was the open warfare tactics, of New Gingrich, vilifying in the most insulting, unpatriotic name-calling he could come up with, describing any Democrat who openly disagreed with him as treasonous and unpatriotic.
With every election cycle, the RNC — was encouraged and pressured by the Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society, the Koch brothers, the Mercer family, and then, the right-wing media gasbags like Limbaugh, and the entire Murdoch team of conspiracy theorists at Fox (Faux Noise), to rid itself of all even-keeled Republicans using their critical thinking skills.
For the past 25 years or so, the Republican "leadership" not only forced out their moderates, they decided that meeting with, debating with, and negotiating with Democrats was the latest of "original sins." Karl Rove bragged about how he tricked conservative Christians into putting Jesus' teachings on the shelf in favor of Ayn Rand's rantings proclaiming empathy and compassion as signs of weakness. Ann Coulter is a classic example of the genre.
That said, the left-wing of my Democratic Party has found oxygen with new ideas. Despite those ideas, they will may wind up handing DJT a second term.
Beware.
3
Well said, David!
Do we have centrists? If not, it is only because they are almost all to the right of center.
There are loud voices pointing this out. That's to the left of center.
There are not very many actually in Congress, and they are too new and too few to get anything done beyond the noise. That is to the right of center.
No centrists, and that isn't what is needed anymore. It is too late for that.
Douthat thinks the Pope isn't Catholic because he is a lefty. Douthat's ideas are somewhere in the 15th Century. So to him, the 19th Century Robber Barons are modern ideas, a center he might support sometimes.
5
@Mark Thomason Thanks. Exactly as you wrote:
"Douthat thinks the Pope isn't Catholic because he is a lefty. Douthat's ideas are somewhere in the 15th Century. So to him, the 19th Century Robber Barons are modern ideas, a center he might support sometimes."
2
@Mark Thomason
It's probably because he's a Jesuit.
2
I don't concur with the specifics, but Douthat is right on the largest question. The electorate has been ping-ponging back and forth for decades. The opportunity is there to cement a center-left majority that will really be a majority and be able to stay in office long enough to formulate and carry out the long-term policies that will grapple with the very large and long-term challenges of the post industrial world. Here's the quick test -- are you still griping about the Supreme Court or are you able to see the 2000 election should never have come down to chads in FL. Gore should have won well before that. Think hard.
1
Douthat is absolutely right, and a lot of readers seem to be missing the point.
Sometimes it loos like Democratic Party has dual personality.
On the fiscal side, by world standards, and up to appearance of Bernie Sanders on national stage, it has been centrist at best. $15 minimum wage, Universal health care, and free college are not extreme ideas - they are more or less universally adopted in the developed world, and I would claim that those are the things that really matter.
On the other hand, socially/culturally, democrats support some extreme views, supreme among them unlimited (i.e. late term) abortion rights. In Europe, abortion is typically allowed up to 14-16 weeks, and after that only if medically necessary. I would imagine that vast majority of american people would agree with that limit. Democrats should do the same and take this issue off the table.
I would say that up in the Northeast I have no trouble meeting people, both Democrats and Republicans, who describe themselves as fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Those worried more about the pro-lifers crushing women's reproductive freedom vote left; those more worried about Euro-sclerosis due to high taxes and regulation vote right.
DeLong is describing a 'center-left' focused on the economic side of the mix; Ross correctly notes that Bill Clinton's centrism had a cultural component. (He noted 'safe, legal and rare' but omitted Clinton's famous support for the death penalty in 1992).
Well. The centrist Democrats did seem to abandon the rest of the cultural fight, and the centrist Republicans haven't had a lot of success moderating their party on the cultural side either. Meanwhile, we are all surprised to learn that economics and culture are not easily separated.
The obvious trainwreck is illegal immigration. Democrats insist Republicans are racist haters for wanting to curb the arrival of our undocumented future friends from Latin America. The fiscal Republicans marvel at a Democratic party that can fret constantly about rising income inequality and stagnant working class wages yet insist on waving in more unskilled workers by the busload.
Paul Krugman actually noted this absurdity in 2006 and got booed off the field by his readership. Little center-left leadership on this since.
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/opinion/north-of-the-border.html
If Eisenhower or Nixon were President today, they would be advocating policies very similar to today's Democratic candidates.
Most other western nations have policies even further to "the left" (in Douthat's terminology) than anything being advance by today's Democratic candidates. The fact is that Douthat's party has moved so far to the right that the center is way over the horizon and consequently completely invisible for most party advocates like Douthat.
5
Every election is followed by a mistake by both parties. Let's call it the mandate mistake when the winners think they have a mandate to turn the country hard left or hard right. The nation's people do not want a hard turn in any direction yet, like Groundhog Day, it happens after each election. Of course, each party has enough votes in Congress to obstruct the other party's agenda and we the people are gifted another 2 or 4 years of gridlock. Holding to one's convictions above all else is admirable although it is destructive for the nation. We either work together or fall together.
1
"a party that has consistently moved leftward faster than the also-changing country, and consistently overread victories"
A welcome development for those working towards The Restoration. Give them more rope, I say.
I am concerned that writers such as Mr. Douthat's use of the term socialism in a rational opinion piece plays into to the Trump/Republican use of socialism as a political smear campaign against progressive ideas. Progressive ideas do address issues that are important all of us. I would hope that such op-ed pieces try to make an obvious distiction from their use and Trump's use of the word socialism.
1
I suspect that the majority of people in your country, as in mine, are centrists in that their main concerns are economic rather than ideological, and would prefer that their elected representatives work together to improve life for those paying their salaries. The electoral primary system combined with gerrymandered districts appears to give overweighted influence to those with extreme views at both ends of the political spectrum, making cooperation for the good of the voters much more unlikely. Re-districting using unbiased algorithms which have been developed by many university researchers would make it much more likely that centrists from both parties could win primaries and elections, and more directly reflect the viewpoints of their constituents - and actually get things done.
The Democratic Party left its mission when it slid into the pockets of the corporate donors and let them set the course. Do the corporate donors care about cultural issues? Not likely. So Democratic candidates sought to appeal based on these cultural issues of identity politics, abortion and LGBTQ issues. We can count on them for that - they don’t offend their patrons with that stuff. Meanwhile they have turned away from their role protecting the economic interests of workers, unions, families, consumers and so on. That’s how they have lost. DeLong is correct, it is time to pass the baton. The Democratic has been left of center on social, cultural issues and right of center on economic issues. They continue to appeal to “their base”- folks who aren’t struggling and are fat left culturally.
2
Wow....really? So, the Republicans are correct? They’ve raised the national debt by trillions, the GOP is clearly the party of the 1% even though poor folks keep voting against their own best interests! The GOP Tax Scam helped only the fabulously wealthy and you complain about the Democrats who gave Americans without healthcare the ACA?!
The Democrats held sway in America from 1932 to 1968 with a progressive approach that became the envy of the world.
Subjugation of the Great Depression, development of Social Security, destruction of 2 totalitarian regimes fighting a 2-front war covering the entire globe, rebuilding Europe and Japan.
Then, the GI Bill opening up colleges to anyone who wanted to go. Desegregating the military. Massive infrastructure development. Desegregating schools and the marketplace.The Civil Rights Act, Medicare, Medicaid. And reaching the moon.
Yes, there were failures and misjudgements, most notably Vietnam which led to the breakup of the Democratic coalition, and the ascendance of the Republican right-wing.
In the meantime the Republicans yearned to dismantle what had been created, but largely failed.
Now, the Republican Party is the party of lies, deceit and economic plunder. It is the beacon of authoritarianism and forges bonds with the most vile and vicious dictators on the planet, while insulting and turning on our allies and friends.
The middle class has been drained and the poor treated like chattel for the top 1%
Whether you call it liberalism or progressivism or socialism, it's what America wants and needs to make America great again.
7
Douthat and the punditry circus believe that there is a single gargantuan bell-shaped curve governing left and right. The problem is that the most typical individual might find herself scattered willy-nilly left or right in many mini-bell curves, with views ranging from social democratic to anti-immigrant.
3
What is all this about center-left and the Democratic party abandoning it? In the past 30 years the Democratic party has abandoned its progressive forum, become more like the Republican party and more subject to lobbyist than to its constituents. Obama immediately showed his stripes by bailing out the banks and corporations while allowing people to lose their homes,, and later assisted in the transference of the manufacturing industry abroad.
The failures of the Clinton-Obama presidencies are directly responsible for the debacle the nation faces in the trump residency, and it is this debacle that has awakened many Democrats to the dangers of its past policies.
It is nonsense to think that this movement represents a move toward "Socialism", which requires the elimination of a capitalist class. The kind of progressivism offered by the awakened left in the Democratic Party has rightly been termed by Bernie Sanders as Democratic Socialism, which certainly does not infer the elimination of capitalism but : control of the runaway banks that brought about '08, a living, minimum wage of $15. free tuition in state colleges, medicare for all, and building up the nations infrastructure.
3