Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 whembly wrote:
Uh... a political candidate wanting to ban a political movie during an election? That's... and extreme position.

It has nothing to do with the left/right scale, regardless of how "extreme" it is. Not everything you disagree with is automatically left-wing extremism.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for the graph, it's worthless. It's designed on the assumption that 0.0 is halfway between the centers of the two bell curves, so saying that it proves that the democrats are as far from center as the republicans is circular logic. For it to have any value you'd have to calibrate the left/right scale against an international average. And if you do that you'd find that the democrats peak somewhere a little left of center, maybe around 0.1 to 0.25 or so, while the republicans are off around 1-1.5.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:



But it is not an extreme position to either the left or right.

Yes it is. SCoTUS ruled Citizen United as violation over the 1st Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 whembly wrote:
Yes it is. SCoTUS ruled Citizen United as violation over the 1st Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This is not a left/right decision, and Citizens United has been criticized by both sides of the scale. What you're demonstrating here is that you're incapable of discussing politics as anything but Your Team vs. Their Team.

 whembly wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:



But it is not an extreme position to either the left or right.

Yes it is. SCoTUS ruled Citizen United as violation over the 1st Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So where in that does it say that to restrict it is an act of right or left wing extremism? And I'm sorry but until you can successfully argue that either A) Hitler did not restrict free speech or B) Hitler was not right wing then you can post all the unrelated court cases you want, it still won't make curtailment of free speech an act of left wing extremism rather than just blanket authoritarianism of any political spectrum.

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Yes it is. SCoTUS ruled Citizen United as violation over the 1st Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This is not a left/right decision, and Citizens United has been criticized by both sides of the scale. What you're demonstrating here is that you're incapable of discussing politics as anything but Your Team vs. Their Team.

What the feth are you talking about? It's literally on the Democrat Party's platform.

actual platform.

 whembly wrote:
What the feth are you talking about? It's literally on the Democrat Party's platform.

Like I said, conservatives have also criticized Citizens United (and, more generally, the issue of money and corruption in politics behind the decision). And we certainly have the example of Trump wanting to suppress unfavorable media coverage, so does that somehow make Trump a left-wing extremist?

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
What the feth are you talking about? It's literally on the Democrat Party's platform.

Like I said, conservatives have also criticized Citizens United (and, more generally, the issue of money and corruption in politics behind the decision). And we certainly have the example of Trump wanting to suppress unfavorable media coverage, so does that somehow make Trump a left-wing extremist?

No, conservatives have not criticized CU.

 whembly wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
What the feth are you talking about? It's literally on the Democrat Party's platform.

Like I said, conservatives have also criticized Citizens United (and, more generally, the issue of money and corruption in politics behind the decision). And we certainly have the example of Trump wanting to suppress unfavorable media coverage, so does that somehow make Trump a left-wing extremist?

No, conservatives have not criticized CU.

So John McCain isn't conservative?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
So John McCain isn't conservative?

No true Scotsman conservative...

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

So John McCain isn't conservative?

Not a "real" one.... Or at least, I'm sure that'll be the response

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
What the feth are you talking about? It's literally on the Democrat Party's platform.

Like I said, conservatives have also criticized Citizens United (and, more generally, the issue of money and corruption in politics behind the decision). And we certainly have the example of Trump wanting to suppress unfavorable media coverage, so does that somehow make Trump a left-wing extremist?

No, conservatives have not criticized CU.

So John McCain isn't conservative?

Not really. He's center-right (often accused being a RINO).

He's earned his nickname of "Maverick".

Since when did being centre-right mean someone wasn't conservative? How far do you have to be from the centre for "conservative" to be an acceptable description?

Being a republican comes with a lot of extra baggage on top of conservatism so having the party which elected Donald Trump saying you're a RINO is not the same as not being a conservative.

 whembly wrote:
Not really. He's center-right (often accused being a RINO).

He's earned his nickname of "Maverick".

Uh, lol? Based on the graph you posted McCain is well within the mainstream peak of the republican party as a whole, and only very very slightly to the left of the republican senate majority leader. He is clearly a conservative, even if some far-right extremists label him a RINO.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Since when did being centre-right mean someone wasn't conservative? How far do you have to be from the centre for "conservative" to be an acceptable description?

center-left / center-right are moderates.

An opposite of John McCain (center-right) would be Jim Web (center-left)... or even Joe Manchin.

They're all moderates.

 whembly wrote:
Dunno about that... Clinton did advocate to punish the movie directors making a critical movie about her after all... 'bout as far from center you could be...

That feeling when Whembly refers to Clinton as "as far from the center as can be" 3 posts after posting a chart showing her to be tied for the 2nd least liberal politician on it

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Being a republican comes with a lot of extra baggage on top of conservatism so having the party which elected Donald Trump saying you're a RINO is not the same as not being a conservative.

You're right. The GOP (the ones who elected Trumpo) are NOT conservative.

The conservative movement is dead at the moment...

This GOP Congress with Trump is go'n big... BIG GOVMINT big.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Dunno about that... Clinton did advocate to punish the movie directors making a critical movie about her after all... 'bout as far from center you could be...

That feeling when Whembly refers to Clinton as "as far from the center as can be" 3 posts after posting a chart showing her to be tied for the 2nd least liberal politician on it

That issue Ouze.

I'm sure there are plethora of political critters who advocate something that'll yank their score either way.

 whembly wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Being a republican comes with a lot of extra baggage on top of conservatism so having the party which elected Donald Trump saying you're a RINO is not the same as not being a conservative.

You're right. The GOP (the ones who elected Trumpo) are NOT conservative.

The conservative movement is dead at the moment...

This GOP Congress with Trump is go'n big... BIG GOVMINT big.

So, McCain could be classified as a conservative then.

 whembly wrote:
center-left / center-right are moderates.

An opposite of John McCain (center-right) would be Jim Web (center-left)... or even Joe Manchin.

They're all moderates.

Oh FFS, could you at least keep a consistent argument? Look what you posted on the previous page:

It shows polarizations across the liberal-conservative spectrum based on the Congress critter's voting rolls. There's not a whole lotta moderates in both parties.

But suddenly McCain is a moderate, even though he's right in the middle of the republican party peak on the graph you posted. And if that peak is "moderates" then there are lots of moderates in both parties, at least half of each party! Your story changes to be whatever is needed to make Your Team correct.

Whembly is currently flipflopping about as much as Trump during a debate.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Being a republican comes with a lot of extra baggage on top of conservatism so having the party which elected Donald Trump saying you're a RINO is not the same as not being a conservative.

You're right. The GOP (the ones who elected Trumpo) are NOT conservative.

The conservative movement is dead at the moment...

This GOP Congress with Trump is go'n big... BIG GOVMINT big.

So, McCain could be classified as a conservative then.

Sure... a little 'c' conservative... not the big 'C' Conservative. (I'm wondering if you're basing your understanding of what it means to be conservative from the UK?).

The big bugaboo on McCain, is he'll do gak that's polar opposite to limit government principles.

 whembly wrote:
You're right. The GOP (the ones who elected Trumpo) are NOT conservative.

The conservative movement is dead at the moment...

This GOP Congress with Trump is go'n big... BIG GOVMINT big.

And yet magically this argument doesn't apply to the democrats. If Trump's big government policies (which are nothing but an extension of the republican party's big government policies over the past decades) mean that the conservative movement is dead why doesn't a similar conclusion apply to the democrats and things like Obama's pro-war positions and "tough on crime" anti-terrorism laws? Shouldn't this mean that the liberal movement is dead, and the democrats are a centrist party that is NOT liberal?

No true Scotsman conservative indeed...

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
center-left / center-right are moderates.

An opposite of John McCain (center-right) would be Jim Web (center-left)... or even Joe Manchin.

They're all moderates.

Oh FFS, could you at least keep a consistent argument? Look what you posted on the previous page:

It shows polarizations across the liberal-conservative spectrum based on the Congress critter's voting rolls. There's not a whole lotta moderates in both parties.

But suddenly McCain is a moderate, even though he's right in the middle of the republican party peak on the graph you posted. And if that peak is "moderates" then there are lots of moderates in both parties, at least half of each party! Your story changes to be whatever is needed to make Your Team correct.

*sigh*

That chart is based on the voting rolls.

Distinctly different than policy positions.

 whembly wrote:
The big bugaboo on McCain, is he'll do gak that's polar opposite to limit government principles.

That's because limit government is not an actual principle without caveats. There are many circumstances where government is very much necessary, such as safety standards.

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
You're right. The GOP (the ones who elected Trumpo) are NOT conservative.

The conservative movement is dead at the moment...

This GOP Congress with Trump is go'n big... BIG GOVMINT big.

And yet magically this argument doesn't apply to the democrats. If Trump's big government policies (which are nothing but an extension of the republican party's big government policies over the past decades) mean that the conservative movement is dead why doesn't a similar conclusion apply to the democrats and things like Obama's pro-war positions and "tough on crime" anti-terrorism laws? Shouldn't this mean that the liberal movement is dead, and the democrats are a centrist party that is NOT liberal?

I'm not making that case for democrats. You're projecting.

I thought the graph was interesting but yeah, Whembly, I'm gonna have to agree, you might want to take a step or three back and look at the past few pages again, your current line of reasoning is very much scoring 'own goals.'

I think that graph isn't useless like the others are saying, however what I think people are missing is that it's answering a single, very specific question and people are probably looking for answers more than it gives.

The graph is added evidence for one of the main things I've learned about American politics in the last 9 months or so.

And that is, there is perfectly rational, sane people in the Republican party. However, in order to make any progress to be nominated, they have to pretend to be utter lunatics (by my own standards).

You're then faced with a question of, what happens when they come up against someone who actually is one...

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:
The big bugaboo on McCain, is he'll do gak that's polar opposite to limit government principles.

That's because limit government is not an actual principle without caveats. There are many circumstances where government is very much necessary, such as safety standards.

This. Right here is what's called a straw man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Compel wrote:
I thought the graph was interesting but yeah, Whembly, I'm gonna have to agree, you might want to take a step or three back and look at the past few pages again, your current line of reasoning is very much scoring 'own goals.'

I think that graph isn't useless like the others are saying, however what I think people are missing is that it's answering a single, very specific question and people are probably looking for answers more than it gives.

The graph is added evidence for one of the main things I've learned about American politics in the last 9 months or so.

And that is, there is perfectly rational, sane people in the Republican party. However, in order to make any progress to be nominated, they have to pretend to be utter lunatics (by my own standards).

You're then faced with a question of, what happens when they come up against someone who actually is one...

For the GOP that nominated the Trump... that was more of an extension of the GOP primary voters rejecting the old school 'establishment' GOP party.

Whereas Clinton *is* the party of the whole democrat establishment.

The "outsider" politician became a thing, not because these outsider candidates (Trump/Sanders) were fething awesome... they were a thing because the lowly voters were rejecting the mainstream party choice.

I'll say this again: that earlier chart is useful as it normalized the datapoints BASED on the congressional critter voting behaviors. NOT based on some party platform, or candidate's campaign policy.

 whembly wrote:
That chart is based on the voting rolls.

Distinctly different than policy positions.

And just last page you were praising the chart for using voting records instead of stated policy positions as a clearer indication of what a party/politician stands for:

This chart is useful in the sense that it's what Congress critters voted on...

It's not perfect since Congress critters don't always vote for ideological reasons (horse trading, etc...). But, it's still useful.

But now that it's useful to talk about stated policy positions you're eager to ignore voting records.

 whembly wrote:
I'm not making that case for democrats. You're projecting.

And now you're making stuff up. Fortunately we have your own words from the previous page:

Democrats are not "just the center". They're comfortably in the left, just as the GOP are comfortably in the right.

You claim that the democrats are not in the center despite the fact that they have some right-leaning positions, but somehow the fact that the republicans support big government (as they have for quite some time now) means that they aren't conservative anymore.

And I stand by those statements.

I don't know why you're in a tizzy.

It's as if, it's an affront to your sensibilities when that the Democrats are not the centrist party... as if, it's some badge of honor to be centrist.

Do you not think the Democratic party are the progressive wings of American Politics?

 whembly wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 whembly wrote:
No... I wouldn't include any other countries.

This chart is useful in the sense that it's what Congress critters voted on...

It's not perfect since Congress critters don't always vote for ideological reasons (horse trading, etc...). But, it's still useful.

These conversations usually devolved into "hey, I'm the 'center'... everyone else is the extremist" This is nonsense. Everyone has an opinion.

Which is the whole reason that the chart is useless. It's like saying "Republicans are far-left" because you are comparing them to the nazis. All the chart shows is the relative left-right swing of the parties, which means both parties end up about the same distance apart.

It shows polarizations across the liberal-conservative spectrum based on the Congress critter's voting rolls. There's not a whole lotta moderates in both parties.

Did you read at all what I said? All the thing shows is the relative difference int he left-right spectrum, not where they reside on it, get it?

 whembly wrote:
I get it. I really do... but, at the same time I don't blame Trump on this. Why give an obvious adversarial Press any more ammunition?

This is me being acrimonious towards that media elites, rather than cheerleading Trumpo.

The criticism by the media is justified by Trump doing things that really, really, REALLY need to be criticized a lot.