Maggie's Farm

feeblemind: 115 years ago. Not 100.

115 seemingly qualifies as 100+.

mudbug: The fact that JFK would never get the Democratic nomination today shows that the Democrat{ic} party has moved far to the left, the fact that Bill Clinton could not get the Democrat nomination today shows how fast it has moved.

The center itself has been moving left, as it has been for centuries. JFK died before the the end of segregation, before the gay rights movement, before women entered the workforce en masse, before Loving v. Virginia, even before Griswold v. Connecticut.

As for immigration, Trump's views on immigration are far to the right of Clinton at the time of that speech. Trump wants to expel millions of people who have been in the U.S. for years, and gives no notion that he understands the complexity of the issue.

mudbug: I'm not sure the center has been moving left for centuries. The creation of the US and the resultant rise of liberal democracies in its wake disputes that.

Huh? The revolutionary period was leftist — by definition.

mudbug: Trump merely to enforce the law. Both Hillary and Trump understand the complexities.

Sure he does. Trump has said he wants to expel eleven million undocumented immigrants. What will that entail? Boxcars full of people running continuously for months dropping them at the border? What about children who were brought to the U.S. as children? What about the undocumented who have citizen children?

MissT: You just don't listen, do you?

Sure we do. With regards to undocumented immigrants, Trump said "They have to go," and ""We got to move 'em out." As was clear throughout the primaries, he advocated for deporting all undocumented immigrants. The question is, why weren't you listening?

mudbug: Leftist espouse more government control over everything. The American Revolution was a move to self government and maximum freedom of individuals.

That doesn't even begin to make sense, that is, unless you think Louis XVI, a monarchy is highly concentrated political power, was left wing. Nor does it explain why military dictatorships are considered right-wing.

In fact, the left-right spectrum is orthogonal to the anarchy-authoritarian spectrum. There are people on the left who are anarchist, and people on the left who are authoritarian, with most somewhere in between. There are people on the right who are anarchist, and people on the right who are authoritarian, with most somewhere in between.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics

mudbug: Hillary wants to flood the country with unfettered immigration in order to ensure Democratic victories in the future.

Most Americans support a path to citizenship. That, and the fact that she is generally liberal with regards to diversity is more than sufficient to explain her position on immigration.

Meanwhile, Republicans devise laws specifically designed to minimize minority voting, but that won't work in the long run, with or without a path to citizenship.

mudbug: Rounding up all illegal immigrants at once and deporting them would be impossible and unwise.

Trump said he would do it in two years, or about a half million a month. Are there enough boxcars? Just dump them on the border?

mudbug: As for the children (said to be citizens), they could choose to stay or go with their parents.

Sure. Just leave a minor child in the U.S. or take them to Mexico, a country they have never been.

a monarchy, is which highly concentrated political power,

mudbug: Most dictatorships are left wing - Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Kim Jung Un.

Most historians place Hitler on the political right.

Nor have you answered the points raised. The Bourbon kings concentrated power in the monarchy, yet they were clearly on the political right, as were military dictatorships as once often found in Latin America. On the other hand, there are plenty of left-wing anarchists, such as Occupy. These examples show that your understanding of the political left-right spectrum is inconsistent with common usage, while the citation provided above shows it is inconsistent with scholarly usage.

mudbug: Whether most people want a path to citizenship or not does not change the motivation for Hillary and the Democrats implement unlimited illegal immigration.

Again, you didn't respond, or provide evidence to support your bald claim. Most Americans support a path to citizenship. That, and the fact that she is generally liberal with regards to diversity is more than sufficient to explain her position on immigration.

mudbug: As for voting, up till the '70s, for the previous one hundred years, Democrats have been trying to suppress the black vote.

Sure. Southern politicians nearly universally supported Jim Crow. That changed with the Civil Rights Movement. A large segment of the Democratic Party doesn't just support minorities — it is largely composed of minorities.

mudbug: Now they want non citizens and felons to vote - since they will likely vote for them.

There is no move to allow non-citizens to vote in federal elections. As for felons, the majority of states already allow felons to vote once they have served their time, including states that are strongly Republican.

mudbug: Republicans support voting laws to minimize fraud, like picture ID requirements - that are favored by large majorities of blacks.

The federal courts have found the some of those laws have clearly discriminatory intent and effect.

mudbug: As for the children of people who immigrated illegally, who is responsible for their plight?

We suppose it depends on whether you are your brother's keeper. (See Genesis 4:9.)

Assistant Village Idiot: As current political categories do not accurately reflect the political questions of centuries ago - nor could they ever - your statement has no meaning.

The standard definition of the political left is advocacy for greater equality, and was originally a rejection of power concentrated in a monarchy and other vestiges of feudalism. The right were those who supported traditional hierarchies.

More particularly, the examples we provided were flash-points in the liberal-conservative divide. It was conservatives who resisted the end of segregation. It was conservatives who resisted gay rights. It was conservatives who resisted interracial marriage. It was conservatives who resisted availability of contraceptives.

That's because conservatives saw these changes as threats to the stability of the traditional mores and values — the very definition of conservatism. What was once considered radical is now accepted by nearly everyone on both the left and the right. The center has moved to the left.