jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (19 posts)

Isn't this a great time for all moderate U.S. politicians to ban together?

  1. Don Fairchild profile image78
    Don Fairchildposted 4 years ago

    Isn't this a great time for all moderate U.S. politicians to ban together?

    Since the extremist political groups, (yes all three extremists groups) have demonstrated that their ideals are basically garbage.  Now is a perfect time for moderate Democrats, moderate Republicans, moderate Tea party to come together and start taking care of the countries citizens COLLECTIVELY.
    Let's create a MAJORITY of MODERATES, time to fix this country!

    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/8492351_f260.jpg

  2. profile image0
    SassySue1963posted 4 years ago

    Sadly, the Moderates were run out of Washington. You can thank your President, Harry Reid & Nancy Pelosi for that. Why were they voted out? Because instead of listening to the people, they made back room deals and took earmarks as bribes to vote "yes" to ObamaCare.
    That is what happened to your moderate Democrats.
    The ripple effect from this is that now you have the Tea Party and some still moderate Republicans who can't find a way to meet in the middle. There may be some secretly moderate Democrats left in Washington, but they are few & far between and have lost all power.
    The people are being completed ignored by this Administration and the extreme left that have infiltrated DC. They know better than you, didn't you know that? Just listen to the President telling all those who have now lost their insurance how the government knows better, they didn't want those plans! It's beyond insane.

  3. junkseller profile image84
    junksellerposted 4 years ago

    Well, first, Obama is a moderate. That's how he won the election. Just as the bulk of the Democrats are moderates. I suspect a lot of Republicans are fairly moderate as well they are just hiding in terror from the Tea Party who is running around with pitchforks and torches. I don't really blame them.

    Secondly, no, absolutely not. A depth and variety of ideas is a GOOD thing. We don't need fewer ideas or for everyone to be a pasty average blob of ordinary grey ideas. What we need is for politicians to actually care about and know how to have a conversation together and through compromise craft good policy. There is nothing wrong with electing politicians with off-center ideas. There is, however, something wrong with electing politicians who have no interest in being legislators.

    1. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Moderate what? Obama is no moderate. He ran as a moderate but his policies have gone more and more left.

    2. junkseller profile image84
      junksellerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      You have no apparent understanding of the left. Look at the Green Party as an example. They are HIGHLY critical of Obama and the Affordable Care Act, by the way. The left (generally) wanted a single payer system.

    3. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      As does Obama. The entire thing is set up to fail and force the country to single payer. Reid has already come out and admitted that. And let's not even start about pulling power from Congress and shifting it to EPA, HHS, IRS, etc.

    4. junkseller profile image84
      junksellerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Maybe Obama does want a single-payer plan. He compromised and implemented a MODERATE market-plan. Intending it to fail is conspiracy theory rubbish I won't waste my time on. As for shifting power, if true, it has nothing to do with the left.

    5. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Why would Harry Reid start a conspiracy theory about the Democrats & the President? Get a grip. The man came out and said it bold as brass.

    6. junkseller profile image84
      junksellerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Prove it.

    7. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      About how they wanted single payer, how he knows the law won't work forever, step 2 single payer, 3:30 http://youtu.be/SXgSKwYMnWo

    8. junkseller profile image84
      junksellerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Believing a program to be a step along the way does not mean it is "set up to fail and force the country to single payer." Incremental changes is pretty much how things work. Of course he's looking ahead. that's what politicians do.

    9. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I gave u the nice interview with the nice liberal. there are others out there as well where he says it is a step to removing health insurance completely. Keep downing that kool-aid though.

    10. junkseller profile image84
      junksellerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      It's no secret that some see it as a step towards a certain end. That still is nothing like intending something to fail as a way to force in outcome. If you see no difference in those two things than, I'm sorry, but you are dumb.

    11. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      you want to get to point d. you can't use a straight line. It's a steip toward  he said. you take steps to get where you initially want to go. if u think it isn't set up to push the county into single payer than u are worse than dumb. you are naive.

    12. junkseller profile image84
      junksellerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      If the country decides in the future to take another step to a single-payer system, than that would simply be democracy. Your implying a level of deviousness that just isn't here.

    13. jstfishinman profile image64
      jstfishinmanposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      junkseller: and there in lies the rub, this is not a democracy, it is a republic.
      There are many that treat the US as a democracy, in fact it gave the Democrats their name. This is a republic, which gave the Republican party its name. Government 101.

    14. junkseller profile image84
      junksellerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Very well: "If the country decides in the future to take another step to a single-payer system, than that would simply be republicanism." Not sure how that would alter my point of denouncing SS's allegation that this is some sort of devious plan.

  4. jstfishinman profile image64
    jstfishinmanposted 4 years ago

    Moderates,  are the first people attacked.  The left hates them, the right hates them, and they are so wishy-washy  with their votes, that the electorate  isn't comfortable not knowing which way they are going to vote.
    Nobody likes lukewarm, moderates are like the undecided voter, they have no passion. Hitler counted on the moderates to follow like sheep, and they did. Moderates are just scary!

  5. Don Fairchild profile image78
    Don Fairchildposted 4 years ago

    Interesting observation on just where some people feel the Moderate Point should lie.  How can you claim a moderate point to be smack in the middle of a far extreme position?
    Also moderates appear to be 'wishy washy' only because they are sadly outnumbered by the extremists on both sides.  Ergo, back to my original statement of needing a majority of true moderates.
    Let's cut the finger pointing and start doing what is right for the country and it's citizens collectively.

 
working