It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is a New Progressive Party starting to take shape?

page: 2
17
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2019 @ 12:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
What do you think stopped that momentum?


Prohibition. They completely overstepped and miscalculated.




posted on May, 13 2019 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

The never trumpers will not accept trump as a republican.
Well, unless he leads us into a land war in Iran.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody


The never trumpers will not accept trump as a republican.


Which is ironic, his admin looks very similar to Bush Jr's without being as mush mouthed.


Well, unless he leads us into a land war in Iran.


Or Venezuela.

I'm still giving the old chap a chance, but he's done to me should he let Bolton have his way.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

And Eugenics...but that really never stopped for some did it?



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: CriticalStinker

The never trumpers will not accept trump as a republican.
Well, unless he leads us into a land war in Iran.


I don't think there are all that many left. Not ones showing it outwardly anyway.

Besides, what is their alternative? Watch a socialist win the election?



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker
Bolton isn't going to lead Trump anywhere that he doesn't want to go.

It's more of a good cop, bad cop thing.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

We have too many laws in favor of workers. This country needs to move further to the right and cater more laws serving the billionaires and CEOs. Remember Peter 2:18.


edit on 13-5-2019 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 01:23 PM
link   
To the OP. Look a bit into social darwinism. That (to me at least) was the driving force behind the "golden age" all progs were seeking prior to WW2.

It is one of the reasons they slowly co-opted communist lite after WW2. They needed so badly to be the thinking people of the FUTURE.

Then again, "conservatives" slowly fell in line. So it is what it is.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: matafuchs

Napalitano is a neocon shill, and I don't trust him, or his opinions, as far as I could throw him.


How big a boy are ya? Napolitano is 5'7 and around 140 pounds. He'd toss easily.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Abe Lincoln did. LBJ won 1964.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ahabstar
Abe Lincoln did. LBJ won 1964.


My post says '1964'.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

I could find myself identifying with classical democrats. however, that is now "republican".

Too bad libertarianism doesn't have answers to any of societies problems, or society might be more accepting.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: matafuchs
It even took some transitioning for the party to accept Trump, many did not like him.

People forget this all the time. In a lot of ways, Trump wasn't really accepted by a large percentage of Republicans until after he won the election, and even then a lot of the old guard really hated the idea. The Republican party seems strong at the moment. But look back a few years and you'll see pundits saying the Republican party was dying and near death.

There is a way to make a stronger Progressive party. You need a charismatic leader to start. After that, you need to concentrate on things everybody has an interest in, like jobs and money and healthcare. Something that can be directly addressed by the law. As I've said before, gender and ethnicity become surprisingly unimportant when a person has money.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: matafuchs
Too bad libertarianism doesn't have answers to any of societies problems, or society might be more accepting.

Yeah, libertarianism has its positive aspects, but it has a tendency to reject society rather than figure out ways to make it work better. It also works better with populations that are not quite as dense, and certainly those with fewer women, children and old people who really need the support of society.

I'm sure there are a lot smarter people than I who are trying to puzzle out what kind of political stance would be both popular and effective for most people without leading to a tyranny of the majority.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: matafuchs
You are correct with your timeline but it was not 'mainstreamed' till Teddy tried it to take a nomination.


Totally incorrect. The ideals of the Progressive Era were fully espoused by the Republican Party of that time. There are lists of Republican politicians from the local to national level who ran on and won due to their support of Progressivism.


I am trying to recall exactly when the Prohibition Movement was. That was a progressive thing and it was religious. It was one of those times when you saw Republicans on board with progressivism for moral reasons. It currently is the reason why Kansas has so many big government problems -- moral progressives and leftist progressives ally more often than most outsiders realize even if it's for differing reasons.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

Libertarianism is more of an individualistic approach in the extreme. You really need a strong society to operate in a libertarian world.

Right now, you have too many libertarians who are primarily interested in libertinism more than in true liberty.

The kind of liberty that would lead to a strong, functional society is basically one of extremely strong personal responsibility in most individuals at all levels. You need a lot of people who can say, "Just because I could doesn't mean I should and therefore, I recognize that I won't because it's just not a smart idea no matter how much fun it might seem to be."

Yeah, we need a lot of growing up first.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Yeah, we need a lot of growing up first.

Most of us are tied to old ways of thinking because of tradition, habit, laziness, etc. We get nostalgic for times in the past that we think were great but in reality never really existed, and the only way to get away from that kind of nonsense is for the old people who think that way to slowly die off. We're only now getting away from the idea that the 20th Century people who fought all those wars were the "Greatest Generation." If they were so great, why were they constantly fighting wars?

It's hard to even tell what "progressive" means. Progressive how? People are people, and we get stuck doing people-like things. Everybody wants things to progress, but nobody has a clear idea as to what that would actually look like.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

And there was a time when a lot of people thought that the old ways were awful and needed to change because they were old.

They had trendy names like Red Guard and brought in things like the Cultural Revolution.

Sometimes, people learn that change for the sake of change isn't all it's cracked up to be. Sometimes, the old ways got to be the old ways, not because people are stagnant and unable to think of anything better, but because nothing so far has actually been better. And sometimes, that change you all want so bad? It isn't actually new, but it's been tried before and failed, and failed really hard.



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Progressives won't last long, investing investing so much of their time in dead-end endeavors like this! (LOL)


A trio of House Judiciary Committee Democrats are pushing legislation to pause the statute of limitations while a president is in office.

The "No President Is Above the Law Act" is aimed at President Donald Trump.

Many Democrats — and hundreds of former federal prosecutors — believe Trump has committed crimes detailed in the report from Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Trump is shielded from facing criminal charges by a controversial Justice Department policy preventing prosecution of a sitting president but not a former president.
More at: www.sun-sentinel.com...



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 06:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
I am trying to recall exactly when the Prohibition Movement was. That was a progressive thing and it was religious. It was one of those times when you saw Republicans on board with progressivism for moral reasons. It currently is the reason why Kansas has so many big government problems -- moral progressives and leftist progressives ally more often than most outsiders realize even if it's for differing reasons.


It had it's grassroots very early but really started to gain traction in the last quarter of the 19th Century.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join