Reply With Quote
So I take it you like where the country is right now?...was so viscerally scandalized by the ascendancy of a black man to the presidency that it drove the entire Republican base to the fringes of the far right.
...was so viscerally scandalized by the ascendancy of a black man to the presidency that it drove the entire Republican base to the fringes of the far right.
So I take it you like where the country is right now?...was so viscerally scandalized by the ascendancy of a black man to the presidency that it drove the entire Republican base to the fringes of the far right.
OP is a faux-intellectual got.
The entire base? Facinating.
It's in a lot better place than it was during the Bush era, that's for sure.
Economists have already do ented how the far-right wing of the Republican Party has managed to drag the entire party to the fringes of the far right, such that even so-called "moderate" Republicans are considered extremist by the standards of just half a century ago.The entire base? Facinating.
That's absurd. Economists?
Think before you post, son.
There aren't any true 'moderate Republicans' like Roosevelt anymore at the top of the party, who are willing to get Progressive when need be. They're all far right vehement Conservatives. Rand Paul tries to market himself as the moderate candidate but isn't succeeding..
Agreed...the top of the party are a bunch of loons.
Oohhh...a chart with no data or context. Try again.
but the voters who elect them aren't?
You think Karl Marx is "moderate"
There aren't any true 'moderate Republicans' like Roosevelt anymore at the top of the party, who are willing to get Progressive when need be. They're all far right vehement Conservatives. Rand Paul tries to market himself as the moderate candidate but isn't succeeding..
only you are talking about your straw man MarxYou think Karl Marx is "moderate"
The graph is supposed to speak for itself.
But since you apparently need an analysis, the main premise is that through much of the 1930's until the 1970's, Republicans and Democrats were relatively dissimilar on the political spectrum. In other words, they were ideologically indistinguishable.
But beginning in the mid-1970's, the two parties began to move apart and become more polarized. The difference is, Democrats moved only slightly more to the left. Republicans, on the other hand (particularly since the election of Obama), veered so far into the right that the entire party can now essentially be considered reactionary.
The chart does not speak for itself nor does your tortured "analysis"cut it. I do this for a living. Give me some actual data or at least a cite so I can do the heavy lifting for you.
Some are, some are not.but the voters who elect them aren't?
Off the top of my head, I suspect the data points are self-represented which opens a whole e can of worms that leads to the collection of data.
You keep mentioning Marx as If I worship him or something..You think Karl Marx is "moderate"
Not all socialists are Marx-loving advocates of a classless society that drive around in Ladas with Stalin posters plastered around their living room walls like Fox News would have you believe..
Ladas still run?
most are, voting for Repugs against their best financial interests, for the right-to-work-for-less, because Repug pols wave pics of dismembered fetuses, Bibles, lie about Dems confiscating guns,etc, etc., and just out of plain ignorance, stupidity, low information. guns/gays/god/LGBT/racism/immigration are the issues that get extremist Repugs elected repeatedly. and the extremist Repugs are the ones controlling the legislatures.
Yeah..ok.
Are you a political scientist?
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...n-of-congress/
Does he not get that the chart negates the point made in the op?
No. I'm an analyst with a background in education and sociology. When I encounter a chart or graph, I tend to read the underlying data and methodologies before I decide if it's Kosher or not. Clearly, this chart says what you want it to say and that was good enough for you and your boutonsque, asinine soliloquy at the head of the OP.
This chart doesnt measure "red state america" anymore than your vapid talking points resemble reasoned thought.
The chart is based upon data from the DW Nominate model. The data is robust and the methodologies used, sound. It's the conclusions drawn from inaccurate application that's a particular issue.
Here's a quick read that states my case much clearer than I have the time and patience to.
I expect it to be largely ignored as it doesnt fit the pre-established narrative.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...polarized.html
Pretty much par for thinkprogress.borg tho.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
