Jump to content

Talk:Democratic Party (United States)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateDemocratic Party (United States) is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 27, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
October 14, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate


Political position

[edit]

Why don't the American political parties have "political position" as a category in their info boxes? Like where it would say "center-left"? Almost all wiki pages about political parties in other countries have this category. 150.108.240.134 (talk) 22:34, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has been discussed before. Everyone has a different opinion on where various ideologies fit into the political spectrum. The articles already state party ideology in the info-box. There is no need to add where Wikipedia editors place these ideologies in the political spectrum. TFD (talk) 23:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you point me to these discussions? I am having trouble finding them and I don't think this is a particularly strong argument. American political parties should not get special treatment simply because a lot of editors have opinions on it - but my mind is open. Carlp941 (talk) 16:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
nevermind - found em. I still don't buy the arguments posed, I find them quite off base. Plenty of big tent parties that have a similar character to the Democrats and Republicans have their political positions labeled.
but I can accept that there is no consensus for change for now. I found the attempts at change to be poorly thought out as well. I think people can get "center left" from the ideologies for the democrats and can get "right wing" from the GOP ideologies. Carlp941 (talk) 16:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you name any other parties that have no control over membership or who their members nominate for office? In some states, such as Vermont, the party has no membership at all. Can you name any other parties that don't have members? Also, neither party has a statement of ideology. Also, primary elections run by government is fairly uncommon. TFD (talk) 16:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is a non-sequitor. Unique party structures do not do away with a political position. Did the European Greens temporarily surrender their ideology by having open primaries for the 2013 European parliament elections? Did the French Socialists suddenly become non ideological because they started to hold open primaries in 2012? Of course not. Every political party has a unique context - they are still ideological and have a place on the political spectrum. Carlp941 (talk) 17:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone revert the edit saying that the Dems are Centre-left? They have so many diverse factions and their economic policy certainly isn't Centre-left so this is inaccurate 101.119.138.41 (talk) 07:35, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would definitely agree. There are a number of sources noting that the party has notable centrist[1][2][3] and conservative/right-leaning[4][5] factions. While I don't deny that there are certainly some "social justice warrior" progressives in the party, they've become a big tent (even "conservative") party of anyone supportive of the constitutional status quo as opposed to the radical right (says The Atlantic[6]). If we're going to put a political position in at all, it should be "big tent" or "center" (since that's where the party "establishment" mostly is) with a note that the party has also has a substantial left-leaning faction and a somewhat smaller right-leaning faction. PtolemyXV (talk) 05:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC) PtolemyXV (talk) 05:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would say the most accurate definition would be centre left to centre right. This would include members such as the squad, who fit the profile of centre-left social democrats in many countries, as well as moderate Democrats who are most akin to centre right politicians in peer countries. 184.145.1.225 (talk) 03:58, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Who are these moderate Democrats akin to centre-right politicians? AusLondonder (talk) 01:24, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. TFD (talk) 02:29, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's no way Obama, Biden or Harris would be members of the Conservative Party (UK), the Liberal Party of Australia, The Republicans (France) or the Christian Democratic Union of Germany. I'd argue they're all to the left of parties such as the Australian Labor Party or the Labour Party (UK). Both those two parties oppose legalisation of cannabis while the Australian Labor Party has supported tax cuts for the rich, a questionable policy of turning back migrant boats on the open seas and indefinite detention of asylum seekers. The Australian Labor Party was in government opposing same-sex marriage while Obama and Biden were supporting it. AusLondonder (talk) 04:56, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Center to center-left versus center-left

[edit]

It appears a general consensus has been reached across the several talk page sections about the political position of the party, and that the consensus is the political position should be added to the page. However, there appears to be disagreement over whether the text should state "center to center-left" or just "center-left."

I have included several of the sources I've found about this topic below.[b] Thank you Toa for trimming some of the other sources I found that were not as reliable as these (I included the The New York Intelligencer as it is a reliable source as per wikipedia).

References

  1. ^ Hood, John (December 6, 2006). "Meet the New House Centrists". National Review.
  2. ^ "United House Democrats Return to Squabbling Ways". National Journal. Retrieved October 14, 2018.
  3. ^ Kesselman, Donna. "Fact check US: Is it true that 'In a country other than the US, Joe Biden would not be in the same party as the Democratic left'?". The Conversation. Retrieved 19 July 2024.
  4. ^ "The US Presidential Election 2020: Last Lap Reflections". The Political Compass. Pace News Ltd. Retrieved 19 July 2024.
  5. ^ Bacon, Perry. "The Six Wings Of The Democratic Party". Five Thirty Eight. Retrieved 19 July 2024.
  6. ^ Graham, David. "The Democrats Are Now America's Conservative Party". The Atlantic. The Atlantic. Retrieved 19 July 2024.
  7. ^ Rae, Nicol C. (June 2007). "Be Careful What You Wish For: The Rise of Responsible Parties in American National Politics". Annual Review of Political Science. 10 (1). Annual Reviews: 169–191. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.071105.100750. ISSN 1094-2939. What are we to make of American parties at the dawn of the twenty-first century? ... The impact of the 1960s civil rights revolution has been to create two more ideologically coherent parties: a generally liberal or center-left party and a conservative party.
  8. ^ Guardino, Matt; Snyder, Dean (December 2012). "The Tea Party and the Crisis of Neoliberalism: Mainstreaming New Right Populism in the Corporate News Media". New Political Science. 34 (4). Taylor & Francis: 527–548. doi:10.1080/07393148.2012.729741. ISSN 0739-3148. Indeed, the Democratic Party's longing for centrism and consensus with the right wing disables its ability to articulate a resonant message with the public.
  9. ^ Marantz, Andrew (May 24, 2021). "Are We Entering a New Political Era?". The New Yorker. New York, New York: Condé Nast. Archived from the original on April 19, 2024. Retrieved June 16, 2024. Moderation may be relative, but moderates still run the Democratic Party.
  10. ^ Levitz, Eric (October 18, 2018). "America Already Has a Centrist Party. It's Called the Democrats". New York Intelligencer. New York City: New York Media. Archived from the original on February 24, 2024. Retrieved June 17, 2024. But for now, the actually existing Democratic Party is a centrist organization that champions fiscal responsibility, balanced budgets, procedural norms, a civil public discourse, strong border enforcement, a globe-spanning military empire — and, like the vast majority of the American people, a more ambitious and generous social-welfare state, higher taxes on the rich, abortion rights, a path to legal status for the undocumented, more regulatory protections for consumers and the environment, and various incremental reforms aimed at increasing labor's share of economic growth.

Notelist

  1. ^ According to the Manifesto Project Database MARPOR dataset for 2020, the Democratic Party has a RILE score of -24.662, putting it within the range of being a center to center-left party. Historically, it has classified the party as centrist or center-right, but the database has noted a relatively recent shift to the left in the party's politics.
  2. ^ [7][8][9][10][a]

BootsED (talk) 01:19, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support center-left, with centrist and left-wing factions. Some of your sources are older, before the Democratic Party lost its more conservative-leaning Southern faction in the 2010s, except for African Americans and some urban areas in the South. Sources:[1][2][3][4]

References

  1. ^ Sach, Maddie (December 16, 2019). "Why The Democrats Have Shifted Left Over The Last 30 Years". fivethirtyeight.com.
  2. ^ Yglesias, Matthew (July 26, 2016). "Bill Clinton is still a star, but today's Democrats are dramatically more liberal than his party". Vox. Retrieved 31 May 2022.
  3. ^ Kane, Paul (2014-01-15). "Blue Dog Democrats, whittled down in number, are trying to regroup". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 2014-01-16. Retrieved 2014-07-23. Four years ago, they were the most influential voting bloc on Capitol Hill, more than 50 House Democrats pulling their liberal colleagues to a more centrist, fiscally conservative vision on issues such as health care and Wall Street reforms.
  4. ^ Zengerle, Jason; Metz, Justin (June 29, 2022). "The Vanishing Moderate Democrat". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved July 20, 2022. Over the last decade, the Democratic Party has moved significantly to the left on almost every salient political issue ... on social, cultural and religious issues, particularly those related to criminal justice, race, abortion and gender identity, the Democrats have taken up ideological stances that many of the college-educated voters who now make up a sizable portion of the party's base cheer ... .

JohnAdams1800 (talk) 02:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Center-left, the only stance with reliable sources. Our most reliable sources present the party as center-left, without qualifications; the most reliable presents it as a near opposite of the GOP. The center-left by definition includes both the center and left, making the clarification of "centrist and left-wing factions" utterly redundant. Also, re:Intelligencier - it's an opinion piece, and it's a wildly opinionated one presenting the Republicans as a fascist party. It's not reliable for anything other than Levitz's opinion. Toa Nidhiki05 03:02, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose, as has been said before, the party is way too much of a big tent to make a definitive position. Both major parties in the USA are big tents, the ideology section is a much better way to figure out what the party stands for. And to reiterate another point made before, the party is not on the left on the international scale. The only compromise I'd consider is Big tent (perhaps listing centrist and centre-left factions). GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 12:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly Support, as there are Big tent parties that has political position listed for example Liberal Party of Australia is considered a Big tent conservative party listed as Centre-right to Right-wing plus political position is mostly listed from the standards of the individual country (e.g. compare Conservative Party (Norway) listed as Centre-right and Republican People's Party classified as Centre-left even though the latter is more conservative). Mhaot (talk) 13:04, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Liberal Party is considered a broad church by its members, sure, but broad strictly on the right. The Democrats have factions to the left of centre and right of centre. Hence my "big tent" suggestion. GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 13:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Democrats do not have any right of center factions. Toa Nidhiki05 14:34, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with @Toa Nidhiki05. The conservative Democrat faction has steadily declined in the 21st century, as Democrats lost power in the South. The Blue Dog Coalition has just 10 members (it peaked at 54 in 2009) and moved left in recent years, Senators Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin became independents and won't run in 2024.
Bill Clinton would be considered a very moderate or Blue Dog Democrat by today's standards, not including his record on LGBT rights. Bill Clinton supported the death penalty, enacted a welfare reform law, deregulated the telecom and financial industries, and was lukewarm on labor unions (see my Vox source). JohnAdams1800 (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clinton also did not support LGBT rights while he was president, so I'm not sure why you highlight his history on that subject as if he was anything but moderate on it. 2603:6011:59F0:3C40:E0CE:6FA:FF3D:4FA2 (talk) 15:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clinton was also incredibly tough on crime which is not typically associated with modern day leftism. 2603:6011:59F0:3C40:E0CE:6FA:FF3D:4FA2 (talk) 15:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Political Positions are more based current stances and a countries standards
- No use comparing politics today to the 1990's plus Bill Clinton supports same-sex marriage since 2013.
- A center-left party in a non-western country is mostly more conservative than a conservative party in a Western Country Mhaot (talk) 02:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since 2013... his presidency ended in 2001. 2603:6011:59F0:3C40:E0CE:6FA:FF3D:4FA2 (talk) 01:49, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of the four sources above, Guardino and Snyder are largely irrelevant. They do not describe the party as centrist, they comment on its efforts to reach agreements with the right-wingers. Marantz is talking about moderates dominating the party, not centrists. Rae describes the party as both liberal and center-left, attributing this direction of the party to the influence of the civil rights movement. Levitz describes the party as centrist (not center-left), but also implicitly describes it as militaristic and imperialist. According to him, the party's goals include the maintenance of a "globe-spanning military empire". Dimadick (talk) 14:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am changing my support to center-left. I have found additional high-quality sources that I believe should put the question of whether the Democratic Party is "Center-left" or not to rest.[1][2][3][4]

References

  1. ^ Bruner, Christopher M. (2018). "Center-Left Politics and Corporate Governance: What Is the 'Progressive' Agenda?". BYU Law Review. 2018 (2). Digital Commons: 267–334. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2917253. ISSN 2162-8572. SSRN 2917253. This article has argued that a widespread and fundamental reorientation of the Democratic Party toward decidedly centrist national politics over recent decades fundamentally altered the role of corporate governance, and related issues, in the project of assembling a competitive electoral coalition.
  2. ^ Coates, David, ed. (2012). "Liberalism, Center-left". The Oxford Companion to American Politics. Oxford University Press. pp. 68–69. doi:10.1093/acref/9780199764310.001.0001. Observes that the terms "progressive" and "liberal" are "often used interchangeably" in political discourse regarding "the center-left".
  3. ^ Cronin, James E.; Ross, George W.; Shoch, James (August 24, 2011). "Introduction: The New World of the Center-Left". What's Left of the Left: Democrats and Social Democrats in Challenging Times. Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-8223-5079-8. pp. 17, 22, 182: Including the American Democratic Party in a comparative analysis of center-left parties is unorthodox, since unlike Europe, America has not produced a socialist movement tied to a strong union movement. Yet the Democrats may have become center-left before anyone else, obliged by their different historical trajectory to build complex alliances with social groups other than the working class and to deal with unusually powerful capitalists ... Taken together, the three chapters devoted to the United States show that the center-left in America faces much the same set of problems as elsewhere and, especially in light of the election results from 2008, that the Democratic Party's potential to win elections, despite its current slide in approval, may be at least equal to that of any center-left party in Europe ... Despite the setback in the 2010 midterms, together the foregoing trends have put the Democrats in a position to eventually build a dominant center-left majority in the United States.
  4. ^ Hacker, Jacob S.; Malpas, Amelia; Pierson, Paul; Zacher, Sam (December 27, 2023). "Bridging the Blue Divide: The Democrats' New Metro Coalition and the Unexpected Prominence of Redistribution". Perspectives on Politics. Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association: 3. doi:10.1017/S1537592723002931. ISSN 1537-5927. We conclude by considering why Democrats have taken this course, why they are not perceived as having done so, and why, at this fraught juncture for American democratic capitalism, political scientists could learn much from closer examination of the rich world's largest center-left party.

BootsED (talk) 00:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree @BootsED, political positions mostly takes into account the standards of the individual country (e.g. compare Conservative Party (Norway) listed as Centre-right and Republican People's Party classified as Centre-left even though the latter is more conservative). Mhaot (talk) 13:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose What's Left of the Left: Democrats and Social Democrats in Challenging Times defines center-left as "a variety of political forces, among them social liberals, social democrats, democratic socialists, progressives, greens, and human rights campaigners." (p. 5) Others, including most editors in this conversation, may define it differently so for example by excluding democratic socialists. It's circular: if by center-left we include the ideology of the Democratic Party, it is center-left. OTOH, if we define centrism as liberalism, then the party is centrist. TFD (talk) 16:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think this is covered by the factions section only having centrism and progressivism, not democratic socialism, greens, and whatnot. The book also describes European center-left parties, which are generally more left than the American center-left, and which it acknowledges followed a different historical path than the American Democratic Party. While I was collecting these sources I came across another one that expounded on this point. I will have to find it again and add it here. BootsED (talk) 21:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Like @Mhaot said, political positions take into account the standards of the individual country and independent sources, and generally not international standards (which are hard to define). JohnAdams1800 (talk) 00:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Democratic Party is an outlier in the book because it is the only major that does not have Marxist roots. While Marx was advocating the overthrow of capitalism, Democrats were building capitalism. However, it is the most left-wing of the two major U.S. parties, is identified with minorities and labor, and like Marxist parties it has moved to the center. In Europe however, liberal parties tend to occupy the middle ground between social democrats and conservatives.
    While I understand that in some contexts, the Democrats can be seen as center-left, in other contexts, they can be seen as centrist or center-right. It is misleading to describe them as center-left without explaining what is meant. The footnote should say, "By center-left we mean socialist and green parties and, in the United States, the Democratic Party." TFD (talk) 02:02, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"the only major that does not have Marxist roots" The Democratic Party was founded in 1828, when Karl Marx was 10-years-old. Both the Democratic Party and the preceeding Democratic-Republican Party were populist parties which represented the American variations of classical radicalism.Dimadick (talk) 02:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Democratic Party is not socialist or green. There have been many discussions over putting in "democratic socialism" or socialism as a faction of the party and all have failed. Why would we put a footnote saying that the Democratic Party is "socialist and green"? BootsED (talk) 13:56, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of Europe uses a multi-party system, while the English-speaking world uses first past the post voting, which by Duverger's law incentivizes two parties. If you want to compare the Democratic Party internationally, consider comparing it to the Liberal Party, Australian Labor Party, or Labour Party (UK) because those nations have two major parties.
Because of the party's size, environmentalist and socialist positions tend to be represented by say the Congressional Progressive Caucus, not individual coalitions. 2610:20:6B73:240:0:0:0:B096 (talk) 21:48, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Democratic party began before the Communist Manifesto, and before the Civil Rights movement, was a combination of two coalitions--Southern Democrats and Northern Democrats, symbolized by Andrew Jackson (Tennessee) and Martin Van Buren (New York). See the article on Southern Democrats for their full history, while Martin Van Buren stayed loyal to the Union (he died in 1862).
Northern Democrats became pro-labor after William Jennings Bryan toppled the Bourbon Democrats in the 1896 presidential election, and continued with FDR's New Deal in the 1930s. Southern Democrats, which for nearly a century (1877 to 1964) became known as the Solid South, were obviously not a left-leaning coalition; it was reactionary and white supremacist, disenfranchising African Americans and poor Whites. User:JohnAdams1800 (talk) 21:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why would you presume defining centrism as liberalism is agreeable to anyone other than your singular self? 2603:6011:59F0:3C40:E0CE:6FA:FF3D:4FA2 (talk) 15:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An additional source with more information on how the Democratic Party is further to the right than European left-wing parties, and how there is no strong socialist or equivalent "left-wing" movement in the United States. I think with this source, there shouldn't be any more confusion that there are "socialist" elements within the center-left Democratic Party, which I believe should satisfy TFD's concerns.[1][2]

References

  1. ^ Hargrove, Erwin C., ed. (2010). "Introduction". The Future of the Democratic Left in Industrial Democracies. Issues in Policy History Series. Penn State Press. ISBN 978-0-271-02356-4. pp. 1, 2: There is "liberalism" or "progressivism" in the United States of many hues, but with no "social democracy" or politically viable socialism to the left. ... Definitions thus push us towards questions about American "exceptionalism" in the sense that the center of political gravity is further to the right in the United States than in Europe.
  2. ^ Hamby, Alonzo L. (2010). "Is There No Democratic Left in America? Reflections on the Transformation of an Ideology.". In Hargrove, Erwin C. (ed.). The Future of the Democratic Left in Industrial Democracies. Issues in Policy History Series. Penn State Press. ISBN 978-0-271-02356-4. pp. 3, 4: The concept of "the left" is a European import that always has existed uneasily in the United States. ... It has especially struggled for existance in that most liberal of societies, the United States. That we discuss the left at all in an American context at the beginning of the twenty-first century may be a tribute to its capabilities of survival and adaptation—as well as a certain talent for infiltration and disguise. The left, to the extent one exists in America, has appropriated the vocabulary of liberalism, and when all is said and done abandoned much of its original content and tone while clinging to remnants of its social objectives.

BootsED (talk) 03:59, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the Democratic Party is not a Labor party like the UK Labor Party or Germany's SPD. Part of the reason is the Southern United States, which is heavily racially polarized--White evangelicals in the Bible Belt vote nearly as Republican (80-90%) as African Americans vote Democratic (85-95%). But a party can still be center-left without relying on organized labor, and instead be focused on issues such as abortion rights and environmentalism.
The party is instead comprised of well-educated White voters and racial minorities, particularly African Americans. It could be called postmaterialist among White voters, because educational attainment in the United States is highly correlated with income and wealth. I have three sources for this.[1][2][3]

References

  1. ^ Grossmann, Matt; Hopkins, David A. "Polarized by Degrees: How the Diploma Divide and the Culture War Transformed American Politics". Cambridge University Press. Retrieved May 23, 2024. Democrats have become the home of highly-educated citizens with progressive social views who prefer credentialed experts to make policy decisions, while Republicans have become the populist champions of white voters without college degrees who increasingly distrust teachers, scientists, journalists, universities, non-profit organizations, and even corporations.
  2. ^ Levitz, Eric (October 19, 2022). "How the Diploma Divide Is Remaking American Politics". New York Intelligencer. Archived from the original on October 20, 2022. Retrieved April 24, 2023.
  3. ^ Sosnik, Doug (April 17, 2023). "The 'Diploma Divide' Is the New Fault Line in American Politics". The New York Times. Archived from the original on April 24, 2023. Retrieved April 24, 2023.

JohnAdams1800 (talk) 17:58, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It depends what your definition of center left is. It seems like a term created in order to group European Socialists with Democrats. What information does it provide readers about the Democrats that the ideology box doesn't? TFD (talk) 19:27, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
TFD, the very Wikipedia page for center-left politics does not list European Socialists with the Democratic Party. Specifically in the lead of the page, "Centre-left politics are contrasted with far-left politics that reject capitalism or advocate revolution." I don't think people will be confused and think that the Democratic Party are socialists. Also, we have a lot of sources now that use center-left to describe the current Democratic Party. Pending some change in this, I think the argument for center-left is strong at this time. BootsED (talk) 20:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Current proposal

[edit]

For a refresher for those confused with all the references listed and the addition and removal of some of them, this is currently how the political position and the sources used to describe it are proposed to appear.

Political position Center-left[b]

References

  1. ^ Rae, Nicol C. (June 2007). "Be Careful What You Wish For: The Rise of Responsible Parties in American National Politics". Annual Review of Political Science. 10 (1). Annual Reviews: 169–191. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.071105.100750. ISSN 1094-2939. What are we to make of American parties at the dawn of the twenty-first century? ... The impact of the 1960s civil rights revolution has been to create two more ideologically coherent parties: a generally liberal or center-left party and a conservative party.
  2. ^ Marantz, Andrew (May 24, 2021). "Are We Entering a New Political Era?". The New Yorker. New York, New York: Condé Nast. Archived from the original on April 19, 2024. Retrieved June 16, 2024. Moderation may be relative, but moderates still run the Democratic Party.
  3. ^ Bruner, Christopher M. (2018). "Center-Left Politics and Corporate Governance: What Is the 'Progressive' Agenda?". BYU Law Review. 2018 (2). Digital Commons: 267–334. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2917253. ISSN 2162-8572. SSRN 2917253. This article has argued that a widespread and fundamental reorientation of the Democratic Party toward decidedly centrist national politics over recent decades fundamentally altered the role of corporate governance, and related issues, in the project of assembling a competitive electoral coalition.
  4. ^ Coates, David, ed. (2012). "Liberalism, Center-left". The Oxford Companion to American Politics. Oxford University Press. pp. 68–69. doi:10.1093/acref/9780199764310.001.0001. Observes that the terms "progressive" and "liberal" are "often used interchangeably" in political discourse regarding "the center-left".
  5. ^ Cronin, James E.; Ross, George W.; Shoch, James (August 24, 2011). "Introduction: The New World of the Center-Left". What's Left of the Left: Democrats and Social Democrats in Challenging Times. Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-8223-5079-8. pp. 17, 22, 182: Including the American Democratic Party in a comparative analysis of center-left parties is unorthodox, since unlike Europe, America has not produced a socialist movement tied to a strong union movement. Yet the Democrats may have become center-left before anyone else, obliged by their different historical trajectory to build complex alliances with social groups other than the working class and to deal with unusually powerful capitalists ... Taken together, the three chapters devoted to the United States show that the center-left in America faces much the same set of problems as elsewhere and, especially in light of the election results from 2008, that the Democratic Party's potential to win elections, despite its current slide in approval, may be at least equal to that of any center-left party in Europe ... Despite the setback in the 2010 midterms, together the foregoing trends have put the Democrats in a position to eventually build a dominant center-left majority in the United States.
  6. ^ Hacker, Jacob S.; Malpas, Amelia; Pierson, Paul; Zacher, Sam (December 27, 2023). "Bridging the Blue Divide: The Democrats' New Metro Coalition and the Unexpected Prominence of Redistribution". Perspectives on Politics. Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association: 3. doi:10.1017/S1537592723002931. ISSN 1537-5927. We conclude by considering why Democrats have taken this course, why they are not perceived as having done so, and why, at this fraught juncture for American democratic capitalism, political scientists could learn much from closer examination of the rich world's largest center-left party.
  1. ^ According to the Manifesto Project Database MARPOR dataset for 2020, the Democratic Party has a RILE score of -24.662, putting it within the range of being a center to center-left party. Historically, it has classified the party as centrist or center-right, but the database has noted a relatively recent shift to the left in the party's politics.
  2. ^ [1][2][3][4][5][6][a]

BootsED (talk) 20:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, because it explains the Democratic Party as ideologically less cohesive (though the Republican Party in recent years has more factions) and center-left. The "Polarized by Degrees" source explains how the Democratic Party is center-left but differs from Europe's center-left because it relies more on the college-educated instead of organized labor.[1] JohnAdams1800 (talk) 17:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support center left as the sole position. These sources are excellent. Carlp941 (talk) 03:28, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Support (see sources and comments above). DN (talk) 03:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mixed oppose Change to "center to left wing" to encompass both the Blue Dog and New Democrat Coalitions, and the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Dhantegge (talk) 13:12, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I really dislike this usage, it is ambiguous and confusing. What does it mean? That reliable sources have variously described it as "centrist" and "left-wing"? If so, why not have a footnote explicitily saying this with a list of sources? I would avoid "Left-wing" at all for the same reasons explained by TFD. Is it meant to describe the factions within the party, as you seem to imply here? Why not actually add a proper "Factions" parameter to the infobox as I tried to do years ago because users keep adding anyway an artificial Factions: parameter (as is also done here for the "Ideology" parameter in this very article) so we can list either official factions and/or ideological wings? In such cases, I would just put "Center-left", "Centrist", "Center-left", "Left-wing", or "Right-wing", and have a footnote explaining why the party has also been described the other way and the scholarly debate.
In the case of Democrats, I would go with "Center-left" as that is the more common indicator in the United States (or "Centrist" if we go by scholarly groupings as explained by TFD) and "Right-wing" for the Republicans to underscore their much more significant rightward case. Same thing for the Labour Party and the Conservative Party in the UK, as the Labour Party is a member of the centre-left European grouping whereas the Conservatives are members of the right-wing (not center-right) European grouping and also underwent a rightward shift. In all cases, I would just have a footnote concisely summarizing the debate rather than ambiguous and confusing "Center-left to left-wing" or "Center-right to right-wing". Same thing for "Ideology": in the case of Democrats, I would just list liberalism, linking to the "Modern liberalism in the United States" article, and have a footnote explaining the other ideological factions within the party and do it at an historical level not limited to recentism (after all, if we are going with the ambiguous "to", why not actually summarize the party's historical position on the spectrum and explain the reversal between the Democrats and Republicans from left-wing to right-wing and vice versa? That would be much better and clear than this ambiguous "to" usage), while finally creating a proper "Factions" parameter where we would list and link the Blue Dog Coalition, New Democrats, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and the like. Davide King (talk) 16:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As I mentioned earlier, these terms have no fixed meaning and therefore create ambiguity rather than clarity when used without context. Note that "What's Left of the Left" cited above defines center-left as the Democratic Party in the U.S. and social democratic parties abroad before saying the grouping is controversial. Can anyone explain what additional information this field provides beyond what is already stated in the ideology field? TFD (talk) 17:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either "Center-left" (per the reliable sources and because it effectively acted as the center-left party in the United States) or "Centrist" (per TFD, who I think raises several important and interesting points and that I hope can be further discussed at Talk:Centre-left politics but that a footnote can address), with a footnote. Oppose any "to" wording usage, which is ambiguous, as I outlined above. While personally favouring "Centrism" (per TFD), I think the presented reliable sources are enough to support "Center-left". I also support the current footnote, and as long as it explains this, discusses the scholarly debate (I would add a summary of the whole evolution of the party and do the same for the Republicans), and reflects that, to quote TFD, "By center-left we mean socialist and green parties and, in the United States, the Democratic Party", I am perfectly fine and in full support of "Center-left (with footnote)".
  • Personally, I like "Centrism" because it represents the "Big tent", which I would not use because it is not a proper political position on the spectrum, of the Democratic Party, which is a liberal, not social-democratic, party. Internationally, even left-liberal parties, despite its ideological name, are centrists who effectivly act as the center-left parties, such as in Canada (with the social-democratic NDP as center-left) or the United States. But I would still group them as centrists because the centre is always moving, and just because they may not be equidistant between the Left or the Right, and thus be closer to the center-left, it does not mean they automatically became center-left just because the spectrum and thus the center moved rightward
  • At the same time, I think "a variety of political forces, among them social liberals, social democrats, democratic socialists, progressives, greens, and human rights campaigners" does not necessarily exclude left-liberal, and thus I would include both democratic socialists (e.g. left-wing social democrats) and social liberals, rather than exclude one or both; I would group more radical democratic socialists as left-wing and closer to what was known as "Marxist centrism" (e.g. even many radical democratic socialists are in fact both reformists and revolutionaries, and even when advocating revolution, they see it more as a democratic revolution rather than a violent one). Also there is a fact to consider left-liberals as center-left, even in the United States: there was an early 20th century liberal, whose name evades me (never mind, I found him: it was Herbert Croly) who rejected the view that American liberal tradition was inhospitable to anti-capitalist alternatives. So even from a more left-wing perspective, American liberalism can be considered center-left. And that is why I also personally support "Center-left" as an accurate grouping for the Democratic Party.
  • As an addendum, I think that I believe must be discussed in regards to Center-left politics is its evolution, because it makes it appear as though anti-capitalism is only a far-left position when in fact it was taken by center-left social democratic parties in the 20th century, with the difference being that the center-left was more moderate and pragmatic, and attempted more to trascend capitalism through reforms rather than overthrow it by revolution. Thus, were the pre-World War II social-democratic parties left-wing or center-left, or did they become center-left in the post-war period? I always assumed they were center-left (like the modern center-left, they were more reformists than revolutionists) and that was changed was the political climate and the Overton window. Plus, were the revolutionary liberals far-left? The French Revolutionaries were not all far-left, and in fact far-left was used to refer to those further left of the Jacobins, like the Hébertists, and the Jacobins (revolutionaries) were left-wing. I think this should be clearer and discussed within the context of center-left politics, with a section expanding on the American context. Davide King (talk) 17:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Grossmann, Matt; Hopkins, David A. "Polarized by Degrees: How the Diploma Divide and the Culture War Transformed American Politics". Cambridge University Press. Retrieved May 23, 2024. Democrats have become the home of highly-educated citizens with progressive social views who prefer credentialed experts to make policy decisions, while Republicans have become the populist champions of white voters without college degrees who increasingly distrust teachers, scientists, journalists, universities, non-profit organizations, and even corporations.

Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2024

[edit]

This political party is listed as center-left. It would be more accurate to claim this institution is center-right.

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746.amp 2603:8000:A301:1A0:510:AAFF:ABF:843B (talk) 17:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. your link does not mention the Democratic party or even the words center or right Cannolis (talk) 19:08, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be considered left wing, you have to be anticapitalist. Both American political parties are owned by corporations. They are directly responsible for following the views of those who give them donations. That is how freedom of speech works in the United States.
The left starts at anti-capitalism. At bare minimum you have to side with workers over corporations. Alextitmier (talk) 01:22, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1). nobody is suggesting that the majority of the Democratic Party is “left-wing”; there is a substantial difference between “center-left” and “left-wing”, and discourse on this talk page has made that clear.
2). while there is a significant amount of corruption within our government, most, if not all, of it is consolidated in factions that are pro-business, such as the NDC, which adheres to “third way” liberalism. corruption is not particularly common in a faction such as the CPC, which adheres to “social liberalism” (considered to be a “center-left” ideology) and fits your “bare-minimum”, obtuse narrative of anti-capitalism (simply siding with workers over corporations).
3). although you believe the Democratic Party should be listed as “center-right”, you can’t provide a reliable source (or any source, really) that supports your claim. even if factions such as the BDC and NDC are capitalist and adhere to “fiscally conservative” policies on the economy, that doesn’t necessarily make them “center-right” in political science.
4). it would be better if you could actually defend your argument instead of making two different threads to push your narrative. 71.254.80.96 (talk) 05:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 July 2024

[edit]

“Please change Democratic Party to Democrat Party”.


Reasoning:

There is a Republican Party (not a Republic Party) which consists of individuals dubbed Republicans (not Republics) There is likewise a Democrat Party (not a Democratic Party) which consists of individuals dubbed Democrats (not Democratics). 2600:1006:B115:E801:51DE:FFA4:C67A:6D1B (talk) 15:11, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Incorrect, the party is called the Democratic Party. — Czello (music) 15:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More to the point, that's a pejorative epithet. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems right-wingers think democrat sounds bad, democratic sounds good. If the use of “democrat” as the name is wrong, there should some discussion of this in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:4300:EE90:CDF3:43A:6271:51B9 (talk) 18:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's just silliness. Several years ago, they almost renamed the Democrats the Democrat Socialist Party. TFD (talk) 02:52, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thoughts on ideology/position

[edit]

I understand there is discourse on both the Democratic Party and Republican Party Wiki talk pages over their respective ideologies and positions. Because there are a lot of factors in this discussion (including personal bias, political affiliation, and overall coherency), it’s no surprise no one can seemingly agree with each other. With that in mind, I believe it’s important for a party’s ideology and position to be labeled generally but also correctly on Wiki. Analyzing the Congressional House caucuses of the Democratic Party, it’s fair to label its “ideology” as “progressivism” and “liberalism”; this takes into account the fact there are two major caucuses that disagree with each other over economic policy (“third way” in the NDC and “social liberalism” in the CPC) yet still adhere to the tenants of “liberalism” and “progressivism”. However, factions such as PSC (“centrism”) and BDC (“fiscal conservatism”) shouldn’t be ignored either; therefore in the “factions” section of “ideology”, it’s only fair that “centrism”, “fiscal conservatism”, “social liberalism”, and “third way” should be listed. As far as the Democratic Party’s “position”, per analyzation of the caucuses, it should be “center to center-left”. While many argue that it should include “center-right”, many also forget that the BDC no longer adheres to “social conservatism” and that no faction of the Democratic Party adheres to an economic policy that is explicitly on the right (“fiscal conservative” policy is usually referred to as centrist and is derived from “economic liberalism”). While many argue that it should not include “center”, many also ignore the fact that the largest caucus (NDC) barely touches the Left. I hope this helps the discussion. 71.254.80.96 (talk) 15:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's too much detail for the info-box and belongs in the body of the article. TFD (talk) 02:48, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 August 2024

[edit]

The ideology says "center-left", which is inaccurate. The Democratic Party is in total support of capitalism. They are a center to center-right ideology. Alextitmier (talk) 01:14, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 02:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV; the "diploma divide" affects us as editors--do you have a college degree?

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


It appears the diploma divide has only grown stronger, per Pew Research data. I'm a graduate student applying to PhD program in statistics this fall, and recognize the irony.

For those with post-graduate degrees--63% Harris, 32% Trump. For those with just a Bachelor's or Associate's--51% Harris, 41% Trump. For those who attended but didn't graduate--44% Harris, 46% Trump. And those with HS or less--38% Harris, 53% Trump. This is a monotonically increasing trend between education and support for the Democratic Party.

Link: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/08/14/the-presidential-matchup-harris-trump-kennedy/ JohnAdams1800 (talk) 00:05, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editors are supposed to ensure that articles reflect reliable sources, not their personal opinions. I would point out that most sources, especially academic literature, are usually written by people with college degrees as well. While that may cause a bias in reliable sources, it's not something that Wikipedia articles are supposed to question. Basically, if someone comes here, they want to see an article similar to what they would see in an introductory polisci textbook. TFD (talk) 02:06, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, my point is the lead of this article on the Democratic Party is written in a more favorable tone, and fails to mention the 2021-2023 inflation surge--instead describing an "increasingly progressive economic agenda," which likely violates NPOV. The policies may be ideologically progressive, but the price increases and polling point to the contrary in terms of effect.
Also the sheer number of discussions on Talk:Republican Party (United States) over the party's ideology and place on the political spectrum, and thinly-veiled disagreement over many of its positions, is likely because most editors have college degrees. See actor-observer asymmetry, where we are less able to recognize that the trend (educational polarization) affects us as well.
Side-note: I'm not a registered Democrat or Republican. But being graduate student and seeing the statistics on educational polarization explain a lot. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 19:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of the sources say the Dems have an "increasingly progressive economic agenda," The first source, which argues it does, says that the consensus is it doesn't. The second source says that the neo-liberal paradigm, pursued by both parties, has been challenged by Sanders on the left and Trump on the right.
This seems like a case of deciding what the article should say, then finding sources rather than identifying the best sources and summarizing what they say.
It's a lot easier to challenge text on the basis that it is unsourced or wrong than to argue NPOV. TFD (talk) 23:34, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2024

[edit]

I believe that the political position of the party should be changed from "Center Left" to "Majority Center to Center-Left" With Factions listed as Center-Right and Left Wing. The Democratic party is a big tent party and this is widely known and established. The prominent policies and economic views reflect social liberalism and third way politics, and the party does not resemble other center-left social democratic parties. The party's RILE score is also sourced as placing it as a center to center-left party. Listing it as center-left is misleading and assumes the idea that the Democratic party has a prominent view of social democracy, which is untrue. BH018123 (talk) 16:32, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Please provide reliable sources that support the changes you want to be made. — BerryForPerpetuity (talk) 21:31, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woodrow Wilson has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Emiya1980 (talk) 03:20, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on Biden's presidency in the lead

[edit]

I'm looking for a consensus on whether to change or remove this sentence in the lead. I support keeping the sources.

Reasons:

  • Biden withdrew from the 2024 election, and he will serve only one term. This itself is extremely notable, and may be worth putting in the lead instead.
  • The sentence fails to mention the 2021-2023 inflation surge, or that Biden ended 2023 with a job approval rating of 39 percent, the lowest of any president since 1979.[1] Biden's presidency has not been viewed favorably by the public, even if the party's agenda is ideologically increasingly economically progressive.
  • Biden is still the incumbent president, and there are other events that could be mentioned. Also, Biden's presidential legacy will almost certainly be affected by the winner of the 2024 presidential election.

JohnAdams1800 (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being forced out of the 2024 race publicly by members of your own party & donors, because it's believed you've no chance of winning re-election, isn't an overly good legacy. I'm not certain how to handle this. GoodDay (talk) 17:03, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Brenan, Megan (December 22, 2023). "Biden Ends 2023 With 39% Job Approval". Gallup.com.

Martin Van Buren has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Emiya1980 (talk) 01:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Final Reference to Consolidate

[edit]

I consolidated most of the references that were duplicated except for the NYMag.com one. This particular one has one source with no quote and another with one. Should they remain separate or should they be consolidated in some way? Ztormtrooper (talk) 19:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Political position: "Center Left" and "Left"

[edit]

I suggest adding "Left" to the political position of the Democratic Party.

Brookings Institution: Have Democrats become a party of the left? https://www.brookings.edu/articles/have-democrats-become-a-party-of-the-left/

Washington Post: Biden’s Democratic Party is to the left of Obama’s. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/07/13/why-progressives-winning-inside-democratic-party/

Center for Politics: Both White and Nonwhite Democrats are Moving Left https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/both-white-and-nonwhite-democrats-are-moving-left/

Classifying the Democrats as only a "Center Left" party seems outdated. This is not the 1990s Bill Clinton Democratic Party anymore. MoldciusMenbug (talk) 16:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Headlines: "News headlines...are not a reliable source." In your first example, the article actually says that the Democrats have shifted left because a thin majority is now liberal whereas thirty years ago a plurality was moderate. It does not say it is a left-wing party.
No reliable sources consider U.S. liberalism, which is committed to capitalism, to be left-wing. TFD (talk) 20:03, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with TFD. There are probably also far more sources labeling it as centrist than full on left-wing (see [1][2][3] and the current efn note in the infobox-- plus one or two sources currently under the center-left label either directly mention centrism or don't refer to the party itself as center-left but as having built a "center-left coalition"). HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References used in this conversation

[edit]
  1. ^ Hogan, Phineas (2024-08-23). "In centrist shift, Democrats deploy anti-Trump Republicans to help Kamala Harris broaden her appeal". Arizona Mirror. Retrieved 2024-10-02.
  2. ^ Levitz, Eric (2018-10-18). "America Already Has a Centrist Party. It's Called the Democrats". Intelligencer. Retrieved 2024-10-02.
  3. ^ Bruner, Christopher M. (2018). "Center-Left Politics and Corporate Governance: What Is the 'Progressive' Agenda?". BYU Law Review. 2018 (2). Digital Commons: 267–334. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2917253. ISSN 2162-8572. SSRN 2917253. This article has argued that a widespread and fundamental reorientation of the Democratic Party toward decidedly centrist national politics over recent decades fundamentally altered the role of corporate governance, and related issues, in the project of assembling a competitive electoral coalition.

Preceded by

[edit]

preceded by the democratic-republican party needs multiple citations as it is a very dubious claim. I'm not sure any US political historian worth their salt would contend that Thomas Jefferson set the stage for what would become the Democrat party. 2603:6011:59F0:3C40:E0CE:6FA:FF3D:4FA2 (talk) 15:27, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Historians argue that the Jeffersonian party was an ancestor of BOTH the modern Dem Party and the modern GOP (The Republicans in 1850s explicitly named their new party after the Jeffersonians). However it was more a 'grandparent' than a 'parent'. FDR made a big deal about Jefferson founding his party and you get that in old popular history books. Since 1970s historians largely agree the old Jeffersonian party was dead for years when the modern Dem party was created by Van Buren and Jackson in about 1830-1834. see Second Party System For recent scholarship look at Michael Kazin, What it took to win: a history of the Democratic Party (2022) online. Kazin gives Van Buren the major credit and explicitly states: "The fact that Jefferson neither created the Democratic Party " [p 8] Rjensen (talk) 02:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undefined reference

[edit]

Hello JohnAdams1800! You made this edit the other day which is dependent on a citation named "cambridge.org". But no such citation is defined on this article, so your edit leaves the article with a referencing error. Are you able to supply the missing citation definition so this error can be fixed? Maybe it was meant to be <ref name="Polarized by Degrees"> -- mikeblas (talk) 16:11, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Party membership

[edit]

This was previously removed, but has been re-added back. I have some objections to this:

1) This information isn't actually party membership. It's party registration data from the 30 states that actually register by party for the purpose of voting in primary elections. 2/5ths of states do not have party registration, so this isn't even a full sample.

2) Ballot Access News doesn't seem like an incredibly reliable or useful source.

Given this information isn't actually membership, is only a sample from 30 states, and comes from a dubious source, I don't think it should be added. Toa Nidhiki05 16:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. These are not party members and should not be presented as such. TFD (talk) 18:31, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]