Is the Democratic Party a viable vehicle for liberalism?

[Electric Feel]

LOL no.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Classical or American liberalism? Mind you my answer is no either way, though I'd appreciate the clarification.

[Electric Feel]

    Classical or American liberalism? Mind you my answer is no either way, though I'd appreciate the clarification.

American liberalism. There isn't anything liberal about Classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is an unfortunate misnomer.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Classical or American liberalism? Mind you my answer is no either way, though I'd appreciate the clarification.

American liberalism. There isn't anything liberal about Classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is an unfortunate misnomer.

     In the modern definition perhaps, though its name makes perfect sense when you consider the etymology of the word "liberal".

[Electric Feel]

     Classical or American liberalism? Mind you my answer is no either way, though I'd appreciate the clarification.

American liberalism. There isn't anything liberal about Classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is an unfortunate misnomer.

     In the modern definition perhaps, though its name makes perfect sense when you consider the etymology of the word "liberal".

Classical "liberals" stand in opposition to rights of economic opportunity and health care, which, to me, is the exact opposite of a liberal mindset.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Classical or American liberalism? Mind you my answer is no either way, though I'd appreciate the clarification.

American liberalism. There isn't anything liberal about Classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is an unfortunate misnomer.

     In the modern definition perhaps, though its name makes perfect sense when you consider the etymology of the word "liberal".

Classical "liberals" stand in opposition to rights of economic opportunity and health care, which, to me, is the exact opposite of a liberal mindset.

     So in other words you say classical liberalism is a misnomer because you grew up in a society where liberalism used without adjectives refers to American liberalism? Why didn't you just say so the first time?

[Electric Feel]

     Classical or American liberalism? Mind you my answer is no either way, though I'd appreciate the clarification.

American liberalism. There isn't anything liberal about Classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is an unfortunate misnomer.

     In the modern definition perhaps, though its name makes perfect sense when you consider the etymology of the word "liberal".

Classical "liberals" stand in opposition to rights of economic opportunity and health care, which, to me, is the exact opposite of a liberal mindset.

     So in other words you say classical liberalism is a misnomer because you grew up in a society where liberalism used without adjectives refers to American liberalism? Why didn't you just say so the first time?

That isn't what I am saying. Liberalism has always been based on freedom and liberty. Classical liberalism, on the other hand, is not supportive of economic freedom and therefore isn't really liberalism in any era or nation.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Classical or American liberalism? Mind you my answer is no either way, though I'd appreciate the clarification.

American liberalism. There isn't anything liberal about Classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is an unfortunate misnomer.

     In the modern definition perhaps, though its name makes perfect sense when you consider the etymology of the word "liberal".

Classical "liberals" stand in opposition to rights of economic opportunity and health care, which, to me, is the exact opposite of a liberal mindset.

     So in other words you say classical liberalism is a misnomer because you grew up in a society where liberalism used without adjectives refers to American liberalism? Why didn't you just say so the first time?

That isn't what I am saying. Liberalism has always been based on freedom and liberty. Classical liberalism, on the other hand, is not supportive of economic freedom and therefore isn't really liberalism in any era or nation.

     Rather, it is supportive of a different definition of economic freedom.

[Electric Feel]

     Classical or American liberalism? Mind you my answer is no either way, though I'd appreciate the clarification.

American liberalism. There isn't anything liberal about Classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is an unfortunate misnomer.

     In the modern definition perhaps, though its name makes perfect sense when you consider the etymology of the word "liberal".

Classical "liberals" stand in opposition to rights of economic opportunity and health care, which, to me, is the exact opposite of a liberal mindset.

     So in other words you say classical liberalism is a misnomer because you grew up in a society where liberalism used without adjectives refers to American liberalism? Why didn't you just say so the first time?

That isn't what I am saying. Liberalism has always been based on freedom and liberty. Classical liberalism, on the other hand, is not supportive of economic freedom and therefore isn't really liberalism in any era or nation.

     Rather, it is supportive of a different definition of economic freedom.

Maybe. Personally, I find that definition of "freedom" horribly flawed, but you are entitled to your own opinion.

[Torie]

Yes.

[Anthony]

The Democratic Party is probably the best we'll ever get for a viable vehicle for liberalism. The last time liberals tried voting for a third-party candidate instead, it split the liberal vote, and resulted in the election of one of the worst presidents of all time.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

do liberals have any other alternative?

[perdedor]

No, not in the least. That said, it's a two party system and the alternative to voting Democratic is voting Republican, which is in no liberal's interest these days.

[opebo]

American liberalism, obviously not, but classical liberalism, of course - both american parties are slavish devotes of the ruling class.

[Deldem]

It's the best we've got. It's too bad that they've screwed up so bad in their brief time in power though.

[Electric Feel]

It's the best we've got. It's too bad that they've screwed up so bad in their brief time in power though.

Only if you accept it. If you consider them to be only marginally better than the Republicans, it might be a good idea to find a new way to move forward your beliefs. The Democrats only have as much strength as we give them, why settle for this mess?

[Bo]

The Democratic Party is probably the best we'll ever get for a viable vehicle for liberalism. The last time liberals tried voting for a third-party candidate instead, it split the liberal vote, and resulted in the election of one of the worst presidents of all time.

Blame Gore for that, not Nader. Gore should have won enough votes even with Nader in the race to win the election (and even without FL). Gore had the good economy, lack of foreign threats, and Clinton's popularity going for him. All Bush had was his charisma (and Gore's lack of it) and the stock market decline. Yet Gore still managed to blow it.

[Deldem]

It's the best we've got. It's too bad that they've screwed up so bad in their brief time in power though.

Only if you accept it. If you consider them to be only marginally better than the Republicans, it might be a good idea to find a new way to move forward your beliefs. The Democrats only have as much strength as we give them, why settle for this mess?

Well, I think they're way better than the GOP. I'm actually thinking that if some of the leaders are out, then things will work better, especially in the Senate- Harry Reid just isn't strong enough to get things to work.

[Scam of God]

The problem with the Democratic Party, and American liberalism more generally, is that its core philosophy has remained essentially static since 1932. There are ways of advancing the cause of the working class (and is "working-class" now a naughty word to liberals?) without relying whatsoever on the State, but modern liberals are unwilling to give even the remotest credence to them.

[opebo]

The problem with the Democratic Party, and American liberalism more generally, is that its core philosophy has remained essentially static since 1932. There are ways of advancing the cause of the working class (and is "working-class" now a naughty word to liberals?) without relying whatsoever on the State, but modern liberals are unwilling to give even the remotest credence to them.

Yeah because they're absolute garbage Einzige.  The only way to alter an oppression which is absolutely State-imposed is to fight for control of the State.  Your obsession with irrelevant issues like technology is a symptom of your lack of understanding of how our society works.

[Anthony]

The Democratic Party is probably the best we'll ever get for a viable vehicle for liberalism. The last time liberals tried voting for a third-party candidate instead, it split the liberal vote, and resulted in the election of one of the worst presidents of all time.

Blame Gore for that, not Nader. Gore should have won enough votes even with Nader in the race to win the election (and even without FL). Gore had the good economy, lack of foreign threats, and Clinton's popularity going for him. All Bush had was his charisma (and Gore's lack of it) and the stock market decline. Yet Gore still managed to blow it.

I never said that Gore dosen't deserve some of the blame. The point I was trying to make was that Nadar was able to win just enough liberal votes to allow Bush to win the election. If those people voted for Gore instead, then Bush most likely wouldn't have been elected. And if enough people who usually vote for the Democratic candidate vote for a third-party candidate, then it will split the liberal vote, and we will see a repeat of 2000, with the election of another Republican president.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I think it definitely is here in Minnesota.. but on the national scale?  No.

[Psychic Octopus]

No, and it hasn't been since the 60's-70's.

[k-onmmunist]

No. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are anti-liberal - only parties such as the Libertarians are truly liberal.