It depends. We Americans have been propagandized against “socialism” and “communism” for over a century, so in media discourse, this might be the political spectrum. But when polled on issues, apart from party identity, Americans support policies far to the left of any politician. Universal health care is perhaps the canonical example.
There’s some good evidence that Sanders would’ve won. And Mamdani did. The population can be progressive when progressive candidates are allowed to run.
And a trivial one to verify, since a 2024 poll found 62% of Americans support a single-payer health care system. And, recall that same-sex marriage achieved majority public support before Democratic leaders, like Obama and Clinton, shifted their stances to support it.
I see you stopped reading after the second sentence of the comment you replied to. I present you with the rest of the comment, which I implore you to now read:
But when polled on issues, apart from party identity, Americans support policies far to the left of any politician. Universal health care is perhaps the canonical example.
Elected US Politicians represent the political spectrum of electoral US politics? Wow, thanks for the insight.
The full spectrum on a left/right axis in a liberal democracy is actually not that subjective. It’s bordered on the left and right by people who actually reject the liberal democracy: the far left who want to overthrow the system to achieve better equality and conditions for the greater number, and the far right, who want to overthrow the system to achieve stronger privileges for the in-group they belong to.
Indeed, US politicians do not represent the full spectrum of ideas in between those extremes. The political spectrum of the US is what it is, sure, and that’s actually what this meme is all about.
You understand that it’s not subjective? “Leftwing” and “rightwing” are actual political and academic terminology with actual definitions. Stop talking out of your ass and educate yourself.
No it’s not subjective, that’s an idealist notion. These words have actual meaning beyond discourse. Our economic and social reality is defined by class struggle over real material contradictions. Politically left people actively support the large majority of humanity who make up the oppressed classes trying to liberate themselves. The actions of the political right keep the oppressed down. The right is materially useful only for a tiny minority of brutal oppressors. That’s the world we live in. It applies in every country. Just because the right is stronger in the US, than in practically every other country, doesn’t make half of them suddenly left.
You guys understand that this is subjective?
They may not be left enough for you personally but they represent the political spectrum of in the US.
It depends. We Americans have been propagandized against “socialism” and “communism” for over a century, so in media discourse, this might be the political spectrum. But when polled on issues, apart from party identity, Americans support policies far to the left of any politician. Universal health care is perhaps the canonical example.
Yeah but how can you elect progressive representatives if the population is not progressive.
There’s some good evidence that Sanders would’ve won. And Mamdani did. The population can be progressive when progressive candidates are allowed to run.
You’re saying the population is more progressive than the candidates the dems put up? That’s quite the claim.
And a trivial one to verify, since a 2024 poll found 62% of Americans support a single-payer health care system. And, recall that same-sex marriage achieved majority public support before Democratic leaders, like Obama and Clinton, shifted their stances to support it.
Do you think that Trump won because the democrats didn’t alienate enough minorities? Maybe they weren’t supportive enough of genocide?
Trump won because he got more votes than the Democrats.
I see you stopped reading after the second sentence of the comment you replied to. I present you with the rest of the comment, which I implore you to now read:
Elected US Politicians represent the political spectrum of electoral US politics? Wow, thanks for the insight.
The full spectrum on a left/right axis in a liberal democracy is actually not that subjective. It’s bordered on the left and right by people who actually reject the liberal democracy: the far left who want to overthrow the system to achieve better equality and conditions for the greater number, and the far right, who want to overthrow the system to achieve stronger privileges for the in-group they belong to.
Indeed, US politicians do not represent the full spectrum of ideas in between those extremes. The political spectrum of the US is what it is, sure, and that’s actually what this meme is all about.
Yes but every commenter in this thread is complaining that their supposed progressive representatives are in fact conservative.
My point is, they represent the spectrum of the US, and by definition some are more progressive than others.
Incorrect. The US is incorrect and needs to change. This will not be given up.
You understand that it’s not subjective? “Leftwing” and “rightwing” are actual political and academic terminology with actual definitions. Stop talking out of your ass and educate yourself.
No it’s not subjective, that’s an idealist notion. These words have actual meaning beyond discourse. Our economic and social reality is defined by class struggle over real material contradictions. Politically left people actively support the large majority of humanity who make up the oppressed classes trying to liberate themselves. The actions of the political right keep the oppressed down. The right is materially useful only for a tiny minority of brutal oppressors. That’s the world we live in. It applies in every country. Just because the right is stronger in the US, than in practically every other country, doesn’t make half of them suddenly left.