When was the last Progressive Democrat in the White House ...???

[dutch508]

MindMover (3,892 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251357457

When was the last Progressive Democrat in the White House ...???
Was it Jimmy Carter ?

and if he was the last, my real question is who is our Progressive Democratic Presidential candidate?

 

CBGLuthier (9,497 posts)
1. 1945, but then he died and Truman took over.

Are they using a different dictionary over there or something?

vi5 (10,426 posts)
4. If we view "Progressive Democrat"

As someone who holds more than 50% progressive views then I'd say Carter. As someone else in this thread pointed out, he wasn't perfect and he did some things that may have not been economically progressive. But on balance he was the last one that was more progressive than he was not.

Clinton got the needle tilting even closer to that 50% mark and straddled it a lot more than he should have.

But with Obama, given his positions on foreign policy/spying/etc., his corporate/wall street friendly views and appointments, his lackluster support of labor/unions, and his horrid positions on education I'm afraid is not even in the ballpark. It's only because Republicans have gone so far right, off the deep end batshit crazy that anyone can with a straight face try to claim that Obama is a progressive democrat in any sense of that combination of words.

daybranch (577 posts)
19. wrong question

When was last democratic who supported progressive economic ideas in the White House? Who was the last President who understood the relationship between the ability of consumers to purchase and the health of our economy? Who was the last President who actually stood up for the financial heaslth of the American people against Wall Street, corporations, and banking forces? Who and when?
For an economic system to flourish and help its citizens, we need a basic structure containing
-an adequately informed populace
-an adequately educated populace and
-an election system which weighs each vote the same.
The moneyed interests have been attacking these for a long time. Faux news and the purchasing of main stream media to ensure the public is uninformed is obvious. Their attacks on public education and support for charter school is a great example of denying education to the general populace. Their use of Gerrymandering is a monstrously successful stealing of the power of our votes.
Of these three, the most immediate and most damaging is taking away the power of our votes and denying us representational democracy through Gerrymandering.
I define corruption as the serving of big donors at the expense of the constituents are were elected to serve. The purpose of Gerrymandering is to allow you to profit from corruption without voter interference and those in or running for public office who support Gerrymandering support corruption. The power of Gerrymandering is monstrous. In Ohio 106 of 109 officials legislators were elected by Gerrymandering. Three quarters of our members of the US House are Republicans even though the votes for each party were about the same across Ohio. Getting anything done to support the people of Ohio is about impossible.
We need your help. No matter your location, your age, your political affiliation, we are all served by representatives accountable to the citizenry and this is not the case under Gerrymandering. One thing about Democracy, working for it anywhere is working for it everywhere. Creating democracy again in Ohio, creates more democracy in the US Congress. If the makeup of our representatives in the House reflected the makeup of the votes cast in our state you would have 4 less Republicans and 4 more Democrats there. It is obvious that the battle against Gerrymandering should be one all Democrats and any non corrupt Republican should support. Please help us, you can do this by first going on our MoveON petition and pledging your support. This is not a plea for money but a plea for you to identify yourself as one who will standup for democracy. The link to our petition is http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/gerrymandering-in-ohio?source=c.fwd&r_by=99591 Thank you.

  WTF?

[Carl]

When was the last democrat that campaigned by telling the truth?
It was before Wilson at a minimum.

[franksolich]

Well, it seems to me that if one defines "progressive" as being in favor of maximum individual freedom, minimal intrusive government--the old hippie idea of "do your own thing"--that would be Grover Cleveland, president 1885-1889 and 1893-1897.

But if one defines "progressive" as being in favor of totalitarianism, that would be.....the present occupant of the White House.

[JohnnyReb]

The last progressive I don't know about ....but the biggest communist one ever is still in the white house.

[txradioguy]

MindMover (3,892 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251357457

When was the last Progressive Democrat in the White House ...???

He's kidding right?

[franksolich]

He's kidding right?

I dunno; sometimes it's hard to tell if a primitive's joking, or being serious.

[miskie]

All of you primitives who are denying Obama's progressive credentials are racist.

[Big Dog]

DUmmy daybranch thought he had smoked a leaf from the Tree of Knowledge, but instead he lit up some locoweed sprayed with Roundup.

The DUmmy doesn't know the definition of "progressivism". His pet political philosophy was the cover for authoritarian, fascistic* paternalism by Northeastern limousine liberals like Wilson, both Roosevelts, and Rockefeller.  *as properly defined, not the leftists' misuse of the word

Progressivism has never been intended to tear down the walls on Wall Street, nor to create or promote self-sufficiency and success among the lower class. It was intended to keep the huddled masses poor, weak, and dependent; far away from the Old Money master class in their gated mansions, their crumbs paid for by New Money (mercantile or middle class).

Progressivism is, by necessity, authoritarian (socially), totalitarian (politically) and fascistic (economically)- for the underclass's own good, of course; "their own good" being defined by the master class. Progressiveness can be summed up in one sentence: "Shut up and eat your gruel, we'll do the thinking for you."

And King Hussein is the embodiment of progressive "rule".

[Delmar]

MindMover (3,892 posts)

When was the last Progressive Democrat in the White House ...???

With any luck Barry Soetoro will be the last.

[wasp69]

DUmmy daybranch thought he had smoked a leaf from the Tree of Knowledge, but instead he lit up some locoweed sprayed with Roundup.

The DUmmy doesn't know the definition of "progressivism". His pet political philosophy was the cover for authoritarian, fascistic* paternalism by Northeastern limousine liberals like Wilson, both Roosevelts, and Rockefeller.  *as properly defined, not the leftists' misuse of the word

Progressivism has never been intended to tear down the walls on Wall Street, nor to create or promote self-sufficiency and success among the lower class. It was intended to keep the huddled masses poor, weak, and dependent; far away from the Old Money master class in their gated mansions, their crumbs paid for by New Money (mercantile or middle class).

Progressivism is, by necessity, authoritarian (socially), totalitarian (politically) and fascistic (economically)- for the underclass's own good, of course; "their own good" being defined by the master class. Progressiveness can be summed up in one sentence: "Shut up and eat your gruel, we'll do the thinking for you."

And King Hussein is the embodiment of progressive "rule".

Well said, sir.

[thundley4]

For an economic system to flourish and help its citizens, we need a basic structure containing
-an adequately informed populace
-an adequately educated populace and
-an election system which weighs each vote the same.
The moneyed interests have been attacking these for a long time.

Most of the MSM is owned by liberal progressives deliberately keep people misinformed.
Labor unions and so-called progressives have been in control of the education system for decades.
Democrats are against voter ID because it would limit their ability to rig elections. They do not want all votes counted and to be counted the same.
Unions have poured millions of dollars into every election for decades. Soros and other wealthy leftists have done the same.

But now the Dummies get pissed because of Fox News and the Koch brothers.

[Carl]

Most of the MSM is owned by liberal progressives deliberately keep people misinformed.
Labor unions and so-called progressives have been in control of the education system for decades.
Democrats are against voter ID because it would limit their ability to rig elections. They do not want all votes counted and to be counted the same.
Unions have poured millions of dollars into every election for decades. Soros and other wealthy leftists have done the same.

But now the Dummies get pissed because of Fox News and the Koch brothers.

Did the administration know its Ocare promises were outright lies...yes.
Did the media do all they could to hide that from the public...yes.

[BlueStateSaint]

DUmmy daybranch thought he had smoked a leaf from the Tree of Knowledge, but instead he lit up some locoweed sprayed with Roundup.

The DUmmy doesn't know the definition of "progressivism". His pet political philosophy was the cover for authoritarian, fascistic* paternalism by Northeastern limousine liberals like Wilson, both Roosevelts, and Rockefeller.  *as properly defined, not the leftists' misuse of the word

Progressivism has never been intended to tear down the walls on Wall Street, nor to create or promote self-sufficiency and success among the lower class. It was intended to keep the huddled masses poor, weak, and dependent; far away from the Old Money master class in their gated mansions, their crumbs paid for by New Money (mercantile or middle class).

Progressivism is, by necessity, authoritarian (socially), totalitarian (politically) and fascistic (economically)- for the underclass's own good, of course; "their own good" being defined by the master class. Progressiveness can be summed up in one sentence: "Shut up and eat your gruel, we'll do the thinking for you."

And King Hussein is the embodiment of progressive "rule".

Right from the bolded I knew that I'd have to H5 you for this.

[Ptarmigan]

Obama is pretty far left as he gets. Obama is not left enough for DUmmies. Gee, what a bunch of batty children!  

[DefiantSix]

When was the last democrat that campaigned by telling the truth?
It was before Wilson at a minimum.

I'd probably say that was Stephen A. Douglas.

After that was that whole Civil War thing, and ever since, Dhimmi'Rats have managed to fool some of the people most of the time by pretending that they aren't what they really are.