Why the hell did these people vote for Trump?

In fact the American democratic party line is pretty far off to the right of a Dutch centrist party. It would align to one of our more right-wing parties. On the left side we have actual for real communists.

Relevant to the other thread, the Netherlands has a wealth tax, for instance.

This can’t be true. I’ve been told over and over again that the Democrats represent a radical and violent Left!

Well, it’s certainly overstated. Yes, the American center is to the right of the European one, but I’d be interested in knowing which Democratic Party platform planks place it on the European far right.

Well yeah I overstated a bit, but prior to the (re)normalisation of extreme right or fascist parties in Dutch politics our rightmost party were the liberals. Economic right and moderately culturally right. The rich man’s party.

We have five large parties*1 that make up coalition governments. The balance has shifted quite a bit over the last four decades, but we used to have at least two degrees of socialism with the larger party being the moderates. The smaller ones were the radicals, and have only written Mao and Lenin out of their party line a year or five ago.

1* And a ton of smaller ones, often with specific issues such as animal rights or net neutrality.

Well, from a UK perspective - and we’re not very left-wing by some European standards - a couple of things spring to mind:

  • Any party not full-throatedly in support of our national socialized single-payer health service would be committing electoral suicide, so even the Conservatives support it, in word if not in deed. You’d need to go over to UKIP for support for any health insurance type policies. (I know a lot of Democrats favour single payer, but I’m not sure that’s party policy yet? Apologies if I’m wrong on this one)
  • No mainstream party here would be in favour of private gun ownership. I think even UKIP, which has been in favour of legalizing handguns, would still be to the left of the Democrats because they would want them to be officially licensed by the government.

On health care:

Democrats believe that health care is a right, not a privilege, and our health care system should put people before profits. Thanks to the hard work of President Obama and Democrats in Congress, we took a critically important step toward the goal of universal health care by passing the Affordable Care Act, which has covered 20 million more Americans and ensured millions more will never be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. Democrats will never falter in our generations-long fight to guarantee health care as a fundamental right for every American. As part of that guarantee, Americans should be able to access public coverage through a public option, and those over 55 should be able to opt in to Medicare.

That’s a call for universal health care coverage, a public option available to all, and the expansion of existing public health care programs.

On guns, first of all, all legal handguns in the USA are already effectively ‘licensed’ by the government, because the federal government requires a background check application as part of a handgun purchase.

The Dem’s platform on guns:

To build on the success of the lifesaving Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, we will expand and strengthen background checks and close dangerous loopholes in our current laws; repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to revoke the dangerous legal immunity protections gun makers and sellers now enjoy; and keep weapons of war—such as assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines (LCAM’s)—off our streets.

The gun issue is complicated by the existence of the 2nd amendment, and the current posture of SCOTUS with respect to that amendment. As an issue, it’s hardly a fair comparison with European countries, and I readily grant that the major US parties are to the right of European parties because they have no real alternative.

And yet that’s still to the right of any mainstream party in the UK. The ACA seems a big improvement on what went before, and I appreciate the direction of travel, but any party proposing something similar to the public option over here - and opening the door to private insurance replacing government funding - would simply not get elected. (You can get extra private health insurance, to gain quicker access to nicer facilities, but this is strictly in addition to government funding.)

The NHS, for all its flaws, is something the British public is fiercely protective of, and is often near the top of voters’ main policy concerns. (There was a section of the London 2012 Olympics opening ceremony that explicitly celebrated the NHS, which I loved but couldn’t help but wonder if the rest of the world was scratching their heads over why we’d do that…)

No, it isn’t. The Dem platform calls for universal health care provided by a government insurance scheme, which is exactly what the NHS is. And even if you think it is to the right of the mainstream, that doesn’t make it right-wing.

I’ve already acknowledge the the US center is to the right of the European center. What I’m objecting to is the false claim that the Democratic Party platform would be extremist in Europe.

The Democrats are right wing by Canadian standards, even.

Same question to you: What are the right wing policies in the Democratic platform of 2016?

They are a very business friendly party who have made few meaningful steps towards a proper social safety net or healthcare for all, they remain hawkish and unwilling to curb military spending. They are afraid to raise taxes. They are only very slow to bring about social change, e.g. legal protections and recognition of rights for minorities.

Just because their attempts have not be en successful does not mean they are afraid to raise taxes… because they’re not.

I don’t think the NHS operates anything like an insurance scheme. You can use it without ever having paid one penny towards it. You pay for it in proportion to your earnings through progressive taxation, but everyone gets the same standard of care no matter how much they have paid in. It’s just a public good financed through taxes. It would be like claiming that, say, paying for the military was a form of insurance, which I dunno, I guess is true in only the loosest, most poetic sense of the word.

I think the nearest the US would get to the NHS would be single payer, which as you said is not the current Democratic policy. So no, not exactly like the NHS at all.

I think it does, by definition? Left and right are relative, and will have different agreed meanings depending on the societal context, the Overton window and all that. So in this example a (US) left-wing policy would be a (UK) right-wing one.

Ah, if someone has described them as extremist, I’d disagree also. But I thought this tangent started with:

which doesn’t mean they would be “extremist”. You asked for examples, and I mentioned a couple of policy areas where the Democratic platform aligned with UKIP, who are more right-wing than the Conservatives, but I wouldn’t say those particular policies were right-wing extremist positions. (UKIP is more extremist in other areas, of course.) But they are to the right of the UK mainstream nevertheless.

I never claimed that. They are about as (economically, socially) conservative as the rightmost of our (dutch, which != europe, its a part of it, but all of europe is not .nl) mainstream parties.

To the right of that we have the crazies. Back when people who had actually lived through ww2 were still an active part of society, extreme right bullshit was equal to “wrong in the war” and therefore equal to “morally highly objectionable”. This changed.

But not in all of europe. In germany for example, they are scared shitless of fascism. never again still lives in their hearts and bless them for it. They are having a far more centrist political spectrum, on the left they have no outliers either. Mutti Merkel is conservative as fuck but if she were american, she’d be on the right hand side of the democrats i think.

The UK have had a practical two-party system for ages. Labour (socialists!) vs Conservative. Only the last few elections is that opening up a little, though not in a fun way. If you want to see dumbfuck voters shoot themselves in the foot, take a look at very recent English history.

France has also always had a strong stigma on the extreme right which has faded a little. They also have a strong socialist movement. And now they have a fucking manager doing technocracy on them. And he aint even doing that bad. At least not a raving fascist lunatic.

I suspect it depends a bit how you view it. Here in Scandinavia, for instance, even the right-most mainstream parties support policies that would be considered extreme left-wing even by the US Democrats.

On the other hand, when the people who lead these parties make comments on US politics, it’s the GOP (and even Trump) that they express their admiration for. And they’re more than happy to use similar racist dog-whistles (or even direct Trumpian-style rhetoric) to the extent that they think it will be effective, as well as do their best to give “tax cuts” at every opportunity. So while, in terms of policy, they may be to the left of the Democrats, I think that’s purely a function of the society and political rules that they’re forced to operate under, rather than any deep-felt belief in the policies. IMO, I suspect a lot of those social safety nets that the social democratic movements established post-WW2 would be jettisoned overnight, if the right-wing parties thought they could get away with it.

The only reason the democrats are considered left wing here is because they are left of the republicans.

It’s my misunderstanding, then. I read this:

In fact the American democratic party line is pretty far off to the right of a Dutch centrist party.

…as saying something more than ‘right of center’.

Guys you aren’t even true liberals gosh.

Nor Scotsman!