Talk:Democratic Party (United States)

message: It's been pointed out that the Washington DC mayor's wikinote, should not be included with the state governors and/or territorial governors in the infobox. GoodDay (talk) 23:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I removed it because the Mayor of Washington, DC is not considered a governor, as DC is the federal capital and not a state however it is considered a territory, albeit with different rules treatment than other US territories. Furthermore, I believe granting statehood to DC brings up a constitutional issue and can be controversial. Best to leave the Mayor of DC out of the list of governors of US states. Completely Random Guy (talk) 23:42, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Washington DC mayor 'note', in the infobox 

message: See section Democratic Party (United States)#Conservatives
*
A conservative Democrat is a member of the Democratic Party with more conservative views than most Democrats. Until the 2010s, the Democratic Party had a large conservative element, mostly from the South and Border regions. Their numbers declined sharply as the Republican Party built up its Southern base.  
After the 1994 Republican Revolution, the Blue Dog Coalition was formed as a caucus of conservatives and centrists willing to broker compromises with the Republican leadership. The Blue Dog Coalition has at times acted as a unified voting bloc, giving its members some ability to influence legislation.
The longstanding version omits this and it seems there is no consensus supporting mention of this ideology in the infobox. While I would agree conservatism in the democratic party is well documented historically, I also agree with Toa that it seems misleading to keep it in the infobox, especially in 2024. It's coverage in the article does not appear substantial enough to warrant it's inclusion there at this time IMO. DN (talk) 03:38, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest, I support removing all of the factions from the Infobox as with all other political parties. That’s why articles have “Factions” (or similarly titled) sections. Listing factions is potentially misleading, and the Infobox is meant to be a brief summary.— Autospark (talk) 11:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

text: Support removing that section from the Factions section, and instead incorporating it into the history of the party and/or in the initial paragraphs about the history of the party's factions. I agree the Conservative Democrat faction has largely died out, but it's worth mentioning that the Democrat Party used to have a prominent conservative faction in the article. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 14:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with User:Autospark (the "factions" section should be removed from the "ideology" infobox parameter), while I oppose removing references to conservatism in the "factions" section of the article, if that is what User:JohnAdams1800 is talking about. The only ideology in the infobox should be "liberalism", with a links both to liberalism (not social liberalism) and, between brackets, liberalism in the United States (or modern liberalism in the United States). --Checco (talk) 13:35, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly oppose both this, and any bracketed links with "American" in them. Keep the current three factions, and link "Liberalism" to Modern liberalism in the United States without an WP:ENGVAR-violating and utterly unnecessary bracket. Toa Nidhiki05 14:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conservative ideology in the Infobox? 

message: I believe that 'centre to centre-left' is a fair and unbiased position. There are many sources which mention both centrist and centre-left ideologies in the Democratic Party. Any other position is very rare to be supported by a party member. Andrijator (talk) 10:11, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with the above. Aficionado538 (talk) 02:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

text: What is your definition of centre-left? (And don't just say it lies somewhere between center and left.) TFD (talk) 02:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Centre-left politics support government intervention to a state in which there is still a mixed-market economy, however with social welfare programs. The strongness of those programs varies in different ideologies, e.g. social liberalism and social democracy. Andrijator (talk) 11:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: All major parties in Western democracies support this. The Democrats however are less supportive than right-wing parties in other countries. TFD (talk) 13:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

text: Agree with this. The previous RfCs on this topic haven't been particularly persuasive, especially when put into context of similar discussions of other political parties. The US isn't "special" in this regard. AwesomeSaucer9 (talk) 23:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The U.S. actually is special. It has two parties, neither of which have a statement of ideology or enforces ideological conformity. IOW you cannot be expelled from either party for any reason and you cannot be stopped from running under their banner. Furthermore, state governments are involved in the nomination process by running "primary elections." Can you name any other country in the world that has this system? TFD (talk) 13:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: how does that make it special? Lots of countries have unique political systems. Lots of parties don't state an overriding ideology and have factions. That's why we rely on secondary RS Alexanderkowal (talk) 13:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

text: The issue with the US is that its media is incredibly insular so they make their own definitions of the political spectrum Alexanderkowal (talk) 13:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Every country has its own political spectrum. There is no "global political spectrum". There's maybe regional ones - like, say, in Europe, or to some degree the US and Canada - but there's no global spectrum. Toa Nidhiki05 13:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed that other regions have different political spectrums with the centre being at the top of the bell curve, but there is a global one regarding ideology Alexanderkowal (talk) 14:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

text: The position on the spectrum parameter is there to make cross country comparisons easy for the reader Alexanderkowal (talk) 14:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

text: Agree, WP:OR and my impression, but on the worldwide political spectrum, the democrats are centre-left to centre-right, and the republicans are right wing to far-right Alexanderkowal (talk) 12:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The Democratic Party is not, in fact, center-right. Toa Nidhiki05 14:06, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: They certainly are from a European perspective. Economically they are centre-right. Socially idk, I’d say centre Alexanderkowal (talk) 14:48, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not even from a European perspective, but why is Europe even relevant here? Toa Nidhiki05 14:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The European spectrum seems to be used as the ‘global spectrum’ on Wikipedia when looking at other regions’ political pages. Neo-liberalism is centre-right in Europe, which the democrats champion. Alexanderkowal (talk) 15:32, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen no evidence of this, but even if it was, they aren't a center-right party, and this article isn't about a European party. Toa Nidhiki05 17:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

text: First, Wikipedia is aimed at an international audience, not the U.S. specifically. Second, although Americans use the terms left and right, liberal and conservative, in a different way when describing their politics, academic literature in the U.S. uses internationally understood definitions, even when describing U.S. politics. So for example U.S. conservatism is normally categorized as a sub-branch of liberalism. TFD (talk) 17:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: That’s good academics use internationally recognised definitions, I didn’t know that. Surely that makes it easy to put something in the political spectrum parameter? Alexanderkowal (talk) 19:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

text: I would agree if it weren't for Trumpism which is illiberal, it seems liberal principles are wholly accepted among academics but not the population. I was under the impression conservative meant conserving/preserving tradition and generational commons to preserve perspective which make up an ethnic identity/nationality, so it's about managing change rather than opposing it. Trump is a regressive, not a conservative Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:44, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

text: Bigotry is very useful for lots of people, it props up their ego, there needs to be an alternative for individualist and egoist societies rather than just imposing liberalism. Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political position 

message: This article is in American English. The article is for an American political party. Adding a disclaimer of "American" on political ideologies is nonsensical. Anyone reading this article understands this is American - a piped link is more than sufficient, especially putting WP:ENGVAR into consideration. Toa Nidhiki05 05:32, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you talking about the info-box? Based on the source used, it refers to Modern liberalism in the United States, which is seen as half-way between Social liberalism and laissez-faire liberalism, while the term social liberalism generally refers in the U.S. to being liberal on social issues. Perhaps a better term could be found. TFD (talk) 15:47, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You’re absolutely correct. The correct term in American English would be “Liberalism”, and piping it the Modern liberalism in the United States article. Toa Nidhiki05 15:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Social liberalism" and American English 

message: Add international affiliation in infobox (Progessive Alliance) GoonerNGA (talk) 03:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussed and rejected earlier at Talk:Democratic_Party_(United_States)#International_affiliation. Zaathras (talk) 03:27, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2024