r/centrist

An article detailing a safety net included with California's state budget that will protect California transgender youth in response to the Trump administration slashing funding for Medi-Cal and other state programs.

Newsom touted the budget as evidence that states can budget responsibility while also ensuring vital services remain. In a quote the California governor said;

>“This budget reflects years of disciplined decisions that built historic reserves, paid down debt, strengthened our economy, and made transformational investments in education, healthcare, housing, infrastructure, and opportunity. We’re leaving California stronger than we found it — and leaving the next generation a state that’s fiscally sound, economically dominant, and ready for whatever comes next.”

Neutral summary: The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas found that increased unauthorized immigration between 2021 and 2024 contributed to higher housing demand, which was associated with rising home prices and rents, particularly in areas with limited housing supply. The study also found little evidence that the immigration surge reduced average wages.

As someone center left, I believe the right's focus on culture-war issues, election denialism claims, abortion restrictions, inflation, ICE tactics and Iran, has significantly hurt conservatives, especially in North America. It seems to have energized liberal and moderate voters while making it easier for opponents to portray the right as out of touch with mainstream public opinion.

For example, despite returning to office after winning the popular vote, Donald Trump's approval ratings have plummeted, remained in a similar range to where Joe Biden's were during much of his presidency. To me, that suggests many of the issues conservatives have emphasized haven't translated into broader public support and may have alienated many voters who voted for them in '24.

I'm curious to know what you all think.

What has most hurt Democrats in the US or Liberals elsewhere, regardless of whether it’s justified?

As a Liberal Canadian, I believe trans activism has significantly fuelled the right, especially in North America. It effectively galvanized the right to rally against it.

For example, Donald Trump’s ads during his last election campaign, particularly those focusing on transgender issues like sports and surgeries, were among his most heavily played, expensive, and effective commercials.

This trend seems to have gained momentum around 2015, coinciding with the rise of the “Intellectual dark web” movement.

I’m curious to know what you all think.

Summary:

Levitz's central argument is that primary victories do not translate into a mandate for the DSA's actual legislative agenda, because Democratic primaries attract a left-leaning electorate that is not representative of the broader general election voting public. This as an old structural problem for the American left: the gap between what energizes primary voters and what the median American voter will support in a general election or tolerate from their legislators. The article argues that the socialist electoral wave is real but that delivering on the actual policy platform remains a separate an intractable challenge.

Opinion:

The DSA's argument for socialism hinges on the idea that it can all be paid for by taxing billionaires. However if you confiscated the entire net worth of every U.S. billionaire, around $8.4 trillion, it could barely cover a single year of current federal spending. It could only fund the full DSA agenda for months. Even among Bernie's supporters, these policies are only popular on the condition that the 'rich' will pay for it all. Most leftists, and a super majority of everyone else, do not favor raising their own taxes. A YouGov/Vox poll showed Medicare for All support drops from ~70% to ~37% when respondents are told it would require a middle class tax increase. Yet implementing the DSA agenda would require additional annual tax revenue of anywhere from $10,000 - $30,000 per American household. The median household income in the US is $80,000. So the DSA agenda represents an additional tax of 15% - 40% of the median income. There are approximately 130 million U.S. households. Even a 100% wealth tax on every American billionaire - were it possible to accomplish such a thing - raises roughly $65,000 per household, a one-time windfall that funds the agenda for less than two years and then the money is gone forever.

The history of social democratic expansions in Europe shows that middle-class tax increases in the range of 15-25% are politically survivable only when the benefit is immediate and universal. The DSA agenda is much more diffuse, making the political backlash far more likely.

Personally, I think the cost of a single DSA legislative victory will mean the sudden and catastrophic end of their political mandate in the very next election.

If you look even briefly into my comment and posting history you will quickly and easily see that I am no friend of the Democratic Socialists of America and especially not their newest candidate for high office Darializa Avila Chevalier.

But when Mamdani is right, he knows how to say it. We ARE a shining city on a hill, we are a beacon of liberty. I am more than happy to stand side by side arms linked with the DSA on this one.

E Pluribus Unum.

You should listen to Mamdani say it.

https://www.youtube.com/live/JztQx56c2nA?si=vqJCiFUpJ8QR5kqR

You name it... Climate Change, and Coronavirus vaccinations.

97% of scientists concur Climate Change/Global Warming IS real

Republicans so many of them don't believe, say it's a hoax

Then, the vaccination many Republicans I remember were anti getting vaccinated, when there was Coronavirus...

Why Republicans are seemingly not trusting of Science?

Summary:

Readers submitted over 3,000 comments naming hundreds of films that best captured America right now, with responses split between nostalgic/hopeful picks and bleaker, critical ones. The most frequently mentioned movie was Mike Judge's 2006 satire "Idiocracy," which many commenters cited with a mix of resignation and dark humor—some even calling it a documentary rather than fiction.

All of this could have been prevented

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHvRA1W54LY

Jared Huffman is a member of the House Natural Resources Committee which championed the America 250 celebration planning way back in 2016. It was a bipartisan effort committed to celebrating the anniversary with a unified spirit.

He posted a video yesterday explaining how the Trump administration set up a shell company to funnel tax payer dollars into Trump and his supporters' pockets, invite foreign and corporate influence in to American policies, and harvest your personal information by the same outfit that organized the January 6th events.

Here's an AI summary of Huffman's transcript:

>The Creation of "Freedom 250" > >Sidelining the Official Commission: In 2016, a bipartisan group established a nonpartisan commission called America 250 to plan the milestone anniversary. Huffman alleges that former President Donald Trump sought control over the celebration for personal and financial gain. After failing to replace existing commissioners with loyalists, Trump allies created a shadow shell company registered in Delaware called Freedom 250. > >Dark Money and the National Park Foundation: Freedom 250 was lodged inside the National Park Foundation (a 50-year-old charitable institution). Huffman claims this allowed the entity to accept massive, anonymous donations and hide where the money went while using a trusted institution's branding. > >Defunding America 250: The White House allegedly starved the original, nonpartisan America 250 commission by whittling down its promised $100 million allotment of taxpayer money to just $25 million, redirecting the rest to Freedom 250. > >Corporate Access and Alleged Fraud > >Selling Access: Freedom 250 targeted major corporate sponsors (including Lockheed Martin, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Mastercard, United Airlines, and United Health), offering access to Trump in exchange for cash. Huffman notes this constitutes a conflict of interest, as these corporations lobby the government. > >Foreign Influence: The CEO of Freedom 250 allegedly traveled to Davos to solicit funds from foreign governments, inviting them to help shape America's birthday celebration. > >Bait-and-Switch Tactics: A whistleblower claims that fundraisers misled donors by providing Freedom 250's banking information to entities that intended to donate to the nonpartisan America 250 commission, which Huffman identifies as potential wire fraud. > >Data Harvesting and Revisionist History > >Voter Data Collection: The Freedom 250 website is operated by a company owned by Brad Parscale, Trump's longtime digital strategist. Huffman claims that citizens signing up for free events (such as the World Cup fan zone) are unknowingly handing over personal data to a political targeting operation. > >Altering Public Spaces: Park Rangers were reportedly ordered to remove factual signage regarding slavery, climate change, and the forced removal of Native Americans. > >Propaganda and Christian Nationalism: The administration allegedly spent $10 million in taxpayer funds on trucks playing PragerU videos and featuring an AI-generated George Washington. Huffman states the official playbook included scripture readings and worship nights on the National Mall, pushing a "white Christian supremacist identity" and Christian nationalism over the principle of self-government. > >Personal enrichment and Political Favors > >High-Dollar Events: The administration allegedly sold sponsorship packages and photo ops with Trump for $10 million. Additionally, a UFC ring was built on the South Lawn for Trump's 80th birthday, with seats costing $1.5 million sold to corporate executives regulated by the government. > >Insiders Contracts: Lucrative contracts were handed to close Trump allies, including Event Strategies, Inc., a firm involved in orchestrating the rallies surrounding the January 6th insurrection.

I just watched many articles and several news channels celebrating the primary win of a 29-year-old young Democrat who unseated a 30-year-old incumbent. Diana degette. As a new immigrant to the United States, I always wondered why around the world countries which are getting bombed by american made bombs, people who are victims of violence around the world look up to United States and US people as their saviors and expect Americans to care for them.

I think it's elections like these and the results like these which show that voters really care about issues which may not directly affect them and are conscious. Despite heavy amount of money and propagandq against them, they care about ideals and values.

I'm not sure if such things happen in the UK,Germany and France or for that matter in other parts of the world like China, Canada, India, Australia. Where despite money and propaganda flowing in favor of issues that do not directly affect the electorate the electorate chooses to do what is ideally and morally the right thing to do.