noblehunter wrote:That would be a colossal waste of time based on your stated reasons for being here.PeterZ wrote:What is the sine qua non of progressivism? I would assert that progressives are much more driven by the acquisition of power than any unchanging principles. Many liberals would not qualify as progressives because they do not discard those views in pursuit of power.
Alan Dershowitz is the best example I can name. The man is a liberal Clinton supporter that holds true to his principles. He is not a Trump supporter and I doubt will ever vote for a republican, yet he holds to his views of civil liberties despite how those views mandate supporting the President against the Dems that act against those principles.
I would rejoice if Professor Dershowitz becomes the AG and can live with whatever comes from his being in that position, even the impeachment of the President. His is the sort integrity we need in government. I don't agree with much of his political views but whole heartedly agree with his views of civil liberties. I would trust his application of the powers of the AG office in ways I don't for progressive politicians.
So, rather than broadening the defintion of progressive, let's see if the essential qualities can be enumerated first.
I would agree. Had you showed any interest in trying, that would argue against your being a progressive in the first place. At that point I would be in a discussion with a liberal, not a proggy.