Was FDR a progressive?

[JaneyVee]

Or progressive on some issues and moderate on others?

[riversedge]

1. You have poiinted out the problems of Sanders manufacturing a litmus test for what it

means to be a Progressive. If not fit the test --then it is the highway for you!!

[el_bryanto]

2. By most standards you would have to say he was.

But here's a question for you, why do you think that Wall Street is pouring so much money into Hillary Clintons campaign?

Bryant

[JaneyVee]

3. Because a Bernie presidency would be an economic disaster.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

5. Only for Wall Street.

Not for people who are tired of starvation wages.

[Gregorian]

6. As opposed to the economic disaster that exists?

Pretty poor for a comparison, since we're crashing every 4-7 years in this economy.

[el_bryanto]

8. Ah - I see - you are one of those trust in the markets wisdom types.

I'm not. I've spent too much time studying Wall Street to place much faith in unregulated avarice. But to each their own.

Bryant

[AZ Progressive]

11. Canada has single payer, how's their economy? Germany has free college, how's their economy?

Australia has a $17.29 minimum wage, how's their economy?

[MineralMan]

4. Sometimes. Sometimes not so much.

History reveals the facts in both cases.

What's interesting is that there's not a single DUer who was of age when FDR was President. Not one. With the passage of time, we know only fragments of what people did. We're selective with history, it seems. Getting more knowledge means digging into the past, something most of us aren't inclined to do.

[wyldwolf]

13. "Roosevelt endured vicious, unrelenting attacks from his left"

In my examination of the historical record, it is clear that Roosevelt endured vicious, unrelenting attacks from his left that often exceeded the level of vitriol directed at President Obama, and correspondingly, Roosevelt was not viewed by liberals of his day with the adulation and reverence liberals view him today.

In fact, it's pretty remarkable how closely the attacks Roosevelt experienced from his left echo the attacks that liberals make against Obama today. There was criticism of Roosevelt for being too close to Wall Street, criticism of the New Deal's pragmatism and non-ideological approach, criticism of the New Deal for not going nearly far enough, criticism of the New Deal and Roosevelt as preferring conservatism to liberalism, and so on.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/08/11/891631/-UPDATED-Liberal-Criticism-of-Franklin-Roosevelt-and-The-New-Deal#

[MineralMan]

14. Shreds from history...gathered up today.

People who idolize FDR know only part of the story. He did some very good things, economically. No question about it. In other areas, he was a man of his own times and some of his actions look pretty ugly today.

History never bears being examined closely, I think. Idolizing people from the past is generally not appropriate.

I had a friend in college who was born in a Japanese internment camp during WWII. She could barely speak of what it did to her parents. That's also part of FDR's legacy. There are other issues, as well.

Still, it does little good to dissect a 70 year old presidency from today's perspective. That will always end in disappointment. The 1930s and 40s were a different time. I would not care to live in those times. I was born in 1945. That's plenty long enough ago for me.

[earthside]

7. Here's your historical allusion.

Bernie Sanders is like FDR.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt#Second_New_Deal.2C_1935.E2.80.9336

"The country needs and, unless I mistake its temper, the country demands bold, persistent experimentation," he wrote. "It is common sense to take a method and try it; if it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something."

Hillary Clinton is like Al Smith.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Smith#Opposition_to_Roosevelt_and_the_New_Deal

[wyldwolf]

9. Progressive on some, moderate on others, which is why the left generally didn't care for him

[angrychair]

12. Did he vote for republicans?

Words have meaning for a reason.

'moderate' and 'progressive' are mutually exclusive terms.

A moderate is a centerist, that values republican ideals as well as Democratic ones. Sometimes even votes Republican.
"The Democratic pollster Peter Brodnitz of the Benenson Strategy Group (DLC, Joel Benenson is HRC's chief strategist) conducted the inaugural "State of the Center" poll (in 2014)"..."They see both parties as overly ideological and wish politicians would compromise more. A plurality are Democrats, but they see themselves as slightly right-of-center ideologically, and one-third say they vote equally for Democrats and Republicans."
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/moderates-who-are-they-and-what-do-they-want/370904/

A progressive is very, very, different.

"We want decent paying jobs and benefits for workers and sustainable economic growth. We want growing businesses producing the world’s best products and services. We want an economy that works for everyone, not just the few. We want all nations to uphold universal human rights and to work together to solve common challenges.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/03/22/1761431/what-it-means-to-be-a-progressive-a-manifesto/

So, as a moderate, you would sometimes vote republican. Do you vote republican?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. He was both. As are, both the Democratic candidates now.

He was progressive on economics, but not progressive enough on economics for my Socialist father. He was very "moderate" on civil rights. He was downright racist when it came to interning Japanese/American citizens.

I usually vote for candidates I think are "mostly progressive" or "most progressive".

It's all a matter of degree and interpretation. i.e. In my opinion, Sanders is progressive enough to vote for. Hillary isn't progressive enough to vote for.