Jump to content

Talk:California Democratic Party

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dated information

[edit]

There must be a better way to provide information in this article that is current, or that doesn't need constant updates. Right now there are sections with data from 2012 and 2013, making much of the information obsolete for visitors. Artfullheart (talk) 20:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new state central committee elected every two years. The party just reorganized two weeks ago on May 19-21, 2017 (the "state convention"). It creates a party platform every four years, immediately after the gubernatorial election, which would have been the May 15-17, 2015 convention or afterward. Four years should be sparingly enough to keep up.
I think listing government officeholders that happen to be party members is a bit overboard. (The party has no formal role in state, county and local government elections.) It doesn't even include LA County supervisors, who represent over 2 million people each, or the other countywide LA County officers which represent and govern a whopping 10 million people. They are Democratic Party members too. int21h (talk · contribs · email) 01:29, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Int21h:Thanks for your update to the page, and discussion above. To begin cleaning up the page, I'm moving the history section to #1, then Governance, then creating a new section Organization with Platform and Resolutions. This section can later be expanded into a description of how the CDP is organized beyond the standing committees. I'm moving the Current Elected Officials section to the end for now. This section seem to be up to date, so maybe we can remove the reference to 2013. And I agree, not sure they should even be listed here. Seems like resolutions could be rewritten also to not require constant updating, just an explanation of the resolution process, a few samples, and a link to find past resolutions with no date. Maybe it would be helpful to include one actual resolution with an explanation of the way they're written as a run-on sentence with required clauses. Same with Platform - an explanation of how the process works, sample past platforms, and a link. In general, I think it would be better to revise from discussing specific content, which changes all the time, to the general processes involved (versus the specifics, which can also change.) Artfullheart (talk) 18:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like all state Democratic Party pages -- List of state parties of the Democratic Party (United_States) -- have some kind of list of state government officeholders, though there are many different set-ups. Artfullheart (talk) 20:51, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on California Democratic Party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:59, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Center-left to Left-wing

[edit]

Please change the following lines to include the entire position of the California Democratic Party. Thx

From : position = Center-left

To : position = Center-left to Left-wing 98.251.7.240 (talk) 16:43, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 16:59, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The California Democratic Party are self proclaimed social democrats. Social democrats are already established as "left wing" by wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy. I would argue that the Californian Democratic Party is Center-Left to Left Wing. AquaCorpsman (talk) 15:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

|ans= no AquaCorpsman (talk) 15:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

California Democratic Party "Ideologies"

[edit]

This page lists "Ideologies" of the California Democratic Party. If you Google search "California Democratic Party" there is an information box and within that information box there is a list of supposed "Ideologies". They are listed as "Social liberalism, Modern liberalism in the United States, Progressivism in the United States". I am proposing that this section be removed unless a reference can be provided. This is in regard to the recent controversy regarding the California Republican Party having one of their ideologies list "Nazism" on Wikipedia which resulted in the Google information box displaying "Nazism" as one of the California Republican Party ideologies. At first, Google removed "Nazism" from the ideologies list. I asked in the talk page of the California Republican Party "who determines the ideologies of a political party?" and since then the ideology box has been removed entirely (by someone else) from both the Wikipedia page and the Google information box. This is not vandalism because the California Republican Party doesn't state their ideologies on their platform or anywhere else. I cannot find anything on the California Democratic Party page that states what their ideologies are and so it should be removed from this page. 108.252.124.176 (talk) 00:35, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 14:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


I noticed that when I Google search 'California Democratic Party' the ideologies are no longer displayed on the Google information box. Perhaps this discussion made some effect in that regard. Anyway, I'm going to delete the ideology section as it is not supported by any references. The ideologies seem to be more of an allegation than anything the political party actually claims. 108.252.124.176 (talk) 00:08, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a source for the List of chairs ?

[edit]

I found this contradicting source: [1]. It states that Bob Mulholland was California Democratic Party chair since 1994. Muholland is also labelled as California Democratic Party chair in this 1999 video: [2]. While Muholland clearly isn't chair now, we need to make sure we have a source for the current list of California Democratic Party chairs. Emass100 (talk) 05:56, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The 1994 video itself only identifies Mulholland as a "Campaign Advisor" with the party. The 1999 video at 3:12 says he is a "campaign advisor for the California Democratic Party, a post he has held since 1991." It appears that the C-SPAN text identifying him as a chair is wrong. I have sources for transitions from
For full disclosure, I am a member of the Executive Board of the California Democratic Party and know Bob Mulholland. I have served on CDP since Torres was chair.RichardMathews (talk) 21:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here is another source taking things back to 1983:
RichardMathews (talk) 21:29, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for all these sources, this resolves the issue. Emass100 (talk) 02:09, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Center to Center-left?

[edit]

CDP is more left-leaning than other states' Democratic Party. I think the rationale for CDP being centrist is insufficient.

Therefore, I think it is wise not to write down the political position of the CDP.--Storm598 (talk) 00:19, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is never a small share of democratic socialists in the party, and the conservative journalist Daily Telegraph also reported that the party is moving in a far-left direction. The Daily Telegraph, unlike yellow journalist the Daily Mail, believes it has some credibility.--Storm598 (talk) 00:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to have appointed yourself as an expert on the ideology of people and parties, but your judgment is -- in my mind -- suspect. Your addition of Category:Radical to a number of pages in which the article gives absolutely no suport for it is worrisome. Because of this, I am not inclined to accept your opinion on these matters, which is why I reverted back to the last good version of the article before your edits/ I suggest that you are not the expert that you think you are, and that you find another subject area to edit in.
As to the specific case, there is no mainstream political party in the United States which is purely a left-wing party. They are center-left incluing the CDP, whose "leftness" is not nearly as great as you're making it out to be. And the Daily Telegraph is hardly a reliable source for what is or isn't left. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that the Democratic Party of the United States is a center-left party in the U.S. political context, and in terms of South Korean political standards, the "social" stance is very left-wing. Just because American politics is more conservative than European politics does not mean that it is mail oriented by global standards. The U.S. Democratic Party is a center-left party, and there are socialists and extreme leftists in the party.--Storm598 (talk) 00:50, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is inappropriate to define the ideological positions of American political parties by the standards of South Korea. This is what I mean by saying that your judgment is suspect.
Yes, the US Democratic Party is center-left. There are NO "extreme lefists" in the party. NONE, ZERO. The farthest left anyone goes is a couple of moderate democratic socialists. Again your judgment on these matters is poor, and you need to edit in another area. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:53, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I live in South Korea, the largest Korean wiki classifies the U.S. Democratic Party as a social liberal and social democratic party and the Democratic Party of South Korea as a social liberal and social conservative party. South Korea's Democratic Party is much more socially conservative than the U.S. Democratic Party and has a market-controlled tendency economically, but the problem represents some of the chaebol trust interests than the U.S. Democratic Party. And there is not a single socialist in the Democratic Party of South Korea.--Storm598 (talk) 00:55, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(1) A Korean source is not appropriate. (2) A wiki is not a WP:RELIABLE SOURCE. If you continue to make very poor edits in the area of American politics, I will eventually be forced to file a request that you be topic banned from that subject. I suggest, again, that you find a different area to edit it. Your edits in this area are not productive. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:59, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What moderate democratic socialist in the U.S. insists on dismantling the financial district and destroying the police organization? There is no single socialist in the Democratic Party of South Korea and only conservatives. In South Korea, the U.S. Democratic Party is perceived as left than the Democratic Party of Korea.[1][2] It is simple for me to bring up South Korea. European standards are not applicable to American politics. If the U.S. Democratic Party is not left-wing to center-left by European standards, the U.S. Democratic Party becomes far-left by Korean standards. Is Europe the standard of global politics?--Storm598 (talk) 01:03, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, I just don't agree that CDP is centrist. In Europe, there is also a 'center-left'(not centre to centre-left) party affiliated with social liberalism. (A typical example is the Radical Party of the Left.)--Storm598 (talk) 01:06, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Even if the U.S. Democratic Party is "Centre to Centre-left," the CDP is on the left side of the U.S. Democratic Party's average. The CDP is never a 'centrist' party.--Storm598 (talk) 01:08, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Category:U.S Democratic Party (Namuwiki)
  2. ^ Category:Democratic Party of Korea (Namuwiki)
So, a couple of things. First, I am not convinced that the South Korean Wiki is a authority on American political parties any more than say, an Italian one or a Brazilian one. External perspective is useful, but not necessarily authoritative especially given that the peoples of different nations can have (positively or negatively) biased views of people in other countries. Second, I'm a member of the Executive Board of the party in question and as such, I believe I have a good sense of where members of the party stand. From that position, I would actually support the original idea of removing center-left not for any of the nonsense reasons stated above, but rather because the party is an enormous body of over 3,500 delegates and we aren't all any one thing. There are progressives and moderates and a spectrum of positions in between that recognize a diversity of thought, culture and experience that cannot be summed up in "left", "center-left" or any other such term. Glennglazer (talk) 01:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your description of the various beliefs of your members is actually covered very nicely by "center-left", which does not mean "the center of the left wing", but instead, "from the center (i.e. 'moderate') to the left (i.e. 'progressive')" and everything in-between. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:11, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what Centre-left politics says. Specifically, "...are political views that lean to the left-wing on the left–right political spectrum, but closer to the centre than other left-wing politics. " Glennglazer (talk) 01:17, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
'Centrism' and 'Centre-left' are different. 'Centre-left' refers to parties that are not completely 'left-wing' but are not completely 'Centrist'. Modern liberalism in the U.S. is recognized as a mixture of progressivism, social liberalism and social democracy in my country, and moreover, CDP is not a "Center to Center-left" party. CDP is "Center-left" party. If the U.S. Democratic Party is "Center to Center-left," then the California Democratic Party is "Center-left." and Modern liberalism is an American social democracy.--Storm598 (talk) 01:25, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the Modern liberalism in the United States documentation mentions the similarities between European social democracy. Modern liberalism in the United States is a little different from general social liberalism.--Storm598 (talk) 06:13, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Political Position & ideology

[edit]

I think we should added ideology as “big tent” and put majority of the ideology and factions ideology based on the actions/speeches of major California Democratic Party’s number. The political position should be centre-right to left wing since the California Democratic Party contains Neoliberals, Modern liberals, Social Democrats and Democratic Socialists. Sirui JIN (talk) 21:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should stop making disruptive edits and suggestions. FDW777 (talk) 22:10, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lol when you don’t want to argue and discuss the problem, you just put other people’s idea as “disruptive”, just like communists and fascists who states their oppositions as “reactionaries” or “traitors” uhh? Sirui JIN (talk) 16:02, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest learning about non-negotiable policies before replying any more. FDW777 (talk) 16:03, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you to read wikipedia:Consensus https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus Editing arguable Wikipedia information is based on discussions, not your personal preference. Sirui JIN (talk) 16:20, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to apply that standard to your first post. Since there is nothing actionable in your first post or any subsequent post, no change to the article is needed as present. FDW777 (talk) 16:26, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Substantively, as an executive board member of the CDP, I assert that the page should remain the way it is, without an ideology in the infobox. This is because I agree with the prior consensus that there are a range of viewpoints in the party, but they do not correspond to standard categories, and thus using such labels either misses significant elements or, as in the suggestion above, are overbroad and include political positions that are completely absent from the California Democratic Party. Glennglazer (talk) 16:27, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Center-left seems appropriate, in fact you could even argue it to be center-left to left-wing. It's a bit farther left than the national Democratic Party. CrazyC83 (talk) 21:25, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If these claims are backed up by sources, they can be added then. Vacant0 (talk) 12:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The republican counter parts have political ideology, it is only reasonable therefore for the CDP to have the same. AquaCorpsman (talk) 15:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Beyond My Ken: could you explain your revert, considering that you did not do it in your edit summary? Vacant0 (talk) 09:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, here's my edit summary: "Revert POV edit". Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:54, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How is it POV to remove unsourced content from an article? Vacant0 (talk) 10:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because you only removed that particular content, not all the similar information in the infobox. Infobox information does not require sourcing if it is adequately sourced in the body of the article. It is, like the lede, a summary of the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:10, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why I removed that is because, if you check the article's history, a user added (Special:Diff/1153716612) the claims without providing any sources for them. As of now, it still remains unsourced. Vacant0 (talk) 11:15, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As do more than a dozen other fields in the infobox. I know - let's blank them all! Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's indeed a problem, but sources for other used parameters could be easily found online, whether it is to confirm that Gavin Newsom is actually the governor of California or if the two Senators from California are Democrats. But if you want to keep the unsourced ideologies and position then okay, good to know. Vacant0 (talk) 11:40, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No longer a problem as it has been addressed, by me. Are you now willing to remove the unsourced ideologies and position from the infobox? --Vacant0 (talk) 12:27, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting that you went and searched for sources for other parameters, but studiously avoided doing so for those in the "Ideology" field - another indication of your POV. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:34, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

[edit]

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Illinois State University supported by WikiProject Politics and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request for adding ideologies and political position

[edit]

Checked other State Democratic Party pages, all of them had an ideologies and sometimes political position list besides this one. Maybe we should add it in there. I suggest political position should be centre-left or maybe centre-left to left wing since it’s generally considered more progressive than other State Democratic Parties. Kevin454123 (talk) 19:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:California_Democratic_Party&oldid=1206512321"