Mustn't we reevaluate our party since it is is going through a right wing realignment?

[Dragonfli]

40. They are Right Wing by definition, their goals and their actions, their only "moderation" lies in

their social platform, over time even that has slowly begun to erode.

Was Eisenhower Right Wing? I believe he was. Here is a quote naming him in the Republican platform of the time:

Our great President Dwight D. Eisenhower has counseled us further: "In all those things which deal with people, be liberal, be human. In all those things which deal with people's money, or their economy, or their form of government, be conservative."

While jealously guarding the free institutions and preserving the principles upon which our Republic was founded and has flourished, the purpose of the Republican Party is to establish and maintain a peaceful world and build at home a dynamic prosperity in which every citizen fairly shares.

That belief is almost identical to that of the New Democrats that have taken control of the party.

New Democrats, in the politics of the United States, are an ideologically centrist faction within the Democratic Party that emerged after the victory of Republican George H. W. Bush in the 1988 presidential election. They are identified with centrist social/cultural/pluralist positions and neoliberal fiscal values. They are represented by organizations such as the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), the New Democrat Network, and the Senate and House New Democrat Coalitions

After the landslide electoral losses to Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, a group of prominent Democrats began to believe their party was in need of a radical shift in economic policy and ideas of governance. The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) was founded in 1985 by Al From and a group of like-minded politicians and strategists. They advocated a political "Third Way" as a method to achieve the electoral successes of Reaganism by adopting similar economic policies (Reagan Democrats and Moderate Republicans would provide burgeoning new constituencies after adding these new economic policies and politicians to our tent they contended) While hoping to retain, woman, minorities and other social issues allies with long ties to the party. Such would be their new Democratic coalition forged between fiscal right and social left under the "New" Democratic banner. The DLC disbanded in 2011 during an apparent re-branding of the New Democrat movement when money ties to the Koch bros. and Koch representatives placed on the DLC's board embarrassingly became common knowledge among the Democratic left. The DLC is survived by the Third Way, The New Democrat Coalition, and Al From's Progressive Policy Institute among other corporate funded groups that continue to sell their Economic-Right/Social-Left brand of "Centrism" to America.

The only difference between the Eisenhower Right Wing and the New Democratic Right Wing that anybody with an ounce of political historical understanding is that the New Democratic version of moderate Right Wing appears to include a great deal more Military "adventurism" and a great deal less "maintain a peaceful world and build at home a dynamic prosperity in which every citizen fairly shares within it", I will admit however that the New Democratic Right Wing is split on this issue of "the eternal war Doctrine", Hillary Clinton being on the side of the neocon hawks in such internal debates.

You mistakenly believe that by comparing Moderate Right Wingers to near Fascists (Modern Republicans) somehow changes the meanings of words in the political lexicon, it does not. Your argument is both lacking in substance and is also fallacious.

Perhaps you are conflating Right and Left political definitions with what is called the "Overton window"

The Overton window, also known as the window of discourse, is the range of ideas the public will accept. It is used by media pundits.

But even then, Bernie Sanders and "New Democrats" both fall within that window and still fall respectively with Center Left and Right Wing as is revealed by national polling on issues

82% oppose cutting Social Security benefits in order to reduce the debt.
67% oppose cutting Social Security to make the program more solvent in the long term.
63% oppose reducing Social Security benefits for people earning more than $60,000 or more when they retire.
69% oppose raising the Social Security retirement age to 69.
66% support enacting Social Security taxes on wages about $106,800 (the Pay Roll Tax Cap) to make the program more solvent....

82% oppose reducing Medicate benefits in order to reduce the nation’s budget deficit.
64% oppose spending cuts to Medicare.
76% believe cutting Medicare to help reduce the budget deficit is mostly or totally unacceptable.....

58% say people should not have their Medicaid benefits taken away in order to deal with state budget problems.
69% oppose cutting spending on Medicaid in order to reduce the national debt.
76% oppose cutting state funding for the Medicaid health insurance program....

76% support increasing the taxes paid by people who make more than one million dollars a year
63% support increasing the taxes paid by people who make more than $250,000 a year.
64% think it is a good idea for the wealthy and corporations to pay their fair share in taxes and can afford to pay more for programs and government operations......

Now, let us compare the New right Wing Democrats to an actual Center left Democrat, Franklin D. Roosevelt

It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people — whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth — is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights — among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

As our nation has grown in size and stature, however — as our industrial economy expanded — these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. "Necessitous men are not free men." People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all — regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.

If the theme seems familiar, you will not find it on the "far left", as you would describe such, they are not the words of Trotsky Or Eugene Debs, but rather those of a center right Democrat, the closest thing we have to such a Democrat in our modern party is Bernie Sanders, who, like FDR, is not "far left fringe" but ideologically a center left Democrat, nothing more than a pre "Al From, Clinton - takeover of the party" Democrat.

His words sound rather like those spoken by FDR, do they not?

Quite the contrast to the agreeing words of both Eisenhower and the New Democrats.

I like the pre Right wing Democratic party and it was the one I joined many years ago. I feel we must return to what we once were AND MORE, I would like that party as it was but with added unity and equality for all humans no matter their insignificant differences in melanin, sex, sexual preferences, gender identities, or other minor differences. I would also like to see an effort to save the environment on a scale that would make the Manhattan Project, and the moon landing appear as trivial hobbies in comparison.

I suppose that would make me a "mouth frothing raving Communist" in your eyes, but I care so very little about how others judge by political beliefs that such would not even phase me, let alone leave me feeling insulted or disgraced.