I am a centrist also and I dont think of left and right the way you do. Both sides argue for democracy and no side argues for autocracy since autocracy is not consistent with the US tricameral form of government. There is no dichotomy just issues which are argued by their individual twists.
I seek policies that address both sides of an issue fairly. A centrist needs to be objective and understand both sides of an issue in order to do that. Just because we have three branches of government doesn't mean they can't be bought. You may as well claim that you can't be objective if you're claiming there is no autocratic side at play in our government. Try to remember that Democracy/autocracy is about the centralizing and decentralizing of power.
Monsanto in 2013 was able to pass legislation that insulated themselves from any lawsuits that could claim health risks or environmental damage due to planting genetically modified plants. So, whether you realize it or not, the centralizing and decentralizing of power does occur in our government as legislation is passed and policies are enacted.
Therefore, I'm sure that I'm not the only one witnessing the middle class disappearing even as the wealth gap increases. I'm not the only one who sees how the rich and powerful are controlling more of the messaging that gets people elected to congress and into the presidency. I think it's safe to say that it's the autocratic side of the spectrum that would want the Epstein files buried while claiming they are for transparency.
Objectively however, they are autocratic as a matter of circumstance, and not according to anyone's subjective opinion. To qualify as leaning autocrat, they would be active in crafting and favoring policy that entrenches and supports their status or hold on power, not diminish it. One has to know that these rich and affluent interest groups exist and are politically active to be able to reason on this Dichotomy. --> Democray/autocracy
So, of course, autocrats would want to sound like they're for Democracy and serving everyone's best interests. Which is why one needs to look at their policies. For example, Citizens United is a policy that counts unlimited dark money in politics, as a matter of free speech. This would be a policy that would serve the rich and affluent not the average Joe citizen.
It is not a negative spin but actually true. Do some research on what policies and stances caused the democrats the last election.
It's a negative spin about the Democrats view because (1) It's subjective (2) it's not neutral nor a positive spin. I would say the number one issue was probably the economy, specifically the high prices of groceries and housing, inflation, etc.
It is widely known that the left policies on immigration lean toward open borders compared to the right which lean toward closed borders. This is old news.
When Trump first announced his idea for a great wall, I remember it was touted as impenetrable, up to fifty feet high and made of steel and hardened concrete with a beautiful giant door. I also remembered how impractical that was, especially since there already was partisan approval and funding for a steel bollard border fence. Soon afterward Trump, in his speeches, was equating NOT being for HIS wall AS --> Not for border security --> Pro-Crime and Pro-open Borders. <-- And people believed this negative spin and repeated it because they're easily deceived.
Please note that this is a subjective negative spin about the Democratic view depicted by -->
Trump: The Democrats want to have no borders. They want to get rid of ICE. … Between Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi, and getting rid of ICE, and having open borders — and the biggest thing, you have open borders. All it’s going to do is lead to massive, massive crime. That’s going to be their platform, open borders, which equals crime. I think they’ll never win another election, so I’m actually quite happy about it.
The obsessiveness as I stated it related to cultural issues such as parental rights, LGTBQ policies, and soft on crime policies. There is no objective view per se since individual perspective are ymmv.
I don't see Parental rights as a cultural issue. And I don't see "soft on crime" as a cultural issue.
I guess the LGBTQ community might share some experiences that could qualify as cultural. I can't speak for the LGBTQ. But I would guess that the objective view would be that the LBGTQ want equal rights as in regard to acceptance of their lifestyle, in some reasonable degree, and the opposition would most likely feel like the law should not be used to force acceptance of the LGBTQ lifestyle.
I'm not sure what qualifies this issue as "obsessive" on only one side. Perhaps you meant the Democrats focus on it too much, but that too could be what autocrat messaging intends to portray.
Again, look at the criticism of DA’s from dark blue cities such as San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Portland, etc. for allowing violent criminals back on the street with little to no bond, for example. Again, this has been on the news constantly for a few years now. Maybe keep up with the news?
So this is what was lurking under "soft on crime"? One thing that comes to mind is how it's possible to cherry pick reports to support a one-sided narrative, so as to amplify or magnify an issue for political ends. The two-tier justice system has been a problem for criminal judges for as long as I can remember. A judge has to weigh the rights of people against the safety of the people, and either grant or deny bail to potentially violent people who may or may not be guilty and oftentimes are poor. I would hope they get it right more times than not.
As a centrist, I can therefore see that any depiction where the "left" represents being for "letting violent offenders free" and the right represents being against "letting violent offenders free" is propaganda from the right.
There is no autocrat. The form of the US government is composed of the executive, Supreme Court, and congress.
The Democracy/autocracy dichotomy is about the centralizing and decentralizing of power. For example, if the legislative branch and the Supreme court do not check a Presidents power but gradually let him run roughshod over the rights of people with impunity, then the system of checks and balances have failed, and power has become centralized.
I think it's clear that Trump is an autocrat. Autocratic policies would include things like stripping government employees of civil service protective status, targeting political dissent, threatening journalists, newspapers, media outlets, educational institutions, declaring arbitrary tariffs as a massive regressive tax, abusing immigrants' rights by sending people away to prisons in foreign countries without a trial, etc..
