this, again, is not my personal opinion, but what I've read from political scientists.
I question your use of the term "political scientist". I think you actually mean "political pundits", writers of op-ed pieces, etc. To say that someone schooled in the science of political interactions is taking a stand as to whether something is "left" or "right" really strains my credulity. The thing is, the definition of those terms -- as this thread itself demonstrates -- is a fuzzy concept that changes over time, place, and individual speaker, and doesn't have a scientific definition. Moreover, any scientist could tell you that the left-right spectrum itself is a hideously handicapped model of political values. In other words, you're never going to find a paper in political science making claims that "the political left believes that...".
Now, if you believe that those folks acting as foils against the American Right -- to wit, Pres. Obama and the Democratic Party -- are not themselves representative of the Left, can you answer two questions for me?
1. What are the ideas of "real" members of the Left that Obama and the other Democrats are failing to represent?
2. Since Obama and the Democrats clearly are in opposition to the American Right, what are those ideas that they (the DEMs) are fighting for in opposition to the Right?
That doesn't mean that we can't more or less precisely place one or the other political force onto it.
This is not "real" science of course, more kind of art, but if we conform to the rules of the game ("liberal democracy" it is called), then I think by polling large enough pool of political scientists/commentators/pundits/whatever-you-wanna-call-them we can arrive at pretty good consensus of where to place one party or the other at each moment in time, wouldn't you agree?
now to your questions:
1. What are the ideas of "real" members of the Left that Obama and the other Democrats are failing to represent?
the link to the article by J.K.Galbraith I gave above perfectly answers it, I think:
Whether your prime interest is housing, health care, peace, justice, jobs or climate change, if you are an activist in America you have known for a long time that this President is not your friend.
2. Since Obama and the Democrats clearly are in opposition to the American Right, what are those ideas that they (the DEMs) are fighting for in opposition to the Right?
Well, I'm actually not even so sure anymore that Obama is in clear opposition to "American Right" whatever that may be. I don't recall any issue during his presidency where he has stood his ground and haven't bowed to pressure from GOP, do you? Guantanamo, Afganistan, Healthcare, Bush Tax Cuts extensions and now Debt Ceiling deal. Not one of those went by unmodified by Tea Partiers, even when Democrats had supermajority.
So I clearly side with commentators who called Obama centrist right from inauguration. I mean, who even calls Obama leftist besides Tea Partiers?
the link to the article by J.K.Galbraith I gave above perfectly answers it
Galbraith isn't a political scientist. He's a well-respected economist, like Krugman, who writes political commentary. That's nowhere near the same thing. One may as well call Rush Limbaugh a political scientist.
One will also note that you complained that while America has citizens on the Left, these people do not have representation. You then went on to use Pres. Obama as an example of this. Let me remind you that the President isn't intended to be a representative of anyone: his job is to execute the decisions of the Congress and of the Courts. Thus, blaming him for what those decisions are is nonsensical.
I don't wish to actually debate the topics you list, but I'd like to briefly address a couple of them -- not in the interest of proving that I'm right, but to show that there really are (at least) two sides to these stories, and that the ideas of the Left really are being represented.
I understand that the Left feels betrayed by the recent debt ceiling deal. But you should understand that fiscal conservatives feel precisely the same way. Contrary to the hyperbole in the media, there really are no cuts to spending: by and large, the cuts agreed on are doing nothing more than slightly slowing the projected growth of spending. The decreases you'll see in spending next year are, quite literally, a drop in a bucket. To say that such a trivial compromise is caving in to the Right is disingenuous.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say that Obama (for which I'm substituting "the Democrats of Congress, since, as I noted above, it makes little sense to hold the President accountable for the actions of Congress) betrayed the Left over healthcare. I mean, we've now got a system in place that will guarantee medical care to everyone. This certainly is not the outcome that the Right wanted. Indeed, since it seems that a majority of Americans today dislike it (or at least the way it was implemented), there must be some force to the left of center that dragged it in that direction.
There is one area where I do think you've got good reason to feel betrayed, and that's all of our various wars. Back in 2008, the Democrats took a clear stand against our wars -- Iraq and Afghanistan -- and make all kinds of promises to get out. Yet today, we're still fighting, and although troop levels are lowered, there's really no actual end in sight. But, to make matters worse, Pres. Obama has illegally gotten us tangled in another war (in Libya), and Congress -- both the DEMs and the GOPs -- have done nothing to stop it.
I question your use of the term "political scientist". I think you actually mean "political pundits", writers of op-ed pieces, etc. To say that someone schooled in the science of political interactions is taking a stand as to whether something is "left" or "right" really strains my credulity. The thing is, the definition of those terms -- as this thread itself demonstrates -- is a fuzzy concept that changes over time, place, and individual speaker, and doesn't have a scientific definition. Moreover, any scientist could tell you that the left-right spectrum itself is a hideously handicapped model of political values. In other words, you're never going to find a paper in political science making claims that "the political left believes that...".
Now, if you believe that those folks acting as foils against the American Right -- to wit, Pres. Obama and the Democratic Party -- are not themselves representative of the Left, can you answer two questions for me?
1. What are the ideas of "real" members of the Left that Obama and the other Democrats are failing to represent?
2. Since Obama and the Democrats clearly are in opposition to the American Right, what are those ideas that they (the DEMs) are fighting for in opposition to the Right?
Then, how and why do those two sets differ?