I think one of the biggest problems in modern political discourse is that we lump people into narrowly defined groups rather than a spectrum. For example, I am very much a progressive. I have progressive ideals, both socially and economically, and I put those ideals forward as I see them: ideals. I vote as a progressive. I tend to find better company in progressives.
This all said, I think there are a LOT of people who give progressives a bad name, and there are a lot of tactics used to forward our agenda that are absolute bullshit. Broadly speaking, trying to shut down conversation is a big one. I've got a fascist "friend" of sorts (pretty much self-proclaimed) who I vehemently disagree with, but will have an open conversation with in public without trying to shut him up. It's healthy to compare ideas, especially when they're radically different than your own.
While I disagree with centrism for not going far enough to support citizens in a wealthy country (globally is a much better debate IMO) I tend to agree with most of the complaints that centrists levy towards the left. I'm confident the problem lies with a vocal minority, but there is way too much petty bullshit done by these people that is easy to spot and get annoyed with. To me, it's all hugely counter productive. Spreading hate, even with good intention, is still spreading hate. Shouting down literal nazis is one thing, but treating the entire right-wing as nazis is ridiculous.Promoting white guild is ridiculous. Ham fisting equality into law as a replacement for social education is ridiculous.
I largely see this as a divide along the liberal-authoritarian spectrum though. I still believe in freedom and the right to live your life as you see fit as long as you don't infringe on the freedoms of others. Some of my peers on the other hand seem to think it's appropriate to force people to accept their point of view and that "offensive" views should be silenced. I still tend to get along with these people, but god do they drive me nuts sometimes.