Thread: Democrats have a problem..

The Democratic party is at its lowest point in its history. Its entirely dis-connected from the average working man/woman. This virilent leftist/Liberal element running it is going to destroy it. To have lost two elections to such a weak opponant is laughable. I suspect theres going to be a purge of the leftist/loudmouth/big city/flagburning/self-serving element in that party. There was a time the party was for the average hardworking, blue collar, church going, working man/woman. Now look at whats its sunk to?

And you think Hillary isnt worried now? Right now she's wishing she'd moved back to the Arkansas trailor park and became the jr senator from Ar-kan-sas. Theres no way shes going to win the south and she knows it now...........Rich

I don't feel Gore was that bad. I think he would've pushed technology. Scratch that, he WOULD have pushed technology. That's what we needed.

Originally Posted by Luke9583

I don't feel Gore was that bad. I think he would've pushed technology. Scratch that, he WOULD have pushed technology. That's what we needed.

But he said he invented the internet...

Originally Posted by du510

But he said he invented the internet...

Don't count gore out of 08. I was listening to a radio show this morning, and that's what they were talking about. Gore was supposedly against the iraq war the entire time, something kerry and hillary can't say.

either way, i don't think anyone would be guliani in 08. he may even put new york into the red column.

Originally Posted by busyLivin

Don't count gore out of 08. I was listening to a radio show this morning, and that's what they were talking about. Gore was supposedly against the iraq war the entire time, something kerry and hillary can't say.

I think that's another problem that the Democratic party hasn't realized yet - the way they are handling the Iraq War. The Democrats wanted to use the Iraq war against Bush, but they went about it all wrong...

People aren't against the war, people are against LOSING the war. Kerry kept preaching that the war was a mistake... well no shit Sherlock ... but hey, guess what, we are already there now. No one wants to hear you tell us how smart you are and how you wouldn't have started the war in the first place. Hindsight is always 20-20. And don't lie and say it's another Vietnam, because it isn't - it isn't even minor leagues compared to Vietnam... and it's only comparable to Vietnam if we give up before we win.

Just tell us that if elected, you will win the war, pronto, and bring the troops home. Tell us Bush is dragging his feet and not giving the troops enough firepower or armor. Tell us you'll kick ass, take names, and flatten the place if need be, then you'll bring the boys home. Tell us the war is becoming a mistake and if you win, so will we. If not, Bush will continue to screw up and boys will continue to die for nothing..... Most everyone supported the Iraqi War when it began, so most everyone doesn't want to hear Democrats saying "Nah, nah, nah.. told ya so"... Most everyone wants to win the stinking war and get the hell out of there ASAP.

This was so simple, that I couldn't believe the Democrats screwed it up. The Democratic party is so out of touch with middle America that it's a shame. It's also quite scary, because the result is turning this nation into a one-party government.

Joining this thread...

Welcome to the New Republic everyone. Been saying it since the day after elections. There is no longer a viable Democratic party - just some die hards who will try and stand in the way of progress and use some weak filibuster maneuvers.

OD

Get a grip OD. In case you need reminding Kerry only needed one more major state to win. Your doomsday prophacy regarding liberalism is pure fantasy and completely preposterous.

Originally Posted by redspy

Get a grip OD. In case you need reminding Kerry only needed one more major state to win. Your doomsday prophecy regarding liberalism is pure fantasy and completely preposterous.

But you forget it was not all just about Kerry. The President won by the biggest popular vote in the history of the country. The same people tossed out on their ear the top democratic leaders (senate leader Daschl, Kerry, Edwards and more) and took out senate seats, house seats and governors. It was a disaster of a train wreck for the Democratic Party. I don't think you realize just how bad it is for them. They are barely afloat after the last election loss. Now they are almost completely gutted and left for dead. Liberalism is pragmatically politically silenced and rendered impotent in this country for the current generation. Unless Kennedy can "get it up" some day without having a heart attack or a liver attack they have zero credibility and no annointed to fall back on.

OD

Stop being a drama queen. If the Democrats lost by a margin of 40%/60% I'd concede there's a serious problem. That simply isn't the case, nor anything near. Your sensationalism might appeal to your Conservative friends but it doesn't have any credence.

Hey Red, if ya dont mind me asking, did you vote for Kerry?

Originally Posted by du510

Hey Red, if ya dont mind me asking, did you vote for Kerry?

Nope. I would have voted for Dean had he been on the ticket.

Originally Posted by redspy

Nope. I would have voted for Dean had he been on the ticket.

I was just kidding... but are you serious??

Absolutely serious. I had to vote with my conscience and that wasn't Kerry. He voted for the war and the patriot act. His stance on Israel is no different to Bush (which seriously pisses me off), his environmental platform is weak and the party still relies heavily on corporate campaign financing.

Really. So a 3rd party for you? Thats where mine went...

Some will say it's a wasted vote or a vote for Bush but why invest your vote for someone not aligned with you? Like I said I would have voted for Dean as I find his agenda very inspirational and refreshing.

Originally Posted by redspy

Some will say it's a wasted vote or a vote for Bush but why invest your vote for someone not aligned with you?

Im catching a lot of shit, along the lines of "Its a wasted vote, a vote for Kerry". I completely agree.

Originally Posted by du510

Im catching a lot of shit, along the lines of "Its a wasted vote, a vote for Kerry". I completely agree.

If you listen to these people we'll be stuck with a two party system forever, I don't believe this is a healthy state for a democracy.

Originally Posted by redspy

If you listen to these people we'll be stuck with a two party system forever, I don't believe this is a healthy state for a democracy.

To this day, we haven't agreed on politics, but right now, we agree 100%.

Originally Posted by du510

To this day, we haven't agreed on politics, but right now, we agree 100%.

Indeed. And don't forget we share many objectives, we just disagree on policy direction and how to get there. I'm sure we both want a vibrant economy, good schools, a healthy environment, equal opportunity, quality health care etc etc.

As I said before if the Libertarian party could get a consistent framework and not be all over the board with Zero morality I would lean that way.

By the way red - drama is fun when the party is in full swing. And right now the Republicans are rock-n-rolling...

OD

Originally Posted by redspy

If you listen to these people we'll be stuck with a two party system forever, I don't believe this is a healthy state for a democracy.

The problem with having a multi-party system (more than two parties) is that the winner will rarely win with a majority of the vote.

People screamed that Bush had no mandate because he won with a minority vote. They did the same when Clinton won with a minority.... can you imagine the chaos of, say, an election with five or six parties, and the winner only gets 40% of the votes?

It's fun to think about. Neither party represents me and I wish the Libertarians would gain some ground.

With the first past the post system other parties will never gain a foothold. Look at the way Ralph Nader was excluded from the presidential debates so the cosy two party can live on. What's needed is some level of power sharing, without this both parties attempt to undo the work of previous administration and overall progress is impeded.

Not that England is a bastion of democracy but they have a three party system with power allocatyed across the parliament. The Green Party also has some power at the local level.

Really now. Was Nader excluded, or did he not have enough support to BE on the ballot? I can only speak for my state, but he didn't have enough sigs to be on the ballot. I suspect other states were similar.