ker8
Adult Chick
Posts: 1,811
|
Post by ker8 on Aug 25, 2008 18:26:20 GMT -8
there is no way obama could pick a man futher to the left than he is, especially as he himself has shifted slightly right of where he was when fighting clinton. In order to win, Obama probably does have to convince Right Wing voters. This is one of the electoral weaknesses of the Democratic Party in Presidential elections - the more actively partisan voters tend to have the biggest influence in the Primaries, and they tend to pick candidates who appear too "Liberal" to many voters - especially in swing states, where significant numbers of Democrats are Conservative in general outlook. Many of these Conservative Democrats vote DP in local and state elections, but switch to a Republican in Presidential elections - because the Republican candidate may often seem to resonate more with their own views on security and social issues. (Although introducing a "celebrity" view is only a minor point here - it's still interesting that Emily seemed to recognize this a couple of years ago when she said the Democrats would be the natural choice - provided they had someone who could win) I think Obama can win - on the tide of opinion favouring change - but I think it will be a tough job, significantly tougher than some of the Democrats aiming for Congressional seats. We have to remember that many Conservative Democrats voted for Bush. Obama has to win those people over. (By contrast, McCain has less to worry about from the Republican Right Wing. It's true that many of those are luke warm or suspicious of him - but, for the most part, they have nowhere else to go, except into abstention. And if they abstain, it's arguable that he can still balance them with Conservative Democrat votes) I always think it's funny that people ALWAYS refer to "conservative democrats" but never say anything about "liberal republicans". I personally think of myself as an independent, but if pushed to choose between the two, believe myself to be a "liberal republican". Only b/c I am not pro-choice (not b/c I'm Catholic, this is simply my personal moral belief), I believe in the right to bear arms (with certain restrictions), smaller government, lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, and less government intervention with families. However, I also believe in saving the environment, renewable sources of energy (thank you T. Boone Pickens!), affordable health care for everyone, massive immigration reform including amnesty for those who are already here illegally, more money for children's education & higher standards for children's education (grade school and high school), and an end to the war in Iraq (not sure how though yet). These among other reasons are why I'm still on the fence. Even between Clinton and McCain I hadn't chosen, but I had chosen Clinton over Obama. Now with it as Obama and McCain, I'm back to being unsure between the two.
|
|
|
Post by drizzletown on Aug 25, 2008 18:53:36 GMT -8
I think McCain is a war monger. If you want to see the war end, and not 2 more started, I think we all better vote for Obama. I'm with the others that believe, NEW & CHANGE is only going to be better for us. I hope it pans out.............God, I hope it pans out.
|
|
|
Post by james on Aug 25, 2008 18:58:27 GMT -8
It makes me laugh when they call the Dems left wing,when in fact they are right wing,but thats the likes of O'Reilly trying to scare people into not voting for them and also the Reps are so right wing,it might look to somepeople that the dems must them be left.
|
|
|
Post by Bingo on Aug 25, 2008 19:20:48 GMT -8
The Republican Party was notably more to the Centre before the Reagan era. It could convincingly be argued that American politics at that time was not strongly marked by consistent ideological divisions. Many of the Republican leaders before 1980 would probably appear relatively Liberal from the standpoint of today's Conservatives (though it's doubtful if they would be seem paricularly Liberal by European or Canadian standards).
Today, US politics has become more markedly ideological, and Republicanism is strongly identified with Conservatism. This is stressed by many on the hard Conservative Right, who see a strong priority in keeping the GOP on a Conservative path. Nevertheless, there are still Republican politicians who would be considered relativel Liberal - e.g, in New York, Rudolf Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg, and in Pennsylvania, Arlen Specter.
I think the reason "Conservative Democrats" get more attention is that they do seem to have made a significant difference in tilting Presidential elections towards the more Conservative candidate. "Liberal Republicans" don't seem to have had as much electoral impact.
That is probably because most "Moderate" voters tend to plump in the end for a candidate who offers "status quo" positions on security and the more divisive social issues. This has tended to keep US politics on a more generally Conservative path than several of the other Western democracies. The US is one of the few modern democracies where "Liberal" is almost taken as an "unsafe" (if not negative) description that mainstream politicians often try to avoid.
Interestingly, ker8, some of the issues you mention are cross-party in appeal. For example, several Republican politicians do favour an immigration amnesty (just as quite a few Democratic voters oppose it). Also environmentalism is increasingly crossing party lines, with many Republicans in local government well ahead of their national leaders.
|
|
ker8
Adult Chick
Posts: 1,811
|
Post by ker8 on Aug 26, 2008 3:26:30 GMT -8
Bingo, you're right on the immigration amnesty (John McCain helped write the bill) and the environmentalism (T. Boone Pickens for one I believe is a Republican) but from what I see, those two issues are still, by most people, placed squarely in the liberal democrat column. I'm sure over the years that will probably change (well, at least environmentalism, not necessarily amnesty) and they'll be included on both platforms.
I agree with your points on Conservative Democrats. Toby Keith for one, I believe to be a Conservative Democrat. Obviously Natalie would be a Liberal Democrat. John Rich is apparently a Conservative Republican. I can't think of a Liberal Republican at the moment besides my mother who is a Republican but has voted for Democrats in the last several election cycles.
And to drizzletown, I can't choose a president just on the idea of "ending the war". As it stands right now, I don't think either one could do too much differently from one another regarding that. If I recall correctly, Bush has said or done, can't remember which, what many people want, reducing the number of troops in Iraq to eventually pull them all out. I don't think speeding up or slowing down the process of taking them out would help over there. IN THIS CASE, I feel like the top generals and the Iraqi gov't and NOT the president should be the ones deciding how we should be pulling out b/c they're the ones who are there, living this every day.
Besides, at this point I think our fiscal problems are really where we have our biggest issues. And you can't say this would be fixed if we pulled out of Iraq, b/c it wouldn't. It would cut back on some of what we're spending (money that we're borrowing from China) but nowhere near enough to give us a surplus budget. We import so much into this country that our exports nowhere near balance it out. We can't keep doing this b/c at some point our money well is going to run dry. You can't take in less than you're spending indefinitely, and honestly, that's what our gov't thinks it can do at this moment in time.
Modified: I forgot to add, I NEVER voted for Bush (though I couldn't vote in the first election and I also hated Kerry but voted for him anyway) and if he was running for a 3rd term, I wouldn't be voting for him. But I do not believe McCain is Bush. That's a falsehood, just as it's a falsehood that Obama is a Muslim and Obama isn't patriotic.
|
|
ker8
Adult Chick
Posts: 1,811
|
Post by ker8 on Aug 26, 2008 3:35:23 GMT -8
I suppose I could be considered by some to be a Conservative Democrat as well......(kinda makes sense since my family's from Appalachia).....although I do think I lean slightly more liberal than conservative when you take into account all of my views.....
Ehh, I think I'll just continue to call myself a moderate/independent and be done with it.
|
|
|
Post by duncan175 on Aug 26, 2008 3:42:51 GMT -8
i'm a communist
|
|
|
Post by peacenik on Aug 26, 2008 4:49:06 GMT -8
remember Johnn Cash's song about "the one on the left . . and the one on the right . . . " . .can't remember the title exactly just now . . .
|
|
|
Post by duncan175 on Aug 26, 2008 5:41:00 GMT -8
lables tend to be pointless
|
|
|
Post by b@@b on Aug 26, 2008 6:41:48 GMT -8
Conservative Republicans... Liberal Republicans... Liberal Democrats... Conservative Democrats ohh geez c'mon... so... Coke Diet Coke Pepsi Diet Pepsi all still chocked full of baaad sugar, or hfcs for ya. I consider myself a Preservative of the Laborer Party and it's all I got left, you damn right!! i'm a communist I think I will be soon. I mean really, sometimes I wish China would just get on over here annd take us over. It destined to happen someday anyway. Geez, the US is like one of its own, an American nervous wreck whom has maxed out their credit cards into debt. has all the extravagant things to out-do its neighbor(s). But now....the currency that got it all must be spoken for. I don't know how China is doin but it can't be that bad if we are borrowing from them!! Eventually we gotta pay up, or give up. Take your pick. Some new leadership, err-umm rulership could be the swift kick in the ass a lot of America needs too. ...just my few cents on that.
|
|
|
Post by natkins on Aug 26, 2008 7:03:06 GMT -8
List of celebrities who admit they are McCain supporters:
Stephen Baldwin Pat Boone Wilford Brimley Dean Cain Jon Cryer Robert Duvall Angie Harmon Patricia Heaton Lorenzo Lamas Craig T. Nelson Gail O’Grady Jason Sehorn Gary Sinise Jon Voight
|
|
|
Post by dripsey3 on Aug 26, 2008 7:05:40 GMT -8
Conservative Republicans... Liberal Republicans... Liberal Democrats... Conservative Democrats ohh geez c'mon... so... Coke Diet Coke Pepsi Diet Pepsi all still chocked full of baaad sugar, or hfcs for ya. I consider myself a Preservative of the Laborer Party and it's all I got left, you damn right!! i'm a communist I think I will be soon. I mean really, sometimes I wish China would just get on over here annd take us over. It destined to happen someday anyway. Geez, the US is like one of its own, an American nervous wreck whom has maxed out their credit cards into debt. has all the extravagant things to out-do its neighbor(s). But now....the currency that got it all must be spoken for. I don't know how China is doin but it can't be that bad if we are borrowing from them!! Eventually we gotta pay up, or give up. Take your pick. Some new leadership, err-umm rulership could be the swift kick in the ass a lot of America needs too. ...just my few cents on that. The only Communists in China are the government. China is moving closer to a capitalist society with each passing day. Communism only works for a while. We saw this when the old Soviet Union collapsed. Democracy is the only way forward, it can be imperfect, but it is the best system IMO.
|
|
|
Post by drizzletown on Aug 26, 2008 7:27:51 GMT -8
List of celebrities who admit they are McCain supporters: Stephen Baldwin Pat Boone Wilford Brimley Dean Cain Jon Cryer Robert Duvall Angie Harmon Patricia Heaton Lorenzo Lamas Craig T. Nelson Gail O’Grady Jason Sehorn Gary Sinise Jon Voight Aaaaaakkkkkk! More people to hate eerrr, really dislike. Jon Cryer.......really? Duckie?
|
|
|
Post by peacenik on Aug 26, 2008 7:50:15 GMT -8
who the heck were "The Mugwumps"? . . sounds like an old folk group from the sixties! ha! . . . then there were "The Know Nothings" (as opposed to "The Do Nothings") . . . and why do they call these things "Parties" ? . . . ain't no party goin' on.
|
|
|
Post by dc4life on Aug 26, 2008 8:52:36 GMT -8
Just like I mentioned. Everyone on MSNBC's site is talking about how C-SPAN had the best coverage of the convention last night. No political hacks, just the speeches, and you as an individual can come to your own conclusion. One lady even mentioned that she thought Anne Curry from NBC news was trying to start a Jerry Springer like interaction between a Hillary supporter and an Obama supporter, and that she lost all her respect for Anne. I wish people would realize that the mainstream media is part of the discord in this country. I'm not saying they can't have opinions, but there are too many people that refuse to think for themselves and follow what they hear, whether it's wrong or right. Maybe I'm speaking to the wind, but I don' t care. We need to hold the media accountable since so many people take it as gospel. Anyway- It was such an honor to see Sen. Kennedy whether you like him or not, he is fighting a hard battle and he did a superb job. Michelle Obama's speech was so heartfelt and genuine. I hope people got the message.
|
|
|
Post by james on Aug 26, 2008 8:52:43 GMT -8
Conservative Republicans... Liberal Republicans... Liberal Democrats... Conservative Democrats ohh geez c'mon... so... Coke Diet Coke Pepsi Diet Pepsi all still chocked full of baaad sugar, or hfcs for ya. I consider myself a Preservative of the Laborer Party and it's all I got left, you damn right!! I think I will be soon. I mean really, sometimes I wish China would just get on over here annd take us over. It destined to happen someday anyway. Geez, the US is like one of its own, an American nervous wreck whom has maxed out their credit cards into debt. has all the extravagant things to out-do its neighbor(s). But now....the currency that got it all must be spoken for. I don't know how China is doin but it can't be that bad if we are borrowing from them!! Eventually we gotta pay up, or give up. Take your pick. Some new leadership, err-umm rulership could be the swift kick in the ass a lot of America needs too. ...just my few cents on that. The only Communists in China are the government. China is moving closer to a capitalist society with each passing day. Communism only works for a while. We saw this when the old Soviet Union collapsed. Democracy is the only way forward, it can be imperfect, but it is the best system IMO. China and Russia were never communist,they are/were dictatorships,which China is still one.
|
|
|
Post by SandraC on Aug 26, 2008 10:19:28 GMT -8
Ya know, if we lived in an anarchist country, we wouldn't have to worry about this whole voting thing.
|
|
|
Post by Bingo on Aug 26, 2008 12:37:29 GMT -8
Ha, ha! But with anarchy, you can forget about countries. Countries only exist where humanity is divided up into states with their own little patch of ground, which they keep distinct from everyone else. With anarchy, you only have humanity - supposedly co-operating to live in harmony - but you'd probably have to take votes on everything - since if anything needed to be done jointly, you'd have to get everyone's permission to do it!
|
|
|
Post by peppermintpatti on Aug 26, 2008 13:10:34 GMT -8
Ya know, if we lived in an anarchist country, we wouldn't have to worry about this whole voting thing. Yeah, we'd have all the riots and chaos to worry about instead. I too was naive enough to think anarchy works, but in reality its just like communism and socialism. Man is inherently greedy and we need a system that keeps human vice in check or else all out violence would ensue for power.
|
|
|
Post by drizzletown on Aug 26, 2008 13:19:50 GMT -8
Socialism is nothing like Anarchy. Socialism takes a larger share, from everybody, and makes sure that everybody is taken care of. It's not perfect, but it's far fairer than this crooked democracy. Take a look at 1american's pics in Detroit. If we don't do something about this economy the whole country is going to look like that. Don't you think?? JMHO.
|
|
|
Post by peppermintpatti on Aug 26, 2008 14:40:00 GMT -8
No, what I meant was it is ulimately useless. Just about every socialist state has failed. Somebody will get greedy and screw it up for everybody else.
|
|
|
Post by peacenik on Aug 26, 2008 16:48:12 GMT -8
if you read the New Testament . . . and the "Act Of Tne Apsotles" and various epistles describing "the early church", the ideal outline of "socialism" can be found practiced. . . i would imagine that some of that (even much of that . . and maybe even most of that) fell into the background or fell apart, once the Chruch became "legally recognized by Constantine . . . then many "christian believers' began to conform to or fit-in with the social culture of the time rather than to live "against the current" nor to work to transform the culture rather than being transformed by "it" . . .
but the experience of the more recent in history "socialist experiences' have turned out even far worse . . even into disasters . . to the point of dehumanizing . . .
so, the lesson may turn out to well be: "that it's not always the BEST thing to "be legal" or to be legally accepted . . . outside the parameters of the dominant social culture and milieu, religious and spiritual beliefs stand a better chance of remaining "pure" and unadulterated . . and one can live a more "god-like" life . . . becoming conformed to "the Divine" rather than becoming conformed to what some manipulative social planners and societal engineers THINK you should be . . .
capitalism is flawed . . .socialism is flawed . . . somewhere one must strike out on a more independent course . . .
|
|
|
Post by b@@b on Aug 26, 2008 17:58:29 GMT -8
I was never implying any change to wahtever -ism our country is. I was just saying that China is a stronger nation, by military population alone, and now we'll owe them money! Deeeep shit.
|
|
|
Post by mbcchicks on Aug 26, 2008 20:11:22 GMT -8
Because I don't think he'd have a snowball's chance in hell if he picked anyone else. Anyone else that he was supposedly considering seemed to be no-name politicians - therefore we continue with the whole "well they have no experience, so why vote for them?" argument. Seems to me that this whole campaign is centering around the wonderful word "experience" so there we have it, a career politician who's had a similar career as John McSame. That's what the voters seemed to want, well now they've got it, let's see what other argument they are going to come up with. To me, a new politician would not be as crooked because he/she is so new to the whole arena, so why Obama's lack of experience scared everyone senseless confuses the heck out of me. Like he wouldn't know what to do in an emergency? Seriously? Well our country is at such a crossroads, many feel its not the right time for on the job training and letting him make his rookie mistakes. This isn't a Senate seat, its the leader of the free world. I'd much rather have someone who has a longer tenure around D.C. then just 4 years as Federal offical. You wouldn't want a brain surgeon operation on you with only 4 years of med school would you? Why would you want someone to be president with that kind of experience? I don't buy the whole less time around D.C. less corrupt. A politician is a politician. If he's not corrupt now he will be by the end of it. Bottom line is I don't see the whole messiah like worship of Obama. He's not infalible. Just because he's new doesn't make him good or the right choice. I want someone who knows what they're doing and has a stronger record of getting things done. Well in my eyes he's the lesser of two evils. No one is worshiping anyone here. Bush was just a Governor, never even a Senator like Obama is - and he had 8 years at it. So let's give another rookie a try. McCain is McSame! We need something different ASAP and I don't see anyone else running do you?
|
|
|
Post by Bingo on Aug 26, 2008 20:53:52 GMT -8
Actually, a Governor would probably stand a better chance - a Governor already has executive experience; many voters dislike "Washington politics"; a Senator usually has a burden of a voting record which can be portrayed by the other side as flip-flopping, linked to lobbying, partisan, "extreme" or otherwise unpopular.
In the last forty years, the Democrats have had a fairly good record of winning with Governors - and have tended to lose with Presidential candidates from the Senate.
(However, this time it's a moot point, since both main candidates are Senators!)
|
|