Had the Democrats nominated a candidate with a pro-military voting record and strong support for the Iraq war both in good times and bad (Lieberman and Gephardt), they would have beaten Bush.
Of course, neither one had much of a chance because of the Move-On.org mentality that infested the party for so long. Get rid of the haters, show some optimism when discussing the issues, and the Democrats will attract the middle.
Of course, neither one had much of a chance because of the Move-On.org mentality that infested the party for so long. Get rid of the haters, show some optimism when discussing the issues, and the Democrats will attract the middle.
Sarcasm or not, Rob you are seemingly on mark, as even the exit polls showed that Morals were the deciding factor, The Dems need to strongly consider alienating gays and abortionists amongst other reforms, because the Democratic south is long no more, it's the Republican party's new rock-ribbed base and ever growing in population.
They're probably SOL until Clinton's cloned..and his replica boy reaches age 45?
They're probably SOL until Clinton's cloned..and his replica boy reaches age 45?
My desire is to have a candidate that is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. It's probably nearest to the Libertarian, but I'm not willing to throw a vote away for a party that doesn't have any chance of winning. Because of this, I would like two good centrists from both main parties. My first choice for 2000 was McCain and I'm in TN which would have benefitted by having Gore in office, but I connected most with McCain. I seriously hope he is in the running come 2008. But for the Democrat party, I'm equally concerned with who their party candidate might be. Because if the Republicans stay as far right at GW Bush is or even further right, that really only leaves the left to vote for. And there's no way Hillary is going to get elected, nor B. Obama, so there is a lot to determine between now and 2008. But the point to this rant is how I don't think having the initial caucuses in New Hampshire and Iowa help the left in finding the best candidate. I think they would be smart to go to states that are strong republican states like TX, MS, TN, SC, etc. and let those voters influence who will be the nominee. In my life (born in 1976) only two Democrats have been elected: Carter and Clinton. And both are relatively southern. Obviously Clinton wasn't the most religiously connected nominee, but he had enough smarts to play into the hands of the people who need some religious affirmation in their candidate. I don't know if Gephardt, Clark, or Dean would have fared any better, but obviously a Mass. Democrat Senator is going to get a boost in the New Hampshire caucus. So they have a disproportionate amount of say in who the nominee will be. And how does that help the party? Not much at all here in the south and in the heartland.
Anyway, there's my take. I didn't get much accomplished today because I felt like I was attending a day long funeral. Very sad indeed.
Take care.
Anyway, there's my take. I didn't get much accomplished today because I felt like I was attending a day long funeral. Very sad indeed.
Take care.
Last edited:
you can't win with a rag tag group of hollywood stars, professors, media
personalities, gay activists, feminists and urban dwellers lumped together
attacking "the man" This went out of vouge years ago.
The repubs appeal goes from management down to labor in companies. People
who work and have families won't lump themselves with the Dems splintered
base. While a large factor, you can't say that the religious right is the only
factor that gave this result. The dems are responsible and no one else.
personalities, gay activists, feminists and urban dwellers lumped together
attacking "the man" This went out of vouge years ago.
The repubs appeal goes from management down to labor in companies. People
who work and have families won't lump themselves with the Dems splintered
base. While a large factor, you can't say that the religious right is the only
factor that gave this result. The dems are responsible and no one else.
It was less than a generation ago the GOP asked the same thing. They hadn't controlled Congress in ages and had two discredited ex-Presidents to their name. It is just a GOP era right now and realistically the best thing to do is just let it self-destruct, which inevitably it will do. That is basically the pattern of the world, juggernauts run things for a while until they mismanage it then the other party comes in to "save" the country. Count on it happening again.
Bill, what scares me the most is how the religious right continues to influence the direction of this country in a very alarming way. Now I don't have the perspective of growing up in the 50's or 60's, and during my lifetime most would argue that our society has gotten more and more socially liberal in almost every way imaginable. Especially with the gay culture being so mainstream relative to even 10 years ago, let alone 50 years ago. But, instead of this country being pushed and pulled in different fiscally philosphical directions, I feel as though it is being pushed and pulled in different socially philosphical directions. Which has a catastrophic feel to it, like I can see this great country is headed towards an iceberg yet the socially conservative won't look up to see that we need to turn the steering wheel to avoid disaster.
The first thing Democrats need to do is figure out a reason to vote FOR them as opposed to just voting AGAINST republicans.
They also need to lose the celebrities and Hollywood types if they plan on getting in touch with average people. I believe the momentum turned dramatically towards bush after the Whoopie Goldberg incident. He was going downhill before that and afterward he pretty much led in most polls till the election. They live in a fantasy world where they think that people care about their opinion on issues they know next to nothing about.
Their raising taxes issue is also not going to work most of the time.
They also need to lose the celebrities and Hollywood types if they plan on getting in touch with average people. I believe the momentum turned dramatically towards bush after the Whoopie Goldberg incident. He was going downhill before that and afterward he pretty much led in most polls till the election. They live in a fantasy world where they think that people care about their opinion on issues they know next to nothing about.
Their raising taxes issue is also not going to work most of the time.
Bill and a lot of others don't get it!
My two girls graduated college as liberals and then got jobs - and quickly became conservative centrists. That wouldn't have happened 20 years ago.
The pendulum topped of its swing to the left about 10 years ago and now it's starting to swing back to the right!
The Dems are in the same shape that the Republicans were in in the 60's and 70's.
Yiu can figure 15 to 30 years of growing Republican domination as the national mood becomes more and more conservative, before the pendulum starts its swing back to the left.
You don't have to believ me - just open a history book and check the cycles out!
My two girls graduated college as liberals and then got jobs - and quickly became conservative centrists. That wouldn't have happened 20 years ago.
The pendulum topped of its swing to the left about 10 years ago and now it's starting to swing back to the right!
The Dems are in the same shape that the Republicans were in in the 60's and 70's.
Yiu can figure 15 to 30 years of growing Republican domination as the national mood becomes more and more conservative, before the pendulum starts its swing back to the left.
You don't have to believ me - just open a history book and check the cycles out!
