These are dark days indeed for the Democratic Party.

skippy · 11-07-2002, 02:34 AM

This might be even worse than the Regan years. We desperately need a new Bill Clinton, albeit one who can keep his dick in his pants. Who is our candidate in '04? Gore? Hillary? Gephardt? Or will a fresh face arise from amongst the Democratic governors? Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself.

Also, Terry McAuliffe = suckiest DNC Chairman ever.

kypper · 11-07-2002, 02:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by killtheyouth
We don't need a new Clinton, actually. We need someone with Clinton's charisma and enthusiasm who is actually a liberal as opposed to a moderate. The whole problem is that the party lacks an identity...between trying not to step on any toes after 9/11 and attempting to claim the middle over the last several years, they've turned into spineless cowards who refuse to take stands on anything important. Since when the hell do Democrats vote for a tax cut that goes mostly to the rich??? WTF?!??!?!

This looks like a job for stupendous man!

Random Female · 11-07-2002, 02:42 AM

yeah. Gore simply isn't going to cut it. Good hustle, though, buddy. We need someone with his intellect but with a tad bit more personality. Just a hair.. that would blow Bush out of the water.

Random Female · 11-07-2002, 02:44 AM

Killtheyouth: Don't you think the public actually wants a moderate liberal, though? That's what all the polls have indicated... that we're veering towards this standard of moderacy. It's sad, but having the liberal version of a John McCain would be better than Bush. I'd be willing to compromise if the dude (or woman, that would be nice) stood a chance.

Chicagoboy · 11-07-2002, 02:44 AM

I've always wondered why noone mentions Richard Daley as a potential candidate for a national office. He's one of the most powerful, respected, and popular mayors in the country. If he could run the nation half as well as he runs Chicago (which I think he can), things would be very good for all of us. Maybe people still confuse him with his father.

jared · 11-07-2002, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by killtheyouth

Tax cuts, welfare reform, .

what's wrong with those?

kypper · 11-07-2002, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by killtheyouth

I suppose that's what I'm sort of going at. Though I would prefer a liberal liberal . The problem seems to be that a lot of major Democrats and the party as a whole are just plain moderate now...the only real exceptions i can think of are health care/prescription drugs and social security. Other than that, it seems like a race to be like "Ooooh! Ooooh! We like that too, but when we do it, it will be more....compassionate!!!!"

Tax cuts, patriot act, welfare reform, drug laws, globalism, free trade...its hard to tell the two parties apart a lot of time on these issues. Sure there are exceptions, but not enough.

There's nothing wrong with centrism.
My only problem with it is when it veers too far right.

Too far left is stupid too; it eliminates the element of responsibility.

kypper · 11-07-2002, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bittertrance

what's wrong with those?

Tax cuts: have traditionally been used to alleviate the 'burdens' of the rich.

Welfare reforms: Never do a damned bit of good. They cut it off instead of tying up the loopholes.

Lie · 11-07-2002, 02:57 AM

http://democrats.com/images/ps756-sm1.jpg

kypper · 11-07-2002, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by killtheyouth

Perhaps it's a sign of the times when I (and others) associate todays version of centrism with a diluted form of conservatism.

Perhaps so. Centrism theoretically should be the lines of grey between the black and white: e.g. we should have some universal health care, but we shouldn't let convicted serial rapists get law degrees while serving life sentence terms in comfortable confinement.

This is a problem I see with American politics: Nobody wants to forsee a middle ground between the two.
I, for one, support many left and right policies, but overall detest the right attitude and the extent to which they drive home their concepts.

skippy · 11-07-2002, 02:58 AM

Most Americans are moderates. The Dems should be working to retake the middle ground that the GOP has managed to co-opt from them, quite a feat considering how very conservative they have become as of late. Liberal candidates only succeed in the primaries and in Europe. This is not France.

kypper · 11-07-2002, 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark LeDrew
Most Americans are moderates. The Dems should be working to retake the middle ground that the GOP has managed to co-opt from them, quite a feat considering how very conservative they have become as of late. Liberal candidates only succeed in the primaries and in Europe. This is not France.

and in Canada, where they have had the role since 1992. Granted, they're more conservative than liberal at this point.

11-07-2002, 03:09 AM

EXT. A backdrop of stars lights the main titles as they roll up into infinity.

It is a dark time for the Democrats. Although Afganistan has been destroyed, Republicans have driven the Democrat forces from Capitol Hill and pursued them across the nation.
Evading the dreaded Rumsfield, a group of freedom fighters led by Clinton has established a new secret base on the remote ice world of North Dakota.
The evil lord Darth W. Bush, obsessed with finding young Al Gore, has dispatched thousands of anti-terrorism agents into the far reaches of Washington...

11-07-2002, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by killtheyouth

hahaha

man, I so wanna watch Empire right now . . .

jared · 11-07-2002, 03:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by kypper

Tax cuts: have traditionally been used to alleviate the 'burdens' of the rich.

.

why does noone say how it hurts people with average incomes more (most of the population) to raise taxes than it helps the richest one percent to lower taxes? it seems like too much focus is on the poorest and richest that live here instead of the common joe

skippy · 11-07-2002, 03:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ugly
EXT. A backdrop of stars lights the main titles as they roll up into infinity.

It is a dark time for the Democrats. Although Afganistan has been destroyed, Republicans have driven the Democrat forces from Capitol Hill and pursued them across the nation.
Evading the dreaded Rumsfield, a group of freedom fighters led by Clinton has established a new secret base on the remote ice world of North Dakota.
The evil lord Darth W. Bush, obsessed with finding young Al Gore, has dispatched thousands of anti-terrorism agents into the far reaches of Washington...

I swear to god when CNN announced that the Republicans had taken over the Senate I could actually hear Darth Vadar's theme in my head. It was chilling.

BlueStar · 11-07-2002, 09:25 AM

A true liberal will never win the presidency. Winning always lies in getting the "swing vote"/"undecided vote". Which is why politicians always move to the middle/become more moderate when running for election.

BlueStar · 11-07-2002, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark LeDrew
Who is our candidate in '04? Gore? Hillary? Gephardt? Or will a fresh face arise from amongst the Democratic governors?

Short list of names:
John Edwards
John Kerry
Dick Gephardt
Al Gore

Hillary will never be able to be a presidential candidate right off the bat...she's going to have to be vice president first. Tom Daschle's name has also been thrown around, but he has been too much against the president and really isn't viewed as moderate. Edwards and Kerry have both been played up by the Dems as the next Kennedy.

mpp · 11-07-2002, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BlueStar

John Edwards

It's all about this man. He's young, handsome, charismatic, intelligent, and rich.

He's my choice.

MisterSquishyHalo · 11-07-2002, 03:47 PM

Beg, pray and Hope that Colin Powell will run

sarmatianus · 11-07-2002, 04:19 PM

What was that quote I read yesterday:

"We have a country that, by and large, is to the left of the Democrats, and a government that is to the right of most of the conservative European governments. Strange times indeed."

I'm not terribly impressed, but as far as I'm concerned the game is up for the Dems, at least for now. But they didn't really deserve to win this year; I mean, did they even make a decent effort? I loathe the Republicans as much as the next person, but the Democrats did everything but wave the white flag.

The upside to all this is that after Bush royally fucks the US over, no conservative will be able to get a seat anywhere. But that's going to be many years down the line. The rubberband will eventually swing the other way, though. I'm convinced of that.

Until then, well...better start blasting the Imperial March, b/c things are going to have to get worse before they get better.

skippy · 11-07-2002, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sarmatianus
But they didn't really deserve to win this year; I mean, did they even make a decent effort? I loathe the Republicans as much as the next person, but the Democrats did everything but wave the white flag.

Agreed. The Democrats were a bunch of pussies in the last election starting with DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe who has got to go. When they folded on the Iraq issue, seemingly overnight, I was furious and ashamed to be a Democrat. The election was already over right then and there.

The Omega Concern · 11-07-2002, 06:11 PM

There's some good points in here about the problems in the Democratic party. I know it to be of a Marxist agenda that is well documented and something I've experienced on a professional level. Before you roll your eyes and flame, let me display my point of view first. I'll do it by saying if John Kerry runs on a single issue he brought up, I would be inclined to vote for him, and it would be the first Dem I've voted for since Dukakis in '88.

I think it was the Chris Matthews show where Kerry said he'd put on his platform to allow the Military to recruit on College campi. This practice was removed during LBJ's term, if I recall correctly.

It's not that Im a big warhawk, Im not, that's not the point. The point is the Democratic party has allowed to fester an ugly and unnecessary Anti-Nationalistic dogma. This dogma has seeped into the education system over the last 30 years and Kerry is right to see it as a wrongheaded notion in its totality. I believe his stance on this issue is his way of getting the Democrats back to the grass roots level it has lost sight of many moons ago.

But, Im sure the Religious Left (Yes, there is one, and its likely your Professor is part of it, though he/she is far too leet to ever cop to it), Im sure the Left would be very frightened by Kerry if he were to push this idea to fruition. But I'd bet you a Diezel Amp that a lot of swing voters would feel comfortable voting Democrat if they saw one stand up to the frustrated Marxist that have driven the Party to the lowly depths its currently in.

Like I said earlier Blue Star, I see the Dem party at the end of a 3 decade cycle where the counter-culture elitist are now running scared because of their own paranoia, ironically enough. They need to be nudged to the side the way the Rep's eventually tossed Newt Gingrich out. But I have my doubts about all this happening in 2 years, but 2008 seems more likely.

11-07-2002, 02:34 AM	#1
skippy Apocalyptic Poster Location: NJ Posts: 4,096	These are dark days indeed for the Democratic Party. This might be even worse than the Regan years. We desperately need a new Bill Clinton, albeit one who can keep his dick in his pants. Who is our candidate in '04? Gore? Hillary? Gephardt? Or will a fresh face arise from amongst the Democratic governors? Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself. Also, Terry McAuliffe = suckiest DNC Chairman ever.

11-07-2002, 09:25 AM	#17
BlueStar Newly independent Location: Some state's capitol building Posts: 7,242	A true liberal will never win the presidency. Winning always lies in getting the "swing vote"/"undecided vote". Which is why politicians always move to the middle/become more moderate when running for election. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-07-2002, 02:42 AM	#3
Random Female Apocalyptic Poster Location: white folks' ghetto, San Diego Posts: 2,005	yeah. Gore simply isn't going to cut it. Good hustle, though, buddy. We need someone with his intellect but with a tad bit more personality. Just a hair.. that would blow Bush out of the water.

11-07-2002, 02:44 AM	#4
Random Female Apocalyptic Poster Location: white folks' ghetto, San Diego Posts: 2,005	Killtheyouth: Don't you think the public actually wants a moderate liberal, though? That's what all the polls have indicated... that we're veering towards this standard of moderacy. It's sad, but having the liberal version of a John McCain would be better than Bush. I'd be willing to compromise if the dude (or woman, that would be nice) stood a chance.

11-07-2002, 02:44 AM	#5
Chicagoboy Amish Rake Fighter Posts: 13	I've always wondered why noone mentions Richard Daley as a potential candidate for a national office. He's one of the most powerful, respected, and popular mayors in the country. If he could run the nation half as well as he runs Chicago (which I think he can), things would be very good for all of us. Maybe people still confuse him with his father.

11-07-2002, 02:57 AM	#9
Lie Socialphobic Location: Goin' out West where they'll appreciate me Posts: 10,001	http://democrats.com/images/ps756-sm1.jpg

11-07-2002, 02:58 AM	#11
skippy Apocalyptic Poster Location: NJ Posts: 4,096	Most Americans are moderates. The Dems should be working to retake the middle ground that the GOP has managed to co-opt from them, quite a feat considering how very conservative they have become as of late. Liberal candidates only succeed in the primaries and in Europe. This is not France.

11-07-2002, 03:09 AM	#13
Ugly Posts: n/a	EXT. A backdrop of stars lights the main titles as they roll up into infinity. It is a dark time for the Democrats. Although Afganistan has been destroyed, Republicans have driven the Democrat forces from Capitol Hill and pursued them across the nation. Evading the dreaded Rumsfield, a group of freedom fighters led by Clinton has established a new secret base on the remote ice world of North Dakota. The evil lord Darth W. Bush, obsessed with finding young Al Gore, has dispatched thousands of anti-terrorism agents into the far reaches of Washington...

11-07-2002, 03:47 PM	#20
MisterSquishyHalo Apocalyptic Poster Location: seattle, wa, usa Posts: 3,964	Beg, pray and Hope that Colin Powell will run

11-07-2002, 04:19 PM	#21
sarmatianus Apocalyptic Poster Location: Charm City Posts: 1,033	What was that quote I read yesterday: "We have a country that, by and large, is to the left of the Democrats, and a government that is to the right of most of the conservative European governments. Strange times indeed." I'm not terribly impressed, but as far as I'm concerned the game is up for the Dems, at least for now. But they didn't really deserve to win this year; I mean, did they even make a decent effort? I loathe the Republicans as much as the next person, but the Democrats did everything but wave the white flag. The upside to all this is that after Bush royally fucks the US over, no conservative will be able to get a seat anywhere. But that's going to be many years down the line. The rubberband will eventually swing the other way, though. I'm convinced of that. Until then, well...better start blasting the Imperial March, b/c things are going to have to get worse before they get better.

11-07-2002, 06:11 PM	#23
The Omega Concern Banned Location: stay, far, away Posts: 8,997	There's some good points in here about the problems in the Democratic party. I know it to be of a Marxist agenda that is well documented and something I've experienced on a professional level. Before you roll your eyes and flame, let me display my point of view first. I'll do it by saying if John Kerry runs on a single issue he brought up, I would be inclined to vote for him, and it would be the first Dem I've voted for since Dukakis in '88. I think it was the Chris Matthews show where Kerry said he'd put on his platform to allow the Military to recruit on College campi. This practice was removed during LBJ's term, if I recall correctly. It's not that Im a big warhawk, Im not, that's not the point. The point is the Democratic party has allowed to fester an ugly and unnecessary Anti-Nationalistic dogma. This dogma has seeped into the education system over the last 30 years and Kerry is right to see it as a wrongheaded notion in its totality. I believe his stance on this issue is his way of getting the Democrats back to the grass roots level it has lost sight of many moons ago. But, Im sure the Religious Left (Yes, there is one, and its likely your Professor is part of it, though he/she is far too leet to ever cop to it), Im sure the Left would be very frightened by Kerry if he were to push this idea to fruition. But I'd bet you a Diezel Amp that a lot of swing voters would feel comfortable voting Democrat if they saw one stand up to the frustrated Marxist that have driven the Party to the lowly depths its currently in. Like I said earlier Blue Star, I see the Dem party at the end of a 3 decade cycle where the counter-culture elitist are now running scared because of their own paranoia, ironically enough. They need to be nudged to the side the way the Rep's eventually tossed Newt Gingrich out. But I have my doubts about all this happening in 2 years, but 2008 seems more likely.