PDA

View Full Version : "Death throes of a dying party"



Onceler
11-29-2006, 08:22 AM
Or so says Ann Coulter about the Democrats' recent win. Take a look at what "death throes" look like:

Democratic Party, 39,267,916 votes, 57.7% of the vote
Republican Party, 28,464,092 votes, 41.8% of the vote

This election, and the past 6 years, have given birth to a major political realignment. A whole generation of younger voters have formulated their political mindset during the Bush years, much to the GOP's dismay. More Republicans have become Independents, and more Independents have become Democrats.

I'm really tired of people on the right (Dixie here, SR on FP & a whole slew of people on Fox) warning Democrats that they had better "watch out" and lecturing them that they don't have a mandate to do anything. They were elected not just to change the course of Iraq, but the country as a whole, after 6 years of gross incompetence & negligence on issues that need attention. Congressional reform, funding stem cell research, raising the minimum wage, tax relief targeted at helping families with college tuition costs, health care, incenting the development of alternative energy, restoring Congress' vital role in providing oversight of the executive branch....this is a common sense agenda, with wide, mainstream appeal. They don't have to "watch out" for anything; they just have to move forward with what they have pledged to do....

Cypress
11-29-2006, 08:25 AM
I'm so glad that John Kerry lost the presidency in 2004.

It was useful to allow american voters to see what life would be like with six years of one-party Republican rule.

evince
11-29-2006, 08:56 AM
Im just glad the American people finnally woke up , I was begining to think they never would

Onceler
11-29-2006, 09:02 AM
I'm so glad that John Kerry lost the presidency in 2004.

It was useful to allow american voters to see what life would be like with six years of one-party Republican rule.

You got that straight. I was never a huge Kerry fan, but I was truly depressed when Bush was re-elected in 2004. While that election hurt in the short-run, particularly on a policy level, it is probably the best thing that couuld have happened to Democrats in the long-run.

uscitizen
11-29-2006, 09:09 AM
I'm so glad that John Kerry lost the presidency in 2004.

It was useful to allow american voters to see what life would be like with six years of one-party Republican rule.
Kerry losing was the best thing for the country. You are right. The repubs need to be in power periodically to remind the people how they run things and to cause the people to bring back the demoncrats.
This has been a repeating cycle in our countrys history.

OrnotBitwise
11-29-2006, 10:48 AM
I'm so glad that John Kerry lost the presidency in 2004.

It was useful to allow american voters to see what life would be like with six years of one-party Republican rule.


You got that straight. I was never a huge Kerry fan, but I was truly depressed when Bush was re-elected in 2004. While that election hurt in the short-run, particularly on a policy level, it is probably the best thing that couuld have happened to Democrats in the long-run.


Kerry losing was the best thing for the country. You are right. The repubs need to be in power periodically to remind the people how they run things and to cause the people to bring back the demoncrats.
This has been a repeating cycle in our countrys history.
Ahem! May I know say "I told you so" and have done with it?

I told you so.

There. Now I feel better. May I remind you gentlemen that several times during the 2004 campaign season I was called to task for saying that I didn't think that defeating Bush was that much of an emergency. Not enough to compromise my principles and vote for Kerry, anyway. Not naming any names -- cypress. ;)

Damocles
11-29-2006, 10:51 AM
Just like I was glad when we lost both Chambers. I hope this forces the party to move more towards the small "l" libertarian views... Look at the "frontrunners" for 2008 right now. It appears to be working... (crosses fingers, knocks on wood)>

Cypress
11-29-2006, 10:53 AM
Ahem! May I know say "I told you so" and have done with it?

I told you so.

There. Now I feel better. May I remind you gentlemen that several times during the 2004 campaign season I was called to task for saying that I didn't think that defeating Bush was that much of an emergency. Not enough to compromise my principles and vote for Kerry, anyway. Not naming any names -- cypress. ;)

I'm a convert.

Kerry losing was in the long term interest of discrediting republican policies.

OrnotBitwise
11-29-2006, 11:08 AM
I'm a convert.

Kerry losing was in the long term interest of discrediting republican policies.Agreed. There's more to it than that though.

These things really are cyclic; it's not just a cliche. I still remember the late 60s and early 70s well enough to know that much of the alarmist excess on both sides is overwrought and kind of silly. The nation was much more polarized then than it is now.

Bush? Yeah, he's bad, but we've been through bad before. I still believe that Reagan was substantively worse, largely because he wasn't such an obvious buffoon.

Yes, we can and do make progress . . . despite the best efforts of the conservatives. No, it's not at all fair to ask people who are suffering now to be patient and put up with injustice. Sadly, though, that's the only prescription that works.

LadyT
11-29-2006, 11:23 AM
I wanted and still do want Bush out of office, but after Kerry lost my only bright spot was the fact that it would highlight Republican policy shortcomings and they would be the ones that would have to clean up after their $hit immediately following the onset of the war. Rest assured republicans would have blamed Kerry for everything that went wrong even though they inniated it.

One of you (i can't remember now) said it best:

Bush and Cheney drove over a cliff despite our warnings and are now looking to dems to fix the situation.

PULL OUT OF IRAQ NOW.

uscitizen
11-29-2006, 11:44 AM
I'm a convert.

Kerry losing was in the long term interest of discrediting republican policies.

If anyone will recall this is just what I said before the 2004 election. Otherwise if kerry had won the rebutlikens would have just blamed all their mess on him. this way Bush and his party has to be held accountable for thier mistakes.
And the congress would not have changed hands at this point if Kerry had been elected.

uscitizen
11-29-2006, 11:45 AM
Yep Desh and all those who balied out of the buss before it ran over the cliff were labeled "cut and runners" ;)