Article backs up what Dano said: Dem party has lost it's moderates

TheDanold

Unimatrix
For awhile I have been blasted as making excuses for when I have defended Repubs by saying that some Repubs vote Liberally and moderately while virtually no Dems vote anything other than Liberally, as to why this country has moved in a more left-wing direction on spending, despite a "Republican" majority.

A fantastic article backs up exactly what I said by looking at the voting records rather than the rhetoric. HERE ARE THE FACTS:
"The Congressional Quarterly calculates that House Democrats voted with the majority of their party 88% of the time in 2005, the highest total since CQ started keeping track in 1956."
http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8108149

You see how they stick together like sheep? They vote in a giant Liberal bloc with very few deviating from their Liberal leaders. For all the rhetoric over Repubs being partisan, the record shows it's the Dems who are and BIGTIME.

The article (and remember this is from a magazine/writer that endorsed Kerry over Bush) also goes on to show how the Dems under San Fran far-left Liberal Democrat Nanci Pelosi are just running against everything rather than pushing any solutions or ideas.
 
Last edited:
I am a moderate and will vote almost entirely Demoncratic this election.
BAHAHAHA, you have been trashing all Repubs since the moment I've known you, you are a yellowdog Liberal Democrat through and through, with the exception of guns - whooped-de-dee. Takes more than that to be a moderate.

Well at least you admit you are exercising your demons...
 
I trash Republicans sure, but that is not what this thread is about now is it. I am a moderate and I vote almost entirely demoncratic.
I am for properly done tax cuts.
I am absolutely for smaller government, when done properly for the betterment of the govt and people.
I am for balanced budgets.
I am against govt in the bedroom.
I am for getting rid or welfare and medicare/medicaid fraud.
I am against giving illegal immigrants benefits.
etc, etc...
 
of course, the article "proves" nothing. I would suggest that democrats voting as a bloc is a direct response to the idiocy of this republican adminstration's legislative agenda.

now "disprove" THAT assumption dano.
 
What the article fails to note is that the current positions held by many Democrats are either to the right of or reflective of those policies advanced by Richard Nixon. It is Hillary Clinton after all who has called for an increase in troops levels in Iraq, even while other Democrats have called for an immediate withdrawal, or as Murtha has done, a more gradual withdrawal. Yeah, they are all together those Democrats. It wasn't that long ago that the Republicans were saying that the Democrats were all over the place and didn't seem to have any cohesiveness or positions onthe issues. Now they are too cohesive. No contradiction for the say anything, do anything, to win, Republicans.

"I kill, therefore I am." Phil Ochs

Democracy Now!!!!
 
What the article fails to note is that the current positions held by many Democrats are either to the right of or reflective of those policies advanced by Richard Nixon. It is Hillary Clinton after all who has called for an increase in troops levels in Iraq, even while other Democrats have called for an immediate withdrawal, or as Murtha has done, a more gradual withdrawal. Yeah, they are all together those Democrats. It wasn't that long ago that the Republicans were saying that the Democrats were all over the place and didn't seem to have any cohesiveness or positions onthe issues. Now they are too cohesive. No contradiction for the say anything, do anything, to win, Republicans.

"I kill, therefore I am." Phil Ochs

Democracy Now!!!!
You're a complete moron, let's try this again nice and slow:

Democrats are all over the place when it comes to going to talking to the voters and attacking Repubs (ie: they try and go after Repubs for runaway spending, but then propose GIANT record breaking new spending programs like universal healthcare).
Democrats are united when it comes to voting - they vote straight Liberal as a bloc.
 
What if we vote for a moderate demoncrat ?
A democratic vote is not necessarially a liberal vote. Well I am sure you know no difference though Dano.
Besides another confustication factor. I am registered as a Rebutliken ;)
 
You're a complete moron, let's try this again nice and slow:

Democrats are all over the place when it comes to going to talking to the voters and attacking Repubs (ie: they try and go after Repubs for runaway spending, but then propose GIANT record breaking new spending programs like universal healthcare).
Democrats are united when it comes to voting - they vote straight Liberal as a bloc.


the problem is: you continue to use the words "democrat" and "liberal" as if they are totally synonymous. They are not.

And just because the democrats have figured out that the only way to maintain any check on single party rule is to stand united against republican control of all three branches of government does not make that unity more "liberal"...it just makes it more unified.
 
You're a complete moron, let's try this again nice and slow:

Democrats are all over the place when it comes to going to talking to the voters and attacking Repubs (ie: they try and go after Repubs for runaway spending, but then propose GIANT record breaking new spending programs like universal healthcare).
Democrats are united when it comes to voting - they vote straight Liberal as a bloc.

And because I point out the obvious that the Democrats are all over the place I am not just a "moron" but a "complete moron"! Actually I am not a complete anything at this point, I have a missing limb... But how would you have known that???
 
And because I point out the obvious that the Democrats are all over the place I am not just a "moron" but a "complete moron"! Actually I am not a complete anything at this point, I have a missing limb... But how would you have known that???

Sorry to break the news to you but the brain is not a limb...
 
Dano's solution:

Lets give the repubs one more try.
Actually it's that we need to elect more Conservatives from either party, but yeah usually that's going to be Repubs.
You will note that before 2004 we had a spending problem, before 2002 even moreso, then we got more Republicans in the house and senate (same president) and spending started getting weaker.

That's just the facts.
 
Actually it's that we need to elect more Conservatives from either party, but yeah usually that's going to be Repubs.
You will note that before 2004 we had a spending problem, before 2002 even moreso, then we got more Republicans in the house and senate (same president) and spending started getting weaker.

That's just the facts.


:blah: :bs:
 
Back
Top