Okay, Dems, What Went Wrong? And How Can We Fix It?

No, I'll pass. I would have to go back to message boards four or more years old to get the data and I'm not sure it will even be there. But I've been doing this stuff a long time. In this thread it has been suggested that we Bush voters can't say 'the people have spoken'. I took exception to that. I'm not requiring anyone to prove that the people have NOT spoken. I would ask that my opinion be allowed to stand on its own merits or lack thereof as well. You are free to disagree with it. And you have.

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

Just wondering- and apologies in advance if this question is too off-topic for some contributors-

Is it a matter of any concern to you, that for the first time in its history the USA is opposed by all the developed countries in the world, with the possible exception of Israel?

Opposed, I mean, in terms of its stance and chosen course of action against the terrorism threat, its record on ecological protection and conservation, foreign policy and international trade?

These countries have always been opposed to the US. George Bush did not cause this rift that is Democratic slander and a myth. The Europeans for years have been snobby and have acted as if because they are older in history that they are better. Calling us all cowboys! They have been doing underhanded arms deals with dictators and have shown their greed for money over principle. How much can we expect from the likes of Chirac?

If the Israelis were suicide bombing Palestinian children and civilians on busses we would be on the Palestinian side. If the world wants to side with murderers and terrorists they can! They will reap what they sow when their countries are overrun by Muslim extremists looking for a state to terrorize like they are doing in Africa.

As for global warming and the Kyoto treaty, when the developing countries unite on the treaty and they are not just expecting the US to take the brunt of the whole world then the US will most certainly climb aboard.

This Kyoto treaty will become moot in a few years when the world switches to hydrogen for fuel and the emissions go from where they are today to zero. Then are we going to have developing countries still using the worlds supply of oil?

This is just demagoguery created by Al Gore the patron saint of the demagogues..

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

I would ask that my opinion be allowed to stand on its own merits or lack thereof as well. You are free to disagree with it. And you have.

I have no problem with letting your opinion stand on it's merit lack of merit.

I point you to the last time you declined to support your claims:

Foxfyre wrote:

That is my prerogative. I don't have to prove it to have an opinion about it. So there.

Craven de Kere wrote:

I agree and strive only to make the caliber of your claims clear.

As I said then, my efforts will merely be to point out said lack in merit.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

How about, as a change of pace, digging up some actual examples or citations of what you claim rather than just setting your gums to the wind and letting fly.

Sniping, always sniping. C'mon the election margins in '92 and '96 are fairly well known and easy to find.

I lean, but only lightly. By theway the verse in question is preceeded by another that sets the scene. They are;

I sometimes think that never blows so red
The Rose as where some buried Caesar bled;
That every Hyacinth the Garden wears
Dropt in its Lap from some once lovely Head.

And this delightful Herb whose tender Green
Fledges the River's Lip on which we lean--
Ah, lean upon it lightly! for who knows
From what once lovely Lip it springs unseen!

0 Replies

Just in the interest of clarification, I wish to state it is not my position The Democrats must be more Republican-like. My position is that The Democrats have been pursing, and vigorously so, a failed course of action. Whatever they do or become, it likely should be different than what's gone recently before if they are to improve their electoral prospect.

0 Replies

Yes it's in the NY Post, but some might be interested in what Bill Clinton has said about reasons the Dems lost and the GOP won:

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/31816.htm

0 Replies

Clinton "Gets it" too, but then, he has for some time. "Getting It" got him re-elected Governor of Arkansas 4 years after a failed bid to retain that office, and it got him elected President twice.

0 Replies

Yes. Clinton is one of those rare politicians who actually does learn from his mistakes. I have no confidence that he has any agenda other than the promotion of Bill Clinton, but I have never questioned his political savvy.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Yes it's in the NY Post, but some might be interested in what Bill Clinton has said about reasons the Dems lost and the GOP won:

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/31816.htm

Quote:

Democrats "need a clear national message, and they have to do this without one big advantage the Republicans have, which is they won't have a theological message that basically paints the other guy as evil," he said.

Right on, guys. Thanks fox, timber.

0 Replies

Which European newspaper had the headline,

"How Can 59 Million Americans Be So Stupid?"

0 Replies

Foxf, good article. Clinton was an expert at focused messages. There is much in the article that addresses just what this thread is all about.

0 Replies

I think it was The Daily Mirror that ran that headline, Lola

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

From the NYTimes Interactive feature on the elections:

Quote:
So one thing that that means for the Democrats [..] is that the party has to find a nominee and a way of talking about religion to religious people of all faiths that doesnt make them feel as if the Democrats are Margaret Mead conducting a sociological experiment

Come to think of it, this is quite an ironic way of the NYTimes of putting it, actually - because only that darned liberal incrowd that in this interpretation is responsible for the defeat, would get the Margaret Mead reference in the first place ... ;-)

0 Replies

That occurred to me as well, nimh ... gotta love irony, 'specially when its unintentional.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

nimh wrote:
From the NYTimes Interactive feature on the elections:

Quote:
So one thing that that means for the Democrats [..] is that the party has to find a nominee and a way of talking about religion to religious people of all faiths that doesnt make them feel as if the Democrats are Margaret Mead conducting a sociological experiment

Come to think of it, this is quite an ironic way of the NYTimes of putting it, actually - because only that darned liberal incrowd that in this interpretation is responsible for the defeat, would get the Margaret Mead reference in the first place ... ;-)

This is just the NYT way of saying Kerry was so low that Bush could win. It will not be long before the TRUE media takes over the spotlight of publications like the NYT. They will finally cater to the heartland of the US and show the world what true public majorities think and need. The NYT sits down every morning and trys to figure out how to tear America down... blazing news on the burner of hell's fire. Americans are tired of this and the decline of publications like the NYT will usher in a time of unity and world cohesiveness.

0 Replies

Yes, the people have voted against evil, not the evil of terrorism, the evil of the Democrats. Yup, that's us. The party of the evildoers, we do evil things like promote the minimum wage. OOh. and frightful, don't let the children see, a fair shot at healthcare insurance, horrors. and greatgodamighty the moving forward of scientific knowledge.

I've got to hand it to Karl Rove, he earns his money. He knew it would be razor thin in some states, including Ohio, and he made the machine work.
(In Ohio if 68,000 Bush voters stayed home, Kerry would have won the Electoral College, still lost the popular vote by three million or so, but still won the Presidency.)

It's still a wonder to me, that any person is willing to trade their vote on a single issue, this one being moral values. Moral values not being against pre-emptive war but against two guys kissing.

Quote:

It will not be long before the TRUE media takes over...

Hopefully, that will be the day before Jesus re-appears.
Joe

0 Replies

"It's still a wonder to me, that any person is willing to trade their vote on a single issue, this one being moral values. Moral values not being against pre-emptive war but against two guys kissing."

Part of the problem we humans have in getting along is the inability to appreciate and tolerate, if not understand, the value judgments others hold in different priorities than our own.

If politicians and political campaigns do not acknowledge the moral priorities held by the electorate and cater to them, they are destined to lose. Which is why I could never be a successful politician, not having the stomach for the hypocricy required to cater to a value judgment I do not hold.

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

Yes, the people have voted against evil, not the evil of terrorism, the evil of the Democrats. Yup, that's us. The party of the evildoers, we do evil things like promote the minimum wage. OOh. and frightful, don't let the children see, a fair shot at healthcare insurance, horrors. and greatgodamighty the moving forward of scientific knowledge.

Evil that democrats do... Man, that's not one book or one bookshelf full of books, that's a whole library of books. I wouldn't know where to start. You might start back in the 1830s or somewhere with the dems and their negros = 2/3 of a human idea using black voting entitlement to keep slavery in place and the republican party being invented to get rid of slavery, Tammany Hall, the KKK, the deal they made to keep segregation (the goof presidential election back around 1880 or whenever it was), Woodrow Wilson and the Versaille treaty which probably caused WW-II, Roosevelt's policies which prolonged the depression for almost a decade, Henry Wallace who God's grace and pure dumb luck prevented from becoming our first communist president, JFK and LBJ who started the VietNam war after Ike stood there on the dias when JFK was innaugerated and specifically warned them not to.....

I mean, that's just for bare starters. How much would you like to hear??

0 Replies

Good Morning, Larry!

Yes. This administration and it's supporters are the best at being appreciative and tolerant of the value judgements of others who oppose them. Just the day before yesterday, the President said he would reach out to anyone who shared his goals. That's nice, isn't it? Reaching out to people who already agree with you.

And the nice, tolerant people who love freedom, but who don't want everybody to be that free are moving forward. What next? How about a law that further proscribes the role of women in any marriage as subservient to their husbands. (Psst. That's already the law in Louisiana but they think we should make in nationwide.)

But I think you've convinced me that I should not only appreciate and tolerate narrow thinking, but see that it's the better way. Isn't it the better way?

Isn't about time we put prayer back in schools and let the little children seek Jesus' help in their studies and I think it's right about time to stop all this shopping and such on the Lord's Day and maybe Wednesday night too?

We've got to stop all this nonsense and bad-mouthing being published in the papers everyday, by making sure that everyone backs the President, a man of God, in everything he says and does.

And these movies out of Hollywood have to start showing the life changing virtues of Grace and I don't mean Will and Grace.

We got to get back to the moral values that built this country and I for one just want to know what I can do to help to bring back Puritanism

I want to help anyone who has really narrow thinking to succeed at making us think that way too. Once we are all narrow thinkers, think of the bliss!

I'm on your side now, lead the way.

Faithfully yours.

Joe

0 Replies

And good morning to you joe.

"But I think you've convinced me that I should not only appreciate and tolerate narrow thinking, but see that it's the better way. Isn't it the better way?"

Not necessarily. Those you ridicule simply hold different priorities in their value judgments than do you. I would never agree that you should change yours to be in agreement with them. Nor do I think you should expect them to change theirs in order to be in agreement with yours.

0 Replies

Okay, Dems, What Went Wrong? And How Can We Fix It?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know