0
   

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

 
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Apr, 2005 05:11 pm
I've said plenty about Democratic values but we're so busy defending ourselves against abuses, we have our hands full at the moment.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Apr, 2005 06:06 pm
Lola, I begin to think perhaps a large part of the Democrats' problem is that what the Democrats perceive to be abuses, the The GOP, in concert with the majority of The Electorate, sees as values to be cherished, promoted, and defended.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Apr, 2005 07:03 pm
Lola wrote:
Timber, Foxfire and george......by the time you finish gloating over your perceived victory and look around you, it will be too late. The GOP is flirting with the edge and some have already fallen.......they just don't seem to have recognized it yet.

Tom DeLay for one has finally cooked his own goose, I do believe. And Frist too. When those without a true mandate get too cock sure and all gloaty, they will find themselves by the wayside, cast aside as most over confident bullies eventually are.......... and deservedly so.


But I wasn't gloating. Instead I offered what I regard as a useful suggestion. What I got was denial, "Our Platform is OK" Our candidates are OK". I guess that means either the voters are not OK or that evil genius Karl Rove has them all in a spell.


With respect to Tom DeLay it is evident that there is a well financed campaign underway designed to destroy him, We shall see if it works. I do believe that he was fairly elected by the voters of his district, so your assertion that he doesn't have a "true mandate" doesn't make sense to me. What is a "true mandate" ? Is this a phrase that denotes the approval of liberals or something like that?
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Apr, 2005 08:16 pm
georgeob1 wrote:
Lola wrote:
Timber, Foxfire and george......by the time you finish gloating over your perceived victory and look around you, it will be too late. The GOP is flirting with the edge and some have already fallen.......they just don't seem to have recognized it yet.

Tom DeLay for one has finally cooked his own goose, I do believe. And Frist too. When those without a true mandate get too cock sure and all gloaty, they will find themselves by the wayside, cast aside as most over confident bullies eventually are.......... and deservedly so.


But I wasn't gloating. Instead I offered what I regard as a useful suggestion. What I got was denial, "Our Platform is OK" Our candidates are OK". I guess that means either the voters are not OK or that evil genius Karl Rove has them all in a spell.


With respect to Tom DeLay it is evident that there is a well financed campaign underway designed to destroy him, We shall see if it works. I do believe that he was fairly elected by the voters of his district, so your assertion that he doesn't have a "true mandate" doesn't make sense to me. What is a "true mandate" ? Is this a phrase that denotes the approval of liberals or something like that?


And this "well financed campaign designed to destroy [DeLay]" is also responsible for all the stuff being uncovered? Finally someone is digging. And with DeLay, you don't have to dig very deep. We shall see.......it's true.

It's well financed ok. It's financed at the grass roots level. I've sent as much as I can to help with the expenses. When we can no longer depend on the press, someone has to support a search for truth. DeLay is a scumbag from way back.
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Apr, 2005 11:22 pm
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1269856#1269856

Lola's tired of politics. Let's have a little fun at the cafe, ok?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Apr, 2005 10:02 pm
When ya'll sober up, here's a provocative piece that summarizes beautifully what those evil Republicans have been trying to say all along:

Quote:
Enough already! Let Democratic movers and shakers take one last look at those they are demonizing, because many are their brothers and sisters, social democrats driven into exodus by party excesses.



My Party Is Leaving the Faithful Behind

By Kevin Starr, Kevin Starr, state librarian emeritus, is professor of history at USC. His latest book is "Coast of Dreams: California on the Edge, 1990-2003," from Alfred A. Knopf.

Perhaps the outpouring of admiration for Pope John Paul II last week will at long last alert those at the helm of my political party ?- the Democratic Party ?- to a truth that has yet to sink in despite the whack to the head administered by last year's election: Cultural values count.

Those of us who label ourselves Democrats have stood for economic fairness since the New Deal, but in the last three decades our once-majority party has embraced a take-no-prisoners cultural agenda that now threatens to relegate Democrats to permanent minority status. The hostile takeover driving this drift to irrelevance is especially painful to cultural moderates, who remember that social democracy was born of traditional values.

Politics, Aristotle tells us, is the art of the possible. Politics is about the shaping and control of government toward practical ends.

Government serves society, a much larger entity. And society, in turn, is structured and animated by a complex interaction of beliefs, values, symbols and socio-economic forces which, taken cumulatively, we describe as culture.

The chicken-and-egg relationship between society and culture is intricate enough to have kept three millenniums of philosophers and social scientists busy. Now even economists are beginning to acknowledge that culture is a more powerful social force than politics ?- Harvard's Amartya Sen, for instance, won the 1998 Nobel Prize in economics because he demonstrated how social values and structures born of culture affect the ability of a society to take care of its impoverished, even in times of economic boom.

Today's Democratic Party leaders have apparently forgotten, however, that the social programs that came of age during the New Deal had their origins in Judeo-Christian tradition, even more than in secular humanism. Indeed, it might be argued that popes were as influential as politicians in shaping policy.

In 1891, Pope Leo XIII (an Italian count, for goodness sake) helped usher in the modern era of social democratic thinking with his encyclical Rerum Novarum, defending the rights of working people to organize themselves into unions and to achieve a living wage.

In 1906, a Catholic priest, John Augustine Ryan, took on the modern American industrial system in his pioneering "A Living Wage: Its Ethical and Economic Aspects," followed by "Distributive Justice: The Right and Wrong of Our Present Distribution of Wealth" (1916).

In 1931, Pope Pius XI (a librarian, as well as a champion Alpine mountaineer, for goodness sake) extended Ryan's teachings to the entire church in his encyclical Quadragesimo Anno.

In 1933, the pope named Ryan a monsignor, and a newly elected Franklin D. Roosevelt (a scion of the Anglo-Dutch Hudson River aristocracy, for goodness sake) turned increasingly to the social philosophy Ryan represented as he fashioned the policies and programs of the New Deal. Indeed, Ryan became popularly known as the Right Reverend New Dealer.

Flowing into New Deal policy and practice as well were the social values of the Jewish tradition, with its emphasis on tikkun olam ?- repairing the world through social action. Protestant America's evangelical fervor, as represented by the advocates of the Social Gospel movement, also contributed. And when Dust Bowlers and African Americans clamored for redemption in this world as well as the next, Roosevelt and his fellow Democrats heeded their faith-based yearnings too.

Three of the Democrats who reached the White House after FDR ?- Harry Truman, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton ?- were Bible-reading Protestants who spoke with a twang, and the fourth, John F. Kennedy, was a Roman Catholic, the first and still the only Catholic to reach the White House.

The Democratic Party, in short, made a powerful alliance with the culture of Ordinary America, including its religious values. True, the party's links to segregationist Dixiecrats caused problems ?- big problems. But it was two Southerners ?- Martin Luther King Jr. and Lyndon B. Johnson ?- who struck the most significant hammer blows against the injustice of that dependency.

But now the Democratic Party elite ?- the activists, the pundits, the big-bucks donors ?- have succeeded in pitting social democracy against the very values (one is tempted to say the very people) that gave rise to social democracy in the first place.

Baffled by such rejection, an ostracized faith community shows every sign of realigning itself politically. Although a few astute politicians such as Hillary Clinton are trying to find a way out of this breach, there is no clear path. Democrats should be reading Jacques Maritain ?- a social democrat and cultural moderate ?- or even studying the progressive policies and programs of the Eisenhower and (yes!) the Nixon years. Instead, social democrats, once anchored in the deepest imperatives of religion and culture, substitute sloganeering and sound bites for thought ?- as when party Chairman Howard Dean describes Republican Americans as pure evil, no two ways about it.

Faith and traditional values get shred in the ideological crossfire, and the sustaining, healing power of American culture is lost.

Enough already! Let Democratic movers and shakers take one last look at those they are demonizing, because many are their brothers and sisters, social democrats driven into exodus by party excesses.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-values10apr10,0,400505.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Apr, 2005 11:56 pm
Maritain was arguably the best known Catholic philosopher in the world ... at the time of his death in in 1973.

But I'd never considered him a social democrat - Thomism it is.
(Should read him again ... when I'll do some religious readings.)
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 09:59 am
Many months ago, McGentrix, who says he himself is not a Christian, started a thread on the thesis that it will be the much-maligned religious right who is likely to have the last laugh after all. Well the most recent elections seem to bear that out. It isn't that the religious right are the answer or means to the correct ends or that people need to be one of them, but to ignore that more than 90% of the people have their values, ideals, and sense of justice formed in part by their religious faith is pure folly for any group who hopes to prevail politically.

Again it is not whose values that should concern us but what values. The majority can be ignored only a political peril.

And yes Walter, Martain is amazing and should be required reading at some point by just about everybody.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 10:08 am
Quote:
Dean's followers unique
'Deaniacs' are unified but are still largely out of step with nation, survey says.


By Chuck Raasch
Gannett News Service

April 10, 2005


WASHINGTON -- Howard Dean's supporters remain a cohesive political force, one made up disproportionately of liberal, nonreligious and highly educated Americans, according to an extensive study released this past week.

The study by the Pew Research Center contains good news for Dean, who is chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Most of the former presidential candidate's followers who participated in the survey said they wished there were a viable third party, but only one in 10 said they hoped the Democratic Party would "die off and be replaced" with a new one. That suggests many could support Dean's efforts at the DNC.

But Pew discovered potential bad news for Dean: Not only are the self-described "Deaniacs" out of step with other Americans on contentious issues such as gay marriage, they also differ with fellow Democrats on many positions. That could portend a tough battle for the heart and soul of the Democratic Party between now and the 2008 elections.

Although Dean, a former Vermont governor, failed to capture the Democratic presidential nomination, his network of more than 500,000 supporters "left a strong imprint on the political world," the survey concluded.

Pew conducted online surveys of 11,568 Dean supporters Sept. 13 and Dec. 14. It got the names from a database supplied by Dean's now-dormant presidential campaign. The combined surveys have a margin of error of plus or minus 1 percentage point.

Pew used earlier surveys it conducted to determine overall Democratic leanings. It got its total population percentages from a 2003 Census Bureau survey.

Dean's supporters were "far wealthier, better educated, more secular and much less ethnically diverse than other Democrats," according to Pew's analysis.

The study concluded:

• A third of Dean's supporters have college degrees, compared with 9 percent of all Democrats.

• Ninety-two percent of Dean's supporters are white, compared with 79 percent of all Democrats.

• Thirty-eight percent of Deaniacs said they had no religious affiliation, compared with 11 percent of all Americans.

• Ninety-one percent of Deaniacs support allowing gay people to marry, while 38 percent of all Democrats do.


For those who want more, The Pew Study

Meanwhile, back at "We wuz robbed",

Quote:
CNN: Kerry cites voter intimidation examples
Sunday, April 10, 2005 Posted: 7:37 PM EDT (2337 GMT)


BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) -- Many voters in last year's presidential election were denied access to the polls through trickery and intimidation, former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry told a voters' group Sunday ...



Oh, yeah - these folks got it all figgerred out and they're movin' the Democratic Party onto the path to recovery.

One thing Kerry was quoted as sayin' in that CNN article stands out to me, though: " ... "We need to go about the business of making our own democracy in America work better," he said."

You got it, Senator - thats the deal. Now whatchya gotta do is get yerself and yer buddies back into participatin' in the game; grousin' about the plays and the players from the sidelines don't do a thing for the score.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 10:26 am
Grousin? You mean like the Florida case where Republican Feeney asked a software developer to make a program to steal the vote?

http://www.bradblog.com/ClintCurtis.htm

Or where a newly formed Republican group gets to give expert testimony at Ohio Voter hearings?

We can't fix what went wrong if part of what needs to be fixed is repeatedly poo-poo-ed and referred to as whining and grousing.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 10:36 am
Too right Squinney, but don't expect Timber to be changing his tune any time soon; he's having much too much fun putting people down right now.

Timber,

Quote:
You got it, Senator - thats the deal. Now whatchya gotta do is get yerself and yer buddies back into participatin' in the game; grousin' about the plays and the players from the sidelines don't do a thing for the score.


Get back into the game?

Have you read any of the news lately?

The Dems aren't just back in the game, they are winning at the moment. With such complete majorities, the Republicans should be steamrolling the competition. It isn't happening.

True, it's only the first quarter; but it's nice to see some initiative... Smile

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 10:42 am
Well, squinney, thats mostly what it is - bring somethin' of substance to the table if ya wanna contribute to the meal.

The media bein' what it is, if there's a shred to get ahold of, the rug will get yanked right out from under whoever is standin' on it. Absolutely no denyin' there are flaws in The System - and not just as related to the votin' process.

Problem for The Left In America is, it just doesn't seem to be able to get past its cherished myths and move into the realm of reality. A continent doesn't drift away from an iceberg.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 10:50 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Too right Squinney, but don't expect Timber to be changing his tune any time soon; he's having much too much fun putting people down right now.

Ain't that I'm puttin' folks down, Cyc, its that I see some folks unable or unwillin' to recognize and address the real problems.
The Dems' leadership just ain't playin' the same game the rest of The Nation is. I ain't puttin' people down, I'm criticisizin' the mindset that has brought The Democratic Party to its present fortune. Some folks don't wanna hear that external influences have played no part in how the Dems have gotten themselves to where they are.

Quote:
Get back into the game?

Have you read any of the news lately?

The Dems aren't just back in the game, they are winning at the moment. With such complete majorities, the Republicans should be steamrolling the competition. It isn't happening.

True, it's only the first quarter; but it's nice to see some initiative... Smile

Cycloptichorn


If you figure 3 goals down, 3rd and long on your own 8 - again - is "showin' initiative", that goes a ways toward explainin' things.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 10:53 am
You're right Timber. So long as the Dems continue to ignore the realities and continue to beat the drum that they lost because they were victimized or cheated, and if they think criticism of the Republicans is evidence they are winning, we can look forward to GOP victories for generations. All the smart Democrats have already acknowledged that it takes more than bashing the opposition to win. You have to have something to vote for instead of just something to vote against. And what the Deaniacs and their ilk want us to do is vote for what most of the American people have said pretty strongly that they don't want.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 11:12 am
Democrats suffered major setbacks in the 1990s when an ethics-challenged leader -- House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.), who resigned in 1989 -- became a larger symbol of his party than its platform issues. Now we have Tom DeLay vs the platform of Social Security reform. DeLay probably won't win this one and the republicans know that.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 11:49 am
Timber,

3 goals down? How can you even say that?

Your team should be running away with the game right now, and it isn't happening.

Social security = not happening any time soon
Terri Schiavo = big mistake
Crusade against Judges = big mistake
Tom Delay = big anchor weighing ya down

True, you won the election. Kudos. But in the time since then, what has the Republican party done? Nothing, that's the answer, except for stirring up a lot of problems during the TS fiasco and now starting a crusade against judges which is going to backfire hard, and is causing division within your own party.

Dys brings up a great point that the Republicans have won in the past based upon ethics issues, and they haven't done a single thing to clean up the system, as they promised to do. They are going to get slammed by the Dems the same way in '06, bet on it.

Down by three goals? Your party hasn't accomplished any goals they've put forth this cycle so far, so I wouldn't start crowing yet.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 12:05 pm
Medicare Reform, Tort Reform, Bankruptcy Reform, ANWAR ... seems to me that's ball control.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 12:09 pm
Heh

Medicare Reform - has been a fight from the beginning and is far from over

Tort Reform - allright, give ya that one

Bankruptcy Reform - this actually represents a loss for your party, as there are zero constituents who supported this area of interest and a very large number who were against it. Basically nothing but a soft lob to the credit card companies, and everyone knows it.

ANWAR - Haven't won that one yet, don't get ahead of yourself.

Anwar? Tort Reform? Are you purposefully ignoring the fact that your MAJOR legislative goals are being stymied at the moment, and choosing to focus on smaller goals? That's hardly ball control.... and Ball control is hardly scoring goals...

President's approval rating = lowest ever for second term president.

Congress approval rating = one of the lowest ever.

And you call that winning? Sheesh. I understand that you aren't capable of admitting that things aren't going as well for yer party as one would have hoped for this time period, but you should face some facts, man...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 12:16 pm
It's a looooong way to 2008.


I'm not as optomistic as you, Cyclop. I don't think the majority of the public is as informed as those who post here in politics. I don't think most of the voters think about what they hear on the news. They hear it while fixing dinner and throwing in some laundry and telling the kids to stop jumping on the couch and accept whatever angle they are fed by whatever channel they watch. They don't question, let alone give it enough thought to catch the innuendo, consequences or real agenda.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2005 12:22 pm
Oh, I agree with ya, Squinney.

I'm looking forward to '06 as the strategic goal right now. I think the Dems have an excellent chance of picking up some seats; when you count the 'redistricting' the Repubs did in Texas and the seats lost due to that, the Dems really didn't do all that badly in the national elections last cycle.

The hopeful factors for me are the following:

Extremely poor approval ratings for both Congress and the President

Social Security reform isn't going well at all, and this is an issue that MANY people, if not MOST people, are aware of

Tom DeLay is getting major face time in the news these days, and it isn't positive

The TS fiasco really drives home how much the party has been taken over by radical Right-wingers; this doesn't sit well with many traditional conservatives

All in all it is difficult to imagine how, in the face of the recent electoral loss, the Dems could be doing much better at the moment. Given that they don't have any sort of majority whatsoever, it is encouraging that they have managed to hold on to as much power as they have so far.

I also like the unity displayed on the SS issue by the Dems; the Republicans wish they had anything that unified on the issue.

Still a long game to go, but trust me; it could be much, much, much worse.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 03/15/2026 at 11:15:02