The Fighting Dems! 57 Iraq Vets Running as Democrats

57!!!!!!!! I quess that tells us something.

0 Replies

Good strategy by the Democrats....and sorely needed to bump up their credentials on security. However, putting up veteran candidates is a far cry from unseating incumbents as shown by the Rothenberg article below.

Stuart Rothenberg wrote:

A military record is a credential that voters may consider, but they often prefer to use other vote cues to pick the candidate for whom they will vote. They will surely use partisanship and incumbency. They'll likely use issues such as taxes and abortion. They'll see what kind of interest groups are supporting which candidates.

source

0 Replies

Not sure where you get your numbers from (57???), but anytime you get new blood into politics, it is a good thing. Lord knows, the current crop of Dummycrats need to be replaced by some new blood.

0 Replies

Sounds like Heinz is behind this...

0 Replies

I would bet if this is accurate that the bushco machine will find ways to question their service and patriotism. Vets against Iraq vets or something. Lots of flags and posters and smear.

Then again maybe not, it's not like they've ever done it before and .....oh.... .never mind.

0 Replies

Stuart Rothenberg wrote:

Being in the reserves or even on active duty in Iraq or Afghanistan or at the Pentagon almost certainly isn't enough, by itself, to get any of the veterans elected.

Well, thats a nice straw man to break down. Anyone ever seen anyone actually assert that "Being in the reserves or even on active duty is enough, by itself, to get elected"? No? Didnt think so.

Of course its not enough, by itself. But it'll help.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Sounds like Heinz is behind this...

0 Replies

Oh, gosh, I am just rolling down laughing with the Heinz remark. However did you think of it, McGentrix?

Isn't "dummycrats" against the rules here?

0 Replies

As far as I am concerned, this is the best thing that could happen to the Democratic Party.

The far, hyper and extreme left wings of the Party are going to find this biting them in the azz in a few years if they DO get their candidates in place.

The majority of military people are Republican and even the minority who vote Democrat are more conservative (With a small 'c') than most of their Democratic brethren on many issues.

I think the far left will find itself more and more marginalized by its representatives when they find out that the people they put in place aren't in favor of many of their very, VERY out there causes that the current Democratic Party stands behind.

I'd like to see it happen, because I think that all elected individuals should have spent at least SOME time in the military. And also, it will help reel in some of the more Leftward leaning tendencies of the Party.

Just my 2 cents (Pre tax)

0 Replies

We're a big tent party. Plenty of room for disagreement while still retaining the same ideals: prosperity for all Americans, environmental responsibility, and sensible foreign policy.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

We're a big tent party. Plenty of room for disagreement while still retaining the same ideals: prosperity for all Americans, environmental responsibility, and sensible foreign policy.

Cycloptichorn

I do not know what party you describe, but I am sure it is not the current Democratic Party of big govt, big taxes, no foreign policy.

0 Replies

That's an empty statemtent; it doesn't mean anything.

You can't accuse the Dems of being the 'big gov't' party anymore, the gov't has exploded in size under Bush.

You can't accuse the Dems of not having a foriegn policy, as they obviously do; just not one you agree with.

And 'big taxes?' Yes, Dems will raise taxes if elected in. What, you think this country of ours runs on wishes and dreams? We have to pay money to keep it going, and the 'supply-siders' idea of continually mounting defecits is not a sustainable economic policy for the future.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

We're a big tent party. Plenty of room for disagreement while still retaining the same ideals: prosperity for all Americans, environmental responsibility, and sensible foreign policy.

Cycloptichorn

I'm not quite sure which Party you mean?

Are you talking about the Democratic Party who nearly cut each others GUTS out with rusty razors during the 2000 and ESPECIALLY 2004 Primary?

I haven't seen infighting like that since the Borgias.

The Democratic Party, in deciding to run these candidates is going to find itself moving to the right on many issues when these people start voting their conciences. It will happen without you even noticing as the 'loony left' finds themselves unable to get meetings with the 'new crop' of Democratic military vets.

Just my 2 cents (Pre tax)

0 Replies

Perhaps you will be correct; but I'd still rather have a centrist Democrat in office than a right-wing Republican. And if things keep going the way they have been....

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Fedral wrote:

Are you talking about the Democratic Party who nearly cut each others GUTS out with rusty razors during the 2000 and ESPECIALLY 2004 Primary?

I haven't seen infighting like that since the Borgias.

I gather you didnt check in for the character assassination of McCain in the 2000 Republican primaries, then?

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

That's an empty statemtent; it doesn't mean anything.

You can't accuse the Dems of being the 'big gov't' party anymore, the gov't has exploded in size under Bush.

You can't accuse the Dems of not having a foriegn policy, as they obviously do; just not one you agree with.

And 'big taxes?' Yes, Dems will raise taxes if elected in. What, you think this country of ours runs on wishes and dreams? We have to pay money to keep it going, and the 'supply-siders' idea of continually mounting defecits is not a sustainable economic policy for the future.

Cycloptichorn

I am not speaking about the current Republicans as a alternative to the current Democratic Party members.

The reality is the current Democratic Party is for higher taxes, bigger govt, have no consistant foreign policy, support racist programs such as afirmative action, support quotas...just to name a few.

That does not mean the current Republicans are any better or even hold differing positions.

Say what they are and if you support those positions, be proud. Stop hiding behind clever terms like "PROGRESSIVE PLATFORMS".

0 Replies

I didn't state that they had progressive platforms; many long-standing, establishment Dems are little better than Republican Lite.

We are trying, though. Every time you guys complain or laugh at the 'left-wing' of our party, that's the Progressive platform trying its best to become THE platform of the party.

The debacle of the Iraq war, mounting Republican scandals in Washington, and huge defecits and debts are going to push whichever party wants to win into a progressive stance, Reps. or Dems.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Call it whatever CLEVER LITTLE word you want. the current policies of the current crop of democrats have been rejected by the voters in the last 2 elections.

Maybe, just maybe some new blood and fresh ideas will bring us public servants who really really want to serve the public and not expand their power base.

0 Replies

Quote:

the current policies of the current crop of democrats have been rejected by the voters in the last 2 elections.

Not by much. And the Republicans are doing everything they can to cut their slim leads in national elections down to nothing.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

The Fighting Dems! 57 Iraq Vets Running as Democrats

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know