Radical Ron
Member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
- Messages
- 209
- Reaction score
- 31
- Location
- Palm Harbor, FL USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
This one's not bad...Kandahar said:I think the Democrats should abandon the socialists, race-baiters, and union dinosaurs. Then they can stand for REAL progress, and probably more-than-compensate for those losses in the votes that they can gain from progressives and moderates. The Republicans can do the same by abandoning the religious nutjobs.
This one sucks...Che said:Don't worry, in 2006 DNC will win Senate and house due to breach of civil liberties and war weariness. It will be a hard fight though since there are alot of Red necks and Christian nazi cons that will vote Republican.
galenrox said:I think the future of the democratic party is a split. I think the democrats will regain power with the combined liberal and disenfranchised republicans (and some libertarians) voting against the current republicans, but the two main bases for the democratic party are so divergent that they will split, leaving a third more conservative, envigorated libertarian party.
cnredd said:This one's not bad...
Disown the radicals and you find a happy medium of moderates from both sides of the aisle...
This one sucks...
As I've said previously...There are two ways to win an election...
1) Make yourself out to be better than the opposition...
2) Make the opposition look worse than you...
The Democratic Party has abandoned option "A"...They want to win with a popularity of 2%, as long as they make the opposition have a popularity of 1%...
What a plan...:roll:
ChristopherHall said:The Democratic Party is in serious trouble unless it embraces faith, freedom, and family. There is a trend here in my state. Pro-Life Democrats win over Republicans hands down. If the Democrats can recapture values it may recover.
ChristopherHall said:The Democratic Party is in serious trouble unless it embraces faith, freedom, and family. There is a trend here in my state. Pro-Life Democrats win over Republicans hands down. If the Democrats can recapture values it may recover.
ChristopherHall said:Feel free to keep marching into oblivion. I challenge you to read some articles articulated by the Third Way and the DFLA:
http://dispatch.third-way.com/articles/2006/01/25/a-new-progressive-approach-on-abortion
http://www.democratsforlife.org/
The Democrats do not have to become theocrats to embrace a pro-life or pro-values agenda. For example the Third Way has virtually adopted the 95/10 Initiative from the Pro-Life Democratic group Democrats for Life. The Democratic position here is to suggest policies that will asist struggling mothers while reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies.
What amazes me is how the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice sides are completely blind to the middle ground, and friend, the middle ground is where most of the voting electorate is.
galenrox said:Well I think the merit of your argument relies somewhat of what you mean by bringing faith, freedom and family. If you mean that by having a leader with clear values and a good sense of right and wrong, while understanding compassion and the shades of gray in any situation, I agree 100%. If you mean we should have a leader that wants prayer in school, God on the money, and abortion illegal, I don't agree, nor do I think that that would be someone who could claim to be for faith, freedom, and family.
galenrox said:You know what I've decided, I've decided that I like you, and we're gonna get along!
I am pro-choice, but I agree that instead of arm-wrestling over and over again over its legality, I think we should just focus on fixing the problems that lead to abortions, and so women will have the option, but won't opt to do it.
And I agree about the prayer, and I agree about the money, and I too am a very religious person.
That being said, you should become a libertarian.
Kandahar said:You know what's a great way to reduce the number of abortions? More abortions. Unwed pregnant teenagers (the demographic most likely to get an abortion) are very often the daughters of unwed pregnant teenagers. In a generation or two, the problem solves itself. Eliminate the demographic most likely to get an abortion and I can guarantee you'll reduce the number of them. Abortion is great for crime control too.
JOHNYJ said:The last aristocrat to make the American people believe in him was Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He knew how to talk to the people and to be understood.People like John Kerry don't have a clue.
They are left wing ideologues who have no feeling for ,the folks.
The democratic party is controled by the special interests and minorities.They have no understanding any more of working white people or even poor white people.You can even add asians to that.
ChristopherHall said:Roughly two out of every three abortions are performed on women who live below the poverty level. Two out of three women report that they chose abortion because they could not afford a child or were not responsibile enough econominically to have a child. This means abortion is a poverty issue. Abortion is also a minority issue seeing that there is a greater percentage of minorities below the poverty line. Abortion overwhelmingly effects poor minority women because of their economic hardship.
I do not believe that we need to eliminate poor minorities to reduce abortion or to reduce crime. That sounds very inhumane to me. I believe the solution is to lift up women who struggle under economic hardship. Subsidized daycare, educational opportunities, expansion of SCHIP and WIC, and other programs will not only reduce abortions but they will equip mothers with the tools they need to properly raise their children thus reducing crime. Increased focus on education will also reduce poverty.
The answer isn't the systematic elimination of poor people through encouraged abortion. The key is for us as a society to lift them up and address their greatest needs.
ChristopherHall said:Johny, the Democratic party isn't controlled by special interests and minorities, it's concerned with the issues they face. My mother-in-law is the Chapter Chair of the Blue Collar chapter of our AFSCME local and I have first hand knowledge of Democratic political efforts. They are very concerned with working white people and poor white people. The minimum wage has been stagnant while inflation and the cost of living has steadily risen. Only Democrats support raising the minimum wage to match the cost of living. The vast majority of working whites work for small businesses and corporations like Wal-Mart. They have the lowest pay and benefits in their field. Only the Democrats have been concerned with their plight. Only the Democrats have supported their Constitutional right to unionize and negotiate for better wages and benefits. Wal-Mart could afford it. Wal-Mart alone has the 8th largest economy in the world and is pulling in record profits.
Amidst rising healthcare costs the Democrats are the only ones who proposed a solution. The cost of healthcare is something white working Americans and the elderly are very concerned with. By opening up the group rates received by Congress to every American who qualifies we would not only cover more people but we would offer employers a more affordable healthcare option for their employees. In addition conventional health insurance providers would have to compete and lower their prices. By using capitolist market forces the Democrats were poised to lower healthcare costs and generate competition. The Republicans only drafted plans to lock people into the conventional healthcare system which is steadily raising healthcare costs.
Every time I run into folks who make these asertions about the Democratic Party I find that they have not heard the whole message, considered all the details, or given it serious thought. More often than not they are merely parrotting the sentiments of radio talk show hosts.
JOHNYJ said:The problem is no one believes what you say. The Democratic party is a 5 to 1 majority in NYC.Yet they elected a Republican mayor for the second time
. Most Americans voted against their own interests to elect President Bush.Thats how much they disliked the democrats.
Kandahar said:Well that's not what I said, now is it? I said we should eliminate through abortion the demographic most likely to commit crime (or have an abortion themselves): the children of unwed teenagers.
Steven Levitt (author of Freakonomics and a possible future contender for the Nobel Prize in Economics) studied this and found that legalization of abortion in 1973 was the single factor most responsible for the drop in the crime rate beginning the early 1990s.
JOHNYJ said:The problem is no one believes what you say. The Democratic party is a 5 to 1 majority in NYC.Yet they elected a Republican mayor for the second time
. Most Americans voted against their own interests to elect President Bush.Thats how much they disliked the democrats.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?