• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Big review set by Democrats after election losses

Cephus said:
I'm not talking 2014, I'm talking the last time they got their asses handed to them, they made a big deal about "re-evaluating" their platform and instead of making moves to appeal to a wider audience, they doubled down on their idiocy to appeal more firmly to their core. The Democrats will do the same.
Click to expand...

They lost in 2006, 2008 and 2012. What big changes did they make to their platform after those losses?
 
tres borrachos said:
Wasserman Schultz said in a video announcing the project. "We know we're right on the issues. The American people believe in the causes we're fighting for.

That assumption right there may be the problem.
Click to expand...

Yeah, not much hope for sufficient introspection when the presumption going in is "We're not the problem."
 
Deuce said:
Yeah, this idea that Democrats are "anti corporation" and Republicans are "pro corporation" is really just rhetoric. A way to divvy up the population into two rival sports teams. (along with some of the wedge issues you mention) In reality, both parties are two sides of the same coin, politicians of all sorts are basically purchased by big business interests, because those are the people with the clout and the money to actually fund their re-election. Your vote doesn't buy you squat in terms of actually getting an elected representative to listen to your concerns, nor does your $50 donation to their election campaign. $50 gets you on a mailing list that serves only to repeatedly ask you for more money.

$5 million to the "independent" SuperPAC supporting-but-pretending-not-to a candidate, on the other hand, buys a CEO a sit-down with said representative to hash out details on what is really important to that business. Coincidentally, those are the things that actually get done. Because that business gave $5 million to both parties.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% with your post.
 
grip said:
There weren't enough voters to counter the older and middle aged conservatives, who are afraid of the immigration issue, acceptance of LGBT community, social programs, legalization of marijuana...
Click to expand...

I agree with the quoted statement. It is irrational fear from (mostly) ignorant people that is holding our country back from making the changes that are needed. Most those people do change their positions over time, just too slowly. For example most of them are not overtly racist, don't support segregation, don't want to jail gays, want at least some environmental regulation, want to keep medicare and social security, don't want to push women back into the kitchen etc. In other words, the positions of today's conservative-centrist are the positions of yesterday's liberal. The problem is that their slowness to recognize the rights of marginalized people and to address pressing problems causes a lot of harm to others. (ie. harassed gays, jailed pot smokers, people sickened from living in toxic environments)
 
Last edited:
NIMBY said:
When you bring up the media, you discount just how impressive FOX and right-wing radio have been in helping the GOP.
I don't--I watch such FOX programs as Bret Baier and now the Kelly file on a regular basis.
The liberal media you speak of has cowardly retreated from their brand and mainstreamers are acting butthurt over the way Obama has treated them.

The economic results are plainly obvious to everyone--Dems stupidly ran from them due to a lack of intelligent National Leadership running the campaign.
As for messaging, Dems couldn't even use Romney's positive comments on the latest 3.5% GDP to their advantage.
While FOX was actually able to convince their viewers that lower gas prices are a bad thing to America.

The GOP and their posters won the messaging war this time around and it hasn't let up one iota--just being honest from my POV .
Click to expand...

I think part of the Dems inability to capitalize on good economic news is that in bad times they actively make business owners the enemy. They pulled in a large segment of the OWS faithful into the party when the economy looked bad and the Dems thought they could make some political gains playing to the anti-capitalist movement, but now that the economy has shown some signs of life they are at odds with the OWS base by cheering the good news. I mean, the messaging is a non-starter for OWS when the chief sign of recovery used most often is monetary gains on Wall Street.

This is similar to the trouble the Republicans have with the Tea Party movement. You can't court the Tea Party and then expect them to remain calm when you start talking about big government programs as solutions to the problems of the day. The Republicans have it a bit easier, though, since their hypocrisy is entirely avoidable while the Democrats can't avoid being hypocrites in cheering an economic system they are supposed to be against.
 
tres borrachos said:
All politicians want power. I don't have any delusions about that. I actually don't oppose corporations so it doesn't bother me that the Republicans get support from them. Democrats do too.

In some issues there is no middle ground, sadly. SSM is one. Abortion is another. So is welfare. So are tax incentives. So are unions and right to work. And so on. Those seem to bring out the most divisive of opinions.
Click to expand...

I don't oppose corporations and think some of them are almost indispensable, but the amount of consolidation of larger and larger, industry monopolizing behemoths (too big to fail) are screwing everyone.

All those issues have middle ground, with a little imagination and compromise. Abortion is settled, it's called the Roe vs Wade decision. SSM is easily solved by making all marriages a legal civil union and the church scene purely ceremonial. Welfare is a necessary evil, unless corporations want to spread some of their profits around in the form of new jobs, higher wages, more benefits, etc. Lets face it, the corporations have all the excess money, not the poor slobs that make up the lower 90%. Taxes should be cut across the board, with gov waste, fraud and spending being reduced. Unions in their current form aren't the same institutions they started out as, helping workers against unfair business practices. The divisiveness isn't a bad thing, until it becomes intractable.
 
grip said:
I don't oppose corporations and think some of them are almost indispensable, but the amount of consolidation of larger and larger, industry monopolizing behemoths (too big to fail) are screwing everyone.

All those issues have middle ground, with a little imagination and compromise. Abortion is settled, it's called the Roe vs Wade decision. SSM is easily solved by making all marriages a legal civil union and the church scene purely ceremonial. Welfare is a necessary evil, unless corporations want to spread some of their profits around in the form of new jobs, higher wages, more benefits, etc. Lets face it, the corporations have all the excess money, not the poor slobs that make up the lower 90%. Taxes should be cut across the board, with gov waste, fraud and spending being reduced. Unions in their current form aren't the same institutions they started out as, helping workers against unfair business practices. The divisiveness isn't a bad thing, until it becomes intractable.
Click to expand...

Hmmm.....sorry, but I don't believe welfare is the responsibility of the corporations in this country.
 
tres borrachos said:
They lost in 2006, 2008 and 2012. What big changes did they make to their platform after those losses?
Click to expand...

The GOP hasn't really altered much, but they do seem to have toned it down a notch. It's more "let's stop fighting so hard on a few battles we're clearly losing."

And also "HEY, ****BIRDS, STOP TALKING ABOUT RAPE BECAUSE OUR OPINIONS ON RAPE ARE HORRIFYING AND THE PUBLIC ABSOLUTELY DESTROYS US EVERY TIME WE BRING IT UP"
 
tres borrachos said:
Hmmm.....sorry, but I don't believe welfare is the responsibility of the corporations in this country.
Click to expand...

So is it my responsibility, then, to subsidize WalMart's ****ty pay by funding TANF and SNAP for all their employees? Because that's the result. If working 70 hours a week isn't enough to feed and clothe yourself, what the hell can be done other than having taxpayers pick up the tab?
 
Hard Truth said:
I agree with the quoted statement. It is irrational fear from (mostly) ignorant people that is holding our country back from making the changes that are needed. Most those people do change their positions over time, just too slowly. For example most of them are not overtly racist, don't support segregation, don't want to jail gays, want at least some environmental regulation, want to keep medicare and social security, don't want to push women back into the kitchen etc. In other words, the positions of today's conservative-centrist are the positions of yesterday's liberal. The problem is that their slowness to recognize the rights of marginalized people and to address pressing problems causes a lot of harm to others. (ie. harassed gays, jailed pot smokers, people sickened from living in toxic environments)
Click to expand...

You can't expect stubborn older people from a different era to change their values and ideas easily. They may give in on some of their more inflexible positions when reasoned with but not forced by coercion. My neighbor is a 70yr old southern conservative, very religious. She'll tell me how weird those gay pride parades are, but if I ask her do you want to deny them human dignity and rights, she sheepishly says, no. Some black teenagers will walk by and she'll say, those angry negros scare me. And I'll say should I go beat them up for you, and she hangs her head down and says, I'm sorry. She's not a bad person, just steeped with old habits and ways. And forget about Pot, she thinks that stuff is the devil's underwear.
 
Deuce said:
The GOP hasn't really altered much, but they do seem to have toned it down a notch. It's more "let's stop fighting so hard on a few battles we're clearly losing."

And also "HEY, ****BIRDS, STOP TALKING ABOUT RAPE BECAUSE OUR OPINIONS ON RAPE ARE HORRIFYING AND THE PUBLIC ABSOLUTELY DESTROYS US EVERY TIME WE BRING IT UP"
Click to expand...

I think it's their candidates that changed, as I haven't noticed anything about their platform that changed. In the past the GOP ran some pretty shocking candidates - Sharron Angle, Todd the "Legitimate Rape" guy, Richard Mourdock, that bimbo Christine something or other who challenged Chris Coons, etc. and those idiots not only shot themselves in the foot, but the entire GOP as well.
 
tres borrachos said:
Hmmm.....sorry, but I don't believe welfare is the responsibility of the corporations in this country.
Click to expand...

Not directly, but they shouldn't be allowed to control all goods, services and trade without giving some back. There's only so much money, and if all goes to the top, there's going to be a lot of unhappy poor people.
 
Deuce said:
So is it my responsibility, then, to subsidize WalMart's ****ty pay by funding TANF and SNAP for all their employees? Because that's the result. If working 70 hours a week isn't enough to feed and clothe yourself, what the hell can be done other than having taxpayers pick up the tab?
Click to expand...

It isn't your responsibility either. It's also not, say, Honeywell's responsibility to pay welfare for able bodied people.

Please don't make this about WalMart.
 
grip said:
Not directly, but they shouldn't be allowed to control all goods, services and trade without giving some back. There's only so much money, and if all goes to the top, there's going to be a lot of unhappy poor people.
Click to expand...

How much should, say, Boeing have to give back to pay for poor people?
 
Deuce said:
So is it my responsibility, then, to subsidize WalMart's ****ty pay by funding TANF and SNAP for all their employees? Because that's the result. If working 70 hours a week isn't enough to feed and clothe yourself, what the hell can be done other than having taxpayers pick up the tab?
Click to expand...

It's not Walmart's fault that there are so many people who lack basic job skills that they have to work for such low wages. That's the fault of the people who lack the skills, education and basic drive to have learned it when they were supposed to. Maybe if society held people accountable for their actions, or lack thereof, there wouldn't be such a problem.
 
tres borrachos said:
I think it's their candidates that changed, as I haven't noticed anything about their platform that changed. In the past the GOP ran some pretty shocking candidates - Sharron Angle, Todd the "Legitimate Rape" guy, Richard Mourdock, that bimbo Christine something or other who challenged Chris Coons, etc. and those idiots not only shot themselves in the foot, but the entire GOP as well.
Click to expand...

Sharron Angle was the most egregious, I think. She is the reason Harry Reid is still in charge of the senate. (well, until January now, anyway). Reid was just about the least popular senator in the entire country, and he was a Democrat in a state that isn't exactly the bluest of states. Generic McRepublican could have mopped the floor with him. Instead, we got some Crazy Cat Lady who started into conspiracy theory rants about Reid when asked about statements on her own website.

Christine O'Donnel (?) is a close second. When your candidate starts a campaign ad with "I am not a witch," something has gone seriously wrong.
GOP did a lot better this time around. Kept their folks in line. They actually had seminars on this stuff. Are the candidates better, or just better at hiding the crazy? We'll see!
 
grip said:
Big review set by Democrats after election losses[/url



The Democrats were handed such big losses, because they've pushed the liberal agenda too hard. There weren't enough voters to counter the older and middle aged conservatives, who are afraid of the immigration issue, acceptance of LGBT community, social programs, legalization of marijuana, taxes and poor economic performance. Too much change, too soon got a lot of the older vote out, meaning the Dems need to slow their roll and find some middle ground. Obama's unpopularity and lack of response, especially on the recent News coverage of ISIS and Ebola hasn't helped. The Dems risk having no majorities or Presidency in 2016, if they don't learn to compromise on how hard they go left.. looking to pick up the swing vote from the middle.

Both parties don't seem to realize that a majority of people are split or in the middle of many political issues, not to the extremes.
Click to expand...


You are reading WAAAAAAAY too much into this. Extensive exiting polling showed that people were equally disenchanted with Republicans as they are Democrats. The difference in the Senate shift rested primarily with red state Democrats falling to Republicans. This isn't surprising nor is it rare in mid-term elections.
 
tres borrachos said:
How much should, say, Boeing have to give back to pay for poor people?
Click to expand...

I know the airlines don't make much profit in today's environment. Though there should be regulations that limit corporate control of certain industries from gauging customers. When I saw the 2008 recession and collapse due to debt, I knew the retail companies would suffer, while the commodities corporations would start raising prices.

There is no easy way to prevent the corporate attitude of 'profit above humanity', but if some solutions aren't found, it won't self correct.
 
Deuce said:
Sharron Angle was the most egregious, I think. She is the reason Harry Reid is still in charge of the senate. (well, until January now, anyway). Reid was just about the least popular senator in the entire country, and he was a Democrat in a state that isn't exactly the bluest of states. Generic McRepublican could have mopped the floor with him. Instead, we got some Crazy Cat Lady who started into conspiracy theory rants about Reid when asked about statements on her own website.

Christine O'Donnel (?) is a close second. When your candidate starts a campaign ad with "I am not a witch," something has gone seriously wrong.
Click to expand...

Christine - yes I think she was O'Donnell. The one who had to make the videos "I am NOT a witch". Man she was doomed before she even started, and I can only imagine what kind of malfeasance she would have committed in the Senate had she gotten there.

Sharron Angle is a moron. I really like Sue - oh **** I can't remember her last name - and also the Tarkanian guy. It's because of Angle that Harry Reid is still around wreaking havoc.
 
ocean515 said:
You know NIMBY, the Fox thing the left clings to is rather silly. The highest rated program on FOX only reaches 2.5 million viewers. What fraction of the "right" does that represent? As to talk radio, there is certainly a slight advantage to shows on the right, but it's not nearly what is suggested. NPR, a decidedly left radio programing broadcast has ratings approaching 30 million per week.
Click to expand...

That's not really a fair comparison.

NPR airs over 30 programs nationally, only a small handful of which ever deal with current news and/or politics.

While those programs may have 30 million weekly listeners in aggregate none of them approach anything like those numbers individually or on a daily basis.

Now, if you want to argue that something like the Diane Rehm program is overwhelmingly liberal I'd be inclined to agree with you, but that particular program is only pulling in around 2 million listeners weekly.

Most of the NPR programming I listen to is decidedly middle-of-the-road. If it wasn't, if it was biased in either direction, I wouldn't waste my time listening to it (as I don't listen to Diane Rehm's progressive screed).

For what it's worth, NPR also airs programming that tends to lean a bit more conservative. Not overwhelmingly so, but there's certainly a slight lean. I'd suggest listening to the Marketplace program a time or two if you're interested. It revolves more around business (the "marketplace" - duh) than politics, but when it does dip into politics or policy it tends to be with a fairly rational, slightly conservative slant (as one might expect from a program that speaks to business issues).
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
It's not Walmart's fault that there are so many people who lack basic job skills that they have to work for such low wages. That's the fault of the people who lack the skills, education and basic drive to have learned it when they were supposed to. Maybe if society held people accountable for their actions, or lack thereof, there wouldn't be such a problem.
Click to expand...

And there it is. This is the mindset that leads to this situation. The circular logic of the value of human labor, you are why we spend so much on welfare.
 
disneydude said:
You are reading WAAAAAAAY too much into this. Extensive exiting polling showed that people were equally disenchanted with Republicans as they are Democrats. The difference in the Senate shift rested primarily with red state Democrats falling to Republicans. This isn't surprising nor is it rare in mid-term elections.
Click to expand...

The margin of percentage that many Republicans won by was small, but the amount of wins in the senate and governors was a political shellacking. I hope you don't work for Dem campaigns, because those who refuse to see anything wrong, will get it again.
 
I really don't care for people making up responsibilities and necessary evils out of their ass. It stinks.
 
Henrin said:
I really don't care for people making up responsibilities and necessary evils out of their ass. It stinks.
Click to expand...

Does the stuff that comes out of your ass smell like roses? :)
 
Deuce said:
And there it is. This is the mindset that leads to this situation. The circular logic of the value of human labor, you are why we spend so much on welfare.
Click to expand...

Yes, labor has a certain marketable value. What evil stuff there. :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom