• 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!

So what exactly is your problem with Keith Ellison?

eohrnberger said:
You can reject and live in denial as you choose.

Just consider this:
The Democrat party has only 4 states out of 50 where they lead the state legislature. That's what? 8%?
The Republicans have all of the rest. That's 96%

Yeah, I think it fair to call the Democrat party a minor party at this point in time.

They should come back to the more populous left-center and gain more votes, regain some state legislatures, regain some representation in congress, before it's too late and the trend is irreversible.
Click to expand...

You offer no substance to back up your claim that the Democratic Party represents the "Far Left". All you did was regurgitate the same talking points you included in your previous post that I quoted.
 
eohrnberger said:
You can reject and live in denial as you choose.

Just consider this:
The Democrat party has only 4 states out of 50 where they lead the state legislature. That's what? 8%?
The Republicans have all of the rest. That's 96%

Yeah, I think it fair to call the Democrat party a minor party at this point in time.

They should come back to the more populous left-center and gain more votes, regain some state legislatures, regain some representation in congress, before it's too late and the trend is irreversible.
Click to expand...

There's no such thing as the "Democrat Party."

I also don't know where you're getting your information regarding state legislatures, but it's hilariously wrong.
 
eohrnberger said:
Trump is no "Dear Leader" to me. As I posed (elsewhere) on election eve, 'Congratulations President-Elect Trump. no don't **** it up'.

You can't accept that the far left has dragged the Democrat party away from it's previous center-left position? Fine.
Given that the Democrat party hast lost so much ground at the state level to almost be legitimately labeled a minority political party, that the Republicans could almost pass a constitutional amendment on their own, go ahead, keep dragging the party ever further left then, and continue losing what little political influence the party has.

I do wish the adults in the Democratic party would regain their footing and return to center-left. Given the wisdom of checks and balances, I'm not at all in support of the idea of having a political party, any political party, including the Republicans, with that much control over government.
Click to expand...

Being center left is what lost the Democrats the 2016 election, lost many seats in congress, and has created an "elitists" caucus with in the Democrat party. "Center left" is how Democrats become too complacent and accomplish nothing. Republicans are in power today not because they are currently "center right".....

I am tired of people putting the blame on the progressives within the Democrat party. I don't understand how wanting basic human rights is such a bad thing......

The basic human rights and NEEDS of this country that I agree with and is why I am a progressive are as followed...
1) National Security DoD - Our military and Department of the Defense is one of the biggest socialists organizations in the world. Defending the military is hardly a progressive stance, but we need it as it is a basic human right.
2) Health Care - It is impossible for an individual to live life with out some sort of health care. People should have access to health care with out going into huge debt because of lack of insurance and/or coverage. This route can be cheaper as Europe pays 50% less than we do, and Canada spends 35% less. Claiming those countries don't receive the same quality treatment as we do doesn't hold any weight. Health care is a need and a basic human right.
3) Education - It is in the best interest of this country to at least present the opportunity for people to receive a college education regardless of income. This would help more poor people to develop the skills and requirements to obtain a better paying job. Which in turn would get more people off of government assistance. Not to mention college graduates would be free from the burden of college loans which in turn would allow more people to contribute more to the economy. This is a need and basic human right.
4) Living Wage - If someone has a job, they shouldn't be dependent on government living assistance such as welfare to subsidize low wages. If someone is employed they should not be subjected to severe poverty like conditions. This is a need and a basic human right.

Out side of these needs and basic human rights the free market can reign and CEO"s can make as many billions as they want. No one is trying to destroy this capitalist way of life, only to protect basic human rights. We should be debating on how do provide these basic human rights, not whether they should exist.
 
Last edited:
Kobie said:
Goalposts moved, and you're still not counting split legislatures.
Click to expand...

Getting more specific because you are getting picky. OK. Fine. From the citation:

Democrats went into Election Day only holding trifectas in seven states – their lowest totals since the Civil War (when the country was 15 states fewer). It seemed plausible the only direction they could go was up.

That didn’t happen.

Democrats only retained five trifectas across the country amid more Republican gains at the local level. Republican Phil Scott was elected governor in the blue bastion of Vermont, putting a check on their Democratic controlled legislature. The GOP also battled to a tie in the Connecticut state Senate.

Republicans finally gained control of the Kentucky state House – the remaining legislative chamber in the South to be controlled by Democrats. They also won majority control of the Iowa Senate. Regarding the Kentucky and Iowa wins, Republican candidates unseated Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal and Kentucky House Speaker Greg Stumbo – making GOP gains there all the more symbolic.
Click to expand...

Further:
  • Democrats surrendered the White House to political neophyte Donald J. Trump.
  • US Senate seats slipped from 55 to 46, down 16 percent.
  • US House seats fell from 256 to 194, down 24 percent.
  • Democrats ran the Senate and House in 2009. Next year, they will control neither.
  • Governorships slid from 28 to 16, down 43 percent.
  • State legislatures (both chambers) plunged from 27 to 14, down 48 percent
  • Trifectas (states with Democrat governors and both legislative chambers) cratered from 17 to 6, down 65 percent.
Obama’s legacy is a devastated Democratic Party | New York Post
Click to expand...

And again in graphic form.
Dems_2_Percent.jpg

Stunning Graph Shows the Wrecking Ball Obama Has Taken to the Democrat Party
Click to expand...

Any way you cut it, any way you look at it, the Democratic party's presence and influence in government, federal and state, has declined, and is a fraction of what it formerly was.

I still am of the belief that the party would eject the ridiculous excessive PC social war, move more to the center-left, where they've historically been, where there are more voters, they'd do better.

I also still believe that as much presence the Republicans have in federal and state government, it's not good. No one party should have that much control over everything, it always ends badly, and the nation misses out on the checks and balances between the two parties.
 
LunaRose said:
Being center left is what lost the Democrats the 2016 election, lost many seats in congress, and has created an "elitists" caucus with in the Democrat party. "Center left" is how Democrats become too complacent and accomplish nothing. Republicans are in power today not because they are currently "center right".....
Click to expand...

How about not running a candidate who is under FBI investigation during the campaign? An investigation that is still ongoing today.
How about not running a candidate who put her office up for sale to foreign interests? Only thinly disguised as donations to her own charity.
How about not running a candidate who put up her own private email server for all her official email communications for the expressed purpose of avoid congressional oversight and to thwart legitimate FOIA requests?

There are many reasons for Hillary to have lost. But that doesn't explain why such losses at the state levels.
Maybe they are selling the wrong product? Maybe they have the wrong people selling the wrong product?

LunaRose said:
I am tired of people putting the blame on the progressives within the Democrat party. I don't understand how wanting basic human rights is such a bad thing......

The basic human rights and NEEDS of this country that I agree with and is why I am a progressive are as followed...
1) National Security DoD - Our military and Department of the Defense is one of the biggest socialists organizations in the world. Defending the military is hardly a progressive stance, but we need it as it is a basic human right.
2) Health Care - It is impossible for an individual to live life with out some sort of health care. People should have access to health care with out going into huge debt because of lack of insurance and/or coverage. This route can be cheaper as Europe pays 50% less than we do, and Canada spends 35% less. Claiming those countries don't receive the same quality treatment as we do doesn't hold any weight. Health care is a need and a basic human right.
3) Education - It is in the best interest of this country to at least present the opportunity for people to receive a college education regardless of income. This would help more poor people to develop the skills and requirements to obtain a better paying job. Which in turn would get more people off of government assistance. Not to mention college graduates would be free from the burden of college loans which in turn would allow more people to contribute more to the economy. This is a need and basic human right.
4) Living Wage - If someone has a job, they shouldn't be dependent on government living assistance such as welfare to subsidize low wages. If someone is employed they should not be subjected to severe poverty like conditions. This is a need and a basic human right.

Out side of these needs and basic human rights the free market can reign and CEO"s can make as many billions as they want. No one is trying to destroy this capitalist way of life, only to protect basic human rights. We should be debating on how do provide these basic human rights, not whether they should exist.
Click to expand...

With progressivism comes a good dose of statism.

No one is denying those needs. Where liberals and progressives go wrong is who is responsible for paying for those things. Some would like to enable the individuals to be able and capable of paying for them, deciding for themselves, to both good and bad outcomes. Liberals and progressives want to grow the power of the state, so it can forcibly confiscating the funds necessary from the successful (and even the not so successful) and give them away to the people it (and they) prefer. This an anathema to non-liberals and non-progressives.
 
eohrnberger said:
How about not running a candidate who is under FBI investigation during the campaign? An investigation that is still ongoing today.
How about not running a candidate who put her office up for sale to foreign interests? Only thinly disguised as donations to her own charity.
How about not running a candidate who put up her own private email server for all her official email communications for the expressed purpose of avoid congressional oversight and to thwart legitimate FOIA requests?

There are many reasons for Hillary to have lost. But that doesn't explain why such losses at the state levels.
Maybe they are selling the wrong product? Maybe they have the wrong people selling the wrong product?



With progressivism comes a good dose of statism.

No one is denying those needs. Where liberals and progressives go wrong is who is responsible for paying for those things. Some would like to enable the individuals to be able and capable of paying for them, deciding for themselves, to both good and bad outcomes. Liberals and progressives want to grow the power of the state, so it can forcibly confiscating the funds necessary from the successful (and even the not so successful) and give them away to the people it (and they) prefer. This an anathema to non-liberals and non-progressives.
Click to expand...

The Democrats have lost so much ground that the only way they could get the White House was to run a Democrat on the Republican ticket.
 
Dittohead not! said:
The Democrats have lost so much ground that the only way they could get the White House was to run a Democrat on the Republican ticket.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Don't think that's likely, given the deep Republican bench all trying to edge each other out, I would imagine.
 
eohrnberger said:
"they could get the White House was to run a Democrat on the Republican ticket"

It's history?
Click to expand...

A joke isn't funny if it has to be explained, but here goes anyway:

Trump has been a Democrat all of his life. He's not really a Republican, he just plays one on TV.
 
Dittohead not! said:
A joke isn't funny if it has to be explained, but here goes anyway:

Trump has been a Democrat all of his life. He's not really a Republican, he just plays one on TV.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Ok. Kinda thought so.

Sent from my HTC6515LVW using Tapatalk
 
The David Duke endorsement bothers me.
Normally a person is not responsible for who supports him but this might indicate some anti-Semitism on Ellison's part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom