The thing that has vilified the term liberal to me is having read your postings along with Conjurs, Daves and Dahunans for the past few months. I see you guys as typical libs and have no respect for the genre.
Well you seem to have the ignorance part down right...
BTW, that was one of the saddest generalizations I've ever seen.
On the topic: Democrats need to start calling the Republicans on their fiscal irresponsibility. Don't just complain that your programs aren't getting enough funding. Start bitching about the fact that Republicans aren't living up to their promise of smaller limited government. Call them out on their lies.
And for pete's sake, don't push morons for presidential candidates. Bush is a bloody moron but somehow the Democratic party put out worse candidates. Were they trying to lose?
I don't think the author of the article really knows what he's talking about...nor do the researchers. From everything I've heard from the Dems after 2004, the strategy is to draw contrasts between themselves and the Republicans in a way that appeals to "mainstream America". A lot of people look at it as the Republicans represent the ideas of the mainstream, and the Dems are a bunch of fruit-loops on the far left, but the real issue is that the Republicans just manage to convey their ideas better to moderates.
Trying to draw more moderates by duplicating the views of the Republicans is silly, because Republican views aren't the only way (or the best way) to address moderate concerns. Look at the issue of fighting terrorism, a good example of something most Americans are concerned about. The big problem in 2004 was that a lot of people didn't really even know what the lefty solution was, so they picked what they knew...the righty one. If Kerry had simply been a Bush clone on terrorism issues, he wouldn't have taken away any more votes, why get the clone when you already have the original. If, instead, he had suggested that Bush really hasn't made us safer, and presented a firm (and different) plan for actually protecting us from terrorism, he probably could have won the election on that alone.
The thing is, the Dems know this already. They aren't planning on catering more to the lefties, that would be stupid, the left isn't going to start leaning towards the Republicans. What they are planning on doing is presenting themselves as a real alternative for moderate America. And remember, all BS aside, the last election was one of the closest in history (other than 2000, you have to go back to the 70's to find a close one...and then a long ways back from there). The Dems don't really need to attract too many more moderates, but they seem well aware of the fact that they DO need to get at least a few more on their side.
I don't think people give the Dems enough credit, they aren't stupid, and 2004 taught them a lot...and it seems like they have a good plan of attack. The fact that the right seems to be largely ignoring this is another point in the Dem's favor.
Trying to draw more moderates by duplicating the views of the Republicans is silly, because Republican views aren't the only way (or the best way) to address moderate concerns. Look at the issue of fighting terrorism, a good example of something most Americans are concerned about. The big problem in 2004 was that a lot of people didn't really even know what the lefty solution was, so they picked what they knew...the righty one. If Kerry had simply been a Bush clone on terrorism issues, he wouldn't have taken away any more votes, why get the clone when you already have the original. If, instead, he had suggested that Bush really hasn't made us safer, and presented a firm (and different) plan for actually protecting us from terrorism, he probably could have won the election on that alone.
The thing is, the Dems know this already. They aren't planning on catering more to the lefties, that would be stupid, the left isn't going to start leaning towards the Republicans. What they are planning on doing is presenting themselves as a real alternative for moderate America. And remember, all BS aside, the last election was one of the closest in history (other than 2000, you have to go back to the 70's to find a close one...and then a long ways back from there). The Dems don't really need to attract too many more moderates, but they seem well aware of the fact that they DO need to get at least a few more on their side.
I don't think people give the Dems enough credit, they aren't stupid, and 2004 taught them a lot...and it seems like they have a good plan of attack. The fact that the right seems to be largely ignoring this is another point in the Dem's favor.
LOL, "a person who is poor." It's a fact that the richer a person is, the higher chance they will vote Republican.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html
Scroll down to vote by income.
Now, who is the person that is igonorant? It's you, not "Republicans." Idiot.
From Rainsford-
"Maybe, but I think the moderates are less firmly in the Republican court than you might think."
ntdz's link bears that out.... self styled moderates (45% of the vote) voted for Kerry 54% vs 45% for Bush...
The margin of victory for repubs in 2002 and 2004 has largely been due to the relentless fearmongering about Terrar, plain and simple. As 9/11 fades, their position will plummet, particularly among that moderate sector of the electorate. The Repubs record of greed and recklessness can't be avoided without that strong distraction.
"Maybe, but I think the moderates are less firmly in the Republican court than you might think."
ntdz's link bears that out.... self styled moderates (45% of the vote) voted for Kerry 54% vs 45% for Bush...
The margin of victory for repubs in 2002 and 2004 has largely been due to the relentless fearmongering about Terrar, plain and simple. As 9/11 fades, their position will plummet, particularly among that moderate sector of the electorate. The Repubs record of greed and recklessness can't be avoided without that strong distraction.
Pliablemoose
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 25,195
- 0
- 56
Seriously, the Democrats should press 3 things in the midterms:
The 3 C's
inCompetence of the Republican appointees
the Corruption of the Republicans
the Cronyism of Bush
They need to write a "Contract with Americans" to do away with the 3 C's...
Throw in a couple of Winnie the Pooh stories & they're golden...
(I should prob just keep my mouth shut, won't do them any good anyway)
The 3 C's
inCompetence of the Republican appointees
the Corruption of the Republicans
the Cronyism of Bush
They need to write a "Contract with Americans" to do away with the 3 C's...
Throw in a couple of Winnie the Pooh stories & they're golden...
(I should prob just keep my mouth shut, won't do them any good anyway)
Nothing would help out the GOP more than for the left to follow your advice. I'm all for your advice though, let the Democrats tell people where they stand so they can see how far left they really are and how out of touch with reality those on the far left are.
I heard a great man once say something like: BRING IT ON!
And that would be a bad thing?
Along the same lines - if it weren't for strong Conservative leaders we might all be speaking German.
I love how each side claims the other is so "out of touch" with reality. The fact of the matter is that America is split in half. Neither party is in touch with the whole of America.
Alas, that is the sad reality of politics today. It's no longer about bringing the country together, it's about demonizing your opposition and seeing how many you can churn out from your own base.
The Republicans will just fire back with salvos of nightmarish Democratic leadership in New Orleans.
the thing about NO is most people recognize it was a failure on all levels. it's not something you can blame solely on Democrats or Republicans. what the Dems can show is a consistent lack of leadership at the hands of this Republican administration from Iraq all the way to Katrina.
Pliablemoose
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 25,195
- 0
- 56
It is true. The republician base of retards willing to write in a R because jesus said so is massive. It is also much harder to pleases the left then the right.
From Shades of Grey-
"Along the same lines - if it weren't for strong Conservative leaders we might all be speaking German."
What a magnificent truckload of manure, revisionist history at its finest. It was the Conservatives of the era that wanted to stay out of WW2 at any cost, who tried to prevent lend-lease, and who were actually in sympathy and in business with the Nazis. Lindbergh? German-American Friendship League? Grandpa Bush?
Or are you claiming that FDR was a conservative? Maybe his vice-prez at the time, Wallace? All of organized labor and the left who lined up behind FDR? Who, then?
Or is the urge to post inane trollery simply irresitible?
"Along the same lines - if it weren't for strong Conservative leaders we might all be speaking German."
What a magnificent truckload of manure, revisionist history at its finest. It was the Conservatives of the era that wanted to stay out of WW2 at any cost, who tried to prevent lend-lease, and who were actually in sympathy and in business with the Nazis. Lindbergh? German-American Friendship League? Grandpa Bush?
Or are you claiming that FDR was a conservative? Maybe his vice-prez at the time, Wallace? All of organized labor and the left who lined up behind FDR? Who, then?
Or is the urge to post inane trollery simply irresitible?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter