Obviously, we won't be coming together during this term...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Originally posted by: KK
Originally posted by: Infohawk
I think there's been interesting discussion lately about how today's politics are a continuation of the civil war. In this view, we've been divided for a very very long time and there are only temporary lulls of powerlessness on one side now and then. I mean has the South EVER been on the same side as a large portion of the country? The Civil war, failed reconstruction, the civil rights movement (these people were advocating oppressing blacks don't forget), now today they are still much more to the right then most Americans. So will we be re-uniting? No, it seems like we'll remain divided until there is such dramatic population shift that the white south is only a very vocal minority. (How did the south affect this election? Well Bush won the south by more votes than he won the popular election, meaning the south was a very large factor in his favor.)

South is alot bigger than just in the south, huh?

yup KK, chalk this up as another Infohawk moronic statement....continue on with that bitterness and elitism which cost you the election in the first place info...heck even Barney Frank feel's your parties actions are to blame noting that the cracks on lacking intelligence and "moral" values by the left really pushed away key voters...but back on your issue, I live in Massachusetts, arguably one of the most liberal states in the nation, and more than a few districts including the one which I live in went to Bush...your drawn out civil war comment is laughable and you should be ashamed that you type some of the garbage which you do.

In response to the OP, as long as they keep putting up polarized people then no....as others have said we really need a centrist, or at least someone who doesn't conform to the traditional conservative/liberal ideals....if they run Hillary for the Dems in 08 vs. some other radical right winger then no we will not be comming together anytime soon.
 

bsobel

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Dec 9, 2001
13,346
0
0
Originally posted by: ciba
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
From bsobel-Zealots are incapable of compromise, by definition, and presently have little reason to even contemplate the whole idea...

Why should the republicans be the only ones to compromise? You're right that they have little reason to compromise.

For the record, your post seems to put my name on Jhhnn quote. I don't think that is what you intended.

Bill
 

imported_Condor

Diamond Member
Sep 22, 2004
5,425
0
0
You know, I converted from Democrat to Republican for Clinton. If the Democrats ever start thinking about the nation again instead of their personal agendas, I would possible vote for their candidate if he/she was better. I don't see that happening.
 

earthman

Golden Member
Oct 16, 1999
1,653
0
71
So Democrats should call themselves Democrats but adopt the Republican platform? Would that make them more successful? Hey, but then we wouldn't need Republicans!
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
From Condor-

If the Democrats ever start thinking about the nation again instead of their personal agendas, I would possible vote for their candidate if he/she was better. I don't see that happening.

Nice bit of "framing the issues" propaganda, and an excellent example of how Repubs lure folks into thinking with lies. What "personal agendas" do you reference? Obviously not the Me!Me!Me! agenda of deceptive tax shifts represented as tax "cuts"...

Explosive debt serves the nation in what way?

Micromanagement of the NIH for ideological purity serves us how?

Far Right judicial nominees, and an insistence that Dems confirm them, serves this spirit of coming together in precisely what fashion?

Grover Norquist, spiritual and ideological guru of the current Republican leadership, set out their operational definition of bipartisanship- he called it date rape. What recent actions on the part of that leadership have done anything to alter that position?
 

skace

Lifer
Jan 23, 2001
14,488
7
81
The only thing required to unite a nation is success. The more failures, the more doubt, the greater the split.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: piasabird
I hope Hillary runs for president that would be really funny.
Who knows, if a muddle minded thick tongued hand puppet like the Dub can get elected twice anything can happen.
 

Gravity

Diamond Member
Mar 21, 2003
5,685
0
0
I think we're more united than you can imagine. With this forum we do debate actively but we probably agree on the largest, broadest issues, like freedom and the right to pursue it.

The methods by which we achieve and maintain it are sometimes a topic of debate.

I feel united and didnt' feel differently when Clinton was in office.