*Poll* Are the Democrats unoriginal?

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

I like how unoriginal the Democratic party has been...the Bush administration paints Kerry as a waffling 'flip-flopper' and now they, in turn, use the same rhetoric towards Bush...talk about a lack of originality. I have been noticing this more and more in these threads, too. Therefore, please vote and let me know if you, too, believe the Democrats have little substance and are completely unoriginal.

Even 'Cliton' has propsed "changed," which was original in its own sense; granted, we had no idea what he meant by this glittering generality, but it sure sold...and sounded good...and was political brillant. Is this too much to ask nowadays from the DNC and Kerry camp? Even Dean had some originality with a little meat on the bone...


What say you?

 

[conjur]

At least there's proof that Bush has flip-flopped.

99% of the supposed Kerry flip-flopping is just lies and deception from Karl Rove.


You should change the 'xxxxx's in your name to 'baaaa'

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Republicans are certainly more original. Look how they justify Iraq.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Gee, you'll have 27,000 posts before the day is done; how did I know you would be the first one in here? Moreover, how do you know I didn't change my name to baaaa, right before I changed it to xxxxx?

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Republicans are certainly more original. Look how they justify Iraq.

Much like Bosnia--it's in our national interest. Welcome to my world.

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Republicans are certainly more original. Look how they justify Iraq.

Much like Bosnia--it's in our national interest. Welcome to my world.

Oh, but the UN approved that. :roll:

KK

 

[dmcowen674]

" *Poll* Are the Democrats unoriginal?"

*Poll* Are the NeoCons unoriginal?

Fixed your Title for you.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Republicans are certainly more original. Look how they justify Iraq.

Much like Bosnia--it's in our national interest. Welcome to my world.

Oh, but the UN approved that. :roll:

KK

...Congress didn't have a say in it, at first. Clinton violated the War Powers Act of 1972 (I keep saying I'll check the date; correct me if I am wrong on 1972, power-googlers), so are you saying that the U.N. has precedence over the U.S. Congress and should an ability to usurp power from our own government? Let's not go the "U.N. approved it" route...

[edit] I think you were being facetious, so I strike my comments from the record...unless you were being serious

 

[fjord]

Yes, unoriginal and criminaly corrupt.

More importantly, democrats may be as bad as republicans.

Roughly the same amount of corruption in general. Cheating, lying, and self-service.

Both benefit economically from a feigned difference in policy.

The fix is in--political plurality is a hoax--and regular working (read: the vast majority of) people in the United States are the worse for their covert fellowship .

The only real difference is the figureheads they sell to us--One prefers religious nutcases, the other is more secular.

 

[burnedout]

Do they have any new ideas, or is everything borrowed?

Please see "Communist Manifesto" by Marx/Engels and then tell me what you think.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: fjord

Roughly the same amount of corruption in general. Cheating, lying, and self-service.

If you are ever bored, there's a good public policy book on this subject written by Mayhew--The Electoral Connection...basic premise that he argues (with a high level of bravado ) is that the sole purpose of any Congressman is to get re-elected...nothing more/nothing less...very good read. You can apply his model to anyone in politics today and it still holds up quite well [after some 30 years or so]....Joe Bob says check it out.

 

[DealMonkey]

I don't really see either party being very original. For example, the Repubs borrowed many issues from the dems during the last few years. Medicare and it's subsequent expansion comes to mind. I don't think the dems are any less original than the repubs. A good example are the segment of dems who supported OIF, tax-cuts and the Patriot Act among other issues.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: burnedout

Do they have any new ideas, or is everything borrowed?

Please see "Communist Manifesto" by Marx/Engels and then tell me what you think.

Marx was such an economic hack. Even his mom said, "If Karl had been a better economist perhaps we wouldn't be so poor."

Oh, and I just read your statement again...that's deep...if I take it the way I think you meant it

 

[SuperTool]

The Republicans are very "original" with their budgeting. Kinda like Enron and Worldcom were "original" with their accounting. Originality is not always a good thing.

 

[LunarRay]

John,
You know that both sides are told to support what will get them elected or reelected and that is the surface issues they support.. the party ideology rests elsewhere.. in the minds of the elite power brokers who we never get a chance to vote for.. they establish the 'general policy' for mother earth... and insure the puppets get elected via any number of stategic actions.

If, as in the recent past, Iraq posed a problem for them they simply find a means to eliminate it ... as they did. Laws be danged. lives be danged. It is the Agenda that matters and nothing else!

 

[myusername]

I say you blow goats for money.

Where's the option for "go stuff yourself?"

What the hell does originality have to do with who we want to run the country? Find me an "original" person, and I'll show you a nihlist suicidal schizotypal artist. It's a beautiful goddamn thing, and our society definitely needs these types of people .. we just don't need them with access to "the button".

In addition to the aforementioned "originality" being specious praise, it also is quite nebulous. If you would like to discourse on the subject, rather than trolling for replies like this one, why don't you start by defining "originality", and give some examples that illustrate an area where the republican party has obviously demonstrated originality as compared to the democratic party.

And what the hell is with your name? This administration is diametrically opposed to that which Rand would have considered moral.

 

[Perknose]

Troll polls generate more heat than light, by design. Are they part of the Bush energy policy?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: fjord



Roughly the same amount of corruption in general. Cheating, lying, and self-service.

If you are ever bored, there's a good public policy book on this subject written by Mayhew--The Electoral Connection...basic premise that he argues (with a high level of bravado ) is that the sole purpose of any Congressman is to get re-elected...nothing more/nothing less...very good read. You can apply his model to anyone in politics today and it still holds up quite well [after some 30 years or so]....Joe Bob says check it out.

I think that's how it should be. A Congressman angling for re-election is one listening closely to his constituents and reacting off their desires because without representing their interests he'll find himself out of office. There are, of course, exceptions when the population's desires do not coincide with what's best for them, but if it truly is best for them then many will recognize it and the rest will witness it in due time.

 

[Moonbeam]

Take the issues, take the point where the fewest issues a person can politic on intersects with the a plurality of votes that stand will achieve and you will find the two party candidates. Throw in the points of view that the campaign contributers want handled and you have the party differences.

If you want to see creativitivity in politics vote out the incumbent and vote for a third party candidate, whoever that incumbent is.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Take the issues, take the point where the fewest issues a person can politic on intersects with the a plurality of votes that stand will achieve and you will find the two party candidates. Throw in the points of view that the campaign contributers want handled and you have the party differences.

If you want to see creativitivity in politics vote out the incumbent and vote for a third party candidate, whoever that incumbent is.

So you're voting for Nader then, MB?

 

[Perknose]

If you want to see creativitivity in politics vote out the incumbent and vote for a third party candidate, whoever that incumbent is.

Indeed, it is incumbent upon the creative voter to do so.

So . . . stop being recumbent upon your couch, potato, and don't deny what your many many eyes see.

Instead, vote for me.


Brought to you by sit'nzens for Bob Forehead, the third eye party candidate.:Q

 

[datalink7]

What an original poll idea...

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Take the issues, take the point where the fewest issues a person can politic on intersects with the a plurality of votes that stand will achieve and you will find the two party candidates. Throw in the points of view that the campaign contributers want handled and you have the party differences.



If you want to see creativitivity in politics vote out the incumbent and vote for a third party candidate, whoever that incumbent is.

So you're voting for Nader then, MB?

No, I'm voting for Bush who is a creative genius especially when it comes to fictitious reasons why we need to go to war.

 

[Spencer278]

Lol repbulican claiming democrats are unoriginal is just stupid.
Might I ask what was the last name of the last two republician presidents?
Might I ask where did the majorty of the cabinit come from for the current president?
Might I ask what country the last two republician presidents decided to attack?

 

[drewshin]

You're right, I guess the truth is unoriginal, but with lying you can always be so creative!

You're pointing out that posts showing Bush as a flip flopper as lacking originality. However, you don't seem to realize that this is a "counter argument" (would you like a definition of this?) showing that both candidates do the exact same things. I apologize if you were not perceptive enough to see this, I'll make it more clear the next time.