If Democrats Don't Win this November...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 11 2006, 01:39 PM) [snapback]331272[/snapback]</div>

My thoughts...?
The electorate is fed up with BOTH parties! :angry:

 

Do you mean what else could happen to benefit them in the next couple weeks? Gas prices rising and the stock market tanking are two things that come to mind right away.

In my opinion, the Democrats have spent too much time reacting rather than acting. They shot themselves in the collective foot a few years ago by being afraid of the "soft on terrorism" accusation. They also need to decide what their base is and go after it. Lately it seems like their message is "we're more moderate than the neo-cons". That's not really clear. A lot of regular Republicans are more moderate than the neo-cons, too.

One thing I'll say for the Republicans ... they've done a better job in recent years of energizing their base. And it translated to votes. Whether they do it through fear (terrorism, gay marriage, etc), "Swift Boating", or honest hard work doesn't matter. In '04 they got out the vote better than the Democrats.

If the Dems don't win at least one house in November, I think they need to do what perpetually losing sports teams do. "Blow up the team" and start over. Decide on a definite identity and stick to it, regardless of what happens in the '08 elections. It may not pay off right away, but they've got to offer something more cohesive than "Hey, at least we're not Republicans!"

Just the humble opinion of an Independent who campaigned for Kerry.

 

To add a few:

Losing face with the international community
Attempts of manipulation of scientific results.
Censorship of scientific results.
Meddling with the way NIH awards research money (unprecedented).
Worsening of environmental standards.
100k tax break for Hummers, 3k tax break for hybrids.
They freaking took part in Killing the Electric Car!!
Making gay marriage and flag burning an issue when people are dying.
Its always a republican that wants intelligent design taught in schools.

 

Every time a political party loses big, anywhere, there are plenty of pundits declaring it's all over for them. Their obit is written in a thousand commentators' columns. And then eventually they get a more savvy leader, or the other party screws up, and the "dead" party is in power again.

The electorate is like King Lear, rushing back and forth to whichever daughter seems to be treating him with less disrespect at the moment, and never realizing that the only honest daughter is the one he disowned because she told him the truth from the beginning.

If the Democrats lose this election it will be business as usual in politics and government. If they win, it will be business as usual in politics and government. New faces, same story. Either way, the electorate, like King Lear, will run back and forth from one party to the other.

 

If the democrats can't win this November they deserve to be hanged.

"And my poor fool is hanged. No, no, no life?
Why should a dog, a horse, a rat have life, [280]
And thou no breath at all? Thou'lt come no more,
Never, never, never, never, never."

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 11 2006, 02:54 PM) [snapback]331325[/snapback]</div>

Gosh, are we referring to the same Democratic Party? I've never really thought of 'em as terribly left leaning.

Perhaps in comparison to the Republican Party, which has undergone a significant transformation and is now approaching the stature of a pseudo-religous organization.

Despite accentuating each other's differences, I fear that similarity is what they, primarily, have in common.

 

If the Democrats are "too left wing", it's only because your viewpoint is so far to the right.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 11 2006, 03:14 PM) [snapback]331339[/snapback]</div>

Seems to me that, right now, the Dems define themselves by what they're *not.* Problem is, it's a lot easier to critique than create, but in any case they seem to come off as wishy-washy whiners.

Also, I think that the Dems seek to unite some wildly disparate factions; the GOP assumes a stance and then (based on one's beliefs) you're either for them or against them.

Until the GOP moves too far right and alienates a significant portion of voters who are fiscally conservative but liberal on social issues, I don't think there's much the Democrats can do about the situation...unless, as has been said, they 'reinvent' who they are and what they stand for.

And, since our system favors heavily status quo, I don't think there's much chance of that happening.

 

The democrates could win if they had any kind of leadership. Leadership has been missing for a long time now!!!

 

Americans see the Democrats as weak. I can't think of one that's not a wuss. No 'big brass ones' to protect the homeland while the rest of us selfishly focus on trying to climb over each other to get to the top.

This election cycle will have a pretty low voter turn out. Low voter turn out typically means lower voter turnout for Democrats than it does for the old guard conservative republicans.

Which is the only chance for the republicans to win... everyone stays home....

If the Dem's are going to get control at all, I'd prefer a total sweep in 2008. Ya'll take control all in one day and then we can watch the cities burn with a clear dividing line as to why it is happening. Elections in fall of 2008, turn over of control in January 2009, country in position to surrender to terrorists by November 2009.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Oct 11 2006, 07:34 PM) [snapback]331444[/snapback]</div>

Times change:Latest CNN Newsweek Poll

it’s part of a larger loss of faith in Republican leadership, thanks mostly to the war in Iraq. For instance, for the first time in the NEWSWEEK poll, a majority of Americans now believe the Bush administration knowingly misled the American people in building its case for war against Saddam Hussein: 58 percent vs. 36 percent who believe it didn’t. And pessimism over Iraq is at record highs on every score: nearly two in three Americans, 64 percent, believe the United States is losing ground there; 66 percent say the war has not made America safer from terrorism (just 29 percent believe it has); and 53 percent believe it was a mistake to go to war at all, again the first time the NEWSWEEK poll has registered a majority in that camp.


.

 

Part of the problem, regarding the House, is the way the districts are drawn. They are drawn to keep the incumbents from getting voted out. Too much gerrymandering going on. In regards to the Senate, unfortunately, the Dems tend to cluster. This means that, for the most part, most Red states tend to be less populated states versus Blue states that tend to be more highly populated.

Quoting Paul Krugman, "[A] combination of accident and design has left likely Democratic voters bunched together—I'm tempted to say ghettoized—in a minority of Congressional districts, while likely Republican voters are more widely spread out. As a result, Democrats would need a landslide in the popular vote—something like an advantage of 8 to 10 percentage points over Republicans—to take control of the House of Representatives. That's a real possibility, given the current polls, but by no means a certainty."

Just my two pesos.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(huskers @ Oct 11 2006, 05:00 PM) [snapback]331387[/snapback]</div>

Is it a lack of Democratic leadership or an abundance of Republican 'hot-button' tactics?
I'm so sick of White House fear mongering masquerading as "leadership".
Abortion, Al-Qaeda, gay marriage, Osama, Iran, terrorists, North Korea, liberal Democrats, etc.
Remember - "You're either with us, or against us".
The Republican message: Be afraid. Be very afraid (and vote for us, because we'll protect you).
Break out the visqueen and duct tape, here comes another biological attack! :blink:

 

If the Republicans "win" it will prove old P.T. Barnum wrong: You can fool all of the people all of the time!

Suppose the Democrats win just one seat less in each house than they need for a majority. That's a big increase for them. Do they still "lose?"

This topic is just a straw man (no reference to the British minister because I don't know Jack about him) set up to cover their butts in case the REPS don't lose quite enough. 'Cause you know they're going to lose.

The Republicans used to vote for one certain principle: more money would come their way. I can understand this. Everybody wants more money. They were just a little more vicious about it.

But with the state of our country like it is, if making another $1,000 a year or so buys your vote, you're a whore. There are lots of REPS I could vote for, but the ones who are making America into a dictatorship, or just don't care, are beyond the pale. If things aren't bad enough now to get your attention, then it will take a 10 megaton direct hit.

It's well past time for cute remarks, sophomoric logic or idealistic dreams. The country is going to hell in a hand basket and unless we, the citizens, take back control in any legitimate way that we can, Democratic, Green, Libertarian, Peace & Freedom. I don't give a damn who, then winning WWII, except for its racial conclusions, won't have made much difference. Even the idealism of the Greens will turn black.

Pick your pet gotta-have this election. Is gaining this thing important enough to excuse the utter disaster that the last eight years have been in lives ended, freedoms lost and dollars squandered? Can you maybe put aside your qualms about, let's say, gay marriage or flag burning or the military-industrial complex, for just a while as we put out the real fire? Mussolini made the trains run on time. Is that good enough for you?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jmccord @ Oct 11 2006, 02:57 PM) [snapback]331285[/snapback]</div>

Agreed.