Democrats winning Congress

[creekster]

Originally Posted by All-American

Tell me, "friend": when did Creekster the wise abandon reason for madness?

It's been a long week already.

Besides, I am not and never have been very wise, just ask my kids.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by creekster

It's been a long week already.

Besides, I am not and never have been very wise, just ask my kids.

Maybe not, but that's the only way the movie quote could work.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by All-American

Maybe not, but that's the only way the movie quote could work.

AS though to prove my own assertion, I missed it completely.

Saruman the Stupid would be more like it.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by hoyacoug

Democrats should, politically, continue to harp on Republicans over Iraq. They may not even need to present a solution on Iraq.

I disagree. The trouble for the Dems is that all they do is harp on Iraq but present absolutely no solutions. If they want to take control, they have to give the American voters a reason to give them control.

I consider myself a Libertarian, but until a Libertarian comes along who actually has a chance to get elected, I will continure to vote Republican, as their platform more closely resembles my politcal beliefs. I may vote for a Dem in a local election who is a social conservative, but could never reconcile voting Dem in a national election.

[Parrot Head]

Thoughts on the thread...

I sat down with a democratic party leader in the House the other day...

Okay, Haddow!

Democrats truly are in disarray. If they can't capitalize on 6 years of Bush and Republican congressional "leadership" then when can they capitalize?

You're very right here. Jon Stewart on The Daily Show has been saying this for some time. He can't stand the fact that his party can't come up with something! It must even amaze GOP leadership that the Dems can't come up with something solid. Maybe that's why they continue to let Bush have his way.

Democrats should, politically, continue to harp on Republicans over Iraq. They may not even need to present a solution on Iraq. But they do need to present a plan for what else they would do domestically. So far, they have squat. And that could keep them firmly in the minority.

Maybe this is the one thing Dean has finally realized -- or more likely, someone else in the DNC camp. When they criticize aspects of the war too much, yes, it appeals to the hippie liberal sectors of the party, but it comes off as being unsupportive of the military to middle America, which is the needed vote. So since they can't declare bellum interuptus, they have to sit still as not to tick off the illusive "swing" vote, or the swinger vote. Both are very important.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Parrot Head

Thoughts on the thread...


Okay, Haddow!


You're very right here. Jon Stewart on The Daily Show has been saying this for some time. He can't stand the fact that his party can't come up with something! It must even amaze GOP leadership that the Dems can't come up with something solid. Maybe that's why they continue to let Bush have his way.

Maybe this is the one thing Dean has finally realized -- or more likely, someone else in the DNC camp. When they criticize aspects of the war too much, yes, it appeals to the hippie liberal sectors of the party, but it comes off as being unsupportive of the military to middle America, which is the needed vote. So since they can't declare bellum interuptus, they have to sit still as not to tick off the illusive "swing" vote, or the swinger vote. Both are very important.

lol! I didn't mean to come across as Haddow-ish! The point of saying he was in the Democratic leadership was to show just how backwards the Democrats are right now. It never really hit me until I heard from the horse's mouth that there is no plan to have a plan.

[Detroitdad]

I don't think that we could win with a plan. Of course, I don't really think that winning this time around is a great prize, because of the 2008 monster presidential election that will likely be coming along.

The trouble for the Dems is, in my opinion, that there is a short term demographic hiccup while the coalition grows in swing western states like Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico. As these states hispanicize further they will likely become less monolitically Republican, as evidenced by recent electoral trends.

Dissarray aside I think that the demographics are more important. Truthfully, the opposition does not need to fill some void to win eventually in a two party system because the voters have nowhere else to go. Besides, even if there was a coherent strategy, would the voters get the message? Not the average voter.