Let me know when “The Korea War” catches on as the accepted term…
Maybe, and your search of “democrat candidate” doesn’t indicate the number of Democrats that use the noun modifier form in their campaigns, e.g. “Democrat Candidate for …”
Same here for the Iraq War, let me know when Iraqi War catches up.
Why play childish word games? Really, what’s the point? You think Republicans can just change the name of someone else’s party and and no one is supposed to say anything about it?
'Fess up, harveyc: you just want to annoy us Democrats. Otherwise, why not go with the usage we prefer? Don’t you think it’s a little rude to stick with a usage that half the population finds irritating?
In NPR’s Morning Edition coverage of the State of the Union speech, they noted that Bush opened with a gracious acknowledgement of the new political landscape. In the *written * version of the speech, the phrase was “new Democratic majority”…but he couldn’t quite pull the trigger (or drop old habits), so he actually *said * “new Democrat majority”.
Actually not. I have accepted the usage of the adjectival form of democrat on Democrat’s forums and blogs.
I have a genuine interest in why, apparently, the only noun in modern English, democrat, cannot be used as a noun modifier.
Because that was the standard usage until the 1990’s when the Republicans decided that “Democrat” sounded more negative with focus groups than “Democratic”.
They HAVE used “Iraqi War” in newspaper headlines over here.
I understand it has been used for a much longer time than that:
— The term was used by Herbert Hoover in 1932, and in the late 1930s by Republicans who used it to criticize Democratic big city machines run by powerful political bosses in undemocratic fashion. Republican leader Harold Stassen said in 1940, "I emphasized that the party controlled in large measure at that time by Hague in New Jersey, Pendergast in Missouri and Kelly-Nash in Chicago should not be called a ‘Democratic Party.’ It should be called the ‘Democrat Party.’ [4]
The term has been used by numerous Republican leaders since the 1940s and appears in most GOP national platforms since 1948.[5] In 1947 Senator Robert A. Taft said, “Nor can we expect any other policy from any Democrat Party or any Democrat President under present day conditions. They can not possibly win an election solely through the support of the solid South, and yet their political strategists believe the Southern Democrat Party will not break away no matter how radical the allies imposed upon it.”[6] President Dwight D. Eisenhower used the term in his acceptance speech in 1952 and in partisan speeches to Republican groups.[7] Ruth Walker notes how Joseph McCarthy repeatedly used the phrase “the Democrat Party.”[8]
Isn’t the same true of the term “fundie”?
Ok, but even the U.S. Congress over here has recently used the noun modified “Iraq War”:
— IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 10, 2007
Mr. RANGEL submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Calling for the removal of all restrictions from the public, the press, and military families in mourning that would prohibit their presence at the arrival at military installations in the United States or overseas of the remains of the Nation’s fallen heroes, the members of the Armed Forces who have died in Iraq or Afghanistan, with the assurance that family requests for privacy will be respected.
Whereas the truest heroes of the Iraq War are the members of the United States Armed Forces who have made the ultimate sacrifice of their lives on behalf of their country;
It could have been, when the party was founded. They would’ve been grammatically correct to call their party the Democrat Party. But they didn’t.
Republicans are choosing to ignore that fact, and invent their own name for their political opponents. This isn’t a question of grammar; it’s a question of calling someone what they want to be called.
Yes.
Can we Democrats just call them the Repubs? The Repub party? We can say we’re doing it to conserve precious letters during this time of war. 
Yes. Or “trekkie” or “frat”. There’s a dig behind it … as **harveyc ** himself acknowleges with his many cites of its use by the opposition.
There’s nothing wrong with getting a dig in, if that’s your intention. But then you shouldn’t be surprised if the other side bristles in response.
Hmm. Consider:
Democrat Congress is a label the U.S. House of Rep’s and the Senate that further describes, labels, or limits the topic to, the chambers/institution that is controlled by a majority of the elected officials who are part of the Democratic Party.
Democratic Congress seems slightly confusing (or possibly innacurate, depending on the intended subject of the sentence) to me, because most of the Representitives and Senators are democratically elected, and does not single out a particular national party, if that is the need/intention of the speaker/framer.
So, if you wish to talk about, specifically, the Democratic Party members of the Senate and House as a group, you would say “Democrat Congress”, or, perhaps more accurately, the “Democrat controlled House”, or “Democrat Senate majority members”…
I guess I’m just a goof… but it does not seem to be an insult to me. Note: I am talking about what “seems natural” in speaking, not what might be exact, grammatically speaking.
I stated the use “Democrat Party” is wrong since it is the “Demcratic Party.”
I am trying to get clarification on the use of the noun, democrat, and why apparently it can’t be used as a noun modifier today, when every other noun in modern English can be used in that form.
That’s funny, I only got 19,400 hits for “Veitnam War” 
Sorry, I miss spell checking