You seem to be under the impression that “government” equals “passing new laws”. But there’s a lot more to government than that. You should read up about it sometime.
Truth is that I think my position is a lot more valid. I was just being nice about it.
Z.b., I would love to see a country without guns in the hands of everyone who wants one. I know that such is very unlikely to ever be implemented, so, what I believe, truly, is that we should try as best we can to make sure that people who shouldn’t have guns don’t have them. I think that is a very moderate belief.
you, then, would take my belief and say that I’m lying, that what I really want is for government to seize your guns and throw you into jail. And, because you think that yelling that from the rooftops will get you votes, that is what you yell from the housetops. Insane rendering of another’s position just to get votes, or, perhaps, because your mind actually works that way, believing that people you don’t agree with are plotting to harm you.
Cite, again. I don’t believe anything you say, including about other Dopers’ positions, without a cite.
I think you just agreed with me. Pols take care of their own, and they live privileged lives.
They don’t, always. McConnell talks about how much he loves Kynect. Other Republicans talk about the parts of the ACA that should stay.
Many are openly supporting the ACA and Obama. And for the others, I wish they were more honest, but I still support these liars over the alternatives.
No – we’re realists. Voting for these liars who will support Democratic policies is way, way better than the alternative.
We “put up with it” because electing them is better for America than the alternative.
The votes I understand. But he didn’t get heat other than the perfunctory “you should change” official statements. Obama in 2008 was supported by the gay community and gay rights organizations wholeheartedly.
I’ve voted for liars too. The difference is that Democrats in red states make a living out of being liberal in DC and conservative back home. There are some exceptions, Evan Bayh was an honest moderate and Manchin might be more comfortable on the other side. Joe Lieberman was a good liberal but where he disagreed he was forthright. But all of the red state Dems up for reelection are Obama and Reid supporters and vote with them nearly all the time. I’ve never seen it this widespread before.
I said that Democrats don’t mind being lied to, and that much of it was entirely accurate. The other part, that Democratic voters believe themselves in on the secret, is only debunked by your admission that it’s not a secret. Which raises the question of why they do it.
Read the thread. Just the last page or two. Geez. But seriously, you’re avoiding the crux of the issue, again, like a politician. Do you believe Reid to be a man of integrity? Do you believe the Democrats do what’s best for America? I know you believe Charlie Crist is a sincere Democrat, you argued that in the Florida governors’ race thread, much to my amusement.
Your disbelief implies, well, disbelief that anyone could be crazy enough to say those things.
I think it is perfectly clear from any rendering of the political landscape that there are two major branches of the Republican party. Christ was a Republican of one stripe, the current governor, of another. It is fair to say that Dems welcomed Christ and now consider him one of their own, because, put simply, he always had more in common with them than he had with the conservative wing of his former party.
All over the South, party affiliation is more flexible that in other places. The same sincerely held positions today make one a Republican who once were sincere Democrats. Everyone knows that. Anyone in the South who wants well-funded public schools, job training, state involvement in lifting people out of poverty, etc., is now a Democrat. 70 years ago, Republicans could claim those virtues, but no longer can.
Let’s not forget, the conservative wing of the Republican party can not even lie about their support of women’s rights. They abandoned women, minorities and, even, men and women who work for minimum wages that are increasingly meager. They won’t get them back and their policies only create more of them. Sort of like invading a Muslim country and expecting not to generate more Al Queda than you kill.
Because the alternative was so much worse – further, they believed that he would “evolve” – and he did.
This is much, much better than being conservative in DC and back home. We’ll take the liberalism where we can get it.
LOL – no.
Virtually all of the Republicans vote against Obama and Reid nearly all the time.
No it wasn’t.
The Democratic party is not nearly this organized.
Presumably (for the ones that do this), because they think it will help them win.
yes, we do believe what you so casually besmirch. It is crazy to believe otherwise, that the 1% / 99% divide is healthy for any country. Do you think that the rich are actually concerned in any way about the suffering of the bottom 25%? Rich dems, some; rich Republican supporters, not so much.
I did. I can’t find the statements, so I assume you’re misunderstanding/misinterpreting something. Cite.
As far as politicians go? A little bit. Not that I particularly care – I want effective politicians… honesty and integrity are pretty low on the list of what matters to me.
In relation to the Republicans, yes.
Cite, again. Not that I care who/what is a “sincere Democrat”… sincerity barely register on things that matter for who I choose to support.
No, it’s disbelief because you so often post things that turn out to be false.
THe conservative part of the GOP doesn’t lie about their position on womens’ rights, because they don’t need to. Enough women support their view on womens’ issues that they win elections. 2012 was an outlier, not the norm, as Democrats will find out when they pore over the exit poll data and find that the GOP lost the female vote by only a point or two. Democrats make womens’ rights 90% about their lady parts, and the other 10% is based on the assumption that women can’t negotiate their own pay without the government sitting in the room with them.
Republicans’ issues with minorities is a much more difficult problem, but that has even less to do with their views and more to do with simply not asking them for their votes or explaining why they have the views they do. They pretty much allow Democrats to demonize the GOP uncontested in minority communities. And demonize the Democrats do. If the Democrats were so confident that minorities backed them because of what they stood FOR, they wouldn’t need to paint such an incredibly dark picture of the GOP.
Virtually all issues are framed in this way, because negative politics works.
In many cases, you.
I use the pronoun in its indefinite sense. But in a discussion here, I assume that if I said, “Politician X supports position A,” I’d be asked for a cite, and I further assume I couldn’t say, “Well, they say they don’t, but they’re lying.”
In other words, when we discuss policy positions as reasons to support or reject a candidate, rarely if ever do the Democratic advocates acknowledge what you just did.
When can we rely on those lies, precisely? For example, as we discussed the ACA here, much was made of the President’s “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it.” Opponents of the ACA were reminded of this guarantee.
At what point during that debate could I have said, “Well, he’s lying?”
It works even better when it’s uncontested. But the sheer venom and darkness of Democratic appeals to minority communities is so extreme that they would never dare to try it elsewhere. IT’s good that the latest Democratic appeals to black voters are being highlighted. It won’t help with the minority vote, but at least it shows just how vitriolic the Democrats are when they think they can get away with it.
I wasnt here yet, but where I did debate that particular issue, about whether you could keep your insurance, I cited all kinds of studies showing that many would lose their health insurance and they were dismissed by supporters of ACA as what “might” happen. I just have to think a lot of Democratic supporters don’t mind carrying water for politicians when they bullshit the public.
I’m going to go vote for Charlie Crist now. Don’t say I never did anything for you. 
Egotist te absolvo. Go, and sin somewhat less.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say “so what”, but I generally agree with this.
Where this comes to the fore is when, during election campaigns, high-minded commentors and politicians demand that we focus on “issues”, those issues being defined as carefully crafted policy positions that candidates have adopted for the purposes of these campaigns.
For me, what others consider “dirt” is sometimes far more significant, as it’s a far better predictor of what the candidates will actually do once in office than whatever campaign jive they’re currently spouting.