No slight taken. I think you’re completely wrong, but your suggestion is logical if one buys into the premises. Although comparing me to the SA is a bit much. I don’t REMEMBER advocating beating up rich people. Not that it wouldn’t be fun, but it runs counter to my general opposition to non-metaphorical violence, donchaknow.
[QUOTE=elfkin477]
Tell the truth, Evil Captor. You’re not really a democrat, are you? I get it now. You’ve just been stringing us along so you can make fun of them like in this thread.
[quote]
Truthfully, i’m not a Democrat in the sense that I have adopted their plans and ideals as my own. I have my own ideas, and the Dems are SO much closer to what I like than the Republicans are that I am Democrat by default. But in fact, since I live in a place that is overwhelmingly Republican I have thought of joining the Republicans as a “keep government small, yay for the free market but let’s keep the middle class healthy” kinda Republican. I figure if I can help drive a wedge between trad republican and mullah republicans, it’ll be all to the good.
It is important to note that Kerry kicked Bush’s ass in the debates. And IIRC Kerry DID advocate some core Democratic plans, like balancing the budget and such. So your thoughts are non-starters, I’m afraid.
All that does is tie into the spin machine strategy of taking anything Dems say and spinning it into a formula for disaster. Don’t give the bastards anythign to work with, that you don’t have to. Keep the focus on how awful the Pubbies are. Make them defend the indefensible.
In short, it’s ironic to hear you, an admitted Republican, advising the Dems to put their tuchnis in the shredder and then accuse me of being disingenuous.
Would you believe they actually ARE adopting slogan? Actually, a slightly better version that adds “Together,” I think because it’s required in some guidebook.
I find this alarming. My opinion of the Democratic leadership is not high. The fact that their slogan is so close to mine bothers me. I do not think the Dem leadership possesses great minds. I do not like the fact that they and I are thinking alike here.
Granted, they took a tin ear approach to it. To me, “Together, American can do better” while expressing the same sentiment as “We can do better than that” just doesn’t have the same ring to it. It smells like “slogan by committee.” Somebody probably suggested “We can do better than that.” Then somebody else said, 'Yeah, but we need America in it so everyone will know we’re all-American! How about “America can do better than that”?" Someone else piped up with, 'Yes, that’s good, but we need to be inclusive. We need to show we embrace all Americans who will help us keep our phony-baloney jobs. How about “Together, we Americans can do better than that”?" And so on and so on until they got the wording exactly bland.
Okay, fine. Keep believing that you can win elections by bitching about the current administration without actually having plans of your own. It seems to be working out real well for the party, so stick with that. :rolleyes:
On the other hand, the GOP seems to operate on theory that “the Democrats are in disarray, we can get away with anything we want!” Care to wager which will prevail in the 2006 elections?
Imagine how the people who didn’t like the slogan must feel!
Anyway, while I’ve said the same about leadership, Harry Reid has come out of nowhere (to me) and become a capable leader, so who knows?
If the Democrats explain how they can do better, it’s not that bad: I’d prefer them to let the fiascos speak for themselves (or let third parties speak for them), but as long as they’ve got positive suggestions for how to do better, it’s okay.
The Dems recently criticized an aspect of the budget plan. In response, a Republican lawmaker held a conference with a blank poster, saying, “This is the Democrat’s plan. If they want to criticize us, let’s see an alternative.”
He’s right, and this has been a primary Republican attack on Democrats for the past four years, and it will continue to be so. And it’s worked.
The Democratic party can do better. I hope they do.
Daniel
Here’s a quick question. Say Harry Reid gets the Democrats in the Senate all lined up so that they aren’t bickering a lot, and say they pick up some seats so that they can start pushing some legislation through.
Do you know, or does anyone know, what the agenda would be? And would it be an agenda in its own right, or just a defense of very old Democratic programs and opposition to new Republican ones?
Beats me. I’m not predicting he’ll come up with a great agenda. I said that his recent actions have shown he’s more of a leader than I expected, so perhaps he will find other ways to surprise me.
C’mon, guys. Is it so difficult to surf over to www.democrats.org? Their agenda is one of the top-level links.
For example, go to “Keeping America Safe at Home.” Naturally it starts with some puff-text about immigration reform, keeping terrorists out, etc., but after two paragraphs, it moves into specific proposals:
etc. Plenty of specific proposals!
Or let’s move into education, an issue dear to my heart. Again, start with two paragraphs of puff-text before moving into the specific proposals:
Wait–what was that last one? Check it out! Specifics at last! [I’m quoting it since it appears to be a press release, and my understanding is that folks WANT you to quote their press releases]
See? He specifically calls on Republicans to end their outdated strategies! Sure, a link to the proposal in question might be even more specific, or maybe they could’ve gone “Wild” (here I’m waving my fingers and rolling my eyes) and listed the goddamn reforms that they’re goddamn advocating.
Who says the Democrats don’t have an agenda?
Daniel
What’s wrong with a plan to just stop sticking America’s dick in the pencil sharpener and let people get on with their lives. Used to be, Republicans liked that sort of thing.
I’m an Independent voter.
I’m the guy you have to court to win an election. When things get murky I fall to the adage “the devil you know…”
That’s why GWB got my vote because I didn’t know what JK would do. I had to hold my nose and vote GWB.
So saying “we’ll do better” isn’t going to cut it. You better come up with a platform that clearly states goals and “methods”.
In other words…
Stewardess: “Three engines are on fire, we’re diving towards the ground, and there’s a monkey at the yolk!”
John Kerry: “Let me through, I’ve got to take control!”
BwanaBob: “Back off, John – I don’t know what you’re gonna do, so let the monkey have another shot at it.”
This is such a juvenile analogy that I won’t dignify it with a reply.
If you really equate GWB with a monkey then you are truly beyond rational debate. Are all your 14000+ posts filled with such stupidity?
Or as John Stewart put it on The Daily Show, “If you’re riding in a jeep and the driver is all over the road and finally crashes you into a ditch, you just might think about the possibility that he ISN’T the best guy to get you out of the ditch and back on your way!”
But these are such extreme examples as to be non-useful.
Of course I would take the keys from a wreckless driver and hand it to another adult with the hope that they know how to drive.
That does not translate to the political world. Sorry if you see the world in such simplistic terms.