I didn’t know a rolleye smiley constituted a valid rebuttal (even here in The Pit). You have yet to make your case. I posited that the Democrat positions do reflect the “center”. Maybe it would be helpful to define the views of “the center” before we continue?
I don’t know either - at least we agree on this.
I’ll drag out the CNN poll cite breaking down the vote if you insist - but you must show me some good faith as well by elaborating on how the views of Dean and Pelosi constitute “the loony left” (which you have so far refused to do). Are you game or not?
I suggest you familiarize yourself with Dobson before we continue. Assuming you are interested in the direction of the Republican party, and/or politics in general. If you are not, I won’t waste my time either.
This is a semantics argument (which is part of the success of the Republican tactic). Let’s use you as an example (sorry but you’re here to answer so it seems fairest):
You claim to be pro-choice. That is a “liberal” position.
Pro-Stem-cell research. Another “liberal” position.
Atheist you say? You realize that is way outside of mainstream for either party, but Republicans have successfully associated it as a “liberal” position.
So, at what point do you become a self identified “liberal”? Are these positions so irrelevant to your basic ideology? Do tell.
As I’ve said, I know many self identified conservatives who are not liberal bashers. Many of them hold similar “liberal” positions and can and do vote Democrat. The term “liberal” has been sufficiently demonized to render the meaning irrelevant for the purposes of this argument.
You haven’t proven that you are “the middle”. Simply repeating it doesn’t make it so.
Debaser, I get the feeling you are anxiously searching for poll results to refute my claim about the independent vote. For the record, here is the CNN cite I was thinking of:
Again I’ll ask: What does this tell us about the “independent” vote?
Looks to me like it’s a polarized mixed bag that reflects the state of the nation, and doesn’t tell us anything specific about “independents”. If anything, it gives a slight numerical advantage to “left-leaning” independents.
boret, I know you are new here so I’m trying to cut you some slack. I’ve provided numerous cites to back up my claims. You have provided none. You are accusing me of not making a case for my claims when I clearly have. It’s fine for you to disagree with me. It’s not fine for you to dishonestly claim that I’m not even making a case.
:rolleyes: x2
Maybe you missed the words I posted immediately after the rolleyes smiley, where I directly addressed your arguments?
Yes, I have. See my posts where I quote cites of voting records of the democrats in question.
You are the one who has yet to make your case. Perhaps you should try posting some logical arguments using cites instead of merely your own opinion with nothing to support it?
This is not true. I have done so, with cites to back up my claims. You should retract this claim and admit your error.
It’s sort of a personal goal of mine on the boards. When I don’t know something I say so. It’s a dangerous thing to do. You get called an idiot and attacked often for admitting ignorance about anything. However, it’s a good way to learn. Sometimes. In any case, I find the tradeoff worthwhile.
I pay attention to politics and watch/read the news daily. I haven’t heard of Dobson. Why don’t you come down off your high horse and tell me what the hell it is you are talking about and maybe I’ll learn something. Or not.
You are mistaken. I simply asked you to give a cite for a claim you made. No more, no less.
Let’s now examine it a bit further:
You orginally posted that:
I ask for a cite and you provide this:
So, Kerry won 49% of the independent vote. That’s not a majority. You need 50% to be a majority. So, you were wrong.
That’s OK. I’m wrong sometimes too. But, what’s not OK is you posting this as if it proves you correct. That’s silly makes you look stupid.
Lets try and find a cite for the second half of your claim. That “latest polls show “independents” being more closely aligned to the views of Democrats.” Maybe you can do better with this one. It might actually be true. I don’t know. But, you said it, and the problem is I don’t think you know either.
Which does not dimish the fact that more independents preferred Kerry that Bush, which was the whole point of** boret’s** argument. That he said “majority” instead of “plurality” and you jumped on it as some sort of vindication only makes you look small overly concerned with semantics instead of the broader meaning: independents prefer liberals.
By the way, would you please calibrate your political spectrum for us by characterizing the leanings of Rick Santorum? Do you find him mainstream? Moderate? Representative of most Americans? Or is he a right-wing extremist reactionary nut job, inhabiting the rarified air of outer fringes of political thought? Your answer will go a long way to explaining your views on liberals.
Debaser, you are clearly angry and defensive now, and that was not my intention. Can we avoid the personal insults? Or should I have taken advantage of your own careless posting by picking on the fact that you can’t even spell “independent”, much less claim to exemplify it? I’ll overlook your swipes at my “stupidity” and go on in good faith.
Thanks for the sentiment of cutting me some slack as a newbie. I’m not trying to be dishonest here. There were valid (IMO) rebuttals to the cites you have provided so far. How to interpret them being the main point of contention. Which is the broader point I’m trying to make here. Pelosi, for example, is “liberal” compared to whom, and what views?
I’ll ask again if we should not agree to define what constitutes “the center” before we go on. Because “the center” is not a fixed ideology, but only a point between two extremes that exist at the time. So Pelosi’s ratings (as per your cite) are also a reflection of what the fringes on the right are currently espousing.
Basically, my broader point (about the qualities of “the center”) is that the current right-wing extreme is much more radical than the current left-wing extreme. So pol ratings will be skewed, using that as a parameter.
But polls of the general public reflect something else. If you wish to continue in good faith, I’ll be happy to dig up cites for those polls.
What I was overly concerned with is that boret doesn’t seem concerned with being factual in his arguments at all. That’s what I wanted to call him on, and I thought I was rather polite about it.
He’s dead. That you need to start bringing up dead people to find someone more liberal than the leaders of the party kind of proves my point. But, yes, I’ll answer. Santorum is a wacky far left liberal just like Pelosi and Dean and Kennedy. Happy now?
If Santorum were alive he’d probably be one of the most prominent Democrats around, the way the party is heading today.
Actually, that is my primary concern. If I am mistaken, I want to hear about it ASAP, so I can adjust my opinions accordingly. That is why I like this messageboard. It’s not an “echo chamber” for one opinion or another.
And speaking of mistaken, I am not a “he”. Not that it should matter in the larger view.
Seriously, all I told you was that it’s silly and makes you look stupid to post something as though it proves you correct when in fact it does not. That’s hardly the worst insult you’re going to get in this forum if you hang around long enough.
Excellent! See, I knew you would catch on quick. I made a typo and now you use it to discredit me. Very good. I especially like the way you do it without really doing it. Very clever.
Just about anyone outside of San Fransicso, and just about any subject.
OK. But, the difference is that the fringes of the right that exist to balance out Pelosi are not running the republican party. The leaders of the republican party are moderate. Bush’s new SCOTUS pick is moderate. Issues where the conservative hard core base are outside of the mainstream such as abortion have been largely ignored even though they control all branches of government now.
I disagree with this assessment of course. But, as I’ve already stated, even if this were true it’s not as if these extremist republicans are running the party. For the conservatives to balance out their leadership with the democrats right now would mean Rush Limbaugh as president, Ann Coulter as RNC chairperson, and Pat Robertson as majority leader. I’m not saying the right doesn’t have fringe elements, I’m just saying that they aren’t running the party.
Well, that vote smart site doesn’t have info on Santorum:
Also, his web site seems to be mostly fluff. (Most elected politicians web pages don’t have any real meat on the bones these days.) So, I don’t know. Why don’t you guys tell me: Is he more extreme than Pelosi? If so, who cares? It’s not as if the republicans have him running the party.
In one fell swoop, I went from appearing stupid to very clever. Hooray for me!
Oh well, now we are back to vehement disagreement.
Could we please define “the center”? US is a big place, and what seems obvious to me may not be so obvious to you. I engaged a poster in Great Debates about something similar - his experience seems to be that most people are hopelessly stupid, and can and should be manipulated (I’m guessing both parties have people who espouse this idea).
But as for you personally, Debaser, I’d really appreciate it if you’d answer my question about what constitutes a self identified liberal, and how the positions you posted earlier either qualify you or exempt you, to your mind. Are those positions important or not?
Well, let’s see. Does Pelosi think homosexual acts should be outlawed, or tried to blame the recent abuse scandal in the Catholic Church on a “culture of liberalism”? Has Pelosi claimed on television that birth control is harmful to women, or disagreed with the Supreme Court’s decision in Griswold v. Connecticut?
He’s the Republican Conference chairman, making him the third-highest ranking Republican in the Senate. We’re not talking about crank on a street corner here, we’re talking about a man in a position of influence within the Republican party.
