In interest of Doper bipartisanship and to show we’re not all Flavor-Aide drinkers, what’s something about the platform of the party you plan to vote for you’d change if you could? (This is really more imho, but given how heated things get over politics I’ll put it here.)
I’m pretty much a yellow dog democrat and I genuinely like Obama (though I’ve kept very quiet about it). What I’d change if I could:
-While I’m against the war in Iraq, I’m also very against a timed withdrawal. Obama has said that he hopes to have the troops out in 16 months but can’t commit to it as he doesn’t know what he’ll encounter as president, but I would go further than that- basically “we’ll have them all home when we can (if that’s 6 months great, 16 months okay, hopefully no longer, but if it takes 4 years to get the last home safely then it takes 4 years” with no commitments to a particular time frame, preferred or otherwise.
-I admit I have major skepticism into how well Universal Healthcare would work. Absolutely no question that it’s a great ideal and something much to be wished for, and God knows how much Canada seemed like the Promised Land to me during the times when I was uninsured, and pretty much anything is better than nothing, but I think the government plan will probably always be subordinate to private and considered as the “better than nothing” policy only.
I would really like to hear Obama say "we will never use Blackwater except in cases of absolutely dire necessity (such as mutant radioactive giant lizard attacks, near their NC hq). Those people scare the hell out of me.
I will also admit that while I can certainly live with him, Biden wouldn’t have been my pic.
I typically vote democratic, but I strongly dislike and disagree with the Dem’s position that prohibition of firearms can have any meaningful effect in reducing crime.
I also think their position on drug prohibition is equally wrong.
Answering as a Democrat, although I share their sentiment, I think the chances of a nuke-free world is nil, so I’m not sure it should be in their platform. Same thing with removing North Korea’s nuclear weapons, I’m not sure any sane leader of North Korea would ever agree to that, so why make it a goal?
Phatlewt, there actually is nothing about illegal drugs in the Democratic National Platform of 2008. Which makes sense, I don’t think it’s an issue on many people’s radar anymore.
But apparently, only the firearms WE think you should be able to have:
Which has absolutely no impact upon:
Take this out of the platform and the O would win every state. DIO and others on this board like to claim that firearms owners are no longer under threatened now that the Heller decision has been made. If that is the case, why is this BS still on the party plank? If guns are still being called for banishment based upon how they look, which is the heart of ANY “assault weapons ban” I cannot trust that party to protect my other guns in the future.
I looked at the Obama site for the first time this election and I was surprised by his calls for tax cuts, his seemingly acceptable plan for UHC, and a few other things. I’m not a one issue voter, and I don’t care about abortion. I still can’t get over the gun thing though.
Gun control should be a State’s responsibility. I think rural areas can have guns with no problems, but urban areas are better off restricting gun use. Federal regulation won’t solve anything.
We need to use nuclear power. Put money into it and people will figure out what to do with the waste.
Tax cuts can be a good idea. They don’t solve everything, but they don’t ruin everything either.
We can’t leave Iraq until their government is strong enough to resist being taken over by religious extremist.
Gays should be allowed to get married. Drugs and prostitution should be made legal.
Well, I still consider myself Independent, but I haven’t voted Republican in a presidential election since 1992 (though I would have in 2000 if I wasn’t angry at the Bush campaign for their treatment of John McCain), and I’m a strong Obama supporter, so I guess I can speak as a Democrat.
I am really strongly opposed to gun control. I think our founding fathers intended for citizens to have weapons equal to those used by armies, and I don’t think there should be any controls on man-portable firearms besides keeping them away from violent felons, and that private citizens should be allowed to own larger weapons (i.e. RPGs, mortars, AAA) if they are carefully screened and licensed to do so.
I believe that welfare programs and other forms of public assistance need to be more closely monitored to make sure they are not abused by adults who are capable of work, and that it should be easier to disqualify people from receiving such benefits.
Although the Democrats are not any worse than the Republicans in this aspect, I think they still are too pro-censorship. I don’t think possession of any media should be illegal, though producing or selling child pornography should, of course, be a very serious crime.
I am not a Democrat, but largely thanks to Palin I am voting for Obama. I voted for Clinton, Kerry and Gore too, so I guess I am a Dem despite my protestations. Stuff like this from the platform is just bad policy.
Seniors should not be a protected class. Especially as we get more and more inescapable warnings that American workers bear responsibility for saving for their retirement it is irrational to further subsidize the needs of older people. Seniors should pay taxes at the same rate I do. With the enormous costs of Medicare, Social Security and the prescription drug benefit I don’t think we can afford to redistribute more wealth to seniors who failed to accumulate personal savings. As I look at my generation (mid thirties) I can say that if you aren’t saving for retirement then I will deeply resent subsidizing all but the poorest of you folks when you do retire.
I would also like a partially privatized Social Security. I will give up significant benefits under the system in exchange for control. Take 30% of my Social Security taxes, but let me invest the other 70%. I don’t need a nanny state and I don’t need to be infantalized and told I will lose it all in the stock market. A plan like the Federal Thrift Savings Plan offers an excellent variety of low cost diversified options that could provide considerably more benefits than the piggy bank of Social Security.
As truly libertarian leaning poster I will end up resenting any attempt by the government to make decisions I could better make for myself. I am also less forgiving of subsidizing the failures of others than a more liberal Dem might be.
I support school choice and vouchers as long as voucher money is given to schools with non-religously influenced science curriculums. No Jesus-Horsed charter schools, but otherwise I’m okay with it. This is probably my biggest difference with the Democrats (I’m registered Independent).
I’m a non-strident 2nd amendment supporter. I think it’s part of the Constitution & American history but I can’t get overly excited about the average individual not being able to buy an Uzi or a reasonable background check etc…
I don’t believe in nationalised healthcare but I do feel that major corporations should not be allowed to get away with underinsuring employees.
I believe in better leave policies for working mothers than we currently have-but basically extending job protection status for working moms up to one year after the birth of the child. Most people I know want paid leave, like in Europe. I think that’s too burdensome on companies. OTOH, I think people are capable of budgeting for reduced income for up to a year, and it would have the benefit of opening up short term employment possibilities for people (esp. working moms) looking to ease back into the workplace.
And I know Dinsdale is going to hate me for this one but I think part of Social Security should be privatised. There! I said it.
I think Obama’s plan to use the government to drive environmental technology innovation is dreadful. DREADFUL.
This is all irrelevant though-as long as the Republicans are hand in cock with people who want to teach creationism as science, I won’t vote for them and I won’t change my registration back.
Perhaps now in interest of party loyalty Dems should hold off til some Republicans post.
C’mon Republidopers, we showed you some of our’s, you show us some of your’s.
And I know Dinsdale is going to hate me for this one but I think part of Social Security should be privatised. There! I said it.
[/QUOTE]
I’ll add that one to mine as well; started a thread that went on for hundreds of post about it once. I think you should have the option of privately investing in IRA (under fairly strict guidelines) about 1/3 of what you currently pay in SS deductions.
I am not generally a huge fan of most of the ways that the Democrats end up spending money. I also wish they would generally spend less of it, and the national budget/deficit is one of the top issues for me. I am a very typical Connecticut independent, actually - fairly liberal on social issues, fairly conservative on economic issues.
From the 2008 Dem platform, specifically, the part that I would say I most strongly disagree with are the paragraphs that are in their to appeal to the unions. I would not say that I am stauchly anti-union, but I would say that I tend not to lean in their favor unless there is an extremely good reason to do so.
Given the track records of Republicans on spending in my lifetime, I cannot imagine any Democratic administration being worse, and at least I agree with the Dems on the other stuff (gay marriage, abortion, the need for reasonable investment into the development of alternative energy, etc etc etc).
I’m very uncomfortable with the way the Democratic party has officially embraced unions all this time. It seems to me the union connection is a large whetstone we’ve hung around our collective neck simply because we (allegedly) side with the working folks in America. I think we can do that and still stay out of bed with the Teamsters.
Invest in nuclear power. Seriously. I’m all for energy from ethanol, wind, solar, geothermal, tidal and pixie dust farms. But stop treating nuclear power as an afterthought that you’ll never actually pursue (“Oh… and nuclear… if we can make it 100% safe and everyone loves it”) and treat it like an actual plank in your energy program.
Also, stop with the God damned wasteful corn ethanol subsidies. It was a noble experiment to start getting ethanol off the ground but it’s outlived its usefulness and it’s time to drop it for more realistic plans of ethanol production. Thanks.
For the record, I was a Republican not that long ago. I left the party because of the association with the abortion issue, and the piss poor fiscal policy of tax cuts and increased spending. I love tax cuts, I can appreciate the need to spend as a government. The government has record revenues coming in but there is no excuse to spend 400 billion more than is brought in, in one fucking fiscal year!
I fail to see how the Dems will be any better however, but I gave my issues with them earlier.
I seriously dislike McCain’s talk of a gas tax holiday (thankfully it appears to have died down.) I hope he downplays the Marriage Act stuff once he gets in office.
I’m a Democrat, and pretty uniformly prefer their policies to those of the Republicans. But I think they’re too focused on “assault weapons” when in fact ordinary hand guns pose a greater problem. I also agree with the poster above who’d like to see more support for nuclear power.
There are other areas where I’m more liberal than the mainstream Democratic Party. I’d like to see stronger opposition to the death penalty, more support of equal rights for gays and lesbians (including marriage), and a greater commitment to fighting poverty. But I understand that these are perhaps not exactly winning issues for them right now.
