# What's Wrong With the Democratic Party? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 1, 2005, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299 "2005-10-01T03:35:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/61 "2005-10-02T18:26:00Z")
> [@Cronos1](#): > > The budget for 06 is full of funding for everything dear to Republicans. Social Security overhaul is pretty much dead, there’s a reason they call it the third rail of politics. And Bush had made that reform a centerpiece of his second-term agenda. If it’s dead, which it is for now, that’s a pretty hard hit early in the term. > [@](#): > > Not sure how someone with such impacable conservative credentials be viewed so favorably by Dems. Did Bush pick good jurist who happened to be a conservative, or did he pick a conservative whom dems would find difficult to attack? I’d bet it was the latter. You’re entitled to your interpretation of things. I think that if Roberts represented himself accurately in the Senate hearing, he’s a very good judge and seems to have the makeup to be a good Chief Justice. I don’t know how often I’ll agree with what he says, but that’s not what makes somebody a good or bad judge. > [@](#): > > So for the Dems to go along with a stunch conservative shows how weak they view their position. I won’t speak for anybody else, but that’s not true for me. And in terms of a Supreme Court nominee, they ARE in a weak position. They don’t control either house of Congress and their approval of a judge is not required. > [@](#): > > Dems approval has dropped along side Republicans. So what? They’re not the ones dictating how things go in Washington these days. If people are dissatisfied with the government in November 2006, generally that will work to the Democrats’ advantage. No question that they can’t just sit back and do nothing for another year, but at this particular moment, I think they’re doing the right thing. If Bush’s next nominee is someone they feel they need to fight against - I guess we’ll know in a couple of days - that’ll be different, as I said. > [@](#): > > Doing nothing now just gives the Republicans a chance to get their act together. Do you think that, given a few weeks, Karl Rove can come up with a masterstroke that will shift the blame for Iraq, Hurricane Katrina, gas prices, Valerine Plame and Tom DeLay to the Democrats? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/62 "2005-10-02T18:31:25Z")
> [@Cronos1](#): > > My point isn’t whether Bush should be doing this or that. He’s doing what he thinks needs to get done. I am not arguing the merits of it one way or another, or that the Dems would have picked a “better” candidate for the Supreme Court. > > My point is why are the dems putting up more of an opposition considering the GOP’s weakened position? And selection of Roberts for chief justice of the Supreme Court, regardless one’s of view of him, isn’t somethig the Dems would have done on their own volition. Do you mean why aren’t the Dems putting up of a fight? As I said, you have to choose your battles. They’re fighting where it makes sense to do so, but not just opposing things across the board. They fought him on Social Security, and won that battle. > [@](#): > > Do the Republicans have the Dems so boxed-in, with nuclear option and other bugaboos, that all they can do is bend over and take it In the case of Roberts, yes. McCain and his band agreed to not vote for the nuclear option unless the Dems fillibustered a non-extremist candidate. Now, that’s a very amorphous thing, “extremism”, and there certainly are condidates whom the Dems could make the “extremist” case for, but Roberts isn’t one of them. It would have to be someone more like Janice Rogers Brown. n.b.: I don’t personally consider her an extremist, but that label could be applied to her much more easily than to Roberts. > [@](#): > > Letting the GOP continue to self destruct isn’t a viable strategy. My personal experience in life tells me that hope makes for a poor course of action. And if that is their strategy, then they shouldn’t be too surprised to find themselves in the losing end of most elections. I didn’t mean that they should just sit back and let the Pubs self-destruct. Sorry if my post came off that way. But they need to choose their battles wisely, and Roberts wasn’t a battle they could win. Do you think a fillibuster of the Roberts nomination would have been a plus for the Dems? I don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/63 "2005-10-02T20:26:15Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Name the last Republican politician to negotiate a treaty that cut down on US military posturing, like the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. [Ronald Reagan.](http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/inf/) Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/64 "2005-10-02T20:45:23Z")
Ooh, good call, **Shodan**. I retract that point. I still say, and I suspect you’ll agree, that today’s Republican party would **not** welcome JFK into its ranks. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/65 "2005-10-02T21:25:33Z")
As soon as there’s a 2008 nominee, you’ll see “leadership”. Not before. The “problems” you see are at least as much a \*result \* of being out of institutional power as a cause of it. A couple thousand more votes counted in Ohio this time, or Florida the last time, and this thread wouldn’t exist. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/66 "2005-10-02T21:28:29Z")
I really have no idea what the Democratic party is about these days except to hold the line against Bush. I concede the Republican onslaught has been so relentless they’ve had little time for anything else, but as John Kerry’s nomination showed us, as a party, they lack anything compelling to say, and that’s a serious problem. So long as they leave that vacuum, the Republicans will fill it, with total crap, if they have too. I think we’ve seen enough to know total crap can be sold with great success and facility if you scream it from the rooftops enough. Just imagine if that void could be filled with something distinctive, appealing, and yet _wasn’t_ total crap. Anybody? Anybody? ---
**Author:** ![Netbrian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/71e660/32.png) [@Netbrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Netbrian)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/67 "2005-10-02T21:36:06Z")
My own suspicion is that the Democrats’ inability to respond to this in a horribly effective manner, besides simply choosing their battles and giving the Republicans enough rope to hang themselves with, also stems from the divisions between the Democrats themselves (much like the divisions between the more traditional conservatives and neo-conservatives coming to light). While simple obstructionism requires only broad agreement, I feel that trying to advance anything horribly specific would require a party-wide consensus that just isn’t there. We have the more Clinton-esque, pragmatic wing that seems to be holding onto power, and which most Congresspeople seem to belong to (including John Kerry, as much as he’s trying to appeal to the base, and myself), and the smaller, but more passionate and motivated part of the party that’s somewhat further left. Getting those two wings of the party to agree on a common agenda without a truly energizing leader is going to be difficult. (For example, I rather suspect that both BrainGlutton and myself would love a resurgent Democratic party, but I rather also suspect we have strong disagreements on what the agenda should be). ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/68 "2005-10-03T13:54:17Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Ooh, good call, **Shodan**. I retract that point. > > I still say, and I suspect you’ll agree, that today’s Republican party would **not** welcome JFK into its ranks. > > Daniel Hard to say. A President who defeated a former Vice-President on an extremely close election with some highly questionable votes in his favor, cut taxes, invaded a foreign nation, and who triggered an international crisis over WMD. What’s not to like? 😃 Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/69 "2005-10-03T14:33:16Z")
Gotta say, **Shodan** , that was a really good one. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/70 "2005-10-03T14:49:07Z")
Sadly, the Democratic strategy can be summarized as follows: [ol] [li]We’re _different_ from the Republicans.[/li][li]We’re _the same as_ the Republicans.[/li][li]\ Me too! Me too! Me too!\[/li][/ol] They have no _identity_, anymore. They certainly don’t represent the Working Man. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/71 "2005-10-03T15:27:32Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Hard to say. > > A President who defeated a former Vice-President on an extremely close election with some highly questionable votes in his favor, cut taxes, invaded a foreign nation, and who triggered an international crisis over WMD. > > What’s not to like? 😃 > > Regards, > Shodan That is indeed an apt analogy. Except of course the prior President’s WMD were actually there. They had pcitures and everything. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/72 "2005-10-03T16:10:05Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Gotta say, **Shodan** , that was a really good one. Thanks to one of the few Dopers who I can be sure wasn’t being sarcastic. 😃 Although, seriously speaking, the loss of the Scoop Jackson wing of the Democratic party has, in my view, been a net loss for the Democratic party. JFK was anti-Communist and strong on defense. Kerry’s Viet Nam service could have been the ticket to present him as anti-terrorist and strong on defense. Instead, his voting record and general passivity in Congress made him look more like a Viet Nam protestor, even without the Swifties. Although the larger picture remains as it has been mentioned a tiime or two in this thread. The Dems don’t stand **for** anything; they are simply the anti-Republicans. It might even do them some good to pick a fight and then lose it, over some matter of principle - the refusal of Roberts or Miers to promise to uphold Roe v. Wade, or a plan to fix Social Security, or something. Anything but this “we won’t achieve anything but sniping at Republicans”, regardless of how popular it might be among the True Believers. The joke back in the 70s was that if the Democrats in Congress proposed a bill tio invade Mexico, the best the Republicans could do would be to get them to phase it in over three years. Nowadays it’s the Dems in the same position. If the Dems are really serious in their concerns over the deficit, or Social Security, or disaster relief spending, then let them submit some package of spending cuts and tax increases and really try to get it passed. If they fail, at least in 2006 they can say they tried, and argue plausibly that things would be better if they had succeeded. It is not automatically true that anyone who is discouraged from voting Republican will then vote Democratic. Often they don’t vote at all. And that doesn’t help anyone. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/73 "2005-10-03T16:17:26Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Hard to say. > > A President who defeated a former Vice-President on an extremely close election with some highly questionable votes in his favor, cut taxes, invaded a foreign nation, and who triggered an international crisis over WMD. > > What’s not to like? 😃 > > Regards, > Shodan Well done. You could even have started: A President who was sent to an elite boarding school and then made the ivy league with his father’s help. A President who defeated… ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/74 "2005-10-03T17:30:11Z")
> [@Netbrian](#): > > (For example, I rather suspect that both BrainGlutton and myself would love a resurgent Democratic party, but I rather also suspect we have strong disagreements on what the agenda should be). Actually, what I would love would be a reformed electoral system (PR, IRV, ballot fusion) under which both the big-tent parties would be likely to break up along their natural fault lines into several smaller ones, each more internally homogenous and with a more clear and consistent ideology and agenda. See this thread: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=269169](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=269169) ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/75 "2005-10-03T18:08:39Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Well done. You could even have started: A President who was sent to an elite boarding school and then made the ivy league with his father’s help. A President who defeated… I was thinking of that “parallels between Kennedy and Lincoln” that circulates from time to time.[ul][li]Lincoln had a secretary named Kennedy who urged him not to go to the theate. Kennedy had a secretary named Lincoln who urged him not to go to Dallas.[_]Lincoln was shot in a theater, and his assasin fled to a ware house. Kennedy was shot froma warehouse, and his assassin fled to a theater.[_]Both men were shot from behind, on a Friday, sitting down next to their wives.[_]Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson.[/ul]Etc. [/li] My favorite was added to the list later on. [ul][li]A week before he died, Lincoln was in Monroe, Maryland. [_]A week before he died, Kennedy was in Marilyn Monroe.[/ul]I was trying for something like “Both JFK and George ate a lot of Bush while in the White House”, but I couldn’t get the line to flow. [/li] Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/76 "2005-10-03T18:09:59Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > That is indeed an apt analogy. Except of course the prior President’s WMD were actually there. They had pcitures and everything. The questionable vote controversy may also have been less real; I think there’s a Straight Dope column about that. ---
**Author:** ![HPL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3da27b/32.png) [@HPL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HPL)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/77 "2005-10-03T20:28:51Z")
> [@Neurotik](#): > > This is it. The Democrats haven’t had a platform other than “We oppose the Republicans” since Clinton. They have no positive ideas of their own - or, if they do, they utterly fail to market them probably. > > No matter what troubles befall the Republicans, until the Democrats offer a coherent vision for the country, they will never, ever capitalize on those troubles. It’s pretty freaking pathetic how unable the current Democratic leadership is unable to grasp this simple concept. I’ll second this. In 2004, I didn’t vote for Bush because I was unhappy many things about him. However, I didn’t vote for Kerry either. Why? Because he gave me no reason to. Yes, I realize Bush sucks. What are you going to do differently? I never really got an answer to that question. He never gave me a reason to vote for him, and that’s why he didn’t get my vote. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/78 "2005-10-03T20:54:05Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > As soon as there’s a 2008 nominee, you’ll see “leadership”. Not before. The “problems” you see are at least as much a \*result \* of being out of institutional power as a cause of it. A couple thousand more votes counted in Ohio this time, or Florida the last time, and this thread wouldn’t exist. Florida last time? Yes. Ohio this time? Bush won Ohio by over 118,000 votes in 2004. That’s hardly “a couple thousand.” ---
**Author:** ![Khadaji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/79 "2005-10-03T21:38:20Z")
> [@HPL](#): > > I’ll second this. In 2004, I didn’t vote for Bush because I was unhappy many things about him. However, I didn’t vote for Kerry either. Why? Because he gave me no reason to. Yes, I realize Bush sucks. What are you going to do differently? I never really got an answer to that question. He never gave me a reason to vote for him, and that’s why he didn’t get my vote. That is very close to how I feel as well. I was very discouraged with the war from the beginning and did not vote for Bush. Nor did I vote for Kerry for the reasons you stated. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2005, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299/80 "2005-10-04T12:55:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Bush won Ohio by over 118,000 votes in 2004. As far as you know. > [@](#): > > That’s hardly “a couple thousand.” That’s hardly a substantive rebuttal. Care to address the actual topic of the thread instead? **marley23** , oddly, the Enlightened Master has apparently never discussed the alleged graveyard voters in his own city. But here is a good summary anyway. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-democratic-party/324299.md?page=5)