Republican or Democrat?

[monsoon]

Er, no. Bush tried to brand Kerry,who in reality WAS a tax-and-spender, but it didn't work. Stop with this bullcrap, stop attacking the Democrats. If you care about your views you'll try to change the party instead o just complaining.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Didn't work? Hello! Kerry lost the election.

[knuckle50]

Didn't work?  Hello!  Kerry lost the election.   

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

By now I've realized that it's not about being right or correct, it's about winning the argument. If I say the sky is blue you're going to try to convince me it's green and add an to it. you have to make an argument over anything I say.

But use common sense. it was quite clear that the "tax and spend liberal" tag didn't stick, and polls proved it. What stuck was the flip-flopper and weak on national security label. are you capable of being a member of the reality-based community rather than just automatically taking the opposite position as me?

[monsoon]

The only position that I have taken is the one based in facts. And the facts are the Democrats are losing out big time in this country. How many times do I have to say...."The Results Speak for Themselves"?

This has nothing to do with the sky being green. haha

[Spartan]

it was quite clear that the "tax and spend liberal" tag didn't stick, and polls proved it. What stuck was the flip-flopper and weak on national security label. are you capable of being a member of the reality-based community rather than just automatically taking the opposite position as me?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You have a tendancy to make wild accusations with out any back up or proof, which is why you are usually argued against.

This is one situation where I will agree with you. As a right-winger I can say, from how I percieved things, that Kerry wasn't anymore "tax-and-spend" than Bush was "cut-taxes-and-spend." To me what stuck out about Kerry was his lack of ability to say anything definate about where he stood on most of the issues until late in the game, particularly on the ones you mentioned.... and he won 3 purple hearts (apparently). Obviously, as an observer of politics I understand alittle more about what he stood for, but my point is that he didn't make it well known, which probably contributed to his loss.

[monsoon]

A very good article article in the local paper about this subject. (If it asks you to register use BugMeNot - http://www.bugmenot.com )

Basicallly it says that Dean just doesn't get it about the South. Here is what the GOP governer has to say about Dean.....

"Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a former Republican National Committee chairman, had an interesting observation when asked about Dean's new job. Noting that Republicans weren't making a big issue of it, Barbour recalled a phrase attributed to Napoleon: "Never interfere with your enemy while he's in the process of destroying himself."

Democrats still don't get it about the South

[mjcatl2]

"Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a former Republican National Committee chairman, had an interesting observation when asked about Dean's new job. Noting that Republicans weren't making a big issue of it, Barbour recalled a phrase attributed to Napoleon: "Never interfere with your enemy while he's in the process of destroying himself."

Actually that is not true at all, republicans have made a very big deal about Dean and so be it.

Republicans have controlled the South since Johnson and (as Johnson himself said) the Democrats did in fact lose it for a generation, if not longer now. As long Republicans play to the irrationality of gays guns and God, and Southerners buy it, they will continue to control the South. I don't even know any major church that supported the start of the war, but shallow misplaced patriotism prevailed (right along with Civil War pride - kind of ironic). Morality comes up every 4 years, yet true Christian morals of helping the poor, educating your children, and providing healthcare, never seem to be on the radar. As long these issues are ignored (even at Southerners' expense) the South will continue to vote for the R's.

I say this from living in the South for years now by the way, not as an outsider.

[knuckle50]

Partisan Index

Dark blue is for Democrat +7.0 or more, light blue is for Democrat by less than seven, pink is for Republican by less than seven, red is for Republican +7.0 or more:

1976:

1980:

1992:

1996:

2000:

2004:

The South has shifted to become such an ideologically GOP stronghold that the Democrats have ZERO chance of winning there. I think these maps show that.

{edit - added 2004}

[Scott]

I think that Massachusetts should be its own country.

Alot of this country is hostile towards us anyway and we can be the kind of nation that our consciences guide us to being, not the state that the feds and the holy-rollin` flim-flam men that run alot of other states force us to be.

EDIT: We could ban the Republican party all together and nobody could stop us... BWAHAHAHA!!!

[DCjedi7]

dem

[Viper]

I've been tested as a liberal, I consider myself neither, I most recently voted Republican.

This two party system is a complete nonsense. It divides us and causes more stupid accusations, pre-conceived notions and stereotypes than any form of mainstream entertainmnet.

I am me and a Ivote for who I think will do the best, not what platform they run on.

[SOCOM]

This two party system is a complete nonsense.  It divides us and causes more stupid accusations, pre-conceived notions and stereotypes than any form of mainstream entertainmnet.

I am me and a Ivote for who I think will do the best, not what platform they run on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I couldn't agree more. I tend to like the moderates in both parties the best.

[knuckle50]

Any comment on the evidence I posted, monsoon?

[knuckle50]

lol... ok then, the silent treatment it is...

[thedude26]

Democrat

[ironchapman]

This two party system is a complete nonsense.  It divides us and causes more stupid accusations, pre-conceived notions and stereotypes than any form of mainstream entertainmnet.

I am me and a Ivote for who I think will do the best, not what platform they run on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, but that would create a more stagnant form of government. I've heard it said that a party form of government is the sign of a healthy form of government because more than one set of ideals can be implemented or suggested. It's the satire of itself that it has become that should be removed.

[Ruso]

I've been tested as a liberal, I consider myself neither, I most recently voted Republican.

This two party system is a complete nonsense.  It divides us and causes more stupid accusations, pre-conceived notions and stereotypes than any form of mainstream entertainmnet.

I am me and a Ivote for who I think will do the best, not what platform they run on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I completely agree.

[ZachariahDaMan]

I'm a republican

[Viper]

Yes, but that would create a more stagnant form of government. I've heard it said that a party form of government is the sign of a healthy form of government because more than one set of ideals can be implemented or suggested. It's the satire of itself that it has become that should be removed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Without a party system, people would simply vote for the better candidate and not just the platform they run on. There is nothing stagnant about it.

On paper, the 2 party system is ideal but due to human emotion and ignorance, it fails.

The exact same can be said about communism. On paper, it's not a bad system at all, its execuation is horrible and impossible to do properly because we are human.

[monsoon]

I'm a republican

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sorry. Not because you are a republican, but because if that is your only qualification for voting for a candidate, then you have fallen for the game the two parties want you to fall in. You do yourself a disservice when you make a statement "I am Republican" which suggests that you vote on idealogy that is developed by people that you don't elect.

As for that particular choice, I suggest that you look objectively at what this party has done for the USA in the last 10 years.

[Ruso]

I guess you could make a general differentiation among progressive tendencies and conservative tendencies. This comes from the French Rev, when those who wanted changed sat on the left of the congress, (leftists), while those who wanted to maintain the status quo, sat on the right. Progress(liberalism-left), "vrs" conservaturim. Sadly, this term have been confused and malinterpreted, so now a liberal is inmediately considered a democrat, while a leftist is inmediately considered socialist.

I define my beliefs as liberal(open to new ideas), yet I do not belief in any political platform. In certain aspects I have been considered as a conservative.

[DruidCity]

I vote for some of each, and sometimes Third Party.

I tend to prefer smaller government in general (to the point that I have been called "ultra-conservative" by some when discussing national politics, even though I believe both parties are currently geared toward larger government), but I am very willing to be much more "liberal" economically the closer I get to the local level, where I know the people in charge of my money and can see and feel the results.

I vote for Senator Shelby (R-Tuscaloosa) each time he runs, but voted Democrat in Alabama's last governor's race (though really didn't care for either candidate) and in our recent mayoral election.

Tuscaloosa, despite being "rural," majority-white (though with a significant and increasing black population), and at the heart of the Bible Belt, has never had a Republican mayor in the modern era, although our local candidates rarely mention party affiliation during campaigns. I'll also add that our mayor-elect is just 32 years old and ran on a platform of increasing the role of local government, and our retiring mayor of the last 24 years is Catholic.

I think the South Park episode with "giant douche vs turd sandwich" pretty well sums up my feelings about the two national parties and at the state level.

Locally, while I get frustrated sometimes, I generally get along with people from both sides pretty well. Part of it is that a local councilperson makes just $20,000/year, so there aren't as much of the fame, fortune, power, and ego aspects that drive the races in higher levels of government.

[ironchapman]

Without a party system, people would simply vote for the better candidate and not just the platform they run on.  There is nothing stagnant about it. 

On paper, the 2 party system is ideal but due to human emotion and ignorance, it fails.

The exact same can be said about communism.  On paper, it's not a bad system at all, its execuation is horrible and impossible to do properly because we are human.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, that hit me earlier today.

But still then it might could be called the party system because those candidates would have opposing ideas and the followers of Candidate X might consider themselves of Candidate X's "party".

But I callit like I see it. If I like a Democrat more, I'll go for him. If I like a Republican more, then I'll go for him.

[Viper]

I prefer being known as a supporter of candidate X, not a supporter of candidate X's party.

The groups may still be split in two but without a party affiliation to cloud judgement, they'd have no choice but to research the candidates and vote based on their true principles instead just saying, "Oh, I vote 'blah' party." with no consideration for the candidate other than a name and platform.

[SOCOM]

I believe I am the epitome of an independent.

I'm definetly conservative in regards to economics. I favor tax cuts, and little involvement from the government.

However, socially, I'm all over the place. I think how we (as a nation) treated minorities for hundreds of years is disgusting. I'm almost leaning towards some sort of reparations. At the same time, I don't agree with most influencial black leaders today who say that white on black racism is still a huge problem...if anything, I'd say the opposite.

Gay rights is another issue I tend to but heads with when talking to hardcore conservatives. I'm 100% in favor of civil unions and believe all the rights that straight married couples get, should be extended to gay couples.

As far as national security, I'm pretty hawkish. I'm one of those guys that thinks the USA being the one and only superpower is actually a good thing, and that we have a duty to help other nations out. I'm not a fan of the U.N., but I'd also like to see our government exercise some caution before jumping into dangerous conflicts.

The death penalty is something I've been struggling with for a while now. I used to be very much pro death penalty, now I'm probably 50/50 on the issue. It's hard for me to take a strong stand on the death penalty when I know there are some innocent people dying. That said, I do favor the most strict punishments possible (short of the death penalty) for sex offenders, rapists, and murderers.

So that's just a sampling of where I stand on certain issues. Overall, I consider myself an independent with a slight lean to conservatism. A John McCain Republican perhaps.

[Viper]

^Wow, I felt like I was reading something I wrote.