I'm repulsed to say: we need more conservative Democrats

[Eagle_Eye]

She definitely has a couple talents: Derailing discussions and de-balling men and adding them to her Toxic Stable of Geldings. So far she's got Katrina, Angry Bird, GBA, and RB for riding on the weekends. Here they are now!

View attachment 5274

Gee after being on your side for awhile your minions have switched from liking girls to liking guys. WOW!

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

I said he sounds like one. To suggest we need more conservative dems in the party, is absurd.
Besides that, I don't go by what a poster says about another poster, I go by how they post. On the other board, everyone told me anatta (noise) wasn't a racist.........but look at him now. Full fledge right wing nut job racist.

Yeah, nothing like the #TakeAKnee thing to flush them out of the linen closet, eh? Anatta and Noise are the same person?

I'm new here, don't know all the socks yet. :~)

 

[TOP]

Poor Mason...no support against his filthy accusations.... where are all the "feminists" when they are needed...calling out against all those nasty lies against women posting here? I'm just shocked...

 

[Cypress]

Yea...I'm having trouble getting on board with the OP on this one. Basically, he's saying that all politicians should simply say anything they have to in order to be elected. In essence, Democrats should take a page from Republicans.

Those who believe in progressive values in this country far outnumber those who do not. The issue is getting key demographics to vote, despite the hurdles put in place by Red State governors.

Republicans tend to get the moneyed interests. What they got this time, are those who are referenced in the OP, or as Obama correctly stated....those who 'cling to (the issues of) guns and religion.

This election was an anomaly. It will never happen again. The problem is that there is going to be a lot of damage done by this group of animals. Sadly, the only way to slow the damage is to revert back to the Republican idea of 'second amendment solutions'.

If this agenda keeps up, we're going to see a '60s type rebellion, and it won't be pretty. Scalise was just the beginning.

Well, the OP has made it clear that my opinion is worthless, so it would be my pleasure to discuss this with you.
I like all the points you made.

I actually think the Democratic Party would lose more votes than it gained by trying to be faux macho on guns, and lecturing gays that they can't marry.

Minorities, people of color, women (especially single women), and gays are the backbone of the Democratic party. What the fuck is there to gain by insulting them by adopting a faux macho gun fetish, fetishizing redneck values, and telling gay people to fuck off?

The perception that the GOP is crushing the Democratic party at the ballot box is nothing more than recycled horseshit. Gerrymandering, voter suppression, the Electoral College, and the disproportionate power and emphasis given to sparsely populated state are the reasons - and the only reasons - the Republican Party manages to ensconce itself into undeserved power.

It is exactly why you see so many Trumpettes claim that the United States is not a democracy.
They FEAR democracy.

I don't. I have never been afraid that liberal values, progressive economics are not persuasive on their own merit--- that over the long arc of history, these liberal values will always prevail; that in a free and fair, open democratic process the values of liberalism will always prevail over the values of the reactionary rightwing.

The fact that the rightwing hates democracy, hates the popular vote, and ever seeks to make it more of a hassle to vote, tells one all they need to know about the lack of confidence the right has in persuading people of the virtue of their crap ideas.

 

[Mason Michaels]

The Democrats need to return to there roots,representing working people,instead of fringe groups.
Republicans have lost their souls.
To a Flim Flam man

 

[TTQ64]

Well, the OP has made it clear that my opinion is worthless, so it would be my pleasure to discuss this with you.
I like all the points you made.

I actually think the Democratic Party would lose more votes than it gained by trying to be faux macho on guns, and lecturing gays that they can't marry.

Minorities, people of color, women (especially single women), and gays are the backbone of the Democratic party. What the fuck is there to gain by insulting them by adopting a faux macho gun fetish, fetishizing redneck values, and telling gay people to fuck off?

The perception that the GOP is crushing the Democratic party at the ballot box is nothing more than recycled horseshit. Gerrymandering, voter suppression, the Electoral College, and the disproportionate power and emphasis given to sparsely populated state are the reasons - and the only reasons - the Republican Party manages to ensconce itself into undeserved power.

It is exactly why you see so many Trumpettes claim that the United States is not a democracy.
They FEAR democracy.

I don't. I have never been afraid that liberal values, progressive economics are not persuasive on their own merit--- that over the long arc of history, these liberal values will always prevail; that in a free and fair, open democratic process the values of liberalism will always prevail over the values of the reactionary rightwing.

The fact that the rightwing hates democracy, hates the popular vote, and ever seeks to make it more of a hassle to vote, tells one all they need to know about the lack of confidence the right has in persuading people of the virtue of their crap ideas.

Once again, you win the internet today.

STANDING OVATION!

 

[TTQ64]

Yeah, nothing like the #TakeAKnee thing to flush them out of the linen closet, eh? Anatta and Noise are the same person?

I'm new here, don't know all the socks yet. :~)

Yes, they are the same person.

He changed his name to have someone agree with his racist stance. LOL

 

[Craig234]

Garbage? You want social conservative dems in the dem party. They will vote against social issues, but not economic ones? That's silly.[/qquote]

No, it's not. You simply, as I said over and over, don't understand the difference between the plutocracy agenda and the social conservative agenda.

We have social conservative dems in office right now, it's why we don't have single payer or a public option on healthcare.

You're repeating yourself and are wrong again. Democrats who voted against healthcare are corporatist, not social conservatives. I see you are just going going to get the difference.

Blue dog dems have been around for ever. They vote for stop and frisk, tough on crime and against gay marriage. Those things target minorities. So yea, it throws my people under the bus.

No, it doesn't. You're repeating yourself again. This is so hard for you. If you can elect a Democrat who DOESN'T do those things, do it. If you elect a Republican who DOES those things, you haven't protected 'your people'.

You keep overlooking the fact the racist right cheats to get where they are. That is the main problem.

I didn't overlook anything. You are simply incapable of reading simple words. That is it own issue - fight it. It's not most or all of why they win; it is one big part.

You sound just like the racist right. Lets vote for a pedophile because we need his vote in the senate.

You are one sentence from going on ignore.

If YOU had the choice between a progressive who did what Roy Moore did, and a Republican who would do all the harm they do, which would you choose?

 

[Craig234]

Once again, you win the internet today.

STANDING OVATION!

Once again, you show you lack any reading comprehension.

I didn't say a word about "The Democratic Party" changing its policy on anything. I talked about how it should win some of the races it's losing.

 

[Craig234]

The Democrats need to return to there roots,representing working people,instead of fringe groups.
Republicans have lost their souls.
To a Flim Flam man

Yes, they do.

What you miss is that VOTERS need to vote for the right things, and until they do, Democrats need to win elections anyway.

 

[Craig234]

Well, the OP has made it clear that my opinion is worthless

Play the victim.

I actually think the Democratic Party would lose more votes than it gained by trying to be faux macho on guns, and lecturing gays that they can't marry.

Like tt, you are lacking reading comprehension. I didn't say one word about "the Democratic Party" doing those things. I said the party should NOT do them and elect people who don't do them whenever it can.

I'm talking about races where it can't. Where the voters demand something else. Your answer is, give all those races to Republicans and let them keep majorities in al branches. I disagree.

Minorities, people of color, women (especially single women), and gays are the backbone of the Democratic party.

You're right. So how does it help them to ELECT REPUBLICANS as you want to?

What the fuck is there to gain by insulting them by adopting a faux macho gun fetish, fetishizing redneck values, and telling gay people to fuck off?

What there is to gain is that in those districts that ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR THOSE THINGS NO MATTER WHAT, it's better for the party who is AGAINST those things to be strengthened than the Republican Party who is FOR them. For plutocracy to be weakened instead of strengthened.

Listen, can you understand one simple statement?

Our democracy is threatened by allowing wealthy interests to take it over, and a big part of that are the Republican appointees to the Supreme Court whose main job is to wrongly interpret the constitution to allow that. If you want the people to win elections, if you want those groups protected, you need to stop allowing Republicans who are destroying democracy to put their people on the Supreme Court (and approving them as they now have 52 Senators), and givign all the money in the country to a few people.

Of course this message is too late now because they've ALREADY DONE IT and control the Supreme Court for years to come at least.

Political power comes with economic power. Martin Luther King understood that as he fought for economic justice along with equal rights.

The perception that the GOP is crushing the Democratic party at the ballot box is nothing more than recycled horseshit. Gerrymandering, voter suppression, the Electoral College, and the disproportionate power and emphasis given to sparsely populated state are the reasons - and the only reasons - the Republican Party manages to ensconce itself into undeserved power.

Stop misrepresenting what I said. trump lost the popular vote. Republicans have lost the popular vote for the House yet controlled it. Those are their own problem.s

I'm not talking about those issues. I'm talking about how Republicans are able to win elections by only caring about one issue, plutocracy, and pandering to voters on any other issues they want, while Democrats refuse to give bad voters anything they want, and
lose the elections, creating the disaster we have now where Republicans control the Supreme Court, came within one vote of repealing the ACA, and are about to pass a plutocracy bill redistributing $6 trillion to the rich.

I don't. I have never been afraid that liberal values, progressive economics are not persuasive on their own merit--- that over the long arc of history, these liberal values will always prevail; that in a free and fair, open democratic process the values of liberalism will always prevail over the values of the reactionary rightwing.

The fact that the rightwing hates democracy, hates the popular vote, and ever seeks to make it more of a hassle to vote, tells one all they need to know about the lack of confidence the right has in persuading people of the virtue of their crap ideas.

Ya, you can sleep well at night scolding them and having no power while they destroy the country. Fight for those things - but try to win an election once in a while in the meantime.

 

[Craig234]

Last thing Democrats need is Blue Dogs.

Ya, because you prefer Republicans. I don't want a single blue dog in office if we can elect a progressive. But I want a blue dog who will oppose the plutocrat agenda in EVERY office the alternative is a Republican.

 

[Craig234]

The Democrats are their own worse enemies.

No, actually, the Republicans are a worse enemy for them.

 

[Althea]

Yes, they do.

What you miss is that VOTERS need to vote for the right things, and until they do, Democrats need to win elections anyway.

I'm still having trouble with your idea. It might get some disenfranchised fence sitting Republicans to vote Dem, but it does nothing to correct the problem that Dems now have. Key Dem demographics...youth/minority/blue collar tend to get complacent unless they are truly inspired to vote. Contrast that with the Nazi/wealthy/uneducated class who all have a vibrant desire to change society as it now exists, or simply line their pockets ever further.

The Dem message, albeit watered down by Clinton (because she thought the election was a lock) is valid. I think the problem in this last election was that Sanders touched a large part of the Obama coalition, and they decided to teach the DNC a lesson.

We'll see what happens in the mid terms. By all accounts, the Dems are much more vulnerable than Reps, due only to the number of seats up for grabs. We're going see if those who chose to stay home last year, regret the results.

 

[Althea]

.

I'm talking about races where it can't. Where the voters demand something else. Your answer is, give all those races to Republicans and let them keep majorities in al branches. I disagree.



CT REPUBLICANS as you want to?



What there is to gain is that in those districts that ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR THOSE THINGS NO MATTER WHAT, it's better for the party who is AGAINST those things to be strengthened than the Republican Party who is FOR them. For plutocracy to be weakened instead of strengthened.

.

Please clarify. You are suggesting that Dem candidates in these areas just lie? If not, you need them to gain a segment of Republicans, and all the Dems. What happens if you simply distance yourself from all Dems in the region?

If the candidates you suggest aren't lying, then what happens if they do get into office? They're actually the Blue Dogs that you don't want.

I think a better idea would be for Dems to covertly run a third party candidate who can steal 1/4 of the Republican voters via the methods you suggest, and let the Dem steal a seat.

 

[Althea]

Well, the OP has made it clear that my opinion is worthless, so it would be my pleasure to discuss this with you.
I like all the points you made.

He's a little rough around the edges, for sure.

I actually think the Democratic Party would lose more votes than it gained by trying to be faux macho on guns, and lecturing gays that they can't marry.

Minorities, people of color, women (especially single women), and gays are the backbone of the Democratic party. What the fuck is there to gain by insulting them by adopting a faux macho gun fetish, fetishizing redneck values, and telling gay people to fuck off?

I had trouble following along with the concept, but he seems to call for a localized gimmick aimed at seats that are historically out of reach. I see a number of problems with that idea. I live in a Red region of a true Blue state. I don't see the idiots I walk among, falling for a scheme like this...mainly because they would NEVER vote for anyone with a D before their name.

The perception that the GOP is crushing the Democratic party at the ballot box is nothing more than recycled horseshit. Gerrymandering, voter suppression, the Electoral College, and the disproportionate power and emphasis given to sparsely populated state are the reasons - and the only reasons - the Republican Party manages to ensconce itself into undeserved power.

It is exactly why you see so many Trumpettes claim that the United States is not a democracy.
They FEAR democracy.

And they use fear to incite the under educated to vote. GOP ideology is a clear minority in this country.

I don't. I have never been afraid that liberal values, progressive economics are not persuasive on their own merit--- that over the long arc of history, these liberal values will always prevail; that in a free and fair, open democratic process the values of liberalism will always prevail over the values of the reactionary rightwing.

The fact that the rightwing hates democracy, hates the popular vote, and ever seeks to make it more of a hassle to vote, tells one all they need to know about the lack of confidence the right has in persuading people of the virtue of their crap ideas.

Again...this election should not be viewed as something that will ever happen again. In fact, this administration will guarantee that it never happens.

This can all be traced back to Clinton being vulnerable to empty propaganda, the perception that Sanders got screwed, and a large swath of Independents who simply got turned off by the Jerry Springer atmosphere.

 

[TTQ64]

Garbage? You want social conservative dems in the dem party. They will vote against social issues, but not economic ones? That's silly.[/qquote]

No, it's not. You simply, as I said over and over, don't understand the difference between the plutocracy agenda and the social conservative agenda.



You're repeating yourself and are wrong again. Democrats who voted against healthcare are corporatist, not social conservatives. I see you are just going going to get the difference.



No, it doesn't. You're repeating yourself again. This is so hard for you. If you can elect a Democrat who DOESN'T do those things, do it. If you elect a Republican who DOES those things, you haven't protected 'your people'.



I didn't overlook anything. You are simply incapable of reading simple words. That is it own issue - fight it. It's not most or all of why they win; it is one big part.



You are one sentence from going on ignore.

If YOU had the choice between a progressive who did what Roy Moore did, and a Republican who would do all the harm they do, which would you choose?

You must think I care if you put me on ignore. Newsflash, I don't.

Bottom line, 1 million more dems voted correctly in this election. As far as red state voters, they will never vote for a dem even if the dem supported their racist social issues.

The only reason they win in the red states is by cheating. Gerrymandering, voter suppression, the EC and fear. Take away those things and perhaps a dem could take that seat. Look how close those races are.

Your are doing exactly what they want. Stack the dems with republican light politicians so the racist republicans can have their racist views pushed through. They don't have enough voters to win and election for dog catcher without cheating, and you fall for it thinking its the dem politican who needs to change.

Here's the thing, dems have morals. They get rid of their pedophiles so I wouldn't have to make that choice. We would never nominate a progressive pedophile so your theory is moot.

You want to win in red states...........stop the corruption and we will win.

The dems

 

[TTQ64]

Once again, you show you lack any reading comprehension.

I didn't say a word about "The Democratic Party" changing its policy on anything. I talked about how it should win some of the races it's losing.

It's losing in red states that cheat. Get rid of the cheating and we win without throwing Blacks, minorities and gays under the bus.

 

[TTQ64]

Yes, they do.

What you miss is that VOTERS need to vote for the right things, and until they do, Democrats need to win elections anyway.

Racist voters in the south will never vote for dems. NO sense in going after them. President Obama didn't go after them and he won. However, we can go after the cheaters in red states so that we can have fair and balanced elections.

Until that happens dems will never win in red states.

 

[Canceled.2018.1]

We need less extremists on either side, and should hope for more people who are capable and willing to sit down and talk...calmly and factually.