Frist: Democrats are against people of faith

[Chmee]

After the election, George W. Bush had to give them back.

I'm suprised John McCain can walk after the 2004 election bendover he took. After the 2000 Primaries, he had as much reason as any democrat to strongly dislike the Bush Administration, yet they let him be one of their token moderate posterboys. I think he took a huge hit in his integrity, because at a certain point being the "good soldier" just translates to "political bitch".

More and more, I see McCain as Senator Kinsey from SG-1 ... his carefully crafted public persona seems to have little or nothing to do with his policy stances, and his last-minute embrace of Bush smells highly of backroom dealing .... I don't know what he was promised, and frankly I hope I never have to find out.

[Jalinth]

More and more, I see McCain as Senator Kinsey from SG-1 ... his carefully crafted public persona seems to have little or nothing to do with his policy stances, and his last-minute embrace of Bush smells highly of backroom dealing .... I don't know what he was promised, and frankly I hope I never have to find out.

I would have thought McCaub's back would still sting from how often Bush backstabbed him (remotely and unattributably of course) during the 2000 primaries. Karl Rove is apparently very, very good at political machinations - and pretty much proved by the last 2 elections.

[Morilore]

You mean like the Republicans collapsed when the Democrats held power?

Oh, wait. They didn't. This is yet another iteration of stupid bullshit by scaremongers.

Ah, but the scenario I had in mind involved Democratic voters being bled into a more moderate/liberal nominally Republican splinter group, not "t3h fund13s 34t 4m3r1c4." Essentialy liberal politicians end up running as Republicans, because that would be the best way for them to get elected, then break the party apart from within.

[Durandal]

After the election, George W. Bush had to give them back.

I'm suprised John McCain can walk after the 2004 election bendover he took. After the 2000 Primaries, he had as much reason as any democrat to strongly dislike the Bush Administration, yet they let him be one of their token moderate posterboys. I think he took a huge hit in his integrity, because at a certain point being the "good soldier" just translates to "political bitch".

He was thinking ahead. Had he not backed Bush, any bills he wanted to introduce would've been tabled by the Republican-controlled Congress. Ultimately, he can do a lot more good as a respected, moderate senator than an ineffectual senator who's been alienated by his party.

[RedImperator]

Assuming for a moment the Democrats did collapse, the Republicans would probably split within one election cycle, with the Christians breaking away once the businessmen stopped paying any attention to them. The Christians would then ally with the working class/union vote--"Christian morals, Christian charity"--and maybe even some of the environmental vote. The leaves the business wing and the remaining social liberals to try to hammer out some arrangement.

[SirNitram]

Assuming for a moment the Democrats did collapse, the Republicans would probably split within one election cycle, with the Christians breaking away once the businessmen stopped paying any attention to them. The Christians would then ally with the working class/union vote--"Christian morals, Christian charity"--and maybe even some of the environmental vote. The leaves the business wing and the remaining social liberals to try to hammer out some arrangement.

But why, then, would the democrats stay disbanded? The opposition is now split and no longer a majority of the voting populace. This scenario depends on there being large gulfs in the numbers when it's closer to 3-4%. Unless we're imagining the business wing is only a few percent, which is a rather disturbing thought.

[RedImperator]

Assuming for a moment the Democrats did collapse, the Republicans would probably split within one election cycle, with the Christians breaking away once the businessmen stopped paying any attention to them. The Christians would then ally with the working class/union vote--"Christian morals, Christian charity"--and maybe even some of the environmental vote. The leaves the business wing and the remaining social liberals to try to hammer out some arrangement.

But why, then, would the democrats stay disbanded? The opposition is now split and no longer a majority of the voting populace. This scenario depends on there being large gulfs in the numbers when it's closer to 3-4%. Unless we're imagining the business wing is only a few percent, which is a rather disturbing thought.

The business wing is numerically not very large, though you can count among its numbers virtually all the small business owners in America. It's disproportionately powerful because of how much money it has.

At any rate, a party that appealed to the economic interests as well as the "moral values" of the working and lower middle class would almost certainly have a comfortable majority. For Joe Sixpack, a vote for Democrats is a vote for a higher minimum wage, universal health care, Federal aid to put his kids through college, and the like. It's not for gay marriage and secularism. If a party is promising to look out for the working man AND keep the fairys in their place, I don't see why it WOULDN'T have a majority.

[Tzeentch]

The business wing is numerically not very large, though you can count among its numbers virtually all the small business owners in America. It's disproportionately powerful because of how much money it has.

At any rate, a party that appealed to the economic interests as well as the "moral values" of the working and lower middle class would almost certainly have a comfortable majority. For Joe Sixpack, a vote for Democrats is a vote for a higher minimum wage, universal health care, Federal aid to put his kids through college, and the like. It's not for gay marriage and secularism. If a party is promising to look out for the working man AND keep the fairys in their place, I don't see why it WOULDN'T have a majority.

We did have a Populist party for a while with a similar platform.

[JME2]

More and more, I see McCain as Senator Kinsey from SG-1 ... his carefully crafted public persona seems to have little or nothing to do with his policy stances, and his last-minute embrace of Bush smells highly of backroom dealing .... I don't know what he was promised, and frankly I hope I never have to find out.

Then we should look at video footage of the good senator and see if his glow at all...