Home› A Moving Train

Democratic party is destroying itself

lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
edited March 2008 in A Moving Train
its quite sad to see. everyone wants to blame Hilary, but the hilary backers make a good point....Hilary is/has won the states with the most electoral votes...or by some analysis, better chances to beat mccain based on electoral votes. california, florida, ohio...among others.

obamamanics make a good point as well... more states overall and popular vote.

and not to mention the vicious infighting among supporters. many have vowed not to support the other once the nominee is chosen.

They have pretty much handed this to McCain. but from my point of view, all 3 suck. at least my taxes wont be raised.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • cornnifercornnifer Posts: 2,130
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    its quite sad to see. everyone wants to blame Hilary, but the hilary backers make a good point....Hilary is/has won the states with the most electoral votes...or by some analysis, better chances to beat mccain based on electoral votes. california, florida, ohio...among others.

    obamamanics make a good point as well... more states overall and popular vote.

    and not to mention the vicious infighting among supporters. many have vowed not to support the other once the nominee is chosen.

    They have pretty much handed this to McCain. but from my point of view, all 3 suck. at least my taxes wont be raised.

    Hilary actually has no point. The electoral college plays no role in primary season. Thats first. Secondly its naive to think Obama wouldn't carry those hardcore blue states in a general election, in fact recent polling in Califorinia suggests Obama does BETTER against McCain in California than hillary does.
    Her point is pointless.
    The democratic party is not destroying itself, the clinton machine is doing a number on it though.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • AbuskedtiAbuskedti Posts: 1,917
    he he the party is shit! suicide is an improvement
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    cornnifer wrote:
    Hilary actually has no point. The electoral college plays no role in primary season. Thats first. Secondly its naive to think Obama wouldn't carry those hardcore blue states in a general election, in fact recent polling in Califorinia suggests Obama does BETTER against McCain in California than hillary does.
    Her point is pointless.
    why am I not surprised you feel this way. lets say by some miracle hilary wins the nom. would you vote for her? I didnt think so. guess what guy, many people on the obamamanic side feel the same way.
    cornnifer wrote:
    The democratic party is not destroying itself, the clinton machine is doing a number on it though.
    ok, hilary is destroying the democratic party. regardless of who you blame, its happening.
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    The Democratic party began destroying itself a long time ago when it decided to compete for corporate money to play the game the republicans had been playing. Doing this alienated their main voters...the less fortunate, liberals, other groups on the left, working class, minorities even. These voters feel very much ignored nowadays, apathetic often and not represented. This move by the Democrats was strategic and not without reason but they are not up front about what they're doing. They claim to be for the common person's needs and interests over big business and power but nothing could be further from the truth! So they campaign each election year, smiling in people's faces making all these promises that sounds oh so good but once in office they are ineffectual, spineless, power-hungry and greedy...first and foremost. People complain about the job Democrats do in office waaay more than Republican voters do. I think it's because the Dems want to have their cake and eat it too...they want to be seen as the good guys working hard for the people and at the same time, they're making sure they get their hands on all that special interest money. At least, the Reps seem more up front about what they want to do and are all about....as yucky as that agenda is to me. Their voters know exactly what they are getting. The Dems just come across as liars who are bankrupt in political courage and wolves in sheep's clothing.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    The Democratic party began destroying itself a long time ago when it decided to compete for corporate money to play the game the republicans had been playing. Doing this alienated their main voters...the less fortunate, liberals, other groups on the left, working class, minorities even. These voters feel very much ignored nowadays, apathetic often and not represented. This move by the Democrats was strategic and not without reason but they are not up front about what they're doing. They claim to be for the common person's needs and interests over big business and power but nothing could be further from the truth! So they campaign each election year, smiling in people's faces making all these promises that sounds oh so good but once in office they are ineffectual, spineless, power-hungry and greedy...first and foremost. People complain about the job Democrats do in office waaay more than Republican voters do. I think it's because the Dems want to have their cake and eat it too...they want to be seen as the good guys working hard for the people and at the same time, they're making sure they get their hands on all that special interest money. At least, the Reps seem more up front about what they want to do and are all about....as yucky as that agenda is to me. Their voters know exactly what they are getting. The Dems just come across as liars who are bankrupt in political courage and wolves in sheep's clothing.

    I don't know about all this. :confused:

    the dems were in total control of their own destiny when people starting turning against bush. hell, the won congress back...but now they are weaker then ever.
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I don't know about all this. :confused:

    the dems were in total control of their own destiny when people starting turning against bush. hell, the won congress back...but now they are weaker then ever.


    The only thing that was their saving grace was the fact that Bush was sooo horrible. Anybody but Bush....they'd rally behind Clinton, Rev Wright, the purple teletubby... whoever if they were the Dem candidates going up against Bush and his crap.

    They seem weak now mostly because of how ineffectual they have been. I read somewhere that Congress had a lower approval rating than Bush even!! But make no mistake, they will rally against McCain because he has been deemed(fair or not) McBush...the second coming. The fear machine keeps everybody in their place, supporting the craptastic Dems.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    The only thing that was their saving grace was the fact that Bush was sooo horrible. Anybody but Bush....they'd rally behind Clinton, Rev Wright, the purple teletubby... whoever if they were the Dem candidates going up against Bush and his crap.

    They seem weak now mostly because of how ineffectual they have been. I read somewhere that Congress had a lower approval rating than Bush even!! But make no mistake, they will rally against McCain because he has been deemed(fair or not) McBush...the second coming. The fear machine keeps everybody in their place, supporting the craptastic Dems.

    not so sure about that. take that wacky guy cornifer. think he will vote for hilary if she's nominated?
  • WMAWMA Posts: 175
    Cool, thanks for the concern.

    I think you should spend more energy worrying about the Republican party though, as they seem to be in even worse shape. It looks like many of the ones up for re-election this year are going to lose their seats. It must also be tough that so many of them are in legal trouble, and they pretty much all are against the will of the public this year.

    A bunch of die hard republicans even hate Mccain, going so far as saying they'd rather vote for Hillary than Mccain.

    It is so sad to see.
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    WMA wrote:
    Cool, thanks for the concern.

    I think you should spend more energy worrying about the Republican party though, as they seem to be in even worse shape. It looks like many of the ones up for re-election this year are going to lose their seats. It must also be tough that so many of them are in legal trouble, and they pretty much all are against the will of the public this year.

    A bunch of die hard republicans even hate Mccain, going so far as saying they'd rather vote for Hillary than Mccain.

    It is so sad to see.
    no need to thank me. I'm just stating the obvious. kinda scary but it seems like you actually took personal offense to my post. LOL. this place is too funny. its like a cesspool of the politically insane.

    everything is rosey on the dems side huh? all republicans have to do is sit and basically do nothing while the dems tear themselves up.
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    not so sure about that. take that wacky guy cornifer. think he will vote for hilary if she's nominated?

    I think Cornnifer is too smart to vote for her. He knows very well what's she's all about.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    I think Cornnifer is too smart to vote for her. He knows very well what's she's all about.

    good for him. I think many will follow suit. same goes for the hilary camp people. you admitting this kinda defeats your "dems will unite against mccain" theory. ;)
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    good for him. I think many will follow suit. same goes for the hilary camp people. you admitting this kinda defeats your "dems will unite against mccain" theory. ;)


    But...like WMA said, a lot of reps are not happy with their candidate, especially true 'conservatives'. So perhaps hopefully both parties will start losing voters who are tired of their bullshit and realize the people don't want this war, we don't want to be a country who is seen as a warring empire out to gain power and resources at all costs.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • WMAWMA Posts: 175
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    no need to thank me. I'm just stating the obvious. kinda scary but it seems like you actually took personal offense to my post. LOL. this place is too funny. its like a cesspool of the politically insane.

    everything is rosey on the dems side huh? all republicans have to do is sit and basically do nothing while the dems tear themselves up.

    No offense :)

    I'm just returning some of the concern trolling that you are doing.
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    WMA wrote:
    No offense :)

    I'm just returning some of the concern trolling that you are doing.

    what is concern trolling? :confused:
  • WMAWMA Posts: 175
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    what is concern trolling? :confused:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Concern_troll
    A concern troll is a pseudonym created by a user whose point of view is opposed to the one that the user's sockpuppet claims to hold. The concern troll posts in web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.[10]

    For example, in 2006 a top staffer for then-Congressman Charlie Bass (R-NH) was caught posing as a "concerned" supporter of Bass's opponent, Democrat, Paul Hodes on several liberal New Hampshire blogs, using the pseudonyms "IndieNH" or "IndyNH." "IndyNH" expressed concern that Democrats might just be wasting their time or money on Hodes, because Bass was unbeatable.[11] Bass ended up losing the election.
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    WMA wrote:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Concern_troll

    wow theres a wiki page! cool! so any thoughts on the democratic party tearing itself apart?
  • Androgynous MindAndrogynous Mind Posts: 520
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    its quite sad to see. everyone wants to blame Hilary, but the hilary backers make a good point....Hilary is/has won the states with the most electoral votes...or by some analysis, better chances to beat mccain based on electoral votes. california, florida, ohio...among others.

    obamamanics make a good point as well... more states overall and popular vote.

    and not to mention the vicious infighting among supporters. many have vowed not to support the other once the nominee is chosen.

    They have pretty much handed this to McCain. but from my point of view, all 3 suck. at least my taxes wont be raised.

    Agreed. They both bash each other and say how unqualified each is for the position. And in all reality, they are both correct. Neither is White House material in my opinion.

    They are basically doing the dirty work for the GOP. McCain isn't my favorite either, but he will be in in 2008. The best of the worst I think.
    Oh he fills it up with the love of a girl...
  • WMAWMA Posts: 175
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    wow theres a wiki page! cool! so any thoughts on the democratic party tearing itself apart?

    I'm really more concerned about the Republican party though. There is no way they can win with such a weak candidate.
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    WMA wrote:
    I'm really more concerned about the Republican party though. There is no way they can win with such a weak candidate.

    as a democrat why is this a concern of yours?
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    as a democrat why is this a concern of yours?
    why is it a concern of yours? where do you sit?
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    why is it a concern of yours? where do you sit?

    I never said I was a concerned. I'm simply stating what I see happening. as an american, however, it concerns me to see other fellow americans so divided within one party.
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    wow theres a wiki page! cool! so any thoughts on the democratic party tearing itself apart?
    Do you think that if Hillary spent more time campaigning for what she believes in, instead of hurting the party at any cost, people would not despise her so much?? I didn't just wake up one day and decide that i disliked Hillary. She did a good enough job to convince me i shouldn't vote for her ever, all by herself, by the way she has conducted herself during the campaign.

    Her callous outburst that McCain is a more experienced leader in international affairs and would better handling a crisis than Obama, showed that she no longer cares about America or the American People, just her fight to stay alive in a political campaign she is losing. Her hesitation and vague answer when asked if she believed Obama was a Muslim, just added fire to a rumor the Republicans have been spreading for months. Like c'mon Hillary?? If i wrote down all the reasons i wouldn't vote for her this would become a pretty big post. I could go on and on but i think you get my point.. She seems to have forgotten the big picture. This is about America, not Hillary.
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    Do you think that if Hillary spent more time campaigning for what she believes in, instead of hurting the party at any cost, people would not despise her so much?? I didn't just wake up one day and decide that i disliked Hillary. She did a good enough job to convince me i shouldn't vote for her ever, all by herself, by the way she has conducted herself during the campaign.

    Her callous outburst that McCain is a more experienced leader in international affairs and would better handling a crisis than Obama, showed that she no longer cares about America or the American People, just her fight to stay alive in a political campaign she is losing. Her hesitation and vague answer when asked if she believed Obama was a Muslim, just added fire to a rumor the Republicans have been spreading for months. Like c'mon Hillary?? If i wrote down all the reasons i wouldn't vote for her this would become a pretty big post. I could go on and on but i think you get my point.. She seems to have forgotten the big picture. This is about America, not Hillary.

    thats a fine opinion, I respect that.... but this isn't about which candidate you support or oppose. its about the deep split among democrats.
    in may not be evident on this board but there are millions of people who support hilary as fiercely as some support obama.
  • anothercloneanotherclone Posts: 1,688
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    Hilary is/has won the states with the most electoral votes...or by some analysis, better chances to beat mccain based on electoral votes. california, florida, ohio...among others.

    I mean no disrespect to you. Seriously. It just made me giggle that you mention "by some analysis"...considering that every time I turn around, Hillary has some new sort of map, poll, or convoluted demographic analysis to show how she should or could be the winner, but still comes up short where it matters the most.

    Actual votes and delegates.

    To me, it just seems kind of lame and pathetic for Hillary to talk about how she "could" or "should" win, but still, she isn't actually the one winning.
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    anotherclone wrote:
    I mean no disrespect to you. Seriously. It just made me giggle that you mention "by some analysis"...considering that every time I turn around, Hillary has some new sort of map, poll, or convoluted demographic analysis to show how she should or could be the winner, but still comes up short where it matters the most.

    Actual votes and delegates.

    To me, it just seems kind of lame and pathetic for Hillary to talk about how she "could" or "should" win, but still, she isn't.

    I actually read that from a governor (cant remember which state) who supports her and he made a very good case how hilary has won key states. many of those same people will refuse to vote for obama meaning those states (and electoral votes) could possibly go to mccain. I'll try and find the article.
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    WMA wrote:
    I'm really more concerned about the Republican party though. There is no way they can win with such a weak candidate.

    are you kidding? McCain will eat Hillary for lunch if she's nominated.

    Obama might be trickier ... because he's smooth. But he has soft spots to attack if McCain wants to play hard ball. Isn't he outpolling both democratic candidates right now? Last poll I saw, he was.

    He's not my favorite candidate, but I think he'd be an OK president.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • WMAWMA Posts: 175
    slightofjeff wrote:
    are you kidding? McCain will eat Hillary for lunch if she's nominated.

    Obama might be trickier ... because he's smooth. But he has soft spots to attack if McCain wants to play hard ball. Isn't he outpolling both democratic candidates right now? Last poll I saw, he was.

    He's not my favorite candidate, but I think he'd be an OK president.

    He's been getting a free ride lately with all of the attention on the Dems, but I bet things will catch up with him once the democratic candidate is chosen.

    There has been record turnouts to the primaries for democrats - dwarfing the Republican numbers(while there was still many R candidates), and I find it hard to believe that Clinton/Obama supporters would turn their back on party ideals just because their favorite candidate wasn't chosen.

    I think the polling numbers show the divide between Obama/Clinton supporters at the moment. Some claim that they would choose Mccain over their non-chosen democrat, but I think it more likely they'd either still vote D or at the worst, not vote. Vote opposite your ideals because your first choice isn't in?

    I guess we'll see what happens.
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    WMA wrote:
    He's been getting a free ride lately with all of the attention on the Dems, but I bet things will catch up with him once the democratic candidate is chosen.

    There has been record turnouts to the primaries for democrats - dwarfing the Republican numbers(while there was still many R candidates), and I find it hard to believe that Clinton/Obama supporters would turn their back on party ideals just because their favorite candidate wasn't chosen.

    I think the polling numbers show the divide between Obama/Clinton supporters at the moment. Some claim that they would choose Mccain over their non-chosen democrat, but I think it more likely they'd either still vote D or at the worst, not vote. Vote opposite your ideals because your first choice isn't in?

    I guess we'll see what happens.

    What's their party's ideals again?
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • WMAWMA Posts: 175
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    What's their party's ideals again?

    To prevent the supreme court from becoming overloaded with activist judges? ;)


    I suppose it depends on the individual, and why they choose to be a democrat.

    It looks like it'll be either a democrat or the republican winning, and I gather that you don't like either choice...

    So I'll just leave it there.
  • anothercloneanotherclone Posts: 1,688
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I actually read that from a governor (cant remember which state) who supports her and he made a very good case how hilary has won key states. many of those same people will refuse to vote for obama meaning those states (and electoral votes) could possibly go to mccain. I'll try and find the article.

    Naw. Don't worry about doing that. I've read and heard the same type of analysis from her campaign or supporters.

    Still, it doesn't mean diddly-squat. At this point, it is really a LOT of speculation what would happen in a final. :)
Sign In or Register to comment.