A Better Way

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
cjboog said:
NOT ME! I was pissed off! I liked some things he said, but it is what he didn't say that bothered me. They should absolutely be beating the shit out of bush and the republicans right now, but are too scared. They just can't stand up for themselves!!

Can they? Do the Democrats have a coherent message right now? As angy as you want to get about GWB, a better alternative must be presented - not just a series of complaints.
 
nbcrusader said:


Can they? Do the Democrats have a coherent message right now? As angy as you want to get about GWB, a better alternative must be presented - not just a series of complaints.

I agree. This is what the democrats need to do right away:

1. Propose new economic plan that includes maybe steps toward uiversal health care, rid of tax cuts

2. United stance on Iraq (stay or go?)

3. Attack bush on corruption RELENTLESSLY (CIA leak, Delay, Abramoff, etc.)

4. Attack bush on wiretap and not care what the polls say about the issue

5. Attack bush on torture and detainee treatment

They should stop caving in! They need to come up with some new plans and stand up for them.
 
Because democrats can be labelled as

Socialist weasels weak on economic issues

Flip floppers on Iraq

Oppose giving the government the tools needed to fight terrorism


The one party, one ideology setup is a recipe for disaster.
 
cjboog said:


I agree. This is what the democrats need to do right away:

1. Propose new economic plan that includes maybe steps toward uiversal health care, rid of tax cuts

2. United stance on Iraq (stay or go?)

3. Attack bush on corruption RELENTLESSLY (CIA leak, Delay, Abramoff, etc.)

4. Attack bush on wiretap and not care what the polls say about the issue

5. Attack bush on torture and detainee treatment

They should stop caving in! They need to come up with some new plans and stand up for them.

You've got some good points here, but also some problems.

1. A tough position of Democrats. With deficits, and a desire to increase spending, absent alternatives the default result will be higher taxes. We have no history of growing an economy through higher taxes.

2. Timing on Iraq is one thing. World leader on numerous fronts is another. Perhaps an alternative would be to press the UN harder on expansion of democracies.

3. "Corruption" is a universal political problem. Ending corruption may mean killing off a large part of our current political process.

4. The issue lies in a gray area, fraught with technical language and multidirectional precedents.

5. Not as easy an issue as you might think. The image of "coddling" terrorist suspects must be avoided while establishing base line limitations for behavior. And you also face the problem of "outsourcing" torture to European countries.
 
In my opinon they shouldn't give a damn about what Karl Rove can possibly label them. Guess what the republicans can be labeled right now?

War and Fear Mongers

Corrupt Crooks

Does that stop them from pursing their policy goals? No. Democrats should stop caring about Karl Rove and stand up for themselves. They are not socialists, they are not flip floppers, they are not unpatriotic, but they don't say that. They just cave in whenever republicans present them with a challenge. It's time for them to take some progressive steps in their strategy and put up a legitimate opposition to Bush.
 
cjboog said:
Does that stop them from pursing their policy goals? No. Democrats should stop caring about Karl Rove and stand up for themselves. They are not socialists, they are not flip floppers, they are not unpatriotic, but they don't say that. They just cave in whenever republicans present them with a challenge. It's time for them to take some progressive steps in their strategy and put up a legitimate opposition to Bush.

I'll agree with you that they should stand up for themselves and stop blaming Karl Rove for their failures.
 
nbcrusader said:


You've got some good points here, but also some problems.

1. A tough position of Democrats. With deficits, and a desire to increase spending, absent alternatives the default result will be higher taxes. We have no history of growing an economy through higher taxes.

2. Timing on Iraq is one thing. World leader on numerous fronts is another. Perhaps an alternative would be to press the UN harder on expansion of democracies.

3. "Corruption" is a universal political problem. Ending corruption may mean killing off a large part of our current political process.

4. The issue lies in a gray area, fraught with technical language and multidirectional precedents.

5. Not as easy an issue as you might think. The image of "coddling" terrorist suspects must be avoided while establishing base line limitations for behavior. And you also face the problem of "outsourcing" torture to European countries.

I don't really care about whether or not those stances are "a tough position for democrats". I am so sick of them caring about their image. If they can present any stance and argue it with any merit at all, they will be much more popular. They are beating republicans in the 2006 polls right now w/ no plans, imagine how it would be if they actually had a solid set of policies to campaign on...

Also the corruption thing right now is a republican problem much more than a democratic problem. Mostly republicans are associated w/ Abramoff and the CIA leak and Delay things are also republican problems. There have been no democratic scandals in the last year, it has been all about the repubs.
 
cjboog said:
I don't really care about whether or not those stances are "a tough position for democrats". I am so sick of them caring about their image. If they can present any stance and argue it with any merit at all, they will be much more popular. They are beating republicans in the 2006 polls right now w/ no plans, imagine how it would be if they actually had a solid set of policies to campaign on...

It's not just image. You may have the ideal spending package, but if it costs even more than what we are currently spending, it will just kill the economy.

Many people talk about "universal health care" but few actually articulate (i) what they want covered, and (ii) how much they are willing to spend.

cjboog said:
Also the corruption thing right now is a republican problem much more than a democratic problem. Mostly republicans are associated w/ Abramoff and the CIA leak and Delay things are also republican problems. There have been no democratic scandals in the last year, it has been all about the repubs.

As much as it may seem more like a Republican problem, as soon as you start a partisian march against corruption, you will find Democrat(s) facing ethical questions. Neither side has clean hands, so arguing that the other side is "even dirtier" is not your strongest suit.
 
nbcrusader said:


Many people talk about "universal health care" but few actually articulate (i) what they want covered, and (ii) how much they are willing to spend.


As much as it may seem more like a Republican problem, as soon as you start a partisian march against corruption, you will find Democrat(s) facing ethical questions. Neither side has clean hands, so arguing that the other side is "even dirtier" is not your strongest suit.

Good point about the healthcare thing. Notice that I didn't say they should propose universal healthcare, I said they should maybe take steps in that direction. I don't really know all the specifics but I know that the cost of healthcare is a HUGE problem and some 45 million people are not covered. I have also read that universal healthcare is overall cheaper and everyone is covered. I am not an expert and certainly don't know the specifics, but that seems like it takes care of the 2 major problems. I'm not in any position to argue for it, but on face value it seems like a good idea.

About the corruption thing: They don't even have to go after Congress. If they want to avoid the Abramoff thing because there are some democrats involved, they can go after specific republicans (Delay, Ney) and try to tie them to republicans as a whole, or just go after the Administration things like wiretap, and CIA leak. It might even be a better idea to just make general association w/ republicans about corruption. This is a republican dominated Congress and it is tainted with corruption, etc. I just think as a general rule they should stop backing down and put their money where their mouth is.
 
cjboog said:
NOT ME! I was pissed off! I liked some things he said, but it is what he didn't say that bothered me. They should absolutely be beating the shit out of bush and the republicans right now, but are too scared. They just can't stand up for themselves!!

And then there's Howard Dean. He's probably the diametric opposite of Kaine here, but the end result is equally frustrating. Dean picks up on the most hysterical of ideas, and equally ignores issues that are important.

There's a fine line where you're effectively critical of Bush, while also showing that you have a mastery of the issues. Democrats seemingly have a hard time finding it.

Melon
 
Back
Top Bottom