Democratic Senator to Support Bush in 2004!

[STING2]

His name is Zell Miller. He is one of the Democratic Senators from the State of Georgia. He believes George Bush is the right man for the job and likes what he has done on Foreign Policy and Defense. He is disappointed with the Democratic Presidential Candidates and feels they have drifted to the far left and are attempting to appeal the most extreme liberal groups.

He says Bush is on the right track, the economy will turn around in 2004, and while it is difficult to predict what will happen in the war on terror and what is happening in Iraq, the country is better off with Bush in office because he is a leader than can make decisions and act.


I must say, I think this is the first I have ever seen a member of any party come out a full year before the election to say they would be supporting a member of the opposing party for President. Plus he is not just some 2 year flash in the pan congressman, but a long serving US Senator. Very interesting indeed.

 

[bonoman]

I love how you say Bush can make decisions and act on them. But fail to relize that making decision and acting on them is only half the problem. They have to be the correct decisions! You obviously think the decisions were right. Some might disagree.

And if this congressman had a brain he might consider waiting the next say 6 months till he made his 'decision'. He might have more info to go on at that point. Alot can happen in 6 months and this guy might be looking like a complete idiot if something within the Bush admin goes wrong (but what else can go wrong!)

 

[melon]

Haha..."Zell Miller." How did I guess?

He is as much a Republican as Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) are Democrats. I take whatever Sen. Miller says with a grain of salt.

Melon

 

[verte76]

I don't take Zell Miller very seriously as a Democrat, and I expect him to change parties within the year. Partisan stuff is very different in the South, where our states were one-party states until the '80's and you had to be a Democrat just to get elected. There is alot of this "one-party" state mentality left in the area. The Dixiecrats were Democrats. There's still alot of that residue in the area's politics. That's where Zell Miller comes from. Although our elections in Birmingham are non-partisan the we're putting up as mayor is a Democrat, and I didn't vote for the crud. I really dislike *alot* of Southern Democrats; hell sometimes the Republicans are more progressive. I prefer guys like Frist or McCain, who at least don't play games as to where they're coming from. I don't like this old school Southern duplicity.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

 

[STING2]

bonoman,

"I love how you say Bush can make decisions and act on them."

I was quoting what Zen Miller said.

"And if this congressman had a brain he might consider waiting the next say 6 months till he made his 'decision'."

The Senator does have a brain and can obviously change his mind like we all can. He has a number of reasons for voting for Bush rather than the Democratic Candidates. People here at interference and elsewhere have already come out and said they will be supporting or not supporting various candidates. Of course everyone reserves the right to change their mind all the way up to election day. Giving one's support to a candidate at this point is not an indication that one does not have a brain.

 

[Salome]

it is indeed a strange thing to do for a politician though

 

[verte76]

It's not *as* strange for a Southern Democrat, Salome. This doesn't surprise me. The South is conservative, but alot of our politicians are Democrats, even though we vote Republican in Presidential campaigns. Most of these "Democrats" vote Republican in presidential campaigns. Why are they still Democrats? Tradition. Tradition dies hard around here. Up until the '80's or '90's you still had to be a Democrat to get elected to state office. Out in the rural parts in particular there's still alot of that mentality. It goes back to the Civil War when the Democratic party was the party of secession and the Confederacy. I'm not saying these guys are necessarily neo-Confederates or Dixiecrats. But it's part of their conservativism.

 

[verte76]

I love how you say Bush can make decisions and act on them. But fail to relize that making decision and acting on them is only half the problem. They have to be the correct decisions! You obviously think the decisions were right. Some might disagree.

And if this congressman had a brain he might consider waiting the next say 6 months till he made his 'decision'. He might have more info to go on at that point. Alot can happen in 6 months and this guy might be looking like a complete idiot if something within the Bush admin goes wrong (but what else can go wrong!)

Miller is not stupid. He's just conservative, like many other Southern Democrats. He strongly supported Bush in Iraq and still does. There is always at least one big shot Southern Democrat who supports the Republican nominee. In the past, not surprisingly some of them have ended up switching parties. Now that it's no longer obligatory to be a Democrat to win a statewide election this has been going on quite a bit. I'm glad Southerners no longer have to be Democrats to win elections. This is a fossilized Dixiecrat notion, and a terribly undemocratic one at that. It will be another generation before this partisan repression is completely out of our system. It's weakened but by no means dead.

 

[bonoman]

But this man said in an interview i seen the other day that he will not become a republican. He said he lived in the democrates house so long there no point in changing. He pretty much said that he's a republican but is to stubborn to move out of the democrate house.

So really doesnt this just make this thread pointless from a 'Democrate votes for Bush' perspective. He's as much a republican as Bush is.

 

[STING2]

People in the Independent party's think all Democrats are closet Republicans.

 

[verte76]

But this man said in an interview i seen the other day that he will not become a republican. He said he lived in the democrates house so long there no point in changing. He pretty much said that he's a republican but is to stubborn to move out of the democrate house.

So really doesnt this just make this thread pointless from a 'Democrate votes for Bush' perspective. He's as much a republican as Bush is.

Pretty much so, yes. Take a look at his voting record. It's no different from Bill Frist's. Actually, Miller is a heck of alot like my current Republican governor, idea-wise. His terms as governor of Georgia were very similar although he was more successful with the voters--a smarter politician. The difference between Southern Democrats and Republicans is pretty damn blurred. This is very much a "contextural" situation.

 

[verte76]

People in the Independent party's think all Democrats are closet Republicans.

Sting, is there actually an Independent Party? I'm not familiar with it. I'd love to see them try to prove that Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich are closet Republicans. As an officially *independent* voter, I find the idea of an "Independent Party" to be an oxymoron.

 

[verte76]

There's not a national Independent Party in the U.S. There is an American Independent Party, an Independent American Party, and even a Southern Independence Party, based in Tennessee. These groups all favor a total ban on abortion, want to abolish the IRS, and not surprisingly the SIP loves the Confederate flag and blasts Howard Dean as "the dumbest politician in the U.S."
I'm not voting for these guys.

 

[STING2]

Well, I really meant those groups that do not consider themselves to be Democrat or Republican. Many of them believe the USA really has a 1 party system rather than a two party system.

 

[melon]

Well, I really meant those groups that do not consider themselves to be Democrat or Republican. Many of them believe the USA really has a 1 party system rather than a two party system.

Many people are stupid too.



Melon

 

[verte76]

Well, I really meant those groups that do not consider themselves to be Democrat or Republican. Many of them believe the USA really has a 1 party system rather than a two party system.

I know. Socialists lump them all together as "capitalists".

 

[bonoman]

You do have one party. They are all conservative to a certain degree. Democrats (most) are conservative but have little liberal thinking. While Republican are very conservative.

But really all they do is take pot shots at eachother on minor issues. Its actually quite funny from an outsiders perspective to watch shows like crossfire, and to watch people within FYM.

 

[BVS]

I'm glad we can entertain.

 

[bonoman]

And entertain you do!

 

[verte76]

You do have one party. They are all conservative to a certain degree. Democrats (most) are conservative but have little liberal thinking. While Republican are very conservative.

But really all they do is take pot shots at eachother on minor issues. Its actually quite funny from an outsiders perspective to watch shows like crossfire, and to watch people within FYM.

You're right. We don't have an equivalent of the Social Democrat/Labour Parties of Europe. It's more like we have two branches of the Tories/Christian Democrats. European politics has much more of a difference than we have between our Democrats and Republicans, particularly the "moderate" wing of the Democratic Party and the "moderate" wing of the Republican Party. Our general elections are between moderate conservatives and gung-ho conservatives. I think this may be one reason why more people don't vote. Perhaps our politics is too much image and too little substance.

 

[Sherry Darling]

Perhaps our politics is too much image and too little substance.

SD

 

[verte76]

Yeah, sometimes I think our politicians are basically celebrities, for the most part. People raise a stink about Hollywood people and other performers doing politics. But are our political figures that different from the professional performers? I really don't know.

 

[BVS]

Yeah, sometimes I think our politicians are basically celebrities, for the most part. People raise a stink about Hollywood people and other performers doing politics. But are our political figures that different from the professional performers?

I think you're right. This is why I get so pissed off when people say, "leave the politics to the politicians", and right off anyone really trying to get something done.

Politicians for the most part are worthless but necessary evils.

 

[meegannie]

It's not *as* strange for a Southern Democrat, Salome. This doesn't surprise me. The South is conservative, but alot of our politicians are Democrats, even though we vote Republican in Presidential campaigns. Most of these "Democrats" vote Republican in presidential campaigns. Why are they still Democrats? Tradition. Tradition dies hard around here. Up until the '80's or '90's you still had to be a Democrat to get elected to state office. Out in the rural parts in particular there's still alot of that mentality. It goes back to the Civil War when the Democratic party was the party of secession and the Confederacy. I'm not saying these guys are necessarily neo-Confederates or Dixiecrats. But it's part of their conservativism.

It's the same in Kentucky. Both Senators are Republican and five of the six Representatives are (and the one Democrat is a Blue Dog), but it hasn't been until very recently that Republicans have been elected on the state/local level. I've known a lot of "Democrats" who are more conservative than most Republicans I've known.

 

[verte76]

It's the same in Kentucky. Both Senators are Republican and five of the six Representatives are (and the one Democrat is a Blue Dog), but it hasn't been until very recently that Republicans have been elected on the state/local level. I've known a lot of "Democrats" who are more conservative than most Republicans I've known.

We call them "yellow dogs" here. Same thing, different color.