DrTeeth
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
They are bought by different companies.
BTW nice cesspool you?ve just opened...
BTW nice cesspool you?ve just opened...
What's the difference between the Republic and Liberal party in US politics?
- Thread starter DrTeeth
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
pub crawler
New Yorker
Democrats and Republicans, U2girl. Parties from the dinosaur age, largely irrelevant, but good for partisan clashes in Congress, if you're in to that sort of thing.
popkidu2
War Child
people died so that we could have the freedom to get involved in politics. they probably died in your country too at some point. take the time to care, b/c one day it could be gone and you could be ruled by a dictator and then all you're gonna do is wish that you could have a stupid election to follow.
that being said, the most general way i can describe the differences between republicans and democrats is (and i recognize that this is horrible stereotyping):
democrats: big goverment, lots of money spent on public projects like welface, healthcare etc. goverment oversight of business. environment over business. liberal policies in general. strict separation of church and state. smaller millitary.
republicans. small government. control of money left to states. less government oversight of business sector. environment often loses out to business. church and state not so separate. prayer in school, faith based initiatives etc. restrictions on abortion. bigger military. isolationism. conservative policies in general.
the truth is both of those are terrible stereotypes and there are republicans who vote like democrats and democrats who vote like republicans. and there are other political parties, including the Green Party (Ralph Nader), the Reform Party (Jesse Ventura, Ross Perot) and a mileu of another lesser known parties, all known as Independants in the House and Senate. One of the advantages to a two party, and also at the same time a disadvantage, is that coalition goverments do not exist. Good because you don't have these horrible sitations where the coalition falls apart and the goverment collapses, and bad in the sense that party lines are drawn very tightly and animosity and gridlock can be really annoying. Our founders designed our system that way for a very important reason. They didn't want to give anyone the opportunity to have complete power. Gridlock ensures that what policies are crafted are truly a consenses and thus a will of the people.
Enough civics lessons from me. Anyone else want to give this a shot?
that being said, the most general way i can describe the differences between republicans and democrats is (and i recognize that this is horrible stereotyping):
democrats: big goverment, lots of money spent on public projects like welface, healthcare etc. goverment oversight of business. environment over business. liberal policies in general. strict separation of church and state. smaller millitary.
republicans. small government. control of money left to states. less government oversight of business sector. environment often loses out to business. church and state not so separate. prayer in school, faith based initiatives etc. restrictions on abortion. bigger military. isolationism. conservative policies in general.
the truth is both of those are terrible stereotypes and there are republicans who vote like democrats and democrats who vote like republicans. and there are other political parties, including the Green Party (Ralph Nader), the Reform Party (Jesse Ventura, Ross Perot) and a mileu of another lesser known parties, all known as Independants in the House and Senate. One of the advantages to a two party, and also at the same time a disadvantage, is that coalition goverments do not exist. Good because you don't have these horrible sitations where the coalition falls apart and the goverment collapses, and bad in the sense that party lines are drawn very tightly and animosity and gridlock can be really annoying. Our founders designed our system that way for a very important reason. They didn't want to give anyone the opportunity to have complete power. Gridlock ensures that what policies are crafted are truly a consenses and thus a will of the people.
Enough civics lessons from me. Anyone else want to give this a shot?
DoctorGonzo
War Child
There is very little difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. They both push the same legislation and rarely if ever disagree on anything substantial.
Only time they ever really differ is on the issue of abortion. Other than that, the Democrats will try to give a tiny, tiny, tiny bit of help to middle and lower class people, but that is just to maintain their image as the supporters of people who are not rich.
Calling the Democrats liberals is just plain stupid. They are the liberal wing of the Republican party, and are just as conservative and corrupt as the Republicans are. They spend a lot of time convicing people otherwise, but most people fail to look at what the Democrats are really up to.
They both conspire to make sure no third party ever gains popular exposure in the media. They set the rules for public election money and who gets to appear on the debates to ensure that the only people who manage to be real contenders are Democrats and Republicans.
Members of both parties have said that allowing a 3rd party is UnAmerican.
Basically, they are scared shitless of someone like Ralph Nader getting up in front of the TV audience on the televised debate and making everyone painfully aware of how corrupt and ineffective both parties are.
[This message has been edited by DoctorGonzo (edited 12-23-2001).]
Only time they ever really differ is on the issue of abortion. Other than that, the Democrats will try to give a tiny, tiny, tiny bit of help to middle and lower class people, but that is just to maintain their image as the supporters of people who are not rich.
Calling the Democrats liberals is just plain stupid. They are the liberal wing of the Republican party, and are just as conservative and corrupt as the Republicans are. They spend a lot of time convicing people otherwise, but most people fail to look at what the Democrats are really up to.
They both conspire to make sure no third party ever gains popular exposure in the media. They set the rules for public election money and who gets to appear on the debates to ensure that the only people who manage to be real contenders are Democrats and Republicans.
Members of both parties have said that allowing a 3rd party is UnAmerican.
Basically, they are scared shitless of someone like Ralph Nader getting up in front of the TV audience on the televised debate and making everyone painfully aware of how corrupt and ineffective both parties are.
[This message has been edited by DoctorGonzo (edited 12-23-2001).]
I always thought it was interesting Americans only have 2 parties in the senate (right?), and i was always curious what they are about. How do they differ from one another?
ps: i'm not into politics (i never know who to vote for when it comes to parliament elections in our country - i think all parties make promises before the election comes, so i sort of don't know who to choose. and i don't pay much attention to politics in everyday apart from what comes in the newspaper or TV news) or anything, just wondering.
pps: Never mind the typo i the title topic - that's RepubliCAN, not Republic.
------------------
"We feel like this is unfinished business - there's things for us left to do and that's why we still do it." - Larry
"For us, each night on stage has to be like the last night on earth. That's the way our band operates-we can't play the songs unless we're fully into them." - Bono
"The music itself will tell you where to go." - Edge (about recording)
"It's an elevation thing." - Adam (when asked why there's pictures from airport on ATYCLB cover)
[This message has been edited by U2girl (edited 12-23-2001).]
ps: i'm not into politics (i never know who to vote for when it comes to parliament elections in our country - i think all parties make promises before the election comes, so i sort of don't know who to choose. and i don't pay much attention to politics in everyday apart from what comes in the newspaper or TV news) or anything, just wondering.
pps: Never mind the typo i the title topic - that's RepubliCAN, not Republic.
------------------
"We feel like this is unfinished business - there's things for us left to do and that's why we still do it." - Larry
"For us, each night on stage has to be like the last night on earth. That's the way our band operates-we can't play the songs unless we're fully into them." - Bono
"The music itself will tell you where to go." - Edge (about recording)
"It's an elevation thing." - Adam (when asked why there's pictures from airport on ATYCLB cover)
[This message has been edited by U2girl (edited 12-23-2001).]
Ooops! Of course, Democrats, not Liberals.
What's a cesspool Dr Teeth?
Thanks for clearing those things up for me, everyone.
Popkid: true, people have died for my country's freedom in WW II, and in the war against Yugoslavia in 1991.
What i meant was that i don't follow closely to the party programmes, values etc. during the year, and it seems to me like parties in my country bicker among themselves instead of working for the nation's own good. (they do agree on things like EU membership, NATO membership etc.)
There are issues going on (i really don't want to bore anyone with details) that i don't feel connected to, as they were started way before i was even born.
And when the pre-election time comes, everyone is full of promises. All the things the parties are saying make sense to me, so i can't pick.
Spiral_Staircase
War Child
U2girl -
As you can see, the difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is largely an issue of personal opinion. I would say that the vast majority of people in the U.S. (right or wrong) would not agree with Doctor Gonzo's take on it. If you stopped the average person on the street, the most likely reply would sound something like what popkid said.
As you can see, the difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is largely an issue of personal opinion. I would say that the vast majority of people in the U.S. (right or wrong) would not agree with Doctor Gonzo's take on it. If you stopped the average person on the street, the most likely reply would sound something like what popkid said.
Lemonite
I'm a chauvinist leprechaun
True.. I agree with Popkid as well.. Stereotypes afloat...
Democrats.. Want to control the money.. and want to give it to the poor and middle class... A sort of Take from the Innocent and Hard Working rich and give to the poor... and leave very little freedom in the hands of the people
Republicans.. Want people to strive to better themselves, Want people to work to be successful, and will help out those that are truly in need, but leave a lot of freedom in the hands of the people
OP
OP
DrTeeth
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
My guess is that Lemonite votes for the Republicans. Try to be objective if you really want to explain something to an outsider.
Holy John
Acrobat
Hehehe.. so according to Lemonite, the Democrats are the absolute type of the primitive Communists and maybe close friends or were once part of the Soviets, and the Republicans are the absolute freedom, the absolute truth and, would I say.... our messiah, our saviors, our heroes. And the working class is just a pain in the ass.
cheers
------------------
United Nations : www.un.org - UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund) : www.unicef.org
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) : www.unesco.org
?Je suis le dernier homme. Contre tous, je me d?fendrai...?
"I am the last man. Against all, I shall defend myself..."
- 'Rhinoc?ros', Ionesco
!Hasta la victoria, siempre!
"The one who governs with weapons is clearly poor in ideas". - Subcommandante Marcos
On a mis quelqu'un au monde, on devrait peut-?tre l'?couter / we gave birth to someone, maybe we should listen...
cheers
------------------
United Nations : www.un.org - UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund) : www.unicef.org
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) : www.unesco.org
?Je suis le dernier homme. Contre tous, je me d?fendrai...?
"I am the last man. Against all, I shall defend myself..."
- 'Rhinoc?ros', Ionesco
!Hasta la victoria, siempre!
"The one who governs with weapons is clearly poor in ideas". - Subcommandante Marcos
On a mis quelqu'un au monde, on devrait peut-?tre l'?couter / we gave birth to someone, maybe we should listen...
gilmer24
Babyface
I may be new at this, but I don't understand why people are ripping Lemonite when what Doc Gonzo said was a lot more controversial. Though Lemonite seems to favor Republicanism, Doc is seeping Green.
The "ineffectiveness" of these two parties, bipartisanship being a tradition in American Politics, has given Americans the freedom to debate our government, where as in other parts of the world, no such freedom is granted.
Third Parties are rising in membership and popularity, however, due to the process by which people are elected to Congress, beginning with primaries, the system does favor a two-party method.
So if a person wants to change that system, he should get out there and give it all he's got, rather than just vent on Interference.
And I would have a few choice words about Ralph Nader and his party, but in the spirit of the Holiday, I'll abstain.
Merry Christmas to all!
The "ineffectiveness" of these two parties, bipartisanship being a tradition in American Politics, has given Americans the freedom to debate our government, where as in other parts of the world, no such freedom is granted.
Third Parties are rising in membership and popularity, however, due to the process by which people are elected to Congress, beginning with primaries, the system does favor a two-party method.
So if a person wants to change that system, he should get out there and give it all he's got, rather than just vent on Interference.
And I would have a few choice words about Ralph Nader and his party, but in the spirit of the Holiday, I'll abstain.
Merry Christmas to all!
clarityat3am
I Serve Larry's Stick
DoctorGonzo
War Child
Seeping Green?
How 'bout seeping Libertarian?
Or seeping Reform?
All three parties, despite their ideological differences seem to agree on the issue.
Once again I find myself agreeing with DoctorGonzo. The two major political parties are essentially the same, but they find small, insignificant issues to squabble about.
My parents, family and quite a few of my friends agree that the Republicans and Democrats are nothing more than puppets for the upper-class twits and mutli-national corporations that give them money to run their campaigns.
If you want to know the difference between the Independent Parties (Reform, Libertarian, Green, etc) and the Republicrats (a fusion of Democratics and Republicans) you need to look at who donates to each party.
The majority of Americans do not vote, so that means that only 15% consider themselves Democrats and 15% consider themselves Republicans. This leaves about 20% that are moderates that feel compelled to vote either way simply because they don't want to "throw their vote away on a 3rd party". The other 50% have basically given up on the American Political Party and are so overworked in their minimum wage paying jobs that they don't have the strength or obility to organize a powerful alternative to the current state of affairs.
My parents, family and quite a few of my friends agree that the Republicans and Democrats are nothing more than puppets for the upper-class twits and mutli-national corporations that give them money to run their campaigns.
If you want to know the difference between the Independent Parties (Reform, Libertarian, Green, etc) and the Republicrats (a fusion of Democratics and Republicans) you need to look at who donates to each party.
The majority of Americans do not vote, so that means that only 15% consider themselves Democrats and 15% consider themselves Republicans. This leaves about 20% that are moderates that feel compelled to vote either way simply because they don't want to "throw their vote away on a 3rd party". The other 50% have basically given up on the American Political Party and are so overworked in their minimum wage paying jobs that they don't have the strength or obility to organize a powerful alternative to the current state of affairs.
The U.S. has a single-party system. There are 2 factions of that party, which receive money from a slightly different but very much overlapping set of companies - and in fact the differences in this respect are now fairly small. Financially, while it would be very wrong to over-generalize, the Republicans represent the upper class and part of the upper middle-class. The Democrats represent a portion of the upper middle class and most of the middle class.
The poor mostly don't vote and have no voice in the U.S. Despite the incredible economic boom, the poor of America continue to do worse in most indicators of social and economic well-being - health care, infant mortality, educational indicators, you name it. Neither "party" really represents the their interests or those of unified labor (unlike most other democracies).
The poor mostly don't vote and have no voice in the U.S. Despite the incredible economic boom, the poor of America continue to do worse in most indicators of social and economic well-being - health care, infant mortality, educational indicators, you name it. Neither "party" really represents the their interests or those of unified labor (unlike most other democracies).
Lemonite
I'm a chauvinist leprechaun
Ah. My Dearie Holy John.. the question had already been answered, both in a slanted (Gonzo) way and an objective (Popkid) way.. As I stated in my post, 'stereotypes' afloat means that a stereotype is to follow...
Hehehe.. I like it how you will rip me for not being 'objective', when objective answers have already been posted.. yet you take what i said and warp it to become more extreme using swear words.. (Didn't your business ethics professor teach you anything about credibility) That's a healthy way to chide someone for having a bit of enjoyment in a post that is all but done what the initial questioner asked by the time I posted.. I waited for someone to explain it.. then jumped in...
But honestly, how far off am I? or the many many people that make the same sort of generalizations.. What have the democrats done for the poor.. Have the Blacks gotten anywhere better than they were twenty years ago.. seriously.. any ground?.. While at the same time, the Republicans make efforts to help everyone.. it just happens that with equaling up tax rates.. the rich will have to pay significantly less.. but everyone is paying the same 'ratio' of their money.. Hence because of this.. teh Republicans become painted as Monsters.. as they have been called here before..
Hope this helps.. and a bit of objectivity to those who apparently want it. Smile folks..
Sweeping Generalizations Unite
Cheers and Merry Christmas
I am reminded of the saying (rephrased as I cannot recall the ACTUAL saying if it even exists) "Democracy is pain in the a**, but it works better than anything else".
I whole heartedly agree with this. I remember the whole election process we witnessed this last year. In a government without the checks and balances that ours has that could have been a very very bad situation. This country has never had a military coup or take over much less anything nearly as destructive or nightmarish. Whatever side of the fence you land on, or if you land on the fence polotics is something we should care about. We should be educated. I encourage partisianship as people with strong beliefs are active. They may not be the most opened minded but most people in general aren't.
I think an interesting point that was brought up earlier in the thread was the demographics that the parties appeal and campaign too. I think we can credit the renewed awareness of this to Bill Clinton. Rarely does a polotician bring about such passion from people whether it be support or anger. In all reality these are the same emotions, just differently manifested. I also remember seeing a map displaying how the votes in this last presidential election played out. Democratic votes tended to come from very populate urban areas where as Republicans controled most of the land mass, but not a majority of the actual population. This is interesting as it seems that lower class seem to blindly follow the Democratic leadership and vote that ticket while the middle and upper class seem to do exactly the opposite. I think an even interesting study would be to break down Democrats and Republicans into age and gender groups. I would venture to say that many (if not a majority) of single women under 30 tend to believe in things that are part of the Democratic platform. I have seen surveys where that completely shifts when it comes to married women. Is this economcially based? I think it might be. Women are the swing vote in American polotics. Can we say a second term for Clinton? Whoever wants the power needs to appeal to single women in this country. Especially when 80% of people never vote.
I think American polotics is fascinating and an amazing system. That it was dreamed up over 200 years ago from scratch is a mind blow.
------------------
Well the God I believe in isn't short of cash..Mister!
I whole heartedly agree with this. I remember the whole election process we witnessed this last year. In a government without the checks and balances that ours has that could have been a very very bad situation. This country has never had a military coup or take over much less anything nearly as destructive or nightmarish. Whatever side of the fence you land on, or if you land on the fence polotics is something we should care about. We should be educated. I encourage partisianship as people with strong beliefs are active. They may not be the most opened minded but most people in general aren't.
I think an interesting point that was brought up earlier in the thread was the demographics that the parties appeal and campaign too. I think we can credit the renewed awareness of this to Bill Clinton. Rarely does a polotician bring about such passion from people whether it be support or anger. In all reality these are the same emotions, just differently manifested. I also remember seeing a map displaying how the votes in this last presidential election played out. Democratic votes tended to come from very populate urban areas where as Republicans controled most of the land mass, but not a majority of the actual population. This is interesting as it seems that lower class seem to blindly follow the Democratic leadership and vote that ticket while the middle and upper class seem to do exactly the opposite. I think an even interesting study would be to break down Democrats and Republicans into age and gender groups. I would venture to say that many (if not a majority) of single women under 30 tend to believe in things that are part of the Democratic platform. I have seen surveys where that completely shifts when it comes to married women. Is this economcially based? I think it might be. Women are the swing vote in American polotics. Can we say a second term for Clinton? Whoever wants the power needs to appeal to single women in this country. Especially when 80% of people never vote.
I think American polotics is fascinating and an amazing system. That it was dreamed up over 200 years ago from scratch is a mind blow.
------------------
Well the God I believe in isn't short of cash..Mister!
pub crawler
New Yorker
I expect the Democratic and Republican parties to disappear within 20 years.
That's how dead they are. ::yawning smiley::
That's how dead they are. ::yawning smiley::
OP
OP
DrTeeth
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I believe Sir Winston Churchill said something among the lines of: "Democracy is the worst form of politics apart for all the other ones".
My favourite is: "Democracy is nothing more than two wolves and one goat deciding which of the three is going to be eaten".
Lemonite
I'm a chauvinist leprechaun
hah.. Then why are the Blacks complaining to no end how 'bad' they got it, How they still claim racism in everything they say, And.. Why then is there still affirmative action.. That's just racism staring us in the face.. And also.. If the blacks were doing better.. then jEssee jackson.. somewhat of a reverend.. or just maybe a slick talker... would not be needed.. Of course, they're better off, but they're still yelling and clamoring about the same things they were back in the day when Malcolm X was killing whites.. That's what i meant.. not as much referring to statistical analysis of an excel spreadsheet.. though It's also because the blacks do not come to meet the republicans and their programs to help get thme into high managing jobs.. high profile positions.. cuz they lik ethe democrats who just 'give' things to them without any work.. welfare..
And I, as well as many an authors and analysts out there, though I don't have the articles on hand.. The reaganonimics started to finally unfold in the early 90's.. It wasn't Bill Clinton's programs who brought all this economic success.. He's a large large factor of why we have such a bad economy now.. Reagan. bush.. they instituted the programs the economy needed to get it out of the recession and brought the high bull market... reagan inherited the recession.. they had to increase interest rates cuz of the inflation carter brought... The economy was coming back during bush's 'running time'.. He was saying it was coming back.. and I remember a newspaper after clinton got elected.. 'Economy is Back'.. making the 'reading' world think that clinton... or thedemocrats brought the economy back.. Look a little deeper into these things, and you'll see that reagan is who actually gave us the high times during the 90's.. sorry to bust your tome of statements.. but it's true
The republicans give the tools, the means for people to become better off.. In this they also give the responsibility to the people to do somehting with themselves.. Not a callous position in the least.. Just a common sensical capitalistic position where people have the opportunities.. and this doesn't mean that help isn't provided it is.. Everyone just cna't be helped to such a same level.. communism.... What many republicans feared if Gore were to be put into office...
Foxxern
Refugee
In fact, you are quite far off. During the boom years of the past, racial bounds have begun to break down. The average black American now lives far better than ever before, and there are more blacks in the middle- and upper-classes than at any point in history. The mid- and late- 90s were especially good to most poor minorities, who found new, higher-paying jobs in various sectors.
The Republicans make an effort to help everyone? Well if they do, they fail miserably. During the go-go Reagonomics 80s, when conservative economics were the word, everyone certainly did not succeed. As the upper-classes drove a grossly overvalued stock market, most members of the working-class fell victim to downsizing, mergers, and the rapid transfer of jobs from the US into the Third World. Certainly this created (horrible wage, poor condition) jobs in various developing countries, but the number of jobs lost here in a small amount of time meant that if you weren't rich, you weren't doing so well. In fact, the shameful part is that real income (factoring in inflation) actually fell during the 80s! Imagine that--the average worker could buy less in 1989 than they could in 1980. That hardly seems like helping everyone.
------------------
Change is the only constant
Lilly
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
AHHH!!!! America is a multi-party system. Unfortunately, we have forgotten that multi implies we can have WAY more than 2 parties. I am an independent. Meaning I take from both major parties' ideas and add a few of my own in there and voila! a new party. Unfortunately, in America you have to get 10% of the votes to officially get government funding. Without gov't funding, it is EXTREMELY difficult to compete with the multi-billion dollar having big two parties. So, what ends up happening is that even though people may want to vote for the 3rd party individual, but it may endanger their best interests (i.e the Gore, Bush, Nader election. Everybody knew that it was going to be a tight race. People who would be voting for Gore would be democrats who tend to be more liberal than republicans. Nader was on the green party (basically a democrat, but supports saving the environment over everything else) so people who voted for Nader to try to get him 10% so a 3rd party can have $ took away from Gore, thus the losing. And of course, Nader didn't get 10% of the votes and we ended up with Bush (who is doing a lovely job).) They differ in a few ways (oh yea, my explainations will probably be a bit bias though I'll try hard not to be):
--A traditional republican would say: cheaper taxes, but not in any significant amount. programs such as welfare are good. they also tend to be 45+ year old white male Christians. Republicans tend to be conservatives.
--A traditional democrat would sayrograms are good, but let's take the taxes that we could cut and pay for them. religious fundamentalism doesn't seem to run as rampant here. Democrats tend to be more liberal.
--I say: programs are nice, but nobody is using them and I'm sick of paying for them altogether. I want a tax break, but I'm not willing to sacrifice my quality of life to get one, so figure out an acceptable budget and then cut taxes. Government, stay out of my day to day life (get out of our schools damn it!!). Religion is nice, but let's keep it more of a personal thing. We are a non-secular country. I'm a liberal independent.
Hmmm...I hope that hepled you out a bit.
------------------
Taste is the enemy of art.
[This message has been edited by Lilly (edited 12-29-2001).]
--A traditional republican would say: cheaper taxes, but not in any significant amount. programs such as welfare are good. they also tend to be 45+ year old white male Christians. Republicans tend to be conservatives.
--A traditional democrat would say
rograms are good, but let's take the taxes that we could cut and pay for them. religious fundamentalism doesn't seem to run as rampant here. Democrats tend to be more liberal.--I say: programs are nice, but nobody is using them and I'm sick of paying for them altogether. I want a tax break, but I'm not willing to sacrifice my quality of life to get one, so figure out an acceptable budget and then cut taxes. Government, stay out of my day to day life (get out of our schools damn it!!). Religion is nice, but let's keep it more of a personal thing. We are a non-secular country. I'm a liberal independent.
Hmmm...I hope that hepled you out a bit.
------------------
Taste is the enemy of art.
[This message has been edited by Lilly (edited 12-29-2001).]
Zooman91
The Fly
Well, Lemonite, many of the black people who do complain that they don't have equal rights are usually wrong. They are living way better than they ever have, and some of them are stupid enough to make dumb claims like wanting compensation for their ancestors' slavery. Many minorities have been screwed in the past, and they are the only ones who still complain, a lot. Of course, most of them aren't like this, just the dumb ones.
missmacphisto
Refugee
Theyre all a bunch of losers.
I voted for Nader.
Actually i dont like him much either, but he was the lesser of 3 evils. Sigh.
I have a really bad feeling about what is ahppening to this country. It isnt as free as many people think.
------------------
Look...look what you've done to me...You've made me poor and infamous, and I thank you...
My name is MISS MACPHISTO...I'm tired and i want to go HOME...
"Well you tell...Bonovista,that i said hello and that my codename is Belleview" - Bono before opening night of Anaheim Elevation concert
Well tonight thank God it's them, instead of you...
I voted for Nader.
Actually i dont like him much either, but he was the lesser of 3 evils. Sigh.
I have a really bad feeling about what is ahppening to this country. It isnt as free as many people think.
------------------
Look...look what you've done to me...You've made me poor and infamous, and I thank you...
My name is MISS MACPHISTO...I'm tired and i want to go HOME...
"Well you tell...Bonovista,that i said hello and that my codename is Belleview" - Bono before opening night of Anaheim Elevation concert
Well tonight thank God it's them, instead of you...
devalera1
The Fly
Those who say that Democrats and Republicans are essentially the same and agree on all major issues have obviously not spent any time reading newspapers, watching debates, or taking the time to learn about issues.
Take, for example, the tax cut. Democrats were strenously opposed to the cut that was pushed through by the Republicans. They were not opposed to a tax cut, just one in which 2% of a 1.4 trillion dollar cut went to working people. The end result is deficit spending, which in terms means cuts in important programs, and little to no money for prescription drug benefits, school construction, and numerous other policy objectives.
Democrats are hardly the"liberal wing of the Republican party" - nothing is worse than people who paint with broad strokes and don't know how to paint.
If you look at the Democratic party, you'll see it runs a wide gamut on the political spectrum. There are conservative Democrats like Zell Miller of Georgia, and liberal Democrats like Paul Wellstone, and everything in between.
And as for danospano's odd numbers - how do you figure that since less than half the people vote, 15% must be D and 15% must be R? Back up your math, kid.
And for those who don't vote because they're too busy working minimum wage jobs, I'd urge them to take a look at who proposes annual minimum wage increases, and who opposes them, and then stop hiding behind excuses, do your civic duty, and vote. It's not a right, it's a responsibility
Take, for example, the tax cut. Democrats were strenously opposed to the cut that was pushed through by the Republicans. They were not opposed to a tax cut, just one in which 2% of a 1.4 trillion dollar cut went to working people. The end result is deficit spending, which in terms means cuts in important programs, and little to no money for prescription drug benefits, school construction, and numerous other policy objectives.
Democrats are hardly the"liberal wing of the Republican party" - nothing is worse than people who paint with broad strokes and don't know how to paint.
If you look at the Democratic party, you'll see it runs a wide gamut on the political spectrum. There are conservative Democrats like Zell Miller of Georgia, and liberal Democrats like Paul Wellstone, and everything in between.
And as for danospano's odd numbers - how do you figure that since less than half the people vote, 15% must be D and 15% must be R? Back up your math, kid.
And for those who don't vote because they're too busy working minimum wage jobs, I'd urge them to take a look at who proposes annual minimum wage increases, and who opposes them, and then stop hiding behind excuses, do your civic duty, and vote. It's not a right, it's a responsibility
Hans Moleman
The Fly
I would have to agree with devalera...there are major differences between the Democrats and the Republicans. Why people have been decrying them as the same was due to the Clinton-style Democrat, which was more libertarian (deregulate business, deregulate social) than liberal (regulate business, deregulate social). Al Gore, obviously, shared a lot of views with Clinton.
In usual party loyalty, the liberal wing has pretty much been silent, and it hasn't helped that Republicans dominated most of the Clinton-era Legislature. Rather than be obstructionist, the liberal wing was silent again, since they knew the Republicans would never go for an obvious liberal platform.
So, since most of you here are about an average of 20 years old here, you will not remember the liberal aspects of the Democratic Party, because the last twenty years have been dominated by Republicans and Clinton.
Melon
------------------
"Oh no...my brains."
In usual party loyalty, the liberal wing has pretty much been silent, and it hasn't helped that Republicans dominated most of the Clinton-era Legislature. Rather than be obstructionist, the liberal wing was silent again, since they knew the Republicans would never go for an obvious liberal platform.
So, since most of you here are about an average of 20 years old here, you will not remember the liberal aspects of the Democratic Party, because the last twenty years have been dominated by Republicans and Clinton.
Melon
------------------
"Oh no...my brains."
damn straight! i'm only a democrat so i can vote in the primaries...since independents can't (another reason politics are fucked).
------------------
kahnarinha "funky-san" taylor, royal chat nutte for both interference and U2OL, as proclaimed by sir rafaroni (the mexico city treat)
U2: 62%
dd: 37%
-------
proof 2001 simon is bangable:
<Rox> I bang 2001 simon every morning
<J-Tree> you think he'd get tired from being hard all the time
virtual insanity
john nude!
tiny dancer
Blue Crack Distributor
benefits, school construction, and numerous her policy objectives.
Democrats are hardly the"liberal wing of the Republican party" - nothing is worse than people who paint with broad strokes and don't know how to paint.
If you look at the Democratic party, you'll see it runs a wide gamut on thespectrum. There are conservative Democrats like Zell Miller of Georgia, and liberal Democrats like Paul Wellstone, and everything in between.
And as for danospano's odd numbers - how do you figure that since less than half the people vote, 15% must be D and 15% must be R? Back up your math, kid.
And for those who don't vote because they're too busy working minimum wage jobs, I'd urge them to take a look at who proposes annual minimum wage increases, and who opposes them, and then stop hiding behind excuses, do your civic duty, and vote. It's not a right, it's a responsibility[/B][/QUOTE]
It's not only a responsibility it's a privilege we have as Americans. There are many in other countries who don't have it.
Democrats are hardly the"liberal wing of the Republican party" - nothing is worse than people who paint with broad strokes and don't know how to paint.
If you look at the Democratic party, you'll see it runs a wide gamut on thespectrum. There are conservative Democrats like Zell Miller of Georgia, and liberal Democrats like Paul Wellstone, and everything in between.
And as for danospano's odd numbers - how do you figure that since less than half the people vote, 15% must be D and 15% must be R? Back up your math, kid.
And for those who don't vote because they're too busy working minimum wage jobs, I'd urge them to take a look at who proposes annual minimum wage increases, and who opposes them, and then stop hiding behind excuses, do your civic duty, and vote. It's not a right, it's a responsibility[/B][/QUOTE]
It's not only a responsibility it's a privilege we have as Americans. There are many in other countries who don't have it.
tiny dancer
Blue Crack Distributor
Sorry devaleral I ment to post all of your message.
td
td
Similar threads
- Sticky
