US Mid-term Elections
- Thread starter Bre
- Start date
Hawkeye
Well-known member
Honestly,
My thoughts are the republicans deserved the loss.
They just weren't doing that good of a job.
So I'm not really surprised.
I don't know if this will be a good change at all. It's one of those we will get to see. The democratic party-to me has shown nothing other than its ability to bash the president and try to undermine the troops themselves in Iraq (That John Kerry Quote anybody?) so I'm curious to see how effectively they can control the congress.
I personally think it is a good thing to have a republican president and a democrat congress.
I am a die hard liberterian so you can see where I am going with this:
Over the past 12 years the republicans have managed double the size of the government. Over the past 6 years discretionary spending was doubled. We were promised the elimination of the department of education-that has since doubled (and yes I don't care what anyone here says I do vehemantly detest the fact that the federal government is in our schools-I believe that this should be a state issue or local gov't issue). We got nothing from Alaska (ANWR) and they were not even helpful with the Immigration issue.
We're looking at a bunch of weaklings here.
Now we're going to be looking at a bunch of bullies who can do the exact same thing as the republican did.
Absolutely nothing except call the president stupid.
I really do not see this as that big of a change to be very honest with you.
One of the things that does concern me however is the need for continuing to say the polls were all about the war in Iraq, when in fact-the elections believe it or not did not have an overwhelming majority of the War in Iraq as the determining factor as to who to vote for.
The polls said that 42% said it was corruption: There were times when corruption wasnt the case (IE: Tom Delay, Scooter Libby) but it was played up so much by the media people grew tired of hearing about it. I suspect the Foley issue was the last stray
Terrorism came at 40% which just shows you how far the republicans had fallen. Before they were very strong but now they aren't nearly that strong. The democrats who I seriously and strongly believe are weaklings in this were deemed better by the americans
Finally at 37% was the war in Iraq.
So we're seeing a lot of issues being shown and popping up that did play into this.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/...ain/index.html
So how do I really feel about it? I'm not in the least bit surprised and I think this is just what is needed by the republicans to be kicked in the groin to realize what they screwed up on.
Other than that-business as usual.
My thoughts are the republicans deserved the loss.
They just weren't doing that good of a job.
So I'm not really surprised.
I don't know if this will be a good change at all. It's one of those we will get to see. The democratic party-to me has shown nothing other than its ability to bash the president and try to undermine the troops themselves in Iraq (That John Kerry Quote anybody?) so I'm curious to see how effectively they can control the congress.
I personally think it is a good thing to have a republican president and a democrat congress.
I am a die hard liberterian so you can see where I am going with this:
Over the past 12 years the republicans have managed double the size of the government. Over the past 6 years discretionary spending was doubled. We were promised the elimination of the department of education-that has since doubled (and yes I don't care what anyone here says I do vehemantly detest the fact that the federal government is in our schools-I believe that this should be a state issue or local gov't issue). We got nothing from Alaska (ANWR) and they were not even helpful with the Immigration issue.
We're looking at a bunch of weaklings here.
Now we're going to be looking at a bunch of bullies who can do the exact same thing as the republican did.
Absolutely nothing except call the president stupid.
I really do not see this as that big of a change to be very honest with you.
One of the things that does concern me however is the need for continuing to say the polls were all about the war in Iraq, when in fact-the elections believe it or not did not have an overwhelming majority of the War in Iraq as the determining factor as to who to vote for.
The polls said that 42% said it was corruption: There were times when corruption wasnt the case (IE: Tom Delay, Scooter Libby) but it was played up so much by the media people grew tired of hearing about it. I suspect the Foley issue was the last stray
Terrorism came at 40% which just shows you how far the republicans had fallen. Before they were very strong but now they aren't nearly that strong. The democrats who I seriously and strongly believe are weaklings in this were deemed better by the americans
Finally at 37% was the war in Iraq.
So we're seeing a lot of issues being shown and popping up that did play into this.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/...ain/index.html
So how do I really feel about it? I'm not in the least bit surprised and I think this is just what is needed by the republicans to be kicked in the groin to realize what they screwed up on.
Other than that-business as usual.
MxAxC-_ATTACK
Well-known member
I'm not suprised either. Everyone saw it coming, Even I Did and I am a Republican.
I also agree that I think its good to have a democratic senate, and a Republican President..
I also agree that I think its good to have a democratic senate, and a Republican President..
*Stargazer*
Well-known member
I'm not surprised, I saw it coming. But I think anyone that thinks that the Democrats are "better" than the Republicans is not paying attention. I think they are equally as bad as each other and until we get rid of professional politicians and reform the elections system, we're stuck with sleazebags, unfortunately.
I hope at least some good comes out of this change though.
I hope at least some good comes out of this change though.
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
I think at least either house or Senate should always be the opposing party of the president. With an exception of a few members of either party, most them are alike, so I'm not sure if it makes a difference. They may as well form a party together.
I also don't trust most politicians, either, but that's another story.
I also don't trust most politicians, either, but that's another story.
d_flawless
Well-known member
that's how it goes in politics, things go badly and then the power shifts. i'm a democrat, but i'm not even that excited...it's like, what are just a few years gonna do? i think change takes longer than that.
whatever, what the fuck is up with the arnold re-election though? that's what i'm trippin about
whatever, what the fuck is up with the arnold re-election though? that's what i'm trippin about
MxAxC-_ATTACK
Well-known member
Quote:
I generally don't voice my opinions on my political views (conservative)Because I just get bashed on them by the opposite party. I live in CA a very blue state.
But I voted for Arnold, I think Angeledes would have been trouble.
I looked at this election very closely, because face it the republicans havn't been doing so well lately.
Originally Posted by d_flawless
that's how it goes in politics, things go badly and then the power shifts. i'm a democrat, but i'm not even that excited...it's like, what are just a few years gonna do? i think change takes longer than that. whatever, what the fuck is up with the arnold re-election though? that's what i'm trippin about |
I generally don't voice my opinions on my political views (conservative)Because I just get bashed on them by the opposite party. I live in CA a very blue state.
But I voted for Arnold, I think Angeledes would have been trouble.
I looked at this election very closely, because face it the republicans havn't been doing so well lately.
Eoraptor
Well-known member
Yay for the non-Republicans!
Seriously, if Americans would have voted for Republicans after all that's happened lately, I would have given up hope. Still, I agree the Democrats haven't given us much reason to vote for them except that they're NOT Republicans. But honestly, that's enough in my opinion. Although what's important to me is more the liberal vs. conservative scale, which happens to be fairly parallel to the Democrat vs. Republican scale at the moment. So I'm very happy conservatives are getting thrown out, because I don't want to see things like the ban gay marriage amendment passed. And I want to see stem cell research go forth, which could happen now that Congress could muster the numbers needed to override Bush's veto. Anything that keeps this country from becoming a theocracy is good news to me.
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
Well, obviously all Republicans are against gay marriage and all Democrats are for it.
I forgot.
| Originally Posted by Eoraptor
Yay for the non-Republicans!
|
Well, obviously all Republicans are against gay marriage and all Democrats are for it.
I forgot.
MxAxC-_ATTACK
Well-known member
Quote:
oops , I always press that Thanks button
( I noted your sarcasm)
This is the type of thing I can't seem to get through peoples heads!
"oh.. your a republican.. you must oppose Gay marriage..and you only care about Oil , and don't care about the environment"
Untrue. sooo very untrue.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
Well, obviously all Republicans are against gay marriage and all Democrats are for it. I forgot. |
oops , I always press that Thanks button
( I noted your sarcasm)
This is the type of thing I can't seem to get through peoples heads!
"oh.. your a republican.. you must oppose Gay marriage..and you only care about Oil , and don't care about the environment"
Untrue. sooo very untrue.
*Stargazer*
Well-known member
Quote:
This is the thing that drives me crazy about this two party system. I'm too liberal for the Republicans and too conservative for the Democrats. The immediate definition of your values from an outside POV when you claim one party is so difficult to deal with.
| Originally Posted by MxAxC-_ATTACK
"oh.. your a republican.. you must oppose Gay marriage..and you only care about Oil , and don't care about the environment" |
This is the thing that drives me crazy about this two party system. I'm too liberal for the Republicans and too conservative for the Democrats. The immediate definition of your values from an outside POV when you claim one party is so difficult to deal with.
Hawkeye
Well-known member
Exactly.
I think people especially the american people have a hard time realizing point blank what their party believes.
And it infuriates me that they generalize things. Both parties are slime. Many people think the Republicans are nothing more than a bunch of anti gay, anti stemcell, anti everything thats not holy and Christian and the Democrats are for everything the republicans are.
Quite frankly thats just ignorant. Dangrously ignorant.
There are many democrats that voted for the anti gay marriage bill. There were many republicans that voted against it.
*SO* many Americans do not realize that both parties are one in the same. They both want more government, they BOTH want power etc etc. They just have different names. Do they stand for different things? To put it point blank-maybe on one issue.
It's just Ignorant. Anyone who thinks by the party and not actually look at the parties, realize what they stand for and make a generalization is ignorant. And unfortunately these people are running to the polls.
Having absolutely no idea what they believe in.
My favorite example of this was the michael J fox ad. He campaigned for the Democrat Claire Maskell who was for Stem cell research and was up against Jim Talent a republican who wasn't for it. I love Michael J Fox. I think he is a strong courageous guy and I have so much respect for him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMliHkTDHaE
Just some quick facts about stem cell research:
But anyway stem cell research is not illegal in the US. Nor has it been. As a matter of fact the Bush administration has provided more federal funding for it than any other administration. (Looking for the source-but I know I read it on boortz.com but looking for another source as we speak on this!)
But we have the stage set up: Now let me reveal to you what most Americans think (Other than the fact that stem cell research has never been banned in the U.S.).... With Michael J Fox-he made his commercial for the Democrat Maskill and then later on Oct 29 in an interview with George Stephanopolis he tells him that he has never even READ the ammendment he is in support of!
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/story?id=2613377&page=1
And on the anti environment issue you have the celebs that scream they are for the government but what about this?
http://www.tmz.com/2006/10/18/celebs...but-guzzle-gas
The problem with Americans today is
1) We're too lazy to read up on our parties, on our ammendments etc. I'm a die hard liberterian. I'll be the first to tell you where the republicans screwed up. I'll also tell you where the democrats screw up. But if there is a certain issue that important to you-do your homework!
2) We listen to celebs. If a celeb is for something then by God we know that that celeb is telling us the gospel. God FORBID if we should EVER say anything bad against a celeb. But in the artical above with how all these celebs are talking going green but really aren't- we see it point blank-they talk the talk but they can't even walk the walk when it comes to being environmentally conscious.
But it is those two issues that Americans have, to get into that ignorant line of thinking. This is what makes the politicans so damn dangerous. This is what makes the federal government so damn dangeorus. This is what makes the American people like lambs going into the slaughter house. Because we choose ignorance.
I think people especially the american people have a hard time realizing point blank what their party believes.
And it infuriates me that they generalize things. Both parties are slime. Many people think the Republicans are nothing more than a bunch of anti gay, anti stemcell, anti everything thats not holy and Christian and the Democrats are for everything the republicans are.
Quite frankly thats just ignorant. Dangrously ignorant.
There are many democrats that voted for the anti gay marriage bill. There were many republicans that voted against it.
*SO* many Americans do not realize that both parties are one in the same. They both want more government, they BOTH want power etc etc. They just have different names. Do they stand for different things? To put it point blank-maybe on one issue.
It's just Ignorant. Anyone who thinks by the party and not actually look at the parties, realize what they stand for and make a generalization is ignorant. And unfortunately these people are running to the polls.
Having absolutely no idea what they believe in.
My favorite example of this was the michael J fox ad. He campaigned for the Democrat Claire Maskell who was for Stem cell research and was up against Jim Talent a republican who wasn't for it. I love Michael J Fox. I think he is a strong courageous guy and I have so much respect for him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMliHkTDHaE
Just some quick facts about stem cell research:
But anyway stem cell research is not illegal in the US. Nor has it been. As a matter of fact the Bush administration has provided more federal funding for it than any other administration. (Looking for the source-but I know I read it on boortz.com but looking for another source as we speak on this!)
But we have the stage set up: Now let me reveal to you what most Americans think (Other than the fact that stem cell research has never been banned in the U.S.).... With Michael J Fox-he made his commercial for the Democrat Maskill and then later on Oct 29 in an interview with George Stephanopolis he tells him that he has never even READ the ammendment he is in support of!
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/story?id=2613377&page=1
And on the anti environment issue you have the celebs that scream they are for the government but what about this?
http://www.tmz.com/2006/10/18/celebs...but-guzzle-gas
The problem with Americans today is
1) We're too lazy to read up on our parties, on our ammendments etc. I'm a die hard liberterian. I'll be the first to tell you where the republicans screwed up. I'll also tell you where the democrats screw up. But if there is a certain issue that important to you-do your homework!
2) We listen to celebs. If a celeb is for something then by God we know that that celeb is telling us the gospel. God FORBID if we should EVER say anything bad against a celeb. But in the artical above with how all these celebs are talking going green but really aren't- we see it point blank-they talk the talk but they can't even walk the walk when it comes to being environmentally conscious.
But it is those two issues that Americans have, to get into that ignorant line of thinking. This is what makes the politicans so damn dangerous. This is what makes the federal government so damn dangeorus. This is what makes the American people like lambs going into the slaughter house. Because we choose ignorance.
MxAxC-_ATTACK
Well-known member
Quote:
THIS IS SOOOOO INCREDIBLY TRUE!!!! It drives me INSANE.
People do NOT do their research, they just listen to what Celebritys have to say , and go for it.
A lot of high school students like to believe whatever their favorite band tells them. I know because I used to be that way.. UGHHH I shudder at that time period in my life. .
| Originally Posted by youbeabitch
1) We're too lazy to read up on our parties, on our ammendments etc. I'm a die hard liberterian. I'll be the first to tell you where the republicans screwed up. I'll also tell you where the democrats screw up. But if there is a certain issue that important to you-do your homework! 2) We listen to celebs. If a celeb is for something then by God we know that that celeb is telling us the gospel. God FORBID if we should EVER say anything bad against a celeb. But in the artical above with how all these celebs are talking going green but really aren't- we see it point blank-they talk the talk but they can't even walk the walk when it comes to being environmentally conscious. . |
THIS IS SOOOOO INCREDIBLY TRUE!!!! It drives me INSANE.
People do NOT do their research, they just listen to what Celebritys have to say , and go for it.
A lot of high school students like to believe whatever their favorite band tells them. I know because I used to be that way.. UGHHH I shudder at that time period in my life. .
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
Indeed. Identifying with either party seems to be a mistake, however, the assumption that because a person is one or the other and therefore must fall within party lines is a mistake. :/
| Originally Posted by MxAxC-_ATTACK
oops , I always press that Thanks button ( I noted your sarcasm) This is the type of thing I can't seem to get through peoples heads! "oh.. your a republican.. you must oppose Gay marriage..and you only care about Oil , and don't care about the environment" Untrue. sooo very untrue. |
Indeed. Identifying with either party seems to be a mistake, however, the assumption that because a person is one or the other and therefore must fall within party lines is a mistake. :/
caffn8me
Well-known member
The phrase "lame duck" springs to mind. It's a result of the way the electoral system works and it happens in places like France too where the president finds himself running a country where his party is a minority in both houses. We're not really used to that in the UK as we don't have a directly elected prime minister/president. If an oppostion party ever won a majority of seats or formed a coalition with other small parties to gain an overall majority, the first thing they'd do is put one of their own folks in as prime minister. It will be interested to see how things go.
Eoraptor
Well-known member
Okay people, Shimmer quoted me, but apparently didn't read what I wrote-
Quote:
Note I said the conservatives are the ones opposing gay marriage, not the republicans. Obviously not every conservative will be against gay marriage, but I bet there are far more conservatives opposing it than liberals. Yet even if I would have claimed Republicans oppose gay marriage, the congressional votes support that statement. Look at the Defense of Marriage Act. Republicans voted 224-1, Democrats voted 118-65. Or the Federal Marriage Amendment. Republicans voted 191-27, Democrats voted 36-158. It's not a case of every Republican voting against gay marriage, and every Democrat voting for it. But if anyone thinks having more Republicans in Congress will help gay marriage succeed, well... I'd like to see your evidence.
Also, while it may be ignorant to generalize, I'd say it's also ignorant to claim both parties "are one in the same." The generalizations are based on real trends within the parties. The above data show they really do differ when it comes to gay marriage. I bet you'd find similar stats on stem cell research, environmentalism, anything involving religion, etc.. The generalizations exist for a reason. And yes, it's unfortunate we have a bipartisan system that polarizes and combines issues this way, but it's based on how many of our voters think. I'm sure this is self-reinforcing, and also due to religion and other forces.
And no, stem cell research is not illegal in the US. But using federal funds for anything except the contaminated cell lines which were available in 2001 IS illegal. And since most science research comes from federal funds, well... you can see where I'm going.
Quote:
LOL The first human embryonic stem cell line was only reported in 1998. As Wikipedia explains, Clinton's administration was going to allow federal funds for research on any human embryonic stem cells not created for the purpose of destructive research. It was only Bush's administration in 2001 which reconsidered the issue and restricted federal funds to those cell lines which existed at the time. So sure Bush provided more federal funding than the only other administration that existed when human embryonic stem cell lines did, but that's because the prior administration hadn't enacted its guidelines yet. Guidelines which would have allowed more funding than Bush's revised guidelines do. Yours is quite a disingenious fact if you ask me.
But I DO completely agree people's ignorance of the issues they vote for is appalling. And that listening to celebrities isn't a good way of diminishing that ignorance. So we agree on some issues.
Edit: Hope I wasn't too rude to Shimmer.
I just don't like to have my views misrepresented.
Quote:
| Although what's important to me is more the liberal vs. conservative scale, which happens to be fairly parallel to the Democrat vs. Republican scale at the moment. So I'm very happy conservatives are getting thrown out, because I don't want to see things like the ban gay marriage amendment passed ... |
Note I said the conservatives are the ones opposing gay marriage, not the republicans. Obviously not every conservative will be against gay marriage, but I bet there are far more conservatives opposing it than liberals. Yet even if I would have claimed Republicans oppose gay marriage, the congressional votes support that statement. Look at the Defense of Marriage Act. Republicans voted 224-1, Democrats voted 118-65. Or the Federal Marriage Amendment. Republicans voted 191-27, Democrats voted 36-158. It's not a case of every Republican voting against gay marriage, and every Democrat voting for it. But if anyone thinks having more Republicans in Congress will help gay marriage succeed, well... I'd like to see your evidence.
Also, while it may be ignorant to generalize, I'd say it's also ignorant to claim both parties "are one in the same." The generalizations are based on real trends within the parties. The above data show they really do differ when it comes to gay marriage. I bet you'd find similar stats on stem cell research, environmentalism, anything involving religion, etc.. The generalizations exist for a reason. And yes, it's unfortunate we have a bipartisan system that polarizes and combines issues this way, but it's based on how many of our voters think. I'm sure this is self-reinforcing, and also due to religion and other forces.
And no, stem cell research is not illegal in the US. But using federal funds for anything except the contaminated cell lines which were available in 2001 IS illegal. And since most science research comes from federal funds, well... you can see where I'm going.
Quote:
| As a matter of fact the Bush administration has provided more federal funding for it than any other administration. |
LOL The first human embryonic stem cell line was only reported in 1998. As Wikipedia explains, Clinton's administration was going to allow federal funds for research on any human embryonic stem cells not created for the purpose of destructive research. It was only Bush's administration in 2001 which reconsidered the issue and restricted federal funds to those cell lines which existed at the time. So sure Bush provided more federal funding than the only other administration that existed when human embryonic stem cell lines did, but that's because the prior administration hadn't enacted its guidelines yet. Guidelines which would have allowed more funding than Bush's revised guidelines do. Yours is quite a disingenious fact if you ask me.
But I DO completely agree people's ignorance of the issues they vote for is appalling. And that listening to celebrities isn't a good way of diminishing that ignorance. So we agree on some issues.
Edit: Hope I wasn't too rude to Shimmer.
Beauty Mark
Well-known member
Here's my defense and thoughts on things:
I feel the parties are becoming more and more the same because there are so many moderates and the line is blurred.
I also don't disagree with using social issues to define the parties nowadays, because that's how it's unfortunately being done by our elected people. Ideally, we should be using the pure definitions of what it is to be a Dem or a Republican but things have changed. Because I hail from a swing state and am more liberal than conservative, I am a registered Dem but do not identify myself much with the party (I'm only registered Dem, because I feel the votes count more than if I were in a "red" or "blue" state, and I'd like to vote for someone I actually respect.)
Eoraptor- Are we talking fiscally conservative? Socially? There are people who are fiscally conservative but very liberal socially. I haven't met any the reverse, but I imagine it's true.
I feel the parties are becoming more and more the same because there are so many moderates and the line is blurred.
I also don't disagree with using social issues to define the parties nowadays, because that's how it's unfortunately being done by our elected people. Ideally, we should be using the pure definitions of what it is to be a Dem or a Republican but things have changed. Because I hail from a swing state and am more liberal than conservative, I am a registered Dem but do not identify myself much with the party (I'm only registered Dem, because I feel the votes count more than if I were in a "red" or "blue" state, and I'd like to vote for someone I actually respect.)
Eoraptor- Are we talking fiscally conservative? Socially? There are people who are fiscally conservative but very liberal socially. I haven't met any the reverse, but I imagine it's true.
Hawkeye
Well-known member
WIth the embryonic cell research we need to note that "was" and actually doing are two very different things. With this issue the things the left has said many times is the right is dead set against the research when in fact that is not true. It just drives me up the wall when people say that.
I am glad you clarified yourself because I had hoped you were more aware of the situations in politics then your post stated.
I read it as you were saying anyone other than republicans are OK to be in office. I also read it that all republicans are against gay marriage etc. Which astounded me because you don't usually make such blatant generalizations. I read what you wrote but I gotta admit that's the way I read it as well. It would've been like if I had written YAY the democrats lost-now our soldiers will get a congress that appreciates them! Its such a statement that makes you step back and say-WTH? That's not like this person-I know this person is pretty smart and usually doesn't make these comments. That's just how I read it
I knew though - you would be back to explain yourself more!
Now as for Gay Marriage-I'll be perfectly blunt with you-I do not think that it will ever be banned. It's kind of like the abortion issue-people will push for it to be banned but it will never get banned.
Beauty Mark had it right that the lines between both parties are so blurred right now you can't really see where the definate line really is.
Case in point: Joe Lieberman. He ran as an independent he identifies more with the democrats but he has more conservative values. He agrees with the war in Iraq for example.
The lines are getting very very blurred.
Socially there are differences of course not many but there are some.
But the reason I said the two parties are essentially the same is for the following reasons:
1) Both parties want to increase federal spending
2) Both parties want more government in the average american life
3) Both parties want amnesty for illegal immigration
4) Both parties want to raise the minimum wage but in order to raise the minimum wage...
5) Both parties want to continue to tax us more just in different ways
6) Both parties are going to essentially destroy this country and its stand for freedom but in differents ways.
7) Both parties want the american citizen to depend more on the federal government-case in point- the more the minimum wage is raised-the less jobs are created because employeers will not be able to afford each employee at minimum wage. Jobs will therefore be cut. However, if you can't afford to live-guess who will come to the rescue? Federal Government!
There is more common ground than either party cares to acknowledge. Seriously-the only huge dissention that is very evident between the two parties is the war in Iraq-but even that is beginning to get blurred.
Nancy Pelosi and George Bush are going to find they have more in common then they differ.
Maybe thats why there is an insepid hatred for democrats and republicans up in washington. They see things in themselves that they dont like and they see it in the other party.
I am glad you clarified yourself because I had hoped you were more aware of the situations in politics then your post stated.
I read it as you were saying anyone other than republicans are OK to be in office. I also read it that all republicans are against gay marriage etc. Which astounded me because you don't usually make such blatant generalizations. I read what you wrote but I gotta admit that's the way I read it as well. It would've been like if I had written YAY the democrats lost-now our soldiers will get a congress that appreciates them! Its such a statement that makes you step back and say-WTH? That's not like this person-I know this person is pretty smart and usually doesn't make these comments. That's just how I read it
Now as for Gay Marriage-I'll be perfectly blunt with you-I do not think that it will ever be banned. It's kind of like the abortion issue-people will push for it to be banned but it will never get banned.
Beauty Mark had it right that the lines between both parties are so blurred right now you can't really see where the definate line really is.
Case in point: Joe Lieberman. He ran as an independent he identifies more with the democrats but he has more conservative values. He agrees with the war in Iraq for example.
The lines are getting very very blurred.
Socially there are differences of course not many but there are some.
But the reason I said the two parties are essentially the same is for the following reasons:
1) Both parties want to increase federal spending
2) Both parties want more government in the average american life
3) Both parties want amnesty for illegal immigration
4) Both parties want to raise the minimum wage but in order to raise the minimum wage...
5) Both parties want to continue to tax us more just in different ways
6) Both parties are going to essentially destroy this country and its stand for freedom but in differents ways.
7) Both parties want the american citizen to depend more on the federal government-case in point- the more the minimum wage is raised-the less jobs are created because employeers will not be able to afford each employee at minimum wage. Jobs will therefore be cut. However, if you can't afford to live-guess who will come to the rescue? Federal Government!
There is more common ground than either party cares to acknowledge. Seriously-the only huge dissention that is very evident between the two parties is the war in Iraq-but even that is beginning to get blurred.
Nancy Pelosi and George Bush are going to find they have more in common then they differ.
Maybe thats why there is an insepid hatred for democrats and republicans up in washington. They see things in themselves that they dont like and they see it in the other party.
Eoraptor
Well-known member
Beauty Mark- I meant socially conservative. Honestly, my knowledge of fiscal politics is so low that I don't have very many or very well-defended opinions. So maybe the parties are merging fiscally, I wouldn't know. They have switched around historically, of course. Maybe it's in the process of happening again? I couldn't say, I'm no historian.
youbeabitch- Regarding human embryonic stem cell research, I think a lot of Republicans are dead-set against it, in part due to ignorance. After all, human embryos died to let us get even the pre-2001 cell lines. Indeed, here's a poll from last year showing 40% of Republicans oppose it.
Of course, I don't mean to imply all Republicans have the same opinions on these issues, but there are less Republicans favoring stem cell research, gay marriage, etc. than there are Democrats. About 40% of the way down this page , there is a helpful table showing how support for stem-cell research varies by party. As of 2006, 73% of liberal Democrats supported it, 59% of moderate Democrats, 58% of moderate Republicans, and 38% of conservative Republicans. Seems to match what I've been saying. If I want to see stem-cell research thrive, I want more liberals and more democrats in office. Sure some will vote against it (and some Republicans and conservatives will vote for it), but in general things will work out more to my liking.
Quote:
43 states already have statutes defining marriage to be between a man and a woman, and 19 states have constitutional amendments explicitly banning gay marriage. Compare this to only 15 states which have laws banning any abortion (sometimes except in cases of death, incest, or rape; albeit unenforcable due to Roe vs. Wade). Or to make another comparison, a recent poll suggests 51% of people oppose banning abortion, while only 28% of people favor gay marriage. So gay marriage seems less popular than abortion.
Most of the rest of your post involves fiscal things, which I noted I'm not very knowledgable about. But I wonder, what evidence do you have that we have more citizens today that aren't clear-cut Democrats and Republicans than we've had in the past?
youbeabitch- Regarding human embryonic stem cell research, I think a lot of Republicans are dead-set against it, in part due to ignorance. After all, human embryos died to let us get even the pre-2001 cell lines. Indeed, here's a poll from last year showing 40% of Republicans oppose it.
Of course, I don't mean to imply all Republicans have the same opinions on these issues, but there are less Republicans favoring stem cell research, gay marriage, etc. than there are Democrats. About 40% of the way down this page , there is a helpful table showing how support for stem-cell research varies by party. As of 2006, 73% of liberal Democrats supported it, 59% of moderate Democrats, 58% of moderate Republicans, and 38% of conservative Republicans. Seems to match what I've been saying. If I want to see stem-cell research thrive, I want more liberals and more democrats in office. Sure some will vote against it (and some Republicans and conservatives will vote for it), but in general things will work out more to my liking.
Quote:
| Now as for Gay Marriage-I'll be perfectly blunt with you-I do not think that it will ever be banned. It's kind of like the abortion issue-people will push for it to be banned but it will never get banned. |
43 states already have statutes defining marriage to be between a man and a woman, and 19 states have constitutional amendments explicitly banning gay marriage. Compare this to only 15 states which have laws banning any abortion (sometimes except in cases of death, incest, or rape; albeit unenforcable due to Roe vs. Wade). Or to make another comparison, a recent poll suggests 51% of people oppose banning abortion, while only 28% of people favor gay marriage. So gay marriage seems less popular than abortion.
Most of the rest of your post involves fiscal things, which I noted I'm not very knowledgable about. But I wonder, what evidence do you have that we have more citizens today that aren't clear-cut Democrats and Republicans than we've had in the past?
