Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 19 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,549 posts, read 16,533,663 times
Reputation: 6032
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita
Has it dawned on you the country could be shifting to the right, at least temporarily? The pendulum swings back and forth every so often. CA used to be red, the south was strictly Democrats and other states have changed sides. Add to that, Obama is not popular and those running next time, especially those who are incumbents will have to explain their support for him the past X number of years. Hillary will be faced with the same if she decides to run. She either moves away from him, and has to explain why she stayed on as S. of state if she didn't approve of his actions or tell us she approved of what he did or didn't do. Either way she is going to have explaining to do.
Democratic and Republican are parties, not ideologies.
California was indeed Republican, but it wasnt Conservative.
The South was indeed Democratic, but it wasnt Liberal or Progressive.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 19 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,549 posts, read 16,533,663 times
Reputation: 6032
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
right now the GOP is on a roll 244-184 edge in the House. The major advantage the Dems had in the past decade was identity politics, but that has been erased with people like Mia Love, Marco Rubio, and other lovers of freedom.
We are still a center-right country with a belief in individual freedom.
We are a center left country with a belief in individual freedom.
And Marco Rubio and Mia Love are both against gay marriage so they are not so loving of freedom as you claim.
It's not an excuse. It's an analysis. Political scientists don't have agendas.
Really? Then why were they so completely wrong in their analysis of the demographics, their forecasting of "The Emerging Democratic Majority," [Ruy Teixeira, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress] and the demise of the Republican Party? I think it was because they wanted to influence the election with their propaganda. That is what propaganda tries to do.
All political scientists have an agenda. Most of what they put out is nothing more than wishful thinking; pure rhetoric, propping up their side.
Democratic and Republican are parties, not ideologies.
They may be Parties, but they represent distinctive ideologies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251
California was indeed Republican, but it wasnt Conservative.
Except for certain demographic areas, it most certainly was conservative, and a look at the map after this election shows that except for along the coastal areas, it is still very RED.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251
The South was indeed Democratic, but it wasnt Liberal or Progressive.
"Progressivism" is a product of the twentieth century. Woodrow Wilson was considered the leader of the "Progressive Movement" in America. Modern "Liberalism" (as opposed to "Classical Liberalism", which is conservative) is synonymous with "Progressivism," a Marxist/socialist ideology, which has been adopted by the Democrat Party. Barack Obama epitomizes this ideology.
They may be Parties, but they represent distinctive ideologies.
Except for certain demographic areas, it most certainly was conservative, and a look at the map after this election shows that except for along the coastal areas, it is still very RED.
"Progressivism" is a product of the twentieth century. Woodrow Wilson was considered the leader of the "Progressive Movement" in America. Modern "Liberalism" (as opposed to "Classical Liberalism", which is conservative) is synonymous with "Progressivism," a Marxist/socialist ideology, which has been adopted by the Democrat Party. Barack Obama epitomizes this ideology.
I lived in California in the days of Republican control or mostly control. Yes, you are right, for the most part it was very conservative. Like any state it had both, which is the way it should be, but basically it was considered conservative. The only area I can think of that has, for years been liberal is the bay area.
Sure seems like you are on to something. And the current group of crazies in the house seem like they don't even consider appealing to democratic or independent voters in their districts. It is like most are trying to outcrazy each other in the primaries.
Funny, that sounds exactly like the party of 'elections have consequences' and 'we bring a knife to a gunfight' who refused to consider the opinion of anyone who didn't vote for them for the last 8 years. To a democrat compromise means "shut up and do it our way".
I wonder when people will stop thinking just because a candidate is pro or anti gay marriage it will make a huge impact on his/her electability? I certainly hope people vote on more than one or two issues. I know I do; most informed people look at the entire picture. The libs seem to forget, President Obama, when running was opposed to gay marriage, did that stop him from being elected?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
