U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-21-2013, 08:58 PM
 
2,542 posts, read 3,613,694 times
Reputation: 994

Advertisements

You mean in gitmo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-21-2013, 09:01 PM
 
Location: In your head, rent free
14,110 posts, read 7,630,610 times
Reputation: 7096
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Not possible --- we simply cannot add $2 trillion or more every year to the national debt. The current wild spending ways of the democrats certainly appeal to those who don't want to have to work for a living but there is only so much longer it can continue.
Exactly, this country won't survive another 30 or 40 years if Democrats continue to rack up trillions on top of trillions in debt. After 30 more years of this type of spending this country will favor the new Chinese owners.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2013, 09:03 PM
 
47,576 posts, read 60,469,168 times
Reputation: 22275
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
With their current platform of being anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-minorities, anti-immigrant, anti-poor people, pro -military and most importantly pro-obstructionist , the party of "no", the party of "do nothing"---- I don't think the GOP has a chance to regain the White House until they make some major changes.
Okay -- the Republicans have to turn against Christianity, and want the destruction of Israel, and want unlimited immigration of illiterate cheap labor types to bring wages down and put Americans out of work and spend like maniacs on government handouts just like the democrats to win some votes --- but then they'd be just like the democrats so what's the point in having two parties?

We're becoming a one-party ruled nation just like Mexico and Cuba. Only there's no place for Americans to run when things work out badly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2013, 09:03 PM
 
49,982 posts, read 26,499,057 times
Reputation: 15598
Meh...more like 3 to 4 years. Anything beyond that, I'm not so sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2013, 09:41 PM
 
693 posts, read 815,475 times
Reputation: 1546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnutella View Post
Going back to the start of Abraham Lincoln's presidency, which is when the two-party system we know today first started, there have been two extended periods of Republican dominance in the White House, and one period of Democrat dominance.

For 72 years from 1861 to 1933, the United States had 52 years of Republican presidency, and only 20 years of Democrat presidency between three presidents (Andrew Johnson, Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson). The end of this era came with the ouster of Herbert Hoover.

For 36 years from 1933 to 1969, the United States had 28 years of Democrat presidency, and Dwight Eisenhower had the only eight years of Republican presidency during this time. This era ended when Lyndon B. Johnson chose not to run for reelection.

More recently, for 40 years from 1969 to 2009, the Republicans had the upper hand again, with 28 years of the presidency to only 12 years for the Democrats (Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton). It appears to me that this era has ended with George W. Bush's second term.

Right now, I believe that we've entered a second period of Democrat dominance. Why? Because Herbert Hoover, Lyndon B. Johnson and George W. Bush were all highly unpopular when they left office. Hoover was unpopular because of an economic calamity. Johnson was unpopular because of a controversial war. Bush was unpopular because of an economic calamity and a controversial war.

It took the Republicans a generation to recover from Hoover's bad reputation, and it took the Democrats a generation to recover from Johnson's bad reputation. Rightly or wrongly, Bush has a bad reputation, and I wonder if it'll take a generation for the Republicans to recover from it.

With that said, it's worth noting that the less popular political party has put at least one president into the White House for two terms during the dominance of the opposite party. Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson were both two-term Democrats during a long era of Republican dominance. Dwight Eisenhower was a two-term Republican when the Democrats had the upper hand, and Bill Clinton was a two-term Democrat during the most recent Republican era.

The longest period of time that one political party has had control of the White House is 20 years, when the Democrats had it from 1933 to 1953. There were two 16-year periods of one-party control, both by the Republicans, from 1869 to 1885, and 1897 to 1913. Other than that, neither party has been in control for more than 12 years at a time, which illustrates that Americans don't tolerate continuous one-party rule well.

Any thoughts?

I agree. I've shared my thoughts on this in numerous other threads, but they're well worth repeating.

I think the GOP needs some major changes if they want to stay as a viable alternative in American politics as we progress into the future.

The demographics are just against them. Not one minority group votes for the GOP. They all overwhelmingly vote for the Democrats at this point in time. With each passing election cycle, the white percentage of the voting bloc decreases, and the minority percentage increases. This will continually work against the GOP in the future and will only accelerate with more time. By 2050 the US will be a minority-majority nation and will be roughly 45% white. Therefore, the GOP needs to start trying to draw in more minority voters if they want to stay viable in the future. However, they don't seem to be doing this at all. In fact, they're doing the reverse it seems. Throw in their staunch and unrelenting contrarian views on a plethora of social issues (history and demographic trends show that the GOP is on the wrong side of this too) and I think it's fairly obvious that the GOP has their work cut out for them. I really think it's adapt or die time for the GOP. They need to evolve because America is evolving. I don't see them changing much in the next four years, so unless there is some unforeseen disaster (like a complete economic collapse or something- doubtful), then I think the Dems will win another presidential election in 2016 and then have that candidate (whoever it is) be elected again in 2020 as well.

Only time will tell though. We will have to wait and see.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2013, 09:48 PM
 
3,349 posts, read 2,647,823 times
Reputation: 1700
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
With their current platform of being anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-minorities, anti-immigrant, anti-poor people, pro -military and most importantly pro-obstructionist , the party of "no", the party of "do nothing"---- I don't think the GOP has a chance to regain the White House until they make some major changes.

What an ignorant post...... they are not anti women or anti minorities or anti poor

They are against free contraception and unlimited abortions..... in other words, anti irresponsible behavior

They are against freeloaders who milk welfare, NOT against those who work who are poor

They are not anti minorites..... the major cities in Texas and Atlanta (in the South.... gasp!) are the best cites for blacks as any black publication will tell you. Not to mention, the least segregated cities are in the South. If they hated minorites, don't you think they would stay away from them?

Anti gay, I will give you that one as well as pro military

Otherwise, you have been told what to think by some of the most ignorant progressive tools the world has to offer
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2013, 09:50 PM
 
Location: southern california
55,480 posts, read 74,374,114 times
Reputation: 47872
dems and reps wont exist after a few year more years of debting. to a slave master it does not matter if you were dem or rep when he has you in a lettuce field working, its all the same.
but first must come the gun grab, very important.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2013, 09:59 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,389 posts, read 20,021,539 times
Reputation: 8319
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
I wish they were just one-liners. Unfortunately the GOP's lack of regard for those groups have deep insidious roots in the party that will be difficult for them to overcome. They can't just act like a party of inclusion ---they actually have to start including more people, or risk representing an ever-smaller sliver of the nation.


Fair enough.


Now that Democrats have "included" and are "representing" every mooch in America regardless of race, sex, handicap, veteran status or sexual orientation, what will happen when they are unable to continue bribing their highly diverse base of mooch voters with money borrowed from China?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2013, 10:11 PM
 
1,748 posts, read 1,022,804 times
Reputation: 848
What might be nice is if we could get rid of the need to have an "election year" and instead shrink it down to a few months. As well as disallow Corporate money to go into any politicians wallet, while we are at it lets instead PUBLICLY FUND elections so as we can free up the politicians time instead of them spending 3-4hrs a day fund raising and also cut out the influence of Big money that I think would help us out a lot more. Not only that but if you publicly fund elections there will be no way to hide fraud AND you can actually get more 3rd parties involved instead of needing millions to become a candidate. Another thing that would be nice is if you are a under performing House Rep or Senator you will be primaried and not just any stupid bill either something that is actually helpful for the COUNTRY and not the politicians cronies.

But either dem or republican I seriously doubt this will happen anytime soon sadly
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2013, 10:14 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC (in my mind)
7,946 posts, read 15,004,539 times
Reputation: 4481
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
Well you don't support it then. Why would religious institutions or businesses not recognize a marriage?
Because it's their constitutional right not to given their religious conviction. Most businesses would support it, many already have benefits for same-sex domestic partners. Some though, such as Hobby Lobby, would likely refuse to provide spousal benefits for same sex couples and it is their right to do so. Giving gays full marriage rights under the law, fine, but forcing people to deny their religious convictions is anti-constitution. It will probably happen though, just like e-Harmony was forced to create a gay dating service.

If course, its completely bigotted and unethical to take this postion. The enlightened approach would be to force any businesses who provide heterosexual spousal benefits to also provide same-sex spousal benefits, force religious institutions to marry gay people and hire gay employees, and pass hate-speech laws that prevents churches and parents from teaching that homosexuality is sin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:20 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top