Can any republican tell me why any intelligent person should be republican?

[AntiParty]

What wide range are you referring to? 2.9 million jobs is the official number the CBO gave.

I think it is unfair you are being so black and white about this. Why can't you just admit that it is a good thing the stimulus created millions of jobs. Facts are what they are.

"In other words, between 1.0 million and 2.9 million people employed in June owed their jobs to the Recovery Act." That is from your link.

2.9 was the upper limit on the estimate. The lower limit was 1 million.

Three months later, the range was 0.4 million to 2.4 million jobs.

It's a fine thing that people had jobs. I maintain that jobs would have been had one way or another. The recession ended shortly after Obama took office, and not because of anything Obama did. Growth would have occurred one way or another. McCain would have had a stimulus package of some sort. Whatever plan of attack McCain took, he would have executed it better because that would have been his priority. He wouldn't have been distracted by a healthcare boondoggle. Economic recovery would have been job 1 for McCain. He wouldn't have spent a year telling America that he knows they care about jobs and he'll definitely get around to focusing on that when he gets done mucking up their insurance.

No the stimulus makes it quite clear millions of jobs were created directly from the stimulus. Economists say its biggest problem is that it wasn't big enough. Had it been bigger, we would have more jobs.

You are obsessing over the exact number while intitially denying Obama didn't create any jobs. Obama critics like you come across so disingenuous. Concede for once.

Stimulus and Bailouts came when VERY large corporations noticed they had so much power in Congress they could use fear tactics to get finances from tax payers and not just their business. Anyone see the CEO's that just got the bailout went on a Luxury vacation to celebrate?

In short; Say you are a big American business and this is what you say to Congress....

"I'm about to fail. I'm going to take X many jobs with me. Either help, or the economy will go with me"

One of the banks that demanded a bail out only had a 2 PAGE REPORT ON WHY THEY NEEDED IT! 2 pages on why you need a Federal Bailout?! It was blatantly obvious at that point that Corporations were taking advantage of Congress. Both parties were part of it and guilty.

 

[Amelia]

What wide range are you referring to? 2.9 million jobs is the official number the CBO gave.

I think it is unfair you are being so black and white about this. Why can't you just admit that it is a good thing the stimulus created millions of jobs. Facts are what they are.

"In other words, between 1.0 million and 2.9 million people employed in June owed their jobs to the Recovery Act." That is from your link.

2.9 was the upper limit on the estimate. The lower limit was 1 million.

Three months later, the range was 0.4 million to 2.4 million jobs.

It's a fine thing that people had jobs. I maintain that jobs would have been had one way or another. The recession ended shortly after Obama took office, and not because of anything Obama did. Growth would have occurred one way or another. McCain would have had a stimulus package of some sort. Whatever plan of attack McCain took, he would have executed it better because that would have been his priority. He wouldn't have been distracted by a healthcare boondoggle. Economic recovery would have been job 1 for McCain. He wouldn't have spent a year telling America that he knows they care about jobs and he'll definitely get around to focusing on that when he gets done mucking up their insurance.

No the stimulus makes it quite clear millions of jobs were created directly from the stimulus. Economists say its biggest problem is that it wasn't big enough. Had it been bigger, we would have more jobs.

You are obsessing over the exact number while intitially denying Obama didn't create any jobs. Obama critics like you come across so disingenuous. Concede for once.

I am not denying that the stimulus had an impact on jobs.

I maintain that McCain would also have had a stimulus package and he would have paid more attention to making sure that his plan of attack was executed well.

There is no way that he would have sat around and done nothing about the economy. His advisors would have been at least as good as Obama's. And his priorities would have been better than Obama's.

And the resilience of the American people would have had at least as good a chance to be rewarded under McCain as it was under Obama, and in my opinion a significantly better chance.

Tax increases, Obamacare, burgeoning regulations ... these are drags.

If Republicans weren't there to stop Obama, the economy might have faced even greater drag in the form of cap & trade.


I am conservative in the sense of not liking extreme changes. I don't like extreme changes in any direction. The greater the change the greater the risk of damage from unforeseen consequences. When Republicans are in power, I expect Democrats to be the party of no, and they did not disappoint during Bush's tenure. I wish they had supported him when he attempted immigration reform, but they didn't want him to get credit any more than Republicans want Obama to get credit. Politics is king, no matter which party holds the White House. And inasmuch as this results in gridlock, I think that for the most part that is a good thing. I would like some things to change, but not too much, not too fast, and so I am very happy to be part of the party of no.

And the people will find a way to grow no matter what.

 

[Billy000]

"In other words, between 1.0 million and 2.9 million people employed in June owed their jobs to the Recovery Act." That is from your link.

2.9 was the upper limit on the estimate. The lower limit was 1 million.

Three months later, the range was 0.4 million to 2.4 million jobs.

It's a fine thing that people had jobs. I maintain that jobs would have been had one way or another. The recession ended shortly after Obama took office, and not because of anything Obama did. Growth would have occurred one way or another. McCain would have had a stimulus package of some sort. Whatever plan of attack McCain took, he would have executed it better because that would have been his priority. He wouldn't have been distracted by a healthcare boondoggle. Economic recovery would have been job 1 for McCain. He wouldn't have spent a year telling America that he knows they care about jobs and he'll definitely get around to focusing on that when he gets done mucking up their insurance.

No the stimulus makes it quite clear millions of jobs were created directly from the stimulus. Economists say its biggest problem is that it wasn't big enough. Had it been bigger, we would have more jobs.

You are obsessing over the exact number while intitially denying Obama didn't create any jobs. Obama critics like you come across so disingenuous. Concede for once.

I am not denying that the stimulus had an impact on jobs.

I maintain that McCain would also have had a stimulus package and he would have paid more attention to making sure that his plan of attack was executed well.

There is no way that he would have sat around and done nothing about the economy. His advisors would have been at least as good as Obama's. And his priorities would have been better than Obama's.

And the resilience of the American people would have had at least as good a chance to be rewarded under McCain as it was under Obama, and in my opinion a significantly better chance.

Tax increases, Obamacare, burgeoning regulations ... these are drags.

If Republicans weren't there to stop Obama, the economy might have faced even greater drag in the form of cap & trade.


I am conservative in the sense of not liking extreme changes. I don't like extreme changes in any direction. The greater the change the greater the risk of damage from unforeseen consequences. When Republicans are in power, I expect Democrats to be the party of no, and they did not disappoint during Bush's tenure. I wish they had supported him when he attempted immigration reform, but they didn't want him to get credit anymore than Republicans want Obama to get credit. Politics is king, no matter which party holds the White House. And inasmuch as this results in gridlock, I think that for the most part that is a good thing. I would like some things to change, but not too much, not too fast, and so I am very happy to be part of the party of no.

And the people will find a way to grow no matter what.

Obama extended the Bush tax cuts and is responsible for the biggest tax cut for the middle class since Reagan. These are things republicans like to deny simply because he is a democrat.

Regulations really don't have a significant impact on job growth. We have had consistent job growth since the stimulus package was put in place.

 

[Avatar4321]

No the stimulus makes it quite clear millions of jobs were created directly from the stimulus. Economists say its biggest problem is that it wasn't big enough. Had it been bigger, we would have more jobs.

You are obsessing over the exact number while intitially denying Obama didn't create any jobs. Obama critics like you come across so disingenuous. Concede for once.

I am not denying that the stimulus had an impact on jobs.

I maintain that McCain would also have had a stimulus package and he would have paid more attention to making sure that his plan of attack was executed well.

There is no way that he would have sat around and done nothing about the economy. His advisors would have been at least as good as Obama's. And his priorities would have been better than Obama's.

And the resilience of the American people would have had at least as good a chance to be rewarded under McCain as it was under Obama, and in my opinion a significantly better chance.

Tax increases, Obamacare, burgeoning regulations ... these are drags.

If Republicans weren't there to stop Obama, the economy might have faced even greater drag in the form of cap & trade.


I am conservative in the sense of not liking extreme changes. I don't like extreme changes in any direction. The greater the change the greater the risk of damage from unforeseen consequences. When Republicans are in power, I expect Democrats to be the party of no, and they did not disappoint during Bush's tenure. I wish they had supported him when he attempted immigration reform, but they didn't want him to get credit anymore than Republicans want Obama to get credit. Politics is king, no matter which party holds the White House. And inasmuch as this results in gridlock, I think that for the most part that is a good thing. I would like some things to change, but not too much, not too fast, and so I am very happy to be part of the party of no.

And the people will find a way to grow no matter what.

Obama extended the Bush tax cuts and is responsible for the biggest tax cut for he middle class since Reagan. These are things republicans like to deny simply because he is a democrat.

Biggest middle class tax cut? Which is why taxes have gone up?

 

[Amelia]

No the stimulus makes it quite clear millions of jobs were created directly from the stimulus. Economists say its biggest problem is that it wasn't big enough. Had it been bigger, we would have more jobs.

You are obsessing over the exact number while intitially denying Obama didn't create any jobs. Obama critics like you come across so disingenuous. Concede for once.

I am not denying that the stimulus had an impact on jobs.

I maintain that McCain would also have had a stimulus package and he would have paid more attention to making sure that his plan of attack was executed well.

There is no way that he would have sat around and done nothing about the economy. His advisors would have been at least as good as Obama's. And his priorities would have been better than Obama's.

And the resilience of the American people would have had at least as good a chance to be rewarded under McCain as it was under Obama, and in my opinion a significantly better chance.

Tax increases, Obamacare, burgeoning regulations ... these are drags.

If Republicans weren't there to stop Obama, the economy might have faced even greater drag in the form of cap & trade.


I am conservative in the sense of not liking extreme changes. I don't like extreme changes in any direction. The greater the change the greater the risk of damage from unforeseen consequences. When Republicans are in power, I expect Democrats to be the party of no, and they did not disappoint during Bush's tenure. I wish they had supported him when he attempted immigration reform, but they didn't want him to get credit anymore than Republicans want Obama to get credit. Politics is king, no matter which party holds the White House. And inasmuch as this results in gridlock, I think that for the most part that is a good thing. I would like some things to change, but not too much, not too fast, and so I am very happy to be part of the party of no.

And the people will find a way to grow no matter what.

Obama extended the Bush tax cuts and is responsible for the biggest tax cut for he middle class since Reagan. These are things republicans like to deny simply because he is a democrat.

I'll let someone else field this. It's past my bedtime.


Oh hi, Avatar.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I don't mean conservative. I mean republican specifically. Why should anyone vote republicans in our government?

What good have republicans of today done for this country? What are their accomplishments?

I want real answers. Don't say crap like "because they are better than democrats". That's a lame answer as always. I don't care what you think of democrats or liberals in general. Let's just pretend for a moment liberals don't exist.

Here are some specific questions:

1) What have republicans of today done for the middle class?

2) If tax cuts are so effective as you claim, why is it that 2x as many private jobs have been created in Obama's 5 years than in Bush's 8?

3) Corporate profits are at an all time high. Why are tax cuts for the investment class and deregulation necessary? What other republican policies are there that create jobs?

4) How is it the Republican Party not "the party of no"?

First of all, it isn't your place to question who or what party someone votes for.

You seek real words with hollow questions. Second of all, you aren't the arbiter of free speech. You don't get to tell people what to say in your own threads.

1) What have Democrats done for the middle class?

2) If you're so high on Obama's job creation, why wont you acknowledge that nearly all of those jobs were part time? In 2013 for example, 77% percent (or 731,000) of them were part time, not full time. You forget, Obama oversaw the 6th largest tax hike in American history as well.

3) Moreover, what has he done to help the poor?

4) How is it you call Republicans the "party of no"? Don't you have Harry Reid up there in the Senate blocking Republican bills left, right, and sideways? Don't you have a president blocking a pipeline arbitrarily, after the State Department cleared it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm not a democrat grandpa small brain.....

You just happen to argue their talking points.

I am single topic, single opinion. You Party people categorize people into parties based on 1 opinion generally. You probably saw me voice my opinion agreeing with the Left at some point and categorized me as a Democratic Leftist......

It's easier for people to do this than to actually wonder what someone is thinking in a more broad retrospect......

Example; "He believes in Unions. He must also believe in Abortion, lot's of spending and gun grabbing"

I say single topic, single opinion all the time. Bias people only read one thing and never read anything else. 'He's in this party!" Total ignorance of politics.

You forgot to mention the never wrong part.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This guy doesn't say it all? "The Democrats are STUPID"........Isn't that enough reason to join the Republicans? I mean, that's all Fox News says all day and it works on some. They never seem to have substance and get busted openly by fact checkers on a daily basis but this "Democrats are stupid" motion is working in specific area's in America.

Everyone should demand a party show their qualities. Not just insult other parties. This is 12 year old talk. "They are stupid", "I know you are but what am I". If the debate is this, you don't know political substance at all.

He didn't say anything about Democrats, genius.

But thanks for proving conclusively that you are a Democratic Party hack.

The entire post is about Republicans dude. How can you be so blatantly ignorant to the point? You do realize that Democrats are the equal and opposite party? Me stating that you should educate yourself on Democrats isn't bias.

How old are you? Why is it hard for you to comprehend this>?

It was? Let me check that out.

Because liberals are fucking loons.....


Good enough reason? I think it is

Damn, not a mention of Republicans either, still wrong, still a hack.

 

[Billy000]

I don't mean conservative. I mean republican specifically. Why should anyone vote republicans in our government?

What good have republicans of today done for this country? What are their accomplishments?

I want real answers. Don't say crap like "because they are better than democrats". That's a lame answer as always. I don't care what you think of democrats or liberals in general. Let's just pretend for a moment liberals don't exist.

Here are some specific questions:

1) What have republicans of today done for the middle class?

2) If tax cuts are so effective as you claim, why is it that 2x as many private jobs have been created in Obama's 5 years than in Bush's 8?

3) Corporate profits are at an all time high. Why are tax cuts for the investment class and deregulation necessary? What other republican policies are there that create jobs?

4) How is it the Republican Party not "the party of no"?

First of all, it isn't your place to question who or what party someone votes for.

You seek real words with hollow questions. Second of all, you aren't the arbiter of free speech. You don't get to tell people what to say in your own threads.

1) What have Democrats done for the middle class?

2) If you're so high on Obama's job creation, why wont you acknowledge that nearly all of those jobs were part time? In 2013 for example, 77% percent (or 731,000) of them were part time, not full time. You forget, Obama oversaw the 6th largest tax hike in American history as well.

3) Moreover, what has he done to help the poor?

4) How is it you call Republicans the "party of no"? Don't you have Harry Reid up there in the Senate blocking Republican bills left, right, and sideways? Don't you have a president blocking a pipeline arbitrarily, after the State Department cleared it?

TK you are the poster child of hypocrisy lol. You criticize the left constantly. Don't give me your self righteous bullshit.

1) Obama is responsible for the biggest tax cut since Reagan.

2) A president only has so much control over what businesses do you goon. How exactly is Obama supposed to control that?

3) He extended unemployment benefits and food stamps. He also provided housing assistance through the stimulus package.

4) They are against progressivism of any kind.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I don't mean conservative. I mean republican specifically. Why should anyone vote republicans in our government?

What good have republicans of today done for this country? What are their accomplishments?

I want real answers. Don't say crap like "because they are better than democrats". That's a lame answer as always. I don't care what you think of democrats or liberals in general. Let's just pretend for a moment liberals don't exist.

Here are some specific questions:

1) What have republicans of today done for the middle class?

2) If tax cuts are so effective as you claim, why is it that 2x as many private jobs have been created in Obama's 5 years than in Bush's 8?

3) Corporate profits are at an all time high. Why are tax cuts for the investment class and deregulation necessary? What other republican policies are there that create jobs?

4) How is it the Republican Party not "the party of no"?

First of all, it isn't your place to question who or what party someone votes for.

You seek real words with hollow questions. Second of all, you aren't the arbiter of free speech. You don't get to tell people what to say in your own threads.

1) What have Democrats done for the middle class?

2) If you're so high on Obama's job creation, why wont you acknowledge that nearly all of those jobs were part time? In 2013 for example, 77% percent (or 731,000) of them were part time, not full time. You forget, Obama oversaw the 6th largest tax hike in American history as well.

3) Moreover, what has he done to help the poor?

4) How is it you call Republicans the "party of no"? Don't you have Harry Reid up there in the Senate blocking Republican bills left, right, and sideways? Don't you have a president blocking a pipeline arbitrarily, after the State Department cleared it?

TK you are the poster child of hypocrisy lol. You criticize the left constantly. Don't give me your self righteous bullshit.

1) Obama is responsible for the biggest tax cut since Reagan.

2) A president only has so much control over what businesses do you goon. How exactly is Obama supposed to control that?

3) He extended unemployment benefits and food stamps. He also provided housing assistance through the stimulus package.

4) They are against progressivism of any kind.

I criticize the left because they present as easy targets, Billy. Your thread is such an example.

1) Then he let them expire. So in reality he oversaw a rather sizable tax hike.

2) Stop making excuses Billy. How does a president control all of that? By introducing reasonable jobs legislation.

3) He's supposed to be leading them towards a job, not by the hand.

4) You do realize that Democrats are "progressive" as well right? Didn't you get through calling me a hypocrite earlier?

 

[TemplarKormac]

LOL. You must be camping in this thread, Billy.

 

[Billy000]

First of all, it isn't your place to question who or what party someone votes for.

You seek real words with hollow questions. Second of all, you aren't the arbiter of free speech. You don't get to tell people what to say in your own threads.

1) What have Democrats done for the middle class?

2) If you're so high on Obama's job creation, why wont you acknowledge that nearly all of those jobs were part time? In 2013 for example, 77% percent (or 731,000) of them were part time, not full time. You forget, Obama oversaw the 6th largest tax hike in American history as well.

3) Moreover, what has he done to help the poor?

4) How is it you call Republicans the "party of no"? Don't you have Harry Reid up there in the Senate blocking Republican bills left, right, and sideways? Don't you have a president blocking a pipeline arbitrarily, after the State Department cleared it?

TK you are the poster child of hypocrisy lol. You criticize the left constantly. Don't give me your self righteous bullshit.

1) Obama is responsible for the biggest tax cut since Reagan.

2) A president only has so much control over what businesses do you goon. How exactly is Obama supposed to control that?

3) He extended unemployment benefits and food stamps. He also provided housing assistance through the stimulus package.

4) They are against progressivism of any kind.

I criticize the left because they present as easy targets, Billy. Your thread is such an example.

1) Then he let them expire. So in reality he oversaw a rather sizable tax hike.

2) Stop making excuses Billy. How does a president control all of that? By introducing reasonable jobs legislation.

3) He's supposed to be leading them towards a job, not by the hand.

4) You do realize that Democrats are "progressive" as well right? Didn't you get through calling me a hypocrite earlier?

1) you do realize that tax cuts run up our debt right? Revenue pays the government's bills. Right now our revenue as a percentage of our GDP is historically low.

2) Yeah and the stimulus created millions of jobs.

3) He did. In the mean time, shouldn't people who lose their jobs against their will be provided relief? We lost 8 million jobs within the course of 9 months. Get a clue.

4) Um yes democrats are progressive. Yes you are still a hypocrite.

 

[Freewill]

TK you are the poster child of hypocrisy lol. You criticize the left constantly. Don't give me your self righteous bullshit.

1) Obama is responsible for the biggest tax cut since Reagan.

2) A president only has so much control over what businesses do you goon. How exactly is Obama supposed to control that?

3) He extended unemployment benefits and food stamps. He also provided housing assistance through the stimulus package.

4) They are against progressivism of any kind.

I criticize the left because they present as easy targets, Billy. Your thread is such an example.

1) Then he let them expire. So in reality he oversaw a rather sizable tax hike.

2) Stop making excuses Billy. How does a president control all of that? By introducing reasonable jobs legislation.

3) He's supposed to be leading them towards a job, not by the hand.

4) You do realize that Democrats are "progressive" as well right? Didn't you get through calling me a hypocrite earlier?

1) you do realize that tax cuts run up our debt right? Revenue pays the government's bills. Right now our revenue as a percentage of our GDP is historically low.

2) Yeah and the stimulus created millions of jobs.

3) He did. In the mean time, shouldn't people who lose their jobs against their will be provided relief? We lost 8 million jobs within the course of 9 months. Get a clue.

4) Um yes democrats are progressive. Yes you are still a hypocrite.

1) Did you know that in 2013 the federal government took in record revenue? Go to this sit and see. Historical Amount of Revenue by Source

2) At what price to our children? How much debt causes how many job loses, it is impossible to tell. But going by those on disability, at a record high, those not participating in the work force, at a record high, and the UE rate it seems like we have not added any real jobs. Remember as we let our border be flooded with illegals and the birth rate thousands of jobs have to be added just to stay even.

 

[Billy000]

I criticize the left because they present as easy targets, Billy. Your thread is such an example.

1) Then he let them expire. So in reality he oversaw a rather sizable tax hike.

2) Stop making excuses Billy. How does a president control all of that? By introducing reasonable jobs legislation.

3) He's supposed to be leading them towards a job, not by the hand.

4) You do realize that Democrats are "progressive" as well right? Didn't you get through calling me a hypocrite earlier?

1) you do realize that tax cuts run up our debt right? Revenue pays the government's bills. Right now our revenue as a percentage of our GDP is historically low.

2) Yeah and the stimulus created millions of jobs.

3) He did. In the mean time, shouldn't people who lose their jobs against their will be provided relief? We lost 8 million jobs within the course of 9 months. Get a clue.

4) Um yes democrats are progressive. Yes you are still a hypocrite.

1) Did you know that in 2013 the federal government took in record revenue? Go to this sit and see. Historical Amount of Revenue by Source

2) At what price to our children? How much debt causes how many job loses, it is impossible to tell. But going by those on disability, at a record high, those not participating in the work force, at a record high, and the UE rate it seems like we have not added any real jobs. Remember as we let our border be flooded with illegals and the birth rate thousands of jobs have to be added just to stay even.

1) That stat refers to raw dollars. Inflation and the size of the economy must be taken into account. The only accurate way to measure revenue is as a percentage of GDP. As a percentage of GDP, it was its highest in 2000 at 20%. Now it is at 16. The government is very much under funded because of Bush's tax cuts. It is a chief reason our debt is so high. And yes, over spending from both Bush and Obama has contributed.

Look I agree Obama has spent a lot. Way too much on defense. However aside from that, it is completely stupid to put the chief of the blame on him for our economic problems. To put most of the blame on Obama for the labor participation is complete non sense. A president only has so much control over the economy.

 

[The Rabbi]

Billy the ignorant troll continues trolling.

 

[SAYIT]

Here's how I posited the two-party to my kids....

Democrats take from the haves, and give the the have-nots.

Republicans have by hard work, risk, and exposure of capital.

You can either side with the rich taking riches from the Republican rich through deceit and guilt...

or you can simply make your own way in life and provide for yourself and your family.

Don't take offense to this statement but it's very important people recognize this...

Democracy has NOTHING to do with welfare politics. Neither does socialism, neither does capitalism. Welfare is an entity on it's own and you would be surprised at how many Christian Republicans actually want to help the truly needy, just not the lazy sloth moochers.

You should do a search on what a "Democracy" actually is before judging it. Note that just like all organizations, it's corrupt. You may want to do a search on what a "Republic' is too.

You may want to cease being such a pompous jackass.
Those "Christian Repubs" want to choose what causes they will support with their resources and to what extent.
Dems want to choose for everyone what causes we must support and use the power of gov't to confiscate private wealth.

 

[Paperman299]

Quite truthfully I am not sure what you expect the party that has not been in power for the last 7 years to do.

...

I can only go by history and I see nothing in the past history of the DNC to be proud of. I certainly would not vote for the party of slavery no matter how long ago and no matter how they make the claim things have changed because they have bought the black vote.

The EPA, Clean Water Act, the end of segregation, end of poll taxes, the end of Jim Crow, the earned income tax credit, and support for every civil rights act since the civil war makes me want to be a Republican.

If these legislative accomplishments are your reasons for voting Republican, and you believe it's only the party in power that makes the rules, then it's time you seriously considered switching parties (here's links for Senate history and House history)

The EPA - Proposed by Republican President Richard Nixon, but ratified by both the House and Senate, each controlled by Democrats. It's also worth noting that the legislative branch was very supportive at this time of environmental efforts, and the year previous to Nixon's resolution had passed the National Environmental Protection Act.

The Clean Water Act - Introduced in 1971 by a Democrat, passed both Democratic-controlled Houses of Congress, and was VETOED by Nixon. His veto was overridden

The Civil Rights Act (end of de jure segregation) - Introduced in 1963 by a Democrat, passed both Democrat-controlled Houses, and signed into law by Democratic president Lyndon B. Johnson

The Earned Income Tax Credit - Designed as a proposal by a Democrat and added to the Internal Revenue Code in 1975 when both Houses had Democrat majorities (though notably with broad partisan support)

Here is a link to an eHow on registering with the Democratic Party.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Can any republican tell me why any intelligent person should be republican?

Sure.

But it would all sail miles over your pin head at light speed, anyway. So, really, there's no point in it.

 

[jillian]

I could ask the same question of Democrats their record is no more impressive as many have said on this board including myself there is very little if any difference between the two parties.

unless you believe in a working supreme court, a working congress, reproductive choice, equal pay for women....

shall i go on?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I could ask the same question of Democrats their record is no more impressive as many have said on this board including myself there is very little if any difference between the two parties.

unless you believe in a working supreme court, a working congress, reproductive choice, equal pay for women....

shall i go on?

Don't bother because any intelligent reader will know most of it is bullshit propaganda ment to garner money & votes & not much more.