Howard Dean DNC Chief??? LOL

[Bonnie]

www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/11/8/205524.shtml

Former presidential candidate Howard Dean is considering a bid to become chairman of the National Democratic party.
Steve Grossman, himself a former chairman of the Democratic National committee, said Dena had told him he was thinking about it.
The next chairman will replace Terry McAuliffe, whose term is ending.........

This just makes my day

 

[no1tovote4]

www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/11/8/205524.shtml

Former presidential candidate Howard Dean is considering a bid to become chairman of the National Democratic party.
Steve Grossman, himself a former chairman of the Democratic National committee, said Dena had told him he was thinking about it.
The next chairman will replace Terry McAuliffe, whose term is ending.........

This just makes my day

YeeeeeeeeeAhhhh!

Now that is a good choice! It will definitely bring us all closer together, good thing the Democrats are so big on National Unity and heed the advice of their candidates!

 

[manu1959]

YeeeeeeeeeAhhhh!

Now that is a good choice! It will definitely bring us all closer together, good thing the Democrats are so big on National Unity and heed the advice of their candidates!

being a moron republican that was too dumb to vote for kerry this strikes me as odd that they would move the party even further left....but hey what do i know i am a moron

 

[no1tovote4]

being a moron republican that was too dumb to vote for kerry this strikes me as odd that they would move the party even further left....but hey what do i know i am a moron

:rotflmao:

Yeah, this Libertarian is stupid too!

 

[manu1959]

:rotflmao:

Yeah, this Libertarian is stupid too!

funny the country is run by morons ... really frosts the bacon of those ivy league boys

refresh my memory....wasn't the dem party founded in dixie?

 

[5stringJeff]

Oh please oh please oh please...

BTW, the original Democrat Party was founded by Jefferson and Madison as the opposition to Hamilton's Federalists.

 

[no1tovote4]

Oh please oh please oh please...

BTW, the original Democrat Party was founded by Jefferson and Madison as the opposition to Hamilton's Federalists.

The name of that Party was actually the Democratic Republican Party and was the precursor to the Republican Party, not the Democratic Party.

 

[Avatar4321]

The name of that Party was actually the Democratic Republican Party and was the precursor to the Republican Party, not the Democratic Party.

If i remember right, it was actually a precursor to both parties. The Whigs fell apart (What the heck is a whig anyway?) so there was a power vaccuum which created the Republican and Democrat parties as we now know them. Republicans ran on an anti slavery / Anti Polygamy platform and elected President Lincoln while the Democrats had a split ticket that year. needless to say Lincoln won and the South Seceded from the Union.

I hope we have another Lincoln in the making. We are going to need him. or even better yet another Reagan.

 

[Bonnie]

If i remember right, it was actually a precursor to both parties. The Whigs fell apart (What the heck is a whig anyway?) so there was a power vaccuum which created the Republican and Democrat parties as we now know them. Republicans ran on an anti slavery / Anti Polygamy platform and elected President Lincoln while the Democrats had a split ticket that year. needless to say Lincoln won and the South Seceded from the Union.

I hope we have another Lincoln in the making. We are going to need him. or even better yet another Reagan.

A Whig refers to the British reform party or any American colonist who supported the American Revolution.

 

[no1tovote4]

A Whig refers to the British reform party or any American colonist who supported the American Revolution.

Which is why they fell apart. The war was over, there was no longer a single issue that united the Party.

 

[musicman]

I've never whorn a whig, and I never whill!

 

[5stringJeff]

The name of that Party was actually the Democratic Republican Party and was the precursor to the Republican Party, not the Democratic Party.

Wrong.
The Democratic-Republican Party (which Jefferson and Madison founded) was the major party of the early 1800's. By the time Andrew Jackson rolled around, it had shortened to the Democratic Party. The Whigs rose up to oppose Jacksonian policies, but they were short lived (I haven't read a lot about it, but there seemed to be a lot of infighting). The Republican Party organized in the 1850's as an amalgamation of ex-Whigs, Know-Nothings, and abolitionists. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party still existed and eas electing Presidents. Abe Lincoln's candidacy as a Republican (and his abolitionist-friendly stance) in 1860 galvinized the South against him, which is why the South voted solidly Democratic (and continued to do so until the Reagan Revolution).

 

[Bonnie]

Wrong.
The Democratic-Republican Party (which Jefferson and Madison founded) was the major party of the early 1800's. By the time Andrew Jackson rolled around, it had shortened to the Democratic Party. The Whigs rose up to oppose Jacksonian policies, but they were short lived (I haven't read a lot about it, but there seemed to be a lot of infighting). The Republican Party organized in the 1850's as an amalgamation of ex-Whigs, Know-Nothings, and abolitionists. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party still existed and eas electing Presidents. Abe Lincoln's candidacy as a Republican (and his abolitionist-friendly stance) in 1860 galvinized the South against him, which is why the South voted solidly Democratic (and continued to do so until the Reagan Revolution).

Im going to have to side with you on this re Lincoln..the south was mistrustful of Lincoln way before he was elected President they didn't like his rederic even though he was still taking a pramatic approach to slavery, after the election there was an almost immediate vote in South Carolina for secession.

 

[no1tovote4]

Wrong.
The Democratic-Republican Party (which Jefferson and Madison founded) was the major party of the early 1800's. By the time Andrew Jackson rolled around, it had shortened to the Democratic Party. The Whigs rose up to oppose Jacksonian policies, but they were short lived (I haven't read a lot about it, but there seemed to be a lot of infighting). The Republican Party organized in the 1850's as an amalgamation of ex-Whigs, Know-Nothings, and abolitionists. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party still existed and eas electing Presidents. Abe Lincoln's candidacy as a Republican (and his abolitionist-friendly stance) in 1860 galvinized the South against him, which is why the South voted solidly Democratic (and continued to do so until the Reagan Revolution).

http://www.historyshots.com/parties/

If you notice here, the Democratic-Republican Party was the founding Party of both parties. Notice in the diagram the split of the Party just before Jackson and after the Federal Party was engulfed by the Democratic-Republican Party. The Parties are a split of the original Party associated with Jefferson-Monroe. The Republicans as a Party came later but they came from what used to be members of the Democratic-Republican Party.

 

[5stringJeff]

http://www.historyshots.com/parties/

If you notice here, the Democratic-Republican Party was the founding Party of both parties. Notice in the diagram the split of the Party just before Jackson and after the Federal Party was engulfed by the Democratic-Republican Party. The Parties are a split of the original Party associated with Jefferson-Monroe. The Republicans as a Party came later but they came from what used to be members of the Democratic-Republican Party.

I understand what you are getting at, but it is still very misleading to say that the GOP came from the Democratic-Republican party. It didn't. Some members of the D-R Party formed splinter groups who eventually organized into the Whigs; when the Whigs splintered, some of those groups formed the Republicans. Meanwhile, the D-R party simply renamed themselves the Democratic Party, and while the ideology has changed (drastically), it is the same party.

 

[manu1959]

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/110804_stolen_election.shtml

 

[KarlMarx]

www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/11/8/205524.shtml

Former presidential candidate Howard Dean is considering a bid to become chairman of the National Democratic party.
Steve Grossman, himself a former chairman of the Democratic National committee, said Dena had told him he was thinking about it.
The next chairman will replace Terry McAuliffe, whose term is ending.........

This just makes my day

Terry McAuliffe is out, Dean is in...hmmm I wonder.... are the Clintons losing their grip on the ol' Democratic National Party?

 

[Bonnie]

Terry McAuliffe is out, Dean is in...hmmm I wonder.... are the Clintons losing their grip on the ol' Democratic National Party?

You know what's interesting about that is it's very telling just how liberal the Democrat Party has become. Truly if the Clinton's can't hold sway on the on the party and Dean thinks he has a shot, that is frightening and comical all in one. :cof:

 

[theim]

Can any Dem here please explain this thought process?

"My party has lost 3 elections in a row. My party is getting more and more liberal. My party is losing worse and worse. Therefore, we need a man who is not only very liberal, but a verifiable psycho as our Chairman."

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Can any Dem here please explain this thought process?

"My party has lost 3 elections in a row. My party is getting more and more liberal. My party is losing worse and worse. Therefore, we need a man who is not only very liberal, but a verifiable psycho as our Chairman."

Break out the orange beanies again! <---a deanie dimocrit