The 2012 Democrat Party Convention

[Avatar4321]

They are free to do whatever platform they want. They chose not to include God and Jerusalem. That's fine. Im not the one they need to worry about there. God is. I think it's foolish to act in a way that can anger a most benevolent and gracious God, and I, of course, recommend against it. But if they really wanted to do that, it was up to them. It showed a real contrast between Republicans and Democrats in that regard.

With that said and done, i think some of them realized the mistake here, even if they think they need to do it just to convince some voters. personally, Id rather them just be honest rather than lie to people. It's not like God doesn't know their hearts. Of course, the Jewish vote might be affected by the Jerusalem prong, but did adding God and Jersusalem really make a difference? They had a very public vote under duress that at least half voted against. They made their displeasure over it very public.

With all that, does anyone think they are sincere with this change? Does anyone think that changing the platform will make voters believe they actually mean that? Or will the boos and the duress suggest to voters that they are just trying to pander?

I cant just hearts. I dont know the answer to those questions. I can make an educated guess, but I could be wrong. I think it may be less wise to falsely acknowledge God for political purposes than to disregard him all together. Im not sure if or how God ranks things in that regard.

What is done is done, but will these changes mean anything?

 

[peach174]

The democrats are a fractured party in disarray. They have a very powerful left wing base of atheists and anti-semites that is out of step with the majority of Americans . Apparently, out of step with many democrats as well.

The republicans are a fractured party in disarray. They have a very powerful right-wing base of Evangelical Christians that are out of step with the majority of Americans . Apparently, out of step with many republicans as well.

-----------------------------------

2 sides of the same coin, sir.

It was Evangelical Christians in the Democratic party that wanted God and Jerusalem back on the platform.
President Obama could not afford to lose a large amount of the votes from Blacks, Hispanics and Jews.

 

[Katzndogz]

The democrats are a fractured party in disarray. They have a very powerful left wing base of atheists and anti-semites that is out of step with the majority of Americans . Apparently, out of step with many democrats as well.

The republicans are a fractured party in disarray. They have a very powerful right-wing base of Evangelical Christians that are out of step with the majority of Americans . Apparently, out of step with many republicans as well.

-----------------------------------

2 sides of the same coin, sir.

It was Evangelical Christians in the Democratic party that wanted God and Jerusalem back on the platform.

They certainly got put in their place too! When Ted Strickland made that motion, and specifically said that he was a pastor of his church, how do you think that went over for democrats? No one asked him how he felt right after his motion was so soundly rejected and booed. obama might have lost Strickland's vote.

 

[Merchant_of_Meh]

The democrats are a fractured party in disarray. They have a very powerful left wing base of atheists and anti-semites that is out of step with the majority of Americans . Apparently, out of step with many democrats as well.

The republicans are a fractured party in disarray. They have a very powerful right-wing base of Evangelical Christians that are out of step with the majority of Americans . Apparently, out of step with many republicans as well.

-----------------------------------

2 sides of the same coin, sir.

The difference is, the republicans didn't fracture over their own platform. The democrats did and in a very public way. Not only did they fracture, but ignored their own vote to pander to the avalanche of democrats who were mercilessly beating them up from home.

Interesting indeed, and although the GOP didn't "fracture in a very public way" at their convention, I am not deceived into believing they present a united front. Just as the Democrats have their factions, so too do the Republicans. The dying contingent of moderate republicans like Olympia Snowe represent such a faction as do the Tea Party (try as they might to tell us that they are not beholden to one particular party).

I repeat....2 sides of the same coin. They mirror and mimic each other constantly. You'd have to be incredibly partisan not to acknowledge this.

The democrats are a fractured party in disarray. They have a very powerful left wing base of atheists and anti-semites that is out of step with the majority of Americans . Apparently, out of step with many democrats as well.

The republicans are a fractured party in disarray. They have a very powerful right-wing base of Evangelical Christians that are out of step with the majority of Americans . Apparently, out of step with many republicans as well.

-----------------------------------

2 sides of the same coin, sir.

It was Evangelical Christians in the Democratic party that wanted God and Jerusalem back on the platform.
President Obama could not afford to lose a large amount of the votes from Blacks, Hispanics and Jews.

Quite sure that's the first time I've seen the terms "Evangelical Christian" and "Democratic Party" in the same sentence. They have very little representation and even less actual power within a party that katzndogs describes as the party of "atheists and anti-semites". They are essentially on par with Atheist Republicans, nearly nonexist.

As for Blacks....The Sunday morning televangelists have very little sway over Obama. Blacks are traditionally protestant anyway, a denomination that Obama himself is part of. Obama still has over 80% of the Black vote and even after he's overlooked them largely for the past 4 years, there's not a whole lot that will change that. As for pre-dominantly Catholic Hispanics? You would think they wouldn't back Obama due to criticism the Vatican has leveled towards the ACA, but that doesn't seem to be much of an issue considering he is still handily ahead of Romney in those polls. And then there's the largely Orthodox Jews. They are indeed a powerful contingent of the Democratic party and Obama's ostracism of Israel certainly doesn't sit well with them, but once again you would expect them to back Romney and yet they don't.

So you see, with the exception of the Jews, Obama hasn't even come close to losing the support of these key demographics. Romney, on the other hand, still has some work to do.

 

[Foxfyre]

As opposed to the oh-so tolerant TEA Party.

Come on Joe. I am a staunch Tea Partier and you are right that we are not at all tolerant of fiscal irrepsonsibility, erosion of personal liberties, expansion of government power and authority, and/or rewrites of the Constitution without using due process.

On every other issue, you will find every possible point of view among Tea Party people and the Tea Party doesn't concern itself with what anybody thinks about them. Which makes the Tea Party more tolerant than most groups.

 

[Merchant_of_Meh]

That was way too over the top from Granholm. She needs to lay off that pre-speech cup of coffee. I think she's a nice woman, but too much energy lol

 

[CandySlice]

I cannot watch those people without going into one of those helpless irresponsible rants than always end with me whacking my forehead on my breakfast table repeatdly until I either pass out or they go away.
Very ugly scene. Nobody needs to hear that coming out of a neighbor's house in the middle of the night.

 

[Peach]

Not enough lard, skins of slaughtered animals, and slave mined jewelry for today's PRyan eaters. Watch the RNC again, you'll see enough blubber to make Shamu look skinny.

 

[Rozman]

I saw NY Gov.Cuomo give a speech today.
And the end of Rev Al Sharpton's show
and now Joe Biden's last few minutes...

What the fuck is all the screaming about.
Gov Cuomo was screaming the whole speech.
Acting I hate to say it sort of like a black minister
getting his congregation all worked up.

Biden,Sharpto,Cuomo...can't they just give a speech...

 

[Bill Angel]

I saw NY Gov.Cuomo give a speech today.
And the end of Rev Al Sharpton's show
and now Joe Biden's last few minutes...

What the fuck is all the screaming about.
Gov Cuomo was screaming the whole speech.
Acting I hate to say it sort of like a black minister
getting his congregation all worked up.

Biden,Sharpto,Cuomo...can't they just give a speech...

I`ve heard quite a few black ministers preach the gospels by screaming at the top of their lungs into a microphone connected to an amplifier set at its highest volume. This is so the congregation doesn't fall asleep. I watched all of Biden's speech, but didn't come away with the impression that his delivery was similar to that type of black preacher.

 

[Twofox]

Obama's speech:

I don't know if anyone else noticed this... Obama's 2008 speech was all tax and spend leftist. The Dems take a shellacking in 2010 and lose control of the house. Obama stays left. Suddenly tonite he takes a right....

 

[FA_Q2]

I was disappointed to see that as well. It brought back memories of a Democratic Convention I attended as a teenager back in 1962. It was a state convention in Hartford Connecticut. There was a group of vociferous delegates in attendance, and on some matter the "chair" gaveled a motion though with the same disregard for Convention sentiment (of those in the hall anyway) as the "chair" at the national Democratic Convention did last night. In this era of "smart phones" the Convention organizers could have issued all of the accredited delegates smart phones so that if it was necessary for them to vote on an issue like they did yesterday, their smart phones would have alerted them, and they could have registered their YEA or NAY vote via their cellphones, regardless of where they were physically located. This "voice vote" procedure is an anachronistic and innaccurate way to try to conduct business.

As evidenced by how it went, it was obvious that it was just a vaguely necessary ritual required to change the platform. Obviously the vote didn't mean shit cause they didn't pay any attention to it. Which makes you wonder why they needed to do it in the first place.

That was just icing on the shit cake as surrounding the whole issue. There's no way the democrats can avoid having this used against them now. Worst case: Obama only put those two things back in cause he felt the political pressure. Best case: some people who don't care about God and don't believe in Jerusalem as the capital of Israel have plenty of control within the party.

The vote was meaningless grandstanding. Those who did not support the idea have already forgotten about it and those that actually cared will see what they wanted to see. The fact it was removed in the first place was a political stunt to have the vote. It was all very manufactured and it is quite obvious.

 

[copsnrobbers]

I was disappointed to see that as well. It brought back memories of a Democratic Convention I attended as a teenager back in 1962. It was a state convention in Hartford Connecticut. There was a group of vociferous delegates in attendance, and on some matter the "chair" gaveled a motion though with the same disregard for Convention sentiment (of those in the hall anyway) as the "chair" at the national Democratic Convention did last night. In this era of "smart phones" the Convention organizers could have issued all of the accredited delegates smart phones so that if it was necessary for them to vote on an issue like they did yesterday, their smart phones would have alerted them, and they could have registered their YEA or NAY vote via their cellphones, regardless of where they were physically located. This "voice vote" procedure is an anachronistic and innaccurate way to try to conduct business.

As evidenced by how it went, it was obvious that it was just a vaguely necessary ritual required to change the platform. Obviously the vote didn't mean shit cause they didn't pay any attention to it. Which makes you wonder why they needed to do it in the first place.

That was just icing on the shit cake as surrounding the whole issue. There's no way the democrats can avoid having this used against them now. Worst case: Obama only put those two things back in cause he felt the political pressure. Best case: some people who don't care about God and don't believe in Jerusalem as the capital of Israel have plenty of control within the party.

The vote was meaningless grandstanding. Those who did not support the idea have already forgotten about it and those that actually cared will see what they wanted to see. The fact it was removed in the first place was a political stunt to have the vote. It was all very manufactured and it is quite obvious.

Romney will use everything the Liberals stand for in living color in his ads.
He doesn't have to say a thing.... Liberals focus solely on the agenda. Nothing else matters to them. That's why we never see positive results from them. Only high unemployment and division.

 

[007]

Obama's speech:

I don't know if anyone else noticed this... Obama's 2008 speech was all tax and spend leftist. The Dems take a shellacking in 2010 and lose control of the house. Obama stays left. Suddenly tonite he takes a right....

Well, he's taking a beating for his speech too. The thrill is gone. He lied through his teeth in grand style during his first campaign, so he might be bright enough to realize that all those lies and soaring rhetoric just aren't going to fly this time, I don't know. He's a fraud, a liar, and took the presidency as a political virgin moving into on the job training. He didn't have what it takes to be the president of the United States then, and he still doesn't now. Thankfully the majority of people have seen obama for what he is, a socialist, a marxist, a spread the wealth around commie, and his vision for America is so far removed from what America actually is, one can only surmise that he truly does HATE America.

The Democrats' Soft Extremism - WSJ.com

Obama: A Pedestrian and Overconfident Speech - The Daily Beast

Krauthammer On Obama: "One Of The Emptiest Speeches I Have Ever Heard" | RealClearPolitics

Dana Milbank: Obama lowers the bar on hope and change - The Washington Post

My Way News - FACT CHECK: Obama and the phantom peace dividend

 

[Foxfyre]

Watching the early morning news this morning, it was acknowledged that before his speech last night, Obama had been briefed on he dismal August jobs report released this morning. It is widely speculaed that he likely adjusted his speech to downplay expectations and accomplishments.

The unemployment rate ticked down to 8.1% but only because 386,000 people have stopped looking for work. Only 96,000 new jobs were added--we need a minimum of 150,000 new jobs every month just to keep up with population growth and we haven't seen that kind of job growth since mid 2008. Only 63,5% of the working age population of the U.S.A. is currently employed or actively seeking work, a 30-year low.

His speech last night promised to fix it all but "he needs more time to do it." Of course in 2008 he promised to do it in three years, and if he didh't have it all fixed in three years he wouldn't deserve a second term.

I don't believe he mentioned that in his speech last night.

 

[Foxfyre]

The Democrats did give Romney some more good ammunition when that video said something to the effect that we are all owned by the same government. We rightwingers sure don't look at it like that and think we own the government and it is supposed to work for us, not the other way around.

 

[kwc57]

Disgusting that the Democrats caved to the Republicans once again. They omitted God and Jerusalem mentions and as soon as the right starts complaining, they start including God and Jerusalem in their speeches.

It's like they are trolling Deval Patrick or something

They simply wised up. I have to give them credit for understanding that dropping the language only resonates with the radical fringe of the party. For Democrats in flyover country, that stuff doesn't sale. It's the kind of thing that actually could sway independents and even long time party faithfuls to change their vote. It was an over reach and miscalculation on the DNC's part.

 

[kwc57]

Watching the early morning news this morning, it was acknowledged that before his speech last night, Obama had been briefed on he dismal August jobs report released this morning. It is widely speculaed that he likely adjusted his speech to downplay expectations and accomplishments.

The unemployment rate ticked down to 8.1% but only because 386,000 people have stopped looking for work. Only 96,000 new jobs were added--we need a minimum of 150,000 new jobs every month just to keep up with population growth and we haven't seen that kind of job growth since mid 2008. Only 63,5% of the working age population of the U.S.A. is currently employed or actively seeking work, a 30-year low.

His speech last night promised to fix it all but "he needs more time to do it." Of course in 2008 he promised to do it in three years, and if he didh't have it all fixed in three years he wouldn't deserve a second term.

I don't believe he mentioned that in his speech last night.

As I recall from last week, the left was going and blowing over Romney's lack of specifics on how he was going to solve the nations problems and how Obama was going to do just that at their convention. All I heard was recyled talking points and promises from 2008 with a plea to give him 4 more years to do what he said he could do in 3.5 back in 2008. Where's the beef?

 

[Merchant_of_Meh]

Both speeches were found wanting in specifics so let's not pretend it was just one side and not the other.

Reports also show that Obama had an inkling of what these numbers would look like so he probably tweaked his speech a bit to reflect that, not that any of us could tell.

I think what both will struggle with is getting that person who is sitting at home after another frustrating day of trying to find work after x amount of years, to vote. These people are depressed, discouraged, and frankly, getting if not already desperate. The last thing on their mind is what some guy in a city thousands of miles away is promising to do on TV. It's these people that both candidates have failed and probably will continue to fail in reaching. It's these people who make up that 386,000 who finally just gave up.