Why Democrats Are in Trouble

beretta304

Rookie
Aug 13, 2012
8,664
76
0
A Saner Place
"Barack Obama won because he recognized a new America." Or maybe an America more fluid, more insubstantial than post-election wisdom is ready to grant. You can't always tell about "new" -- a truth the human race rarely acknowledges.

We'll see whether James Carville's and Stan Greenberg's words from a Democracy Corps survey stand up better than the consensus of November 1965, following the Lyndon Johnson-led slaughter of almost every Republican downwind from Barry Goldwater. Johnson, father of the Great Society, was all but run out of Washington on a rail after mucking up the Vietnam War.

Meanwhile, as everyone these days seems to know, the unstoppable alliance of unmarried women, young people, Hispanics and Blacks is set to remake America: the minute Americans agree on what a remade America ought to look like.

"There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip" is the indicated adage for now, notwithstanding that polls such as Carville's and Greenberg's seem to confirm the birth of a new alliance committed to wealth redistribution and big government.

The so-called "Rising American Electorate" appears to hanker for, among other things, larger investments in education, "protection" of Social Security and Medicare and fairness for women. Thomas B. Edsall, in the New York Times, calls attention to a Pew Research Center poll showing rising support for socialism as the remedy for capitalism.

Yes, yes, fine. Let's see how it all works out. To put it another way: Let's see what works out in practice and not just post-campaign rhetoric. The instant temptation, from the conservative side, is to go all weepy at such news. I would counsel resistance to such temptation: this, for a couple of reasons.

Republicans need to cheer up. It always hurts to lose a vital election: for instance, the one immediately past. And yet to victors sometimes belongs something more depressing than spoils; namely, the obligation to make good on lame, idiotic promises. Might we hold the national obituaries pending proof that the 2012 outcome was the will of the gods?


Why Democrats Are in Trouble | RealClearPolitics
 
LOL We lost but the other guys will lose more! Huh! Tell that to the teams on Sunday when they lose, tell that to the person working for a raise, tell that to the sweating grunt passed over for promotion. What BS.

"Logic, like whiskey, loses its beneficial effect when taken in too large quantities." Dunsany
 
.

If I'm reading this correctly, the writer is saying (1) it's okay that we lost, the other guys will screw up anyway, and (2) we don't need to change anything, the electorate will like us more next time. I'm inferring, of course.

Yikes. Don't know if that's a great strategy.

.

Gad, read, what the author is saying is that LBJ won in a landslide, four years later did not run because he mucked it up. What is going to happen four years from now when nothing is better and Obamatax has taken full force?

Myself, I think nothing will change. The takers exceed the makers with a small percentage in the middle. and I don't see that changing except for the worse. The takers, and I don't blame them, will vote for the party they BELIEVE has their best interest at heart. The democrats have definitely won the propaganda war, hats off to them. To get people to believe that we need four more years of what we have had for the last four is quite impressive. We all whine about Washington yet we keep sending the same people back. No punishment at all for failed policy and we expect something else, lunacy.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #6
.

If I'm reading this correctly, the writer is saying (1) it's okay that we lost, the other guys will screw up anyway, and (2) we don't need to change anything, the electorate will like us more next time. I'm inferring, of course.

Yikes. Don't know if that's a great strategy.

.

Gad, read, what the author is saying is that LBJ won in a landslide, four years later did not run because he mucked it up. What is going to happen four years from now when nothing is better and Obamatax has taken full force?

Myself, I think nothing will change. The takers exceed the makers with a small percentage in the middle. and I don't see that changing except for the worse. The takers, and I don't blame them, will vote for the party they BELIEVE has their best interest at heart. The democrats have definitely won the propaganda war, hats off to them. To get people to believe that we need four more years of what we have had for the last four is quite impressive. We all whine about Washington yet we keep sending the same people back. No punishment at all for failed policy and we expect something else, lunacy.




Which is why with all the candidates out there... already I read and hear the talk about Hillary.


Is there no better qualified Democrat than she?
 
.

If I'm reading this correctly, the writer is saying (1) it's okay that we lost, the other guys will screw up anyway, and (2) we don't need to change anything, the electorate will like us more next time. I'm inferring, of course.

Yikes. Don't know if that's a great strategy.

.

Gad, read, what the author is saying is that LBJ won in a landslide, four years later did not run because he mucked it up. What is going to happen four years from now when nothing is better and Obamatax has taken full force?

Myself, I think nothing will change. The takers exceed the makers with a small percentage in the middle. and I don't see that changing except for the worse. The takers, and I don't blame them, will vote for the party they BELIEVE has their best interest at heart. The democrats have definitely won the propaganda war, hats off to them. To get people to believe that we need four more years of what we have had for the last four is quite impressive. We all whine about Washington yet we keep sending the same people back. No punishment at all for failed policy and we expect something else, lunacy.




Which is why with all the candidates out there... already I read and hear the talk about Hillary.


Is there no better qualified Democrat than she?

It isn't about her they want Bill back in the WH. Somehow they believe that he did something great. He is the one that started the outsourcing of jobs with his "free" trade agreements. Yet either the left forgot or just runs from the truth. Clinton not taking action when we were attacked overseas, and actually running away emboldened those who perpetrated 9/11. Planned entirely on Clinton's watch yet do you hear one 9/11er ever give him ONE ounce of the blame?

The real bottom line is that the propaganda machine of the democrats is much better then that of the Republicans. Just stating the facts as they stand isn't good enough. What did Obama actually run his campaign on? A continuous attack on Romney. He had the perfect opportunity to divide the country and used the election to do so.

In my opinion the whole Obama campaign can be summed up as follows.

1. "No one cares" (Benghazi, the economy, unemployment, devaluation of the dollar...etc)

2. " It's not may fault" (anything bad that happened)

3. "Romney is rich" (verse the electorate who are not and never will be so let's attack the rich except Obama and Soros)
 
Gad, read, what the author is saying is that LBJ won in a landslide, four years later did not run because he mucked it up. What is going to happen four years from now when nothing is better and Obamatax has taken full force?

Myself, I think nothing will change. The takers exceed the makers with a small percentage in the middle. and I don't see that changing except for the worse. The takers, and I don't blame them, will vote for the party they BELIEVE has their best interest at heart. The democrats have definitely won the propaganda war, hats off to them. To get people to believe that we need four more years of what we have had for the last four is quite impressive. We all whine about Washington yet we keep sending the same people back. No punishment at all for failed policy and we expect something else, lunacy.




Which is why with all the candidates out there... already I read and hear the talk about Hillary.


Is there no better qualified Democrat than she?

It isn't about her they want Bill back in the WH. Somehow they believe that he did something great. He is the one that started the outsourcing of jobs with his "free" trade agreements. Yet either the left forgot or just runs from the truth. Clinton not taking action when we were attacked overseas, and actually running away emboldened those who perpetrated 9/11. Planned entirely on Clinton's watch yet do you hear one 9/11er ever give him ONE ounce of the blame?

The real bottom line is that the propaganda machine of the democrats is much better then that of the Republicans. Just stating the facts as they stand isn't good enough. What did Obama actually run his campaign on? A continuous attack on Romney. He had the perfect opportunity to divide the country and used the election to do so.

In my opinion the whole Obama campaign can be summed up as follows.

1. "No one cares" (Benghazi, the economy, unemployment, devaluation of the dollar...etc)

2. " It's not may fault" (anything bad that happened)

3. "Romney is rich" (verse the electorate who are not and never will be so let's attack the rich except Obama and Soros)


Bill does seem to be the "draw".
 
.

If I'm reading this correctly, the writer is saying (1) it's okay that we lost, the other guys will screw up anyway, and (2) we don't need to change anything, the electorate will like us more next time. I'm inferring, of course.

Yikes. Don't know if that's a great strategy.

.

I think the electorate will like Republicans more in 2016. Voters tend to switch control of the White House every eight years or so.

The problem for the Republicans is the degree of nastiness that they tolerate coming from their party. Offending Hispanics does not win you votes, offending young women does not win you votes, neither does offending blacks, gays or working Americans

Republicans need to respect those groups who have abandoned them. Let them know that you understand their struggles and believe that republican solutions are the answer

There is a small core of Republicans who are nasty and disrespectful to those Americans who do not conform to the GOP ideal of what Americans should be. Until there is a price to pay for some of the nastiness coming from this small group, ALL Republicans will pay the price
 
.

If I'm reading this correctly, the writer is saying (1) it's okay that we lost, the other guys will screw up anyway, and (2) we don't need to change anything, the electorate will like us more next time. I'm inferring, of course.

Yikes. Don't know if that's a great strategy.

.

I think the electorate will like Republicans more in 2016. Voters tend to switch control of the White House every eight years or so.

The problem for the Republicans is the degree of nastiness that they tolerate coming from their party. Offending Hispanics does not win you votes, offending young women does not win you votes, neither does offending blacks, gays or working Americans

Republicans need to respect those groups who have abandoned them. Let them know that you understand their struggles and believe that republican solutions are the answer

There is a small core of Republicans who are nasty and disrespectful to those Americans who do not conform to the GOP ideal of what Americans should be. Until there is a price to pay for some of the nastiness coming from this small group, ALL Republicans will pay the price


Have you bothered to notice the degree of nastiness from the Democrats here? It's both sides but to portray the Republicans as the most nasty runs contrary to what one can observe at least here anyway.
 
.

If I'm reading this correctly, the writer is saying (1) it's okay that we lost, the other guys will screw up anyway, and (2) we don't need to change anything, the electorate will like us more next time. I'm inferring, of course.

Yikes. Don't know if that's a great strategy.

.

I think the electorate will like Republicans more in 2016. Voters tend to switch control of the White House every eight years or so.

The problem for the Republicans is the degree of nastiness that they tolerate coming from their party. Offending Hispanics does not win you votes, offending young women does not win you votes, neither does offending blacks, gays or working Americans

Republicans need to respect those groups who have abandoned them. Let them know that you understand their struggles and believe that republican solutions are the answer

There is a small core of Republicans who are nasty and disrespectful to those Americans who do not conform to the GOP ideal of what Americans should be. Until there is a price to pay for some of the nastiness coming from this small group, ALL Republicans will pay the price


Have you bothered to notice the degree of nastiness from the Democrats here? It's both sides but to portray the Republicans as the most nasty runs contrary to what one can observe at least here anyway.

The response I expected
 
Then what we do, beretta304 is (1) make sure we are not nasty and (2) point out when the Democrats are nasty. Win Win.

.

If I'm reading this correctly, the writer is saying (1) it's okay that we lost, the other guys will screw up anyway, and (2) we don't need to change anything, the electorate will like us more next time. I'm inferring, of course.

Yikes. Don't know if that's a great strategy.

.

I think the electorate will like Republicans more in 2016. Voters tend to switch control of the White House every eight years or so.

The problem for the Republicans is the degree of nastiness that they tolerate coming from their party. Offending Hispanics does not win you votes, offending young women does not win you votes, neither does offending blacks, gays or working Americans

Republicans need to respect those groups who have abandoned them. Let them know that you understand their struggles and believe that republican solutions are the answer

There is a small core of Republicans who are nasty and disrespectful to those Americans who do not conform to the GOP ideal of what Americans should be. Until there is a price to pay for some of the nastiness coming from this small group, ALL Republicans will pay the price


Have you bothered to notice the degree of nastiness from the Democrats here? It's both sides but to portray the Republicans as the most nasty runs contrary to what one can observe at least here anyway.
 
.

If I'm reading this correctly, the writer is saying (1) it's okay that we lost, the other guys will screw up anyway, and (2) we don't need to change anything, the electorate will like us more next time. I'm inferring, of course.

Yikes. Don't know if that's a great strategy.

.

I think the electorate will like Republicans more in 2016. Voters tend to switch control of the White House every eight years or so.

The problem for the Republicans is the degree of nastiness that they tolerate coming from their party. Offending Hispanics does not win you votes, offending young women does not win you votes, neither does offending blacks, gays or working Americans

Republicans need to respect those groups who have abandoned them. Let them know that you understand their struggles and believe that republican solutions are the answer

There is a small core of Republicans who are nasty and disrespectful to those Americans who do not conform to the GOP ideal of what Americans should be. Until there is a price to pay for some of the nastiness coming from this small group, ALL Republicans will pay the price

It really doesn't look like they will change, much.

Conservatives hate America and Americans.

Simple as that.

You may see consecutive Democratic administrations. Especially if Hillary runs.
 
.

If I'm reading this correctly, the writer is saying (1) it's okay that we lost, the other guys will screw up anyway, and (2) we don't need to change anything, the electorate will like us more next time. I'm inferring, of course.

Yikes. Don't know if that's a great strategy.

.

I think the electorate will like Republicans more in 2016. Voters tend to switch control of the White House every eight years or so.

The problem for the Republicans is the degree of nastiness that they tolerate coming from their party. Offending Hispanics does not win you votes, offending young women does not win you votes, neither does offending blacks, gays or working Americans

Republicans need to respect those groups who have abandoned them. Let them know that you understand their struggles and believe that republican solutions are the answer

There is a small core of Republicans who are nasty and disrespectful to those Americans who do not conform to the GOP ideal of what Americans should be. Until there is a price to pay for some of the nastiness coming from this small group, ALL Republicans will pay the price

It really doesn't look like they will change, much.

Conservatives hate America and Americans.

Simple as that.

You may see consecutive Democratic administrations. Especially if Hillary runs.

I don't think that Conservatives hate Americans, but there is a vocal minority that has a limited view of what a "real American" is

The moderate majority of Republicans has been bullied into ignoring the rants of the radical fringe........Democrats have used these rants as a tool to paint all Republicans as haters.

Like I said, I think events are lining up for Republicans to take the White House in 2016. People will tire of Obama, Republicans have good candidates, the economy will be more stable.

But, like you, I suspect the Republicans will screw it up
 
I think the electorate will like Republicans more in 2016. Voters tend to switch control of the White House every eight years or so.

The problem for the Republicans is the degree of nastiness that they tolerate coming from their party. Offending Hispanics does not win you votes, offending young women does not win you votes, neither does offending blacks, gays or working Americans

Republicans need to respect those groups who have abandoned them. Let them know that you understand their struggles and believe that republican solutions are the answer

There is a small core of Republicans who are nasty and disrespectful to those Americans who do not conform to the GOP ideal of what Americans should be. Until there is a price to pay for some of the nastiness coming from this small group, ALL Republicans will pay the price


Have you bothered to notice the degree of nastiness from the Democrats here? It's both sides but to portray the Republicans as the most nasty runs contrary to what one can observe at least here anyway.

The response I expected

If you expected it that means you had to acknowledge it even if secretly.... to yourself.
 
You may see consecutive Democratic administrations. Especially if Hillary runs.

Hillary may seem like the obvious choice right now. But I don't think she will be around in 2016.

Hillary seems to be burned out in politics. Running for President takes alot of energy, especially in a wide open field

As she gets older, Hillary is also getting more skanky looking. It is not fair, but I think women are held to a different standard of personal appearance than men. In the last year, she has looked more frumpy in her face, hair and dress. I don't think the next four years will be kind to her
 

Forum List

Back
Top