Reality check: Dems dominate elections in 2006, 2008, 2012; Trend?
- Thread starter bucs90
- Start date
- Banned
- #22
Yeah, and after Obama comes Hillary, if the Benghazi scandal doesn't ruin her. From my observations of this past election, Hillary is a shoe-in in 2016. I have never seen so many people literally stunned that that ******* idiot could possibly get re-elected.
Trajan
conscientia mille testes
Harry Dresden
Only Adamantium Member
if you think Democrats are nice folks who never lie and have no Rich people pulling their strings then.....the Democrats sure stuck a flag in your ass.......
Harry Dresden
Only Adamantium Member
when one party has control.....they always seem to **** up.....then the Pendulum swings the other way....and the cycle goes on.....
candycorn
Diamond Member
An uncontrollable carom into the truth!!!
emilynghiem
Constitutionalist / Universalist
You'd have to look at a bigger time line than that to see a trend.
It wasn't until Obama got elected in 2008 and re-elected in 2012
that a large sector of the public got involved in the political process AT ALL
and even STARTED THE LEARNING CURVE -- as late as 2008+.
(So now you'd have to compare people's learning curves that started
in the 1800's with owning property and progressing toward independence,
with people who started 150-200 years later.)
In general, regarding the trend toward increased social programs through govt:
once people give up control of health care and other programs to federal govt,
the people lost leverage to check govt and tell them what to do and not to do.
It's like once a wife gives all her paycheck to her husband's account under his name,
she loses direct say and control, and has to go through HIM to get money to do any activities at all!
Since liberal Democrats claim to be for defending women against abuse and dominance by men,
it baffles me that they don't get this concept. It's the conservatives who USED to defend limited govt,
where if you build and manage your own health care and social programs, you don't become dependent
on govt for those, so you retain leverage and authority to tell govt what does or doesn't present your interests.
This is like the proverbial "working woman" who runs her own household by working her
own job, and doesn't depend on her husband to manage everything as her protectorate "lording over her."
Ironically it's the other way around, where liberals use govt to dictate laws to others.
Apparently not everyone believes the laws are 'social contract' AGREED between people and govt.
Not DICTATED by govt for the people.
What I cannot understand is why liberals use the govt this way, when it even contradicts
the very concept of liberation. They seem to think since the govt represents the people,
they believe they ARE representing the best interests of the people; but fail to recognize
that "people" ALSO includes all the OTHER opinions and interests out there equally, especially taxpayer paying into the system.
They seem to think that anything other people earn belongs to the govt by default,
and any income these people retain from their own labor is 'taken away from taxpayers' when it's the other way around.
And whatever "other opinions" that other people have, the proper use of govt is to
protect THEM from those "other people abusing power and freedom."
They don't treat people as equals.
So whatever trend America is going through, it depends on people learning
to respect each other's beliefs and parties as equals, instead of competing interests
both "bullying each other down" to control the household finances.
It wasn't until Obama got elected in 2008 and re-elected in 2012
that a large sector of the public got involved in the political process AT ALL
and even STARTED THE LEARNING CURVE -- as late as 2008+.
(So now you'd have to compare people's learning curves that started
in the 1800's with owning property and progressing toward independence,
with people who started 150-200 years later.)
In general, regarding the trend toward increased social programs through govt:
once people give up control of health care and other programs to federal govt,
the people lost leverage to check govt and tell them what to do and not to do.
It's like once a wife gives all her paycheck to her husband's account under his name,
she loses direct say and control, and has to go through HIM to get money to do any activities at all!
Since liberal Democrats claim to be for defending women against abuse and dominance by men,
it baffles me that they don't get this concept. It's the conservatives who USED to defend limited govt,
where if you build and manage your own health care and social programs, you don't become dependent
on govt for those, so you retain leverage and authority to tell govt what does or doesn't present your interests.
This is like the proverbial "working woman" who runs her own household by working her
own job, and doesn't depend on her husband to manage everything as her protectorate "lording over her."
Ironically it's the other way around, where liberals use govt to dictate laws to others.
Apparently not everyone believes the laws are 'social contract' AGREED between people and govt.
Not DICTATED by govt for the people.
What I cannot understand is why liberals use the govt this way, when it even contradicts
the very concept of liberation. They seem to think since the govt represents the people,
they believe they ARE representing the best interests of the people; but fail to recognize
that "people" ALSO includes all the OTHER opinions and interests out there equally, especially taxpayer paying into the system.
They seem to think that anything other people earn belongs to the govt by default,
and any income these people retain from their own labor is 'taken away from taxpayers' when it's the other way around.
And whatever "other opinions" that other people have, the proper use of govt is to
protect THEM from those "other people abusing power and freedom."
They don't treat people as equals.
So whatever trend America is going through, it depends on people learning
to respect each other's beliefs and parties as equals, instead of competing interests
both "bullying each other down" to control the household finances.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Jealousy of tiny humane beautiful Israel drives some to demonize it- Started by Pastelli
- Replies: 1
-
If You Can Automatically Be Registered For the Draft....Can't they Also Automatically Register You to Vote?- Started by candycorn
- Replies: 9
-
-
-
Gabbard claims ‘coordinated effort’ by intelligence community to advance narrative to impeach Trump- Started by DonGlock26
- Replies: 22
