Why is there such a divide between Republican and Democrats?

[Krome]

From an outsiders point of view their are alot of things the Democrats do that are cool and alot the Republicans do that are cool.

The main reason I think non Americans prefer Democrats is that they listen and want to walk with the world where as Republicans want things done their way or not at all.

Personally I side with more of the Democrats views than Republicans but I still greatly respect people like Bob Dole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Dole and wouldnt have minded him in power. Although saying that I am not really that up on him more just what we saw in the UK which was always highly positive.

I have always believed alot of government in run incorrectly with this 'us' v 'them' set up. The government really should realise that they are their to serve the peope the best they can without any hidden adgendas of their own.

[red states rule]

From an outsiders point of view their are alot of things the Democrats do that are cool and alot the Republicans do that are cool.

The main reason I think non Americans prefer Democrats is that they listen and want to walk with the world where as Republicans want things done their way or not at all.

Personally I side with more of the Democrats views than Republicans but I still greatly respect people like Bob Dole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Dole and wouldnt have minded him in power. Although saying that I am not really that up on him more just what we saw in the UK which was always highly positive.

I have always believed alot of government in run incorrectly with this 'us' v 'them' set up. The government really should realise that they are their to serve the peope the best they can without any hidden adgendas of their own.


The reason Republicans lost in 06 was because they walked away from Ronald Reagan conservatism

Dems want to be the "Mommy and Daddy" party. They fell people cannot succeed without some government program

Conservatives believe people can make it on their own - just keep government out of their way

[Mr. Blue]

Krome, the thing is most Americans are in the center on most issues...if you gave a list of issues and polled Americans you would find that the majority are moderate.

So why is it that the political parties are so polarized to the far end, either right or left, when the majority of Americans want moderate politicians? The problem rests in our political system. Republicans and Democrats have a very fervent active base of supporters and the party, at least on the national level, want to please that active base of supporters.

In '00 and '04, you basically saw the Democrats put up, what I thought to be, weak candidates that walked the left side of the party line. However, someone like Bill Clinton appealed to a much broader group because he did have moderate policies.

Democrats picked up seats in congress, but what they neglect to focus on is that many of those candidates were extremely moderate and palatable to most Americans.

The primaries, unfortunately, weed out those moderate candidates because the party base wants candidates that are to the extreme right or left.

I happen to be an Independent, I don't really agree with either party on all the issues, but I would like to see more moderation, more compromises, and less bickering, but I doubt that will ever happen.

[red states rule]

Krome, the thing is most Americans are in the center on most issues...if you gave a list of issues and polled Americans you would find that the majority are moderate.

So why is it that the political parties are so polarized to the far end, either right or left, when the majority of Americans want moderate politicians? The problem rests in our political system. Republicans and Democrats have a very fervent active base of supporters and the party, at least on the national level, want to please that active base of supporters.

In '00 and '04, you basically saw the Democrats put up, what I thought to be, weak candidates that walked the left side of the party line. However, someone like Bill Clinton appealed to a much broader group because he did have moderate policies.

Democrats picked up seats in congress, but what they neglect to focus on is that many of those candidates were extremely moderate and palatable to most Americans.

The primaries, unfortunately, weed out those moderate candidates because the party base wants candidates that are to the extreme right or left.

I happen to be an Independent, I don't really agree with either party on all the issues, but I would like to see more moderation, more compromises, and less bickering, but I doubt that will ever happen.

Clinton was a liberal. His policies drove the Congress to Republicans in 94

Moderates are people who wait to see which side of the issue will win - then they chime in

[Mr. Blue]

Clinton was a liberal. His policies drove the Congress to Republicans in 94

Moderates are people who wait to see which side of the issue will win - then they chime in

Bill Clinton was fiscally conservative and socially liberal...he appealed to a wider base because he embraced certain principles that Independents could get behind and even moderate Republicans would agree with and compared to Kerry and Gore he absolutely looks moderate.

As for Moderates, our political system doesn't favor them, and it won't favor them as long as the Reps and Dems have a stranglehold on the American political landscape.

[red states rule]

Fiscally conservative? He had the biggest tax increase in US history as soon as he took office

[Mr. Blue]

Fiscally conservative? He had the biggest tax increase in US history as soon as he took office

Yes, he was fiscally conservative. Do you need me to define fiscally conservative for you? Clinton, for whatever he was, kept the size of government down, kept non-military spending lower than any other President in recent history and he also balanced the budget.

If you just look at the numbers you'd think Clinton was a Republican and Bush was a liberal with the way he's grown the government.

[red states rule]

OMG what are you smoking?

Tax increases and moe government was Clinton

The Bush tax cuts pulled the US out of the Clinton recession - and the insane spending by Republicnas is one reason why they lost in 06

Now, Dems pushed a $400 billion tax INCREASE and want to spend MORE the Republicans

[Mr. Blue]

Actually, you're wrong :)

Bill Clinton's non-military spending growth was only 1.6%
Bush's non-military spending growth was 3.5%

So, looking at the numbers...who grew the government more? Now I'm not saying Clinton was the perfect moderate, but he was moderate enough when you compare him to Kerry and Gore.

Now you're making this into a Rep / Dem issue because you're unfortunately blinding by party politics to realize what I'm talking about. Dem's are too far left, that's why they lost in the last two Presidential elections...they need to find a moderate to win.

Republicans, if they're wise and don't push Romney, will most likely have Rudy as their candidate. He's about as moderate as you can get for a Republican and probably would win in '08...if...he gets the nomination which might not happen.

[red states rule]

Clinton and his record tax increase (even people on SS) and his increases in social spending was why he lost the first midterm

Republicans took over the purse in 92 and vrought spending under control to a point

[Mr. Blue]

Are you purposely being obtuse? Perhaps I should break this down into multiple choice questions:

1. Which Democrat was the most moderate?

A) Bill Clinton
B) Al Gore
C) John Kerry


2. If the Democrats want to win in '08 they should put forward a:

A) A Raging Liberal
B) A Moderate Blue Dog Democrat


3. Which best describes the political landscape of America?

A) Liberal
B) Conservative
C) Moderate (somewhere between the two evils)


Now if you can answer these questions correctly you'll win an understanding of my point. I do realize it's hard for someone that only sees issues as black/white to understand a shade of gray type person like myself, but try it out...you might like it.

[red states rule]

Issues are balck and white

It boils down to what is right and wrong

[Mr. Blue]

Stereotypical Republican, almost too stereotypical to believe you're a true Republican. I'd almost guess that you're a liberal doing your best impersonation of a Republican just to make Republicans look bad.

[red states rule]

Keep trying, maybe one day you will come close to making a valid point

[Mr. Blue]

lol, valid points were made, either you're obtuse or play acting. I can't determine which at the moment.

[red states rule]

When you make a vaild pioint I will respond

That is how debates work

[Mr. Blue]

Nah, valid points were made, you're either:

1. Too dense to understand them
2. You really are a brainwashed Republican
3. You're acting like a stereotype on purpose

[Bill]

This is why there is such a divide.

And it's going to get worse.

Bring on the Second American Civil War.

[red states rule]

How to Debate a Liberal
First, when you debate a liberal, you have to realize something: you’re not going to “win.” Sure, you will have common sense, experience, facts, realistic knowledge, and the very universe in your favor, but that won’t be enough. You see, in order to “win” an argument against a liberal, a liberal has to have the capacity to learn. And a liberal that can learn is a rare thing, indeed. You’ve heard it said “if you’re not a liberal at 16 you don’t have a heart, and if you’re not a conservative at 30, you don’t have a brain.” That’s because liberals tend to “reason” with emotion, like teenagers, while conservatives have learned life lessons and don’t perpetually wear rose-colored glasses all their lives.

So, when arguing with a liberal, the best you can hope for is that a third party reading the debate will look at the differences between you and the liberal and will wise up and join the right side, and that’s not the left.

During the debate, however, you’ll no doubt run into many of the same characteristics others have seen, depending on how long the debate is. Many of these I’ve had the amusing pleasure to see here at Blogster, so there are readily available examples around.

But, you have to be prepared. Here’s a short list of what you should bring with you to a debate:

1) Waders. With liberals, the BS can get awfully deep. The more they talk, the deeper it gets, and they hope to drown their opponents in a sea of sh*t. Come prepared.

2) A pillow or cushion. In a long debate with a liberal, there will be many opportunities to bang your head into something hard as you see your words twisted to mean something else, then attacked. If you type something like “abortions hurt women, and that’s wrong,” and see the liberal reply with “oh, so you’re saying abortions should be illegal because you think raping and incest are just fine and dandy, huh, racist??!!” you may be tempted to run your head into the nearest set of bricks. It’s natural. Being frustrated with arrogant stupidity is something everyone with a brain cell has to endure at times. Just make sure your pillow is nice and soft and you should make it through. Liberals tend to purposely twist words into other meanings so that they can argue against those new meanings. It’s far easier for them than actually debating what you said.

3) A copy of 1984. At some point, if you suggest any limit on any activity liberals like (except campaign contributions to Democrats), you will be compared to something in 1984. I think this is the only book liberals have ever read, and that’s because the title doesn’t have any words in it. As such, despite the fact that they act more like the government in the book, they like accusing their opponents of such behaviors. A Christian meekly stating his view that homosexuals shouldn’t marry is a member of the “thought police,” and everything Bush does us leading us down the path in 1984. On a side note, they may refer to you as a Nazi as well, as in “so you think parents are actually responsible for how they raise their kids? You NAZI from 1984!!” (It doesn’t matter that Nazis weren’t in 1984…a liberal’s grip on reality is tenuous at best, so cut ‘em some slack.)

4) Prepare beforehand. In order to desensitize yourself to a debate with a liberal, you will have to request the assistance of a friend. Have your friend come over before you reply or start a debate, and have him spend no less than one hour screaming obscenities at you. This will ready you for a typical liberal “dialogue” once they are backed into an intellectual corner (which doesn’t take long). If you want to be really prepared, have your friend repeatedly call you the following: bigot, racist, homophobe, islamophobe, war-mongerer, redneck, close-minded, intolerant, and fascist. These make up the core of liberal arguments, even if used improperly. “You conservatives! You’re always wanting people to have to take responsibility for themselves! Homophobes!” Or, “you don’t think Ann Coulter’s latest book should be banned? Racist!!” You get the idea…

5) A scorecard. Just for fun, you may want to write down how often the liberal you’re debating calls you any of the names listed above, or worse. It’s amusing to see how many times a “tolerant,” “open-minded” liberal can use the word bigot or Islamophobe in a debate about school choice. Heck, a liberal could use the word “racist” fifteen times just ordering lunch.

6) A neck brace. If you’re not careful, you could end up with whiplash trying to follow the speedy zips and flips a liberal uses to avoid being pinned down when he knows he’s losing. You think certain cockroaches speed around trying to avoid being caught? Try watching a liberal with nothing he can say. In one sentence he’s arguing against something you didn’t even say, and in the next calling your parentage into question while screaming about how great Clinton was and why you’re a redneck Nazi homophobe for wanting to let Americans vote on abortion. Even quoting a liberal and replying directly to that quote doesn’t help. Apparently, they don’t see what they’ve written afterwards. Selective blindness seems to inflict liberals at a nearly 100% rate. Someone should collect donations to have scientists try to cure it.

7) Another friend. You’ll need someone you can trust to be there with you during some of the longer debates with liberals. This friend should never, under any circumstances, read or listen to the liberal you’re debating. His entire job is just to be there to jump-start your brain when it locks up, stunned into unresponsiveness by the sheer depths of stupidity that the liberal spews out. As a reasonable, thinking person, you may not be prepared to deal with the intellectual black-hole that a liberal can create when they convince themselves of their arguments to the point where they mentally implode and their minds and words become intellectual vacuums. Reading or hearing this level of liberalism can jeopardize your mental capacity, so when your friend sees your eyes glaze over, a trickle of drool coming out of your mouth, and you don’t coherently respond to external stimuli (in essence, you “become” a liberal), he has to be there to start reading to you. Any book above a second grade level should be enough to snap you out of it, seeing as how even that is light-years beyond ultimate liberalism, but the higher the grade, the better. Just don’t use that copy of 1984, or you may find yourself imaging yourself as a Nazi, in keeping with the liberal thought-pattern. In a spot, even “Dick and Jane” will work, but someone has to be there to read it to you.

8) Another cushion. If you’re sitting at a desk, it would be a good idea to put something under your chin, so that when it drops it doesn’t strike the desk and cause pain. This often happens when a conservative sees a liberal accuse him of something that liberals do. A liberal may complain about a person saying something at a graduation ceremony, for example, and states that the person should never have spoken. But, when you reply that they had that right, the liberal can come back with “you conservatives just want to stifle free speech for everyone but who you agree with!” (Usually followed by either “racist,” or “homophobe,” generally.) Having your chin drop all the way into your crotch after reading something this inane not only dries out your mouth, but also can leave you stunned until the pain in your groin fades away. Sometimes, the liberal may say something like this but combine it with Ultimate Liberalism, and leave you writhing on the floor a drooling, slobbering mess. So make sure your friend reads to you and gets you some ice. Or better yet, just have two cushions in advance, and save yourself a little pain.

I hope this helps some people, especially those conservatives who are yet unfamiliar with what can happen when debating a liberal. And here at Blogster, there’s no lack of liberals to practice on, and just be sure to be prepared.

http://edjamacator.blogster.com/debate_liberal.html

[red states rule]

This is why there is such a divide.

And it's going to get worse.

Bring on the Second American Civil War.


Libs know better then to inflame the culture war

Libs know who have all the guns

[Bill]

I got plenty of guns.

I think it will be a lot of fun.

[red states rule]

I am ready as well

[Bill]

QED

"and thus it is proved".

[red states rule]

QED

"and thus it is proved".


I had to promise not to bait libs out in the open by pretending to be a homeless guy

[dragonfly5]

OMG what are you smoking?

Tax increases and moe government was Clinton

The Bush tax cuts pulled the US out of the Clinton recession - and the insane spending by Republicnas is one reason why they lost in 06

Now, Dems pushed a $400 billion tax INCREASE and want to spend MORE the Republicans

This is absolute Bull Shit!

It's one thing to be a republican, it's quite another to have one's head stuck so far up Bush's ass that one cannot even see the truth.

[dragonfly5]

Issues are balck and white

It boils down to what is right and wrong

Now I see what your main problem is, simplistic thinking. You obviously fit right in with the republicans, as a whole.

[red states rule]

This is absolute Bull Shit!

It's one thing to be a republican, it's quite another to have one's head stuck so far up Bush's ass that one cannot even see the truth.
Truth hurts, eh?

[red states rule]

Now I see what your main problem is, simplistic thinking. You obviously fit right in with the republicans, as a whole.


Libs do not like to be judemental - that is their problem

[Linkster]

I am ready as well

So you advocate killing human beings to promote your point of view? Thats a little sick isnt it? Reminds me of the Hitler youth mantras in the 30s and 40s.

[Mr. Blue]

So you advocate killing human beings to promote your point of view?

Kind of sounds like a religion doesn't it? lol.

[stefan segal]

red...you think dems don't like to be judgemental...then try this on for size!!!

Stefan

http://www.commondreams.org/news2007/0430-01.htm

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
APRIL 30, 2007
8:45 AM

CONTACT: Progressive Democrats of America
Jeff Cohen 914-388-1431
Tim Carpenter 413-320-2015


Another Historic Step On Impeachment

Sparked by an insurgency among delegates, the California Democratic Party has taken an historic step forward on the issue of impeachment. In a resolution affirmed by the full state party convention Sunday, the Democrats called on the U.S. Congress to use its subpoena power to investigate misdeeds of President Bush and Vice President Cheney – and to hold the Administration accountable “with appropriate remedies and punishment, including impeachment.” The delegate insurgency was coordinated by Progressive Democrats of America and its allies.

While Speaker Pelosi had declared impeachment “off the table,” the Democratic Party rank-and-file has demonstrated its commitment to putting the issue “on” the table. And it’s no longer just the rank-and-file: Even among the members of the convention’s Resolutions Committee (appointed by the California Party chair), the impeachment resolution was the top vote-getter (tied with one other resolution).

Coming on the heels of mass actions and resolutions across the country in support of impeachment, and Congressman Dennis Kucinich’s introduction of Articles of Impeachment against Cheney, this action by the powerful California Democratic Party builds on the pro-impeachment momentum.

The resolution refers to Bush and Cheney having acted in a manner “subversive of the Constitution” by. . .

using false information to justify the invasion of Iraq
authorizing “the torture of prisoners of war”
“authorizing wiretaps on U.S. citizens without obtaining a warrant”
“disclosing the name of an undercover CIA operative”
suspending “the historic Writ of Habeas Corpus by ordering the indefinite detention of so-called enemy combatants”
“signing statements used to ignore or circumvent portions of over 750 Congressional statutes”


The resolution ends by calling for “vigorous investigation” and “appropriate remedies and punishment, including impeachment.”

This action represents the successful culmination of PDA’s one-month, eleven-city barnstorming tour across California – aimed at putting impeachment and ending the occupation of Iraq at the top of the Party’s agenda.