Save Our State  

Go Back   Save Our State > General Forum (non official Save Our State business) > Elections, Politics, and Partisanship

Elections, Politics, and Partisanship Topics relating to politics, elections, or party affiliations of interests to SOS associates

WELCOME BACK!.............NEW EFFORTS AHEAD..........CHECK BACK SOON.........UPDATE YOUR EMAIL FOR NEW NOTIFICATIONS.........
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-18-2010, 08:04 PM
ilbegone's Avatar
ilbegone ilbegone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,068
Default Divided party?

Divided party?

It's not just GOP, but also Dems


By LIZ SIDOTI AP National Political Writer

03/13/2010

WASHINGTON—For all the evidence of a divided GOP, the Democratic Party has its own widening cracks that could make a potentially bleak election year even more dour.

In just the past two weeks, Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln became the latest Democratic incumbent to attract a primary challenger, anti-abortion Democrats fought hard to derail President Barack Obama's health care measure, and civil rights advocates and environmentalists likened the Democrat to George W. Bush.

Few pieces of the mosaic that is the Democratic Party seem happy.

Labor and gays are restless. Blacks and Hispanics are grumbling. Liberals and moderates are battling. Even some in Hollywood are disappointed.

Obama must bring together—and fire up—the many Democratic coalitions if he hopes to minimize expected losses for his party this fall in his first midterm elections. The risk if he doesn't is that Democrats could become so disaffected that they stay home in November.

It's far from too late. Passage of the health care overhaul would mean a monumental victory for Obama just when he needs one. This president will have accomplished what others before him couldn't, a triumph that would give the fractured rank and file something to rally around.

David Axelrod, a senior White House adviser, isn't panicking.

"We are a broad party," he said in a recent interview. "There's always going to be some degree of tension."

Axelrod voiced confidence that the vast majority of the party's loyalists will get behind its candidates this fall because the philosophical differences between Republicans and Democrats are so great.

"Whatever divides us," he said, "that fundamental split is still animating."

Despite the dissension, 84 percent of Democrats approve of Obama's job performance in the latest Associated Press-GfK poll.

Republicans are wrestling with their own deep splits. There's a family feud over whether the GOP should strictly adhere to conservative principles or be more inclusive. That infighting is prominently on display in a slew of contentious primary contests.

But the fissures among Democrats, festering for months, are striking because the party controls both the White House and Congress, and unity was in style just a year ago as Democrats celebrated the first months of Obama's tenure with bigger majorities on Capitol Hill.

Then, the governing began in earnest—and so did the complaining.

Some of it was expected.

The Democratic Party has always been more of a coalition party than the GOP, bringing together varied factions that include labor, minorities, civil rights activists, social progressives and anti-war protesters. Each part seldom gets everything it wants. Expectations were lofty, with given the Democratic control of the government. A high bar brings the potential for serious letdowns and, thus, infighting.

"I don't think you can say that the party's in any state of disarray," said former Rep. Martin Frost of Texas, a past chairman of the House Democrats campaign committee. But, he added, there are clearly divisions and divisive primaries are "not helpful."

Perhaps nothing better illustrates the Democratic splits than the Senate race in Arkansas.

A moderate, Lincoln infuriated liberals by backing the 2008 Wall Street bailout while opposing a public insurance health care option and key union-organizing legislation. She was considered among the party's most vulnerable incumbents for months when Democratic Lt. Gov. Bill Halter got in the race.

Now, Lincoln is promoting her independence, saying in an ad: "I don't answer to my party, I answer to Arkansas."

Halter has the backing of the liberal MoveOn.org and is collecting big money from labor groups.

Two other Senate Democrats facing tough races—Sens. Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Michael Bennet in Colorado—also have primaries even though the White House is backing the incumbents.

The fractures have been on display in other ways as well this month:

—The American Civil Liberties Union ran a full-page advertisement in The New York Times showing Obama morphing into Bush and asking "Change or more of the same?" The ad criticized Obama for even considering military tribunals for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

—Defenders of Wildlife ran a TV ad featuring actress Ashley Judd assailing Obama for not reversing a Bush decision lifting the federal protection on wolves in parts of the Northern Rockies. Judd says: "You promised change. But by adopting the Bush plan, your administration weakened our endangered species law and has allowed this killing to happen."

—A dozen or so anti-abortion House Democrats are opposing Obama's health care overhaul plan—and putting its passage in jeopardy—because it includes a provision they don't like. The absence of a public insurance option in the legislation also has angered the left.

—Many members of the Congressional Black Caucus voted against a jobs bill that they said didn't focus enough on job training programs or summer employment. They complain that they're getting too little support from the country's first black president. Obama met with them last week.

—Hispanics privately continued to question—after a year of virtual inaction—whether Obama is sincere in his promise to overhaul the immigration system even as he met with senators trying to write a bipartisan bill on the issue and repeated his pledge.

—Unions said they will take sides in primary races and labor officials complained that the White House hasn't pushed legislation that would make it easier for unions to organize workers. The AFL-CIO also rebuked Obama for condoning mass firings at a poorly performing Rhode Island high school.

—The gay community is fretting over the pace at which Obama has addressed their top issues such as repealing the 17-year-old law that bans gays from serving openly in the military. Obama needs Congress' blessing to do that, but there's resistance.

"There are frustrations that we haven't been able to get as much done that we would like to, especially as health care drags on," acknowledged Gov. Martin O'Malley, D-Md. He predicted "less griping and more coalescing" once that's completed, and unity come November.
__________________
Freibier gab's gestern

Hay burros en el maiz

RAP IS TO MUSIC WHAT ETCH-A-SKETCH IS TO ART

Don't drink and post.

"A nickel will get you on the subway, but garlic will get you a seat." - Old New York Yiddish Saying

"You can observe a lot just by watching." Yogi Berra

Old journeyman commenting on young apprentices - "Think about it, these are their old days"

SOMETIMES IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

Never, ever, wear a bright colored shirt to a stand up comedy show.

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-19-2010, 11:49 AM
RadioActiveRich's Avatar
RadioActiveRich RadioActiveRich is offline
Heavyweight Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 13
Default Big difference

The difference between the division in the Democrat Party from the Republicans is that Dems are always divided. The entire party is a conglomerate of sub groups who rarely agree on anything except how much they hate Republicans. This is why they cannot even pass healthcare with both houses of Congress and the Oval.

The division in the GOP is more serious though, because we only win when we are united. Worse still is the division between the Party Leadership and the electorate. You have Steele talking about Amnesty in code and you have Graham acting like amnesty is a bargaining chip to threaten the dems with.

This is about as far from you and I as you can get. The Dems problems are systemic and eternal, but as long as we remain weak, they will win because they will always hate us more than they hate each other.
__________________
---------------------------------------------
RadioActive Rich
http://www.twitter.com/RadioActiveRich
http://www.twitter.com/ConservAlliance
http://www.RadioActiveBlog.com
http://www.ConservativeAlliance.org

(Formerly FoothillPages.com and Mac on the old SOS)

--------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-19-2010, 02:25 PM
Twoller Twoller is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,296
Default

In California, it has been reported here at SOS that %20 of registered voters are "Decline to State". That number is getting bigger, not smaller. The divisions in the state are not just among Republicans or Democrats. Until the Republicans and the Democrats step away from the "two party system", the voters, increasingly, are going to step away from them.
__________________
The United States of America is for citizens only! Everyone else OUT.
Criminalize asking party affilation for voter registration! End the "two party system"!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-20-2010, 12:07 AM
RadioActiveRich's Avatar
RadioActiveRich RadioActiveRich is offline
Heavyweight Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 13
Default Hostile takeover time

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twoller View Post
In California, it has been reported here at SOS that %20 of registered voters are "Decline to State". That number is getting bigger, not smaller. The divisions in the state are not just among Republicans or Democrats. Until the Republicans and the Democrats step away from the "two party system", the voters, increasingly, are going to step away from them.
I am not sure what your purpose in saying this is, so I may well agree with you, but there is no such thing as a two party system. We can create, register, and give rise to as many parties as we like. And the Dems and Repubs may benefit from the lack of an alternative to their nonsense, but they are not responsible for being the only two parties. The people responsible are those who fail at creating any meaningful and sustained progress in the "third" parties. Look at it this way, if you total up those who do not vote with those who are unaffiliated or "decline to state" and both the Dems and Repubs would be dwarfed. What we need is not a third party. The way I see it, the Dems and Repubs are tied for second. What we need is a FIRST party. But unless and until the AIP, Constitution, Tea Party, and whoever else can get their act together, we should make the best use of the only semi-Conservative party we got. Afterall, its how the Whigs became the Republicans in the first place.... Hostile takeover time.
__________________
---------------------------------------------
RadioActive Rich
http://www.twitter.com/RadioActiveRich
http://www.twitter.com/ConservAlliance
http://www.RadioActiveBlog.com
http://www.ConservativeAlliance.org

(Formerly FoothillPages.com and Mac on the old SOS)

--------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-20-2010, 07:32 AM
Twoller Twoller is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,296
Default

Who says we need political parties at all? There is nothing in our system of government that requires political parties. We simply have the right to form associations based on political orientation. It is a freedom, not necessity.

The most important thing we need to do now to confront the "two party system", and make no mistake about it, there are people who insist this is a real system, is to get rid of the primaries.

The primary elections like we see cominig up this June are run for the benefit of the political parties, paid for by the public. We don't need political parties and we should be under no obligation to run their elections. It isn't even necessary that political parties have elections at all. Political parties are free to nominate who they want for an office any way they want to. Political parties are private organizations, not subject to the rules of government provided by the constitution.

One of the ways we can get rid of the primaries is to declare it unconstitutional to ask somebody registering to vote what their political party is. It is none of any of any part of government in the US's business to ask what your political party is. The only justification there is for asking is to provide information for running the primaries. That's it. Remove party registration with voter registration and the primary elections have nothing to work with. They could no longer know at the polls, like they do now, what your political party is.
__________________
The United States of America is for citizens only! Everyone else OUT.
Criminalize asking party affilation for voter registration! End the "two party system"!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-20-2010, 08:10 AM
PochoPatriot PochoPatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 336
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twoller View Post
One of the ways we can get rid of the primaries is to declare it unconstitutional to ask somebody registering to vote what their political party is.
Is there a specific clause in the Constitution that prohibits this? If there is one, please point it out to me, because I have missed it. Otherwise you seem to be willing to die on the wrong hill.
__________________
I think, therefore I love the Dodgers!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-12-2010, 03:49 PM
RadioActiveRich's Avatar
RadioActiveRich RadioActiveRich is offline
Heavyweight Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 13
Default

This is another one of those things that everybody goes apesh1t for when it is said, but never really made sense to me.

But, if you ever want rousing applause during a speech just talk about how you hate partisan politics and how there should be term limits. People go nuts.

The truth is though, that the problem isn't political parties. It is that you cannot tell the parties apart anymore. What is the real difference between the GOP and the Dems? Both want amnesty, both want healtcare reform (just different versions), both spend money like drunken monkeys and then blame everyone else. No difference.

Partisan politics is good. There is nothing wrong with it. We just need to get the American people to do their part and call BS when they are supposed to.

As for term limits, there is no law that says you even have to nominate the incumbent again. There is your term limit. Primaries and elections are term limits. Anything else is a cop out by the voters. You want the person out? Vote them out!
__________________
---------------------------------------------
RadioActive Rich
http://www.twitter.com/RadioActiveRich
http://www.twitter.com/ConservAlliance
http://www.RadioActiveBlog.com
http://www.ConservativeAlliance.org

(Formerly FoothillPages.com and Mac on the old SOS)

--------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-12-2010, 07:16 PM
ilbegone's Avatar
ilbegone ilbegone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,068
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RadioActiveRich View Post
This is another one of those things that everybody goes apesh1t for when it is said, but never really made sense to me.

But, if you ever want rousing applause during a speech just talk about how you hate partisan politics and how there should be term limits. People go nuts.

The truth is though, that the problem isn't political parties. It is that you cannot tell the parties apart anymore. What is the real difference between the GOP and the Dems? Both want amnesty, both want healtcare reform (just different versions), both spend money like drunken monkeys and then blame everyone else. No difference.

Partisan politics is good. There is nothing wrong with it. We just need to get the American people to do their part and call BS when they are supposed to.

As for term limits, there is no law that says you even have to nominate the incumbent again. There is your term limit. Primaries and elections are term limits. Anything else is a cop out by the voters. You want the person out? Vote them out!
I dislike both the Republican and Democrat parties: The agendas may be different, but in the end it is the same result for regular people.

And there is no solace in the hope of a third party. Most are nuts, crackpots and something like the cure being much worse than the disease.

Yet the two main parties give us little in the way of candidates which may be palatable to centrist America - it's as though the extremists in both parties have a lock on the nomination of candidates. We have a choice on who scares us the least, and that's called "representative government"?

Something needs to change in the way candidates are chosen and presented to the public. Otherwise the two parties will continue to sodomize us.
__________________
Freibier gab's gestern

Hay burros en el maiz

RAP IS TO MUSIC WHAT ETCH-A-SKETCH IS TO ART

Don't drink and post.

"A nickel will get you on the subway, but garlic will get you a seat." - Old New York Yiddish Saying

"You can observe a lot just by watching." Yogi Berra

Old journeyman commenting on young apprentices - "Think about it, these are their old days"

SOMETIMES IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

Never, ever, wear a bright colored shirt to a stand up comedy show.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright SaveOurState ©2009 - 2016 All Rights Reserved