Why do people consider themselves Democrats?

[MRT144]

Originally posted by cyclotron7


I look at San Francisco as a case study. Homeless people there are a big problem, and there's a lot of constant debate and some action as to what they should give poor people to stop the problem. Obviously, they have not come up with a good solution yet, but I'm convinced that they are genuinely concerned with the problem.

actually this is a great example. there was a measure on the ballot a while a go dubbed care not cash. what it aimed to do was end the system of handing out money to homeless people on a monthly basis for them to live and replace that with care programs like shelters and food centers.

[Japher]

I like Gavin Newsom, he is a good seed for the Democrats... Only if Feinstein and Willy Brown wouldn't endorse him I might like him more.

He is running for mayor, and will probably win. I will just be happy to get Brown out of there.

I was looking over his web site for his compeign and I can't seem to find what party he is attributed too. Though with all the dem support I am sure he is a dem too... He has a good track record, writes some good bills... Really, I think he is a no party kind of guy.

[Al B. Sure!]

Republicans have a lot of racists? What about Senator Byrd? he's a democrat and was a member of the KKK. both parties got some nuts.

Anyway, I've always suspected liberals as trying to keep people poor and what not (i blame the baby boomers for legitimizing drug use and pre-marital sex) but generally this attitude comes from some suspicious people... I've read articles by Reggie White where he mentioned liberals as trying to keep minorities impoverished.

Still, I think that most democrats got good intentions but they are foolish. Social welfare programs and what not (whether they work or not) aren't that horrible of an idea but combined with the social liberalness of the democrats, the democratic agenda only brings down the poor, keeping our communities filled with drugs.

Personally, I don't think the republican party is perfect but the social conservatism alone is enough to help fix some of these problems. Maybe we can have a more populist Republican party in the future? One that is more lower middle class oriented.

anyway...

Was it Rufus who mentioned the point about people voting with their money? That is probably true in some cases (though I dont think that Republican economic policies would bring any harm to the inner city) but most people I know are more concerned with social issues than economic ones. Fundamentalist Baptists and Muslims here in philly are undoubtedly more anti-homosexual and anti-drug than are pro-welfare. religious people (or even those who try to be religious) are usually more concerned with social issues than their wallets.

Though I think the Democrats do realize this hence the last two mayors of Philly, now governor Ed Rendell and John Street (who beat a republican by only 1%-2% of the vote) who are both fairly conservative for democrats. They are more like the moderate social conservative union democrats. Mayor Street (I know his son by the way) is supposedly pretty religious and has been open to public school privatization and been an ardent supporter of the war on drugs.

If the Democratic party of Philly put a drug-legalization, pro-gay marriage, etc. candidate on the ballot, maybe, just maybe, the democratic party will fail in philly.


thanks

[GePap]

Anyway, I've always suspected liberals as trying to keep people poor and what not (i blame the baby boomers for legitimizing drug use and pre-marital sex) but generally this attitude comes from some suspicious people... I've read articles by Reggie White where he mentioned liberals as trying to keep minorities impoverished.

I find this terribly absurd, but it is good to know that these are the sort of absurd notions many consevatives like to sell, and explain the depths of their hatred for "liberals", which I find to be greater than the hatred for "conservatives" many "liberals" have (all of them a racist corporate dogs!)

Liberals do not seek to make minorities poor, anymore than conservatives seek to make them poor. As fo yet, both sides have failed to come up with right answers (where are the conservative Utopias? Mississippii? Alabama? maybe its SC?)

Was it Rufus who mentioned the point about people voting with their money? That is probably true in some cases (though I dont think that Republican economic policies would bring any harm to the inner city) but most people I know are more concerned with social issues than economic ones.

If that is so, why do we have the Log Cabin Republicans, and most highly Catholic Hispoanics vote for liebral dems? Voting patterns show that Rufus is correct as far as pointing out that, out of the populations that vote, economic matters are as if not more important than culture war ones.

Socail ills are the symptoms of the modern system of politics and economics, not the cause.

[Al B. Sure!]

GePap:

Like I said it comes from some suspicious people... like I said, Reggie White, the former Philly Eagle and Green Bay Packers linebacker who is now a (baptist?) preacher... I dont think democrats are plotting evily... i just think they genuinely want to help but are misguided...

in some ways, its reminiscent to some black nationalists years ago who wanted white liberals to keep away and stop claiming to help them because these nationalists felt that white liberals were not doing anything constructive

[RGBVideo]

Just because people think GWB is an idiot doesn't automatically make them Democrats

Bottom line, Speer.

It may surprise you, but just because people belong to a certain group, they don't automatically agree on everything.

[Cyclotron]

Of course. There are many democrats I often feel like slapping.