Ditch Dixie

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MrFun
Howard Dean to the RIGHT of Kerry?

yeah right

Yup, on most issues. The difference between Dean and the rest of the DP is that Dean is militant, no apologies, balls to the wall, anti-Conservative. He's not as liberal as Kerry, but then again, Kerry isn't as liberal as Kerry.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Kerry did try to move back to the middle in the actual election but if you remember the primaries the far left wing of the party had a huge say (likely a deciding say) in who the nominee was

Er, the left of the party had very little say, actually. Kerry was the Clinton nominee, not the left's nominee.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
The Dems don't need a new ideology; they need either new brains or new balls. Gephardt didn't have 'em; Daschelle didn't have 'em; moderates just don't have 'em. Liberals like Russ Feingold and Nancy Pelosi do.

Please, please, please run Nancy Pelosi for President in 2008!

[Ben Kenobi]

Howard Dean.

I agree with this assessment.

I would have been much more likely to vote for Dean, than I would have been for Kerry.

[Az]

Nice avatar there.

[Ned]

Originally posted by DanS
However, the GOP did change its ideology. Maybe Reagan didn't change his own, but the party is different ideologically than in Nixon's day, for instance.

Hardly. Republicans are following Kevin Philips "Emerging Republican Majority" strategy to a tee. This is Nixon's strategy, and it has forged the current Republican Majority.

That strategy, among other things, called for the Republicans to court the working class, Southern and Suburban whites, social conservatives and the patriotic.

That is today's Republican Majority. It will remain unless the Democrats change.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


I agree with this assessment.

I would have been much more likely to vote for Dean, than I would have been for Kerry.

[Ned]

For you Democrats, Bush was/is still going after your base. He was openly courting black and Hispanic social conservatives. His success with blacks was marginal, but he achieve great success with Hispanics, so much so, that Catholics can now be considered a Republican base.

So, it looks like it is going to get worse for you liberals before it gets better.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm a pacifist Mr. Fun.

[Az]

Originally posted by MrFun

multiply zero by 10k, you still get zero.

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Arrian
Me?

Fiscally conservative, socially liberal, proactive on the environment (but I'd stress using proper science, not psuedoscientific hysteria as the basis for policy), and
foreign policy... you know, I'm not sure what the exact term would be. I'm pro-democracy but disagree with the neocon notion of bringing it about via the barrel of a gun. I'm pro-UN (the idea) but generally wary of the UN (the reality). I do think the US government's primary responsibility is to protect the interests of its citizens over the citizens of other nations, but there are limits to that (in other words, America first, yes, but not America uber alles... if that makes sense).

New England Liberal Republican party?

-Arrian

My God, it's true. I'm *not* alone! I have a comrade-in-arms! *looks around the ocean of red/blue* So, uh, did you bring the oars?

Gatekeeper

[Ben Kenobi]

multiply zero by 10k, you still get zero.

Eh, but 0 = 0.

If I had a 0.001% chance of voting for Kerry, I'd be about 0.01% chance of voting for Dean.

[Az]

oh, much better.

[Az]

btw, 10k=10,000

[Ned]

Liberal Democrats today stand for socialism, environmental extremism, libertinism and open hatred and mockery of religion. When Democrats speak of "moral values," what they mean is sex, drugs and rock 'n roll. When they speak of "family values," what they mean is that a woman should be able to have children outside of marriage because placing any value on the man as a father in a family environment is sexist. When they speak of fiscal conservatism what they mean is high taxes in the context of a class warfare attack on the rich, corporations and business in general. And when they speak of environmentalism, what they mean is completely shutting down polluting industries, not building power plants in their backyards, ending drilling for oil anywhere United States, protecting owls over jobs and in general trying to return the United States to the golden age of yesteryear when there were no factories, no cars and no pollution. And when it comes to religion, they favor freedom "from" religion not freedom "of" religion. They opening attack Christianity in all its forms and all its places. Yesterday it was removing prayer from a classroom. Today it is removing Christ from Christmas.

Is there any wonder why the Liberal Democrat finds no home in America outside of the centers of hedonism and socialism, namely Hollywood, San Francisco, New York and Chicago?