So who will it be 2004?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Fez
So you democrats are still looking for somebody? Try Hillary. That is all your party has left. The worst of the worst. Hillary Clinton, Lieber(liar)man, Al "I invented the internet" Gore... wow... you got a real selection there.

What lies did Leiberman tell? Stop talking out of your ass.

And Gore never said he invented the internet, that's a perfect example of a comment taken out of context and twisted to represent something it doesn't.

And you don't know jack **** about the other candidates, I bet. Just because you're misinformed doesn't make things the way you say it does.

Imran,

Being pro-life and pro-police aren't necessarily conservative positions. More young people are also pro-gay rights, pro-social welfare and pro-minority rights than ever before. They are more and more in favor of nationalized healthcare, too.

[jdd2007]

Originally posted by Hobbes


Yeah, and Creed is a good band

there ya go!

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Imran,

Being pro-life and pro-police aren't necessarily conservative positions. More young people are also pro-gay rights, pro-social welfare and pro-minority rights than ever before. They are more and more in favor of nationalized healthcare, too.

Additionally, we Democrates don't have a lot of litmus tests. For example, moi...I am anti-gun but pro-Dean. You have to look at a person's overall approach to politics.

[Boris Godunov]

Same here, Zkribbler. I'm pro-gun control but also am really liking Dean.

[Shi Huangdi]

There was an article in the Washington Post a while back that youth today are adopting conservative values, unfortunately I couldn't seem to find it on the WP website. My textbook for Freshman Orientation at college also said more people my age were adopting conservative values, although as I said on some issues such as the environment and gay rights they take a more liberal viewpoint.

[Imran Siddiqui]

But if ideology and charisma mattered more than money, Jesse Jackson would have been the nominee in '88; he was both mor charismatic than Dukakis and more ideologically in tune with the average Dem primary voter (who tends to be way to the left of the average Dem voter in a general election).

Ideology means the 'correct' ideology. Jackson is very, very left, and many Dems realized that that ideology would lead to him getting creamed in a general election.

Being pro-life and pro-police aren't necessarily conservative positions.

Um... actually they are.

More young people are also pro-gay rights, pro-social welfare and pro-minority rights than ever before. They are more and more in favor of nationalized healthcare, too.

Pro-minority rights and pro-social welfare isn't necessarily liberal issues.

Additionally, we Democrates don't have a lot of litmus tests.

You don't actually believe this do you?

In the 1988 nomination, Pennsylvania's Governor Casey was supposed to speak but was bumped off. Why? Because he was pro-life. The Dems had no room for those people. Shi will know what I'm talking about.

Also the national Dem party is getting more and more anti-gun, which is why Dean won't have a chance.

I mean, really, there are plenty of pro-choice Republicans, but the national party isn't that receptive to it (though we ALMOST had a pro-choice Republican Veep - Tom Ridge).

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
we ALMOST had a pro-choice Republican Veep - Tom Ridge).

Yeah? And we almost had a Democratic President - Al Gore. "Almost" doesn't count except in hand grenades and tactical nuclear weapons.

[Capt Dizle]

And horseshoes. Don't forget horseshoes.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yeah? And we almost had a Democratic President - Al Gore. "Almost" doesn't count except in hand grenades and tactical nuclear weapons.

Well you were saying that the Republicans would never have a pro-choice Veep. Saying that Ridge almost got it, proves you wrong.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Being pro-life and pro-police aren't necessarily conservative positions.

Um... actually they are.

Not true. I know many staunchly liberal Catholics who of course are pro-life. And I'm pretty pro-police in most regards, and I'm leftist as well. The stereotype of leftists thinking of cops as authoritarian monsters is really stale.

Pro-minority rights and pro-social welfare isn't necessarily liberal issues.

Can't have it both ways, Immy. Show me a major conservative who is pro-welfare and pro-gay rights. It's certainly quite a rarity in the GOP.

And as for the gun issue, I think you're wrong here. One of the things Gore realized was that the gun issue was killing the Democrats in rural areas, which is why he didn't make gun control a prominent issue in his campaign. The Democrats have been beaten with that cudgel many times, and I don't see any evidence they are becoming more leftist on the issue.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

But if ideology and charisma mattered more than money, Jesse Jackson would have been the nominee in '88; he was both mor charismatic than Dukakis and more ideologically in tune with the average Dem primary voter (who tends to be way to the left of the average Dem voter in a general election).

Ideology means the 'correct' ideology. Jackson is very, very left, and many Dems realized that that ideology would lead to him getting creamed in a general election.

Jackson is not very left, he is pro black period. Most of you guy are to young to remember when he started the Rainbow thing. He did not include anyone that was not black until some woman, Latinos and other started to b!tch, then he said that he did not mean to exclude them. I have watch Jackson since 68 and he could care less about non black people.

[Drake Tungsten]

Show me a major conservative who is pro-welfare and pro-gay rights. It's certainly quite a rarity in the GOP.

What about the Log Cabin Republicans? Or Fez? Both are conservative and flaming at the same time...

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Show me a major conservative who is pro-welfare and pro-gay rights. It's certainly quite a rarity in the GOP.

What about the Log Cabin Republicans? Or Fez? Both are conservative and flaming at the same time...

Neither are significant nor pro-welfare.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Well you were saying that the Republicans would never have a pro-choice Veep. Saying that Ridge almost got it, proves you wrong.

I never said the Republicans would never have a pro-choice Veep! And if I had, my full quote would have been: The Republicans will never have a pro-choice Veep until they grow a brain.

BTW Imran, how's law school going?

Oh yeah, and horseshoes. Of course, horseshoes, horseshoes, horseshoes.

[Drake Tungsten]

Neither are significant nor pro-welfare.

Why would they be pro-welfare? Being gay doesn't make one an idiot...

Speaking about the Log Cabin Republicans and not Fez, or course. He's the exception that proves the rule...