Racism and Bigotry an Equal Opportunity Offense for both Parties

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Is this an assertion that Repugs have become the big tent party? Come one come all.

[Cyclotron]

Is this an assertion that Repugs have become the big tent party? Come one come all.

Of course it is. They've been that way for a long time; where else do you see Wall Street pragmatists cozying up to Falwell's crazies? I've got nothing to argue with you about there. Being inclusive, however, does not make one right - and as far as "purging" goes, the conservatives take the cake. It's hard to criticize purging within the Democratic party when one sees the extensive purging of the GOP from both within and without (i.e. the Club for Growth).

[Sikander]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Oerdin
real voters instead of fringe activists voting in a primary.

There was a 40% turnout in the primary, including thousands of people like Arrian who registered as Democrats just to be able to vote. The people who voted for Lamont aren't extremists. You should look at the exit poll data before him make BAMs like that, Oerdin.

Basically around 8% of the registered voters in Connetticut voted for Lamont in the primary. It's quite possible that a group that small could be "fringey".

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

===

Well, now I'm starting to feel the same way about Joe Lieberman. Now that he's running as a third-party candidate, I'm remembering some choice quotes he'd said, way back in the 2000 election, about how wrong it was to vote for Ralph Nader.

“I ask those who are thinking about voting for Ralph Nader to decide how they feel — how George Bush feels — about protecting the environment, protecting consumers, protecting a woman’s right to choose, because all of those may well be in jeopardy if George Bush is elected president.” — Joe Lieberman, October 2000

“For Republicans to be putting Ralph Nader on television in a paid ad, certainly might lead your average observer to be cynical.” –Joe Lieberman rejecting GOP support for spoiler candidates, October 2000

“A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush,” — Joe Lieberman, September 2000

...

Lieberman is a Hypocritical Political ****er.

Here's why he's not hypocritical in this instance - He's leading the race according to the last poll. He has a chance to win. If anyone should drop out it should be the Republican.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Why should people who aren't memebers of the party decide who's running for the party?

They shouldn't as long as they are willing to organize and pay for their own primaries. As they are using state resources for their essentially private political organization they have to play by the rules decided by the state government - which they dominate anyway.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
So this is a purging based on 1 issue and 1 issue alone?

Whether one agrees or disagree with the use of the word "purge" ... Lieberman lost because of Iraq.

As should many, many others. They won't, but that's not my problem.

I do not see it as an ideological purge, though. It's about policy. He supported a very, very bad policy. That policy is now extremely unpopular. He got fired (sorta, depending on whether he does in fact win as an Independent). Lieberman lost... on the issues (or rather, the ISSUE). Imagine that! Shocking! Appalling! The END of the Democratic Party! OMG!!

Please.

-Arrian