Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

And if they're throwing out career politicians... what is Sarah Palin?  I mean, didn't she quit her previous (political) job in order to focus more on being a national politician?

Their slogan should more accurately read: "Throw out all current career politicians and substitute them with our own."

That's not very chantable though.

[Nikov]

Everyone knows the value of your political position is in how well you can chant it.

[Demonic Spoon]

...american...politics?    

[Renault]

Yep. This is American politics.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

The problem with American politics is that, as time goes on, the voters becomes increasingly polarized to either side of the political spectrum.

That's the exact opposite of what the system does. Two party systems specifically depolarize the politics (politics must be differentiated from rhetoric, which is always extremely negative and polarized, even in cases where both sides support the same thing), normally leading both parties toward the center. The problem in more recent years is that the right wing, upon finding that the left wing had become center-rightist and essentially identical to them on major issues, decided that they weren't far enough away from Democrats to demonize them as radicals (having browbeaten them to the center with that very tactic), and so shifted from being merely rightist to taking a running leap off a cliff.

[Renault]

Saying they're essentially identical is a bit of a stretch, but you make a good point in that two-party systems seem to depolarize politics, at least in the US style. It sort of forces it, as you need moderates to make general elections.

[Nikov]

The problem in more recent years is that the right wing, upon finding that the left wing had become center-rightist and essentially identical to them on major issues, decided that they weren't far enough away from Democrats to demonize them as radicals (having browbeaten them to the center with that very tactic), and so shifted from being merely rightist to taking a running leap off a cliff.

Huuwaaaaah?

[alway]

Look at what has been done thus far with dem controlled congress and presidency: we got nationwide Romneycare, increase in Bush-era big brother programs, and even now they are going for tax cuts, of all things! Democrats are indeed center-right.

[Nikov]

Leftist, Statist, and Populist, in that order.

PS: Oooh! You forgot 'tack entirely undebated gays-okay-in-military-amendment onto the DoD budget they were too lazy to take care of at the start of the year'. That was a politically brilliant move. Legislate a major change in social norms in the most conservative element of our society in a fashion that leaves zero time to consult public opinion by turning the budget for that element into a poison pill before everyone goes on recess for campaigning.

Saying a hypothetical 'Tea Party' split is going to save the Democrats from losing big is like saying the mad rush to the stern will counterbalance the sinking bow and right the Titantic.

[alway]

PS: Oooh! You forgot 'tack entirely undebated gays-okay-in-military-amendment onto the DoD budget they were too lazy to take care of at the start of the year'. That was a politically brilliant move. Legislate a major change in social norms in the most conservative element of our society in a fashion that leaves zero time to consult public opinion by turning the budget for that element into a poison pill before everyone goes on recess for campaigning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_ask,_don't_tell#Barack_Obama
Considering he ran on the position of repealing DADT, 2 years is hardly "zero time to consult public opinion." Then of course there is the comprehensive review...

This amendment provided for the repeal following a study conducted by US Army General Carter Ham.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_ask,_don't_tell#Comprehensive_Review_Working_Group_.28CRWG.29
And even without democrats' help, it would probably end up getting axed anyway. http://www.edition.cnn.com/2010/US/09/09/dont.ask.dont.tell/index.html?hpt=T2&imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail
As for the public opinion: http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/02/10/DADT_Poll_57_for_Gays_Serving_Openly/

So... Remind me again, what makes democrats so "leftist," when even 40% of republicans agree with the change?

[PTTG??]

Why does anyone care what particular kind of person a random volunteer soldier is attracted to? We're already shipping them off somewhere to get killed by some extremist group or the other. It just doesn't seem like a big deal. I suppose that it's a "right" to give up your rights and get yelled at by large men with crew cuts and tiny brains, and some conservapedians might point out that if you give a gay a right, next thing you know you're being mass married to "Jeb" by the communist overlord of the US.

My point is, not a liberal issue.

I have to agree with Alway. It is a well-accepted fact that what passes for a liberal in the US would be a moderate in Canada and GB, and conservative in any of the Norse states. An american conservative is, from an external perspective, virtually indistingushable from an Ayatollah, except for the fact that he hates Ayatollahs.

[Leafsnail]

PS: Oooh! You forgot 'tack entirely undebated gays-okay-in-military-amendment onto the DoD budget they were too lazy to take care of at the start of the year'. That was a politically brilliant move. Legislate a major change in social norms in the most conservative element of our society in a fashion that leaves zero time to consult public opinion by turning the budget for that element into a poison pill before everyone goes on recess for campaigning.

I've always thought it crazy how much of a deal everyone makes over the issue.  I mean, there are gays in the army.  There always will be.  But apparently aknowledging that will cause the collapse of society.

Democrats definitely seem centrist when compared to most other developed countries and their past incarnations.  I mean, they can't even get a unanimous vote on a fairly basic piece of healthcare legislation (and since most would reject universal healthcare, this puts them to the right of British conservatives, at the very least).

[smigenboger]

The no gays in the military is actually a gay conspiracy which started when they realized they'd have more seats in congress if all the straight men chose the military path. They'd be undefeated in elections, and could pass any law they wanted.

[Nikov]

Its been said Prohibition got started because all the men were busy in the army.

[Leafsnail]

Actually, come to think of it, wasn't DADT ruled unconstitutional last week anyway?  Apparently it violates some smallprint somewhere (the "First Amendment", whatever that is).