[iLikebeer]

Hypothetical question here: If things continue down the same road and democrats continue to fail to really do anything but disappoint and we were to basically go to a 1 party dominated country, what would happen if all the democrats, the politicians and voters, all switched to Republicans?

Is that even allowed or do they get to have a say as to who joins the party? It seems to me that if the old democrats were able to get a popular vote but electoral vote loss, that they could possibly change who got elected in the primaries. Instead of a lot of democrat and republican voters voting party line, they'd actually have to do some investigating to figure out who to vote for. Maybe that would cause some kind of party split with 2 different parties from the old dem/rep duo. Could Republicans put up more than 1 candidate or would the other major candidate be an independent?

I doubt anything like that would ever happen, but I know some states like Illinois should be Republican but have voted Democrat since the good old days and like to keep it that way, even when the ideas behind the parties have reversed.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

Hypothetical question here: If things continue down the same road and democrats continue to fail to really do anything but disappoint and we were to basically go to a 1 party dominated country, what would happen if all the democrats, the politicians and voters, all switched to Republicans?

Is that even allowed or do they get to have a say as to who joins the party? It seems to me that if the old democrats were able to get a popular vote but electoral vote loss, that they could possibly change who got elected in the primaries. Instead of a lot of democrat and republican voters voting party line, they'd actually have to do some investigating to figure out who to vote for. Maybe that would cause some kind of party split with 2 different parties from the old dem/rep duo. Could Republicans put up more than 1 candidate or would the other major candidate be an independent?

I doubt anything like that would ever happen, but I know some states like Illinois should be Republican but have voted Democrat since the good old days and like to keep it that way, even when the ideas behind the parties have reversed.

I don't know the answers to your questions, but I've been thinking that now would be a perfect time to create a new party consisting of some Democrat defectors and others. Bush seems perfect for a subset of the population, but there is a big gaping hole in representation for a number of other ideas, making choices not very attractive to many.

I can see the Libertarians picking up ground, since the Neo-cons are clearly not about personal freedoms, choices and civil liberties.

Hopefully the Democrats will use this downtime to recreate themselves into something attractive to voters, perhaps reclaiming some new territory that the Neo-cons have left in the dust (e.g. small government, tight spending, civil liberties, etc.).

[Spliffdaddy]

So the Democrats will become what Republicans once were.

(our plan is working to perfection)

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I don't know the answers to your questions, but I've been thinking that now would be a perfect time to create a new party consisting of some Democrat defectors and others. Bush seems perfect for a subset of the population, but there is a big gaping hole in representation for a number of other ideas, making choices not very attractive to many.

I can see the Libertarians picking up ground, since the Neo-cons are clearly not about personal freedoms, choices and civil liberties.

Hopefully the Democrats will use this downtime to recreate themselves into something attractive to voters, perhaps reclaiming some new territory that the Neo-cons have left in the dust (e.g. small government, tight spending, civil liberties, etc.).

You will never be happy with ANY party or administration's handling of ANY matter if you only pay attention to the negative aspects of that party or administration's performance.

But, hey! Jon Stewart is keeping you in good spirits so he can't be all bad, right?

And ALL you Fuzzy libs keep the rest of us laughing, so everything balances out.

Sure. Go ahead. Start a new party. Protest. Wring your hands. Stay clueless. Then lose in 08!
And then repeat. All to our everlasting amusement!

BTW, just to show you how well we're sighted in on you guys. Look at Spliffdaddy's post and mine. I didn't see his when I posted. He didn't see mine when he posted. Yet, we are saying the same thing about you guys.

Hint, hint? Clue, clue?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by aberdeenwriter

You will never be happy with ANY party or administration's handling of ANY matter if you only pay attention to the negative aspects of that party or administration's performance.

But, hey! Jon Stewart is keeping you in good spirits so he can't be all bad, right?

And ALL you Fuzzy libs keep the rest of us laughing, so everything balances out.

Sure. Go ahead. Start a new party. Protest. Wring your hands. Stay clueless. Then lose in 08!
And then repeat. All to our everlasting amusement!

BTW, just to show you how well we're sighted in on you guys. Look at Spliffdaddy's post and mine. I didn't see his when I posted. He didn't see mine when he posted. Yet, we are saying the same thing about you guys.

Hint, hint? Clue, clue?

Wow... It's astonishing how one day you can be pretty thoughtful and a good conversationalist, and then the next day a jerk with nothing to say.

Welcome to my ignore list, you are in good company with Kevin, Railroader, and SpliffDaddy.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Wow... It's astonishing how one day you can be pretty thoughtful and a good conversationalist, and then the next day a jerk with nothing to say.

Welcome to my ignore list, you are in good company with Kevin, Railroader, and SpliffDaddy.

Lies certainly can be hurtful. But I have the feeling what I've said to hurt you here is pretty close to the truth.

FWIW, I'm not angry at you. Think of this as being candidly direct. Sometimes when your Canadian friends won't tell you what you need to hear it takes an American to hook you up.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by aberdeenwriter

Lies certainly can be hurtful. But I have the feeling what I've said to hurt you here is pretty close to the truth.

Yes, that's right. He's hurt because he knows he actually is a "fuzzy lib" who exists only for your "everlasting amusement" and lives up to about every stereotype you could think of off the top of your head. Your post wasn't at all rude and dismissive.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Yes, that's right. He's hurt because he knows he actually is a "fuzzy lib" who exists only for your "everlasting amusement" and lives up to about every stereotype you could think of off the top of your head. Your post wasn't at all rude and dismissive.

Strange World!

[besson3c]

We can disagree until the cows come home. All I ask is that the person I'm conversing with is civil and respectful with me, or else not only are my efforts a waste of time (like most political debate these days), but unpleasant - a combination I'm not willing to tolerate, I have better things to do.

Obviously Aberdeen has difficulty having a semi-intellectual discussion without resorting to personal attacks.

It's a shame.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by besson3c

We can disagree until the cows come home. All I ask is that the person I'm conversing with is civil and respectful with me, or else not only are my efforts a waste of time (like most political debate these days), but unpleasant - a combination I'm not willing to tolerate, I have better things to do.

Obviously Aberdeen has difficulty having a semi-intellectual discussion without resorting to personal attacks.

It's a shame.

I know I have said some things that have offended you. So, I will give myself a time out while we both think about what brought us to this point.

And NO that DOESN'T mean you thinking about what ABERDEENWRITER did.

You think about you and I'll think about me.

Talk to you in a few days.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I can see the Libertarians picking up ground, since the Neo-cons are clearly not about personal freedoms, choices and civil liberties.

PSSST either are the liberals unless it gives them some political advantage.

Hopefully the Democrats will use this downtime to recreate themselves into something attractive to voters, perhaps reclaiming some new territory that the Neo-cons have left in the dust (e.g. small government, tight spending, civil liberties, etc.).

Yes that is what the Dems do best. When your virtues aren't working, MAKE UP NEW ONES!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Wow... It's astonishing how one day you can be pretty thoughtful and a good conversationalist, and then the next day a jerk with nothing to say.

Welcome to my ignore list, you are in good company with Kevin, Railroader, and SpliffDaddy.

besson you are one of the biggest flamers in here. Your recent high horse act doesn't fool anyone. But go ahead put the world on ignore. And people wonder why liberals are so disconnected from reality.

And YOU sir are throwing personal attacks out too. Don't you realize it?

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

So the Democrats will become what Republicans once were.

(our plan is working to perfection)

Actually that happened already once, and I don't see a reason why it wouldn't happen again.

Taliesin

[Kevin]

Clinton was one of the best Republicans the Democrats had.

Actually that isn't fair. Clinton just held a stance to whatever he thought would get him a thumbs up.

Whatever the most popular thing to do was, he did it. Regardless if it was the right or wrong thing to do.

Bush seems to be doing what he thinks is right, regardless of public opinion.

I can respect the latter a bit more. And I had a feeling Kerry was just going to be another Clinton. He already shown signs of waffling.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Clinton was one of the best Republicans the Democrats had.

Much more interesting though is the changes in policies within the democratic and republican party since the civil-war. Conservative and progressive policies, support in cities vs. rural, north and south, state vs. federal, isolanist vs. interventionist changed considerably within the two parties, and I don't see any strong reason why it shouldn't continue to fluctuate.

The socalled neo-conservatives within the republican party is just the latest fluctuation, and I think the democrats are ripe for a fluctuation within their own party.

Taliesin

[Kevin]

"neo-cons" is a silly word.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Kevin

"neo-cons" is a silly word.

I agree, but it's the most popular word for it. Maybe you prefer to call neo-cons "straussians".

Taliesin

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by Kevin

"neo-cons" is a silly word.

You hafta understand that when people's viewpoints (the liberals in this example) aren't widely accepted, it's human nature to attempt to demonize the 'other side' - the side whose viewpoints are more popular.

If you refer to the opposing side as 'human beings', you give some merit to their beliefs and opinions. If you give them a nickname then you can treat them as objects, instead.

It's easier to hate an object than to hate a group of people.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

You hafta understand that when people's viewpoints (the liberals in this example) aren't widely accepted, it's human nature to attempt to demonize the 'other side' - the side whose viewpoints are more popular.

If you refer to the opposing side as 'human beings', you give some merit to their beliefs and opinions. If you give them a nickname then you can treat them as objects, instead.

It's easier to hate an object than to hate a group of people.

Indeed, and when the time comes that the democratic party receives its changing fluctuation, I'm sure your "side" will have a nice catchy nickname for that fluctuation, too.

Taliesin

[Spliffdaddy]

Tree-hugging peacenik eco-weenies

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Tree-hugging peacenik eco-weenies

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Tree-hugging peacenik eco-weenies

This tree-hugging peacenik eco-weenie likes that. Thanks!

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

You hafta understand that when people's viewpoints (the liberals in this example) aren't widely accepted, it's human nature to attempt to demonize the 'other side' - the side whose viewpoints are more popular.

If you refer to the opposing side as 'human beings', you give some merit to their beliefs and opinions. If you give them a nickname then you can treat them as objects, instead.

It's easier to hate an object than to hate a group of people.

So why do Republicans do the same thing about as often to Democrats?

[G Barnett]

Times like this, I think the only really sane thing to do is completely replace our election system with a lottery. Every 4 years, some poor bastard somewhere in the country gets his notice: "You're president for the next four years. The Secret Service will be coming to take you to Washington within the week. Declining is not an option." Do the same for Congress and the Senate. Make it like Jury Duty, only with nice pay and perks. Hell, even make bribery legal, as long as it's completely aboveboard, reported and taxed.

Hell, we'd end up with a better governmental representation of the actual state of the country that way. As an added bonus, we'd be rid of the Democrats, the Republicans, the career politicians, election year advertising, attack and smear campaigns, etc.

Now THAT would be a Revolution. And a long-overdue one, too.

[Moderator]

Originally Posted by G Barnett

Times like this, I think the only really sane thing to do is completely replace our election system with a lottery. Every 4 years, some poor bastard somewhere in the country gets his notice: "You're president for the next four years. The Secret Service will be coming to take you to Washington within the week

The funny thing is that's almost exactly what Rove said to Bush in '99.

[mrcolton]

I read enough of your post to simply reply:

SHUT UP!

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by mrcolton

I read enough of your post to simply reply:

SHUT UP!

Can't wait to complete my self imposed time out!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

I agree, but it's the most popular word for it. Maybe you prefer to call neo-cons "straussians".

How about just politicians. It seems to cover all angles. A neo-con, righty, lefty, liberal etc are all from the same pool.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

You hafta understand that when people's viewpoints (the liberals in this example) aren't widely accepted, it's human nature to attempt to demonize the 'other side' - the side whose viewpoints are more popular.

If you refer to the opposing side as 'human beings', you give some merit to their beliefs and opinions. If you give them a nickname then you can treat them as objects, instead.

It's easier to hate an object than to hate a group of people.

Much like the Nazis did the jews.

Originally Posted by mrcolton

I read enough of your post to simply reply:

SHUT UP!

Someone must have recently been banned from here.

[Taliesin]

I just read a bit on wikipedia about the republican party's founding. Apparently the republican party was founded by democrats and other groups, and after that many democrats joined the republican party...

The reason was to counter a push by southern democrats to make slavery federally allowed, and since the major parts of the northern democrats were against slavery they broke with their party and founded the republican party with other minor groups, and the rest is history.

Fascinating stuff.

Taliesin

[Taliesin]

If I would have to make a wild guess about what might happen in the political spectrum of the US in the next few years, I would say this: John McCain founds with disappointed politicians from the democrats and the republicans a new party and wins the following election and becomes the new president of the US.

Taliesin

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

Much more interesting though is the changes in policies within the democratic and republican party since the civil-war. Conservative and progressive policies, support in cities vs. rural, north and south, state vs. federal, isolanist vs. interventionist changed considerably within the two parties, and I don't see any strong reason why it shouldn't continue to fluctuate.

The socalled neo-conservatives within the republican party is just the latest fluctuation, and I think the democrats are ripe for a fluctuation within their own party.

Taliesin

As your "Straussian" comment reflects, you know that these neo (i.e. new) cons (conservatives) were once Democrats who came to realize that LIBERAL POLICIES DID NOT WORK.

They looked at all the wonderful things that the progressive liberalism was supposed to bring about in the 1960's and 1970's and they noticed things only got worse.

That is when and why they turned to conservatism.

All of the Fuzzy Brained Liberals (FBL's) here think this stuff is new and cutting edge and enlightened.

Well, it's NOT.

It's been tried and it has been proven not to work.

And the only reason we're having these debates is because the FBL's won't do their homework to realize they are playing a losing hand.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by aberdeenwriter

As your "Straussian" comment reflects, you know that these neo (i.e. new) cons (conservatives) were once Democrats who came to realize that LIBERAL POLICIES DID NOT WORK.

They looked at all the wonderful things that the progressive liberalism was supposed to bring about in the 1960's and 1970's and they noticed things only got worse.

That is when and why they turned to conservatism.

All of the Fuzzy Brained Liberals (FBL's) here think this stuff is new and cutting edge and enlightened.

Well, it's NOT.

It's been tried and it has been proven not to work.

And the only reason were having these debates is because the FBL's won't do their homework to realize they are playing a losing hand.

What ever happened to giving yourself a time-out so that you could purge yourself of being a jackass? *Sigh* so much for that...

Perhaps it is just easier to add you to that ignore list....

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

Indeed, and when the time comes that the democratic party receives its changing fluctuation, I'm sure your "side" will have a nice catchy nickname for that fluctuation, too.

Taliesin

"Fuzzy Brained Liberals" gets my vote. I'd also go with, FBL's or Fuzzies.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by besson3c

What ever happened to giving yourself a time-out so that you could purge yourself of being a jackass? *Sigh* so much for that...

Perhaps it is just easier to add you to that ignore list....

First of all, YOU are the only one who takes the term "Fuzzies" to heart and is bothered by it.
(BTW, does the term HIPPIE bother a person with big hips???)

And I wasn't addressing you in particular with that post. So, I'd look inward to see 'was up wit dat.'

Finally, once again you are exhibiting that quaint little tendency to try to control my expression.

I thought YOU might have taken this time to examine the dynamics of our interactions with a particular focus on the things that YOU are responsible for and that YOU can control.

And just because you don't WANT to exercise self-control in these areas doesn't mean that it isn't possible, nor that it might not be a good idea. It just means that you haven't.

From the film, "Silence of the Lambs."

CLARICE
You see a lot, Dr. Lecter. But are you
strong enough to point that high-powered
perception at yourself? How about it...?
Look at yourself and write down the truth.
(She slams the tray back at him)
Or maybe you're afraid to.

EDIT: Oh, and what say you to the content of the post?

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

I just read a bit on wikipedia about the republican party's founding. Apparently the republican party was founded by democrats and other groups, and after that many democrats joined the republican party...

The reason was to counter a push by southern democrats to make slavery federally allowed, and since the major parts of the northern democrats were against slavery they broke with their party and founded the republican party with other minor groups, and the rest is history.

Fascinating stuff.

Taliesin

Is there any hope you'll become a Bushie?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Perhaps it is just easier to add you to that ignore list....

Join the club. I've found that discussions are actually easier to follow with his noise filtered out. He just throws out really bizarre insults.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Join the club. I've found that discussions are actually easier to follow with the opposing opinions filtered out.

Fixinated™

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by smacintush

Fixinated™

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by smacintush

Fixinated™

I don't have you, Kevin or anyone else filtered out, so I don't know where you get that. AW doesn't offer an opposing opinion — just something that I assume is supposed to be wit but is in actuality nonsense. I'll click "View Post" on one of his posts to illustrate. Here's what the one I clicked says:

"Fuzzy Brained Liberals" gets my vote. I'd also go with, FBL's or Fuzzies.

Yeah, it's his opinion that I'm filtering, not his endless stream of pompous bullshit.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I don't have you, Kevin or anyone else filtered out, so I don't know where you get that. AW doesn't offer an opposing opinion — just something that I assume is supposed to be wit but is in actuality nonsense. I'll click "View Post" on one of his posts to illustrate. Here's what the one I clicked says:

Yeah, it's his opinion that I'm filtering, not his endless stream of pompous bullshit.

Strange World

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

What ever happened to giving yourself a time-out so that you could purge yourself of being a jackass? *Sigh* so much for that...

Perhaps it is just easier to add you to that ignore list....

besson when you purge yourself of your own jackassery I think forum members will start taking posts of you complaining about others a bit more seriously.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Kevin

besson when you purge yourself of your own jackassery I think forum members will start taking posts of you complaining about others a bit more seriously.

Thanks, Kevin. I think besson3c has issues beyond my control. He seems to confuse the mirror's reflection (me) with the person standing before the mirror (besson3c).

God uses some kind of attraction to make sure we remain 'engaged' with the people we are assigned. However, the people with whom we have assignments are not always those we like. But they are always the ones with whom our greatest growth might be manifested.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by aberdeenwriter

(BTW, does the term HIPPIE bother a person with big hips???)

No.

Hippie = unwashed, liberal idiot with no clue.
Hippy = person with wide hips.

[aberdeenwriter]

Originally Posted by Doofy

No.

Hippie = unwashed, liberal idiot with no clue.
Hippy = person with wide hips.

Well, certainly that's true. I just thought maybe because the same way some people are bothered by and sensitive to the slightest accusation of Fuzziness, even when not directed at them, that there might be another example of such sensitivity even though there is really no slight intended.

Hippie ≠ Hippy

But, apparently, only besson3c sees the word FUZZY and feels

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by besson3c

What ever happened to giving yourself a time-out so that you could purge yourself of being a jackass? *Sigh* so much for that...

Perhaps it is just easier to add you to that ignore list....

well that worked for me

[mrcolton]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Someone must have recently been banned from here.

recently? nope. good try though