The voters are telling you what the Democratic party we'll vote for looks like.
Dear Democratic Party:…
"A sinister cabal of superior writers."
About This Lamont Thing: An Open Letter from the Democratic Base - Comments Page 2
The voters are telling you what the Democratic party we'll vote for looks like.
Dear Democratic Party:…
Article comments
26 - Liberal
It's funny Dave. If you replace GOP with Democrats, it is equally true.
27 - Dave Nalle
I'm not one bit surprised to hear that, Mr. L.
Dave
28 - Bryan
I don't see how much of the blame for actual republican failures can attach to Bush, since he's tried to do what his constituents wanted [...]
Largely true, Dave, but the recent efforts to restrict illegal immigration and the veto on the stem cell bill would suggest that Bush is beginning to alienate himself even from the conservatves that voted for him. Although there is probably a number of his constituents that probably think he isn't hard enough on illegal immigration.
29 - KickThemOut
It's about time for an Anti-Incumbent Party
30 - Boxclocke
Wow. I didn't expect my first political article to get such a huge response. Thanks for the comments, everyone. Now, to address something that perhaps wasn't clear:
Part of what I was saying was that Democrats badly need to create an identity that isn't just anti-Republican and anti-Bush, but also has some genuine, positive vision for how to fix what's wrong with the country. Yes, a big part of what lost the election for Lieberman was his close ties with the Bush White House, but more than that, it was the fact that he represents the sort of politician that American voters are sick of. The fact that Lieberman said that if he lost the primary, he would run as an independent might have been enough of a show of political ego and cynicism to get people to vote against him.
The Daily Show may have put it best:
"If not nominated, he will run. If not elected, he will serve."
Alright, carry on, everyone.
31 - DJRadiohead
A (former) local talk show host in my market referred to this as Outcumbents (he might not have coined the phrase first but it is the first time I heard it useed). Something to be said for the idea.
32 - Liberal
"Democrats badly need to create an identity that isn't just anti-Republican and anti-Bush"
Apparently, the majority of Democrats here in CT think that their party should create an identity that IS anti-republican and anti-bush...for a change.
33 - Boxclocke
"Apparently, the majority of Democrats here in CT think that their party should create an identity that IS anti-republican and anti-bush...for a change."
Well, that's step one, yes. We should be on step #954 by now, but you do have to start somewhere.
34 - Vegas Guy
I'm waiting to see what Boxclocke has to say when Joe wins the general election. Probably more of the same.
Maybe there's more to leadership than sticking your head out the window? Maybe there should be room for a guy who bases his votes on principles rather than pollsters? Just a thought...
35 - Paul
"Actions speak more than words", and that means that anyone that speaks against Lamont and for Leiberman is really missing the entire point. Been there done that. It's all over but the cryinnn'. Snap out of it get over it and stop trying to perpetuate ignorance. Start talking about uniting and stop talking about dividing. The votes have been counted and your horse lost. Move on. Become a big person. Stop being a baby. Obviously, the children are acting like the adults here and just like with this recent internet revolution that has mysteriously encapsulated the planet for the past decade ~ ~ the students have officially become the teachers of the (so-called) teachers and you better stop being a recalcitrant and grab your surboard.
I can't believe the people that are slandering people for their youth. Either get on this wave and ride it with the rest of us or vote Republican and lose everything. You're either a Democrat or a Republican and the choice is simple because of the past present and future "Actions" of the Republicans.
Your single Mantra should be: Democrats Unite !! ;
(Otherwise: Get off this planet now and give us back that oxygen that you're wasting - - while acting and pretending to impersonate so well - - a Human Being of compassion.)
36 - Jeff
It still won't work. Democrats still have no message. Trying to convince the voters that a primary victory represents the way the majority will vote in this country is just plain stupid.
You can't win by simply bashing Republicans and "W" - you need a platform and you don't have one. You are weak on policy, weak on security issues and are still stuck in 2000...GET OVER IT ALREADY!
I hope you are still convinced that "W" has no backing...it's a classic mistake you make every election...keep it up! It does nothing but help us.
Perhaps you should stop hating America and Americans and try to establish a real agenda for yourselves...we've been waiting for a long time for real competition.
Jeff the conservative.
37 - Brandon
I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!
38 - Dave Nalle
Being mad as hell and $6 will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks, and that's about it.
Dave
39 - Thomas Bockhorn
Lamont's primary victory highlights how partisan this country has become. Instead of working through this huge problem in Iraq, we blame each other. The Republicans blame Democrats as cut and run and proclaim that they are the true leaders in security, while their record shows otherwise. Democrats argue over and over we should never have been in Iraq. Iraq is a distraction on the war on terror. Though I agree that we should never had been in Iraq, that argument is over. We are already there, losing lives (both American soldiers and Iraqi civilians) by the hundreds each day. We lost creditability amoung foreign leaders especially among muslims who we supposedly to be saved by our version of liberty. We need to stop this partisan warfare and find a solution to this crisis. If we fail to stop making the Iraqi conflict a political issue full of meaningless gesturing, then dire consequences will result.
40 - Nancy
Went to the Anti-Incumbent site: great idea, except that what we SHOULD be aiming for is to get a 3rd choice put on every ballot: None of the Above. If NOTA wins, then those already on the ballot are disbarred from further elections, and another election has to be held, with new people. Expensive, yes. Clumsy, yes. But we shouldn't be stuck with having to vote for the lesser of 2 evils, or for some loser just because he isn't a worse loser we loathe even more. I suspect it would only be a few of these odd elections before the system would straighten itself out & they'd become unnecessary.
I think the biggest problem (and the W.P. addresses it in the Ed. page this morning) is that the Dems who "head" the party can't seem to get their brains together to decide what they do stand for, and what their policies are; in addition to which they're all so cowardly that like their brothers in the GOP they don't WANT to have to be held to 'stand' for anything, because it could come back to bite them later, a la Lieberman & his vote for the war. I've only heard one candidate so far declaring, "THIS is what I believe, this is what I stand for, and if you like it vote for me, and if you don't - tough". All the rest of them are professional pols, meaning they shift on policies like grass on quicksand, and like the Governor in Best Little Whorehouse, they're expert at saying nothing. In fact, I was reminded of Durning's excellent performance lately while watching several pols being interviewed on the immigration question: every single one of them waffled all around it, and not one even addressed the question, let alone tried to formulate an answer. It was both amusing and nauseating to watch them equivocate.
I think if the Dems want to win big time, and for the long run, they HAVE to get rid of those currently ruling/running the party. Yeah, that includes Dean, Feinstein, Clinton, and all the rest of that 'professional' crew who are too slick & too smart for their own - and our - good.
41 - Liberal
"Perhaps you should stop hating America and Americans"
Vee vill define America, unt if you disagree with us, you hate America - long live zee fatherland!!!
42 - Michael J. West
Perhaps you should stop hating America and Americans
God, not this again.
43 - Lance
Issues I have with American Politics:
(1) Far too polarized. Both parties suffer from this left/right-hate affliction. For those of us who are truly left/right-centric, this is getting far too tiring. I vote split-ticket every time.
(2) The sale of fear for votes though the level of spin that seems to be going on. Yes, the terrorists are out there, yes they hate us, yes we should be vigilant, no not everyone who disagrees with us are terrorists, no you will never be completely safe - life is supposed to be a little dangerous and that's ok, yes you are more likely to die in a plan crash then in a terrorist attack, no we should not give up any of our rights, and no we shouldn't forget the Constitution whatever the cost.
(3) Religion should have nothing to do with government - plain and simple. We seem to think we are better then the Middle East, well keep in mind part of the problem with these countries is that they allow religion and government to mix. The same would happen whether the religion in question is Islam, Christian, Jewish, or Hindu. Religion is bad for government - just as government is bad for religion. It's time for the evangelicals to wake up and realize this. And any candidate - Republican or Democrat - who panders to any religion will never get my vote - ever.
(4) Most folks used to understand that each region and sometimes each state spawned radically different republicans and democrats. Now, everyone seems to think that all republicans must believe X and all democrats must believe Y. This has really caused problems for those of us in the middle. Let's get back to more personalized government! This case is a prefect example.
(5) Very little difference or honest debate between the parties/candidates. Debates usually fall to: if someone doesn't believe X or Y then they are unpatriotic. It seems the candidates don't think that the American public can understand the nuances of a discussion - perhaps they're right.
Personally, I'm disillusioned with both sides of the aisle right now. As a Centrist, I'm seriously considering alternate parties just to shake things up a bit. I just wish some of these more interesting and varied groups would have a bit more power so I would feel that my vote would count!
44 - Nancy
The issues addressed in #43, Lance, all come to us courtesy of the hate-spewing monster, Karl Rove, whose specialty it is: if you ain't with me, then you hate all of us, especially Amerika, and you're a terrorist & satanist.
The pity & scandal is, that the rank & file idiot voters believe this crap & vote accordingly.
45 - Thomas Bockhorn
I agree we need a third party. Unfortunately, most Americans don't agree by their votes. Instead of wishing for a third party, the American people need to act. Waiting for politicans to get it will take too long, we as a people need to vote the incumbents out and keep voting them out until the politicans get it. As long as the general people keep voting for career politicans, problems will not be solved. Another thing is that if anyone has a good idea on how to solve the Middle East issue, raise it at a public forum, heck run for office. The people need to take back their government rather than just complain about it. I know when election time comes, I will seriously look at my state representatives voting record and I will vote accordingly.
46 - David Flanagan
Well, it is unfortunate that you "new" Democrats feel so good about Joe Lieberman's primary loss. The fact is, his loss weakens your party in ways you do not seem to understand.
When it was discovered that President Clinton had lied about Monica Lewinsky, and Democrats were dumbstruck, wondering how on Earth Clinton would survive such a monumental blunder, Lieberman did something very simple. He stood up on the floor of the Senate and denounced what the President had done. Then, he immediately became the President's staunchest supporter in arguing against impeachment.
And because Lieberman had been the first Democrat to critisize the President, his voice was the most effective in beating back arguments made by Republicans in regards to removing the President from office. And Lieberman's stance in support of the President made all the difference.
Furthermore, Lieberman has been incredibly loyal to his party. He votes with fellow Democrats 90% of the time. Conservative have pointed out that Senator Lieberman has one of the most liberal voting records in Washington. He's been a leader and a die-hard supporter of his party since the beginning.
But, of course, none of that is good enough. Honesty doesn't count if you support the war in Iraq. Integrity does not count if you support the war in Iraq. Loyalty does not count if you support the war in Iraq.
You see what I'm saying here? Despite your assertions that your party is the "party of ideas," you are actually just a one-issue wonder party. You are the party that wants out of Iraq... Period, end of story.
Otherwise, why would you celebrate Lieberman's loss? Why would you proudly claim to have helped engineer his loss? That is really the only issue that was discussed by Lamont during the primary... Iraq.
And that is why Lamont is going to lose in the general election. Which begs the question; how are you going to feel when Lamont loses to Lieberman in the general election?
Think about it. And get used to the idea, because Lamont himself is a one-issue wonder, and that just is not going to be enough to win.
Thanks.
47 - Lance
For a third party, I'm looking at those interesting Libertarians. They tend to believe in doing away with both the Republican's DaddyState and the Democrat's NannyState through the re-institution of a smaller Federal government, and by getting out of people's personal business. They tend to take the best of both worlds: extremely liberal when it comes to personal beliefs and actions and extremely conservative when it comes to fiscal matters. They are what had originally drawn me to the Republican party as they are what the Republican party used to stand for. Generally they do not believe in overbearing constitutional amendments, they are pro-choice, and they really don't care who you sleep with. They are a bit more isolationist then I think is possible in this world, and they seem to be a bit naive with a few things, but no one is perfect. The idea is to preserve our system of checks and balances, and to do that we need real debate - not hysteria. Both of the incumbent parties tend to shy away from the former and embrace the latter to the detriment of our country, and perhaps a party with principles would help the matter.
48 - Bryan
David, please explain to me why the Democrats should take the advice of a Republican who links to Ann Coulter on his website when selecting a candidate.
It seems like a conservative telling the liberals who to vote for is a little fishy.
49 - gonzo marx
in #48 Bryan sez...
*It seems like a conservative telling the liberals who to vote for is a little fishy.*
Quoted for Truth
another case of "framing" and "spin"ight out of Roves talking points on the Issue
when YOU are in the voting booth come November, do what YOU think is best and rests easiest on your own Conscience...
NOT what some lapdog for ANY group tells you... but what YOU think is best for your own Reasons
just a Thought
Excelsior?
50 - Maurice
#47 - well stated..