Originally Posted by Chukpike

"which IS a trend, or at least the start of one." mmarsh

That is a trend? Guess that trend ended rather abruptly.

Most political trends do. Its rare that political trends last more then a decade.

Many different ways? Any way you slice it his policies are losing Democrat's votes. If his course corrections continue to diminish his party where will the Democrats be?

[B]Anyway I slice it? Hmm OK. How about the Newsweek poll 2 weeks ago that showed Obama approval at 54%? But I am guessing FOX NEWS decided to leave that part out. The fact is that you are already counting out the Democrats, when the Democrat position still is quite strong. The Dems hold the Senate and White House thats 2 versus 1. And the GOP position will be much weaker in 2012 than it was this year.

No you didn't, you said, "or at least the start of one." See above comments.

Still arguing semantics again...BOORRRRR-ING!!!!

Yada! Yada! Yada! Back to those evil Republicans.
Where is your conversation?
"Now do you what to have a real conversation on the Democratic Party or do you want to keep pussyfooting around?"mmarsh

If people were to visit your past posts they would find you a broken record: Wah, Wah, Wah, it is those evil Republicans that are ruining the world!

My defensive aren't we? Don't like criticism do we? As if your anti-democrat posts are any different. Once again your hypocrisy blinds you.


This topic is about the Democrats failure to deliver on their promises and the subsequent loss of support. You want to whine about the GOP start your own topic.

Jesus, You dont even read your own posts! How pathetic is that? The topic states INCREDIBLE SHRINKING DEMOCRATIC PARTY (your words, not mine). It doesn't say anything about failure to deliver on promises in the subject or in your first post either. So Ill stick to the topic AS YOU WROTE IT.

Lets be honest: you started this thread to gloat about the election. Which is fine, you can enjoy your victory. But don't start a thread here and not expect people not to disagree with you. Get this through your thick head: THIS ISN'T WWW.FREEREPUBLIC.COM. ITS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN

"If I were him I would start by course correcting by Ignoring the obstructionist GOP and start reconnecting with my BASE,"quote mmarsh
If you were him you would not"Ignor the obstructuinist GOP",[/I] since that is all you ever talk about. How is President Obama going to ignore the party that controls the House of Representatives? He is at least smart enough to know he will have to try and work with them.

Don't know much about pol-sci do we? The answer is: A LOT. Congress only controls the money, He can still get a lot of things done without them. For example Foreign policy. He can get more involved in the Middle East. He can get involved as CnC. He can enforce laws already on the books..like financial reform (something the GOP will go ape s**t about) and other regulatory statues, also Enviromental regulations. There are tons of things he can do without the House.

Encourage Working with the GOP? Were you paying attention at all in 2009-2010? Obama got on his knees and sucked GOP c**k in order to try and get a deal with the GOP on healthcare. And the sad part about it was he didn't need to it, He could have used reconciliation to pass it without the GOP. And despite him NOT using strong-arm tactics, the GOP spat on him anyway.

And what about both McConnell and also Bohners statements concerning future cooperating with Obama? Let me refresh your memory

"our primary goal is to make sure Obama stays a one term president". -Mitch McConnell. Yeah, real spirit of bi-partisanship there.

Want to run that "Obama lack of cooperation with the GOP" line on me again, or you going to stick with self-delusion.

The fact that Obama tried to get the GOP on board is what pissed the liberals off the most. If anything Obama needs to abandon his idea about bipartisanship (there isn't any) and reconnect with his base.

So quit"pussyfooting around"and "have a real conversation on the Democratic Party".

Oh and Copying my own text? Shows a unsurprising lack of originality. Very, very, lame. You keep that up and we might have to find ourselves a new milforum Troll.

embedded.

I disagree with the premise as delineated by your subject line.

I do NOT believe the Democratic party is REALLY shrinking. Democrats (historically speaking), have included voters, who for personal reasons, have been known to at times split their ticket ..... namely, splitting their ticket because a certain candidate is more in line philosophically with the voter's beliefs or because they are upset with the Democrats that presently hold office. Polls have indicated that fewer Republicans have done so.

This election was no exception. Many Democrats are disenchanted with Obama's policies and stance on a host of issues (including the Health Care Bill). On top of that, many voters are upset that Obama (and his administration), have fallen short of keeping the promises that elevated him to the people's choice for President of the United States.

While the vote was overwhelmingly lopsided and Republican, the Democratic Party is NOT dead. Politics are cyclical in nature .. and .. Democrats will in the future, again be the majority party.

Originally Posted by Chief Bones

I disagree with the premise as delineated by your subject line.

I do NOT believe the Democratic party is REALLY shrinking. Democrats (historically speaking), have included voters, who for personal reasons, have been known to at times split their ticket ..... namely, splitting their ticket because a certain candidate is more in line philosophically with the voter's beliefs or because they are upset with the Democrats that presently hold office. Polls have indicated that fewer Republicans have done so.

This election was no exception. Many Democrats are disenchanted with Obama's policies and stance on a host of issues (including the Health Care Bill). On top of that, many voters are upset that Obama (and his administration), have fallen short of keeping the promises that elevated him to the people's choice for President of the United States.

While the vote was overwhelmingly lopsided and Republican, the Democratic Party is NOT dead. Politics are cyclical in nature .. and .. Democrats will in the future, again be the majority party.

Well said Chief

And I will say that Obama did make some mistakes that contributed to people staying away or voting Republican: For example

1. They didn't sell the healthcare Act. They let the GOP spin machine blow it out of proportions without even trying to defend it. As Herman Goering once said "the bigger the lie the more people will believe it". And Obama inexplicably decided not to confront the liars.

2. Obama nominated a very pro-Wall Street economic team at a time where Wall Street was a popular as stomach flu. These people namely Geitner and Summers told Obama if he fixed Wall Street (and didnt punish it for their role in the economic catastrophy) it would in turn fix Main Street by proxy.

Well, Wall Street got fixed as is in recovery, but unemployment stayed at 10%. So the public saw bankers get richer and their neighbors houses in foreclosure and it made people very angry. Democratic voters (who tend to be Middle Class) saw this as a betrayal, favoring the rich over the middle class is supposed to be a GOP strategy.

3. And lastly was the message. Theres a saying in DC that I feel is 100% true: "The GOP is terrified of its base, the Democrats hate their base". Several White House Staffers (Emmanual and Gibbs) got caught bashing their own base in public. Its one thing to ignore the people who got you elected, but to public insult them because they criticize your elections is just stupid.

Its this that what cost the Democrats the last election, not a repudiation of Democratic principals as some people would like us to believe.

"Now do you what to have a real conversation on the Democratic Party or do you want to keep pussyfooting around?" mmarsh

It might have been interesting to have a discussion. To bad you refused your own suggestion.

Your refusal to discuss the Democratic Party, after making the above statement, indicates who the Troll really is.
Your ignoring of the problems Democrats are facing with the voters may give a real time example of why they are having problems. They are doing the same thing. They are not coming out and addressing the issues, they are not offering solutions, they are just whining about and are more worried about what the Republicans are doing.

In short they are "pussyfooting around".
That would explain a lot about why the Democratic Party is shrinking.

Originally Posted by Chief Bones

I disagree with the premise as delineated by your subject line.

I do NOT believe the Democratic party is REALLY shrinking. Democrats (historically speaking), have included voters, who for personal reasons, have been known to at times split their ticket ..... namely, splitting their ticket because a certain candidate is more in line philosophically with the voter's beliefs or because they are upset with the Democrats that presently hold office. Polls have indicated that fewer Republicans have done so.

This election was no exception. Many Democrats are disenchanted with Obama's policies and stance on a host of issues (including the Health Care Bill). On top of that, many voters are upset that Obama (and his administration), have fallen short of keeping the promises that elevated him to the people's choice for President of the United States.

While the vote was overwhelmingly lopsided and Republican, the Democratic Party is NOT dead. Politics are cyclical in nature .. and .. Democrats will in the future, again be the majority party.

The shrinking of the Democratic Party is what the article explains:
"Geographically, Democrats were largely pushed out of states where the party believed it had made lasting inroads, such as Indiana, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin. The result is a national electoral map that more closely resembles that of the early 2000s, with the Democrats by and large confined to the East and West coasts, with the GOP dominating the heartland and the South." LA Times

Neither the article nor I indicated a belief that the Democratic Party was dead. What the article does indicate is that the Democrats were losing votes form women and younger voters which traditionally have been strong areas for them. While the Republicans made gains, I don't think it was a lopsided election.

mmarsh whiny attitude may very well mirror what voters see in the Democratic Party. Voters are tired of finger pointing and the fact that the Democrats accomplished little economically in the last two years even though they controlled the Congress, Senate and the Presidency.

Chukpike

Still arguing sentence semantics I see, it obviously saves you from discussing the topic as per usual. Perhaps you think I care about such nonsense? I don't. Which is why I didn't even read what you wrote, your not a conservative, your're just boring. I am smart enough not to get dragged into stupid arguments made by very childish people.

Suffice it to say and I this is has been echoed by mostly everyone, except for yourself because you don't want to admit its true. The Democratic party really isn't shrinking, elections are cyclical in nature, in 2012 it could be the GOP that is on the receiving end of an electoral drubbing, especially if there is a schism between the establishment and its more radical elements. This single election is too small a sampling to determine what the political mood is or will be. This election was anti-establishment vote, not a anti-democrat one. So Enjoy your victory, but don't think you can draw any long term conclusions about how small the democrat party is going to be...

To me the problem with backing the Republican Party or the Democratic Party in the hope to fix the state of the Republic is just like fighting cancer with cancer. Would you go to a doctor who tells you that the only way to fight off a deadly cancer is with another, less lethal form of cancer, as a way to divert from the original problem? I think the same metaphor can be used to explain the current politics in the US.

As I see it, there really is no difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. Politicians from both sides have been called out on corruption, driven up the national debt, and have passed laws limiting American's freedom. I think that the only way to stop the current pattern of constantly switching sides in hope of a better government is for the average American to stop buying into the two-party system. To stop buying into the notion of voting for the better of two evils, instead of voting for whom truly represents the voter's ideals.

There are more than two political parties in the US. Why not do some research on politicians running for office in all parties and affiliations to find out who best suits you. There are more than two choices on the ballot, or at least there should be.

Originally Posted by Seehund

To me the problem with backing the Republican Party or the Democratic Party in the hope to fix the state of the Republic is just like fighting cancer with cancer. Would you go to a doctor who tells you that the only way to fight off a deadly cancer is with another, less lethal form of cancer, as a way to divert from the original problem? I think the same metaphor can be used to explain the current politics in the US.

As I see it, there really is no difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. Politicians from both sides have been called out on corruption, driven up the national debt, and have passed laws limiting American's freedom. I think that the only way to stop the current pattern of constantly switching sides in hope of a better government is for the average American to stop buying into the two-party system. To stop buying into the notion of voting for the better of two evils, instead of voting for whom truly represents the voter's ideals.

There are more than two political parties in the US. Why not do some research on politicians running for office in all parties and affiliations to find out who best suits you. There are more than two choices on the ballot, or at least there should be.

The US has always been a 2 Party system. The "debt & limiting freedom" thing is only too true. There are control freeks on both sides, but seems the left gives more lip service to freedom, butn only if you support thier views. Prot was the last big Independant Prez candidate & all he actually did was give the Presidency to Clinton. The Libertarian Party is in favor of limited Govt & as much personal freedom as possible. Unfortunately that has elements that attract & repel both sides. Don't see them becoming a major force. The Republican Party Leadership is still dominated by the Big Govt types that ran things under Bush. The TEA Party is 60% Rep, & 40% Independants & Democrates upset with the sharp Left turn that has occured the last 2 years. Maybe they can shove things to the Center. Funny how the Libs accomplices in the Press call them Extreme Right Wing while pretending the Extreme Left Wing(by US standards) Obama, Pelosi, Ried,ect. is perfectly normal people.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

Chukpike

Still arguing sentence semantics I see, it obviously saves you from discussing the topic as per usual. Perhaps you think I care about such nonsense? I don't. Which is why I didn't even read what you wrote, your not a conservative, your're just boring. I am smart enough not to get dragged into stupid arguments made by very childish people.

Suffice it to say and I this is has been echoed by mostly everyone, except for yourself because you don't want to admit its true. The Democratic party really isn't shrinking, elections are cyclical in nature, in 2012 it could be the GOP that is on the receiving end of an electoral drubbing, especially if there is a schism between the establishment and its more radical elements. This single election is too small a sampling to determine what the political mood is or will be. This election was anti-establishment vote, not a anti-democrat one. So Enjoy your victory, but don't think you can draw any long term conclusions about how small the democrat party is going to be...

Spoken like a true politician; has nothing to say, but says it anyway.

"Still arguing sentence semantics I see,".......
"Which is why I didn't even read what you wrote" quote mmarsh

I will leave it to others to assess your credibility. If you didn't read what I wrote, why was your first comment about what I wrote?

Just merrily trolling along.

Originally Posted by Chukpike

Spoken like a true politician; has nothing to say, but says it anyway.

"Still arguing sentence semantics I see,".......
"Which is why I didn't even read what you wrote" quote mmarsh

I will leave it to others to assess your credibility. If you didn't read what I wrote, why was your first comment about what I wrote?

Just merrily trolling along.

Thank you for the compliment about me being suitable for politics, Ill take it under advisement.

Don't you worry about my relationship with others. I have been here 5 years everyone here knows me, whether they agree with me or not. I can stand on my reputation. Can you say the same? You would be surprised, how many people here REALLY don't like you. Lets just say that if you ever were banned here..nobody is going to be rushing to your defense. You remember that the next time you piss off a moderator.

As for trolling: I learned from a master didn't I? Though even I will admit that I doubt I could reach your level of being an assh*** even if I had the desire.

Changing the color on a map, doesn't mean there isn't a political presence of the other party still left in a state. It DOESN'T represent a shrinking of the party either. All it really represents, is the fact that there was at least one more vote for one party than for the other.

Parties wax and wain based upon what this election cycle's pet issues are. One election, the Republicans better represent America's issues and concerns, and the next election the Democrats do. As I said in my other post, politics is cyclical ... this years 'in' party, is out of power next election cycle, and then it goes round and round and round ad-infinitum.

Need I remind you of where the Republicans were the last time they got their bums waxed. Independents and Republicans crossed over, to vote the Democrats into power ... this time around, Independents and some Democrats crossed over to give the Republicans back the House.

IT DOESN'T REPRESENT ANYTHING MORE THAN IT WAS THE REPUBLICANS TURN THIS PART OF THE POLITICAL CYCLE, TO HAVE A MAJORITY ... NOTHING MORE, AND NOTHING LESS.