Is the Democrat Party Breaking up?

@bobmnu (8160)
United States
April 29, 2008 12:57am CST
There is a very good article in the American Spectator, by William Tucker, about the internal trouble the Democrat Party is having with it's coalition members. http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13114 The Democrat Party is composed of various groups and right now they are at odds with each other. The largest group, the Black Voters and Academia are against the Blue Collar Union Workers and the Catholics. They are backing two candidates who each represent a first and which ever one loses that group is going to take it very hard and may cause Senator McCain to win because they can't support the other Democrat Candidate. Who can bring the party together or will it have to change and narrow its focus?
2 people like this
3 responses
• United States
29 Apr 08
Is the Democratic party breaking up? Well, we can hope! Seriously, though, if either of these 2 'ground breaking' , 'historic', 'first time ever' candidates really knew anything concerning leadership and teamwork, that is, if either was really qualified to be President, there would be no problem. That is because, at a minimum, the one who was deserving of being President would offer to be VP for the sake of the nation and their party. Is either of them doing that? VOTE for John McCain.
1 person likes this
• United States
29 Apr 08
OOPS... forgot to add, I don't think the Democratic party will break up. They go through ups and downs. This is one of the downs. Before the election they could easily solve this problem and still win.
2 people like this
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
29 Apr 08
If you were Senator Obama would you want Senator Clinton looking over your shoulder and second guessing you with media leaks all the time. She want you job.
3 people like this
• United States
29 Apr 08
The main problem with either of the dumbocrat candidates being the VP is that both have radical crazy nutso followers who might be willing to sacrifice themselves or their freedom by killing the President just so the VP could become President. This would bother me more than the figurative back stabbing. This is key, "If either... really knew anything concerning leadership and teamwork, that is, if either was really qualified to be President." This is the actual problem.
1 person likes this
@Destiny007 (5820)
• United States
29 Apr 08
Instead of trying to be all things to all people they do need to redefine their values and narrow their focus. The socialist influence in the democrat party is very strong, and mainstream America does NOT want anything to do with Communism... yet the democrats have an extremely socialist agenda. Both Hillary and Obama have socialist connections going back to at least their college days, and Obama got his political start with a socialist organization. The ultra- left liberal influence does not represent the every day working man... instead they represent the socialist elitists who believe that they are better qualified to dictate our lives and everyday decisions then we are. They seem to think we need to be taken care of. I think there may be another split like there was in the sixties eventually as one of the factions becomes disenfranchised and decides to go elsewhere. Only time will tell, although I know there are a lot of democrat voters right now who consider that their votes didn't count because of the DNC decisions over holding elections too early in some states where the delegates were not seated as a result.
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
30 Apr 08
We are at a turning point where people have to decide are they going to work for the government and depend upon the government for everything or are we going to become responsible for ourselves andnto look to the government for everything. I hope the latter.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27238)
• United States
1 May 08
Gee, I'm sorry to disappoint you but the Democratic Party is alive and well and is actually growing like crazy. I love how writers in right-wing publications think they can explain the opposite party. Never fear, once the Democratic nominee is chosen the party will be very united behind him or her and then people will get to know the real John McCain and you'll see what a "landslide" really looks like. Annie
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
1 May 08
One possibility is that we get two splinter parties out of this election. A Conservative party and Liberal party plus the two parties we have now. There are times when neither party seems to be listening to the people and the party bosses are calling the shots.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27238)
• United States
4 May 08
I think we have to remember the "average voter" isn't at all like most of us who post here in this interest. Many of them STILL have no real idea what a Super Delegate is or in some cases even that there IS such a thing. Many of them know little or nothing about their party's leaders or even their overall platform. Some people choose their party affiliation based on what their parents were and some go by a very broad description, i.e. Republicans are against abortion, Democrats are against the war, etc. They go by generalizations that aren't always completely accurate. However, when it comes to voting for the next President they often go by intangible things such as personality and charisma, whatever that even really means! I really don't think many people will switch parties because of what the party's leadership does. Personally, I certainly don't always agree with what the DNC says or does but that doesn't mean my whole ideology is going to change to the point where I become a Republican. What we need is more people to become active in their local organizations in both parties if they want more of a voice in how elections are conducted. Annie
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
6 May 08
What you say is true except that people who feel cheated will vote against the party for that reason and come back in future elections. When President Johnson decided not to run and the country voted in Richard Nixon,many people voted for Nixon not because they liked him but rather it was a vote against President Johnson. The same thing happened a few years later with Ford and Carter. It could happen again if people feel they were cheated by the party. You make a good point.