When Both Major Party's Can't Seem to Find Themselves...

@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
June 1, 2007 11:12pm CST
This will be an interesting election cycle because both major parties are pretty much fractured. Added to that fracture is the fact that neither party has either a heir apparent or cause celeb around which to rally. The democrats had the war in Iraq, but their lack of any real move towards "bringing the troops home" with the leadership of Congress has stripped them of that issue. The republicans had Conservatism and National Defense on their side, but well, we have seen conservatism take a hit for the team, and National Defense has been exposed in the VA, Military Healthcare System and now Illegal Aliens. The current lineup of Democrat candidates are tripping over themselves trying to play old, warn out "us vs them" gambits like class warfare and their delusion that they are still running against Prs. Bush. The current Republican candidates are trying to convince us that they are the "most" conservative, but none have really taken the torch and ran with it. So, will their be a darkhorse in one of the parties? One who doesn't have to qualify their positions and platform? Or will the major parties simply ask us all to vote against the other party's candidate... in other words, vote for the letter after the name instead of the person behind it?
1 person likes this
1 response
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
2 Jun 07
The Demcrates and the Republicans are imploding before our eyes. The democrates were wanting to make this into an anti-war campaign, but the republicans can use their lack of ability to get us out of Iraq against them. Bill Clinton taught the democratic party not to use class envy. He said it gets us no where and it makes us look like socialits. Then why is every democrat trying to run as far to the left on social welfare as they can. Every democrat has a plan to raise your taxes, and spend more money than the other guy. The problem the republicans face is that they are self-delusion that being pro-war makes you a conservative. LBJ was pro-war, does that make him a conservative? Pity the thought that we base our existance on being pro-war. Many of our best presidents never had us fighting in a war. Every republican tries to echo Ronald Reagan. What great war did Reagan get us into. Invading Grenada doesn't count. Reagan was a national defense president, and I think everyone can agree with that. So if he can be a National Defense PResident, and not declare war on any country then that means that a republican can seperate himself from this Iraq war and still be strong on national defense. Republican party has always been the party that people associate with strong national defense. It is their advantage over the democrates, but they are strongly loosing that edge. A recent gallop poll showed that more people consider themselves independent than belonging to a party. 38%- independent 35%- democrat 24%- republican 3%- undecided Now most independents consider themselves somewhat conservative. That is the reason why traditionally they have swung republican, but the majority of the independents are against illegial immigration, the Iraq war, and are against the outsourcing of jobs. This is the group that people like H. Ross Perot, and Pat Buchannan have spoke for in the past. The problem is that there is no candidate that fits this profile. I am not saying that it is time for Pat Buchannan to jump back into the race for presidency, but maybe it is. He fits all three profiles that the majority of independents consider themselves. Also 30% of republicans align themselves with Buchannan's point of view, that is more than other republican candidate's point of view is getting right now.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
2 Jun 07
True, more people consider themselves independent than any of the major parties... but independents also don't vote as much either. Hopefully that will change soon. Another thing I've noticed (though I don't have a poll to back this) is, just saying "independent" is pretty much the latest fad. People seem to think that "independent" means that they think for themselves, as if being in a party means you don't. If a person claims to be "independent", but they would never vote for a candidate who is republican, or who is democrat... they probably aren't that "independent" afterall. ;~D I think it's interesting that people trash Buchannan so much, but if we had listened to him back in the 90s, we wouldn't be facing a lot of the domestic problems we are having now. I think people have come to believe that "pro Iraq war" "pro war" and "National Defense" have come to mean the same thing. I do think that the #1 problem facing our national defense today is Islamist terrorism, and Iraq is the epicenter of that fight today. However, to disagree with me isn't being "anti national defense".
1 person likes this