The "Implosion" of the Democratic Party

[ruminator]

And that - the studying of the opposition - is why I decided to stay here.

...and also why I make it a point to watch the Fox News channel as one of a number of sources for information.

I purposely search and research anything that I don't agree with, as well as issues that contradict logic and common sense.

 

[ubertroll]

And don't forget the Bill O'Reilly Comedy Hour lol...


It's so funny. Except that some people believe him. That's kinda scary.

 

[ruminator]

And don't forget the Bill O'Reilly Comedy Hour lol...


It's so funny. Except that some people believe him. That's kinda scary.

Yup, I could never say enough about that man.

He's the only one looking out for our best inetersts. I know this because he tells me.

....but who can we get to protect us from him?

I especially like when he gets the occasional foreign diplomat on his show, reams him out, and then proceeds to tell him what he wants done on the diplomat's return home.

 

[ubertroll]

I'm waiting for the episode of "Whose Line is it Anyway?" when Drew Carey opens by saying

"That's right, the points don't matter, just like a guest on the O'Reilly Factor".

If he disagrees with his guest, he cuts the guy off every word possible, or has the episode censored. If he agree, the two of them spend the hour chatting about how right they each are. It's funny.

 

[ruminator]

I'm not much interested in poll numbers, but I saw others were so I decided to post the current ones when I came across them.

The link goes to a full page of results from multiple sources for comparison.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

CNN/Time Poll conducted by Harris Interactive. Dec. 30, 2003-Jan. 1, 2004. N=604 likely voters nationwide. MoE ± 4.

.
CBS News Poll. Dec. 21-22, 2003. N=685 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 4 (total sample).

"If the 2004 presidential election were being held today, do you think you would probably vote for George W. Bush or probably vote for the Democratic candidate?"

ABC News/Washington Post Poll. Dec. 18-21, 2003. Registered voters nationwide (from a total sample of 1,001 adults). Fieldwork by TNS Intersearch.

"If the 2004 presidential election were being held today, would you vote for George W. Bush, the Republican, or for the Democratic nominee for president?" Options rotated

Associated Press poll conducted by Ipsos-Public Affairs. Dec. 15-17, 2003. N=756 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.6. (Data from 11/03 and earlier co-sponsored by Cook Political Report.)

"If the election were held today, would you definitely vote to reelect George W. Bush as president, consider voting for someone else, or definitely vote for someone else as president?"


Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates. Dec. 15-17, 2003. N=623 registered voters nationwide.

"Looking ahead, would you like to see George W. Bush reelected president in 2004 or would you prefer that a Democratic candidate win the election?" If "Other" or "Someone else": "If you had to choose, would you like to see George W. Bush reelected or would you prefer that a Democratic candidate win the election?"



"Do you think George W. Bush deserves to be reelected as president of the United States, or is it time for someone new?" Trend includes slight variations in wording.

.

Deserves Reelection Someone New Not Sure
% % %
12/15-17/03 45 47 8

CBS News/New York Times Poll. Dec. 14-15, 2003. N=525 registered voters nationwide.

.

"If George W. Bush runs for reelection in 2004, do you think you will probably vote for George W. Bush or probably vote for the Democratic candidate?"

Bush Democrat Can't SayUntilChosen(vol.) None/Won'tVote (vol.) Don'tKnow
% % % % %
12/14-15/03 44 40 8 1 7


National Public Radio Poll conducted by Public Opinion Strategies (R) and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research (D). Dec. 10-15, 2003. N=1,002 likely voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.1.

.

"I know it is a long way off, but thinking about the elections in 2004, if the election for president were held today and the candidates were Republican George W. Bush and the Democratic nominee for president, for whom would you vote: Republican George W. Bush or the Democratic nominee for president?" If undecided, ask: "Which way do you lean as of today? Do you lean toward Republican George W. Bush or the Democratic nominee?" Options rotated

Bush Democrat OtherCandidate(vol.)Don'tKnow

% % % %
12/10-15/03
46 42 3 10

This is just a small sampling of a few of the questions, results and Pollsters

 

[teddybear4play]

The sitting President's party typically loses seats in Congressional elections. What happened to Clinton in 1994 can easily happen in 2004 or 2006.

Well, no, it can't. The rule is that the President's party loses in midterm elections, which 2004 is not. And, for good measure, Bush and the Republicans bucked that trend in the midterm elections of 2002, winning Congress outright.

The 2006 midterms could go conventionally, but there's an awful lot of time between now and then, and if the '04 election is contestable, then the '06 elections are downright unknowable.

TB4p

 

[ubertroll]

Well, no, it can't. The rule is that the President's party loses in midterm elections, which 2004 is not. And, for good measure, Bush and the Republicans bucked that trend in the midterm elections of 2002, winning Congress outright.

The 2006 midterms could go conventionally, but there's an awful lot of time between now and then, and if the '04 election is contestable, then the '06 elections are downright unknowable.

TB4p

Clinton also bucked the trend in 1998, by the way. And he DIDN'T need wag the dog, or scare tactics. And that was despite a VERY hostile congress.


And 2006, the party in the White House WILL gain seats, I predict... because the Dems will be in it


And don't forget, the President's party, when he is elected, almost ALWAYS gains seats in both houses of Congress. GWB LOST in both, the first time around. He bucked more trends than one... I guess its because he lost in 2000, to be fair...

 

[teddybear4play]

You wanna take bets on '06, too?

TB4p

 

[miles]

ruminator

DUH!

Dude, of course an "unamed candidate" does well against Bush. Unfortunately the clowns who are running as Dems all have names.

Try posting the polls where Bush runs against Dean, Lieberman, or Kerry, etc., ad nauseum.

They get their asses kicked.

 

[ruminator]

Re: ruminator

DUH!

Dude, of course an "unamed candidate" does well against Bush. Unfortunately the clowns who are running as Dems all have names.

Try posting the polls where Bush runs against Dean, Lieberman, or Kerry, etc., ad nauseum.

They get their asses kicked.

I posted the link to the page with all of the results there.

 

[Spinaroonie]

So Clinton never broke any laws.... hillary turned a 10K investment into 1million in the commodity market? WTFE....

Prove it in a court of law, or it ain't true.


HA

lol

 

[ruminator]

How about a push for Republicans to vote for Al Sharpton?

COLUMBIA, S.C. - A conservative radio program airing in South Carolina's Republican-heavy Upstate region has airwaves buzzing with talk about a matchup between President George W. Bush and a flamboyant black preacher from New York.

Whether a wacky stunt or a sincere endorsement for presidential candidate Al Sharpton, the morning drive-time show on WORD-AM has called on its GOP listeners to exercise their right to vote in the state's first-in-the-South Democratic primary.

"We just happen to be very excited about the Reverend Al Sharpton," said WORD program director Peter Thiele. "I think of all the candidates who would be the most fun running against 'W' - he is the Reverend Al."

full story here
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/7576335.htm

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

Uh, Ruminator, hardly a week goes by without someone in the Democratic Party in the Press or at McAuliffe’s direction makes charges against the Republicans. But remember the people making the charges fled to New Mexico to thwart the will of the majority of Texans…

Yes LTGR. When the Democrats sold out to the sackers of ROTC buildings and the conquerors of Dean’s and President’s offices it was exactly the same as when the Royal house of Sa-aud (Bandits one and all I might add!) sold out to the Wahabbis. It’s just extreme left (like Kazyinski [sp?]) vs. extreme right (like Usama).

Wrong element – The Democrats would not be panicking and attacking one of their own (I read a good comparison yesterday at TownHall.com I think it was about how Democrats acted in previous primaries in not attacking each other.) if the majority of the polls were showing a close race. Right now. Right now, if Dean’s the man, they loose the South. They loose all the South. Remember, he’s been endorsed by a guy who COULDN’T WIN HIS HOME STATE OF TENNESSEE…

Of course Ruminator, CNN/Time wouldn’t do the same thing (and remember FOX is rated higher than CNN, so a majority of American news watchers are voting conservative with the remote…). Do we need to revisit Jason Blair or the Jordan affair and CNN’s hiding of the truth of Iraq?



“The Democrats not only have a chance to get the White House, but if they lose that, they can also get Congress.

The sitting President's party typically loses seats in Congressional elections. What happened to Clinton in 1994 can easily happen in 2004 or 2006.” Our friend LT…


As to the first, the Democrats have to defend more seats. They are furthermore hampered by the fact that many of the seats are held by southern incumbents who are refusing to run again and switching parties.

As to the second, Celeste the Body hit me with that same exact truism right before this last election and it was no more true then that it is now. And at that time, I told her she was either stupid or naïve. Which is it LT?



Don’t forget ubertroll, Clinton was put into office NOT by the majority of Americans but a plurality. More people voted against Clinton than for him. This time, it looks like the left will have the strongest third-party opposition with the Greens and that further erodes and implodes the Party if they try to tack back to center. The Democrats have been slowly giving up power ever since the Post Office scandal and Clinton actually ACCELERATED the process.

Nope Ruminator. Conservatives WANT Dean. Did you see the news this morning? Dean’s nukes have the laxest security in the nation. Now ya’ll want to give him the football too? Clinton lost it once. Dean will probably throw it away…

 

[ruminator]

Uh, Ruminator, hardly a week goes by without someone in the Democratic Party in the Press or at McAuliffe’s direction makes charges against the Republicans. But remember the people making the charges fled to New Mexico to thwart the will of the majority of Texans…

Yes LTGR. When the Democrats sold out to the sackers of ROTC buildings and the conquerors of Dean’s and President’s offices it was exactly the same as when the Royal house of Sa-aud (Bandits one and all I might add!) sold out to the Wahabbis. It’s just extreme left (like Kazyinski [sp?]) vs. extreme right (like Usama).

Wrong element – The Democrats would not be panicking and attacking one of their own (I read a good comparison yesterday at TownHall.com I think it was about how Democrats acted in previous primaries in not attacking each other.) if the majority of the polls were showing a close race. Right now. Right now, if Dean’s the man, they loose the South. They loose all the South. Remember, he’s been endorsed by a guy who COULDN’T WIN HIS HOME STATE OF TENNESSEE…

Of course Ruminator, CNN/Time wouldn’t do the same thing (and remember FOX is rated higher than CNN, so a majority of American news watchers are voting conservative with the remote…). Do we need to revisit Jason Blair or the Jordan affair and CNN’s hiding of the truth of Iraq?



“The Democrats not only have a chance to get the White House, but if they lose that, they can also get Congress.

The sitting President's party typically loses seats in Congressional elections. What happened to Clinton in 1994 can easily happen in 2004 or 2006.” Our friend LT…


As to the first, the Democrats have to defend more seats. They are furthermore hampered by the fact that many of the seats are held by southern incumbents who are refusing to run again and switching parties.

As to the second, Celeste the Body hit me with that same exact truism right before this last election and it was no more true then that it is now. And at that time, I told her she was either stupid or naïve. Which is it LT?



Don’t forget ubertroll, Clinton was put into office NOT by the majority of Americans but a plurality. More people voted against Clinton than for him. This time, it looks like the left will have the strongest third-party opposition with the Greens and that further erodes and implodes the Party if they try to tack back to center. The Democrats have been slowly giving up power ever since the Post Office scandal and Clinton actually ACCELERATED the process.

Nope Ruminator. Conservatives WANT Dean. Did you see the news this morning? Dean’s nukes have the laxest security in the nation. Now ya’ll want to give him the football too? Clinton lost it once. Dean will probably throw it away…

I don't think I've ever supported anyone for election in these posts. I find information and post it. I don't always agree with what I post but I post it if I feel it's important, someone else was looking for clarification and that it's accurate information.

If your comments are about the poll numbers, I stated clearly in my post that I don't put much value on them.

In my post about Fox terminology, I stated that they all do it to dome degree. I did not add that I have seen a regular practice of ownership disclosure on CNN when they have story that is connected to their own corporation.

Bad news comes from everywhere against everyone. I'm not a Democrat so insulting them doesn't hurt me.

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

I was just basically posting the different thoughts that came to me as I read through the thread, not trying to make anything too personal or too in-depth. I was raised Democrat, but once I became dis-illusioned with the corruption and dogma of the party, I went pretty much third-party and Libertarian. This is the first time I'm going to vote Republican since I voted for one Richard Millhouse Nixon...

I really don't think the election is going to be that close and I think the old methods of polling are somehow not getting at a true cross-section of America.

I just enjoy the discussion.

 

[Ishmael]

I was just basically posting the different thoughts that came to me as I read through the thread, not trying to make anything too personal or too in-depth. I was raised Democrat, but once I became dis-illusioned with the corruption and dogma of the party, I went pretty much third-party and Libertarian. This is the first time I'm going to vote Republican since I voted for one Richard Millhouse Nixon...

I really don't think the election is going to be that close and I think the old methods of polling are somehow not getting at a true cross-section of America.

I just enjoy the discussion.

There's polls and then there's "polls". Both Parties use the same tactic. Take a poll which gives you the answers you want for public consumption (Easy to do by manipulating the way a question is phrased). And then the "real" poll that generally never sees the light of day.

Ishmael

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

Mornin' bro...

Like the Dean Nuke News?

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

I remember a short story, it may have been Bradbury, but they had polling down to such a science that the sample was one. So the most representative person was chosen and he was the only vote that counted...

 

[ruminator]

Yeah, same here on the conversation.

I had a Democrat parent and a Republican parent; I've been Independent since I could make the choice.

......damn, you mean sometimes political conversations get personal? I don't take them that way usually, even if I don't agree I enjoy reading what you have to say.

I think polls are manipulated like everything else that's done with an important value like the elections.

I/m with you on the Dems letting some critical times slip away from them and I would have fewer problems with the current elected officials if there could be a little more common sense and compromise. I don't even connect to payback, we did/theydid or anything similar. I see some core conservative issues in the beginning stages of slipping away from the Republicans.

One thing for almost certain, someone's going to be elected.

 

[Ishmael]

Mornin' bro...

Like the Dean Nuke News?

Haven't got there yet. Here's your chance to beat me to the punch bro.

Good mornin'.

Ishmael

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

Then again, there is the Drudge headline this morning. Something about Bush Administration to crack down on social spending (social may not be the right word, Domestic?, I'd need to go look.). But that's the one thing the Conservatives have really been hammering on, the proclivity to sign everything that comes before him and his Democrat-like spending habits. So now, it seems he may be taking up that gauntlet now too. Since 9-11, he has had a bit of a Midas Touch about him.

Drives Dems Crazy...

[VOICE=Owen Wilson]
Drives the Lit Posse crazy too!
[/VOICE]

 

[Ishmael]

Then again, there is the Drudge headline this morning. Something about Bush Administration to crack down on social spending (social may not be the right word, Domestic?, I'd need to go look.). But that's the one thing the Conservatives have really been hammering on, the proclivity to sign everything that comes before him and his Democrat-like spending habits. So now, it seems he may be taking up that gauntlet now too. Since 9-11, he has had a bit of a Midas Touch about him.

Drives Dems Crazy...

[VOICE=Owen Wilson]
Drives the Lit Posse crazy too!
[/VOICE]

Yep, domestic spending. We'll see.

Saw the Dean Nuke article too. No biggee and no one will remember a week from now. I can't see that hurting him. It's his mouth that's going to bury him, not some old reactor.

Ishmael

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

Haven't got there yet. Here's your chance to beat me to the punch bro.

Good mornin'.

Ishmael

Vermont Nuclear Reactors have the most lax security in the nation which begs the question of why Dean should be allowed to supervise Nuclear Weapons.

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

It could still be little Dickey Gephardt...

He'll play a little better in the Southern primaries I would assume.

 

[Ishmael]

It could still be little Dickey Gephardt...

He'll play a little better in the Southern primaries I would assume.

Gephardt is playing a strategic game whereas Dean is using the "human wave" assault technique. Dickie's hoping that Dean breaks the bank before the later primaries and Dean is hoping to sweep the front loaded primaries and bury the competition before it gets to far into the season.

Either way, still brings up the same likely scenarios.

1.) Dean wins, gets the nod, and is trampled by the Republican juggernaut.

2.) Dean wins, but the party establishment rebels. A food fight breaks out and someone else gets the nomination. Whoever the nominee is is trampeled by the Republican juggernaught.

3.) Dean looses a few primaries and in a hissy fit forms a third party. The Democratic nominee is trampled by the Republican juggernaught.

There are some other possibilities of ever decreasing probability. But those are pretty much the "big three".

Ishmael