Democrat Party doesn't reflect the diversity of opinion of its voters

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[bronzeage]

There's no such thing as "same sex "marriage"." However, to your point, the Republican party is NOT the dominant party and is not trending to become the dominant party. Further, its a much bigger tent in terms of the range of views reflected. Its leadership actually doesn't differ that much from the leadership of the Democrats on many key issues.

There used to be various factions in the Democratic Party, which no longer exist at a national level.

If the Republicans pretend there is no such thing as "same sex marriage" will the issue go away before the next election?

Could this sort of thinking be the reason it is not trending to become a dominant party?

 

[koalabear]

Two Black Democrats Become Republicans in Louisiana

Anyone who doubts that the Republican Party can attract black voters needs only look south to Louisiana.

At a conference held in Baton Rouge at the end of May, called @Large and aimed to attract black conservatives, black Democrat Elbert Guillary, a member of the state legislature, announced that he was switching party and becoming a Republican.

http://townhall.com/columnists/star...rats-become-republicans-in-louisiana-n1620190

 

[Adre]

Two Black Democrats Become Republicans in Louisiana

Anyone who doubts that the Republican Party can attract black voters needs only look south to Louisiana.

At a conference held in Baton Rouge at the end of May, called @Large and aimed to attract black conservatives, black Democrat Elbert Guillary, a member of the state legislature, announced that he was switching party and becoming a Republican.

http://townhall.com/columnists/star...rats-become-republicans-in-louisiana-n1620190

Two votes. That should make a difference.

 

[koalabear]

Two votes. That should make a difference.

^^http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/18.gif

 

[bronzeage]

Two votes. That should make a difference.

Q: How can a black person in Louisiana get money and support from the Republican National Committee?

A: Declare themselves to be a Republican.

Q: How can a black person get a vote from a Republican in Louisiana?

A: Now, that might be a problem.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The ole nigga never got nuthin, its the nigga driver who gets the poke chops and Massa's old drawers. Nuthins changed.

 

[Liar]

It's not designed to.

That's what I said.

 

[cjh]

Show me a racist Republican policy.

"By the '70s and into the '80s and '90s, the Democratic Party solidified its gains in the African American community, and we Republicans did not effectively reach out," [Republican National Committee chairman] Mehlman says in his prepared text. "Some Republicans gave up on winning the African American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization. I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302342.html

 

[kbate]

What's your point -- that party discipline on floor votes exists? Of course it does, that is the whole point of having a party caucus. However, the diversity of views represented within the party makes a difference in the conduct of committees and the content of bills, in the stages before they come for a floor vote.

The point is that you have repeatedly tossed your "breakdown of the democrats by theoretical core belief chart" into discussions when it is a meaningless and useless bit of shite. 95% of them vote straight party line. They are Democrats. <full stop> Calling one a socialist, or a social democrat or a libertarian is a pointless deflection from the simple fact that we have a straight two party system and the only time any of them break party line is for voter appeal on certain issues that might be important in their next election.

The division of core belief means absolutely zero because unless you march the party line, your bills don't get into committee let alone back to the floor for a vote.

How they vote on final bills is what matters, not what they'd like to do if they were dictators.

I do like your term, "diversity of views" though - it shows good use of catch words and modern social linguistics, even if it is pointless.

 

[Squibbs]

Errmmm, that was my point -- the GOP when originally formed was the least racist party in the field -- a fact which has changed.

'Change' is too scary for that old fool.

 

[KingOrfeo]

The point is that you have repeatedly tossed your "breakdown of the democrats by theoretical core belief chart" into discussions when it is a meaningless and useless bit of shite. 95% of them vote straight party line. They are Democrats. <full stop> .

You are entirely missing the point, which is that the party's (that is, the elected, Congressional party's) ideologically diverse makeup is one of the factors that determine what the party line is. The party line is a product of a whole lotta internal negotiations and logrollngs -- on the Dem side, that is. On the Pub side, at least since 1994, the party line seems to be more a product of leadership commands, Westminster-style. Much more tightly disciplined party.

 

[kbate]

You are entirely missing the point, which is that the party's (that is, the elected, Congressional party's) ideologically diverse makeup is one of the factors that determine what the party line is. The party line is a product of a whole lotta internal negotiations and logrollngs -- on the Dem side, that is. On the Pub side, at least since 1994, the party line seems to be more a product of leadership commands, Westminster-style. Much more tightly disciplined party.

No,I'm not missing your point. I'm stating that it is an irrelevancy having little to do with the real world of two parties trying to maintain 50.1% majorities and being unable to tolerate any dissenters in a narrowly divided nation.

Both parties march straight lines unless a certain politician wants to appear as a "maverick" on certain issues and gets a pass from the party for election purposes.

When I know Mark Warner is going to vote straight democrat line, no matter how conservative he was as a businessman - his 'ideology' is meaningless. You can list him as "blue dog" but his voting record puts him as solid 'blue'.

The Repubs are actually more diverse NOW than the democrats who have voted largely as a bloc since 1994 when they finally lost congress for the first long period since the 1930s. They marched in line through Clinton and Bush - but now they've split into factions of radical idiots, idiots and vetteman grade idiots - along with the normal republicans who haven't got any idea what happened to their party.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

No,I'm not missing your point. I'm stating that it is an irrelevancy having little to do with the real world of two parties trying to maintain 50.1% majorities and being unable to tolerate any dissenters in a narrowly divided nation.

Both parties march straight lines unless a certain politician wants to appear as a "maverick" on certain issues and gets a pass from the party for election purposes.

When I know Mark Warner is going to vote straight democrat line, no matter how conservative he was as a businessman - his 'ideology' is meaningless. You can list him as "blue dog" but his voting record puts him as solid 'blue'.

The Repubs are actually more diverse NOW than the democrats who have voted largely as a bloc since 1994 when they finally lost congress for the first long period since the 1930s. They marched in line through Clinton and Bush - but now they've split into factions of radical idiots, idiots and vetteman grade idiots - along with the normal republicans who haven't got any idea what happened to their party.

Normal Republicans know that Dubya got drunk and drove America off the road into a ditch. Dubya was always the sad, confused face of the George Babbitt branch of the GOP. He got rolled, and tossed out of the locker room naked. Folks don't trust the GOP leadership.

 

[KingOrfeo]

They've allowed themselves to be taxed at confiscatory rates . . .

What, in the U.S.? Not lately.

. . . to fund hundreds of welfare programs aimed at helping black folks . . .

That was always a negligible share of the federal budget.

So tell me, what has the Democrat Party done for black Americans beside inserting itself between the black female and the black male as her sole protector and provider, robbing the black male of his rightful role?

"Rightful role"?

Tell me, how do Democrat welfare policies of forcing black folks into publicly funded "reservations" enhance their economic outlook, their liberty, their upward mobility?

If "reservations" means "projects," that's pretty much a thing of the past. When was the last time a new one went up?

Really, sometimes it seems like you think it's still 1967 and you're excoriating LBJ's War on Poverty. (Which failed only because the Vietnam War sapped the funding, but that's another story.)