What's wrong about the Democratic Party

[mburbank]

Vinth, are you still existing?

I think what's wrong with the democratic party is a lack of spine and fire. Shach may be somewhat correct in his assesment, but in a two party system I'll go with a party that cares too much and thinks better than it should of American citizens than a country a party so cynical they can't even be bothered to polish their exploitative lies.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by The_Rorschach

What is wrong with the Democratic Party, as I see it, is an exact reflect of what is wrong with society. The Democratic Party relies upon those whom care, whom possess good intent and enough initative, pride or concern to live according to their convictions and protect the public. Universal Healthcare is not an evil ideal in and of itself, only unreasonable in light of the effects of its implimentation. It is the perfect example of the Democratic Party's conceptions. It is a wonderful, idyllic dream which men cannot be trusted to keep.

I don't think those who have power in the Party, such as the Al From DLCers, really support such a "utopian" notion" as universal coverage. The problem for the Democrats isn't the fact that Democrats tend to support certain policies, it's that the head of the Party rarely reflects the ideas of the Party's base.

The Republican Party once had similar problems, but beginning in the 90's, they developed a "no enemies to the Right" policy in order to take the House in 1994. The neo-cons and fundamentalists who run the Party aren't necessarily reflective of really conservatism, but the "real" conservatives have done a much better job of silencing dissent.

Such men as the Democratic Party needs to champion its ideals no longer exist in politics because they do not exist within the public any longer -and I greatly doubt they ever will again. It doesn't matter anyway, it is all such a game really. Sadly its the only game in town.

I don't know that this is correct. Again, I believe the Democratic Party's problems tend to be systemic, rather than having much to do with their ideas. George F. Will, one conservative theorist (a dying breed) whom I truly admire, recently said that the reason people can't rally behind the Dems is b/c they tend to look at politics and policy matters as complicated, lacking easy answers. In other words, Dems lack a clear message b/c politics often lacks such things. According to Will, Republicans on the other hand speak in broad generalizations, and offer clear (although potentially idiotic) messages and ideas. People like ideas, and they like strong statements. They don't like indecision. If this assesment had come from anyone other than Will, I'd have called it condescending and predictable.

The reports of the Democratic Party's coming death may be over stated. I once thought the Democratic Party may be heading the way of the Anti-masonic Party, but on further review, this two party system has ALWAYS produced a one party dominance. Jefferson's Republicans controlled both branches of the government from 1801 to 1829 for the most part. From 1933 to 1968, the Democrats controlled all three political bodies for 21 of 35 years. The list goes on.

[mburbank]

I think the recent barage of reports about the Democratic parties demise are part of an orchestrated strategy, and a particularly cynical one at that.

Like certain e-tards, some republican pundits feel simply stating "We won. It's over. Your irrellivant" will help make it so. It's a strategy they apply not only to voters, but countries, world leaders, and multilateral organizations. It's arrogant, needlessly irritating, non productive and will contribute to a back swing of the pendulum in much the same way Newt Ginrich's personality and approach led to his downfall.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by mburbank

I think the recent barage of reports about the Democratic parties demise are part of an orchestrated strategy, and a particularly cynical one at that.

It's good to be cynical.

Don't misunderstand me. Although I think the demise of the Democratic Party is overstated, I however feel that there are many good reasons to feel that the Democratic Party is in a sink or swim kind of position. The Democratic Party, in one way or another, has always been an ideal rather than a reality.

If you look at American Party history, particularly the demise of the Federalist Party following the War of 1812, I think there are several comparisons between them and the modern Democratic Party.

Like certain e-tards, some republican pundits feel simply stating "We won. It's over. Your irrellivant" will help make it so. It's a strategy they apply not only to voters, but countries, world leaders, and multilateral organizations. It's arrogant, needlessly irritating, non productive and will contribute to a back swing of the pendulum in much the same way Newt Ginrich's personality and approach led to his downfall.

Well, be honest Max, it's a tiny bit more than simply Right-Wing think tank rhetoric. For the most part, the Democratic Party got its collective ass beat in the 2002 election cycle (granted, I believe they actually won MORE positions if you include the statewide elections throughout the country, but they still lost the "big ones").

Certainly, the Republicans are using this decline in Party success as a way to demonize progressive policies, equating low turnout at the voting booths with a displeasure for Democratic policies, etc., but I think the Democrats would also do this. When the Democrats are on top, they too would talk about how it must be reflective of the bad ideas Republicans put forward, rather than the problem being a combination of things, many systemic.