Countering the Dems

[Rudey]

Obama has said rejected the "moderate" core of the Dem party and asked that the DLC not be associated with him. He's definitely on the left and is not bashful about that. Much more down to earth than $400/haircute Edwards.

Hillary has been a moderate for a long time. And there are plenty of Republicans that support universal healthcare as well as a multitude of other "socialist" objectives (Pew Poll shows that 59% of social conservatives and 63% of populist conservatives support universal healthcare). The entire evangelical core is socialist and is Republican right now. There is evidence of that in everything from support to religious "philanthropies" and in Bush's prescription plan.

Guiliani has said he's against abortion but doesn't want to legislate it. Of course this upsets certain Catholic priests, who really have no room to talk on moral legislation. Rudy is definitely right of center and a lot of the press releases against him not being conservative enough have come from...the DNC.

Thompson has a cute wife and has a hit tv show. Romney wears Mormon underwear but has the support of most of my coworkers.

-Rudey

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I'd put it like this...

Obama- I think his "moderate" tone covers for his liberal tendencies. This was also the case with Edwards in 2004. However, Edwards Senate record and attitude since the election have shown his legitimately liberal nature. I think Obama is the same.

Hillary- Likewise, since 9/11 she has toned herself to a moderate level, which I think hides some of her liberal nature. Socialized medicine wasn't moderate the first time she proposed it, and it isn't a moderate idea now. The question is whether she values ideology over opportunism. My opinion is no, she doesn't. Therefore, many on the right may detest her, but they also would probably rather have her become president than Obama, who may not be as hesitant to push for "progressive" change.

Guiliani- He's close to the center. Very questionable on abortion rights and even public funding (to conservatives, of course).

Thompson/Romney- Both have detractors and past incidents which take away some of their conservative appeal, but both also have fairly conservative records and current ideologies.

Of course, its hard to say where everyone is on the political spectrum. The problem is with what positions define what label.

[shinerbock]

Guiliani is making an effort to paint himself as economically conservative, which I think is somewhat accurate. However, him being solidly on the right is very questionable, I think. Additionally, I think his personal life edges into his social conservative appeal, and I wonder when that issue is going to start coming up. By Oct/Nov, I imagine.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Guiliani is making an effort to paint himself as economically conservative, which I think is somewhat accurate. However, him being solidly on the right is very questionable, I think. Additionally, I think his personal life edges into his social conservative appeal, and I wonder when that issue is going to start coming up. By Oct/Nov, I imagine.

Yeah, it seems to me that even on the positions where he's conservative, he's just sort of typical for the party, but when he deviates, he deviates pretty far left for the party. As long as he was just running in New York, he was clearly pro-choice, pro- gay marriage, and pro- gun control, which don't seem to me to be typical Republican positions.

His conservative positions: military, homeland security, public school reform, for example are probably just hitting the center of the party.

And if you are inclined to regard personal life and indicative of general character, the less you know about Rudy the more you might like him.


Is the only reason that a Democrat would want to distance himself from the DLC be that he wanted to be seen more liberal than that? It seems to me that it's close association will Bill and Al might want to be something you didn't want to taint yourself with, rather than it's actual positions.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by AlphaGamUGAAlum

Yeah, it seems to me that even on the positions where he's conservative, he's just sort of typical for the party, but when he deviates, he deviates pretty far left for the party. As long as he was just running in New York, he was clearly pro-choice, pro- gay marriage, and pro- gun control, which don't seem to me to be typical Republican positions.

His conservative positions: military, homeland security, public school reform, for example are probably just hitting the center of the party.

And if you are inclined to regard personal life and indicative of general character, the less you know about Rudy the more you might like him.


Is the only reason that a Democrat would want to distance himself from the DLC be that he wanted to be seen more liberal than that? It seems to me that it's close association will Bill and Al might want to be something you didn't want to taint yourself with, rather than it's actual positions.

Well in the primary it makes some sense. The core of the party has become pretty far left, mostly in anger over the current administration. I imagine the more centrist lean will be reestablished in the general, but who knows.

That is the no. 1 problem for the dems, in my opinion, is that they let ideology interfere w/ political judgment. Now, some might think thats a good thing, but they've been given an inch (the war) and now want to take a mile. Despite what the DNC and CNN thinks, I don't think 2006 was a mandate for serious progressive change. They won with people like Heath Shuler, and if they now continue to cater to the Feingold/Pelosi wing of the party, I think they're going to be in trouble come 2008.

[Tom Earp]

And of course, the Democratic leader ship in Congress have shown what?

Not a damn thing!

They still piss and moan about how the Republicans did and do things and still are a do nothing inept bunch of sheep!

Have any of them helped any of us?

Say yes and you are kidding your selves.

Wake up and smell the posies!