Thiebear Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 I wasnt commenting on his beliefs.. I was commenting on "insert name here" could have beat Bush last time if it wasnt Kerry.... Being From Ohio was a boost also... Win you home state and California and New York and your looking like a lock... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 The Dems could try toning down the race-baiting and put up a canidate with a prayer of winning. A fast read of this thread shows some examples of the rhetoric that turns people off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 It is not simple racism or "southern stupidity" or any other nonsense. Except for isolated pockets, the South is not heavily racist or educationally backwards at all. Nor is it just the efforts of the republican spin machine. Simply put: the South is religiously fundamental, and socially conservative. The Demos are the opposite. That's all. And it is not going to change. Predicto's prediction: The Demos will not retake the South in my lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Predicto It is not simple racism or "southern stupidity" or any other nonsense. Except for isolated pockets, the South is not heavily racist or educationally backwards at all. Nor is it just the efforts of the republican spin machine. Simply put: the South is religiously fundamental, and socially conservative. The Demos are the opposite. That's all. And it is not going to change. Predicto's prediction: The Demos will not retake the South in my lifetime. I completely disagree, you will see the democrats in the south again before too long. Lets face it, the republicans did the unthinkable, they got people to vote against their best interest with propaganda. It is plain and clear as day, you just need to see the influx of the right wing propaganda stations, fox news, and their rhetoric of vilianizing anything from the other side ie. Schiavo and SSI. Now, they are already taking the steps to thwart the GOP and it is starting to work. Air America was a much needed start, and they are expanding greatly. They will be in almost every market by the end of this year, and there will also be other stations to pop up. You will also see a democratic channel to combat Fox News in the future, and Al Gore is trying to get one started. Now, not to sound egotistical, or racist, but it does have a lot to do with education. Almost every educated state votes for democrats and the uneducated states all vote for republicans. It isn't that hard to figure out, the majority of the people in the South don't take the time needed to become informed on the issues, and they believe anything they hear or read. There is absolutely no alternative opinion out there, especially for people without internet access, so they need to get their ideas heard. The democrats are right a majority of the time, they just have to tell people this. This isn't to say EVERY person in the South in uneducated, in fact there are many educated people living there. Just when you consider the population as a whole, they are less educated then the democratic voting states. I believe Virginia is the only state in the top 10 in terms of SAT scores to vote Republican, all the rest voted democratic. Fighting the republican bias in the media is no easy task, but it can be done and it will be done. The republican party will be nothing like we know it now, and Bush was the absolute worst thing that could have happened to the party. All of the Reagan republicans are now starting to look at the other side, the dems just need to be heard. You are already starting to see the shift, for those who are willing to see it, but it will be another 3 years before everyone is aware of it. For some reason, the American public gets it right, but it always takes way longer then it should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Predicto the South is not... educationally backwards at all. Simply put: the South is religiously fundamental, and socially conservative. [/b] Why do you think those qualities are not similar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 As long as Dems do what chom just did, they will lose. Chom, YOU and the DEMS dont get to decide what's in apersons best interest. The people do that. Until the Dems stop thinking that people who vote for the GOP are stupid and or uninformed, they will lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 As long as Dems do what chom just did, they will lose. Chom, YOU and the DEMS dont get to decide what's in apersons best interest. The people do that. Until the Dems stop thinking that people who vote for the GOP are stupid and or uninformed, they will lose. Until the people who vote for the GOP stop talking with the exact same points as Rush and Hannity, I will not change my opinion. Once the democrats get their propaganda heard, you will see the change, as of right now they are not. I'm in Huntsville, Alabama right now and I did a quick check on the AM dial. . . there were 12 republican talk stations on, yet not one democratic one. Until they start getting their voice heard, nothing will change. It's all in the propaganda, with the South. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 It's a free market isnt it? Those stations succeed because their is a market for them. It's not propoganda, it's money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 That and the fact is, all of those areas are served by Liberal Propoganda machines like, CNN, CBS, NBC, PBS, NPR........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Liberty Why do you think those qualities are not similar? This attitude and air of superiority is why an imminently defeatable George Bush is serving a second term. If Southerners (and mainstream Americans, really) get the impression that the left wing of the Democratic Party feels this way about those who are religious, and the mainstream Dems embrace that particular fringe group of the party, then it'll be a long learning period before they ever again win the Presidency. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Chomerics, with regards to the whole "uneducated south" thing, thats just wrong. You're showing your true MA "more superior than everyone else" attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by chomerics I'm in Huntsville, Alabama right now and I did a quick check on the AM dial. . . there were 12 republican talk stations on, yet not one democratic one. Until they start getting their voice heard, nothing will change. It's all in the propaganda, with the South. That is because AM talk radio is the current means of communication for conservatives. Heck, here in San Francisco you can listen to Rush and the gang on several stations. Liberals do not get their news and opinions from that source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 That and the fact is, all of those areas are served by Liberal Propoganda machines like, CNN, CBS, NBC, PBS, NPR........ Yes, spoken like a true Rush wannabe :doh: When you finally realize that those companies are driven by the republicans, and not the democrats, you will understand. . . But, until this happens, you will continue to have your head in the clouds with blinders on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Yet, my side keeps winning elections. Who has blinders on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Predicto That is because AM talk radio is the current means of communication for conservatives. Heck, here in San Francisco you can listen to Rush and the gang on several stations. Liberals do not get their news and opinions from that source. I agree, but that is starting to change. It takes time, but it is happening right now. There is a large market for liberal talk radio, and it is just starting to be explored, once the market gets a foothold, you will see the same thing as the RNC shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by ntotoro This attitude and air of superiority is why an imminently defeatable George Bush is serving a second term. If Southerners (and mainstream Americans, really) get the impression that the left wing of the Democratic Party feels this way about those who are religious, and the mainstream Dems embrace that particular fringe group of the party, then it'll be a long learning period before they ever again win the Presidency. Nick My brother's wife is from rural Virginia, and there is nothing she hates more than the attitude that all southerners are "booger-eating morons." As long as that perception exists and is associated with liberal Democratic elites, southerners will vote GOP, if only out of spite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Predicto As long as that perception exists and is associated with liberal Democratic elites, southerners will vote GOP, if only out of spite. Exactly. We love to be faithful with our politics, but the human part of us can also be blinded by spite. Like my Father says, almost every election since Kennedy has either been to get someone out or keep someone else from getting in. Ain't that the truth... Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 Yet, my side keeps winning elections. Who has blinders on? And our contry continues to go into the toilet. What was our economy like before Bush and the repunlicans (neo-cons) gained power? What has happened to the deficit? How about our forign policy? How were we preceived in the world? How about at home, how many people have health care? How many people are being laid off of work? How many different social services have been taken away? Look at the big picture Kilmer, not the minute one the RNC wants you to look at. Hell, the neo-cons even want to re-open the Schaivo case :doh: Yes, that is the party you now stand for. The party of God, guns and no gays :doh: The dems are gaining momentum, and it will swing back, you are starting to see it already. Bush's approval is the lowest ever, he is below 40% in most northern states and below 47% in the southers states. The ship is sinking fast, and the RNC is about to eat itself in a fit of party politics which is splitting the moderates against the neo-cons. It will be fun watching them consume each other. This is what happens when religion mixes with politics, which is why it needs to be seperated, not joined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 If Bush was running for reelection, I'd be worried, but not too much. Because I know the Dem Party doesnt know how to beat the GOP right now. It's ironic that you claim Im spewing talking points, when you just listed the exact words I just heard on Al Franken talking to a Dem strategist. The economy was tanking under Clinton, Bush has fixed it. It's strong despite what the Dems desperately want the country to bnelieve. Our defecit is too high, but it's smaller than it was in the 80s. How were we perceived in the world? It was great. People liked us so much that they flew airplanes into our building and killed thousands of innocent people. The difference now? We have a GOVT who frankly doesnt give a flying f@#k what some backwards ass hatebreeding country thinks about us. They care about the people IN the US. Including those in the South. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huly Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 If I responded to some of these post like I would like too I would be forever banned from this site. I am a southern gal and I am republican all the way! During the elections the news media stated this and I agree 100% Bush= Morals Kerry=Economy I voted for morals as I believe this country needs more of them. Look at how many children alone were killed in DC this year. Most of the things Kerry stood for I am against. It has nothing to do with race etc. It is my moral and religion and my conservative side that leads me to being republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Huly If I responded to some of these post like I would like too I would be forever banned from this site. I am a southern gal and I am republican all the way! During the elections the news media stated this and I agree 100% Bush= Morals Kerry=Economy I voted for morals as I believe this country needs more of them. Look at how many children alone were killed in DC this year. Most of the things Kerry stood for I am against. It has nothing to do with race etc. It is my moral and religion and my conservative side that leads me to being republican. Nothing is so clear cut and simple, what does voting for morals even really mean? By morals do you mean coercing people into following what you believe is right? What could you possibly mean? I always thought morals were a personal decision not to be enforced by the State. OK take those killed in DC how do your Republicans feel like dealing with that issue? They outlaw drugs which increase crime and gang related deaths. They make mandatory minimums that are outragrouosly long for drug users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Using that logic, if we had no laws, we'd have no crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 Using that logic, if we had no laws, we'd have no crime. Ignoring the idea of "morals" because I have a very low tolerance of people trying to force their idea of morality on me, let's just look at the practical benefits (or lack there of) of the the second prohibition era. That one liner post of yours does nothing but degrade this argument. If you want to use logic we can, but it has to work both ways I can't be the only one thinking in the conversation. Now, look at first prohibition era for reference. The fact that the government made a legit product with a large market illegal means that the product will still be sold, but it will be done so underground. And the people that work underground are criminals and they will make loads and loads of money selling the legit product. When prohibition was lifted the criminal underground lost a good source of money and the people got back a little lost liberty. Now what do you value more, free business + liberty + lower crime or the so called "moralit?/" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Liberty Ignoring the idea of "morals" because I have a very low tolerance of people trying to force their idea of morality on me Lucky your logic is off because they are voting on "their" morals, has nothing to do with you at all, they are not forcing you do anything you do not want to do. We all have the right to vote how we want, that is why this country works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Originally posted by Liberty Ignoring the idea of "morals" because I have a very low tolerance of people trying to force their idea of morality on me, let's just look at the practical benefits (or lack there of) of the the second prohibition era. That one liner post of yours does nothing but degrade this argument. If you want to use logic we can, but it has to work both ways I can't be the only one thinking in the conversation. Now, look at first prohibition era for reference. The fact that the government made a legit product with a large market illegal means that the product will still be sold, but it will be done so underground. And the people that work underground are criminals and they will make loads and loads of money selling the legit product. When prohibition was lifted the criminal underground lost a good source of money and the people got back a little lost liberty. Now what do you value more, free business + liberty + lower crime or the so called "moralit?/" Actually, I think drugs should be legalized, and taxed to death. But your belief that by doing this will somehow lead to less crime and less gang activity is shortsighted at best. And mandatory minimums are rather stupid, but not having them wouldnt lead to less crime either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.