US Political Party Survivor (In Round 7)

[Deldem]

Know-Nothing.

[Deldem]

We must vote off the Democrats before the GOP, the Democratic Party's history is one of the most vile.

Perhaps, but they've redeemed themselves in the last 75 years, and the Republican Party became a party of crazy religious interventionist nutjobs, thereby totally undermining the good parts of their history.

[Deldem]

We must vote off the Democrats before the GOP, the Democratic Party's history is one of the most vile.

Perhaps, but they've redeemed themselves in the last 75 years, and the Republican Party became a party of crazy religious interventionist nutjobs, thereby totally undermining the good parts of their history.

By being populist interventionists? Democrats SUCK.

It's a hell of a lot better than the GOP.
While I'll agree Vietnam and Korea shouldn't have been done, what major interventionist actiona did they take besides those (Note that both of those were generally supported by the GOP)?
And I was referring to the emergence of social liberalism as the redeeming factor, they've always been at least somewhat populist.

[Deldem]

We must vote off the Democrats before the GOP, the Democratic Party's history is one of the most vile.

Perhaps, but they've redeemed themselves in the last 75 years, and the Republican Party became a party of crazy religious interventionist nutjobs, thereby totally undermining the good parts of their history.

By being populist interventionists? Democrats SUCK.

It's a hell of a lot better than the GOP.
While I'll agree Vietnam and Korea shouldn't have been done, what major interventionist actiona did they take besides those (Note that both of those were generally supported by the GOP)?
And I was referring to the emergence of social liberalism as the redeeming factor, they've always been at least somewhat populist.

WW1 and WW2.

WW1 was over 75 years ago last time I checked, so it's not in the time frame.
WW2 was justified in my opinion- we were attacked, after all.

[Deldem]

We must vote off the Democrats before the GOP, the Democratic Party's history is one of the most vile.

Perhaps, but they've redeemed themselves in the last 75 years, and the Republican Party became a party of crazy religious interventionist nutjobs, thereby totally undermining the good parts of their history.

By being populist interventionists? Democrats SUCK.

It's a hell of a lot better than the GOP.
While I'll agree Vietnam and Korea shouldn't have been done, what major interventionist actiona did they take besides those (Note that both of those were generally supported by the GOP)?
And I was referring to the emergence of social liberalism as the redeeming factor, they've always been at least somewhat populist.

WW1 and WW2.

WW1 was over 75 years ago last time I checked, so it's not in the time frame.
WW2 was justified in my opinion- we were attacked, after all.

Either way, I would never embrace populism, interventionism, or social liberalism/New Dealism. Therefore, never can I support the Democratic Party.

That's all well and good, but don't say that Democrats suck. We represent a wide range of people and beliefs. You have a difference in opinion, but that doesn't mean that Democrats are inherently bad.

[Deldem]

My main reason was the Southern Democrats.

Which for the most part now do not exist, at least not in the way they did in the past. They basically are the Southern Republicans now. In fact, a large number of people in the South even today were actually once registered Democrats- take Governor Rick Perry or former Senator Phil Gramm, for example.

The Southern Democrats that are left are more like their Northern counterparts than earlier Southern Democrats. Take me for example- I'm certainly not a classical Southern Dem.

[Deldem]

My main reason was the Southern Democrats.

Which for the most part now do not exist, at least not in the way they did in the past. They basically are the Southern Republicans now. In fact, a large number of people in the South even today were actually once registered Democrats- take Governor Rick Perry or former Senator Phil Gramm, for example.

The Southern Democrats that are left are more like their Northern counterparts than earlier Southern Democrats. Take me for example- I'm certainly not a classical Southern Dem.

I think he's referring more to people like BushOklahoma and Dave Hawk- the populist types. Rick Perry and Phil Gramm focus more on their economic conservatism than social issues anyways, and therefore have nothing in common with Democrats. Southern Democrats typically refer to the Dixiecrat days of the New Deal Coalition- labor supporting economic liberals that are very religious and socially conservative (often racist).

Oh they definitely are both very socially conservative. It's just not as noticeable if you're not living there. When you look at it, the last wave of Southern Dems (those elected between roughly 1960 and 1990), they are pretty conservative both economically and socially.

But on a person-to-person level, most of the Republicans I know (around 70%) are Republicans due to social issues, and I live in a fairly well-off area. I'd estimate that about 40% of that group is moderate-to-liberal economically. Trust me, they're descendants of Southern Dems. I realize this is purely anecdotal, but I feel it's somewhat relevant.

[Deldem]

Libertarian