DeMint for President?

[Smash255]

Phil, saying Demint can win the presidency is about as laughable as arguing that Kucinich or Bernie Sanders can.

It's not that far out there... I'd say it's like Sheldon Whitehouse winning.

Sure, it's possible, but it ain't happening.

No, it is more along the lines of Sanders & Kucinich.    Whitehouse is a liberal Democrat, but he isn't hard left as Kucinich & sanders are.  Demint's wing of the GOP is hard right.

[Lief 🗽]

Phil, saying Demint can win the presidency is about as laughable as arguing that Kucinich or Bernie Sanders can.

It's not that far out there... I'd say it's like Sheldon Whitehouse winning.

Sure, it's possible, but it ain't happening.

I think Whitehouse is more comparable to someone like Ensign or Thune; a partisan, non-moderate yes, but a generally inoffensive, boring one.

[Nixon in '80]

Phil, saying Demint can win the presidency is about as laughable as arguing that Kucinich or Bernie Sanders can.

It's not that far out there... I'd say it's like Sheldon Whitehouse winning.

Sure, it's possible, but it ain't happening.

No, it is more along the lines of Sanders & Kucinich.    Whitehouse is a liberal Democrat, but he isn't hard left as Kucinich & sanders are.  Demint's wing of the GOP is hard right.

I think Whitehouse is more comparable to someone like Ensign or Thune; a partisan, non-moderate yes, but a generally inoffensive, boring one.

Kucinich and Sanders are closer to the ideological opposite of DeMint than Whitehouse is, but in terms of electability, DeMint has them beat. Sure, DeMint will never be President, but if he ran he wouldn't be a joke like Kucinich, he'd be taken somewhat seriously.

[Smash255]

Phil, saying Demint can win the presidency is about as laughable as arguing that Kucinich or Bernie Sanders can.

It's not that far out there... I'd say it's like Sheldon Whitehouse winning.

Sure, it's possible, but it ain't happening.

No, it is more along the lines of Sanders & Kucinich.    Whitehouse is a liberal Democrat, but he isn't hard left as Kucinich & sanders are.  Demint's wing of the GOP is hard right.

I think Whitehouse is more comparable to someone like Ensign or Thune; a partisan, non-moderate yes, but a generally inoffensive, boring one.

Kucinich and Sanders are closer to the ideological opposite of DeMint than Whitehouse is, but in terms of electability, DeMint has them beat. Sure, DeMint will never be President, but if he ran he wouldn't be a joke like Kucinich, he'd be taken somewhat seriously.

Perhaps, but Demint's chances of winning are closer to Sanders & Kucinch's chances than it is to Whitehouse.

[Keystone Phil]

In fact the Demint wing of the party is what these voters were trying to get away from when they were voting Democratic in the first place.

Remember when John Kerry was too liberal for America? Remember all of the "the Dems have to move to the right at least on social issues!" talk?

That was Beltway nonsense, promoted by hacks like David Broder and Mark Halperin.
In fact polls showed that the vast majority of Americans agreed with the Democratic positions on various issues.

LOL what?

A vast majority agreed with the Dem positions in 2004? It's silly enough to say a majority but you just had to take it a step further.

Yeah, those exit polls showing "moral values" as the top issue in 2004 really showed how strongly America loved the Dems.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, for a country that agreed with the Dems a "vast majority" of the time, you'd think he would have received about 58%...

The majority of Americans agreed with Democratic positions regarding the environment, health care, trade, education and abortion even then. If you want to cling on one word in order to avoid adressing the whole point, the knock yourself out.

Hahaha...so pick a bunch of random (and vague) issues where people agreed with the Dems and that proves that Kerry wasn't too liberal. I'd love to see those polls, by the way.

And I'm not clinging on one word. I'm sorry that you are just now realizing how foolish your use of that word was in this conversation.

Phil, saying Demint can win the presidency is about as laughable as arguing that Kucinich or Bernie Sanders can.

It's not that far out there... I'd say it's like Sheldon Whitehouse winning.

Sure, it's possible, but it ain't happening.

No, it is more along the lines of Sanders & Kucinich.    Whitehouse is a liberal Democrat, but he isn't hard left as Kucinich & sanders are.  Demint's wing of the GOP is hard right.

I think Whitehouse is more comparable to someone like Ensign or Thune; a partisan, non-moderate yes, but a generally inoffensive, boring one.

Kucinich and Sanders are closer to the ideological opposite of DeMint than Whitehouse is, but in terms of electability, DeMint has them beat. Sure, DeMint will never be President, but if he ran he wouldn't be a joke like Kucinich, he'd be taken somewhat seriously.

Don't bother with them. Smash is seriously one of the most mindless hacks out there (he just likes repeating his points over and over...) and Lief has made it clear that he's turning up the hack act ever since last Fall.

[Lief 🗽]

So you think that Bernie Sanders is electable? Anything can happen, right?

[Keystone Phil]

So you think that Bernie Sanders is electable? Anything can happen, right?

I've said almost anything is possible. 

A Republican version of Sanders/Kucinich would be Conrad Burns. Even if DeMint is "far right," he has some type of political savvy. Sanders/Kucinich/Burns do not.

[Smash255]

In fact the Demint wing of the party is what these voters were trying to get away from when they were voting Democratic in the first place.

Remember when John Kerry was too liberal for America? Remember all of the "the Dems have to move to the right at least on social issues!" talk?

That was Beltway nonsense, promoted by hacks like David Broder and Mark Halperin.
In fact polls showed that the vast majority of Americans agreed with the Democratic positions on various issues.

LOL what?

A vast majority agreed with the Dem positions in 2004? It's silly enough to say a majority but you just had to take it a step further.

Yeah, those exit polls showing "moral values" as the top issue in 2004 really showed how strongly America loved the Dems.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, for a country that agreed with the Dems a "vast majority" of the time, you'd think he would have received about 58%...

The majority of Americans agreed with Democratic positions regarding the environment, health care, trade, education and abortion even then. If you want to cling on one word in order to avoid adressing the whole point, the knock yourself out.

Hahaha...so pick a bunch of random (and vague) issues where people agreed with the Dems and that proves that Kerry wasn't too liberal. I'd love to see those polls, by the way.

And I'm not clinging on one word. I'm sorry that you are just now realizing how foolish your use of that word was in this conversation.

Phil, saying Demint can win the presidency is about as laughable as arguing that Kucinich or Bernie Sanders can.

It's not that far out there... I'd say it's like Sheldon Whitehouse winning.

Sure, it's possible, but it ain't happening.

No, it is more along the lines of Sanders & Kucinich.    Whitehouse is a liberal Democrat, but he isn't hard left as Kucinich & sanders are.  Demint's wing of the GOP is hard right.

I think Whitehouse is more comparable to someone like Ensign or Thune; a partisan, non-moderate yes, but a generally inoffensive, boring one.

Kucinich and Sanders are closer to the ideological opposite of DeMint than Whitehouse is, but in terms of electability, DeMint has them beat. Sure, DeMint will never be President, but if he ran he wouldn't be a joke like Kucinich, he'd be taken somewhat seriously.

Don't bother with them. Smash is seriously one of the most mindless hacks out there (he just likes repeating his points over and over...) and Lief has made it clear that he's turning up the hack act ever since last Fall.

Yes I'm a hack alright afterall our predictions have been so much better than mine......

[Keystone Phil]

Yes I'm a hack alright afterall our predictions have been so much better than mine......

Actually, my predictions have been pretty close to your predictions (EXCEPT LOL THOSE 2 PREDICTIONS FROM 04 AND 06!!!!!!!) but it's not just about predictions. You spew rhetoric all the time. You hold up your analysis as fact all the time and you simply repeat it over and over, using weird math to justify a lot of your claims, etc.

[Nixon in '80]

Phil, saying Demint can win the presidency is about as laughable as arguing that Kucinich or Bernie Sanders can.

It's not that far out there... I'd say it's like Sheldon Whitehouse winning.

Sure, it's possible, but it ain't happening.

No, it is more along the lines of Sanders & Kucinich.    Whitehouse is a liberal Democrat, but he isn't hard left as Kucinich & sanders are.  Demint's wing of the GOP is hard right.

I think Whitehouse is more comparable to someone like Ensign or Thune; a partisan, non-moderate yes, but a generally inoffensive, boring one.

Kucinich and Sanders are closer to the ideological opposite of DeMint than Whitehouse is, but in terms of electability, DeMint has them beat. Sure, DeMint will never be President, but if he ran he wouldn't be a joke like Kucinich, he'd be taken somewhat seriously.

Perhaps, but Demint's chances of winning are closer to Sanders & Kucinch's chances than it is to Whitehouse.

My point is far-right > far-left in terms of electability, not that I'm particularly fond of either.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree...

[Lunar]

He'd be like somewhere in between a Brownback and a Tancredo eh?

[Nixon in '80]

He'd be like somewhere in between a Brownback and a Tancredo eh?

Closer to Brownback than Tancredo, except without the integrity and a few "maverick" positions.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

He'd be like somewhere in between a Brownback and a Tancredo eh?

Closer to Brownback than Tancredo, except without the integrity and a few "maverick" positions.

Yeah, I've always seen as a Southern version of Brownback; maybe even more ot the right.

[Smash255]

Yes I'm a hack alright afterall our predictions have been so much better than mine......

Actually, my predictions have been pretty close to your predictions (EXCEPT LOL THOSE 2 PREDICTIONS FROM 04 AND 06!!!!!!!) but it's not just about predictions. You spew rhetoric all the time. You hold up your analysis as fact all the time and you simply repeat it over and over, using weird math to justify a lot of your claims, etc.

I'm not just talking about getting the winner correct, but being close on the margins as well...

[Meeker]

The most conservative-voting Senator in America right now that doesn't like prostitutes & family values simultaneously?  And from South Carolina?  Please do.  And if we nominate Leahy or Boxer, it could be a close battle.

This has nothing to do with the topic that everyone else is discussing, but Murkowski's election year shift is so obvious that it's ridiculous. Talk about a sell-out.

[Lief 🗽]

Meh. It's not like there's anyone in Alaska that can beat her (from the left; she could lose in a primary, in which case her leftward shift makes no sense).

[Keystone Phil]

Ugh, Murkowski. She needs to go. That's another race where I disagreed strongly with Santorum. He made it a point to go out there and campaign for that joke.

[pbrower2a]

The most conservative-voting Senator in America right now that doesn't like prostitutes & family values simultaneously?  And from South Carolina?  Please do.  And if we nominate Leahy or Boxer, it could be a close battle.

This has nothing to do with the topic that everyone else is discussing, but Murkowski's election year shift is so obvious that it's ridiculous. Talk about a sell-out.

At least Murkowski knows the way the wind is blowing.

If they weren't so old, I would think of Voinovich, Lugar, and Alexander as three of the more likely GOP senators to have chances to become President some year... but when I look at the moderates within the GOP and their ages I see an unsettling trend for the GOP.

[Landslide Lyndon]

In fact the Demint wing of the party is what these voters were trying to get away from when they were voting Democratic in the first place.

Remember when John Kerry was too liberal for America? Remember all of the "the Dems have to move to the right at least on social issues!" talk?

That was Beltway nonsense, promoted by hacks like David Broder and Mark Halperin.
In fact polls showed that the vast majority of Americans agreed with the Democratic positions on various issues.

LOL what?

A vast majority agreed with the Dem positions in 2004? It's silly enough to say a majority but you just had to take it a step further.

Yeah, those exit polls showing "moral values" as the top issue in 2004 really showed how strongly America loved the Dems.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, for a country that agreed with the Dems a "vast majority" of the time, you'd think he would have received about 58%...

The majority of Americans agreed with Democratic positions regarding the environment, health care, trade, education and abortion even then. If you want to cling on one word in order to avoid adressing the whole point, the knock yourself out.

Hahaha...so pick a bunch of random (and vague) issues where people agreed with the Dems and that proves that Kerry wasn't too liberal. I'd love to see those polls, by the way.

And I'm not clinging on one word. I'm sorry that you are just now realizing how foolish your use of that word was in this conversation.

Well, I am so sorry that the issues I mentioned are vague and random.
I guess I can't find some well defined and very specific issues like say War on Terror. Or even better Moral Values.
I guess that's a knack that only right-wing hacks like you have.  

But then again the fact that you think Rick Santorum and Jim DeMint are electable shows how loose grasp of reality yoy have. I expect you in the next days to praise the electability prospects  of David Duke.

[Keystone Phil]

Well, I am so sorry that the issues I mentioned are vague and random.
I guess I can't find some well defined and very specific issues like say War on Terror. Or even better Moral Values.
I guess that's a knack that only right-wing hacks like you have.

Put up or shut up. It's that simple. Where are the polls that showed the American public supporting Democratic proposals on the issues you mentioned? Oh, and remember that they better be supporting the Dems by "vast majorities," too.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL

"You like Rick Santorum so you're just a big, mean crazy!"

Oh, child, you're going to have to do better than that. And, for the record, I didn't really say that DeMint is electable; I'm just not as arrogant as people like yourself in saying that he cannot win under any circumstances. You obviously still have a lot to learn.

If they weren't so old, I would think of Voinovich, Lugar, and Alexander as three of the more likely GOP senators to have chances to become President some year...

Well, aside from their age and their low levels of appeal to the base, it might hurt that my socks are way more charismatic than any of the people you mentioned.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Well, I am so sorry that the issues I mentioned are vague and random.
I guess I can't find some well defined and very specific issues like say War on Terror. Or even better Moral Values.
I guess that's a knack that only right-wing hacks like you have.

Put up or shut up. It's that simple. Where are the polls that showed the American public supporting Democratic proposals on the issues you mentioned? Oh, and remember that they better be supporting the Dems by "vast majorities," too.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL

"You like Rick Santorum so you're just a big, mean crazy!"

Oh, child, you're going to have to do better than that. And, for the record, I didn't really say that DeMint is electable; I'm just not as arrogant as people like yourself in saying that he cannot win under any circumstances. You obviously still have a lot to learn.

Oh, we are threatening now!
Well, too bad I haven't polls from 2004 in my pocket to satisfy the curiosity of a hack like you.
Why don't you show me a poll where it says that the public supports the Republican positions. Show me yours and I'll show you mine.

As for you not being arrogant. Yeah, and Bill O'Reilly is an independent.

[Keystone Phil]

Oh, we are threatening now!
Well, too bad I haven't polls from 2004 in my pocket to satisfy the curiosity of a hack like you.

Of a hack like me. Wow. Apparently, people are hacks when they ask for proof of something especially when someone makes an outrageous claim!

Do a simple Internet search, my friend. I bet I know why you won't - the numbers you cited are made up.
 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh...this all stemmed from me calling John Kerry too liberal. He was rejected. The exit polls showed that "moral values" were the top issue in 2004. That clearly was a sign that Kerry was too liberal. Everyone accepts this. However, you go on some silly rant about how only two pundits created that as a reason and you claimed that there were polls showing that the public agreed with the Dems had the "vast majority" of voters on their side. The burden of proof is on your shoulders.

By the way, you never answered why the "vast majority" agreed with the Dems but the vast majority didn't vote for Kerry.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh, I get arrogant when I'm dealing with people like yourself; when you confront my accepted claim that Kerry was too liberal with your own arrogance.

And, by the way, you're mocking O'Reilly for not really been an Independent? Well, people in glass houses...

[Landslide Lyndon]

Oh, we are threatening now!
Well, too bad I haven't polls from 2004 in my pocket to satisfy the curiosity of a hack like you.

Of a hack like me. Wow. Apparently, people are hacks when they ask for proof of something especially when someone makes an outrageous claim!

Do a simple Internet search, my friend. I bet I know why you won't - the numbers you cited are made up.
 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh...this all stemmed from me calling John Kerry too liberal. He was rejected. The exit polls showed that "moral values" were the top issue in 2004. That clearly was a sign that Kerry was too liberal. Everyone accepts this. However, you go on some silly rant about how only two pundits created that as a reason and you claimed that there were polls showing that the public agreed with the Dems had the "vast majority" of voters on their side. The burden of proof is on your shoulders.

By the way, you never answered why the "vast majority" agreed with the Dems but the vast majority didn't vote for Kerry.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh, I get arrogant when I'm dealing with people like yourself; when you confront my accepted claim that Kerry was too liberal with your own arrogance.

And, by the way, you're mocking O'Reilly for not really been an Independent? Well, people in glass houses...

http://www.gallup.com/poll/103102/Democratic-Party-Winning-Issues.aspx

Have a nice day... 
Hack.
 

[pbrower2a]

Well, I am so sorry that the issues I mentioned are vague and random.
I guess I can't find some well defined and very specific issues like say War on Terror. Or even better Moral Values.
I guess that's a knack that only right-wing hacks like you have.

Put up or shut up. It's that simple. Where are the polls that showed the American public supporting Democratic proposals on the issues you mentioned? Oh, and remember that they better be supporting the Dems by "vast majorities," too.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL

"You like Rick Santorum so you're just a big, mean crazy!"

Oh, child, you're going to have to do better than that. And, for the record, I didn't really say that DeMint is electable; I'm just not as arrogant as people like yourself in saying that he cannot win under any circumstances. You obviously still have a lot to learn.

If they weren't so old, I would think of Voinovich, Lugar, and Alexander as three of the more likely GOP senators to have chances to become President some year...

Well, aside from their age and their low levels of appeal to the base, it might hurt that my socks are way more charismatic than any of the people you mentioned.

The "base" has been shrinking. The GOP elector is now older than the electorate as a whole. Its organization has begun to falter, especially in GOTV efforts. In 2008, two of the televangelists of highest profile, Jerry Falwell (Virginia) and D. James Kennedy (Florida) died. Those two were powerful organizers of voters especially in their home states, and when they died their once-effective GOTV efforts went into disarray. Surely those two deaths hurt the GOP in either Virginia and Florida. It may not be coincidence that Obama won Virginia, Florida, and the election.

In contrast, the base for the Democratic Party has been increasing because of young voters who reject the GOP. Young adults vote and volunteer for political efforts -- and steer clear of the GOP. These young voters are too rational to accept the idea that  religious revival will make America better -- only more complacent about its own faults. They disbelieve in the need to intensify disparities between bureaucratic elites and workers; they have yet to enter managerial ranks, and they seem to dislike what they see in the leadership of  Big Business. Think about it: the youngest voters in the 2008 election were born in 1990. They are too young to have any memories of the Cold War or of Ronald Reagan.

Those young voters aren't stupid, but their political culture is very different from yours. The Presidents that they best know in contemporary politics are the ineffective George W. Bush, the mediocre Bill Clinton, and the dreadful George W. Bush. When they contrast those weak-to-poor Presidencies of those that draw more attention in American history classes that they all took in high school they can contrast reality to possibility.

They are not pigeons for the Hard Right. They stay clear of fundamentalist Christianity because of its unreason and its inability to offer comfort of any kind. They reject the idea that religious revivalism is a cure for all ills -- or even any. They see pathological leadership in Big Business and thus reject the corporatism that one associates with George W. Bush. They might be patriotic enough -- but their patriotism stops at the effort to connect it to partisanship.  They associate the worst in American business life with the GOP.

They are beginning to have children, and they despair of the prospect of an America getting worse -- one in which well-connected people get whatever they want and all others must defer. Is it any wonder that they reject the conservative Establishment?



 

[Keystone Phil]

Oh, we are threatening now!
Well, too bad I haven't polls from 2004 in my pocket to satisfy the curiosity of a hack like you.

Of a hack like me. Wow. Apparently, people are hacks when they ask for proof of something especially when someone makes an outrageous claim!

Do a simple Internet search, my friend. I bet I know why you won't - the numbers you cited are made up.
 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh...this all stemmed from me calling John Kerry too liberal. He was rejected. The exit polls showed that "moral values" were the top issue in 2004. That clearly was a sign that Kerry was too liberal. Everyone accepts this. However, you go on some silly rant about how only two pundits created that as a reason and you claimed that there were polls showing that the public agreed with the Dems had the "vast majority" of voters on their side. The burden of proof is on your shoulders.

By the way, you never answered why the "vast majority" agreed with the Dems but the vast majority didn't vote for Kerry.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh, I get arrogant when I'm dealing with people like yourself; when you confront my accepted claim that Kerry was too liberal with your own arrogance.

And, by the way, you're mocking O'Reilly for not really been an Independent? Well, people in glass houses...

http://www.gallup.com/poll/103102/Democratic-Party-Winning-Issues.aspx

Have a nice day... 
Hack.
 

LOL

That's from 2007! We were clearly talking about 2004.

What a failure.

The "base" has been shrinking. The GOP elector is now older than the electorate as a whole. Its organization has begun to falter, especially in GOTV efforts. In 2008, two of the televangelists of highest profile, Jerry Falwell (Virginia) and D. James Kennedy (Florida) died. Those two were powerful organizers of voters especially in their home states, and when they died their once-effective GOTV efforts went into disarray. Surely those two deaths hurt the GOP in either Virginia and Florida. It may not be coincidence that Obama won Virginia, Florida, and the election.[/qupte]

It shrunk that much since 2004? I don't think so.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Newsflash - Dems have always had that hold on young voters.

I'm so finished with reading your rhetoric laced nonsense. I choose not to respond to your religious bashing, hack talking points anymore. It doesn't focus on a damn thing that we're discussing.

You have a lot to learn about the world, child. Stop thinking that this is some liberal dawn among young voters.