PDA

View Full Version : For Democrats, a Troubling Culture Gap



Warham
08-11-2005, 04:42 PM
For Democrats, a Troubling Culture Gap

By Dan Balz

Wednesday, August 10, 2005; Page A08

Dissatisfaction over the war in Iraq, the economy and rising health care costs might spell trouble for Republicans, but a study by Democratic strategists warns that their party's failure to connect with voters on cultural issues could prevent Democratic candidates from reaping gains in upcoming national elections.

Democrats have expressed bewilderment over Republican gains among lower-income, less-educated voters, saying they are voting against their economic self-interest by supporting Republican candidates. But the new Democracy Corps study concludes that cultural issues trump economic issues by a wide margin for many of these voters -- giving the GOP a significant electoral advantage.

The study is based on focus groups of rural voters in Wisconsin and Arkansas and disaffected supporters of President Bush in Colorado and Kentucky. The good news for Democrats: All the groups expressed dissatisfaction with the direction of the country and with the leadership of the president and the GOP-controlled Congress.

Then came the bad news: "As powerful as the concern over these issues is, the introduction of cultural themes -- specifically gay marriage, abortion, the importance of the traditional family unit and the role of religion in public life -- quickly renders them almost irrelevant in terms of electoral politics at the national level," the study said.

Many of these voters still favor Democrats on economic issues. But they see the Democrats as weak on national security, and on cultural and moral issues, they view Democrats as both inconsistent and hostile to traditional values. "Most referred to Democrats as 'liberal' on issues of morality, but some even go so far as to label them 'immoral,' 'morally bankrupt,' or even 'anti-religious,' " according to the Democracy Corps analysis.

Democrats Karl Agne and Stan Greenberg, who conducted the focus group, said Democrats need a reform-oriented, anti-Washington agenda to overcome the culture gap. At this point, Democrats are in no position to capitalize if there is a clear backlash against Republicans. "No matter how disaffected they are over Republican failures in Iraq and here at home," they said, "a large chunk of white, non-college voters, particularly in rural areas, will remain unreachable for Democrats at the national level."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/09/AR2005080901334.html

FORD
08-11-2005, 04:59 PM
**Sigh** :rolleyes: ...

Another DLC survey passed off as "Democrats" by the Whore Media.

That being said, if the Democratic party allows the DLC to control the agenda yet again, then we probably will lose, since (as Truman said) given a choice between a Republican and a Democrat pretending to be a Republican, the Republican wins everytime.

The fact is that Democratic values ARE American values. We just have to cut this fucking vile cancer out of the party and actually RUN on them again.

Warham
08-11-2005, 05:28 PM
Democrats have to pretend to be Republicans, otherwise they won't win. Why do you think Hillary is sliding towards the center recently? She knows she doesn't have a prayer if she plays up the gay rights, pro-abortion moveon.org crowd.

Stephen Hawking
08-11-2005, 05:57 PM
No one needed a survey to tell them this.
In the last days before the election, you had Rove and Bush screaming "The Gays Are Coming, The Gays Are Coming!!", and a few days later all the exit polls suggested that's why Bush won.

We're gays have replaced blacks as America's pariah's on the rise.
Much like blacks in the 1940s and 50s, they will have their day soon.
And much like the northern Democrats of the 1960s, liberals must stand there ground. Because once people come to their senses and realize that gay people don't "threaten" "traditional values", people will turn on those with the harshest rhetoric towards homos.

It probably will not occur in the next election, but perhaps the one after that.

FORD
08-11-2005, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Democrats have to pretend to be Republicans, otherwise they won't win. Why do you think Hillary is sliding towards the center recently? She knows she doesn't have a prayer if she plays up the gay rights, pro-abortion moveon.org crowd.

YOU guys are the ones obsessed with gays and abortions, not us.

REAL Democrats want fair trade, and living wage jobs for all Americans. REAL Democrats want true border security and seaports etc. Not fascism based on fear. REAL Democrats are committed to moving forward with alternative energy, and with increased effeciency on current technology, to reduce the dependency on foreign fuel sources. These are AMERICAN values.

Nickdfresh
08-11-2005, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by Warham
For Democrats, a Troubling Culture Gap

By Dan Balz

Wednesday, August 10, 2005; Page A08

...

Democrats have expressed bewilderment over Republican gains among lower-income, less-educated voters, saying they are voting against their economic self-interest by supporting Republican candidates. But the new Democracy Corps study concludes that cultural issues trump economic issues by a wide margin for many of these voters -- giving the GOP a significant electoral advantage.

...


Reading between the lines: "the REPUBLICAN constituency is poor and stupid white trash"....LMAO

Warham
08-11-2005, 06:00 PM
Uh, FORD, I hate to tell you this, but why do you think those liberal nuts from NARAL are running those lie-filled ads about Judge Roberts? Or why Schermer or any of those other lefty nutballs in the Senate want to rack him over the coals?

Do you think it might have something to do with Roe vs. Wade?

Warham
08-11-2005, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Reading between the lines: "the REPUBLICAN constituency is poor and stupid white trash"....LMAO

Well, if the Democrats don't get the 'stupid white trash' vote, they aren't going to win.

:D

FORD
08-11-2005, 08:20 PM
The only reason they vote for the BCE candidates is because they hold up this religious right bullshit. They don't realize that they are being used.

John Roberts isn't being nominated to kill Roe v Wade. He's being nominated because he hates the right to privacy. Now that certainly does enter into reproductive decisions, but it impacts everyone Including right wing religious nuts.

The minute Roe v. Wade is overturned, the BCE loses their gimmick. They have nothing left to con the red states with. Even the gay marriage thing will fail eventually, as enough states will legalize it to force a Supreme Court case, and it will be next to impossible for them to throw out the 14th Ammendment ruling that the state courts used in Massachussettes and Vermont.

After this, the Pukes will have NOTHING to run on.

Warham
08-11-2005, 08:39 PM
The Constitution doesn't guarantee the right to privacy.

The minute Roe vs. Wade is overturned, every liberal activist group will be out in the street with their pitchforks and torches claiming civilization as we know is over, and we'll go back to the dark ages, when in all reality it'll go back to what it should have always been...a states' right issue.

academic punk
08-11-2005, 10:38 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Well, if the Democrats don't get the 'stupid white trash' vote, they aren't going to win.

:D

This is true...because these are the people that are now the chief populance of our country.

Why this is funny is beyond me...

Big Train
08-11-2005, 10:59 PM
Originally posted by FORD
YOU guys are the ones obsessed with gays and abortions, not us.

REAL Democrats want fair trade, and living wage jobs for all Americans. REAL Democrats want true border security and seaports etc. Not fascism based on fear. REAL Democrats are committed to moving forward with alternative energy, and with increased effeciency on current technology, to reduce the dependency on foreign fuel sources. These are AMERICAN values.

Ford, exactly when is this "Justice League" going to show up? Before or after Family Guy?

academic punk
08-11-2005, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by Big Train
Ford, exactly when is this "Justice League" going to show up? Before or after Family Guy?

During. It's on the rivalling PBS.

Warham
08-11-2005, 11:03 PM
I thought Justice League was on the Cartoon Network. Isn't that the network that runs the Howard Dean Show?

Big Train
08-11-2005, 11:06 PM
Can't be the Cartoon Network, people actually watch that station. Perhaps Lifetime or O, somewhere in the middle channels.

Warham
08-11-2005, 11:07 PM
Right after the Golden Girls on the Lifetime channel.

BigBadBrian
08-14-2005, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by Big Train
Ford, exactly when is this "Justice League" going to show up? Before or after Family Guy?

:D

Terry
08-14-2005, 07:00 PM
Think the funniest thing about this is presuming that Democrats or Republicans have any meaningful differences. Seems to me the whole bunch in DC are nothing but a bunch of pondscum looking to suck off the public teat for the remainder of their lives.

You wanna get some honesty in DC? Set term and salary limits on all elected politicians, and neutralize the money buys accessibility factor.

Anyone looking to our politicians to solve our problems is engaged in a fruitless endeavour.

scorpioboy33
08-14-2005, 07:21 PM
Sometimes you don't have to win to be right! Bush is a baby killing, earth destroying facist. Even if the repukes win they are still wrong and pathetic.

BigBadBrian
08-14-2005, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by scorpioboy33
Bush is a baby killing,

How many baby's has Bush killed, moron? Say...compared to the Democratic Party that supports wholescale murder of innocent infants? Answer me that you you COWARDLY fuckface.

scorpioboy33
08-14-2005, 11:51 PM
haha....Just guessing I would say minimum 10,000.
What's Wholescale?
Anyway Democrats support the choice of a woman to control her own body and to decide to abort a preg. big difference.

FORD
08-15-2005, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
How many baby's has Bush killed

Well, if 100,000 Iraqis have been killed, and half of them were children (which was true of Iraq's population before the illegal invasion)

Ballparking it, I'd say Junior's killed 5,000 babies at least. and 45,000 other children.

Here's a few of them....

http://www.welinske.com/child7.jpg

http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraq5_mar2003.jpg

http://www.robert-fisk.com/Bodies-of-woman-&-her-chil.jpg

scorpioboy33
08-15-2005, 12:57 AM
it's so sad to see that FORD but I really think pics like this need to be seen so that people will understand the real cost of this war

FORD
08-15-2005, 02:35 AM
Exactly. Pictures like that, and the flag draped coffins need to be on the 6:00 news every fucking night until these idiots wake up. That's how we finally stopped Vietnam, and the BCE is well aware of this, which is why they spent the 1990's manipulating most of the mass media into their hands, so they could censor such things.

scorpioboy33
08-15-2005, 02:40 AM
still it's so depressing I wonder how conservatives live with it..sincerly it's not about picking sides..and although alot of joking at each others expenses happens this is what it's all about...these are fucking babies that are dying over oil :(

Big Train
08-15-2005, 03:16 AM
I appreciate the moral lesson Canadien.


How many lives have been lost by Canadian non-action and indecision across the world and decades? We can walk this path if you really want to.

Bottom line, it's a war. That is what happens in a war, which sucks. Give me a solution to war that doesn't involve pie in the sky thinking or retarded conspiracy assumptions and I'm listening.

scorpioboy33
08-15-2005, 03:28 AM
Blood for Oil is not worth it. How do you justify 10s of thousand dead in a war that is supposed to be in retaliation for 3 thousand? DO you really think it's not about Oil? Nah I didn't think so.

Big Train
08-15-2005, 03:36 AM
Thanks again for what I said. Useless moralizing and reading the DNC playbook.

I'm asking YOU, Mr. Moralizer, what is your solution. I'm waiting...

scorpioboy33
08-15-2005, 03:41 AM
Well dude I don't really think I'm gonna convince you of this..but what if you wouldn't have invaded Iraq. MAybe there would be alot less people people killed? What do you think?

NightProwler
08-15-2005, 03:44 AM
dumbya was all for abortion when he knocked up his girlfriend.

http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=159

DrMaddVibe
08-15-2005, 07:31 AM
Originally posted by scorpioboy33
Blood for Oil is not worth it. How do you justify 10s of thousand dead in a war that is supposed to be in retaliation for 3 thousand? DO you really think it's not about Oil? Nah I didn't think so.

Give it a break.

Here in reality the price of gas continues to soar.

So much for that "free oil" you anti-war morons espouse.

War is a last resort. When diplomacy fails its time to roll the tanks. It's always been that way and it always will.

Reality...a real motherfucker for liberals!

BigBadBrian
08-15-2005, 09:52 AM
Originally posted by scorpioboy33
Blood for Oil is not worth it. How do you justify 10s of thousand dead in a war that is supposed to be in retaliation for 3 thousand? DO you really think it's not about Oil? Nah I didn't think so.

No. Here's what your Canadian apathy got you all those years....dead bodies in the form of Saddam's victims you fucking fool. Quit playing playing games and wake up and smell the coffee. Read the fucking quotes I posted above and realize that one way or another this bastard was going to be taken in out. Look at his handiwork below. YOU enabled this!!!!! THEIR BLOOD IS ON YOUR HANDS!!!!!!


http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/images/brutality-20030603-ph-01.jpg http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/images/brutality-20030603-ph-03.jpg http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/images/brutality-20030603-ph-05.jpg http://massgraves.info/4.jpg http://massgraves.info/5.jpg http://massgraves.info/8.jpg http://massgraves.info/7.jpg

FORD
08-15-2005, 09:59 AM
Diplomacy?

Come on AssVibe, you know better than that. The BCE came into the White House with an agenda that was already 5 years old (parts of it older than that) and invading Iraq was the number one item on that agenda. Even when Condasleeza Rice (who wasn't party to the PNAC agenda originally) appeared to be discussing rational options in Iraq, the Chimp busted into her meeting and said "Fuck Saddam. We're taking him out!!"

This was long before 9-11-01 by the way. These vile pieces of shit never had any intention of doing anything other than what the PNAC plan required. And as we all can see now, it was a massive failure.

Oil was never the neocons objective. That was just the incentive to bring Chimp & Cheney on board. And the reason for the high oil prices is the same reason it always is - price fixing among the 4 companies that control the industry. And now that the BCE controls the #2 supply of oil, they can further spike the price.

I never believed this fucking stupid war would bring lower gas prices. But I'll bet a lot of Republicans did ;)

Warham
08-15-2005, 05:32 PM
If the U.N. would have done anything about Hussein, other than slap him on the hand while collecting billions in under-the-table money, Bush wouldn't have had to go into Iraq.

Kofi Annon should be strung up.