Have fun Republicans

[iosip]

The country is *extremely* partisan right now, at least on the national level.

Really?

Then explain, if the above statement is true, how come Kerry lost West Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky and Louisiana?

Without resorting to offensive smears please

it's simple. a lot of democrats in east kentucky are not allowed to vote anymore.

we used to be able to take people in isolated areas to the polls. we can't do that now. although the republicans do it through churches.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Suppose you are a registered Democrat living in Alabama and switch your party over to Republican. If you are like most people, you are probably not going to run out to the DMV and ask for your voter registration card back just so you can erase the x mark next to "Democrat" and check "Republican".

You are simply going to start voting Republican and saying that you're a Republican in public opinion polls. Which is why voter registration should be taken with a grain of salt. Change in that department is even more glacial than the Republican re-alignment in the South that took place 1964-2004.

True up to a point, but even if (say) 5% of Democrats in any of those states are "really" Republicans, Democrats would still vastly outnumber Republicans in all of those states.

The reason why I brought this up, was because danwxman said:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Now, unless there's a new meaning to "partisan", if this were true, Kerry would have won landslides in all four states.
He didn't, so it isn't.

[Beet]

Suppose you are a registered Democrat living in Alabama and switch your party over to Republican. If you are like most people, you are probably not going to run out to the DMV and ask for your voter registration card back just so you can erase the x mark next to "Democrat" and check "Republican".

You are simply going to start voting Republican and saying that you're a Republican in public opinion polls. Which is why voter registration should be taken with a grain of salt. Change in that department is even more glacial than the Republican re-alignment in the South that took place 1964-2004.

True up to a point, but even if (say) 5% of Democrats in any of those states are "really" Republicans, Democrats would still vastly outnumber Republicans in all of those states.

The reason why I brought this up, was because danwxman said:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Now, unless there's a new meaning to "partisan", if this were true, Kerry would have won landslides in all four states.
He didn't, so it isn't.

True, but can the Democrats do a complete 180 and suddenly go back to the party that they were in 1968? To do so would require a very left-wing economic policy, basically a resumption of the war on poverty, etc. On the other hand they would have to virtually abandon key social issues like abortion. While the elimination of social issues might benefit Democrats, reality is that now that that can of worms has been opened, it will not just go away.

That is the only way I can see of them ever re-gaining those votes, but it's unlikely ever to happen. It's more likely that those registrations are just ghosts of the past, and are going to keep declining, slowly but surely.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

True, but can the Democrats do a complete 180 and suddenly go back to the party that they were in 1968? To do so would require a very left-wing economic policy, basically a resumption of the war on poverty, etc. On the other hand they would have to virtually abandon key social issues like abortion.

Seems like a good idea if they want to win elections

[Beet]

True, but can the Democrats do a complete 180 and suddenly go back to the party that they were in 1968? To do so would require a very left-wing economic policy, basically a resumption of the war on poverty, etc. On the other hand they would have to virtually abandon key social issues like abortion.

Seems like a good idea if they want to win elections

Possibly a good point. It wouldn't fit all my positions very well but you may be correct. However unlikely.

[dazzleman]

I think that party registration means little.

Many voters are still alive from the era in the south when everybody registered and voted Democratic.

Many people never bothered to change their registration, but simply started voting Republican.  Maybe, like Zell Miller, they have a psychological barrier to actually registering as a Republican, even though they can no longer tolerate the Democratic Party.

As far as Democrats going back to Great Society economic programs, I just can't see that happening.  Those programs were such collossal failures, and there is little public support for them even among the poor.

[Gustaf]

Yay, someone agreed with my analysis!

I think Democrats are actually in much better shape than people think, primarily b/c Republicans are

a) too pleased with themselves

b) have been too successfull (linked to a)

c) too used to not having to reach out

[??????????]

Al,

Have you thought that maybe a lot of those registered Democrats in Red...er Blue (or whatever the hell their called now) states feel the way Zel Miller feels about the party. That the Democrats have swung to far to the left and the national party is out of touch with the common blue collar man and as punishment they are voting Republican until Democrats moderate?

As I said earlier.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Al,

Have you thought that maybe a lot of those registered Democrats in Red...er Blue (or whatever the hell their called now) states feel the way Zel Miller feels about the party. That the Democrats have swung to far to the left and the national party is out of touch with the common blue collar man and as punishment they are voting Republican until Democrats moderate?

As I said earlier.

Very true.
My point was that danwxman had said:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And if that were true, Kerry would have won landslides in WV, KY, AR and LA.
It hardly needs pointing out that he didn't, meaning that the U.S cannot be extremely partisan at the moment.

Sorry for any confusion

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I think that party registration means little.

At presidential level it doesn't, and I'm not disputing that. See above post for why I brought it up

[ATFFL]

The country is *extremely* partisan right now, at least on the national level.

Really?

Then explain, if the above statement is true, how come Kerry lost West Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky and Louisiana?

Without resorting to offensive smears please

Umm because there a lot of partisan Democrats and a lot of partisan Republicans.

All the states Al listed have many more registered Democrats than Republicans.

Not all Democrats and Republicans are partisans.

Then why did you answer the initial question the way you did?

My original point is that we have a very polarized, partisan country right now. What is the problem?

Your statement was that we are a highly partisan and polarized nation.  It would then follow that members of a party would support their party heavily.

Al countered with four examples of states where Democrats have a large advantage in registration numbers.

You answered by saying there are a lot of partisans. 

This does not explain how states where Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans voted for the Republican for President.

That is correct, but it's *not* my point. There are a lot of partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans....just as there are moderate Democrats and Republicans.

So rather than provide an intelligent answer to the question you posted a non-sequitor that looked like a really dumb answer to the question.

Got ya.

[danwxman]

The country is *extremely* partisan right now, at least on the national level.

Really?

Then explain, if the above statement is true, how come Kerry lost West Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky and Louisiana?

Without resorting to offensive smears please

Umm because there a lot of partisan Democrats and a lot of partisan Republicans.

All the states Al listed have many more registered Democrats than Republicans.

Not all Democrats and Republicans are partisans.

Then why did you answer the initial question the way you did?

My original point is that we have a very polarized, partisan country right now. What is the problem?

Your statement was that we are a highly partisan and polarized nation.  It would then follow that members of a party would support their party heavily.

Al countered with four examples of states where Democrats have a large advantage in registration numbers.

You answered by saying there are a lot of partisans. 

This does not explain how states where Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans voted for the Republican for President.

That is correct, but it's *not* my point. There are a lot of partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans....just as there are moderate Democrats and Republicans.

So rather than provide an intelligent answer to the question you posted a non-sequitor that looked like a really dumb answer to the question.

Got ya.

No. You're suggesting that just because there are a lot of partisans that means that every Democrat and every Republican is voting with their party...that's not what I said at all.

[ATFFL]

The country is *extremely* partisan right now, at least on the national level.

Really?

Then explain, if the above statement is true, how come Kerry lost West Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky and Louisiana?

Without resorting to offensive smears please

Umm because there a lot of partisan Democrats and a lot of partisan Republicans.

All the states Al listed have many more registered Democrats than Republicans.

Not all Democrats and Republicans are partisans.

Then why did you answer the initial question the way you did?

My original point is that we have a very polarized, partisan country right now. What is the problem?

Your statement was that we are a highly partisan and polarized nation.  It would then follow that members of a party would support their party heavily.

Al countered with four examples of states where Democrats have a large advantage in registration numbers.

You answered by saying there are a lot of partisans. 

This does not explain how states where Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans voted for the Republican for President.

That is correct, but it's *not* my point. There are a lot of partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans....just as there are moderate Democrats and Republicans.

So rather than provide an intelligent answer to the question you posted a non-sequitor that looked like a really dumb answer to the question.

Got ya.

No. You're suggesting that just because there are a lot of partisans that means that every Democrat and every Republican is voting with their party...that's not what I said at all.

Ok, explain to me what you meant when you answered that there are a lot of partisan democrats and republicans when asked to explain why four states with large democrat advanteges in party registration voted Republican.

Please answer without resorting to offensive smears or non-sequitors.

[danwxman]

The country is *extremely* partisan right now, at least on the national level.

Really?

Then explain, if the above statement is true, how come Kerry lost West Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky and Louisiana?

Without resorting to offensive smears please

Umm because there a lot of partisan Democrats and a lot of partisan Republicans.

All the states Al listed have many more registered Democrats than Republicans.

Not all Democrats and Republicans are partisans.

Then why did you answer the initial question the way you did?

My original point is that we have a very polarized, partisan country right now. What is the problem?

Your statement was that we are a highly partisan and polarized nation.  It would then follow that members of a party would support their party heavily.

Al countered with four examples of states where Democrats have a large advantage in registration numbers.

You answered by saying there are a lot of partisans. 

This does not explain how states where Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans voted for the Republican for President.

That is correct, but it's *not* my point. There are a lot of partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans....just as there are moderate Democrats and Republicans.

So rather than provide an intelligent answer to the question you posted a non-sequitor that looked like a really dumb answer to the question.

Got ya.

No. You're suggesting that just because there are a lot of partisans that means that every Democrat and every Republican is voting with their party...that's not what I said at all.

Ok, explain to me what you meant when you answered that there are a lot of partisan democrats and republicans when asked to explain why four states with large democrat advanteges in party registration voted Republican.

Please answer without resorting to offensive smears or non-sequitors.

Where have I posted any offensive smears in this thread?? lmao..

That has nothing to do with my original point but I'll answer it. There's a lot of conservative Democrats, and not a lot of conservative Democratic politicians left. Please respond without assuming I'm some kind of idiot. Thanks.

[ATFFL]

The country is *extremely* partisan right now, at least on the national level.

Really?

Then explain, if the above statement is true, how come Kerry lost West Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky and Louisiana?

Without resorting to offensive smears please

Umm because there a lot of partisan Democrats and a lot of partisan Republicans.

All the states Al listed have many more registered Democrats than Republicans.

Not all Democrats and Republicans are partisans.

Then why did you answer the initial question the way you did?

My original point is that we have a very polarized, partisan country right now. What is the problem?

Your statement was that we are a highly partisan and polarized nation.  It would then follow that members of a party would support their party heavily.

Al countered with four examples of states where Democrats have a large advantage in registration numbers.

You answered by saying there are a lot of partisans. 

This does not explain how states where Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans voted for the Republican for President.

That is correct, but it's *not* my point. There are a lot of partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans....just as there are moderate Democrats and Republicans.

So rather than provide an intelligent answer to the question you posted a non-sequitor that looked like a really dumb answer to the question.

Got ya.

No. You're suggesting that just because there are a lot of partisans that means that every Democrat and every Republican is voting with their party...that's not what I said at all.

Ok, explain to me what you meant when you answered that there are a lot of partisan democrats and republicans when asked to explain why four states with large democrat advanteges in party registration voted Republican.

Please answer without resorting to offensive smears or non-sequitors.

Where have I posted any offensive smears in this thread?? lmao..

That has nothing to do with my original point but I'll answer it. There's a lot of conservative Democrats, and not a lot of conservative Democratic politicians left. Please respond without assuming I'm some kind of idiot. Thanks.

I was just quoting Al.

So you are saying the divide is less partisan and more idealogical, correct?

For the record, I assume everyone is an idiot until proven otherwise.  This way I am correct more often than not.  In the rare circumstances where I am wrong, it is at least a pleasant surprise.