Will there ever be a Democratic landslide again?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:14:03 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Will there ever be a Democratic landslide again?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Poll
Question: ?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 130

Author Topic: Will there ever be a Democratic landslide again?  (Read 31996 times)
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 10, 2004, 06:01:20 PM »

I want to make prostitution, drug use, and gambling legal. I want to end the anti- smoking legislation and the FCC.


All good positions, none of which is furthered by voting Republican.

Republicans aren't the ones trying to ban smoking from restaurants.

Some Democrats believe in things like drug legalization, but they're rare and far between.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 10, 2004, 06:04:27 PM »

I want to make prostitution, drug use, and gambling legal. I want to end the anti- smoking legislation and the FCC.


All good positions, none of which is furthered by voting Republican.

Republicans aren't the ones trying to ban smoking from restaurants.

Some Democrats believe in things like drug legalization, but they're rare and far between.

I'll admit that both parties are horrible institutions - or rather they reflect their awful constituencies.. but I'm confident the Democrats are a lesser threat.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 10, 2004, 06:05:57 PM »

The Democratic party exists for the sole purpose of molding society through government.

Feminists, anti-smoking nazis, gays, etc.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 10, 2004, 06:11:20 PM »

I know hardcore atheists who think the idea of the pledge being unconstitutional is hilarious
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 10, 2004, 06:28:01 PM »

Also incidentally I find the act of faith absurd, but thats not my business.

OK, then we won't debate that portion.  Smiley

I attack any ideology that is intolerant and has the agenda of imposing its will upon others.

Here, you could make that exact argument for liberalism today.  Liberalism is intolerant other view points, it attacks other view points relentlessly.  And it has an agenda of imposing views on others.  Take for example Affirmative Action, the ones who support it believe that everyone should follow it, and have put that view and action upon us.  If you don't abide by it, you get punished.  Also, for the minorities that do not support Affirmative Action, it is still used on them whether they like it or not.

So you should be attacking liberalism with all your might as well.  Of course, we could also go into Atheism.  With pushing their thoughts and viewpoints on everyone by delcaring that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional.  It's imposing their views on others who want to say the Pledge, so then you should be attacking Atheists as well.

I could also say the same for libertarianism, conservatism, socialism, communism, and so on.

Liberalism mostly wishes to remove impositions upon the individual, such as the pledge of allegiance to which you allude, or exclusion from marriage, etc.  I agree that in some cases, such as affirmative action, liberals are abominable.  However political christianity is the worst of a bad lot, in that its agenda is far more consistently against individual freedom.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 10, 2004, 06:29:37 PM »

The pledge and marriage don't restrict the individual
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 10, 2004, 06:32:16 PM »

The pledge and marriage don't restrict the individual

Ok.. so you've stated your opinion.  Not very interesting, but I suppose if you enjoyed it, that's all that matters.

If you want to actually interact, you might include some sort of argumentation.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 10, 2004, 06:37:07 PM »

I just stated the facts
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 10, 2004, 06:40:48 PM »
« Edited: October 10, 2004, 06:59:46 PM by opebo »

Liberalism mostly wishes to remove impositions upon the individual, such as the pledge of allegiance to which you allude, or exclusion from marriage, etc.  I agree that in some cases, such as affirmative action, liberals are abominable.  However political christianity is the worst of a bad lot, in that its agenda is far more consistently against individual freedom.

To further understand your stance, I would like you to name instances where your case is justified in your opinion.

Gay marriage is the current glaring example.  Another is abortion.  Others include the censorship of media and 'pornography'.  Also much of our long time social interventionism, such as drug laws and laws against prostitution are motivated by religious voters prejudices.  Prohibition was a prime example.  Religion is by nature an intolerant mental condition, and implies that one can know what is right or best for another person.
Logged
nclib
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,300
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 10, 2004, 09:51:03 PM »

Where Democrats carry something like 44 states?



If the 2000 percentages are any frame of reference, for the Dems to win 44 states, the map would look like this...



I suppose it's possible, but very difficult (winning over 50% in Kans., Okla., S.D., etc.)
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 10, 2004, 10:08:11 PM »

Where Democrats carry something like 44 states?



If the 2000 percentages are any frame of reference, for the Dems to win 44 states, the map would look like this...



I suppose it's possible, but very difficult (winning over 50% in Kans., Okla., S.D., etc.)

that's actually pretty close to my best ever President Forever game. I was Clinton in 1996, and won 46 states + DC over Dole. Dole only took Kansas, Idaho, Utah and Alaska.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 11, 2004, 12:22:40 AM »

Obama will landslide
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 11, 2004, 03:43:11 PM »

Where Democrats carry something like 44 states?



If the 2000 percentages are any frame of reference, for the Dems to win 44 states, the map would look like this...



I suppose it's possible, but very difficult (winning over 50% in Kans., Okla., S.D., etc.)


If Nixon could have run for a third term and survived watergate and dodged impeachement and the democrat was a Clintonesque style candidate, THEN I could see that happening.
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 12, 2004, 07:44:49 AM »

Yes, I can see John Edwards winning the entire eastern half of the country. 
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 12, 2004, 07:49:18 AM »

I want to make prostitution, drug use, and gambling legal. I want to end the anti- smoking legislation and the FCC.

That makes me a supporter of theocracy?

Anyway, you can call them false Democrats, but they could call you a false Democrat as well.

Yea, this is true.  But many of the southern democrats are extremely close to republicans on almost every issue.  That's the point they are trying to get at.  But they can call themselves Democrats all they want.  I just don't want to hear it anymore about how the party has betrayed them from the Zell Miller types.  Socially, the two parties have switched, and if they don't like it, by all means, leave.   
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 12, 2004, 07:53:28 AM »

No, because Democrats can't win the rural west.

But of course Democrats can win pretty big, Clinton did in '96.

The rural west is libertarian.  The democrats are moving towards social libertarianism, so if we ever get into another 1992-type election where decisive social issues are the focus of the campaign, a democrat could probably win the entire west minus Idaho and Utah.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 12, 2004, 01:50:46 PM »

The DEMOCRATS moving towards social libertarianism?! These people are trying to ban cigarettes and firearms!
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 12, 2004, 08:55:34 PM »

The DEMOCRATS moving towards social libertarianism?! These people are trying to ban cigarettes and firearms!

2nd hand-smoke hurts people, and I didn't say they were social libertarians, but they are moving somewhat in that direction. 
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 15, 2004, 05:48:59 AM »

At some point, but not in the near future due to the culture wars. Still, once TX, VA, NC, FL, AZ, CO and NV have trended Dem more seriously it will happen.
Logged
No more McShame
FuturePrez R-AZ
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,083


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 16, 2004, 01:18:53 AM »

Putting Democrats in the same sentence as social libertarianism is laughable.

Democrats love to legislate based on questionable science; 2nd hand smoke, global warming, etc.  The national party would just assume overturn the 2nd Amendment.  Today's Democrat party is run by feminists that would shut you up if they disagree with you.  Let's not forget the Kerry campaign's threats towards book stores that dare carry "Unfit for Command" and towards Sinclair Broadcasting.  Reeks of censorship to me!

The Republican Party isn't perfect, but I do believe most Republicans are stronger on social libertarian issues than most Democrats are.  Don't get me started on economic issues. Smiley
Logged
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,288
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 16, 2004, 06:44:16 AM »

Opebo - When did you switch to the Democrats? Sorry, I've been away for a while.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 18, 2004, 02:50:41 PM »
« Edited: October 19, 2004, 12:31:54 PM by opebo »

Opebo - When did you switch to the Democrats? Sorry, I've been away for a while.

A few weeks ago.  I've always been a Republican voter based on a lesser of two evils analysis, and have always had grave reservations about the party's social positions.  I had an epiphany during the anti-gay constitutional referendum amendment here in Missouri, in addition to some other issues.  I realized that the GOP is controlled by the Christian right, and my freedoms are greatly threatened by their agenda.  I wouldn't want to be in the same party as people like that.   The slight impositions Democrats might make on me economically seem like nothing by comparison.
Logged
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,288
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 20, 2004, 04:48:00 PM »

Opebo - When did you switch to the Democrats? Sorry, I've been away for a while.

A few weeks ago.  I've always been a Republican voter based on a lesser of two evils analysis, and have always had grave reservations about the party's social positions.  I had an epiphany during the anti-gay constitutional referendum amendment here in Missouri, in addition to some other issues.  I realized that the GOP is controlled by the Christian right, and my freedoms are greatly threatened by their agenda.  I wouldn't want to be in the same party as people like that.   The slight impositions Democrats might make on me economically seem like nothing by comparison.

That's interesting. I personally never understood the GOP's popularity, since many of its ideals (particularly those stemming from the religious right, as well the Straussian/neo-conservative wing of the party) seem to tread on the very notions of individual freedom and liberty which the United States was based on. But that's a more general thought.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 20, 2004, 05:35:07 PM »

Opebo - When did you switch to the Democrats? Sorry, I've been away for a while.

A few weeks ago.  I've always been a Republican voter based on a lesser of two evils analysis, and have always had grave reservations about the party's social positions.  I had an epiphany during the anti-gay constitutional referendum amendment here in Missouri, in addition to some other issues.  I realized that the GOP is controlled by the Christian right, and my freedoms are greatly threatened by their agenda.  I wouldn't want to be in the same party as people like that.   The slight impositions Democrats might make on me economically seem like nothing by comparison.

That's interesting. I personally never understood the GOP's popularity, since many of its ideals (particularly those stemming from the religious right, as well the Straussian/neo-conservative wing of the party) seem to tread on the very notions of individual freedom and liberty which the United States was based on. But that's a more general thought.


I'm a conservative, and I hate freedom.
Logged
CollectiveInterest
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 511


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 20, 2004, 08:16:26 PM »

You're about to see the most crushing defeat of an incumbent since 1980.

Republicans are gonna be speechless.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.068 seconds with 14 queries.