Who Will You Vote For in 2012?

[Big_Ro]

I, for the life of me, cannot figure out the fanatical loyalty that the black community has to the Democrat Party.

There is no such thing as the Democrat Party. this is an insulting formulation of the correct name Democratic Party. It’s name calling and uncharitable.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

I, for the life of me, cannot figure out the fanatical loyalty that the black community has to the Democrat Party.

The same goes, to great extent, for the Evangelicals, who are in the pocket of the GOP. Both parties have their “voting base” that’ll rarely change.

 

[JHow]

Yes precisely. By voting for McCain as their nominee they virtually guaranteed an Obama victory.

This analysis fails to give McCain enough credit for his own loss. I feel McCain was sunk the moment he put everything on hold to rush back and vote for the first “stimulus” package. That was a government spending love-in moment that signalled to voters “there’s really no difference in how the parties will govern”.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

The same goes, to great extent, for the Evangelicals, who are in the pocket of the GOP. Both parties have their “voting base” that’ll rarely change.

Actually, there has been some waivering in the Evangelical support of the GOP. The fundamentalist wing is entrenched, but some of the more liberal Evangelicals are breaking loose.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

There is no such thing as the Democrat Party. this is an insulting formulation of the correct name Democratic Party. It’s name calling and uncharitable.

For a statement to be considered uncharitable implies intent. Are you stipulating that I intended to insult anyone?

 

[JHow]

The same goes, to great extent, for the Evangelicals, who are in the pocket of the GOP. Both parties have their “voting base” that’ll rarely change.

Yes. And evangelicals can often be safely ignored by Republicans who can count on their votes.

I think voters should always be prepared to jump parties to follow your own objectives. Personally, however, I only cross voted once, and then a few years later the guy switched parties, so he really was more naturally aligned to my party anyway. In the primaries, the gloves should come off and one should definitely vote for the person that best represents you, even if they might not win. I think it sends a message.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

For a statement to be considered uncharitable implies intent. Are you stipulating that I intended to insult anyone?

I’d say no. Some Brits don’t like to be called Englishmen, some Italians don’t care for Eye-Tay, calling a black man a “moolie” is similar. The speaker doesn’t necessarily intent to insult by using such epithets.

But, there are those who refuse to use the correct adjective when referring to Democrats, and I think it’s those people who Big Ro is sore with.

 

[Ridgerunner]

There is no such thing as the Democrat Party. this is an insulting formulation of the correct name Democratic Party. It’s name calling and uncharitable.

No it isn’t.

When, as a very young fellow, I became a Democrat party worker, I was told most definitely by the party “warhorses” that it’s “Democrat Party”, not “Democratic Party”. It had to do with the profound belief that the party is a “party of Democrats”, which, at the time, was thought to denote a group of independent thinkers who nevertheless agreed on fundamental issues, rather than a group that would determine a “party line”, willy-nilly, by “democratic vote”. That might have been a localism, but if it was, it was pretty widespread.

I used the term “Democrat Party” then, and I have continued to do so, notwithstanding that it has fallen out of fashion and notwithstanding that I can no longer support the party in which I was a worker and an officeholder. I use the term, not in derision, but in honor of the old line party leaders, mostly now dead, who taught me “how to say it right”. Those folks were my political mentors and worthy of my respect, even now.

If that offends you, I regret that it does. But I’m not going to change the way I express it. I trust you are a sufficiently understanding person to realize that not all nomenclature ought to be viewed as offensive simply because some take it so.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

No it isn’t.

When, as a very young fellow, I became a Democrat party worker, I was told most definitely by the party “warhorses” that it’s “Democrat Party”, not “Democratic Party”. It had to do with the profound belief that the party is a “party of Democrats”, which, at the time, was thought to denote a group of independent thinkers who nevertheless agreed on fundamental issues, rather than a group that would determine a “party line”, willy-nilly, by “democratic vote”. That might have been a localism, but if it was, it was pretty widespread.

I used the term “Democrat Party” then, and I have continued to do so, notwithstanding that it has fallen out of fashion and notwithstanding that I can no longer support the party in which I was a worker and an officeholder. I use the term, not in derision, but in honor of the old line party leaders, mostly now dead, who taught me “how to say it right”. Those folks were my political mentors and worthy of my respect, even now.

If that offends you, I regret that it does. But I’m not going to change the way I express it. I trust you are a sufficiently understanding person to realize that not all nomenclature ought to be viewed as offensive simply because some take it so.

That is generally my view, since I was raised in Maine and every single person in my family was a Democrat. In fact, my aunt, who was in the state senate for many years, had me vote for her absentee when I was in the Navy. When she had me fill out my voter registration, I asked her “It says here that I have to check either Republican or Democrat”, to which she replied “We are Democrats NOT Republicans” To which I replied “What’s the difference?” To which she just scoweled and repeated “WE ARE NOT REPUBLICANS”. I actually had to ask my chief in the Navy what she was talking about. I’ve called it the Democrat party since then.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

That is generally my view, since I was raised in Maine and every single person in my family was a Democrat. In fact, my aunt, who was in the state senate for many years, had me vote for her absentee when I was in the Navy. When she had me fill out my voter registration, I asked her “It says here that I have to check either Republican or Democrat”, to which she replied “We are Democrats NOT Republicans” To which I replied “What’s the difference?” To which she just scoweled and repeated “WE ARE NOT REPUBLICANS”. I actually had to ask my chief in the Navy what she was talking about. I’ve called it the Democrat party since then.

Everyone calls it the democrat party. The news, newspapers…it’s the accepted name and even how it appears on ballots.

 

[JHow]

I always thought that it was the “Democratic Party” (adj.), but the politician, candidate, party member is a “Democrat” (noun). I have heard both “Democratic Party” and “Democrat Party”, but did not interpret the latter as a slur.

 

[mary_bobo]

There is no such thing as the Democrat Party. this is an insulting formulation of the correct name Democratic Party. It’s name calling and uncharitable.

I doubt that most people on this forum are using it to be insulting. But now that you mention it, the party is anything but democratic.

 

[Joe_5859]

Gilliam, what have you started?!?!? The election is 17 months away! We need to pace ourselves. That’s too long a period for us to sustain this level of discussion!

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

I doubt that most people on this forum are using it to be insulting. But now that you mention it, the party is anything but democratic.

Not at all, Mary. We are blacks, and whites, and Hispanics, and gays, and working men and women. We’re the party of Everyman and Everywoman. Wouldn’t think of being anything else but a part of it.

 

[Big_Ro]

No it isn’t.

When, as a very young fellow, I became a Democrat party worker, I was told most definitely by the party “warhorses” that it’s “Democrat Party”, not “Democratic Party”. It had to do with the profound belief that the party is a “party of Democrats”, which, at the time, was thought to denote a group of independent thinkers who nevertheless agreed on fundamental issues, rather than a group that would determine a “party line”, willy-nilly, by “democratic vote”. That might have been a localism, but if it was, it was pretty widespread.

I used the term “Democrat Party” then, and I have continued to do so, notwithstanding that it has fallen out of fashion and notwithstanding that I can no longer support the party in which I was a worker and an officeholder. I use the term, not in derision, but in honor of the old line party leaders, mostly now dead, who taught me “how to say it right”. Those folks were my political mentors and worthy of my respect, even now.

If that offends you, I regret that it does. But I’m not going to change the way I express it. I trust you are a sufficiently understanding person to realize that not all nomenclature ought to be viewed as offensive simply because some take it so.

Artful dodge. I have no way of proving or disproving your assertion. I’m am not a member of the Party. I just feel that forum rules should apply evenly to all. I would be as taken aback by someone using some of the oft used epithets for Republicans. I will give you the benefit of the doubt as a fellow Catholic and memebr of these forums, but I am not pursuaded by your assertion. Love and respect.

 

[MarysGirls]

We do not all march in lockstep as Catholics. There is an entire spectrum of concerns to the Catholic voter, a wide range of political figures that Catholics would choose or not choose. The Catholics in America aren’t a monolithic group. So, American Catholics will not all vote the same way. IMO.

I was not trying to suggest that we should all vote for the same person, but I guess it did sound that way, didn’t it?

Actually, what I was thinking (and how dare you not read my mind! ) was that it seems to me that as Catholics, we should vote for the candidate who agrees with Church teaching on the most issues, before we even consider what party they belong to.

When someone who is pro-abortion gets ellected, that tells me that some “Catholics” voted for him. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s my thoughts on the matter.

 

[Big_Ro]

Gilliam, what have you started?!?!? The election is 17 months away! We need to pace ourselves. That’s too long a period for us to sustain this level of discussion!

Yes, amen to that. Gilliam you provacatuer.

 

[Big_Ro]

Not at all, Mary. We are blacks, and whites, and Hispanics, and gays, and working men and women. We’re the party of Everyman and Everywoman. Wouldn’t think of being anything else but a part of it.

Ayn Rand wouldn’t approve Rich

 

[antonivs]

Ayn Rand wouldn’t approve Rich

She also didn’t approve of Christianity.

 

[MarysGirls]

People have tried to make that case, including myself. But there are some, on both sides of the isle, who are too married to their party to even consider this option.

All too true…

I, for one, am not a very political person. I claim to be neither Democratic nor Republican, and I have trouble telling the difference between the two most of the time. If I had to choose, I guess I would be Republican (no biting my head off now, Democrats! ) simply because there seem to be more pro-life Republicans than there are pro-life Democrats. But, I am a bit new to politics, and, as I’ve said before, could be wrong.