All you b*tching about Bush, It is YOUR fault he is in office. You chose frinking Kerry???? I mean really what did you THINK was gonna happen? You'd WIN? LOL Get a platform and get a candidate like Biden. You pick Hillary and the GOP could run a dog and win....I mean sh*t they beat you running a chimp...TWICE
2006-08-22
08:04:59
·
23 answers
·
asked by
mymadsky
6
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
That is not a plan. A plan tells HOW you are going to do something! Don't you even know that?
2006-08-22
08:12:43 ·
update #1
Does Dean need to go back to ninth grade civic class to learn what a platform is. It is a plan, a plan tells HOW you are going to accomplish your goals. GOD.. you people sound like Bush yesterday and is "statagy vs tactics"
2006-08-22
08:16:14 ·
update #2
Jim W
You stupidly open you fu ckin pie hole about things you don't understand...and that pis ses me off. Get over it crybaby.
2006-08-22
08:24:15 ·
update #3
Yes, and that move with Kerry is what drove me from the party. NO MORE LESSER OF TWO EVILS! I will be voting my conscience from now on...libertarian
2006-08-22 08:11:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by hichefheidi 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Actually I'd blame the people that believed the lies. It doesn't matter which Dem gets the nomination, they'll be bashed like never before. The people who believe everything the "right" tell them and continue to this day bash Kerry on his war record, voting record, and other issues are to blame. The next dem nominee will go through the same thing and it doesn't matter which one it is. They'll even find a way to bash Obama and get the idiots to believe something retarded like he hates America. What bunch of looney "kool aid drinkers"...
2006-08-22 08:26:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
you may desire to be extremely ignorant to no longer comprehend that the undesirable Republican rules that were in consequence for years crashed the economic gadget. If the Obama administration must be blamed for something this is for no longer vigorously pursuing corrective measures that are solid sufficient to dodge the form of destiny crumple. The regulatory framework must be bolstered, alongside with enforcement. The tax decrease extensions for the wealthiest must be eradicated. Wall street and the remainder of the economic marketplace can’t be allowed to run amok lower back and create needed instability. the government, on behalf of the people, must be conscious of the financial situation and to take corrective action whilst bubbles and different doubtlessly risky financial circumstances are obvious. Lax regulation, deregulation and trickle-down are undesirable rules that contributed to undesirable effects. in case you don’t learn from the previous you will help rules that could have an identical undesirable effects.
2016-12-14 09:56:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
If it wasn't for Perot, Clinton would have been the sacraficial lamb set up to lose against Bush Sr. for term two. Clinton didn't win that election, he just didn't lose it.
The dems don't have a platform that sells to middle america. They abandoned all hope when they decided to forsake all things conservative in the 1960s and mandate that all democratic candidates pledge allegiance to the DNC socialist dogma.
They seem certain that it was liberal america that got them to the White House in 1992, and 1996, while losing ground in the house and senate. It was because moderate, middle of the road americans voted for Perot as an alternative to the same old conservative candidates or the liberal "hippies" who don't represent american values.
The funny thing is listening to Democrats congratulate themselves on winning both houses... they are forgetting the elections aren't until November and the Democratic candidates only campaign platform to date is "We're not Bush." That will only go so far, people want answers.
2006-08-22 08:31:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
While I don't agree with all of your points, I do think that the DNC is responsible for their own losses. At times of war, people will not vote for people that are perceived to be weak on defense.
This puts them in a paradox. If they run more anti-war cooks like John Kerry, their base is happy, but they will loose. If they run somebody that is strong on defense, like Lieberman or Zell Miller, then their base is unhappy and they can't win. Quite a pickle they have gotten into.
2006-08-22 08:15:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by Aegis of Freedom 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The "life Issues" such as using Terry Schaivo's body for shameless political gain,is now costing the Republicans DEARLY.
After you see the 6-point plan at dnc.org,consider others who claim that "dems have no plan".
Consider this:
From: mymadsky
Subject: Re: Pollution question
Message: I ******* interned for the Florida DNR for eight ******* months in the everglades. Once again you open your pie hole about something you know nothing about based on your own BS stereotypical views you really do not care about FACTS do you?
well my my my.
Is this all you have? rage?"Sh*"?. Please!
This is what conservatives are stuck with.
Time has run out on neo-con uptopia.
Like George Will,David Broduer,and Pat Buchanon have all agreed on,2006 could very well be another 1974 for Republicans,at least to minimize damage incurred by Bush.
For my country' sake,its about time.
2006-08-22 08:12:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
We would have won if it hadn't been for the people of Ohio and all of the Christian fundamentalists who let their ministry tell them how to vote. I still don't understand how you can watch your state economy go into the dirt like that and not care. I think people have finally had enough now, though. Matter of fact, I think if you could oust a President the way California can oust their politicians, Bush would be history by now.
2006-08-22 08:14:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by Okkieneko 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
You raise an excellent point and I think it's true. The DNC is run by rabid lefties like Howard Dean and the people they put up for election are too radical for most people.
2006-08-22 08:13:08
·
answer #8
·
answered by Sean 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Finally someone who agrees with me about the DNC. They need to get a platform and a good candidate to win.
2006-08-22 08:11:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by redhotboxsoxfan 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
As a former Democrat I agree with the premise of your statement. Democratic candidates are usually FAR left wing, hate men (this includes Kerry, Edwards), hates business. and life.
The Life issues are tearing them up at the polls. Voters (people) simply see through their lies.
2006-08-22 08:12:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by Lives7 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The DNC is out of touch following their loony base. They now how to sling mudd and *****,but couldn't plan a fart festival. They hate America way to much to be in charge of it. It's all about money and power anyway. They don't have it and want it.
2006-08-22 08:16:18
·
answer #11
·
answered by John S 1
·
1⤊
0⤋