Quote:
Originally Posted by EonBlue
(Post 19309821)
So are you trying to say that rich white people and lunatic fringe evangelicals make up the entire 48% of the US population that voted for them? You mean to say there are no rich white people or lunatic fringe evangelicals firmly entrenched in the Democrat camp? No racist Democrats? No voter suppression tactics used by Democrats? Is it really is just a Republicans = bad, Democrats = good view of the world for you? Would a one party state be more to your liking?
|
In so many words, yeah, that's what I'm saying. Mitt Romney only carried white males - most of whom are affluent, no doubt - and it is my contention that the Republican policy positions and rhetoric have succeeded in driving every other minority and plurality in the electorate out of the GOP camp, while Democratic rhetoric and policy positions have encouraged a much larger, much more viable electoral tent. This is simply true. Unless the GOP embraces a new American electorate, one in which the fastest growing cohort is one that they have sufficiently alienated to have assured Obama's this week?s victory, they are a party destined for the margins.
And really, in comparison with the bigotry that underlies many of the right-leaning stances on immigration, voter suppression, privacy rights for women, etc. etc., that shit is absurd and embarrassing. The Democratic party absolutely does not support that shit. And when Democratic leaders have extreme opinions forced upon them - remember Obama?s minister, Reverend Wright for example - they stand up and make the distinctions between those opinions and the party platform. Not so for the Tea Party fringe, or even for many maintream Republicans. Mitt Romney refused to repudiate his support for Richard Mourdock after that provocative little statement that equated rape with divine purpose in Indiana. But the voters of Indiana reputiated Richard Mourdock. And the voters nationwide repudiated Mitt Romney.
Quote:
Seriously. Nothing is that cut-and-dry and you can't project your disdain for the Republicans onto everyone in the entire country. Not every Republican supporter is a rich, white, evangelical teabagger who hates blacks, women, hispanics, gays and kittens.
|
Yeah, but we're not talking about the entire country here, are we? I do indeed have little regard for the Republican party as a whole. It has embraced what it believes to be a philosophy against high taxation and government intervention at all points that it equates with liberty. I see instead greed and selfishness and a disregard for the responsibilities of citizenship. Furthermore, the Republican party has made no efforts to divorce itself from the statements of those in its ranks who would be so extreme and absurd as to maintan a ridiculous, infantile argument against the citizenship of a president with whom they disagree. It has failed to respond forcefully when some of those attacks have ventured into statements that are overtly racist and xenophobic. Until this party begins to evoke any core value with which I can treat seriously, I will regard it as an intellectual and political black hole and I will say so willingly.
I mean, it's pretty obvious my politics would require a contempt for the Republican party and its positions, as I am sure the Republican party would have contempt for my party affiliations and positions. So fucking what?
Quote:
And sure people can go ahead and vote for whoever the hell they please. The problem is that are too many low information voters out there who have no idea what is in their best interest but just vote based on identity politics. The number one thing that is in everyone's best interest right now is solving the fiscal crisis.
|
Oh, really? Wow. You really are something else. Seems to me that you're the one who would prefer a one-party state. Thank God we have Eonblue here to let us all know what's in our best interest. I'll tell you what buddy, why don't you draw up an aptitude test that we can administer to voters to tell whether or not they are capable of casting the correct vote. You could devise the questions and judge the answers. And so improve the American electorate that the outcomes would certainly not cause you the frustration that you currently endure. Our collective gratitude would ensue, no doubt.
Why bother with the entire democratic dynamic? Better for all of us if you and those like-minded but otherwise thwarted observers of the American experiment could be engaged to make the decision for us, since you seem to have a direct pipeline to our best interests. That would certainly achieve a better result than the process of government of the people, by the people and for the people. It?s about time we got rid of that weakass bullshit, anyway.
