How to fix the Democrats?

[Qikdraw]

Both Republicans & Democrats can answer in here, but please lets keep cross party politics out of here. But what do you think would help the Democrats win more votes? What policies do you want the Democrats to push on?

And please, keep it civil.

Qikdraw

[Qikdraw]

Both Republicans & Democrats can answer in here, but please lets keep cross party politics out of here. But what do you think would help the Democrats win more votes? What policies do you want the Democrats to push on?

And please, keep it civil.

Qikdraw

[NudeAl]

To return to a point that is nearer the center.

IMHO they have leaned too far to the left in order to garner more votes from the extremists but they have done so at a cost, alienating themselves from their traditional base the average, working class, blue collar, voter who has to live in the real world. I think they should return to their traditional roots and stop pandering to those on the far left it dosen't help their cause and it will only continue to alienate them from the vast majority of voters.

But hey what do I know?

I think they may have moved left somewhat but not as much as it looks compared to how far right the Republicans have gone. It creates an optical illusion. The gap has widened but shifted to the right.

That makes Democratic views look more radical than they really are I think. So maybe this can't be corrected without the Republicans also shifting back closer to center.

[NudeAl]

Yes I think you may be right.

It seems we are in another one of those times in history in which no one wants to find middle ground. I mentioned in another thread I would like to see someone like McCain elected President as he is considered a moderate in his party. There in lies the problem his party would not nomiante him.

[Qikdraw]

For me I think the Democrats need to grow a pair of balls and be an opposition party not an appeasment party. Too many democrats have supported things that hurt the American people. (the Bankruptcy Bill for example) They are also trying to reach the Republican voters, which is a mistake.

The democrats need to find a few key issues and stick with them. Take some pages out of republican books and have people saying the same things all the time.

They need to stand up and fight, not back down. I'm really disappointed in the democrats these days. I had hoped Dean would put in some backbone, but he hasn't. They're still doing the same things they have been for the past few years. If this continues they may lose more seats in 2006.

Qikdraw

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NudeAl:
Yes I think you may be right.

It seems we are in another one of those times in history in which no one wants to find middle ground. I mentioned in another thread I would like to see someone like McCain elected President as he is considered a moderate in his party. There in lies the problem his party would not nomiante him. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, they would never nominate him and he's a good guy. I wouldn't mind seeing him in office. Many times he's tried to compromise between the two extreme views.

It's just a shame the Republicans feel they can't nominate someone that moderate.

[Croydon]

Democrats need to pay more attention to minority voters, especially African Americsns.

Although, I voted for Kerry, I never liked him. One of the things that turmed me off about Kerry is his lack of knowledge of issues important to minoirties and his indifference to minorities.

All too often, dem politicians take minority voters for granted, often giving them little attention because they believe they already have the minority votes. WRONG WRONG WRONG.

Kerry, although, received most votes among minorities, he lost a significant amount of traditional minority votes that went to Bush. In fact, Bush had an increase in number of minorities voting for him.

Latinos are more likely to vote republican and many African americans voted for Bush. In addition, many African Americans are becoming more educated and their wealth increasing...the result: more African americans voting republican.

case in point: Dems should not be so quick to believe that the minorities will always vote for them.

[Nude in the North]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But what do you think would help the Democrats win more votes? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


And I was going to suggest my Veterinarian.

She did a great job "fixing" my dog.

Steve

[blackrebel]

Too late Croydon, too many of us who are black have learned to ingore the Dem party. There us a groundswell of blacks, like myself, who are Reps and are not going back. As we educate the black population of who we are as Reps, they think twice about voting Dem again. For too long the Rep party has not courted the black community. The difference is that the Rep party lays their views on the line and the Dems make promises of move welfare to buy votes. Reps have allowed the Dems to lie about who WE are in the Rep party and when I take party away and talk solutions, many blacks love the solutions. THEN they find out that the solutions are Rep based and see that they Dems are not looking our for our interests and are just giving lip service. Our best point is that Dems run the schools and the inner cities and these places have become havens for crime and drugs. Our schools are Dem run and all you have are lower and lower standards, and every effort to keep higher standards off the table. Dems have failed inner city blacks and thrive on keeping them ignorant and without education.

Liberal white media bends over backwards to keep blacks who are conservative off the television. Hell, we can not even be one-on-one in a simple debate on television, not even on black television shows because they know that black Reps would take 10-20% of the black vote with them.

I listen to the Dem party and as long as I see Michael Moore, Striesand, Hollywood left, Hip-Hop stars, and socialists running their party, I chuckle and move on the something of more substance, usually the Powerpuff Girls cartoon hits the spot.

[Qikdraw]

Blackrebel

While I respect your views, can you please keep this on topic instead of adding political commentary?

Thanks,

Qikdraw

[Hooked]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by blackrebel:
Too late Croydon, too many of us who are black have learned to ingore the Dem party. There us a groundswell of blacks, like myself, who are Reps and are not going back. As we educate the black population of who we are as Reps, they think twice about voting Dem again. For too long the Rep party has not courted the black community. The difference is that the Rep party lays their views on the line and the Dems make promises of move welfare to buy votes. Reps have allowed the Dems to lie about who WE are in the Rep party and when I take party away and talk solutions, many blacks love the solutions. THEN they find out that the solutions are Rep based and see that they Dems are not looking our for our interests and are just giving lip service. Our best point is that Dems run the schools and the inner cities and these places have become havens for crime and drugs. Our schools are Dem run and all you have are lower and lower standards, and every effort to keep higher standards off the table. Dems have failed inner city blacks and thrive on keeping them ignorant and without education.

Liberal white media bends over backwards to keep blacks who are conservative off the television. Hell, we can not even be one-on-one in a simple debate on television, not even on black television shows because they know that black Reps would take 10-20% of the black vote with them.

I listen to the Dem party and as long as I see Michael Moore, Striesand, Hollywood left, Hip-Hop stars, and socialists running their party, I chuckle and move on the something of more substance, usually the Powerpuff Girls cartoon hits the spot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, that's an interesting POV, to say the most.

[Croydon]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by blackrebel:
Too late Croydon, too many of us who are black have learned to ingore the Dem party. There us a groundswell of blacks, like myself, who are Reps and are not going back. As we educate the black population of who we are as Reps, they think twice about voting Dem again. For too long the Rep party has not courted the black community. The difference is that the Rep party lays their views on the line and the Dems make promises of move welfare to buy votes. Reps have allowed the Dems to lie about who WE are in the Rep party and when I take party away and talk solutions, many blacks love the solutions. THEN they find out that the solutions are Rep based and see that they Dems are not looking our for our interests and are just giving lip service. Our best point is that Dems run the schools and the inner cities and these places have become havens for crime and drugs. Our schools are Dem run and all you have are lower and lower standards, and every effort to keep higher standards off the table. Dems have failed inner city blacks and thrive on keeping them ignorant and without education.

Liberal white media bends over backwards to keep blacks who are conservative off the television. Hell, we can not even be one-on-one in a simple debate on television, not even on black television shows because they know that black Reps would take 10-20% of the black vote with them.

I listen to the Dem party and as long as I see Michael Moore, Striesand, Hollywood left, Hip-Hop stars, and socialists running their party, I chuckle and move on the something of more substance, usually the Powerpuff Girls cartoon hits the spot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, that's an interesting POV, to say the most. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, it is interesting, hence why I am laughing. A black person identifying themselves as republican is like the unpopular girl in school trying SOOOOOO HARD to be a part of the popular crowd when the popular crowd have made it clear they do not want you.

[Ren]

Excuse me - I'm white, I'm straight, was raised Christian, am male, grew up working class, and went to a great college. I should be Bill O'Reilly, right? But instead I'm very liberal. This will seem simplistic, but needs to be said, black people are allowed to be Republican. Let's not stereotype, please.

The Dems are pretty centrist as it is; the Repubs have pushed far right. I think getting Howard Dean in there is the right move in order to hold a mirror up to the Republicans and show us what they're really made of.

I think the question is misguided. If you want this to move to a new topic, by all means, but some food for thought right now.

It's the system that needs fixing --- more parties or at least more representation of the parties in the public sphere. Then more voices would be heard, etc etc. I'm neither Repub nor Dem, so neither party reflects me to a tee. Don't I deserve at least a voice, as do libertarians, moderates, and so on?

Thus, there should be (at least, though more is acceptible) percentage representation of political parties and views as well as based on population makeup (ie. more women than men, more blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native-American representation).

Also, there should be term limits for all public offices so people will not be entrenched and will actually be jazzed to serve in the now rather than looking to the next election. And lobbying and corporations should be moved out of the political sphere and people should base decisions on rights and evidence.

Until those changes are made, we'll just be getting more of the same. And more of the same again.

[KirkOntario]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
Blackrebel

While I respect your views, can you please keep this on topic instead of adding political commentary?

Thanks,

Qikdraw </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rebel isn't off topic at all. In fact, he's bang on with what's wrong with the democratic party and why they are beng deserted by Americans.

[NudeAl]

Blackrebel
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I listen to the Dem party and as long as I see Michael Moore, Striesand, Hollywood left, Hip-Hop stars, and socialists running their party, I chuckle and move on the something of more substance, usually the Powerpuff Girls cartoon hits the spot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I couldn't have said it better myself. This is my point exactly as long as the party continues to align itself with the far left and every Hollywood big mouth they will lose. It's simple really, do they want to get the votes and get back in the White House or not? If they do then go back to what works, traditional blue collar working class ethics. The things that got them where they are today.

[Qikdraw]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Rebel isn't off topic at all. In fact, he's bang on with what's wrong with the democratic party and why they are beng deserted by Americans. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Kirk

If you are not going to contribute to the topic, please do not post.

Rebel did go off topic with some of his post. I had asked in my original post to please not put in cross party politics, he did, so I asked him to refrain from doing so.

Qikdraw

[Bob S.]

Both parties need to move back to the center. As of now, both are getting too extreme for my tastes.

The Democrats need to get over the past. 2000 is over. They could have easily won the White House in 2004 but the platform they used was empty save for the ABB banner (Anybody but Bush).

As for picking candidates, I think the wrong one was picked, but this is something that could be fixed in both parties. The way it goes right now, the caucases and primaries are held in such a way that the last ones are useless and the first ones are the ones that mean the most. We basically have a handful of states, and therefore, an extremely small percent of the population, picking who will be on the ballot.

I think that all primaries should be held at once or that the results be kept secret until all votes are in. This way, the candidates would have to sell themselves more on the public stage.

The population as a whole needs to come to terms with the idea of sacrifice. We want everything and the government is irresponsibly wanting to give it to us. Spending needs to be cut back by a lot. Congress should adopt a kosher diet and stop indulging in pork. Also it seems the Congress is adopting the contradictory traditional ideas from both parties: spend and cut taxes. I would prefer that we cut both.

Bob S.

[Bob S.]

Kirk

If you are not going to contribute to the topic, please do not post.

He did contribute to the topic. He backed rebel up.

"Rebel did go off topic with some of his post. I had asked in my original post to please not put in cross party politics, he did, so I asked him to refrain from doing so."

Qik, you stated in your message that Both Republicans & Democrats can answer in here but you do not want Republicans to contribute? rebel was giving you an answer to your title question of how to fix the Democrats. He was giving a list of gripes that he has with them as a representative of a group whom the Democrats have always said to champion and rely on to vote for them.

Please accept constructive criticism about your party. Only with that can you grow as a party.

Bob S.

[Qikdraw]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Liberal white media bends over backwards to keep blacks who are conservative off the television. Hell, we can not even be one-on-one in a simple debate on television, not even on black television shows because they know that black Reps would take 10-20% of the black vote with them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is not constructive criticism, that is party politics. That is what I am asking to stop.

Its not that hard.

Qikdraw

[KirkOntario]

Sorry your topic IS about parties and politics.

[Trailscout]

Jobs for working folks!
Probably achieved by:
fair trade (not free trade)
Regaining control of our borders
Stopping American business from hiring illegals
fighting the "Outsourcing of America" (Google to Lou Dobbs' investigative journalism.
Also check out: http://www.techsunite.org/

Reasonable accomodation of nudists at beaches and public recreation areas

Clean, cheap, abundant renewable energy
Solar, wind, biofuels, hydropower, geothermal power needs to be brought into mass production.
Support public transit systems and bring back rail as the primary means of moving freight cross-continent.

Environmentalism
Preserve agricultural areas from commercial and residential development with tax incentives and by other means.
Guard our nation's streams, lakes and rivers
Strict environmental laws for manufacturers, tariffs on goods from countries that don't have such laws.
Strive for ZPG, (zero population growth) through incentives and by mandatory means if necessary.
Mandate sustained yield of commercial forest land, defend wilderness areas. Protect species diversity by conservation in all its forms.

Simply the nation's tax code. It can be revenue neutral and still save taxpayers money because the cost of accounting is reduced. Check out the new Fair Tax book by Boortz and Linder!

[hm0504]

Great platform Trailscout; good luck with your run at the Presidency in 2008!

[Bob S.]

"Strive for ZPG, (zero population growth) through incentives and by mandatory means if necessary."

Why Trail? How does a falling population help the economy? SS would absolutely have to be overhauled if that were the case. And what do you mean "by mandatory means if possible"? That sounds scary. How would you choose who doesn't procreate? Do you want to look to China for inspiration?

Bob S.

[MJ_KC]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NudeAl:
To return to a point that is nearer the center.

IMHO they have leaned too far to the left in order to garner more votes from the extremists but they have done so at a cost, alienating themselves from their traditional base the average, working class, blue collar, voter who has to live in the real world. I think they should return to their traditional roots and stop pandering to those on the far left it dosen't help their cause and it will only continue to alienate them from the vast majority of voters.

But hey what do I know? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The whole Sheehan mess has really made me question whether I want to remain a registered Democrat. I can't understand why the Democratic party needs to associate itself with the anti-war groups.

The Democratic party needs to get behind President Bush and support the Iraq war and the efforts against terrorism. Too often the Democratic party looks to be weak and not willing to fight for American interests. The party leadership can't even agree that our current war effort is worthwhile, so they speak against it with no real ideas to present as an alternative course of action.

[KirkOntario]

Here's one reason Democrats fail to resonate with voters: being unfriendlyt towards religion. Unlike Canada, the United States is a much more religious country than ours is. The democrats must do better at being faith-friendly.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,167881,00.html

"Fewer people see Democrats as friendly to religion now than felt that way a year ago, according to a poll released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

That number has dropped from 40 percent in August 2004 who thought the Democrats were friendly to religion to 29 percent now."

[Hooked]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Here's one reason Democrats fail to resonate with voters: being unfriendlyt towards religion. Unlike Canada, the United States is a much more religious country than ours is. The democrats must do better at being faith-friendly.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,167881,00.html

"Fewer people see Democrats as friendly to religion now than felt that way a year ago, according to a poll released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

That number has dropped from 40 percent in August 2004 who thought the Democrats were friendly to religion to 29 percent now." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm probably going to regret this but down here in Texas, whenever I've heard someone being racist or otherwise ugly about another group, ESPECIALLY MUSLIMS and MIDDLE EASTERNERS, it has hands down, 99.99% of the time been coming from the mouth of a Republican. And during the aftermath of 9/11 and the War on Terror, this was not an uncommon thing to hear at college forums, on the street and around the dining table. So, in my experience, Republicans are only faith-friendly to members of their own faith. Furthermore, I don't think I've ever heard of a Democrat bashing a religious group. If by faith-friendly, you mean passing laws based on interpretations of the Bible or letting a radical religious group bully a minority group into submission (Naturally California comes to mind) then I praise GOD, ALLAH, BRAHMA and ZEUS that the Democrats are not like that.

[KirkOntario]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked: I don't think I've ever heard of a Democrat bashing a religious group. . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahhh... you never heard democrats talking about Christians or the Catholic Church?

[Hooked]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked: I don't think I've ever heard of a Democrat bashing a religious group. . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahhh... you never heard democrats talking about Christians or the Catholic Church? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As a politcal platform, no. Never.

[Boreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Here's one reason Democrats fail to resonate with voters: being unfriendlyt towards religion. Unlike Canada, the United States is a much more religious country than ours is. The democrats must do better at being faith-friendly.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,167881,00.html

"Fewer people see Democrats as friendly to religion now than felt that way a year ago, according to a poll released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

That number has dropped from 40 percent in August 2004 who thought the Democrats were friendly to religion to 29 percent now." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

First, I am glad that Canadian politics has a hands off approach to religion.

So, it is okay to be perceived as catering to the religious right?

From your article link: "A majority of political independents, 54 percent, said religious conservatives have too much influence over the GOP. Fewer than half of independents said those who are not religious have too much impact on the Democratic Party."

[jon71]

Democrats are not hostile to Christians whether Catholic of Protestant. The difference is we don't cozy up to con artists and satanists like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell like the republicans do. They're welcome to them.

[roadrambler2]

Whats the old expression--"IF IT AIN'T BROKE DONT' FIX IT "
Run Well and Smooth---Roadrambler

[Nu]

Kudos to Qikdraw for starting this thread and the related "How to fix the Republicans".

At this point, the "How to fix the Democrats" has 30 replies and 316 views.
The "How to fix the Republicans" thread has 22 replies and 212 views.

Can we infer that the Democrats need more fixing?

[hm0504]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Still_Boreas:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Here's one reason Democrats fail to resonate with voters: being unfriendlyt towards religion. Unlike Canada, the United States is a much more religious country than ours is. The democrats must do better at being faith-friendly.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,167881,00.html

"Fewer people see Democrats as friendly to religion now than felt that way a year ago, according to a poll released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

That number has dropped from 40 percent in August 2004 who thought the Democrats were friendly to religion to 29 percent now." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

First, I am glad that Canadian politics has a hands off approach to religion.

So, it is okay to be perceived as catering to the religious right?

From your article link: "A majority of political independents, 54 percent, said religious conservatives have too much influence over the GOP. Fewer than half of independents said those who are not religious have too much impact on the Democratic Party." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately, the Canadian tradition of keeping politics and religion separate may have ended now that social conservatives dominate the Conservative party. What Canada (and the U.S.) desperately need is an alternative to the Liberals and Democrats that is not beholden to the religious right.

[Baron Lake]

Kirk, perhaps if both parties were to be hostile to religion we would be better served. I suggest any list of human institutions causing more death, destruction, pain, ignorance and biggotry than Religion would prove to be very short.
Gentle folk like Jon71 may say the moral failures of religion can be blamed on the excesses of "leaders" like Robertson et al. Maybe so, but religion is their tool and with it they've dug some nasty potholes in the road.
b.l.

[hm0504]

I believe that political parties need not be hostile to religion, but because religion is such a powerful force in society, that a true democracy must, in practice, separate church and state.

[usuallylurk]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:

I'm probably going to regret this but down here in Texas, whenever I've heard someone being racist or otherwise ugly about another group, ESPECIALLY MUSLIMS and MIDDLE EASTERNERS, it has hands down, 99.99% of the time been coming from the mouth of a Republican. And during the aftermath of 9/11 and the War on Terror, this was not an uncommon thing to hear at college forums, on the street and around the dining table. So, in my experience, Republicans are only faith-friendly to members of their own faith. Furthermore, I don't think I've ever heard of a Democrat bashing a religious group. If by faith-friendly, you mean passing laws based on interpretations of the Bible or letting a radical religious group bully a minority group into submission (Naturally California comes to mind) then I praise GOD, ALLAH, BRAHMA and ZEUS that the Democrats are not like that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You forgot their attitude in Texas toward the French. Texas has been a joke in France for so many years, so now the Texans make fun of the French.

Don't ask me why.....

[smoothm]

I don't believe that either party should shy away from religious principle. If fact, embracing certain principles could even lower some of the coruption in both parties. I do not believe that the Founding Fathers meant to keep their own religious principles out of government. They just wanted to ensure that the government was no respector of any one faith.

[Boreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Unfortunately, the Canadian tradition of keeping politics and religion separate may have ended now that social conservatives dominate the Conservative party. What Canada (and the U.S.) desperately need is an alternative to the Liberals and Democrats that is not beholden to the religious right. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That may be so, up to a point. I do think our two cultures have some significant differences. One is that Canadians don't accept the possibility of the religious right being involved in politics. Otherwise, the Reform Party or now the current Conservative party would have had a better chance of being elected long ago. I think that the perception that religion drives these parties scares people away.

As I understand it, the US was founded in part by some very conservative religious groups (ie Puritans) and that is a critical difference. Our consititutions and societies are also fairly significantly different too.

I would be very surprised to see Canada being influenced so dramatically by the religious right. Not to say it wouldn't happen though!

I think I have just veered into another topic and away from the posted topic! http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif I just did need to comment about this though.

[Trailscout]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bob S.:
"Strive for ZPG, (zero population growth) through incentives and by mandatory means if necessary."

Why Trail? How does a falling population help the economy? SS would absolutely have to be overhauled if that were the case. And what do you mean "by mandatory means if possible"? That sounds scary. How would you choose who doesn't procreate? Do you want to look to China for inspiration?

Bob S. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bob,

Zero population growth is not the same as a falling population plan such as China has by law or some European countries have by reason of lower birthrate.

Two or in some cases, three children per family would achieve ZPG.

This topic alarms some people because of it is an abbridgement of their liberty to reproduce. But in every such debate, there is the argument that your freedom to do "X" impairs my freedom to do "Y".

Every child someone brings into this world will make demands of the natural resources of the world.

First we should decide what is the carrying capacity of the United States to sustain human life with no loss of environmental quality, including no loss of species diversity of all forms of life.

When we reach that population level, then we maintain it by ZPG, either voluntarily or involuntarily.

[Hooked]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nu:
Kudos to Qikdraw for starting this thread and the related "How to fix the Republicans".

At this point, the "How to fix the Democrats" has 30 replies and 316 views.
The "How to fix the Republicans" thread has 22 replies and 212 views.

Can we infer that the Democrats need more fixing? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hahahaha! good one

[usuallylurk]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hooked:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nu:
Kudos to Qikdraw for starting this thread and the related "How to fix the Republicans".

At this point, the "How to fix the Democrats" has 30 replies and 316 views.
The "How to fix the Republicans" thread has 22 replies and 212 views.

Can we infer that the Democrats need more fixing? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hahahaha! good one </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How about electing them to the Senate and House? That way they can effectively change things....

[smoothm]

IMHO:Unfortunately, what is wrong isn't about which party needs to be fixed. It is obvious to me that the country needs fixed because neither party is willing to give enough to take care of the issues. John Adams must be spinning in his grave along with the rest of the original nation builders.

Why do we constantly have to polarize everything? Wouldn't a more productive thread be about finding what we have in common and working out our problems from that point?

According to the Constitution, I have all of the qualifications of a Supreme Court Justice. If I were one, many of these "national issues" would be thrown right back to the states to work out. Maybe then the Federal Government could set its collective sight on national health, social security, poverty, terrorism, and protecting our borders. There must be a concensus solution to each, but no one seems willing to find one, no one wants real dialog, everyone (from both sides of the house) wants to blame the other.

The USA needs to get a life!

I am so grateful that we can discuss theses kinds of problems here in this forum, now we just need to focus on solving the problems, we've done enough on describing them.