General Discussion

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)

5. Because "we" don't get to choose. Party leadership determines who will be allowed to run,

Tue Jun 5, 2012, 08:00 AM

Jun 2012

and they are almost exclusively rich and conservative and still mostly white.

As is most everything else in our country, our political system is collapsing under the strain of the increasing disconnect between the people and their representatives. Outside of Democratic boards like this, I haven't spoken (written) to anyone that was an enthusiastic supporter of the party since the 90's. The clear and growing majority feel abandoned and are holding their noses, closing their eyes and voting for the lesser.

Even in 2008, the enthusiasm was for Barack Obama and the promised change, not the party.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Pew Poll: republicans-older, whiter more conservative; Democrats-more liberal than ever and diverse [View all] pampango Jun 2012 OP

So if our party is so much more liberal than ever Pab Sungenis Jun 2012 #1

Yes. If we're so liberal... JHB Jun 2012 #2

The breakdown of congressional democrats is precisely as the poll says. joshcryer Jun 2012 #3

Yeah, and 98% of congressional Republicans.... BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #18

Which conservatives are you referring to? Skinner Jun 2012 #4

"Which conservatives are you referring to?" Pab Sungenis Jun 2012 #8

Oh. Skinner Jun 2012 #9

It's been a trend since 1988. Pab Sungenis Jun 2012 #14

Even after a quarter-century.... BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #30

My problem is not with Dukakis, who was an absolute failure, yes. Pab Sungenis Jun 2012 #32

Dukakis should have fired back "Yeah, I'm liberal and damn proud of it!" BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #35

Exactly. Pab Sungenis Jun 2012 #37

Well... BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #39

That's My Congress rates Reid as a moderate. joshcryer Jun 2012 #10

Folks like McCaskill, DiFi, Jim Webb, and Baucus. If they are even soft liberals then no wonder TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #24

Obama, Pelosi, Reid, & Wasserman-Shultz? BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #20

You see, this is the kind of shit that drives people out of the party. Pab Sungenis Jun 2012 #27

I understand, however... BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #28

If you understand, you won't drop that "would you rather" stuff on people. Pab Sungenis Jun 2012 #31

Even so, BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #36

Ummm... Pab Sungenis Jun 2012 #38

Pretty much. Pelosi excluded and she can wax limousine at times. TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #25

Because "we" don't get to choose. Party leadership determines who will be allowed to run, Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #5

Tell that to the Progressive Caucus, why don't ya. joshcryer Jun 2012 #7

And its durn conservatives... pinboy3niner Jun 2012 #11

Don't get me started about that muslin Keith Ellison! joshcryer Jun 2012 #12

You mean the 15% of House members that are universally ignored by the people that matter? Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #16

Apparently, there was no "ever" before the year 2000. surrealAmerican Jun 2012 #23

excellent point Blue_Tires Jun 2012 #33

Thankfully they'll all die off soon. joshcryer Jun 2012 #6

One big demographic is missing shawn703 Jun 2012 #13

I think the "older" thing is a bit misleading nxylas Jun 2012 #15

That, and most people tend to become more conservative as they get older... BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #21

That doesn't necessarily translate to Teabaggerism, though nxylas Jun 2012 #34

Maybe an interesting parallel in the global economy The2ndWheel Jun 2012 #40

I think they meant older than before, not older than Democrats. ieoeja Jun 2012 #41

This does not mean that people are becoming more conservative or liberal. harmonicon Jun 2012 #17

Conservative Coalition.... BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #19

And much more DUMB! dmosh42 Jun 2012 #22

maybe could term them the 're uneducated'- or -'reactives'- to fit with the 3 r's lunasun Jun 2012 #26

Okay, add "Retards" to the list of R's BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #29

Not cool nxylas Jun 2012 #42

Just speaking their language.... BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #43