What issue should us Democrats drop?

[nickshepDEM]

Poll question: What issue should us Democrats drop?

If you were asked by someone high up in the Democratic party which issue should us Democrats drop to help become more competitive nationwide which would you choose and why?

Why?

[wyldwolf]

1. If someone held a gun to my head and made me choose one..

..it would be further gun control.

Why? Seems to be the one I could live with best. But I would do so under protest.

[Toots]

6. Yes if a gun was held to my head I would be against gun control..

:crazy:

[wyldwolf]

10. well, the question was...

..what issue would you give up, not which issue you would be against.

[Goldmund]

53. LOL took them words right outta my mouth

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lonestarnot]

2. I voted for gun control but I say even that should not be dropped... don't

give up any issues! Semiauto, fully autos should not be in the hands of children!

[Silverhair]

34. Full-autos have been very tightly regulated since 1934, and...

not even a flintlock should be in the hands of unsupervised children. Note that I said unsupervised. Teaching a child proper gun safety and use under strict supervision is OK with me. I learned to shoot and hunt at age 11.

[nickshepDEM]

3. I say Gun-control and Free trade.

Alot of Americans dont like anyone tampering with their second amendment rights and for that sole reason vote Republican. In races where the Democrat has come out against gun-control we have done very well (see: Schweitzer in Montana and Warner in Virginia). I also think us Democrats should unite behind FAIR TRADE and speak out against FREE TRADE. Most Americans used to look at the Democrats as the party that would never sell them or their jobs out to large corporations and foreign interests, but thats all changed. Now that we have become more lenient on FREE trade people look at us and Republicans as one and the same on issues like jobs...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. Free trade

which is hurting and exploiting workers of all nations, and benfitting only corporations. I know several businesses around here that have gone under because of imports from free trade zones-they would be interested in any party that wants to protect American businesses and jobs.

[BornaDem]

5. Gun control because it's a proven loser.

[Toots]

7. What if the issue were Gun safety?

Why must we use their terminology? The issue is safety, not control. Why do so few here at DU not understand this very basic concept?

[BornaDem]

15. You can call it anything you want to call it, as long as the NRA...

GOA, etc. exist, gun control is a proven loser and will only cost more losses. The true believers VOTE on the basis of this ONE issue; the people you can influence by a PR campaign pretending its something else by calling it with another name, don't (at least they are not ONE ISSUE voters and this won't make them into that.)

[Silverhair]

35. Because the gun grabbers would still try to pass the same laws.

Just because you change the name does not mean that those who want to keep their guns are going to be fooled. They will still see what the legislation does and what it doesn't do, and for many of us, that will be the issue that make the difference. It wasn't for me as I am not a single issue voter, but lots of NRA people are.

[sandnsea]

37. Because too many Democrats INSIST on helping the right

They just can't help themselves when it's about their precious guns and the "gun grabbers". :eyes:

[imenja]

40. Gun control has long since been banished from public discourse

It was never mentioned in the presidential election. The semi-automatic weapons ban lapsed with little attention.
Arguing that Democrats need to abandon gun control makes about as much sense as suggesting they should abandon universal day care. They never talk about it. Most politicians simply lack the political will or moral conviction to take action that might protect citizens against gun violence. The NRA has far to much power. Even those on terrorist watch lists are free to purchase semi-automatic weapons. Why should they try to prevent gun violence when there is so much money to be made from private prisons that house felons?

[Mountainman]

8. Until we control the message it doesn't matter much

We could be 100% against gun control but the message is that liberals want to take guns away. We can't change the message because we don't control the message.

We are defined by the right.

[Smarmie Doofus]

9. You should have included "oppostion to the war in Iraq";

Any votes for dropping this?

[Smarmie Doofus]

11. I wouldn't drop either gay marriage or pro-choice....

But I see room for principled, nuanced wiggle room on both issues.

[Guaranteed]

12. For God's sake, gun control, PLEASE. nt

[Mr.Green93]

13. Nothing.

Everything is starting to turn our way.

[Donailin]

14. I'm voting for gun control

cause like, I'm thinking we may need those guns if we continue on this mad course the country is on

[Discord]

16. I picked Gay Marraige.

Take "civil unions" with the same principled rights and move on.

We lost a shitload of votes because of the sticking point of calling it marraige. If you want rights. They offered it in the way of civil unions. but that just wasn't good enough. This has been reported in many swing states as being the number one reason many swing voters voted Republican.

[wallock]

21. Separate but equal?

Sounds familiar.... maybe we should give the gays their own water fountain too. We start dropping issues like this and we are no longer democrats.

[Orangepeel]

27. the concept of "separate but equal" was struck down in the courts

not the legislature.

(Welcome to DU, wallock :hi:)

I am a firm believer in gay marriage. But I also believe that the civil unions should be legalized first. Why?

1) because civil unions will provide some benefits to gays and lesbians where now they have none. Some is not as good as all, but is it a lot better than none.

2) because it's a fight we can win. most people in the country already think that gays and lesbians should be able to have civil unions. it is just the word "marriage" that people get stuck on. It's stupid, but it is reality.

3) I believe that legalized civil unions would make it EASIER to win recognition of gay marriage. There will be courts (those not packed too tightly with right wing appointees) who use the idea of separate but equal as a precedent for saying that marriage has to be recognized. Right now, there is no "separate" for them to say is "inherently unequal".

Changes in popular sentiment and the MLK protests in the South did a lot to make the courts make the states recognize the rights of African Americans, so I am in no way advocating that progressives stop demanding gay marriage. I just think we need to take civil unions where we can get 'em when we can get 'em and then build on that.

(on edit: however, I voted for "gun control" in the poll)

[Smarmie Doofus]

23. I agree with this... at least for now.

Gotta look at the big picture. Civil union, depending upon how it's framed, conveys about 75% of the benefits of "marriage".

It's infantile for some in the party insist that the party push "marriage" when the general public is not ready for it. And reacts viscerally and irrationally to it.

Education and accommodation have to precede "marriage" as viable public policy.

Pushing it now is like putting bullets in the gun and handing it to your sworn enemy.

[wallock]

26. You're right...

No one should have 'pushed' rights for African Americans because the public wasn't ready. They still had most of the same rights as white people... they were weren't allowed to sit in the front of the bus or go into certain resturants. So what? They had 75% of the benefits of being white, so they should have been happy.

[Smarmie Doofus]

32. Of course not. You miss my point.

And my qualification: "at this time".

My point is NOT that gay marriage is not just or unimportant. My point is that insisting on marriage NOW, is short-sighted; it produces EXPONENTIALLY more evil than it attempts to redress.

Unless, that is, you don't regard violently anti-gay ( and anti-human) domination of the entire ( all three branches) federal gov't as "evil".

I do. Sounds like you do too. But let's be smart about how to undermine that domination. Pushing issues that the republicans are SALIVATING over is not being smart.

[wallock]

33. Not pushing issues right now is morally wrong

We shouldn't 'wait for the right time', because republicans are just getting more and more conservative. Morally, we have an obligation to do what we can right now. Period. You can disagree with my morals, that's fine, but I don't think our party can keep side-stepping this. Our party hasn't been involved in the movement at all (even though those who have are Democrats). We need to fight, lose some battles, and keep coming back, just like the civil rights movement.

[Smarmie Doofus]

65. Then, basically, you believe that the party should...

push hard for gay marriage right now...even if doing so results in a Supreme Court that will for *GENERATIONS* to come be *implacably* hostile to gays?
And not just on marriage, but on non-discrimination laws, adoption rights, hate crime legislation... the whole enchilada.

I think you need to think this through.

[Lars39]

36. The reason civil unions is not acceptable is that

a 2-tier system is created.
The RW would just confer more rights on those with marriages.
There's also the possibility that a 3-tier system would be created,
with covenant marriages being bestowed with more rights than plain marriages or civil unions.
Also sounds a lot like the "separate but equal" bs bigots used to deny blacks equal rights.

[riverwalker]

17. gun control

I learned that many vote on this issue ALONE. People who said they would have voted for Dean, had he won the nomination, because of his NRA rating, ended up voting for Bush, only for his NRA approval.
The idealogical differences between Dean and Bush didn't matter, the only factor for many voters was gun control.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

18. Other- Moving to the middle. n/t

[Capn Sunshine]

19. OTHER; NONE OF THEM

Why any thinking Democrat would even cede this much ground illustrates how the opposition has just scared everyone shitless.

Stop letting the other side define who we are.

[Cuban_Liberal]

20. Further gun control.

This is THE issue that just kills our chances with many rural voters we should and likely would pick up on our remaining issues.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

24. I thought you'd say abortion and woman's rights

;-)

[Cuban_Liberal]

50. LOL!

Not a chance!

;)

[sendero]

22. This one is easy..

... gun control has gained us/the country nothing and cost us millions of votes.

Beyond registration, background checks and restrictions on automatic weapons, gun control is useless IMHO.

[cestpaspossible]

25. Lets stop defending the strawmen the RW erect

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. Is that you Hillary? More caving to the right?

I see the gun nuts are here in force.

[lastliberalintexas]

45. While I often agree with you

on many issues, we certainly see the gun issue very differently. I do not like guns, do not own any and have none in my house. But I see no difference in the gun laws and the drug laws- neither works, though they both infringe on our civil liberties and give the government far too much power over the individual. I'm actually surprised that someone as far left as you are supports gun control.

[Leilani]

29. I said Gun Control

not because I changed my stance under pressure, but I believe the Constitution gives citizens the right to bear arms.

If you believe in the Constitution, the right to bear arms is a lot less murky than other issues we claim a right to have.

[Hippo_Tron]

62. Or you can interpret the second ammendment...

As the right for an organized militia to bear arms. Which is the way that the courts have interpreted it.

[latteromden]

30. Well, "we Democrats," actually. ;) (Grammar freak here!) But I said...

Gun control. I don't see it as "moving to the right." I think we're, quite frankly, on the wrong side of the issue. We can make guns safer and better document who buys guns without banning the ones people use to hunt and protect themselves with.

[nickshepDEM]

31. Sorry, but I's horrible when it comes to grarmer. ;)

[imenja]

38. that hasn't been an issue in years

Kerry never mentioned it. You children are now free to carry AK 47s to kindergarten with them. That is far more important in American politics than literacy or grammar.

[imenja]

39. Most of those issues were not mentioning in the presidential campaign

Kerry never mentioned guns, and ran as far away from the gay marriage controversy as he possibly could. The environment was entirely off the radar in this election. So if you're desire is to see issues banished from political discussion, that has long since happened.

One idea is that the Democratic party might actually start articulating some positions on more issues rather than running away from controversy and banishing topics from public discourse, as your poll seems to suggest.

[karynnj]

41. Kerry spoke about the environment at every rally

But the media covered very little he said. There was only one debate question on it.

[imenja]

43. I didn't hear it at rallies I attended

but then the acoustics weren't always good either.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

42. Drop the gun issue, and reconsider the position on abortion.

80 percent of the debate on guns is ridiculous.

[imenja]

44. what debate would that be?

Cause I haven't heard any in quite a long time. If they reconsider abortion, and become a pro-life party, I'm through with the Democrats. Patriarchy has its limits, and I'm not supporting a party that restricts women's rights over our own bodies. I guess if the goal is to see a collapse of the two party system as we know it, the Democrats abandoning a commitment to choice would be the way to go. They would lose the vote of virtually every woman in America, and women far more than men vote Democrat.

[w4rma]

47. Pro-life is good. Anti-choice is bad. (nt)

[imenja]

51. meaning?

I don't care what you call it. I'm not supporting a party that advocates govt control over my body.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

59. As far as abortion, I simply mean finding common ground with pro-lifers,

(it can be kinda lonely in here sometimes), and define the issue as the Dems see it. Half the country thinks that Dems want unrestricted late-term abortions. That misconception needs to be combated.

[imenja]

71. but that's not what the poll asks

It says which issues should be dropped from debate. Correcting public misconceptions is one thing. Undermining women's rights is another. If what you say is true, half the country are grossly uninformed. Roe v. Wade does not permit late term abortions. Abortions are not legally permitted upon viability of the fetus, or the third trimester.

I have no objecting to welcoming pro-lifers or any one else into the party, but if that means adopting Republican positions on this issue, I will not support them. This is an issue for which there is no common ground. Either the party protects women's rights or it violates them.

Polls overwhelmingly show public support for the right to abortion. The pro-life or anti-choice position is a minority. If the Democrats were to abandon their support of women's rights, they move toward a position that the majority of Americans reject. The vast majority of pro-lifers are Republican anyway. Most of them would never vote Democrat in a million years.

I have a question here? How does one reconcile a pro-life position on abortion with opposition to gun control? In any given year, far more Americans die from gun violence than babies are aborted.

[LilBitRad]

46. Guns

My whole family have been hunters, I know and talk to a lot of hunters; many of them are single issue voters, and this is their "hot" button.

[solinvictus]

48. Further gun control...

It's cost us the blue collar workers who'd otherwise vote for Dems.

[Dr Fate]

49. DEMS should tie every issue to Bush's lack of credibility.

We should not "drop" a damn thing.

[RandomUser]

56. Exactly

We need to be a full service party. And we need to be smart about it -- frame each and every one of these issues in our favor. Not shrink from them and cede everything to the Republicans. And definitely not allow the Republican frames of how Democrats are wrong on every one of these issues to go unchalleged.

[orpupilofnature57]

52. Other, None ,all are important if nothing more than to prioritize..

liberty over progress, to do biz with the Other side,as unapologetic democrats.

[BlackVelvet04]

54. If there are those who REALLY believe

that this is a government on the verge of fascism then I think they ought to ask themselves how strict of gun control do they want?

I've heard many liberals say they believe bush is hitler....well, if that is truly the case then you best be armed to the teeth when they come knocking on your door in the middle of the night, don't you think?

[skippythwndrdog]

55. Gun Control/banning of course.

It is anti-freedom.

[AuntPatsy]

57. Not a DAmn One n/t

[welshTerrier2]

58. you mean in addition to ...

Iraq ??? it's only the dominant issue in American foreign policy and the Democratic Party essentially has no position on it ...

i guess in all fairness you can drop an issue when you've never taken a position ...

[burrowowl]

61. Dems should drop

being Repug-lite and even have more issues: like labor, corporate welfare, etc.
THEY NEED TO GROW A SPINE!

[Babel_17]

63. I took it to mean our party had to pick one issue so ....

I went with gun control though free trade is a murky issue.

I chose gun control because there are ways to work on the problem other than the methods we've been using on the national level.

We can fly under the radar at the local level in a lot of states and in states where we can't we can try indirect methods like supporting official police department advocates and promoting public awareness.

[rman]

64. I see no good reason to drop any of those

-

[Deja Q]

66. All of them! It'd be better to

fully bend over backwards for the repukes. Like Clinton, only completely.

(you know I'm being sarcastic.)

To sell out or die fighting. That's the choice. Sounds like people want to sell out. I'll remember that...

[liberalinAZ]

67. don't give up anything

I don't think the Democrats should give up anything! I guess if I had to pick it would be universal health care.

[rfkrfk]

68. Europe, UN, Europe, UN, Europe, UN, ....

ditch the smoke and mirrors,
if you want something,
don't argue about 'no concensus'

edit, spelling

[_TJ_]

69. None!

When you compromise on your principles you lose your soul. Fight for
what you believe in!

[hiley]

70. Other because

you did not include NONE of Them.


http://rantsbyhiley.blogspot.com /

[LSdemocrat]

72. Other: Disdain for class warfare

We should openly campaign that the poor through the upper middle class will benefit at the expense of the wealthiest (top 2% or so) Americans under a Democratic government.

For too long have we sacrificed the votes of the poor through upper middle class to hold on to a FEW overly sensitive wealthy contributors.

[leesa]

73. Shaivo...biggest loss of mind I have ever seen in all the years I have

been on DU. No thought whatsoever, just foolish emotion. I can't believe people allow themselves to be led by the nose by the GOP like that!

[Wilms]

74. kick n/t