Who are the leaders of the Dem party?
Ellison, Perez, Clinton, Florida HS kids, porn star?
Build the Wall flip flop Schumer?

I'll take Oxymorons for $2,000 Alex.

the way things look, probably Hitler.

Lenin, Marx, Stalin and Mao.

Hell, there's no leadership and no message out there on either side.

Democrats are a cobbled up bunch of special interests with conflicting interests. Unions v. environmentalists. Blacks v. browns. Gays versus other minorities. Lots of others. Hard to keep everybody on the same page. So they have to make it about personalities.

Republicans used to ave coherent interests. Main Street capitalists don't really have a problem with law and order or a strong military. But then they started pandering to special interests, reaching the height with the likes of Karl Rove.

Now neither side as a coherent policy or competent leadership.

(03-26-2018 10:59 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Who are the leaders of the Dem party?
Ellison, Perez, Clinton, Florida HS kids, porn star?
Build the Wall flip flop Schumer?

George Soros, Hollywood elitists, the MSM....

(03-26-2018 12:31 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  

(03-26-2018 10:59 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Who are the leaders of the Dem party?
Ellison, Perez, Clinton, Florida HS kids, porn star?
Build the Wall flip flop Schumer?

George Soros, Hollywood elitists, the MSM....

True

There are none. Fractured echo-chambers feeding upon themselves. This is what happens when previous persons operated in a closed vacuum.

(03-26-2018 12:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Hell, there's no leadership and no message out there on either side.

Democrats are a cobbled up bunch of special interests with conflicting interests. Unions v. environmentalists. Blacks v. browns. Gays versus other minorities. Lots of others. Hard to keep everybody on the same page. So they have to make it about personalities.

Republicans used to ave coherent interests. Main Street capitalists don't really have a problem with law and order or a strong military. But then they started pandering to special interests, reaching the height with the likes of Karl Rove.

Now neither side as a coherent policy or competent leadership.

They kept grabbing special interest causes until they had a big enough coalition to win....but it turns out, many of the special causes conflict with their old base---blue collar workers. That said, the Republicans have some of the same issues. The fiscal conservatives need the social conservatives to win---but they often show they could care less about one another's issues once they get in office---so the coalition doesnt really accomplish as much as it potentially could.

(03-26-2018 07:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-26-2018 12:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Hell, there's no leadership and no message out there on either side.
Democrats are a cobbled up bunch of special interests with conflicting interests. Unions v. environmentalists. Blacks v. browns. Gays versus other minorities. Lots of others. Hard to keep everybody on the same page. So they have to make it about personalities.
Republicans used to ave coherent interests. Main Street capitalists don't really have a problem with law and order or a strong military. But then they started pandering to special interests, reaching the height with the likes of Karl Rove.
Now neither side as a coherent policy or competent leadership.

They kept grabbing special interest causes until they had a big enough coalition to win....but it turns out, many of the special causes conflict with their old base---blue collar workers. That said, the Republicans have some of the same issues. The fiscal conservatives need the social conservatives to win---but they often show they could care less about one another's issues once they get in office---so the coalition doesnt really accomplish as much as it potentially could.

Fiscal conservatives and social conservatives don't really conflict. You an be both. Labor unions and environmentalists are in direct conflict, as are members of the LBGTQ community with historically religious conservative black Evangelicals and brown Roman Catholics.

As one who is fiscal conservative and socially center-left, I have no problem with a social conservative who is also fiscally conservative. But I don't have much use for a social conservative who proceeds to run up mammoth deficits.

low iq maxine/pocahontas 2020

(03-26-2018 10:33 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-26-2018 07:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-26-2018 12:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Hell, there's no leadership and no message out there on either side.
Democrats are a cobbled up bunch of special interests with conflicting interests. Unions v. environmentalists. Blacks v. browns. Gays versus other minorities. Lots of others. Hard to keep everybody on the same page. So they have to make it about personalities.
Republicans used to ave coherent interests. Main Street capitalists don't really have a problem with law and order or a strong military. But then they started pandering to special interests, reaching the height with the likes of Karl Rove.
Now neither side as a coherent policy or competent leadership.

They kept grabbing special interest causes until they had a big enough coalition to win....but it turns out, many of the special causes conflict with their old base---blue collar workers. That said, the Republicans have some of the same issues. The fiscal conservatives need the social conservatives to win---but they often show they could care less about one another's issues once they get in office---so the coalition doesnt really accomplish as much as it potentially could.

Fiscal conservatives and social conservatives don't really conflict. You an be both. Labor unions and environmentalists are in direct conflict, as are members of the LBGTQ community with historically religious conservative black Evangelicals and brown Roman Catholics.

As one who is fiscal conservative and socially center-left, I have no problem with a social conservative who is also fiscally conservative. But I don't have much use for a social conservative who proceeds to run up mammoth deficits.

You can be both.....or you can be one or the other. There are a surprising number of Republican fiscal conservatives who are not social conservatives. In fact, the more blue blood portion of the Republican party is almost embarrassed of the Christian Right segment of the Party. It may not be as obvious as the Democrat problem--but the Republicans have their issues as well.

Look---its just the way its going to be in a nation that effectively has just 2 parties---each trying to pitch a tent big enough to win 51% of the vote. I think we are at a point where multi-party coalition governments probably would represent our people better---but the current political machinery isnt set up to do that (not to mention the current machinery would resist giving up their current power positions).