First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
True History of the Democrat Party
4938 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / The Cat Empire
Offline
Posted 6/22/17 , edited 6/22/17
Didn't watch it, but like

The democrat party isn't what it used to be... parties switch platforms...

I'm sleepy so I'm just gonna say this: who are the ones defunding a bunch of programs?

Here's a couple things being defunded: US Trade and Development Agency, Rural Economic and Development Program, Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants program... so so many... oh and at the same time increasing military spending...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/05/23/here-list-agencies-and-programs-trump-budget-would-defund-entirely/DMRzbdY4lwB0XEGA13Y6PP/story.html

Go read a book or something
19852 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 6/22/17

official-shinsengumi wrote:

Didn't watch it, but like

The democrat party isn't what it used to be... parties switch platforms...

I'm sleepy so I'm just gonna say this: who are the ones defunding a bunch of programs?

Here's a couple things being defunded: US Trade and Development Agency, Rural Economic and Development Program, Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants program... so so many... oh and at the same time increasing military spending...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/05/23/here-list-agencies-and-programs-trump-budget-would-defund-entirely/DMRzbdY4lwB0XEGA13Y6PP/story.html

Go read a book or something


Freedom.. less government the better. do you know all those programs come out of are pockets. do you know why we have a 20 trillion dollar debt? its because of government programs that we can not support . The last few leaders we have had has increased the amount of spending are government does for programs to amount that we as a country happen to be collapsing in on it self. Changes are needed, and less programs is the change we need. I agree are military does not need more money, but we are at this time under attack from inside are own country by Soros, and from the out side by North Keara and China. (not included Isis.) so I understand why some would like to see the military get more funding.
35285 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/22/17
This thread again? Really?
1246 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Online
Posted 6/22/17 , edited 6/22/17

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

Freedom.. less government the better. do you know all those programs come out of are pockets. do you know why we have a 20 trillion dollar debt? its because of government programs that we can not support . The last few leaders we have had has increased the amount of spending are government does for programs to amount that we as a country happen to be collapsing in on it self. Changes are needed, and less programs is the change we need. I agree are military does not need more money, but we are at this time under attack from inside are own country by Soros, and from the out side by North Keara and China. (not included Isis.) so I understand why some would like to see the military get more funding.


The Republicans are no better about keeping the budget down then Democrats, they just pretend otherwise and make more noise about it. Ultimately, It's just a debate of whether to put the money into social programs, or the military and tax breaks for the rich. You hear rhetoric about needing to cut spending all the time, but it's always only in regards to the stuff the OTHER side supports. If they were serious about cutting government spending, they would in fact, be cutting the things their own party favors just as much, but they're not.

Incidentally, wanting a smaller/weaker Federal government was a major thing of the Democrat party during the Civil War era (and probably earlier?). Another example of a topic in which the two major parties have swapped positions on since then.


runec wrote:

This thread again? Really?


Ikr?
35825 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 6/22/17

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

Their was no switch, its just democrats own the media and can make you see what they want you to see, wile they keep their dirty hands out of view.

As has been pointed out to you numerous times: The Republican and Democrat platforms did essentially switch over the course of 100 years. Democrats in Lincoln's day were the conservative, small-government, "states' rights" party, while Republicans were the big-government, "tax-and-spend" progressives.

Proof? Let's take a quick look at President Lincoln:
* Expanded Federal and Executive branch powers: Though presidents of both parties utilize executive orders heavily these days, Lincoln's reliance on them was rather unprecedented and considered quite the overreach/power grab. He also used military force to impose Federal rule on the states.
* Established Federal income tax: New taxes are the antithesis of "Republican" by today's standards.
* Increased education spending: Issued land grants to the states that were to be sold and used to fund new/existing colleges. The current platform prefers cuts to (and the privatization of) education - generally for the sake of less spending and smaller government. Does that sound familiar? It should:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

Freedom.. less government the better. do you know all those programs come out of are pockets. do you know why we have a 20 trillion dollar debt? its because of government programs that we can not support . The last few leaders we have had has increased the amount of spending are government does for programs to amount that we as a country happen to be collapsing in on it self. Changes are needed, and less programs is the change we need.

So, to reiterate, Lincoln:
* Expanded Government
* Increased taxation and spending
* Reduced freedom of the states to self-govern

You still think he sounds just like a modern Republican?
21363 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 6/23/17 , edited 6/23/17
The more things change the more they stay the same.






official-shinsengumi wrote:

Didn't watch it, but like

The democrat party isn't what it used to be... parties switch platforms...

I'm sleepy so I'm just gonna say this: who are the ones defunding a bunch of programs?

Here's a couple things being defunded: US Trade and Development Agency, Rural Economic and Development Program, Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants program... so so many... oh and at the same time increasing military spending...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/05/23/here-list-agencies-and-programs-trump-budget-would-defund-entirely/DMRzbdY4lwB0XEGA13Y6PP/story.html

Go read a book or something


One Punch Mod
97860 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Boston-ish
Offline
Posted 6/23/17
As Karkarov mentioned the other day in another thread, the forums should not be used for political bashing. Some of the posts here get close to that line, and if it goes too far a mod will intervene.

A thread discussing origins of US political parties, changes over time, and our perceptions of the parties and their platforms is okay--as is criticism of current and past party policies and practices. But if this starts sliding further down the path of denigrating supporters of any party, or overgeneralization and mean-spirited mockery, that is not okay, and may be considered inflammatory, which will be grounds for any combination of deletions, bans, or closing the thread.
37069 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 6/23/17

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

'that's not true at all. Republicans are not creating programs to keep people in poverty that is modern democrats,


That's not what unemployment insurance, food and housing provisions, public health insurance, and so on are themselves for.

Be critical of the Democratic Party's use and implementation of these provisions if you want. That's fair. Well-to-do "liberals" who merely give lip service to helping people in order to get elected, make minimal efforts to actually improve peoples' lives once elected, and who largely spend their time in office either wanking lobbyists and consultants or legislating/regulating/managing things in such a way as to set themselves up for a sweet lobbying or consulting gig for themselves after they leave office are worthy of every ounce of scorn. That's why a significant part of the party's base has been shouting "Revolution!" and "Sellout!" lately.

The concept of using state money to keep people fed, housed, educated, and healthy itself, however, isn't something I believe for one minute ought to be driven out along with them.


Republicans are not buying votes with free phones and free stuff.


A healthier population is a more productive population, and a well-educated population is one that will be more innovative and competitive in the global marketplace. When people speak of setting up public internet service and wireless networks they're trying to counteract regional monopolies ISPs have established and would maintain even if you knocked away every bit of regulation thereof (see: cartels).

Oh, and the phone thing started in 1985. It now applies to cellular and broadband services because, unlike in the 1980s, these are the most common means of telecommunications now. Landlines just aren't used all that much anymore. I'm sorry that adjusting legislation to account for technological shifts in order to continue to fulfill its intended purpose makes you angry, but for the life of me I can't understand why it makes you angry.

https://www.fcc.gov/general/lifeline-program-low-income-consumers


Democrats are manipulating people by using the media to push their agenda witch does not help the poor in are country.

yet people lap it up because they paint them selves in the media as the good guys witch they are not.


Yes, the Democratic Party's establishment is using media outlets such as The Washington Post, Politico, MSNBC, CNN, and many others to try to influence public opinion and promote their preferred narrative on political issues. The Republican Party, meanwhile, does that with talk radio shows, tabloids, The Wall Street Journal, FOX News, and many others. This doesn't help anyone but the party leadership, just as you say. You're raising a legitimate complaint. I wonder, however, why you're only shooting off that complaint at half the people responsible?


Their was no switch, its just democrats own the media and can make you see what they want you to see, wile they keep their dirty hands out of view.


I can point to two former chairmen of the RNC and a prominent Republican strategist who say there was a shift in political strategy, and I can point to the career of a specific legislator to illustrate that shift's occurrence in real time.
xxJing 
39819 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Duckburg
Online
Posted 6/23/17 , edited 6/23/17
Democrats and Republicans switched during like FDR or something. It's been a long time so I forgot the details, but Democrats used to be the extremely conservative party, but a democratic president, I think it was FDR, started to implement some very liberal/socialist policies, and all the heavily conservative democrats moved over to the Republicans, and we have what we have today.

What our problem is today, is that our current Liberals want to give away way too much, and our current Conservatives want to take away way too much.
1684 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 6/23/17 , edited 6/23/17
At this point its just a spaming of the same thing over and over again. I wrote a nice long post that explained in detail why this is bullshit, but as this is exact same as last time(it wasn't even a month ago) lets keep it short.

Your wrong and ignoring 50 years of recent history. "Southern Strategy" Go look it up .
2255 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/23/17


i think the Pokemon guy posted the exact same thread before. I think they locked it


there's a documentary movie about this-- it's from the same guy who created Obama's America

Dinesh D'Souza
http://www.dineshdsouza.com/

if this guy was white he would be a racist...

http://hillarysamericathemovie.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary%27s_America:_The_Secret_History_of_the_Democratic_Party

Hillary's America" Trailer | Official Teaser Trailer HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7e6gLht6OQ

if you want to watch the video i'm sure you can just google it


qwueri 
19998 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 6/23/17
At least the link wasn't yet another PragerU vid?
6578 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/23/17
I've heard of this before somewhat interesting how that can happen. though some parts i don't think were a complete switch around from what I've seen/heard etc.

i also think both American parties (and many other countries politcal parties including my own in Canada) probably really need to do some house cleaning to get rid of some of the more extreme and harmful elements in them. i also think making it so more possible newer/smaller parties shouldn't always be overshadowed by the main ones since some maybe better then them sometimes (can't name off hand)yet most of the time can't compete against the main ones who have much more resources readily available.
nxvb 
1170 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Somewhere to my l...
Offline
Posted 6/23/17
I'm probably going to get hated for this, but at the present moment, I too am an atheist (though I'll respect your beliefs if you believe differently, so long as you don't try to force your beliefs on me) and favor freedom of speech but I'm leaning Democrat (note I didn't say that I'm hardcore democrat) because the current GOP.. ehh.. not too much a fan of their actions. I won't go into the reasons because I don't want to bother arguing...
1225 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 6/23/17
I know some history about the two major US parties and I can say that the discussion here all falsely assume homogenity within the parties. I said this before in another topic: the two parties are actually highly heterogeneous and are composed of two diverse coalition of many political groups. There is high internal competition within the two parties and old groups within the parties are constantly replaced by new groups. It is somewhat like the prototypical "Earth Federation versus Zeon" in many Gaundam series. For some reson, the politicians is unwilling to mention this diversity within their party but it may have something to do with the need to unite allies of diverse ideologies and interests.

The Democrat is initially a highly diverse groups who all share some similarity as "commoners against the Republican elites"; the initial Democrat coalition include the Jewish, the Blacks, and the Southern whites who are racist toward both the Jews and blacks. The Republican at that time are more homogeneous and are mostly composed of Northern white Protestant.
The year of 2016 is really the year when a stable relation between the two parties change; this is the year when most of the Libertarian politicians, who represent the metropolitan business elites and who control many news firm, defect from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party after the social conservatives take control of the Republican Party. Due to this event, the Democrats are now representing the more "elite" groups compared to the Republican Party.
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.