Obama is the first candidate of the New Republican-Democrat Party.

Obama is the first candidate of the New Republican-Democrat Party.
Not of Jefferson and Madison's old Democratic-Republican Party, but of the New Republican-Democrat Party. Aheadin delegates in large part due to the help of Republican and Independant support, running on a promise to reach out and include the opposition, and running viciously against the last Democratic Party Candidate, Hillary Clinton.

The times, they are a-changin'.

...SOB... poor Hillary, fighting the good fight for her corporate masters... SOB.. wont somebody thinnk of the children.. SOB...

SOB isn't he? :rofl:

damn double postings.

OMG OMG PANIC PANIC WE MIGHT ACTUALLY WIN AN ELECTION WTF WE CAN'T DO THAT

He was the one of basically neutered the Democratic Party and deliberatly pushed the center of the political spectrum farther to the right.

I toil each day in the right-wing radio business. Here's their scoop FWIW.


Clinton but especially Obama are Marxists who will attempt to get the Government to control every phase of our lives.

McCain is a liberal whose electio will be no better tan Clinton's or Obama.

The country is making a mistake. No matter who wins we'll move so far to left we may never come back


Interesting how your perspective changes when you move outside the DU bubble.

is just that. It's a ploy, to get more conservative Democrats to consider McCain. The painting of Obama as an extreme liberal, by both the Repugs AND Democrats, is just a scream. He's just a tad to the right of McCain. He's with the Repugs on Social Security.

Anyway I thint that ploy may help McCain win it.

Bush-Clinton-Bush is their own party of fascists.

No wonder he's winning.

general liberalism.

:shrug:

Hillary is as progressive, or as centrist, as Obama, depending on which label you apply.

of the League of Conservation Voters, the Children's Defense Fund, the National Journal, and the ACLU.

Obama ranked better by all of the above.

Obama has the single most liberal voting record in the US senate, according to all the vote tallies. If you are upset that someone can do THAT and still attract republicans and independents, then you just aren't interested in winning and changing things.

Is he the most Liberal candidate or is he a candidate that wants to include Republicans? I don't get it.

=P

Voters outside of wonkish echo chambers like this one don't vote issues. They vote people.

next to Gore endorses Hillary.

Civil Rights -- the only group in America (GLBT) that doesn't have full civil rights is behind Hillary.
Obama votecd for the renewal of the Patriot Act, Hillary did NOT.

The War ... Mr. "I-don't-know-how-I-would-have-voted" , has voted identical to Clinton on all subsequent War bills.
Senator Obama declared in one of the early debates that he would unilaterally and pre-emptively bomb Pakistan -- much to the horror of his handlers.

Progressive??? I think not!

I know this is incomprehensible to a lot of people here, but it's true.

to vote for a candidate whose policy statements are almost entirely antithetical to the GOP's fear-and-greed platform. If Obama can convince Republicans to go with the more-enlightened side of the political spectrum, we'll have done a lot to undermine the GOP itself.

And I'd rather run against the Republicans than towards them.

Convincing indies and moderate Republicans to vote for a progressive candidate is not running toward the GOP. It's a terrible fallacy to try to make the argument that either of our candidates are "GOP-lite" or some other such ridiculous moniker. I know from reading your past posts that you're a committed anti-Obama person, and that's fine, you have every right to vie for one candidate or another, but the truth is that there's precious little difference between Clinton and Obama in terms of policy. They're remarkably similar on the war, the economy, reproductive rights, gay rights and even healthcare, though the mandate vs. non-mandate argument is certainly one of the more notable differences between the two.

In any case, point being, neither Democratic candidate is running to the right.

to vote for a candidate whose policy statements are almost entirely antithetical to the GOP's fear-and-greed platform. If Obama can convince Republicans to go with the more-enlightened side of the political spectrum, we'll have done a lot to undermine the GOP itself.

Here's hoping, anyway :)

Times were when we ran Democrats against Republicans, not Demo-Repub-Indies against Republicans.

or to people from the other party? Even in 2004, Bush won a fairly significant percentage of democratic votes--12%, according to an LA Times exit poll, compared to the 6% of republican voters that Kerry won. Only about 40% of voters overall are registered democrats, so not appealing to independents is stupid.

Besides, there's a difference between running a democratic candidate who agrees with the GOP platform (which would be bad) and running a democratic candidate who, as SteppingRazor said, "convinces indies and Republicans to vote for a candidate whose policy statements are almost entirely antithetical to the GOP's fear-and-greed platform."

I'd rather Democrats picked the Democratic nominee.
I know that's not a popular opinion, but it's the one I have.

...

if you were upset about any of his POLICIES that were taken from the GOP, you'd have a point. Right now, you're upset that he's attracting Republican voters. Oh, the humanity!!! We can't attract too many republican voters!!! We'll get a working majority and THEN what will we do???

...

No, they will hold their piggish little noses and vote for McCain.

Can you really be so new to all this that you have never heard of raiding the other party's primary? Standard practice in caucus and open primary states.

who are far outweighed by independent voters who will vote for whoever they like regardless of party.

Research the 1986 gubernatorial primary in Alabama. Republicans raided the Democratic primary, and we ended up with our first Republican governor in more than a century as a result.

I just disagree that the majority, or even anything more than a tiny minority, of these independent voters who vote for Obama will then turn around and go McCain in the general.

My concern is the large number of Republicans who crossed over.

I do think Obama may be able to do a sort of "reverse Reagan Democrat" thing. Not with all the Republicans who voted for him in the primary, of course. But he can get a few. And if we can get a candidate who can actually make people switch parties, then I'm all for it. I only hope I live to see the GOP go the way of the Whigs.

Anti-war, pro-choice, pro-union, pro-civil rights, pro-health care.

Yeah, a real Republican in disguise.

How hard is it to believe that there may actually be some Republicans who are for those things? That it's not the Democrats who are changing but some Republicans are.

Mz Pip
:dem:

see as the future of America?

Do we go on forever divided? Do we succumb to the Republicans? Do we dissolve this country?

If a Republican is willing to vote for a Democratic candidate for the presidency, is it too much to ask that we be open-MINDED towards them? That doesn't mean compromising anything- It simply means being willing to let them 'come-aboard'- not naively- but (oh god, here's that 4-letter word again) with the HOPE that perhaps they have come to see that our party is where they have belonged all along, they just had to experience bush to finally recognize it?-

It's odd, but given the opportunity, I would have put Hillary in the "new-party" and "Obama" in the Democratic one- given their history- but I understand your reasons for phrasing this like you did.


peace~

Obama was deemed the most liberal Senator in 2007. He is putting together a coalition of Americans of all ideological persuasions to work toward a common purpose.

ClintonCo on the other hand operates from the center, although will mouth progressive platitudes for votes.

It's known as....

I think the parties are being redefined. There is a new leftist Democratic Party and a new rightist Republican party. The partisan roles of the parties are returning and that's a great thing. Maybe it will end the gridlock and improve the attitude in Washington. I know it sounds counterintuitive, but I think a correction in the roles of the parties is going to be a great thing.

Or Obama-can, if you will.

This thread is bullshit flamebaiting.

Oz is a really weird place.

:crazy:

Why hasn't this meme caught on? Come on, people!

Oh brother. It would have been more accurate to describe Bill Clinton in these terms. He stood for Reaganomics with a dash of social liberalism, just as his wife does.

To "reach out" to the opposition does not mean to abandon progressive principles. Have you actually read his policy positions?

Wait, there wasn't one.

things change going forward, what matters is what's happening now.

If the best you can do is that he was cordial with Joe Lieberman and attracts Republican voters, you're really weak. You can't point to any of his actual POLICY positions that is bad. That you're reduced to criticising him because he has the potential to win a general election is really telling.

But please, run with that- "don't vote for Obama- he might win!"

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

What makes it "Republican-Democrat Party"?

Thanks in advance!

3, Hold hands together and let hope bring the change

or as Mr Fish put it - in the locked thread
"bring a fresh charisma to doomsday"

Why is that? Is that because Hillary got trounced yesterday? Calm down, Hillary still has a shot. The delegate count is pretty much tied. And she could do well in Texas and Ohio. Relax!

But going back to the dramatic post, how is Obama dismantling the party? What on policy makes Obama a Republican-Democrat?

What is the problem with appealing to others in order to get elected? What is the problem with going back to the days when Democrats and Republicans could agree to disagree?

Are you in favor of the recent polarized politics where nothing gets done?

and he won elections! It's about time indies and moderates sided with a Dem candidate. Please let us know what exactly is so "Republican" about Obama's platform.

I know you're upset that your candidate is losing badly in the primaries. But why piss on another Dem just because he is winning? Why the negativity and destructive attitude. The word is jealousy.

beyond.

Why is this good? The past 8 years have shown that conservative ideas don't work, yet we're going to bring them into the fold?

Get a grip and quit being sooooo bitter. It looks so funny on so many!!

think it is good to unite our country toward a candidate that WAS ALWAYS AGAINST THE WAR, HAS SPOKEN OUT AGAINST FREE TRADE AND EMBRACED FAIR TRADE, AND HAS A THOROUGH GRASP OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW!

Hillary is a DLC shill for special interests and lobbyists.

The Bush/Clinton years of corporate rule are over!

They are actually celebrating the fact that he is not viewed as a democrat
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4560756&mesg_id=4560756
Rejoice! The era of the parties is over!
Well, at least we dismantled ours - and we're confident our fellow republicans will do the same. And why not? They have Obama now!

Just a suggestion: consider both candidates as well qualified and accept the voter's judgement.

Whenever the OP, or so many similar posters on both sides start these sorts of threads, we can vote for their avatar to be changed permanently to an Obama or Hillary troll picture. At least that way nobody accidentally is mislead into believing they have any credibility whatsoever.

Funniest.Line.Ever.

Hyperbole comes to mind.

Hyperbole.

the last Democratic Party Candidate, Hillary Clinton.

If Hillary Clinton is a Democrat, I'm a carpenter from Nazareth.

:hi:

... the "last Democratic Party candidate" would be John Kerry, what with Hillary never having been a nominee for President.

And then one can begin to debate the premise, pointing out that those independents and Republicans that Obama is attracting may well have been Democrats before leaving the Party, and that bringing in new voters to the Party to create a larger working majority is required if we are to repair this sinking ship and then get it turned around.

:hide: