Democrats Get Lowest Rating From Voters in 35 Years, WSJ Poll Finds

Say it aint so said:

They can want Biden to step out, but it's ultimately up to Biden.

Click to expand...

I think he was either coursed or manipulated into it.

ozso said:

I think he was either coursed or manipulated into it.

Click to expand...

Or they could have just had him watch his debate performance.

Say it aint so said:

Or they could have just had him watch his debate performance.

Click to expand...

Funny how that did the trick, despite all of the other times it was clear he had a problem. Whatever the scenario, it should have taken place in the beginning instead of three quarters of the way into the campaign.

BCP1928 said:

Primaries are not constitutional elections nor are they legally required. Political parties are free to select candidates for nomination in any way they wish. Within living memory (including mine) candidates were not selected by primary--the first presidential election I voted in, neither candidate was selected by primaries. Perhaps you are the one who needs to retake 8th grade social studies.

Click to expand...

And democracy gasps for a last breath as we rationalize it away.... Men can have babies and then beat women in sporting events. Words have no meaning any longer. Democracy is the least of our worries.

SavedByGrace3 said:

And democracy gasps for a last breath as we rationalize it away.... Men can have babies and then beat women in sporting events. Words have no meaning any longer. Democracy is the least of our worries.

Click to expand...

As long as people care more about the culture war sex stuff than the real problems we face as a nation, then yes, democracy is in danger.

Jipsah said:

Lessee, there are also "facts" like the popular "Trump will have a federal law enacted banning abortion.", when in fact the SCOTUS has ruled that the Feds are forbidden by the 10th amendment to to any such thing,

Click to expand...

While I agree with a decent amount of the rest of your post, even if I could have done without the aggressive nature of some of it, the Supreme Court to my knowledge never said any such thing; I think they avoided the question entirely in Dobbs v. Jackson. Which decision are you referring to? (pre-Dobbs decisions do not count) That said, I would agree that while the federal government has some power to regulate abortion, it seems inherently limited to whatever they can wrangle out of the Commerce Clause that allows them to regulate interstate commerce.

That said, it is pretty ridiculous to claim Trump would have a federal law enacted banning abortion given his obvious lack of interest in that area. His position, which has actually been quite surprisingly consistent for Trump, has been that the issue of abortion regulation is something to be left up to states rather than the federal government.

BCP1928 said:

As long as people care more about the culture war sex stuff than the real problems we face as a nation, then yes, democracy is in danger.

Click to expand...

I don't know what "real problems" we are facing right now that puts our democracy in danger. It seems to me. Democracy is just fine.

rjs330 said:

I don't know what "real problems" we are facing right now that puts our democracy in danger. It seems to me. Democracy is just fine.

Click to expand...

That's right, everything is just fine. The economy is fine, our trade policy is fine, our foreign relations are fine, the working class is better off than ever, everyone is fine because Trump is bypassing Congress and the courts and is taking care of all of that himself, so our democratic form of government is safe. Everything is just fine, so you can go back to sleep now.

BCP1928 said:

Trump is bypassing Congress and the courts and is taking care of all of that himself, so our democratic form of government is safe.

Click to expand...

Is this your real answer? The rest just seems to be ranting.

rjs330 said:

Is this your real answer? The rest just seems to be ranting.

Click to expand...

Have no sense of humor at all?

BCP1928 said:

Have no sense of humor at all?

Click to expand...

I guess your jokes were just too sophisticated for me.

Just looking at the thread titles of the first page of this forum, NOBODY is talking about the democratic party except to dunk on them. It's all about the GOP, and more than anything about Trump.

How do you expect to have any success if nobody cares about you?

Nithavela said:

Just looking at the thread titles of the first page of this forum, NOBODY is talking about the democratic party except to dunk on them. It's all about the GOP, and more than anything about Trump.

How do you expect to have any success if nobody cares about you?

Click to expand...

This board make Wyoming look "blue".

Hans Blaster said:

This board make Wyoming look "blue".

Click to expand...

Blue isn't a popular color these days, is it? The lunatic fringe took control of the "Left"and pushed their deranged agendas beyond the point where rational "liberals" couldn't stand it anymore. The pendulem is swinging back the other way now.

JSRG said:

While I agree with a decent amount of the rest of your post, even if I could have done without the aggressive nature of some of it, the Supreme Court to my knowledge never said any such thing; I think they avoided the question entirely in Dobbs v. Jackson.

Click to expand...

Yeah, DvJ didn't explicitly talk about the 10th amendment, it was all about the doctrine of "substantive due process:. In overturning Roe V Wade, the court has effectively knocked the "right" to abortion out of the shadowy realm of "due process" and put it back to the states as a 10th amendment issue, and the states have acted upon it as such. Any Federal law declaring a right to abortion, or forbidding it, is going to meet the same roadblock that DvJ faced, because the court has removed substantive due process from the argument. There's no Constitutional bas for a federal law either forbidding abortion or allowing it because would be beyond the powers explcitly granted to the Constition. So yeah, it's a 10th amendment issue now whether it began that way or not.

JSRG said:

Which decision are you referring to? (pre-Dobbs decisions do not count) That said, I would agree that while the federal government has some power to regulate abortion, it seems inherently limited to whatever they can wrangle out of the Commerce Clause that allows them to regulate interstate commerce.

Click to expand...

Good luck with tha one. If RvW didn't pass muster, simple legislation ain't gonna get it done. You can either amend the Constution or leave it to the states.

JSRG said:

That said, it is pretty ridiculous to claim Trump would have a federal law enacted banning abortion given his obvious lack of interest in that area.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it was just part of a laundry list of Bad Things Trump Is Going To Do. My wife was even persuaded that Trump was going to start deporting 'People of Color", and that anyone in our family could be arrested and jailed for not being "white", Given her tendency to believe me to be wrong until proven otherwise, she may still believe it. I just told her to wear sunglasses, and with that and her grey hair nobody would know she wasn't white. <Laff>

JSRG said:

His position, which has actually been quite surprisingly consistent for Trump, has been that the issue of abortion regulation is something to be left up to states rather than the federal government.

Click to expand...

Hans Blaster said:

This board make Wyoming look "blue".

Click to expand...

There are plenty of center to left wing poster on this board, but they are also only talking about Trump et al.

In fact, I believe that at least in this sub-forum, the number of active posters on the left is higher than those on the right.

Nithavela said:

There are plenty of center to left wing poster on this board, but they are also only talking about Trump et al.

In fact, I believe that at least in this sub-forum, the number of active posters on the left is higher than those on the right.

Click to expand...

Do you think the democrats may do a little better if they had a character as outlandish as Trump in their camp directing all attention unto themselves?

GoldenBoy89 said:

Do you think the democrats may do a little better if they had a character as outlandish as Trump in their camp directing all attention unto themselves?

Click to expand...

They'd do a lot better if they didn't embrace so many positions tht are patently insane. They've got a flippin' Communist running for mayor of NYC, for all love! On what planet does that seem like a good idea?

But these are people can't define "woman", but know beyond a shadow of a doubt that a man in a wig unarguablty is one. They're the party that thinks little children should be allowed to chose their sex and then perform body altering surgery on them if the sex they're chosen isn't what they physically are. They're the people who believe that race, ethnicity, and gender are more important in hiring decisions than education, experience, and aptitude. They're the people who believe that national boundaries are irrelevant, and that "the wretched refuse of... teeming shores" should he allowed in unhindered, with little pretense of filtering out criminals, the mentally ill, clandestine agents of foreign powers, and whoever else wants or needs to beat a hasty retreat from wherevever they come from, no matter how many of them will become dependent on the government (i.e., us) for their sustenance, or otherwise be liabilities rather than assets. They're the folks who believe that education of children should be more about social programming than teaching reading, mathematics, sciences, and social studies, which is why American students tend to look like dunces ompared to children educated in other countries. They're the people who believe that every culture is good but ours, that every religion is due respect but the ones common to Americans, just ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

The net effect is that Dems, at root, just don't find much to like in American or Americans. They have different visions, and different ultimate goals, and their sole point if agreement is that whatever it is we have now has to go. They're not about taking the American paradigm and making it work better for all. Their goal is to start it all over in their current vision of what America should be. But the trick is that not even they know what their goal looks like. They're only in agreement that whatever their goal is, it isn't anything that's now standing. They're not about taking what structure we have and making it work beter for everyone. Thegre about destroying it and rebuilding all to their ever-changing ever-evolving, ever-shifting, visions of what America should be.

So maybe Democrats would do better if they have something better to offer than blue-smoke-and-mirors, pie in the sky bye and bye, cultural-reprogrammimg to a standard still under construction vision that even they don't share amongst themselves.

Mahybe if we just set about to make the what we have work better for the people who are here rather than trying to reprogram the people to conform to a standard that, if it's ever completed, will probably be both stupid and self-destructive in its own right.

Jipsah, Old, Bi-Racial, Southern, Anglo-Catholic, Curmudgeon

Jipsah said:

They'd do a lot better if they didn't embrace so many positions tht are patently insane. They've got a flippin' Communist running for mayor of NYC, for all love! On what planet does that seem like a good idea?

Click to expand...

You think they would do better if they didn’t support the candidate that swept the primary?

Jipsah said:

But these are people can't define "woman", but know beyond a shadow of a doubt that a man in a wig unarguablty is one. They're the party that thinks little children should be allowed to chose their sex and then perform body altering surgery on them if the sex they're chosen isn't what they physically are. They're the people who believe that race, ethnicity, and gender are more important in hiring decisions than education, experience, and aptitude. They're the people who believe that national boundaries are irrelevant, and that "the wretched refuse of... teeming shores" should he allowed in unhindered, with little pretense of filtering out criminals, the mentally ill, clandestine agents of foreign powers, and whoever else wants or needs to beat a hasty retreat from wherevever they come from, no matter how many of them will become dependent on the government (i.e., us) for their sustenance, or otherwise be liabilities rather than assets. They're the folks who believe that education of children should be more about social programming than teaching reading, mathematics, sciences, and social studies, which is why American students tend to look like dunces ompared to children educated in other countries. They're the people who believe that every culture is good but ours, that every religion is due respect but the ones common to Americans, just ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

The net effect is that Dems, at root, just don't find much to like in American or Americans. They have different visions, and different ultimate goals, and their sole point if agreement is that whatever it is we have now has to go. They're not about taking the American paradigm and making it work better for all. Their goal is to start it all over in their current vision of what America should be. But the trick is that not even they know what their goal looks like. They're only in agreement that whatever their goal is, it isn't anything that's now standing. They're not about taking what structure we have and making it work beter for everyone. Thegre about destroying it and rebuilding all to their ever-changing ever-evolving, ever-shifting, visions of what America should be.

So maybe Democrats would do better if they have something better to offer than blue-smoke-and-mirors, pie in the sky bye and bye, cultural-reprogrammimg to a standard still under construction vision that even they don't share amongst themselves.

Mahybe if we just set about to make the what we have work better for the people who are here rather than trying to reprogram the people to conform to a standard that, if it's ever completed, will probably be both stupid and self-destructive in its own right.

Jipsah, Old, Bi-Racial, Southern, Anglo-Catholic, Curmudgeon

Click to expand...

GoldenBoy89 said:

You think they would do better if they didn’t support the candidate that swept the primary?

View attachment 368267

Click to expand...

It's the fact that a Commie swept the primary that shows just how screwed up the Democratic Party is.