The 2008 Clinton Vs. Obama Primary Fight Vs. The 2012 GOP Clown Show

One thing hit me about the quality of the two parties. In 2008, the Democratic party had a primary fight. However, it was a primary fight in which two highly skilled and highly capable people trying to rip each others head off (politically, at least). This fight involves more incompetence then anything else. It is a rather amazing contrast. What are your thoughts on the contrast between the 2008 Democratic fight versus the 2012 Republican fight?

PPP Polls: Santorum topping Romney on the first night of our Michigan polll

Santorum continues to come from behind.

twitter.com/ppppolls

Maine Caucus Results So Far: 44% Paul, 37% Romney, 10% Santorum and 8% Gingrich

THese numbers are clearly not official and come from Paul supporters. However, if right and Romney gets beat by Ron Paul, that makes Maine huge. Not for Paul, but as a disaster for Romney.

http://www.dailypaul.com/212690/maine-caucus-results-ron-paul-is-winning

George Will: Republicans need more than rhetoric on defense

Wow.. surprised this comes from George Will.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-need-more-than-rhetoric-on-defense/2012/02/07/gIQA5SF1zQ_print.html

Through 11 presidential elections, beginning with the Democrats’ nomination of George McGovern in 1972, Republicans have enjoyed a presumption of superiority regarding national security. This year, however, events and their rhetoric are dissipating their advantage.

Hours — not months, not weeks, hours — after the last U.S. troops left Iraq, vicious political factionalism and sectarian violence intensified. Many Republicans say Barack Obama’s withdrawal — accompanied by his administration’s foolish praise of Iraq’s “stability” — has jeopardized what has been achieved there. But if it cannot survive a sunrise without fraying, how much of an achievement was it?

Few things so embitter a nation as squandered valor; hence Americans, with much valor spent there, want Iraq to master its fissures. But with America in the second decade of its longest war, the probable Republican nominee is promising to extend it indefinitely.

Mitt Romney opposes negotiations with the Taliban while they “are killing our soldiers.” Which means: No negotiations until the war ends, when there will be nothing about which to negotiate. “We don’t,” he says, “negotiate from a position of weakness as we are pulling our troops out.” That would mean stopping the drawdown of U.S. forces — except Romney would not negotiate even from a position of strength: “We should not negotiate with the Taliban. We should defeat the Taliban.” How could that be achieved in a second decade of war? What metrics would establish “defeat”? Details to come, perhaps.

PPP Polls: New National Leader is Rick Santorum

Very interesting Stuff.

http://twitter.com/ppppolls

Liberals for Rick Santorum

If I may make a suggestion. If anyone can vote for Rick in any GOP primary, they should. His winning or at least prolonging the contest would help ensure a big victory for Obama and Democrats in Congress.

Thoughts?

What does Rick Santorum's Victories Say about Citizens United and Money in Politics?

Let me be the first to say I am happy as everything Rick won. Obama will destroy this man, and I couldn't be happier. Next, let me say that I cannot stand Santorum. He has some of the worst positions of any politician I have ever seen.

With that said, another fact is that he has virtually no money. He is running a shoe-string campaign with hardly any funding and a very badly funded Super-Pac. What that in mind, is there anything that Santorum's Victories say about money in politics and the effects of Citizens United?

Do you Believe that DU is Generally to the Right or Left of the Average Democratic Voter?

Just curious where people thing the board is on members versus the average democratic voters. I would say to the left, but I am wondering what you all think.

I put this here in "Meta-discussion" because I thought this dealt with the discussion here and was a good fit. If it belongs in GD, sorry.

I am a Moderate and I vote Democratic Everytime... Why do I feel Unwelcome Sometimes Posting on DU

I am a strong democratic voter. Where I vote you would have to be crazy not to be. I am from the South and the Republican party is scary here.

That said, I believe in free trade and free markets, regulated capitalism, and a host of other beliefs that many find on this board uncomfortable. I really don't think I am that far out of line with President Clinton or President Obama in how they think the world works. I join my fellow DUers in a belief that society should work to eliminate poverty, that extreme wealth inequality is bad, and I worry about many of the problems this country faces, such as the environmental concerns. However, because I deviate from a set course of beliefs I am often attacked.

My point is not to complain. My point is to point this out and ask, "why is disagreement on some issues so troubling for many who post here?" Many asking or complaining about the nature of my post and the fact that they are allowed.

Is this board not primarily a free speech zone for democratic voters?

I would say, I don't like calling myself a Moderate. I just posted it here as a thread title because it was an easy label for a little space. TO me, my belief system is more about exploring for the truth, then any label.

In a Democratic Society, When is it Just to Work Outside the System (ie Rebellion) for Change?

Let me say, I define "work outside the system" as doing actions that run against the democratically established legal system. I mentioned rebellion to give an example, but there are other methods that are outside the legal system.

Also, democracy is defined as

Democracy : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

I would suggest with all our problems the US falls under this definition. With that said, that brings me to the question.

Given that people have the right to vote and the society is GENERALLY ran as one in which the citizens elect those who represent them, when is it okay to go outside the system in that society?