General Discussion

Chan790

(20,176 posts)

106. They should have left with Reagan.

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 07:37 PM

Mar 2012

Actually, most of them did. I've got a family full of Democrats that haven't voted for a Democrat in a presidential race since Carter.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

121 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can you be pro-Republican Economics and still be considered a Democrat? [View all] HughBeaumont Mar 2012 OP

The bigger question is: Can you be pro-Republican Economics and still be considered intelligent? Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2012 #1

+1 n/t Chan790 Mar 2012 #104

Even more germaine, can you be Horshack and still be Vinny Barbarino? Zanzoobar Mar 2012 #112

Not in my book. sinkingfeeling Mar 2012 #2

Absolutely Yes! AllTooEasy Mar 2012 #49

I didn't say a word about a 'purity test to vote Dem'. Anybody who so desires can sinkingfeeling Mar 2012 #50

Is "Terry Randell" any relation to Randall Terry? 11 Bravo Mar 2012 #93

Apparently so. At least considering the number of........... socialist_n_TN Mar 2012 #3

It's probably the reason "Bewsh got everything he wanted" . . . HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #7

Sure, why not? It's a big tent. Quantess Mar 2012 #4

Clinton at least raised taxes on the rich, which worked for the most part. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #8

Clinton is a good example of a popular Democrat pnwmom Mar 2012 #15

Oh sure, Big Tent or Fifth Column, why quibble? kenny blankenship Mar 2012 #11

First, I agree with the OP. Second, here's what I don't understand... shcrane71 Mar 2012 #5

ALL monies are "double taxed" jmowreader Mar 2012 #68

Yet this stupidity of "double taxation" is repeated in our business schools. shcrane71 Mar 2012 #86

I Get Your Point, But One Small Quibble ProfessorGAC Mar 2012 #92

They may call themselves Dems, but they are not. hifiguy Mar 2012 #6

Nope. Hatchling Mar 2012 #9

One would think. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #12

No... but they are trying like hell to co-opt the party fascisthunter Mar 2012 #10

They've always been part of the party. pnwmom Mar 2012 #16

how many true liberals is the dem establishment supporting? fascisthunter Mar 2012 #29

I have noticed... kenfrequed Mar 2012 #89

hell, we get that here! fascisthunter Mar 2012 #90

If you vote for Democrats and/or are a registered Democrat, yes. pnwmom Mar 2012 #13

Should we welcome people who would send the unemployed to the streets? HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #17

Many of them were part of the party before we were. pnwmom Mar 2012 #67

They should have left with Reagan. Chan790 Mar 2012 #106

No. Chan790 Mar 2012 #105

Where would a socially liberal,economically conservative person sit? Swede Mar 2012 #14

Libertarian Party, which take votes away from Republicans more than anything. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #18

To their credit, the Libertarian Party supports marriage equality. Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #28

Every time I've asked a die-hard Libertarian about where HE (why are they all men?) stands on shcrane71 Mar 2012 #31

So not Libertarians. Just Repubs but ashamed to admit it (nt) Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #33

Die-hard Ron Paul supporters. I guess he is running as a Republican. shcrane71 Mar 2012 #34

Their support has more to do with getting the government out of the marriage-defining business. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #36

Well said. shcrane71 Mar 2012 #39

Current Repub crazy economics--not really Spike89 Mar 2012 #19

We can be pro-business without EC Mar 2012 #20

Maybe a re-framing is needed? HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #27

Apparently but not by me, I consider them as much a deadly enemy as bigot or a theocrat and cut TheKentuckian Mar 2012 #21

Hear hear. nt woo me with science Mar 2012 #72

I think economic far-right-wingers ARE bigots and theocrats LeftishBrit Mar 2012 #97

VERY good point in your last sentence....... socialist_n_TN Mar 2012 #99

+100. Don't forget America's worship of Horatio Alger. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #101

Truth TheKentuckian Mar 2012 #119

No, I don't think so Populist_Prole Mar 2012 #22

I thought it was well put. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #42

No guitar man Mar 2012 #23

There has been an infiltration and deliberate corruption of the party. woo me with science Mar 2012 #24

Both of the Clintons are. So is Carville. Taverner Mar 2012 #25

I think corporate taxes should be cut, and that the tax code should be simplified. Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #26

NAFTA was a loss for the environments, wages and worker progress of all three nations. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #30

Did Paul Krugman deserve the Nobel Prize? Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #37

Does your non-sequiter respond to the previous post? brentspeak Mar 2012 #52

When was Jonathan Tasini awarded a Nobel Prize? (nt) Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #55

Which, I guess, is your way of admitting you have no argument to make n/t brentspeak Mar 2012 #57

Milton Frideman also won a Nobel Prize. Does that mean we should listen to him? white_wolf Mar 2012 #59

Friedman would strongly endorse Obama's free trade policies (nt) Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #62

Yes, he would and he would disagree with Krugman on many things. white_wolf Mar 2012 #64

His argument is based on a bogus strawman karynnj Mar 2012 #85

You should consider the other party. Do youy have ANY evidence free trade creates jobs? grahamhgreen Mar 2012 #47

Why should I consider the other party? Obama agrees with me on all those issues (nt) Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #48

He agrees with you on dismantling the American middle class? n/t brentspeak Mar 2012 #53

Perhaps you missed my earlier post? Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #54

Yes, it helps to clarify that you indeed prefer the middle class gets demolished brentspeak Mar 2012 #58

I guess you're not a fan of Obama (nt) Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #63

You're right, but I think he's wrong on these issues, grahamhgreen Mar 2012 #113

No. n/t Cali_Democrat Mar 2012 #32

Absolutely. Economic policy is very complex... badtoworse Mar 2012 #35

Not using their current sabotage economics. backscatter712 Mar 2012 #38

From what I've seen the past decade. Sure. raouldukelives Mar 2012 #40

it depends on how you define pro-Republican economics... Green_Lantern Mar 2012 #41

Except we know that there's a time and a place for such conservative economic measures. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #45

In that case I'd lean towards no they aren't Democrats.. Green_Lantern Mar 2012 #46

Apparently. It's a big tent. But sometimes I want to leave it because of all the clowns. n/t librechik Mar 2012 #43

Yes Aerows Mar 2012 #44

Evidently so. nt Starry Messenger Mar 2012 #51

Sadly, yes Doug Diggler Mar 2012 #56

Not in this world. RagAss Mar 2012 #60

Ask the New Dem/DLC types. Seems to be working for them. FLAprogressive Mar 2012 #61

Anti-union, pro-Republican economics have been popular on this board since I landed here NNN0LHI Mar 2012 #65

Anti-union, pro-Republican economics are popular with our elected (and apppointed) Democrats progressoid Mar 2012 #81

No DonCoquixote Mar 2012 #66

I hope so - most Dems are since the neocon revolution saras Mar 2012 #69

All you have to do to be a Democrat is register as one. You can believe in any policy totodeinhere Mar 2012 #70

K&R woo me with science Mar 2012 #71

Not only NO, but HELL NO! Firebrand Gary Mar 2012 #73

+1 Crowman1979 Mar 2012 #76

Rec. This thread reminds me of the "old DU" (that so many of us used to know & love) inna Mar 2012 #74

Yeah, one where Republicans are actually policed and not welcomed with open arms. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #79

If one is unfamiliar with the constraints of a particular group, OnyxCollie Mar 2012 #75

The answer is MOST DEFINITELY YES. Selatius Mar 2012 #77

Then again, could that be the reason progressives aren't getting promoted? HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #80

No. limpyhobbler Mar 2012 #78

It's obvious most people are confused mathematic Mar 2012 #82

No, you can be pro-Republican Economics and be Libertarian Motown_Johnny Mar 2012 #83

Can you define what "pro-Republican Economics" is? MineralMan Mar 2012 #84

The belief and support of one or more of the following ideas: HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #87

Obama has signed more free trade agreements than any Republican. Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #98

Uh . . . BECAUSE IT IS??? HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #100

Clinton signed NAFTA. Al Gore lobbied hard for it. Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #102

Er, maybe I'm trying to tell you something about every modern Democrat since the 1980s? HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #108

Pro Republican economics policy also means pro Republican war policy. woo me with science Mar 2012 #88

Death at a 2547% profit margin!! Other People's Money used for slaughter is awesome! HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #95

Republican Economics usrname Mar 2012 #91

See post #87. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #94

I suppose 'a Democrat' just means how you vote LeftishBrit Mar 2012 #96

I've always staunchly felt that the answer is no. Chan790 Mar 2012 #103

I agree with this answer. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #107

So you're redefining the word "Democrat" because you don't like the policies of post-LBJ Democrats. Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #109

Geez... Chan790 Mar 2012 #110

OK. The message I'm getting is that the policies of the Democratic party over the last 30 years Nye Bevan Mar 2012 #111

No not at all even though we have Republicans Prentending to be Democrats currently ChunderingTruth Mar 2012 #114

I think it's been this way for years, as the rhetoric moves further to the right. HughBeaumont Mar 2012 #115

Being Nice and Compromise is the problem ChunderingTruth Mar 2012 #116

I do agree with Republicans on one thing regarding economics. DCBob Mar 2012 #117

Kick. nt woo me with science Mar 2012 #118

Democrat? Yes. Liberal? Hell no. (nm) handa Mar 2012 #120

This message was self-deleted by its author LeftishBrit Mar 2014 #121