The DemocraticUnderground can say things the Democratic Party cannot say.

[graham4anything]

472. Well look at Lincoln and LBJ-

LBJ needed republicans to get past the Wallace(aka today's Ron Paul) John Birch Society like Dixiecrats.
Lincoln needed the other party to get past the then John Birch Society like in his party (parties were switched back then).

I am supportive of all democratic candidates for elective office.(except as stated here, in the rare instances where the democratic candidate is known to not being the one to win, or there is no democratic candidate and the 3rd person has sworn to caucus with the democratic party(as Florida w Charlie Crist(who spit in Jeb Bush's eye twice and is the reason the Bush's hate him so much and have slandered and libeled him time and again).

If I go into a record store and am looking for the Soundtrack to the new Great Gatsby movie wanting it for the Lana Del Rey
song "Young and Beautiful" which appears in 3 separate versions on that soundtrack, however, Jay-Z and Florence & Machine and thirteen other cuts are also on it,
do I look in the Rock section? The soundtrack section(which mostly contain instrumentals), the Rap section? The World music section?
etc.
I myself would have everything alphabetical like in the old days as music is music and people are people.

Hence, the 80-20.

Congress can again vote 80-20 on legislation like in the past.

Regardless of what Rand or Ron Paul want (and if they were not republicans, then why in the world did Ron Paul keep getting
reelected in the state of Tom DeLay all these years? WHy? Because Ron was a useful republican tool. IMHO

But for President and all other ELECTIVE OFFICE, I vote democratic.
It's not like the republican house lets the democratic person subpoena anyone.
It is Darrell Isaa who does so, and who can be rendered obsolete with an 18 point switch, even if,
all 18 would be Max Baucus (if he were in the house) types.

Because then majority speaker Pelosi won't give Isaa the power.

And remember one thing-
one of the best SCOTUS in 1980after times was David Souter.
And he was picked by Bush41. (he was so stealth, Bush41 didn't even know who he was).
Yet Souter himself cried the hardest attempting to render the 7 to 2 decision to send it back to Florida, the last SCOTUS decision,
and NOT the 5 to 4 which he voted against, which said, ha ha time is up, the 7 to 2 is meaningless.

What if back in 2004, John Kerry did as many believe he asked and was slapped down after a possible deal was already broached,
what if John Kerry picked John McCain(at that time some(not me) thought of him as a maverick really, and it might have led to
a very easily won 2004 election. Would you have voted for Kerry/McCain?
(I would NOT have voted for a McCain/Kerry ticket in 2004 myself.)