You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Assuming they could ALL get Elected? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Protagoras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-04 06:37 PM
Original message
Assuming they could ALL get Elected?
Advertisements [?]
Ok, because I'm a bit befuddled by the rancor I see aimed at our own candidates (esp whoever is in the lead on any given month)...and the frequent assertions that anyone who admits to less than idealistic or absolutist positions is some form of sellout...I need to ask the DU community to clarify a couple things for me.

Assuming all 4-5 democratic candidates (however you want to count it) could get elected (thereby removing the concept of electability)...hell assume the Supreme Court is going to appoint whoever DU tells them to....

But republicans continue to control the house and senate...(because by all indications they will).

In the next 4 years...who would be the most effective President? Key word *Effective*.

Knowing they still have to work with the supreme court, still have to appeal to the people, and have to get their bills thru congress and avoid having their Veto's overridden...

Who would be most to least successful in:

Placing progressive supreme court (and other federal court) judges.
Helping to regain seats for democrats in the Congress
Advancing the cause of Healthcare Coverage for all Americans
Increasing primary education support and funding
Increasing access and funding for higher education
Slowing or stopping the Offshoring of American Jobs
Improving our standing in the International Community
Reducing violence in the ME
Increasing the average wage for workers
Increasing empoyment rates/decrease unemployment
Providing for/protect retirement/social security for the elderly
Reducing the impact of corporate contributions on elections
Getting re-elected in 4 years
more...

I'm really focused on the terms effective and successful because I'm seeing so much debate between idealism and electability that I think we sometimes lose sight of what is actually going to happen after the election. Do we want a one hit wonder? Do we want a democrat to serve one term that re-polarizes the right to the extent that Bush has polarized the left? Or are we looking for someone who can get in and keep us in a position for positive change for more than 4 years? And if so...what does it really take to get that? How well must we be able to play with others?

Just curious how the DU veterans view it.

:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC