Republicans' worst fear

[Eric J in MN]

That the Democrats moderate their positions on social issues and sharpen their positions on economic issues.

If Democrats said they wanted to do everything they could to reduce abortion without making it illegal during the first 4 months,

and

that they want to end any federal money for corporations which outsource,

we would win big.

[ochazuke]

1. Win what?

Election's over. Results for future elections are in, too.

[mhr]

2. That's Not Moderation, That's Common Sense, And I Agree Completely!

eom

[saracat]

3. Why would anyone watch any of those? I haven'y turned on the TV

since the great theft and I will not be doing so. The fundies did just fine without knowing anything and so can I! Just like Babs , I don't want to bother my "beautiful mind"!

[freetobegay]

4. No it's Gay & lesbians!

Haven't you been watching the news?

[TaleWgnDg]

7. Yup, it's "guns, gays and God!" . . .

_{. . . . . . "I always laugh when people say that George W. Bush is saying this or that to appease the religious right. He is the religious right." - GWBush first cousin John Ellis}

[stevietheman]

5. There's no need to moderate anything...

but instead it will be important for Democrats to gird and _clarify_ their positions. Also, taking advantage of any Republican catastrophes (of which there will be many) will be helpful--they won't be able to blame Clinton any longer.

[Eric J in MN]

8. Will people who didn't blame Bush for all his failures

until now, change their minds after more Bush failures?

[Nay]

20. Exactly, Eric. People who haven't held * responsible yet aren't

going to start doing so, IMHO. Why would they? And even if they did, if the vote is rigged, it won't matter.

[prof_science]

6. Screw that...

...they have nothing to fear if they control the outcome of elections.

[Eric J in MN]

10. Ohio will require voter-verified paper ballots starting for 2006.

So will California.

In Minnesota and Wisconisn, we use optical-scan ballots.

For other states, use the STATE DROPDOWN on the left of:
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

[jean]

28. op scan balloting can be screwed with in a number of ways

it is not fail safe.

http://www.votersunite.org/info/previousmessups.asp

Plus we've read this past week via BBV that op scan balloting can be screwed with by hacking the central tabulator computer.

[noiretextatique]

9. sharpen?!?! compared to WHAT!!

a weak economy and obscene spending on killing people for halliburton's bottom line? since you are eager to compromise women's rights, which right are you willing to give up in this appeasememt plan? i asked you that in the other thread...

[Eric J in MN]

12. I sacrificed plenty to try to win this election, and it was all for

nothing.

Don't tell me I'm only asking others to sacrifice.

[noiretextatique]

16. i am telling you that by offering to compromise

on abortion, you ARE asking WOMEN to sacrifice their legal right to abotion to appease...people who don't vote democratic. and i am telling you it's not going to happen.

[Eric J in MN]

17. We lost the Presidential race and seats in the House and seats

in the Senate.

It's time to question whether writing-off millions of pro-life voters is a good thing, or if it would be better to compromise.

We aren't helping women's rights by losing elections.

[noiretextatique]

19. better...for who?

you will never get pro-choice women on board with this. just telling you it's a fantasy.

[DELUSIONAL]

11. Oh Bull shit you *&*&^ male -- it was the VOTING MACHINES

We didn't lose -- WE won. There was vote fraud.

Damn males always wanting to compromise with women's control of our bodies.

[Eric J in MN]

14. It's not something I want per se. I'm just responding

to my experience of voters who told me they're undecided because they're "anti-war but pro-life."

[jean]

27. I didn't equivocate with people I talked to - Choice and Civil Unions

It's not Abortion and Gay Marriage. Those are the lables the radical Right has pinned on those issues so they can win the debate and the votes.

Choice and Civil Unions both relate to either you want to respect our Constitution and mainstream American values of equal rights and justice for all - - - or you don't respect the sanctity of the Constitution and want to de-construct it to suit the radical religious and political extremists who are in the minority in this country.

[TahitiNut]

29. Uffda!

:eyes:

[Liberal Gramma]

13. If we moderate our social and fiscal positions, we'll be Republicans.

[Eric J in MN]

15. I don't want us to moderate our economic positions. I want us to

move to the left on economic issues.

Pull out of NAFTA and the WTO.

Raise the minimum wage.

No federal contracts for companies which outsource.

[choicevoice]

18. How many times are you going to start the same damn thread?

Just come out and say you are anti choice and change your party to the Repukes.

[Bridget Burke]

21. No. If they want "morals" let's talk morals.

Abortion is not pretty but it needs to stay safe & legal. Period. But how the hell do they get to define what's moral?

What about starting an unnecessary war to kill thousands of people for no good reason? Is that moral?

What about a system that leaves so many to sicken & die without affordable medical care? Is that moral?

What about corporations that send jobs overseas & are awarded for their trouble? Is that moral?

What about a tax system that benefits the rich & corporations while sucking everybody else dry? Higher local taxes & fees plus fewer social, educational, environmental services? Is that moral?

[many a good man]

22. Let the Courts decide civil rights issues

The culture wars are over and we've already won. They are rallying over sour grapes. Abortion is a right, fetuses aren't citizens, gays can legally sodomize each other in Texas. The point of having a Constitution that guarantees minority rights and civil rights and separation of church and state is that it will overrule any reactionary legislation that threatens equal rights.

The important thing is to keep ideologues from taking over the bench. By letting these issues influence the election we may have lost a meaningless battle out of conviction and lost the real war, which is control of the judiciary. Pray that Bush isn't able to tip the SCOTUS.

With a liberal court we could have sat back and let the freaks pass all the garbage they want to make themselves feel self-righteous only to see the courts strike it down when challenged. Example: the "partial birth" abortion ban. There's no way it can stand because it doesn't allow for saving the mother. Another example is gay marriage. Its clearly a violation of equal rights to give it a different name that connotes second class citizenship.

Obviously, if you can take away these cultural wedge issues Dems have a clear majority. But how can we do it without turning our backs on our own deeply held ideals? Instead of coming down on the "unpopular" side of these cultural issues we can take the position that its for the courts to decide. We are pro-Constitution and pro-people. We want people to live their lives freely and tackle the every day problems all people face.

How do we take these issues off the table without harming the people who depend on us? Maybe we can clone Barack Obama....

[Pushed To The Left]

26. Let's why saving the Supreme Court

from the right-wing was and is the most important issue right now. We all need to make sure that everybody in Congress that isn't hardcore right-wing rejects any extremist judicial nominees. If that means a filibuster, then that is what they need to do. Until then, we all need to support groups like the ACLU and PFAW and kick the right-wing's butt in the courts.

[jean]

30. Bravo - what an articulate and enlightening post!

[in_cog_ni_to]

23. We won't win jack shit as long as

we use electronic voting machines. PERIOD. No wins. EVER! It doesn't matter how we stand on any issue.

[Eric J in MN]

24. Califronia and Ohio will add printers in 2006 (nt)

nt

[jean]

25. Dems will be shut out of the political process on Capitol Hill. They'll

be ignored and demonized if they filibuster in the Senate. I can't imagine a scenario in which the repubs fear the Dems.

We should not moderate our strong, mainstream position on Choice. We need to stand strong and not allow the radical Right and radical Christians to dismantle the Constitution. And by the way, can we stop using the 'A' word when discussing this issue? It's the word of choice the radical Right uses to make a wedge of this issue. The Issue is about a woman's choice and having the autonomy to manage her own health care. Abortion is a procedure and using it to define the issue wedges it in favor of the radical Right and radical Christians. Just using the 'A' word knocks Dems to the ground before discussion even starts. Then we have 'pro-A' candidates.

The issue is CHOICE - a woman's choice to decide what's best for her own health and welfare.

What's most valuable for Dems to do is seek out quality candidates to run in '06. Candidates who are hard-working, pragmatic, straight arrow Dems (not mimics of whatever strategy of the day the DLC/DNC/DCCC and whomever else excluding DFA comes up with). People like that need to be found and convinced to run for office.

This is what one of our MN legislators did, after the repubs in control shut Dems out of the process. She and others went out and worked their butts off, going door to door and net working and convinced new people to run for office. MN ended up taking 13 seats back and the repubs lost their 15 seat majority (it's down to 2)

This has struck a little fear into MN repubs.