Close Topic Options

U. S. Elections 2006 - Page 5

The terrorists know, as do most of the rest of the world, that the Democrats are extremely soft on national security. That is why the Left in England (the BBC in particular), arvhic, and many, many others, are glad that the Republicans are out of power. They don't like the fact that the conservatives in the US are very hard on the subject of national defense. The terrorists, along with the global liberals, are thrilled that the Democrats will stop George W. Bush from doing anything else that might be effective in reigning in the terrorists.

The Democrats will gladly roll over, just as the Spanish did. Appeasement is what the Democrats are all about. Most of the Democratic leadership, such as Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, and Clinton, all despise the military. They also despise traditional American values, such as a strong defense.

It certainly does matter to terrorist who is in power. They claim that they want the US out of Iraq. The Democrats will bow to their wishes. They will win, when the US "cuts and runs".

So, the terrorists won this election, just as much as Nancy Pelosi.

Elections S U

Before 9/11, I would agree with you on this statement but let's not forget that the biggest terrorist attack ever in US soil was during a Republican Administration. Can we really talk about Democrats being soft on national security?

Then, Are you saying that MOST Americans sided with Terrorists?

Edited: LDS_forever on 12th Nov, 2006 - 9:31pm

U. S. Elections 2006 History & Civil Business Politics

That's right. 9 months into a new administration, with most of the national security apparatus still in place from 8 years of Democratic control of the Executive branch, including the infamous "wall" that forbade the CIA and FBI from sharing any information (which was put into place by the Democrat administration). This despite the fact that we had several terrorist attacks against the United States, by Al Qaeda, during that same Democrat administration.

And, yes, we can say that the Democrats are soft on national security. They vote against every single attempt to increase that security, in any way. They fight against ever getting a strong ambassador into place, in any capacity. They want to appease the terrorists. Their first question is never, "how do we defeat the terrorists, so that they won't hurt any more innocents?" It is, instead, "what have we done to anger the terrorists? We need to make them like us, so that they won't attack us any more."

The modern Democrats are just like Neville Chamberlain. Anything for "peace in our time." This despite the fact that the Islamofascists hate their ideas and ideals even more than they hate the Republicans.

At least that is my take on it.

Page 5 Elections S U

I understand what you are saying, but do you realize that most of your folks actually voted for them? And to be honest with you, I do not think it was because the Democrats had anything to offer (since the campaigns basically were: "Are you tired of what Bush is doing?, vote for us!") they did not have anything of substance to offer but...wouldn't you say (based on the votes) that most Americans are saying: 'We want our kids out of Iraq' 'We are tired of this war!'.

Elections S U

First of all, only about 35% of the eligible population voted. That, in itself, is not "most of the people." (Understanding the mechanics of why people don't vote is a whole 'nother topic....)

In my state, only two Democrats were elected in the partisan contests, and those were either a bad Republican choice, or the incumbent was too well known to invite any competition. Every other contest, the Republicans won.

Whether those who voted Democrat did so because they want the US out of Iraq and Afghanistan or not is up for debate. I think there were too many terrible "secrets" revealed during this past year, mostly involving high-profile Republicans in office.

In addition, I think it just happens this way periodically: The regime changes, if you will. Democrat or Republican, people get fed up with whoever is in power after years of being in control, and vote the whole lot out.

All in my opinion, of course.
Roz

U. S. Elections 2006

It is extremely difficult to say that "most" Americans wanted any particular thing, especially from this election.

Less than 50% of the eligible voters actually went to the polls. Most, if not all, of the contested races were very close. Some of them by about 2% (51/49). Also, the conservatives, especially the conservative Christians, stayed away from the polls in droves. For the most part, not because of the war, but because the Republicans have acted more like the Democrats than the Democrats themselves.

So, if you looked at all the people in the United States, less than 25% off the adults actually voted for Democrats in this election. In fact, you would probably find that it was closer to 20% who cared enough to vote for Democrats, and, you are right, most of them voted against the Republicans, not FOR the Democrats. But that is the way it goes. The vast majority of people don't know, or care, about the real issues. They don't WANT to know what the issues are, as long as the government keeps giving them money and services that they could provide for themselves.

Most of the people who support the Democrats don't have any of their children in the war, or even in the military. I think you would find that the vast majority of military families are conservative.

The biggest problem this year has been that most of the Republicans have abandoned their conservative roots. They voted in the McCain-Feingold bill. They supported the "No Child Left Behind Act". They allowed the Democrats to get away with everything, and left us (conservatives) in the lurch.

You are right about what the Democrats had (have) to offer. That is why Rush Limbaugh said that the Democrats "defeated something with nothing." And I doubt that the situation will change any time soon.

U. S. Elections 2006 - Page 5

Thats always the case with our elections. We had a record voter turn out last presidential election and it was still below 50% turnout. So when the polls say something, and the election shows the same thing, I don't see how you can say the majority hasn't spoken.

Just so you know, while I didn't like Clinton, he did have several meetings on Osama Bin Laden and did want to catch him. Bush didn't have a single meeting even though he was warned. You can't lay the blame for this on someone elses presidency and surely not on the democrats. The republicans had the house and senate for the last twelve years and didn't propose any home security bills. But they did submit and pass the defense of marriage act. That being the case, what have the republicans been proposing to help national security before 9/11? I know what, exactly the same thing the democrats did, squat!

Those of you who have watched to much republican propaganda now believe that democrats=terrorist paradise. Seriously, listen to your selves. The terrorists are happy that democrats are in office? Why, did they do something special under the democrats? 9/11 allegedly took 10-15 years to plan. That means they started planning under either Reagan or Bush Sr.

I will tell you what the democrats are going to do better than the republicans. They can start by implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 commission. The republicans have rejected the majority of suggestions, America wants to see these implemented. They want to see our government openly confront the Saudi Arabian government on their part in this, because most of the terrorists where from there.
https://grumet.net/911/recommendations.html

If the democrats do just that, as they have promised to do, then they will have done twice what the republicans have done to protect our country! Its ludicrous and sinisterly biased to make a comment that the terrorists are glad the democrats won the election! Worse, its completely selling out to republican propaganda, which tried to say if you vote democrat your against our country, its really a disgusting tactic and I'm ashamed so many people fell into it.

U. S. Elections 2006 Politics Business Civil & History - Page 5

I am not going to address each point. However, this one is easy.

The problem is that polls are incredible in the fact that they attempt, very hard, to only poll "likely voters."

So, if the conservatives are particularly active one year, the polls may show the conservative point of view to be the majority. This year, the Democrats were particularly active, but on ONLY one point - the Iraq War.

As I said before, ultimately, the conservative point of view was more evident within the individual states than the liberal point of view. However, a great many conservatives didn't bother to go to the polls.

The Democrats didn't win. The Republicans lost.