Democrats vs. Republicans

I have heard many on the Forums speak that there are no differences (major) between Democrats and Republicans, and while that may be true in some areas (War on Drugs, for example), there is a difference when it comes to selecting the lesser of two evils (unfortunately the Green Party isn't powerful enough).

In this case, the Democrats are widely different than the Republicans.

For example, both parties do lean toward certain special interests:

Republicans:
Military (although our troops don't receive adequate pay or care)
Big Business

Democrats:
Labor
Civil Liberties
Elderly
Civil Rights (minorities)
Environmental
Educational


Also, certain groups such as the fascistic Christian Coalition and the Right Wing Extremists all rank Republicans with massive ranging from 100 to 80, whilst Democrats usually get anywhere from 20 to 0 points.

Most extremist Left groups do not vote for the Democratic party because they are seen as too compromising.

Next is the economy and growth:
From Harding In 1921 to Bush in 2003, Democrats held White House for 40 years, and Republicans for 42.5 years, during which time,
1. Democrats created 75,820,000 net new jobs and Republicans 36,440,000.
2. Per Year Average : Democrats = 1,825,200 vs. Republicans = 856,400.
3. There was either a depression or a recession during the administrations of 6 of the 9 Republican presidents .
4. The DOW grew by 52% more under Democrats, and
5. The GDP grew by 26.4% more under Democrats.

REAGAN VS. CLINTON?

1. 24% more jobs underClinton
2. 64% greater GDP under Clinton
3. 500% higher growth in the DOW under Clinton
4. Clinton increased national spending by 28%, Reagan increased it by 80%
5. Clinton increased national debt by 28% , Reagan increased it by 187%
6. Clinton produced a huge surplus, Reagan increased deficits by 112%

Needless to say: IF the DNC would link up and merge with the ideas of the Green Party (as well as their own--and some of the Libertarian party's "social platform") they would be a completely different animal from the Old G.O.P. and maybe, finally, put in it the grave--for good!

 

Fuck clinton hes the reason we are stuck with Hitler this days

 

missprint Mr Bush

 

I don't think that Civil Liberties and Civil Rights are special interests. I agree that Democrats care (or fake it) more about them than Republicans.

I think that Bush has shown that the Coroporate Republican Party is in fact different from the Corporate Democratic Party. Corporations want to make money. They don't care about abortion (as long as they make the money from abortion, birth control, counseling and picket signs) one way or the other. Either the Dems. or the Repubs. will give them NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO type government they want. But there are some governmental actions the corps aren't concerned about.

I'm currently trying to convince my Green friends that the Republicans are bad enough that they should vote Democratic this November.

 

I don't disagree, Mike.

That's why I believe the DNC is the lesser evil.

 

Abortion is not about all that religious and moral crap that is being feed to the religious right. Bush supporting pro-lifers (Abortion) is corporate interest. More babies equals more cheap workers equals more consumers equals more profits. In the corporate world, a woman is a production machine.

The people pushing the pro-life movement, it does not affect them. It affects the lower class and middle class. The fact that the people pushing the pro-life movement are supposedly pro-life and anti public programs and institutions should ring a bell.

 

Dont forget Waco was a Clinton & Janet Reno Product . The chineses open door and the Arabs in complete out of control So dont paint the democrats so nice 911 was plan under clinton belt and the towers were allready bomb in early 90s.

 

4 more years of clinton who knows what alse might went wrong , dont get me wrong im not Bush fan anymore i only like him i the bigining becouse of clinton anti gun ideas and the rest of clinton fuck ups.

 

I don't think that they plan that far ahead. If there is a malevolent motivation for the anti-abortion position, I would say that desperation and a lack of hope decreases resistance to the status quo. They don't seek the desperation of the individual pregnant woman, but a general "no way out" feeling by everyone. Decreasing options in all areas (including sex and reproduction) gives them more control.

Having said that, I think that most pro-life people (the ones behind the card table covered with pictures of fetuses and petitions to sign) are motivated by religious feelings about the sanctity of life. The leaders have different motivations.

 

Societies that ban abortion have a spike in crime in 20 years, and crime is bad for business...
And don't forget the powerful coat-hanger lobby that has the GOP in their pockets.

 

Everything is good for business even crime. What would police men and the courts do without crime? Crime increases police employment, security officers, etc.

 

You seriously need to take a basic course in macroeconomics.

 

Gerald Ford was one of the very best presidents we ever had and he was a Repub. Got in without a single vote, too. So much for democracy.

 

Everything stimulates the economy.

Crime overall it might hurt the economy but some profit from crime. When crime is high it results in hiring more police officers, prison guards, judges, and lawyers. Accidents stimulate the economy because they result in consumer spending. ect

 

Currently, crime gives corps. cheap workers. Inmates cost less in pay, etc.

 

I don't see any difference between the two parties which are controlled by the same people. Sorry.

Both parties represent big government and tyranny.

 

But in those areas where they disagree, do you have a preference?

 

If the Democrats are the lesser of two evils, we're still stuck with evil. Can't we do better?

 

Like I said, you need to take a basic course in economics. This is an old myth. If what you said were true, then having every major city in the US destroyed by nuclear weapons would be good for the economy, because we'd have to rebuild. That's your logic. Funny how countries with huge crime problems and war don't tend to show economic growth.

Would you buy a car if you lived in a neighborhood where car theft was soaring? Would you buy an expensive bike if you couldn't leave it anywhere without it getting stolen? Would you buy an iPod if muggings were rampant? Would you furnish your home with the latest electronics if you got burglarised every few months? And what would happen to the value of property in your neighborhood if everyone was having breakins? Would women go out to theatres and restaurants if there was a epidemic of rape? Would violent crime increase tourism in your city? Would you invest in a country where fraud and theft were out of control? No? Then try to use some common sense and imagine what the impact would be on the economy.

Or, like I said, take a basic course in economics. You're falling for every myth out there.

 

lesser evil....


So sad that we're still being fooled into thinking it's either Hitler or Stalin.

There's always an out.

Those two evils are there because we allow them to be.
We don't have to have a dem or a repub in power.