While there are a few good, progressive democratic politicians, the vast majority are cut from the same imperialist cloth as the GOP. Don't fall for their slick lies; how have the poor been helped since January of 2009?? Huh?



(crickets)

I just like Barack Obama, he was change we needed. Change, that the Republican presidential nominee, John McCain, could not hope to compete with. We may as well give 'em four years to at least try and sort our problems out.

The democratic party is worse than it has ever been and getting worse. This party does not even understand the concept of morals or values. This party is going to do major damage to America. The thing about these guys if you notice they tend to have a certain type of mean personality about them. For example just people that leave comments about my ratings. You can tell if their democrates because of the nasty tone. They just seem to be Bold and Rude. In Fact a phone survey opeartor had the job of calling people to survey who was republican and who was demorate and she said she knew as soon as she began talkng with them because most democrates where very rude and disprespectful. I'm not saying their all terrible people I'm just saying a majority of them are..lol

As I have said before, I am not a Democrat and I'm not a Republican. I am a non partisan. I listen to each candidate, and whoever I feel is better qualified will get my vote.

It's hard to win elections when you're fighting against god.

Well, that is very interesting. But what is the position of the Democratic Party TODAY on the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy in the military?
Can the president vacate that policy as Commander in Chief?
If not, what is the Democratic Party doing to get Congress to allow it?
John E. Armstrong

Update: If your a Republican, the fiasco that is "The War Over Delegates " is the gift that keeps giving. Here are some low lights from yesterdays DNC committee meeting. Have your score card ready! Clinton's camp insisted Obama shouldn't get any pledged delegates in Michigan since he chose not to put his name on the ballot. Obama's camp wants 50% of of the delegates even though he wasn't on the ballot. 44% percent voted un-committed. What percent of the 44 percent would have voted for Obama isn't known, since two other candidates were on the ballot. The Michigan plan, approved by a 19 to 8 vote, that drew sharper opposition because of the way that state's delegates will be awarded. Under the plan, Clinton will be given 34.5 delegate votes in Denver to Obama's 29.5 delegate votes, a percentage distribution recommended by leaders of the Michigan Democratic Party but opposed by 29% of Clinton campaign officials. The Florida agreement included a provision calling for the delegates to be allocated on the basis of the state's Jan. 29 primary, a decision that would net Clinton 19 more delegates than Obama. The net result was a gain of 87 delegate votes for Clinton and 63 for Obama. Until yesterday's action, the magic number for winning the nomination was 2,026 delegates. Now the winner will need 2,118. According to a count by the Associated Press, as of last night, Obama controlled 2,052 delegates to Clinton's 1,877. The committee agreed on a compromise offered by the Michigan Democratic Party that would split the difference, allowing Clinton to take 69 delegates and Obama 59. Each delegate would get half a vote at the convention in Denver this summer, according to the deal. Confused? "We just blew the election!" a woman in the audience shouted. The crowd (50% Obama supporters and 50 % Clinton) was divided between cheering Obama supporters and booing Clinton supporters. Clinton's camp insisted the crowd was about 60% Clinton, but the Obama camp insist that 10% of Clinton's 60% was really shouting for their guy. There will be another meeting to decide the outcome of the shout down. Proponents of full seating continuously interrupted the committee members as they explained their support of the compromise, then supporters of the deal shouted back. "Shut up!" one woman shouted at another. "You shut up!" the second woman shouted back. Clinton supporters interrupted the proceedings, loudly chanting "Denver! Denver!" Denver is the site of the Democratic convention, where Clinton could appeal any decision made by the committee. "How can you call yourselves Democrats if you don't count the vote?" one man in the audience shouted before being escorted out by security. "This is not the Democratic Party!" Stay tuned... 3-15-08: The situation in Florida and Michigan reflect badly not only on the DNC, it demonstrates how this party functions as a whole. In Michigan its a case of revolving irony, they move up the primary date to make the state "more relevant". Then the DNC says you better not do that or else you'll lose all your delegates, but we'll let the voters vote, but only some candidates will be on the ballot. We're no longer "more relevant". Now the race has tightened up and it looks like another primary will be held, now we're "more relevant" again. In the end the popular vote will be close, as well as the delegate count. Insert the Super Duper Delegates...so much for relevence.

Democrats: bad.  Republicans: worse. What's a poor boy to do?

Those of you who have a positive outlook on this party scare me.  HAHAHA.  Step back from being "DEMOCRATS" for a second and take a good hard look at the people representing you.  I would be ashamed and embarrassed.  Obama has about as much experience as a high school kid,  he reads his speeches and steals all of his quotes and causes and everything from other wonerful black leaders and in my opinion he is about as black as George Bush.  He was raised by a white family in a white neighborhood.  Please think about this before you jump because he is by color only a "Black Man" and it is NOT fair that he use his color to try to get people to vote for him.  We should be voting for him because he is a ready, honest, steadfast God fearing man that will lead and protect our country.   And as far as Hiliary is concerned that is a total joke.  I can't believe anyone in their right mind would want that unfaithful man and the woman who acted like it never happened back in the white house and running our country.  Please people lets be smart.  Step back and take a look at the WHOLE picture. 

We are the champions! We care for people, not the rich. We care for children, not the oil.

This group of people absolutely scares me. Democrats in Congress are bent on destroying the current administration now matter what the cost. With the war in Iraq they want instant success or else throw in the towel. I'll admit the war has not been handled that well, but give me a break! Are we American's or what?! Past generations didn't give up, they kept fighting and when things got tough they fought harder. Crap, if this Congress had been in power in the early 1940's, we'd have surrendered after the massive loss of life at Normandy. Screw these people!

I've been a Republican my entire life, but I'm not so sure I will stay that way. I've been taking a serious look at what the Constitution Party has to offer, and I like what I see. I encourage everyone to at least visit their website and to read what they stand for. American Sovereignty is a key platform of theirs, unlike the Democrats or Republicans. The two old parties only mention such things when it is time to have elections. It is time for a new party!!!!!!!!

Currently appear poised on the brink of a return to their salad days.

Unfortunately for them, they are more than a touch bereft of the kind of leadership they once had.

Right now they are benefitting more from GOP screw ups than their own abilities.

Almost as bad as the Republicans.

The biggest problem with the democrats is the inability to find decent presidential candidates.

Gotta go w/a 1 here.  They pretty much suck.  Most of them voted for the war, but refuse to accept responsibility.  They are all a bunch of fakes as are Republicans (at least the latter tends to stick by what they say).  From John "Lurch" Kerry to Hillary "Dogface" Clinton, the Dems suck.

  The Democratic Party has problems, just like any large group of free people belonging to a collective without the ability to expell each other, but it's heads and shoulders above it's only serious rival, the Republican Party - which we'll refer to from hence forward as either 'The Doomsday Cult' or 'The Party of Cthulhu'. The Democratic Party is virtually identical to the American public at large, in it's position(s) on the war in Iraq, the most important issue of the day. The numerical statistical percentages are strikingly similar vis-a-vis troop re-deployments, phased pull-outs, re-focussing on diplomatic and political solutions, etc. etc. etc. The more general point is that very few Democrats are stupid enough to believe that "Dubya's Debacle in The Desert" is 'going well' or even 'salvageable' at this point. (There's Sen. Joe Lieberman and Sen. Hillary Clinton and that's about it.) Conversely, the GOP's Cthulhu worshippers still rank George W. Bush's handling of Iraq in the high 70s-80s in recent public opinion polled percentiles. <~ (That's what professional psychiatric doctors and mental health experts call "NuTz"!)

The Democratic Party is likely to grow in number and in political enfluence in the coming years, due to the fact that the GOP's Doomsday Cult of finger-waggers and crotchety old scolds is becoming less and less appealing to anyone less than 88 years of age, their stance on gay civil unions is identical to their stance on "mixed-race marriages" just a few decades ago, while most YOUNG (college age & younger) "Republicans" completely dissagree with this "bash those who are different" plank in the Cthulhu Death Cult Evangelical Party's Platform.

It's interesting to note that the architect of their 'gay-and-lesbian-bashing' strategy was an openly gay but very reclusive multi-millionaire named Arthur J. Finkelstein who got married to his male partner in John Kerry's home state, after bashing John Kerry politically for not opposing the Commonwealth's same-sex civil unions law more ferociously.

Although the Democratic Party will almost certainly grow in size to vastly outnumber their GOP conservative counterparts, the biggest danger they face is infiltration. As the Bushie-Cult's membership leaves the sinking ship that WAS their beloved Republican Party, they'll be looking for a new political home, because they are attracted to power. If the Democratic Party continues to allow itself to be dragged downward towards the DLC' control - a stealth Southern Christian Conservative's organization, if they stupidly embrace the GOP's horrid and disasterous social/political corporatized, Christiany agenda, the young Republicans may take over control of the old Republican Party and turn it into the new home for thinking, rational, "reality-based" liberals. If that happens, I'll burn my Democratic Party voter's card that I've had my entire adult life, upload the card-burning video to YouTube and I'll join the liberals in the revitalized Republican Party.

  First off let me start off by saying that the description of the Democratic party above is a bunch of lies.  Statistics show that more Republicans give money to the poor and what is this about a strong military, Clinton almost destroyed our military.  The biggest lie is that Democrats stand for American values, ha that is a good one, I believe that American values include being against abortion and gay marriage. Can the Democratic party say the same? I think not.  They have become too liberal in the past years, the majority of Democrats have forgotten what this county was founded on and what this country use to represent. They have taken God out of schools and public places, I believe that they are destroying this country.  Now it is true that the Democratic party is not entirely bad but the majority of that party has ruined this country. Sometimes I think that they would like it if our country had a communist government.  Democrats=Communist=Destruction   

The far left, socialist agenda of this party ought to scare everyone. That is an opinion. In all likelihood, the reality is that they are about to retake power in DC in a major way.

ZZzzz.   This group is really dullsville.  The candidates put up for 2008 are uninspiring, but it appears that one of them, probably Hillary Clinton is destined to win.  The question is, will the weirdos rule or will some common sense prevail with this group?

Represenative Sheila Jackson-Lee (Democrat, Tex.), while visiting Mars Pathfinder Mission Control Center, asked whether the Pathfinder had taken pictures of the American flag planted by Neil Armstrong in 1969. Sheila Jackson Lee, who represents Houston, is a member of the House Science Committee's space subcommittee. Also Houston,Texas is home of NASA. See article here: http://www.seds.org/spaceviews/970915/cap.html

I'll take them over the Republicans any day. I agree with Democrats that America must be made safer and global warming is an issue. However, big government fails and illegal immigrats should not be rewarded but rather kicked back to Mexico where they belong. This year, vote Democratic accept if you live in California, Arizona, Texas, or New Mexico because Republicans are better on immigration. However, people of New Mexico, re-elect your great Governor, Democrat Bill Richardson, who may only serve you until 2008 ( we shall see.)

I have always been a democrat even before i was old enough to vote. I suppose that i will be one until the day i die. The Democratic party stands for the rights of the working man, minorities and small business, and those are important and powerful things. There are many other things that i'm leaving out to keep within the character count, but the democratic party is people's party, more so than some others i know.

Well, at least they're better than the GOP and I like Russ Feingold and Dennis Kucinich a lot...Just vote Green or Socialist (or that left-wing Progressive Party in VT) though...These guys are pretty corrupt and not especially progressive.

Certainly better than the alternative, but they shoot themselves in the foot continually. They stand for most of the issues I consider important. I'm a democrat, and a loyal one, but they don't know how make themselves understood by people who might benefit the most by their policies.

This bunch of fools ....well let's see.Hillary,Howard"The Screamer"Dean,Dennis Kucinich(WHO?),Jesse Jackson,Nancy Pelosi,KKK Byrd and Ted"SWIMMER" Kennedy. The sad part that it was a proud party.True,I disagree with their stances on big government and taxation.True,some of its past members included LBJ,Jimmy the peanut Carter,Ultraliberal McGovern-by the way,I feel that McGovern was a good American and a patriot,he was just too liberal-and of course,my all time favorite target,the father of all dopey things liberal..your friend,NOT MINE....FDR.But those men stood for things and in most cases(well,maybe not Carter and McGovern) would never apologize for American strength abroad.JFK was a strong Democrat.Truman was second only to Reagan of Presidents I admired.LBJ was anticommunist and loved America.And even Roosevelt was FAR better than what passes for a liberal today.In WWII,he wanted us to kick their butts.Now you get geniuses like Rep.Jim McDermott who said that he would trust Saddam over Bush.You have Cynthia McKinney.'Nuf said.We have Sen.Patty Murray with her comments re bin Laden and all the hospitals,roads and schools he built.Yeah,Let's just give him the NobelPeace prize...Although,Knowing the knuckleheads that run that committee,they just might give bin Laden a Nobel Peace Prize. So that is why I give these schlemiels 1 star.

Democrats are a very good party that are a little too good for their own good. Democrats believe in a lot of very basic American values, the sorts of things that make this country great - The ability to get an education, to live in good neighorhoods, live in a clean environment, helping out those who are disadvantaged and clearly need the assistance the government can give them. They believe in people being treated fairly, honestly and equally on a level playing field without religious, social, racial or sexual bias. It all sounds great on paper yet doesnt always translate well to the masses of America. One problem is that Democrats are seen as highbrow, intellectuals, "Goody, Goody Types" who want to do a lot of great things for their own social agenda in the name of what they see is fair , right and just. To their opponents, Democrats want to help out others who should be helping themselves, who should'nt be looking to others to do what they should be doing all along. Democrats have a hard time accepting the opinions of others who dont agree with their well-thought out and analyzed judgements and conclusions. They seem to dismiss the "common man" and his rather "simplistic" view of society. Democrats also love to bash the rich, seeing their wealth as coming at the expense of those less fortunate than themselves. They make a good case for assailing the wealthy and those with wealth in power even as there are those among them who are part of the upper income levels of the country. Democrats take the side of those who need help and assistance. They believe in causes and are much more tolerant of others who are different. They tend to see issues with a more complex persepctive, willing to examine the various sides of an issue and try to do what's right and best for those who clearly need the assistance their power and influence can give them. Bill Clinton was a prototypical Democrat. He ran an effecient government, run smartly and with an agenda he worked out well and got clear results from. During his eight years in Office, America was very prosperous and was a cleaner, safer, economically robust country. He was in the same mold as Democrats JFK, LBJ and even Carter in wanting to help out those who needed assistance and developing programs and agendas that would have a national impact on the citizens of the country. Unfortunately for Clinton, he also was very much a Democtrat in the manner loathed by their adversaires. An adulterer who lied about his affair. He also was involved in some shady dealings - like last minute pardons before leaving office and allowing for a "Dont ask, Dont tell" policy regarding Gays in the Military. Democrats dont always live up to the ideals of America that people have come to know. Being a part of a Party that is more culturally sophistiaced, more tolerant of others, more academically inclined and more open to new ways and means doesnt play well with about half of America. Still Democrats hearts and heads are in the right place and I do think by and large , they mean well.

Let's get this straight Cait: If ignorant means uncultured, unsophisticated, uninformed, uneducated, dense, naive, mindless, cretinous, simple and unversed, I guess you've proved here that you really do have a grasp of it's definition. I would have to guess then, judging by your ideology and the final sentence of your post, you would be a staunch supporter of the Democrats.

The party of 1. Howard Dean 2. Barbara Boxer 3. Maxine Waters 4. Al Sharpton 5. Ted Kennedy 6. Warren Beatty 7. Sean Penn 8. Michael Moore 9. Cynthia McKinney 10. Joe Biden What else needs to be said?

Where do I begin? Democrats are the most hypocritical, close-minded, morality hating political party that I know! They don't care about constituents. They just want to be in the spotlight and think that a politician's job is that of a celebrity. They are ruthless and cold-hearted. They give endless criticism, but don't pose any possible solutions. The government is supposed to protect us, not entertain and amuse us, boneheads! The bottom line is that they are hypocrites and need major reform.

Guilt-ridden capitalists who want to try to assuage capitalisms inherent barbarism through legislation. Too greedy to let go of capitalism, and too pussified to overthrow it.

I still think the Democratic Party has been one that has been fighting for people's rights forever. I think the problem is they need to get a message out and they haven't done that yet. They need to reorganize and get in better shape. I still would rather be a democrat then a republican. The Republicans are extremely corrupt and do not represent moral values. Democrats have morals they just haven't been able to turn around and frame the debate properly. I believe that if the democrats want to thrive they need to turn the party over to the grass roots. Howard Dean is a good leader, he's completely smeared by GOP agents who claim he's a wild eyed radical and he is not. He was extremely pro-gun when he was governor of Vermont.

Bad central leadership seem to be weak points. . .bending over backwards for Bush's failed foreign policy is another. . .but still a solid set of values and ideas although their critics believe otherwise. (A third party would be nice. . .)

I'll take some shrill liberals, over smug, theocratic, warmongering bigots.

A party on the edge, fighting for what they think is right. Problem is nobody really agrees with the party's ever changing definition of the word right except those in the party in connection to right wing, which are dirty words for them. These guys need to pull their heads out and quit convincing themselves that 2006 and 2008 are in the bag. They have done nothing to secure either election. Than kind of thinking got them a solid thump in 2004 by a party that they thought they had by the balls.

Our best chance to preserve freedom. I hope they keep fighting.

I generally agree with most of the views of the democratic party: equality, fairness, respect for individual freedoms, rejection of corporate greed, protect the environment, etc. The party as an entity today just needs to refine its message and be a little bolder in delivering it. As is clear from the last few years, the republicans do not have all of the answers, or even many answers. Dems can swoop back into power with more charismatic leaders preaching a message of inclusion and progress for all, which is how it came to power to begin with.

Better than the alternative, but that ain't saying much. Democrats have foundered, but Republicans inhale toe germs just to get elected.

Only look good in comparison to republicans now that the wacko religious nutjobs have too much of a say in the republican party. The democratic party is right on the social issues and the environment, but that's about it. Plus they rubber stamped Bush's dictatorship with the pro-Iraq war vote, so I'm not sure if they really qualify as an opposition party. Don't like it when they attack the rich (i.e. anyone who has a decent paying job) to garner votes from resentful losers, but I can't vote for the religious wackos, so what choice do I have?

Dennis Kucinich, Deadly Teddly Kennedy, Carl Levin, Robert Byrd, Howard Dean and Bush's criminal behaviour, are the only things this party has going for it.

Just watched Howard Dean on Meet the Depressed. THANK YOU democrats for choosing this lunatic as your party chairman!

I like their ideals, but they are too wimpy. BUT THEY BEAT THE GOP.

What happened to them? They are seriously messed up. The Democratic party is way too full of hypocritical, elitist loudmouthed liberals. I've become so frustrated with it, I don't even know what it stands for anymore. All these liberals I see on debate shows can't do anything but talk about how lame Bush is but they never have any plans. Get your s**t together, guys!

My advice to the Democratic Party is to take Michael Moore, Ted Kennedy, Rosie O'Donnell, Nancy Pelosi, and Terry McAuliffe (sp?), put them all on a boat and send them sailing to parts unknown. A regular old Liberal like Dick Gephart or Al Gore is someone people can handle. When confronted with the hate and childishness of the people that are becoming the face of this party, it is not going to appeal to most Americans.

Only slightly less evil than the GOP.

The only thing every other party has to stop the Republican party with.

Once a party that stood for forward-thinking ideas, they are now totally unfocused and have lost all of my respect. All that they can do now is bash Bush. They seem more interested in giving terrorists civil rights than defending the lead country that stands between tyranny and glorious freedom. John Kerry is nothing more than a bland cipher and the once-cool Al Gore has gone off of the leftist deep end. I do support cloning and stem cell research...but when the party that supports it allows France and Germany to dictate terms (see Kerry's inane 'strong, but not stubborn' campaign loopiness) instead of the world's greatest nation...I can't support it. The Democratic Party continues to believe that crime rates are getting worse--which is flat out untrue, because violent crimes have dropped over 20% in the past ten years. Also, the Democratic party desperately needs an optimistic candidate, and not one who just complains and uses what's bad for America as something good for him.

Until the Democratic Party posts a more moderate candidate, they will get beat time after time. Nobody likes an extreme leftist. After Truman, the Democratic party went downhill. Having guys like Michael Moore, Howard Dean, and Al Sharpton representing your political party equals disaster which the Democratic party displayed in the last election.

I agree with abichara on several points. They won't win without the South and midwest. They have to define themselves and stand for their convictions. Their open support of abortion and gay rights hurts them in most of the country. They need to return to party of Roosevelt and Truman. Those men stood for labor, working class, minorities. Those are the big three in the DP. Catering to left-wing groups only gives the RP a chance to prick their sore spots. I am registered Republican and grew up in a totally Democrat house. I see the DP from the inside looking out and vice versa. It's sad that a party once so inclusive is cutting off its base and limiting themselves to only small regional parts of America. One more thing, as a memeber of the U.S. Navy their lack of support for military raises and benefits hurts them too. Bush was elected twice with a groundswell up support from military personnel (regardless of race). The DP has to have the ability to show themselves supportes of the military while supporting their base.

The main problem I see with the Democratic party at this time seems to be that they have focused in too much on catering to special interest groups rather than coming up with a clear narrative of what they stand for. This is a party that has failed to win the executive branch 5 out of the past 7 elections. This seems to indicate that this is a party that is not connected with the collective will of the country. Democrats can potentially have a winning message, indeed, from the New Deal until the early 1980's they were the ruling party. Here's the reality: the Democrats have got to stop defining themselves as a foil to the Republican party. They have to move beyond defining themselves according to their positions on abortion and gay rights. The truth is that their message on those issues don't appeal to a wide geographical range of Americans. The debate shouldn't be about moving to the left or to the right; Democrats have to stand for something. Kerry lost because he failed to do this; they need a message that's clear, sharp and distinctive. Fight the battle on your own terms. First they've got to hit Republicans where they are weak. Fiscal issues is the top one; deficits have a corrosive effect on the buying power of most Americans. The party has to make a lucid case bringing home this fact, just as Republicans make a good case for tax cuts. Deficits also do matter at the end of the day. We've heard the term moral values bantered around for the past few days among the talking heads. Democrats again have to define the battle on their own terms. Bill Clinton, for all his faults, did a good job at this. In order to do this, you have to acknowledge the religious heritage of this nation; this is an age-old debate in this country, but playing against these tendencies will cost you a large part of the electorate. The Democrats cannot continue to write off rural areas and the South for the time being, if they do this, they will continue to lose elections to the Republicans no matter what the circumstances may be. A distinctive case for them would be to define moral values in terms of how one treats the poor, pluralism, and our legacy to future generations which includes sound fiscal and monetary policy and a clean environment. They should not be afraid to define this in terms of a religious context, that gives moral validity to their arguments. Not including this critical tie-in makes it difficult for any party to win election here in the US. Appeal to the American need for moral leadership at home and abroad; that will give more creedence and popularity to their message.