http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ Patchwork Nation Forum Forum: Campaign 2008: Patchwork Nation: Forum en Sun, 07 Sep 2008 11:59:50 +0000 http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/31#post-168 Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:29:40 +0000 Yolaxochitl 168@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>I, being a transplanted New Yorker (born and bred in NYC), have found a relatively large chasm of understanding between Town Folk/Suburbanites, Country Folk and City Folk. I find this nowhere more starkly defined than in the Western PA. community that I've resettled in. It is almost incomprehensible for non City Folk to recognize the degree of interdependcy that is necessary to survive in a large city. Public tranportation to get one where they have to work, which is usually a distance from where they can afford to live. If someone in the city wants to have some room/breathing space and not be a part of everyone elses life and not have everyone else be a part of their life, they have to move relatively far away from the areas/centers where work forces are concentrated. This still involves an inescapable degree of societal interdependency. In that respect, suburbs reflect this for the most part.</p> <p>Rural areas do have a degree of interdependcy as well, but there is a bit of a stigma attached to needing help, unless it is a result of a general or regional catastrophe, natural or financial. This relative independence and general attitude of taking care of one's own business leads to a belief that one's responsibility is basically to take care of one's own. The idea of others (whether it be Church or State) taking care of one's needs (outside of medical needs) is foreign and tawdry to country folk.</p> <p>I have greatly simplified my opinions of the origins of the sociopolitical chasm between Rural and Urban people. There are other cultural overlays such as the original cultures of the first settlers of the area, the ability of the land to support a growing population attempting to maintain their accustomed lifestyle. The ability to be adaptable to necessary regional changes in their areas and finally, the ability to transmit the needs dictated by various local cultural and geopolitical to the urban centers that end up deciding what aid/money/programs are needed where, when as well as how much and how to administer them. </p> <p>Obama's seeming problem is that the people that are trying to tie this portion of the population to his electorate are seemingly more concerned with getting the votes from here to get him elected, than how to reach these people with assurances that he understands some of their needs and is willing to learn more. Unfortunately, there are many regions that have this problem and efficiency dictates that the most effort be spent in securing the most votes in the least time. These very tradition bound people need more effort expended for understanding their needs and finding ways to connect with them. They are, as far as non local campaign workers are concerned, not worth more than a minimum effort, because of the return for energy expended ratio that they have to work by.</p> <p>So, my take on possibly getting more attention from the Obama campaign and Obama himself is by local campaign workers taking the time to organize the practical needs of the population in a coherent and well documented (facts, dates, reviewable sources of the information given)list and write their own position paper that the Obama campaign can digest, pick up on and make part of their platform. </p> <p>Unfortunately, with the convention happening right now, I doubt that it really can be incorporated into the regular party platform by the Platform Committee. But, it still might be a viable work to do for the last 70 days of the campaign in order to insure that the Obama campaign is able to craft a message for the Appalachian population as well as have a framework with which to work with them after the election when he makes it as President. </p> <p>I just came upon this site, so I am a little late in responding to your observations.</p> <p>Yolaxochitl </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/31#post-165 Fri, 30 May 2008 07:39:08 +0000 faithfull 165@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>I write often about Obama and Appalachia. As many of you know, Obama was crushed in the primaries in Appalachian parts of WV, KY, VA, OH, TN, and PA. I argue the following things as a baseline in how the campaign should think about Appalachia and what they could do to improve. I'd love to hear your thoughts on them, even if you tell me I'm full of it:</p> <p>1. The swing states of VA, OH, PA, and WV hinge on a strong Democratic performance in the Appalachian region of that state. (The same could be said for TN, NC, and KY - not currently considered swing states.)</p> <p>2. Obama obviously got crushed in Appalachia, but these numbers were similar to places with similar demographics across the country, particularly in places with between 6 and 17% black populations.</p> <p>3. As Appalachia goes, so goes the Presidency. Central Appalachian states have gone in a block for every winning candidate since 72.</p> <p>4. Obama could dramatically improve his standing in Appalachia by engaging Appalachian voters, pledging to address endemic Appalachian poverty by ending mountaintop removal and strip mining and putting people back to work by investing in clean energy and alternative industry.</p> <p>Also, which of the community types in Appalachia are "swingable" or competitive for a Democrat, particularly Obama assuming he's the nominee?</p> <p>peace,<br /> faithfull </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/13/page/2#post-164 Fri, 23 May 2008 19:25:49 +0000 elr 164@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>The most important issue? Probably something rarely discussed directly--how we define American culture. That issue is not discussed directly, but it's there, and it probably shows up most profoundly in our attitudes towards war--which is, after all, how we "stand up" for ourselves, what we see about ourselves worthy of protection. And I wonder here if people are still defining themselves by Vietnam in ways we cannot easily see, as so many of us, when starting to discuss Iraq, jump away from Iraq and on to Vietnam. Is Vietnam still defining us? </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/30#post-163 Wed, 21 May 2008 07:47:58 +0000 WetHen 163@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>USA and AIPAC propaganda has encapulated Israel to the point of idolatry. This web of untruths and illusions need to be exposed. The Pro Israelis love to compare Israel as a modern day USA killing Arab to the old west killing off Indians. When the USA subdued the Indians it was to open up an vast continent to all the world's peoples. Israel is killing off the Arabs to enclose a narrowly ethnic state from the rest of the world. And using money from poor American tax payers to do it on... historical punishment no doubt for killing Indians. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/25#post-162 Wed, 21 May 2008 07:39:22 +0000 WetHen 162@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Let China stay in China and solve their own problems first. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/13/page/2#post-161 Wed, 21 May 2008 07:36:18 +0000 WetHen 161@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Israel should be an issue above all others, because it is the pro Israeli neocoms who cooked up the war on Iraq , invaded and did a sordid hanging in the name these United States. It is they who have corrupted the long standing Jeffersonian ethics of humanity by favoring torture , secret police and prisons. The people cry out for change. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/19#post-160 Wed, 21 May 2008 07:28:42 +0000 WetHen 160@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Why this "flag this post as inappropriate" sign?</p> <p>The best messages are those where TOTAL freedom of speech is allowed...anything less, is less. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/29#post-159 Wed, 21 May 2008 07:22:46 +0000 WetHen 159@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Why does this post have a flag as inappropriate? </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/29#post-158 Wed, 21 May 2008 07:20:34 +0000 WetHen 158@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Ron Paul is a courageous man. He was the first major candidate to tell us the truth, and therefore will receive my vote...He was the first to challenge the burden of Israel which America has carried to the point of idolatry. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/26#post-157 Mon, 19 May 2008 23:00:11 +0000 PurpleOwl 157@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>As a lifelong Republican, I am shocked and embarrassed at what the party has become. While I don't agree with him on a number of issues, I see Ron Paul as the only honest candidate, and a breath of fresh air struggling to prevail over a room polluted by tons of stale cigar smoke. I expect to be long dead before people will give such a person proper recognition.</p> <p>That said, I refuse to support the existing GOP presidential candidate and expect to cast my ballot for Senator Barack Obama in the fall. I don't agree with a number of his issues either, but he strikes me as a decent person and the one who has the greatest chance of pulling this country out of the quagmire in which it now sits. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/28#post-156 Sat, 17 May 2008 11:04:08 +0000 Rids 156@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Hey!!</p> <p>The traditional traffic school scenario typically involves six to eight hours of instruction, either on one or two Saturdays, or spread across several evenings, and may take place in a courtroom or a classroom. The instructors are frequently off-duty police officers. The instructor will typically ask the violators about their violations, then discuss ways to avoid repeating them; they will usually also lecture on general traffic safety issues, show one or more films or video programs, and possibly conduct various educational activities. Finally, the violators are typically tested on the material presented in the class, and if they pass the test, they may be issued some sort of completion certificate, which they may be required to present to the traffic court, in order to have their driving records adjusted.</p> <p>----Rids</p> <p><a href="http://www.dummiestrafficschool.com" rel="nofollow">www.dummiestrafficschool.com</a> </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/27#post-155 Sat, 17 May 2008 11:01:47 +0000 Rids 155@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Hey!!</p> <p>The traditional [url=http://www.dummiestrafficschool.com/index.jsp]traffic school [url] scenario typically involves six to eight hours of instruction, either on one or two Saturdays, or spread across several evenings, and may take place in a courtroom or a classroom. The instructors are frequently off-duty police officers. The instructor will typically ask the violators about their violations, then discuss ways to avoid repeating them; they will usually also lecture on general traffic safety issues, show one or more films or video programs, and possibly conduct various educational activities. Finally, the violators are typically tested on the material presented in the class, and if they pass the test, they may be issued some sort of completion certificate, which they may be required to present to the [url=http://www.dummiestrafficschool.com/index.jsp] traffic [/url] court, in order to have their driving records adjusted.</p> <p>----Rids<br /> :):):):):):) </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/26#post-154 Sun, 11 May 2008 20:39:41 +0000 RonPaulSupporter 154@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Many life-long Republicans feel that "the party of Lincoln and Reagan" has lost its way, completely abandoned principles of limited Constitutional government, civil liberties, fiscal responsibility, and created an unsustainable and immoral foreign policy of aggressive wars which has been a disaster for America's respect in the world. </p> <p>Many people are working hard to return to the "grand old party" of core American principles of liberty. Ron Paul is inspiring a whole new generation of people to get into public offices and Republican Party positions. Ron Paul has lit a fire in the hearts of many citizens, he has communicated a vision of what American was supposed to be, and how Constitutional principles apply to today's issues. Many people beleive he has started the second American Revolution. His new book "The Revolution: A Manifesto" is a road map for changing the USA back into a true Constitutional Republic. It seems that his campaign is only beginning! </p> <p>Ron Paul quietly continues to win National delegates at Republican conventions across the country... </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/25#post-153 Sun, 04 May 2008 14:05:32 +0000 abettermouse 153@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Just wondering how developing the 'commodity' might affect foreign policy debate? </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/24#post-152 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:09:20 +0000 Sturdybox 152@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>The first thing the superdelegates should do is to throw Dean far from the train. And then they should hunker down and figure out who is electable. After that, they should act like a team and start seriously courting the voters who were in favor of whichever candidate does not get the nomination. How hard is all this? Answer: it's not at all hard to see what needs to be done, but it may be impossible to DO it given the egos involved.</p> <p>And these two politicians should be running mates, even if they (and their advisers) have to be sedated. Let Kerry--okay, not Kerry, yawn,--let Edwards deliver the big speech. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/24#post-151 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:57:52 +0000 Dchinni 151@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>In the aftermath of Pennsylvania this is becoming an increasingly big topic for the Dems. Sen. Clinton's argument for the superdelegates is "I'm more electable." Sen. Obama's argument doesn't give ground on electability, but, more important, it points out that he has the lead in delegates, states and votes.</p> <p>Adding to the confusion, Dem Committee Chairman Howard Dean came forward this weekend and said the superdelegates should not worry about vote totals, they should choose the person they think is mot electable.</p> <p>What are your thoughts? </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/15#post-150 Sat, 19 Apr 2008 06:17:27 +0000 alaskanemesis 150@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Well using any of the combination of Obama, Hillery or Edward's will result in a loss of votes. Those who hate one of them will not vote for them if they are running as president or vice president. You get all the disadvantages without any of the advantages. Hillery has the highest negatives of any political candidate running for any party. That wont disappear just because she won't be at the top of the ticket.<br /> "BR"<br /> The same applies to Mitt Romney or Huckabee just as much as vice presidential candidates to go with McCaine. Most republicans actively dislike Romney either due to their anti mormon views or their view of him as someone with no views of his own and as someone who would say and do anything to get elected. Huckabee and for that matter the entire religious right,social conservative group is highly resented by many republicans as well as the overwhelming majority of Independents. Inclusion of any of them would be a death nell to any chances McCaine has to get elected.<br /> "BR"<br /> There are some available candidates who would add to their parties chances of getting elected. The two that I can think of who would be best resemble each other quite a bit even though they are from different political parties. Governors or senators who already had experience, political moderates,young at least compared to most, with a reputation for cleaning up corruption.<br /> "BR"<br /> I am talking about Claire McCaskal of Missouri who as a Democrat beat a religious right conservative in poor rural areas that normally vote solidly Republican, and Republican Sarah Palin of Alaska who fought the leadership of her own party and the oil industry lobbyists to beat a incumbent Governor by a 3 to 1 margin. Both of these candidates will add to their parties chances of winning.<br /> "BR"<br /> Alaska nemesis<br /> Sam Goodman<br /> <a href="mailto:nemesis@tranquility.net">nemesis@tranquility.net</a> </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/13/page/2#post-149 Thu, 17 Apr 2008 23:54:59 +0000 electrictractor 149@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>For me, #1 is Iraq. It will require the most attention and courage from our next president, at least in the initial months in office. We can't separate our involvement in Iraq from the way this administration has prosecuted the war, and handed out the keys to the public purse. Because of these mistakes, I can't vote for anyone who isn't ready to drastically reduce our involvement, apologize over and over to the Iraqi people, and turn our country 180 degrees away from the dependency on oil that makes Iraq such a "strategic interest."</p> <p>The economy is important, but anyone who is honest and brave enough to do the right thing in Iraq will bring more honesty and courage to decisions on the domestic economy as well: stopping media agglomeration, tightening credit policies back to a much more prudent position, supporting the turn to sustainable agricultural, housing, and energy policies focussed on low-impact, renewable systems, and returning to the balanced budget focus that was perhaps the greatest legacy of the Clinton presidency.</p> <p>Of the three still standing, only Obama comes close to the stance I believe is needed. I appreciate the honesty and compassion in his healthcare position also, so all three of the top issues are covered with my vote for him. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/13/page/2#post-148 Sun, 13 Apr 2008 19:30:02 +0000 Sturdybox 148@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>It's called irony, abettermouse. LOL </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/23#post-147 Sat, 12 Apr 2008 05:01:29 +0000 Sturdybox 147@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>The Republican Party is irrelevant in this election. McCain is out of the running by virtue of the fact that he is a Republican. BTW, given his area of expertise, the fact that he is a "supporter of the war" makes me wonder if there's not more to the war than we are told. In other words, maybe there is a good reason for it, despite the toll. Don't know what it is. There is no hope for the middle east, and it seems as though a brutal dictator was the best government for Iraq, horrible as that sounds. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/13#post-146 Fri, 11 Apr 2008 17:48:25 +0000 abettermouse 146@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Interesting Forum. Thanks!<br /> (from Brooklyn, NY, here ; )</p> <p>I have had 2 cousins and a friend stationed in Iraq; one still there, the other 2 returned safely. I have family members who were/are in Army, Air Force, Navy and Coast Guard, FBI, CIA, and Florida Hwy Patrol (big, mostly-Catholic Family ; ). These are people I know and love and respect. None of them are perfect and they have all made mistakes in their personal lives and they continue to learn to deal with their lives, just like the rest of us. I appreciate that many people prefer to 'talk in 2-dimensional terms' when discussing Large issues like war, politics, and society in general . I do not appreciate politicians or journalists who feel they must also 'talk in 2-dimensional terms' when discussing/reporting issues which could have an impact on millions of lives. That is just blatant professional irresponsibility. Or ego. Or greed.</p> <p>Seems like The Economy, National Security, Prison/Legal reform, Personal Responsibility, and Candidate Integrity have made it onto this list of what "is or should be the dominant issue of the 2008 Campaign." Other points made along the way, above, are valid, I guess, but are either focused on local or "States' Rights" issues, so, not really appropriate for a Presidential Campaign (unless "States' Rights" is the issue), OR are not clearly expressed in a way that clarifies what the specific issues/goals should be: China, media conglomerate ownership, personal sacrifices, etc. Then again, as expressed in a posting above, what we are all looking for is a Candidate who can clearly express a convoluted issue. As Reagan knew and also did very well, communicating an issue is the same thing as defining an issue, when you are the President of the United States. Thankfully, this is why we have election campaigns. We each get to decide who most clearly communicates the issues that our Country faces. Being "bored" with this process is a personal problem...</p> <p>#1 issue I have not seen enough of in this Campaign: Help for Struggling Families with Children. This includes Quality Educations for ALL Young people, Food and Shelter and Energy Assistance for Poor Working Parents, Paid "Parental" Leave (not just "Maternity" leave), Free Parenting Workshops for ANYONE who wants the advice of Professionals, affordable Family Health Care (preventative, emergency and chronic). I will gladly pay more taxes to support the funding of all of the above. I will also point out to all of our 'wealthy' citizens and Corporations that money spent in this fashion now will improve our ENTIRE society in the Long run. For too long "personal responsibility" as defined by the Republican Party has meant not spending money to help poor families try to improve their lives through social assistance programs. Please notice that all the ideas above are for families who WORK, or who are trying to work. We need to help people who want to help themselves. It is in all of our best interests to support Families with Children. It is also the 'Christian' thing to do.</p> <p>It is crazy to me that in NYC, I get a tax refund (school tax) because I have no children. I also don't have a car, so why should I pay for road repairs? Because we all need good roads to make the City work. Last time I checked, educated citizens with supportive families are also required to make the City work.</p> <p>(I am not 'ignoring the elderly'. Social Security and 'elder care' are different issues than helping children to grow and learn ; )</p> <p>My other 'wish' is for a serious re-examination of our tactics used in this "WAR ON TERROR". 'Candidate Integrity' would require the 3 remaining candidates to admit that we still do not have very well-defined "goals" as to 'what and how' we are going to "win" this "war". The divide between our Military Commanders and our Politicians on this topic is the root of most of the frustration felt by voters, citizens and the world at large. One of the duties of 'Commander In Chief' is to defend US interests at home and abroad. Whether the 'right tool for the job' is Military Action, or Diplomatic Effort is one of the most critical characteristics to be revealed during the Presidential Campaign process. W. Bush started the war in Iraq with little practical understanding of the culture we invaded and with no real plan to follow through once Saddam was deposed. This failure of vision and planning in a US President must never be allowed to repeat itself. All of this "Top secret. Can't talk about it. Can't reveal our tactics or the Enemy will know." can only be carried so far. At some point, someone must be able to say, "But really, Dubbya, you don't have any clothes on." Hello? Republican Congress? Where were you? The notion that the Republican national party "doesn't want to win" this election really misses the point: The Republicans led our country to this juncture. Only a fool would vote to keep their policies and leadership intact. </p> <p>Aside from the obvious military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, is the War on Terror really a "war" at all? Or is this instead a failure of US diplomacy, International leadership and 'creative and unifying leadership at Home' on the part of the (Republican-led) Executive Branch of our government since 2000? No one wants to see another horror like what happened on 9/11, but 'spending all the money in the world' on guns and 'police' will not protect us from that kind of danger. </p> <p>Sturdybox: You cannot honestly believe that 'securing our borders' is going to stop a committed individual or group (of any foreign or domestic origin) from using terror tactics to kill innocent people and make headlines to bolster their own fundraising campaigns and power plays. Aside from this one imperative, is there any other reason why the US should spend Millions or Billions on fences and personnel and equipment to 'secure our borders'? Any wonder why "racism" pops up at this point in the debate? What other reason is there? Really. Too many "illegals" in your town working below minimum wage? Too many "illegals" in your town paying wage taxes into bogus Social Security accounts that they will never be able to collect? Too many "illegals" in your town clogging your Schools and Hospitals and overburdening your (State and Local) budgets? Perhaps we could save those Millions or Billions you want to spend 'securing our borders' and instead take some time to look seriously at "Immigration Reform"? Or is this one issue really about Racism, State and Local Budgets, Crime and Punishment and the 'War on Drugs', and not really a National Security issue at all? Really. </p> <p>Oh, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission will need to be reformed to protect you from your lead-painted toys and poison pet food scandals. (Or is this the 'China issue'?) 'Securing our borders' isn't going to help you there, either. We will have to 'pay' for these reforms, too, but not from the "National Security" budget. (Following your logic on what "Security" means to you, I would have to contact Homeland Security to deal with the toxic substances growing on the left-overs in the bottom of my refrigerator ; )</p> <p>And one last thing Sturdybox:<br /> When using the term "LOL" please understand that it denotes a sincere laugh attack.<br /> Please do not use this term if you are not sincerely "laughing out loud". Pick a different term.<br /> So, yes, "learn the language" is always good advice.</p> <p>Peace in the City. Peace in the Country. Peace in your Soul. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/23#post-145 Thu, 10 Apr 2008 18:47:07 +0000 Dchinni 145@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Do you think his steadfast support for the Iraq war help him voters? Will it hurt him? Will the war largely disappear as "the economy" becomes the primary focus? </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/21#post-144 Sat, 05 Apr 2008 08:39:16 +0000 Dchinni 144@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>I have to admit, watching the daily coverage of the campaign I'm starting to wonder about this now. </p> <p>I thought for certain at first that the fight was hurting the Dems -- and it may be in Pennsylvania where the mud is probably flowing in thicker waves. But it seems that the two are kind of blocking out the sun now for McCain. He may be getting better mileage on his reintroduction tour on his specific stops (and I'm sure that's his goal) but in the national media Clinton-Obama is grabbing the headlines. And not the mud, but the general "who's going to win" storyline.</p> <p>If it stays that way, if may wind up helping them.... </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/22#post-143 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:06:01 +0000 techfun 143@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>I'm not sure I even believe in a political center anymore. The US population is basically conservative - in the APOLITICAL sense of the world. Unless something seems severely broken, we generally don't want to touch it. Thats why Bush's second term attempt at reforming Social Security went nowhere. Thats also why Clinton's attempt at healthcare reform went nowhere in the 90's. Neither situation was bad enough to justify major changes to the system in the minds of the general public.</p> <p>For most of my adult life politicians with the help of the 24 hours news media has dumbed down the political news to the point where everything is cobbled together with bricks made up of wedge issues. If you are pro-choice, a big part of the Republican party leadership is ready to write you off. If you are in favor of a long term US troop presence in Iraq there are Democrats that will do the same.</p> <p>However, I DO think that we are reaching a tipping point where people feel that the Federal government as a whole is broken and that makes them ready for major change. People are approaching that tipping point from many different directions. For some it's all about the politicization of judicial appointments. For others its the war in Iraq's bad planning. For still others it's corruption scandals, or too much influence by lobbyists in Congress, or the dawning realization that deregulation and the lack of regulation of commercial banks helped bring about the current economic conditions.</p> <p>When this many people are ready for change I think we will see real political action on the part of voters this fall. It may be a one time thing and the huge numbers of newly registered voters may fade back into the woodwork after November, but I don't think we are going to see a close race like we did in 2004.</p> <p>If there is a center now, its made up of positions on issues that wind their way around the immaterial wedge issues that are NEVER going to be "fixed" by a President. No single President is going to fix the "abortion issue", or trade policy, or immigration. However, if a candidate of either party can skirt those types of issues and keep people focused on those big tipping point issues, he or she will bring out voters from across the political landscape. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/22#post-142 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:34:19 +0000 Dchinni 142@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>I do think that the 2008 election will be about fighting for the center and I expect all the candidates to be staking out ground there. And because of that I think a landslide for either side seems like it will be tough to achieve. </p> <p>As for which Democratic candidate is the better general election candidate? It's impossible to say -- especially in April -- but we will look for clues in our numbers next Tuesday. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/22#post-141 Tue, 01 Apr 2008 08:49:53 +0000 jhaddix 141@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>Oh, the threats, the threats. At least 30 percent of clinton voters moving to McCain... sure. Ms Clinton cannot weasel her way to the nomination so her supporters will have to go to the dark side. As someone said, take your threats and put them where the minimum wage don't shine. </p> <p>Obama has a 'wealth' of money because democratic voters provide him with more support than they do Clinton. Do you think all that money came from some terrible place? It came from Democrats. 'Party regulars'? The name Clinton 'defines' party regulars... Obama is very much the outsider in comparison. The legal actions to keep polls open and Repubs from meddling in Democratic primaries are considerably more nuanced and complex than your casual distain implies.</p> <p>I deny your dire predictions, and want to suggest something that you are avoiding. Just about half the country has a negavive view of Hillary, and has held that view for over 15 years. I don't think it's particularly justified by any fair appraisal, but it IS real and it's not going away... and due in part to the clumsy negativity of her campaign, polls say it's getting worse. A lot of people just do not like her, have never liked her, and that is not going to evaporate when they step into the voting booth. This will be a HUGE problem in a general election. She would have to convince ALL of the remaining electorate to vote for her just to get a bare majority.</p> <p>Nominating Hillary is like taking aim at our foot once more... and if by chance she wrests the nomination away from the people's choice, we WILL see four years of McCain. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/22#post-140 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 16:43:47 +0000 politicalcenter 140@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>For now, it is readily apparent that the political center will decide this election. The Democratic Party has little chance of being considered the political center, but is courting that part of the electorate by claiming to be part of that group. </p> <p>Obama, with his wealth of money and Democratic Party regulars backing his campaign, has the most work at establishing himself at the political center. His votes are extremely liberal, and his efforts to claim he is actually proud of being an American and his view that we need more racial training strains the illusion he is trying to portray. Indeed, although his efforts to bring another suit in Ohio, on the heels of his lawsuit to keep the polls in certain counties favoring him open during that primary, challenging Republicans voting for Hillary Clinton is the most two-faced approach yet to his claim of the political center, his weird group of alleged supporters continues to confuse. In fact, his has been the claim that he is bringing new Republican votes over to Democrats. This view is predicated on the delusional view that he will be able to win Republican states. </p> <p>The opposite is plainly true. Indeed, Missouri is clearly going back to the Republicans.</p> <p>The political center is not Obamaland. It is the land of Clinton and McCain. And Obama's effort to claim that territory will result in the biggest defeat of the Democratic Party since 1980. </p> <p>So as we move toward the final states, Obama will play on the "facts" that everyone knows his is a new coalition. That everyone knows his is a new group of varied people who want more racial training, more negative talk about America, and less patriotism. His fake replies, his falsified video of his "speech" upon which his whole campaign is based, and his campaign of baseless racist claims has reached its zenith and we are left with either a left wing candidate or two in the center. </p> <p>If the Democratic Party cedes the center, McCain wins in a landslide. Is it too late for Clinton to get the nomination for the political center? If so, then do not bet on Obama's fake claims to be part of such a constituency. And bet on at least 30% of Clinton voters moving to McCain in November. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/21#post-139 Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:42:40 +0000 jhaddix 139@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>I think the continued attacks of the Democratic candidates on each other are very damaging, and I think it's disingenuous to imply that it isn’t. While the national electorate has always found mud slinging and public carping interesting enough to watch, I don’t believe anyone has ever claimed that it makes the participants more admirable or likable, or electable.</p> <p>Every day McCain is above this mud wrestling, is a day he looks more presidential in comparison. When it becomes apparent that we have an inevitable winner in this nominating process, that is the moment where the loser stops thrashing about, trashing their opponent… and if they do not stop… well someone should take them in hand and explain about pride and spite and damage to our party and probably to our nation </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/13#post-138 Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:42:18 +0000 shadowsprite 138@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>I didn't mean that decriminalizing marijuana use was an important issue. </p> <p>It was just the lead in to the fact that our prison system needs an over haul.<br /> The fact that so many of our citizens are in jail is appalling (and expensive). What benefit is it to society?<br /> Not all of them are hardened criminals. We have an unjust system when it comes to deciding who serves a prison term and who doesn't. Those that are convicted often reoffend after they get out it. As a nation I think we need to come up with a better plan. </p> http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/topic/13#post-137 Sun, 30 Mar 2008 14:54:47 +0000 shadowsprite 137@http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/forum/ <p>I have to admit I just picked California as an example. I have no idea which states have longer prison sentences.</p> <p>The radio broadcast of Rick Steves lecture gave me a chance to consider what options are out there. Does society make criminals? Rick Steves uses the Netherlands as an example for better drug policies. The comparison is not a good one for reason that you have mentioned--driving, flying, etc. We don't get around by bicycle as much as their citizens do. </p> <p>The other flaw of considering marijuana use a personal choice is that it floats in the air and effects all those in the vacinity. That wouldn't be such a big problem in states that don't allow smoking in any public building but in other states it might pose a health hazard.</p> <p>On the otherhand, I don't believe making something illegal necessarily keeps people from doing it. We have a huge alcohol problem in this country. The percentage of college students under the age of 21 participating in the illegal activity of drinking alcohol is quite high. </p> <p>Do you really think jail time for drinking alcohol or smoking pot keeps 18 year olds from doing it?</p> <p>On the other hand you make a good point about parenting. Most of the parents I know who don't drink because of religious reasons, or health reason or because they have alcoholics in their families have young adult children that also don't drink. There are many groups of people in this country who don't drink alcohol: Moslems, Mormons, Christian Scientists, Seventh Day Adventists, some Babtists, and I'm sure other religions that I'm not familiar with. It is best to influence by example. Parents behavior and that of an extended religious community make some difference. The media could do a better job of improving the underaged drinking problem in this country. We need more pop stars and sports stars and politicians who are willing to stand up and say that they choose not to drink or smoke pot or whatever. And that their life is better for it. We only hear about movie stars who come out of rehab. When do you ever see a magazine that reports on the actors and actresses that never go into rehab in the first place because they have a spiritual reason for not drinking or doing drugs? </p> <p>I have no idea whether decriminalizing personal use of marijuana for adults is a good thing or a bad thing. I do know that our jails are too crowded and jail time may be more harmful to an individual and our society than the punitive value of teaching someone a lesson. If someone smokes a joint in their own home or they have a beer it doesn't directly hurt anyone else. If they are carrying a baggy of pot in their pocket or a six pack of booze in their trunk it doesn't hurt anyone either. Driving under the influence is where the problem occurs. As a society we aren't doing a very good job of keeping drunk drivers off the road. It is hard to believe that jail time really changes the statistics. Does it? </p>