I invite you pick this apart or support it or build on it.  I would love your opinions.

Why doesn't the Democratic party split in to a socialists wing and a liberal wing.  Think about it they WOULD VOTE THE SAME on MOST issues and the more moderate liberal wing could maintain arms length approach in dealing with their leftist fringe i.e.  Dean, DiFi, Kennedy, Boxer.  Also a possible 3rd ticket in elections.  Issues like judges, GC, and nominees for offices would be more easily solved.

It would be impossible for the lying scum to backpeddal and act centrist/conservative when they want to be re-elected. If they openly admit to being socialist and intending to stay that way, they're done. That's why it'll never happen like that.
  They know they can't totally rule us, so they're attempting to weaken us enough for the UN and/or EU to take over.

Quoted: It would be impossible for the lying scum to backpeddal and act centrist/conservative when they want to be re-elected. If they openly admit to being socialist and intending to stay that way, they're done. That's why it'll never happen like that.   They know they can't totally rule us, so they're attempting to weaken us enough for the UN and/or EU to take over.

Good idea but does anyone recognized as a Democrat leader other than Hillary want to appear their moving to center?????  In Ca. and N.Y. hell most of N.E. they don't have to move to center.

Quoted: Good idea but does anyone recognized as a Democrat leader other than Hillary want to appear their moving to center?????  In Ca. and N.Y. hell most of N.E. they don't have to move to center.

Nationally, they al try that - and many do locally as well. Kerry ran a mile and a half to the right of his record. That's why all their strategies are about "presentation" and "issue avoidance," They have gotten the message - with guns at least - that their actual position is political suicide, so they avoid the issue, or lard their discussions with commie code - "responsible" gun ownership, "sporting," et c.

When running they do. They never follow through on any of it, but the say it and the idiots belive it. Clinton bashed Bush for talking about family values, saying government should have nothing to do with our families, then after seeing it was a winning issue he started hammering on how important family values are.
  They always move towards the right (verbally) to get elected, then continue their socialist agendas.

Quoted: When running they do. They never follow through on any of it, but the say it and the idiots belive it. Clinton bashed Bush for talking about family values, saying government should have nothing to do with our families, then after seeing it was a winning issue he started hammering on how important family values are.   They always move towards the right (verbally) to get elected, then continue their socialist agendas.

After the trash job done on Kerry are you of the opinion the American public is anymore adept at picking up bullshit.  Also do you think more of us will take the time to look at voting records and political historys, not who gave them a blowjob back when?

Not at all. I used to have faith in the people, but I lost a lot of it when they voted Clinton in. When they voted him in for a second term I realised that the hippy mentality has taken over too much of the country for us to ever have the informed citizens/voters we should. Most people don't pay any attention to politics, except for the relative few who watch commercials the last month before an election.
  I admit I could put more effort into learning local politics, but I always vote whether it's a national election or a local bond issue. Ever since I was little and learned about our soldiers who fought and died to keep us free, I've felt that voting is a responsibilty more than just a priviledge. If I missed a chance to vote I'd feel like I was slapping our veterans in the face, and if I voted for a Democrat/socialist I'd feel the same way.

Very patriotic.

don't forget the meat eating, hippie hating, gun owning wing of the Democratic party... lead by me.

Press the button Frist, The Liberal Jihadists Will Not back up Their Threat to obstruct everything
Reid's Home state poll numbers say 57% do not approve of his blocking of GWB's Nominees, He won't risk being "Dashcelized"

Don't rule out the Southern Democrats yet.  If they can figure out a way to keep the national Democratic party from pulling them down, they have a historic record of winning.  Sure, there are Republican wins in the south but that is due to the influence on the national Democratic party.  As for the southern voters, they are, at heart, conservative Democrats.  I have to include myself there as well.  I don't fall in lock step with all the Republican ideology but the reality is that, at a national level, the Republican party reflects more of my values than the Democrat party does.  At the state level, not that way.

Quoted:
Not at all. I used to have faith in the people, but I lost a lot of it when they voted Clinton in. When they voted him in for a second term I realised that the hippy mentality has taken over too much of the country for us to ever have the informed citizens/voters we should.

  He (Clinton) never would have been elected the first time if it wasn't for Ross Perot.  Also he ran as a conservative, and his governing record in arkansas was conservative.  The second time around the Republicans commited suicide by nominating Bob Dole in an election cycle dominated by baby boomer voters who are/where uncomfortable with their generational faillings (cowardice/selfishness)  
  So the people aren't really the problem, this is why the democrats are/where trying to import voters by rushing citizenship to as many people as they possibly could, anyone else rember that one?   The future for the gop looks bright as long as they rember where they came from and do something about imigration.    keeep the faith bro

vin

Quoted: don't forget the meat eating, hippie hating, gun owning wing of the Democratic party... lead by me.

So how are your three followers feeling this morning?

Quoted: don't forget the meat eating, hippie hating, gun owning wing of the Democratic party... lead by me.

Oh its you again, the one who thinks Anne Coulter is an idiot.  Thanks for confirming what I suspected before, that you were a closet Democrat pretending to be one of us.  

The current Democratic Party is a polyglot mix of somewhat disparate leftist groups, all with various agendas.  Sometimes they are co-incident...and sometimes not.

Basically they all have the same values and believe in a few core issues:

-Hatred of Bush

-Hatred of Conservatives

-An unabiding belief in wealth re-distribution

-A fear and loathing of firearms and a disbelief in the 2nd Amendment

-A "One-World" belief, coupled with an intense belief that all nations, especially 3rd world crapholes are the equal and peer of the USA

-Most are anti-Semitic and pro-Palestinian

-A belief that the USA is to blame for all the World's ills.

-A fundamental belief in Marxism

-Most are Atheists

-Most are die-hard socialists

-Most are anti-military.  The current crop of American leftists are that way because they cut their liberal teeth in protesting the Vietnam War and ALL following conflicts over the years are viewed through that jaded lens.

-Most are pro-abortion and anti-death penalty  (Murders=good, babies=bad)

The leaders of the Democratic Party, those senators you mention, are so far to the Left that they can't possibly change their spots.  This is what got them elected many years ago when Liberalism was popular.  Now, they are on the wane, but they're hanging on to whatever little bits of power they can for dear life.  They are all socialists...and all liberals in one...so splitting would be meaningless.

Quoted: Quoted: Not at all. I used to have faith in the people, but I lost a lot of it when they voted Clinton in. When they voted him in for a second term I realised that the hippy mentality has taken over too much of the country for us to ever have the informed citizens/voters we should.   He (Clinton) never would have been elected the first time if it wasn't for Ross Perot.  Also he ran as a conservative, and his governing record in arkansas was conservative.  The second time around the Republicans commited suicide by nominating Bob Dole in an election cycle dominated by baby boomer voters who are/where uncomfortable with their generational faillings (cowardice/selfishness)     So the people aren't really the problem, this is why the democrats are/where trying to import voters by rushing citizenship to as many people as they possibly could, anyone else rember that one?   The future for the gop looks bright as long as they rember where they came from and do something about imigration.    keeep the faith bro vin

I hope you're right. My confidence in the people has been severely shaken.

Party splits generally result in the split party losing.  If history teaches us anything, parties splitting prior to an elections usually results in an elected President that precipitates a catastrophe for the US.  Consider what happened in:

1859 - Democratic Party split; Lincoln elected - Civil War
1912 - Republican Party split; Wilson elected - helps win WWI (major cause for the start of WWII)
1992 - Republican Party challenged by Reform Party; Clinton elected - 9/11

What this country needs is a legitimate third party that can get people elected.  The Libertarians can't shake off the image of being potheads when the put druid priests up for election to Governor (granted, it was for California, but it still hurts their credibility).

I wish both parties would split, maybe then we could actually have a chance to vote for a party that would bring back the good old days. 1790ish style.

Quoted: Don't rule out the Southern Democrats yet.  If they can figure out a way to keep the national Democratic party from pulling them down, they have a historic record of winning.  Sure, there are Republican wins in the south but that is due to the influence on the national Democratic party.  As for the southern voters, they are, at heart, conservative Democrats.  I have to include myself there as well.  I don't fall in lock step with all the Republican ideology but the reality is that, at a national level, the Republican party reflects more of my values than the Democrat party does.  At the state level, not that way.

As Zell Miller stated, he didn't abandon the party, the party abandoned him.  The Democrat Party apparatus is controlled by Howard Dean, and that means he controls the distribution of money to support (re)election of party candidates.  As long as he cotnrols the money, any conservatives left in the party will be expected to shut up and do as Harry Ried and Nancy Pelosi say.