User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 25

  1. #1
    Senior Member SubtleFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    260

    Default What flaws are in the Democratic party?

    I'm an American, and I've been trying to become more knowledgeable politically in the past couple years. As I look at the Republicans, what's wrong with them is loud and clear to me. But for Democrats, usually people will say, "yes, they're flawed" and not really expound on that. Or people will say, "both parties are equally corrupt." Which is pretty vague.

    I'd like to know what specific flaws people see in the party. It could be in the ideology itself or in individual politicians. I don't care if you're a conservative or liberal, but please stick to actual reasoning and arguments, and not things like "the libtards want to destroy Amurica."
    "Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear."--Ambrose Redmoon

    . . . metamorphosing . . .

  2. #2
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Not good at coming up with solutions that work in the real world.

    Play identity politics at the expense of policy.

    Overly rely on Peter to pay Paul.

    Even when in power, not very unified.

    Only have a few issues where they are really in line with middle America.

    Tendency to have limitless faith in central planning.

    Come off as morally self righteous and condescending.

  3. #3
    amateur cartographer kquirk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    593 sp/so
    Posts
    221

    Default

    From a practical standpoint, when it comes to playing political games and solidifying power, I can see how a lack of unity can be a problem. On the other hand, I can appreciate when people think/vote for themselves rather than goose-step along the party line.
    5w6 - 9w8 - 3w2

    Words are wind.

  4. #4
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    They haven't, in a policy sense, moved beyond the tenants of the 30's and LBJ's great society.

    They care more about trying to help people they want to help than making things work.

  5. #5
    amateur cartographer kquirk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    593 sp/so
    Posts
    221

    Default

    The Democrats in power, like the Republicans, only care about winning elections and getting more money/power for themselves and not about fixing anything.
    5w6 - 9w8 - 3w2

    Words are wind.

  6. #6
    libtard SJW chickpea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,959

    Default

    Too willing to compromise their beliefs for money, power or popularity. But that's all politicians.

  7. #7
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,908

    Default

    They're not sure what they want to be. And I think they are much more afraid to take action or stand for anything than Republicans, and are far more disconnected from their base than the Republicans are. Of course this is not an eternal fact. It is something that has been building up since around 1980.

    There's a particularly popular, and as far as I can tell, totally baseless myth amongst Democrats that they were punished for being too left-wing, and they saved their party and returned to successes by seriously moderating themselves. However, the chronology of this makes sense regarding only the presidency. If you pay attention to the legislature (which in its entirety is far more important than the presidency) Democrats didn't start getting hammered until they put the moderate cap on.

    I will not say that both parties are equally corrupt. I think that is false. The Republican party is more corrupt. But the Democratic party is definitely too corrupt, too behest to moneyed interests. Perhaps it stings a little more when the Democrats make that mistake because they are supposed to be the party that supports labor against management, demand against supply, and civics/government against business. It seems like more of a fundamental failure when Democrats do it than when Republican can, but that's only because of better expectations.

    In my opinion, in terms of platform, the Democratic party beats the Republican party in a landslide, but there are still plenty of areas in which the two parties collude in their mistaken positions, ranging from the war on drugs to the overly interventionist foreign policy.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    They haven't, in a policy sense, moved beyond the tenants of the 30's and LBJ's great society.
    I think they have, in fact, moved too far beyond them, or rather, fallen too far behind them.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  8. #8
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    A quote from Winston Churchill comes to mind:

    "Do not let spacious plans for a new world divert your energies from saving what is left of the old."

    They have a pretty bad track record of tripping over their own dicks when legislating.

  9. #9
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    @SubtleFighter

    Depends. In a historical standpoint, the current Democratic Party is the remnants of the New Deal Coalition. The New Deal Coalition was very broad based, in fact, most everyone were ok with it. The so called "liberal" part of the Democratic party kept pushing through Civil Rights legislation. If we were to compare how we are going today compared to how we were in the 60's... we went towards the liberal side while today, we are much more into the conservative part of the politics today (quite far.. in my view.) Nixon, and succeeding Republicans saw, through the Southern Strategy, that the Civil Rights Era was alienating a lot of people. This is especially the case with Southern Democrats, who saw the whole Civil Rights issue in disdain, riots that occurred during the 60's and 70's also caused a lot of people to...say... feel betrayed because a lot of the programs, like the Great Society, was really trying to lift people up to a certain standard, in general.

    Once issues, like abortion popped up in the 1960's, religion got pushed into the fray (this is why we see such a strong presence in the religious right.) And you see a lot of people who are anti-abortion on the right and pro-choice on the left. Pre-60's religion wasn't particularly an issue unless you were Catholic.

    As for the flaws of the Democratic Party, because it is the remnants of the New Deal Coalition, it is very broad based. It is not as tight-knit as the Republican Party. If you look at graphs between the more progressive wing of the Democratic Party and the more conservative part of the Republican Party, the progressive wing is pretty scattered, the conservative... not so much.

    Democrats tend to focused more on individuals while Republicans tend to focus more on community (however you want to interpret the two.)

    The strong anti-war movement in the 1960's also pushed a lot of the pro-war people in the old New Deal Coalition into the Republican Party. FDR actually pushed the war agenda quite far during his time in office (besides the Great Depression effort.) So whether you interpret being pro-war or pro-peace as being better, that is really up to consideration, there are times that negotiating is better than stepping into a country and completely wrecking it, while there are other times negotiating just won't do squat.

    Democrats tend to see the government as a catalyst for change...this view didn't really show up until the time of FDR (although it was prominent in Theodore Roosevelt's time and Howard Taft's time, both of who are Republicans,) while Republican see's the government with more skepticism(this goes as far back as the beginning of America.) The Republican view has been making a comeback since the 1960's.

    The whole issue of Peter Pay Paul is really, a reaction to the 1960's era..... action. Both Democrats, and Republicans saw that being paid an exceedingly amount compared to your workers was very shameful. Most people that were rich were paid about 20 times more than the average of the workers since the very early in America, today, the CEO-average worker pay is closer to 200:1. The 1960's Era, again, sort of created this sort of backlash that people are "taking money from people that earn it" when in fact, there are many programs that affects people of all classes, it is just easier to look at the average/dependent worker because it affects more people. Taxes in the 1930's were close to 75%, that is how much the richer people, back then, thought how shameful it was to be exceedingly rich. Today, it is closer to 35%... and in some cases (with tax breaks and bills that are handed out to companies) it can go even lower.

    There is probably more, some can be seen as flaws by certain people while others may be seen as good by others.

    If I were to make my own government, it would be somewhere between Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Delano Roosevelt (with Madisonian leanings,) and that is how much I like the two. If I were to have presidential rankings of my own... it would be.

    Franklin Delano Roosevelt
    Theodore Roosevelt
    Abraham Lincoln
    James Madison
    George Washington

    Anyhow, a lot of fluff, but I would rather talk about historical reasons why the groups tends to be the way they are today.

  10. #10
    As Long As It Takes.... Redbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Not good at coming up with solutions that work in the real world.

    Play identity politics at the expense of policy.

    Even when in power, not very unified.

    Tendency to have limitless faith in central planning.

    Come off as morally self righteous and condescending.
    I have to agree with these. The first one makes me crazy. The last one really bugs me, too...they really downplay who they've been screwing in corporate land as if they are too pure to indulge in that kind of thing.

Similar Threads

  1. What is the Democratic Party worth? nothing
    By SearchingforPeace in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-03-2016, 04:28 PM
  2. How many kinds of people do you think there are in the world?
    By PeaceBaby in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-01-2012, 08:35 PM
  3. What to do in the SUMMER? YAY!
    By Einnas in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-01-2010, 03:32 PM
  4. What happens if you are in the middle?
    By Jon_sparky in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-23-2010, 05:54 PM
  5. Laughing at television more when others are in the room
    By digesthisickness in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-21-2007, 10:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO