Republicans ashamed to have "Republican" next to their names on ballot

[daihashi]

Where are the republicans of this forums right now? Why no one of them made any comment about this? Maybe they also are ashamed... who knows?

I am not a republican; but typically I stand up for that side because no one else seems to and majority of this forum are quick to bash the Republican party without even knowing what some of it's members that are brought into question stand for.

I had taken a hiatus. I am back, sort've. Reading over the posts in this forum have honestly sickened me and affirmed my belief that people do not want to genuinely research the situation on both sides and weigh it against each other. Since my absence, and I am in no way attributing the balance of this forum to myself, I've noticed the threads that are being posted becoming more and more trivial and almost comical. Had someone opposed these ideas then there may have been some more genuine discussions.

Check the posts on the first page of the politics forum alone. Ridiculous.. I support whoever has the best ideas (given who we are given as options for candidates.)

When I was younger I thought Democrats made much more sense and now that I'm a little bit older Many conservative (notice I say conservative because more parties fall into this category than just Republicans) ideals appeal to me after I've weighed it against my previous affiliations.

IMO many democratic pieces of legislation and proposals don't offer a way to empower the American people. By simply handing out something (as many Democrat programs do) you force the people to rely on you, you do not empower them to help themselves or better themselves.

But what do I know, I'm in the minority here. Guess I'll just have to stick to my looney ways and deal with the attacks that are going to come my way once more.

Someone has to represent the opposing side, I might as well pitch in my effort here along with the handful of other people that do so as well.

[daihashi]

I agree with that! Who cares what the label is, what do they stand for. In my humble view, people that need a label along side a candidate are to lazy to look at the individual issues.

Have a good one:s4:

Exactly, but the people here that are quick to bash a candidate because he is trying to eliminate that label in order to people to possibly actually look at what he stands for are the exact same people that are being lazy.

Yes, I just called a group of people lazy. People would rather pat themselves on the back for voting for a party or candidate they actually know very little about.

voting based on the party a person is affiliated with is honestly disgusting in my opinion.

[dragonrider]

There is a difference between a "label" and a party affiliation. A label is something like "conservative" or "liberal" or "moderate" or "dumbass." A political label is usually supposed to take a set of policy positions that often go together, make a name for that set of positions, and stick that label on politicians, voters or a party that is believed to support that set of policies.

I think it is fine to object to a label, because almost no one fits a label exactly. Almost everyone is a more complex mixture of some "liberal" policies, some "moderate" policies, and some "conservative" policies. For example, it's irritating to be labeled "liberal" because of your environmental policies if you are fiscally "conservative" and "moderate" on most social issues.

But party affiliation is not a label. Party affiliation is a fact. You either are a Republican or you are not. It is relevant, and it should be accurately stated on the ballot, not some made up name. The reason it is relevant is that the candidates are selected in a primary election of that particular party, each party only runs one candidate on the ballot, the party pays for and supports a large part of the campaign for that candidate, and once elected, that candidate will likely work with other party members toward a shared party agenda.

It is not right for a candidate to be registered as a Republican, win the Republican party primary, be the only Republican candidate on the ballot, have his campaign paid for in large part by the Republican party, support the Republican party agenda, and NOT have his Republican party affiliation on the ballot! It is especially not right to have him MAKE UP a new name for his party! That is absolutely ridiculous!

He is not being LABELED a Republican, he IS a Republican --- registered in his party, selected by his party, supported by his party, and expected to support his party in return.

The problem for Republicans this election is that the Republican party itself has been labeled --- the labels are things like "failures" and "fools" and "hypocrits" and "liars" and "thieves" and "incompetents." You can thank George Bush and all the Republicans in both houses who supported him through his failed adminsitration for those labels. Many good Republicans object to those kinds of labels, as they should, but that does not mean they should be allowed to make up a new name for their party affiliation. Voters deserve to know what party they belong to. If these politicains think their party is too tainted by "labels," they should change their party affiliation by registering in a differrent party and going through the primary process in that party, or by forming their own new party.

[dragonrider]

Exactly, but the people here that are quick to bash a candidate because he is trying to eliminate that label in order to people to possibly actually look at what he stands for are the exact same people that are being lazy.

Yes, I just called a group of people lazy. People would rather pat themselves on the back for voting for a party or candidate they actually know very little about.

voting based on the party a person is affiliated with is honestly disgusting in my opinion.

For the most part I agree with you that voting strictly a party ticket with no understanding of the individual candidates, is stupid, especially if it is just due to laziness.

However voting for a candidate because of party affiliation is not always due to laziness. Sometimes voters support their party's candidates regardless of the positions or qualifications of an individual candidate because they support their party's platform and agenda even more than they support a given candidate. I think that is perfectly legitimate, as long as it is not done out of "laziness."

For example, we have a very narrow margin in the Senate right now. A lot of legislation can be blocked by fillibuster or veto. Even if a voter did not agree with particular positions of a particular candidate, that voter might want to vote a party line in order change the margin in the Senate one way or the other. For example, maybe a voter doesn't agree with a particular candidate about abortion or immigration, but they want to see the Democratic legislative agenda as a whole have a better chance of being moved (or blocked) in the Senate.

As long as it is not just done out of complete ignorance, voting the party ticket can make some sense from the point of view of supporting the party platform and party agenda.

----

And I disagree that this candidate is being bashed for wanting voters to take a look at his positions rather than his party affiliation. He is running from the fact that his party has a reputation of failure right now. He's willing to be supported by his party, but he doesn't want anyone to know who he will be expected to support in return. That is dishonest --- enough reason not to vote for him right there.

[maladroit]

i think a lot of people vote for the person who already has the job because they recognize the name...i find myself doing that when confronted with a choice of 80 different people in municipal elections...in that case i find it helpful to know which party they belong to so i can vote to support the general policies of that party...if i know that a political party is socially minded, i will tend to support their candidates in school board seats, and if i know that a party has an environmental record, i will tend to support their candidates for parks board seats...when it comes to the mayor and city councillors, i vote for the party that have a strong fiscal record so their candidates can keep the lid on all the crazy liberals i voted for on the parks and school boards

this year voters will probably turn against the incumbents because of the low approval ratings of congress

[happiestmferoutthere]

At these McCain rallys the Republicans have shown what hateful, racist, ignorant people this party consists of. ( Not all of them, of course. Just the hateful, racist, ignorant ones) They well should be ashamed!
I am thoroughly disgusted. I honestly don't have that much hate in me and it scares me how openly hateful these people are.
Calm the fuck down, people!:angry3:

[daihashi]

At these McCain rallys the Republicans have shown what hateful, racist, ignorant people this party consists of. ( Not all of them, of course. Just the hateful, racist, ignorant ones) They well should be ashamed!
I am thoroughly disgusted. I honestly don't have that much hate in me and it scares me how openly hateful these people are.
Calm the fuck down, people!:angry3:

Uhh.. care to show more specifics of what constitutes racist, hateful and ignorant?

And do you realize you contradicted yourself in the same sentence by making disparaging remarks of a category of people and then saying not all of them.. just the hateful racist ones.

I could say many things based on personal opinion of the democrats, but instead I choose to focus on what their party beliefs are and the political candidates within the own party.

Your comment is an empty statement with no backing behind it. If you want to bash a party at least have some concrete information to substantiate your claim. :hippy:

edit: oh and i have to add, Racism, hate and ignorance has no party affiliation. It effects people across the nation and the world regardless of political motivation, gender, or color of their skin. All 3 of the things you listed transcend politics and can be easily found ANYWHERE you look.

[happiestmferoutthere]

Uhh.. care to show more specifics of what constitutes racist, hateful and ignorant?

And do you realize you contradicted yourself in the same sentence by making disparaging remarks of a category of people and then saying not all of them.. just the hateful racist ones.

I could say many things based on personal opinion of the democrats, but instead I choose to focus on what their party beliefs are and the political candidates within the own party.

Your comment is an empty statement with no backing behind it. If you want to bash a party at least have some concrete information to substantiate your claim. :hippy:



edit: oh and i have to add, Racism, hate and ignorance has no party affiliation. It effects people across the nation and the world regardless of political motivation, gender, or color of their skin. All 3 of the things you listed transcend politics and can be easily found ANYWHERE you look.

All right. You've scolded me. Sorry. I realize it was a blanket statement that in itself was ignorant and hateful. It was a knee jerk response after hearing the shit being spewed at these McCain rallys.
I was, and am still thoroughly, disgusted!

Rants don't always have to make sense. That why they call them rants.

[JakeMartinez]

Uhh.. care to show more specifics of what constitutes racist, hateful and ignorant?

And do you realize you contradicted yourself in the same sentence by making disparaging remarks of a category of people and then saying not all of them.. just the hateful racist ones.

I could say many things based on personal opinion of the democrats, but instead I choose to focus on what their party beliefs are and the political candidates within the own party.

Your comment is an empty statement with no backing behind it. If you want to bash a party at least have some concrete information to substantiate your claim. :hippy:

edit: oh and i have to add, Racism, hate and ignorance has no party affiliation. It effects people across the nation and the world regardless of political motivation, gender, or color of their skin. All 3 of the things you listed transcend politics and can be easily found ANYWHERE you look.

The chants of "TERRORIST!", the people interviewed going to McCain/Palin ralleys quoted as saying he has strong Islamic roots that show his ties to terror, and the phrase "KILL HIM!" ringing through a town hall are pretty strong backing, don't you think?

There are some pretty nasty elements attending McCain's rallies. And, to top it all of, this Friday McCain had to tell his audience that he respects Barack Obama before those elements brought his campaign to its knees.

By the way, the crowd booed when he said that.

[daihashi]

The chants of "TERRORIST!", the people interviewed going to McCain/Palin ralleys quoted as saying he has strong Islamic roots that show his ties to terror, and the phrase "KILL HIM!" ringing through a town hall are pretty strong backing, don't you think?

There are some pretty nasty elements attending McCain's rallies. And, to top it all of, this Friday McCain had to tell his audience that he respects Barack Obama before those elements brought his campaign to its knees.

By the way, the crowd booed when he said that.

You saying something doesn't make it true. Again, show me clips of this. Even still; do you hold Obama responsible for the Riots at the RNC? A small sect of people doesn't necessarily reflect the leadership or direction that a candidate is trying to take a crowd.

You seem so eager to label the opposition without any evidence to substantiate your claims.

Now if you want to label McCain because of personal ties to people in his life involved in scandal then that's another story.

If you like I can find people calling McCain a racist and basically preaching hate speech who are Obama supporters. Does this mean that Obama is a mean spirited person? Does this mean Obama is a reverse racist? (actually there is evidence to substantiate that claim but I'll let it go unless you ask me to reference it).

I don't hold either candidate accountable for the ignorant people that may attend their rallies.