I read an article in the local newspaper today showing that Washington is and has overwhelmingly favored the democratic party for over 20 years. Tis doesn’t make sense to me. What are the causes for folks to elect one party time and again?

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

They never learn?




Dunno. May be that some regions just attract a certain catagory of people by the areas industry and enviroment(demographics?)

__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)

That's simple. Different states attract different types of people. Similar types of people tend to have similar beliefs and thus vote the same. Where do you think the stereotypes come from? As far as WA goes, the left coast is full of idealists - no surprise to find a bunch of democrats there. And I agree with you, supporting the democratic party for 20 years doesn't make sense to me either. There is no telling where we'd be without the republicans getting us back on track every so often. Heck, look how long it took the economy to recover from Clinton's BS...

__________________
1982 Mercedes-Benz 300CD
1982 Mercedes-Benz 240D - stick

Maybe that's why Washingtons economy is such a roller-coaster ride.:p

__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)

Amen, thank god for fiscally responsible republicans I hope we never go back to those days of balanced budgets and a strong dollar.

Uh-oh.
Haven't we already gone down this path?

__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)

I must have stopped at the Republican Joke thread by mistake.....

Damn Democrats! Creating jobs, balancing the budget,cleaning up the environment,lowering the infant mortality rate (now UP for the first time in 40 years!) providing health insurance for people (4 million more without it since Bush took office)and not killing our soldiers in a bogus war with Iraq. DAMN DEMOCRATS! Where the hell are you now that we need you? How long will it take to clean up Bush's mess?
BJ, I'm open to being refuted with FACTS, how about you?

In Texas we have a no-job growth economy, local taxes going thru the roof, and a lack of new capital invetment because our property taxes have gotten so high new business does not want to locate here. The biggest Republican party contributors control companies that have laid environmental waste to huge parts of the state while importing and employing 100s of thousands, if not millions, of Mexican nationals while the Republican dominated government looks the other way. Result: Lousy pay for all the people at the lower end of the economic scale. Jobs that used to be the middle class jobs, like carpenters, plumbers, etc, are now done for five bucks an hour.

When I go home to heavily Democratic New England, I find the most vibrant, booming economies in the US. Due to the strict enviromental laws from all those "environmental wackos" Limbaugh screams about, the great natural beauty of the area has returned. The Merrimack River, which wound its way thru the center of my town, was a stinky putrid multicolored scum run filled with the corpes of roting fish when I was a kid. Its banks were bare because the water liiterally killed the trees. Now it is a pristine ribbon of lush natural beauty even in the most populated areas. Results: companies want to locate there. In Texas, we can't get new companies to locate here unless they are pollutors. Their employees just don't want to live here.

LA changes parties every so often. Most are on the social conservative but somewhat populist side. Our current gov is a female conservative democrat who replaced a term-limited popular male conservative republican. She defeated a first-gen young Indian, male, conservative republican.

We have an open primary which weakens party politics considerably. The pols want closed primaries back, but fear the electorate, who generally like it.

B

Yeah, sort of. But I'm not interested in starting another partisan debate. There's a bunch of other threads we could beat on each other in already. I will spar with you for sport as long as you promise not to take it personally. I will address some of the points you brought up though:

1) Infant Mortality Rate - Source: MSNBC
"U.S. infant mortality has climbed for the first time in more than four decades, mainly because of complications associated with older women putting off motherhood and then having multiple babies via fertility drugs, the government said Wednesday."

"Despite the infant mortality increase, U.S. life expectancy continues to rise because of steady decreases in deaths from heart disease, stroke and cancer.

“When you see decreases in those three causes, you usually are going to see increases in life expectancy,” said Ken Kochanek, CDC statistician.

Homicides decreased 17 percent in 2002, but that was largely because of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks the year before. When only non-terrorism homicides were counted, the U.S. rate dropped 3.3 percent the CDC said."

What, if anything, did either party contribute to any of this?

Multiple Choice Question:
Regarding the IMR, what "facts" are you using to attribute a) the "lowering" to the democratic party or b) the increase to the republican party

a) My source was _____________
b) I don't understand the question
c) That's what I was told and believed without checking it out for myself
d) It was included in my "Kerry for President" action kit
e) I just accidentally kicked my bong over and will have to get back to you on that


2) Providing Health Insurance for People - Source: US Census Bureau's web site.

"The share of the population without
health insurance rose in 2002, the
second consecutive annual increase.
An estimated 15.2 percent of the population or 43.6 million people were
without health insurance coverage
during the entire year in 2002, up
from 14.6 percent in 2001, an
increase of 2.4 million people.

The number and percentage of people
covered by employment-based health
insurance dropped in 2002, from
62.6 percent to 61.3 percent, driving
the overall decrease in health insurance
coverage.

The number and percentage of people
covered by government health insurance programs rose in 2002, from
25.3 percent to 25.7 percent, largely
from an increase in the number and
percentage of people covered by medicaid (from 11.2 percent to
11.6 percent)."

Question #2: Based on the above facts, I
a) don't understand the question
b) would think it reasonable that the President would be more likely to have an effect on the number of people insured through government health insurance programs than employment based programs and am surprised to find the opposite of my assertion to be true
c) still hold my original position in the face of real data
d) am still working on the bong mess and now owe you two.

3) Balancing the Federal Budget Source: Historical Tables, 2004 Federal Budget p.298 Table 15.6 Budget History from 1947 - 2002

This table is too complex for cut and paste. Check it out for yourself. Pay specific attention to "Off-Budget" items Clinton used to offset his deficits.

My point is that each party has its strengths and each party has its weaknesses. "Changing of the guard" is healthy for this country. I'm not a member of either party - but I do vote. Anyone who knows anything about politics in the first place (don't take offense - I am generalizing and not attacking you) realizes that the President of the United States has very little if anything to do with any of the stuff everyone on this site is always *****ing about. The fact of the matter is that the U.S. Congress has the true power, and career politicians have crippled the system. Congress has a two-year term so that anyone can serve - me, you, etc. and then we can return to our regular lives and/or businesses when we're finished. It was not designed to be jammed full of career politicians who are always running for office - always - and never actually representing the rest of us. They do what the people who can help get them re-elected want them to do - period. If you want change, stop focusing so much energy on who is or is not president and convince everyone you know to vote in their own congressional elections and push for term limits. As far as the whole Bush v. Kerry thing goes, you may not like President Bush, but at least you know where he stands and who he is. Kerry won't even be the same person in a week. At the minimum, refuse to be force fed rhetoric and make an informed decision.

__________________
1982 Mercedes-Benz 300CD
1982 Mercedes-Benz 240D - stick

Its all Dubbya's fault!!!


Washington favors the Dems because of all the Dems infiltrating from CA. It aint called the "Left Coast" because its on the left side of the map...

__________________
http://comp.uark.edu/~dmgill/signature.jpg

Here are some clues to somebody's party affiliation. At the end, guess which party this person belongs to.

My party is trying to save the people of the United States from the terrible depredations of the other party. Those heinous swine will say or do anything to get elected.

My party is looking out for you against special interests that influence legislation and against entrenched bureaucrats who intentionally reinterpret legislation to their own purposes.


My party is ______.

I read a while ago in I think it was the CIA fact book that the USA was a broadly 2 tiered society until the great success of the computer industry blended the middle a bit, making new wealth, and creating an entire generation of prosperity for uncounted 10s of millions of folks. This transition has taken place in about the last 25 years. I mention this as there is a supposition that folks with money tend to vote republican while others vote democrat. While the Washington area has been heavily influenced by the computer industry, you’d think the trend would have an impact on the voting distribution. And even if it doesn’t, don’t the laws of complementary distribution say that voting over time will fall 50/50 to the 2 major parties? Yet it doesn’t. How can this be? It’s akin to tossing a coin for 25 years and having it come up the same way every time.

So what influences a vote for the republican vs. democrat parties. I’m sure most will agree that both parties are closer to a ship of thievs and fools than enlightened groups. Is this another case where xenophobia or institutional memory takes the role of leadership?? Or maybe, just maybe indifference suggests a vote for the democratic party?

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

Now this thread is back on track. Good moderation Lebenz. What you're clearly asking now is truly the question. In my experience, most people who claim to be one or the other cannot define either. What I usually hear from them is what I see on the news, or in the press. On the large scale, unfortunately it's the same old thing - follow the money. Each party has its favorite targets - Republicans target the middle class and wealthy and the Democrats target the poor, aged, and minorities. Each side makes empty promise after empty promise. "Sales pitch" after sales pitch. Each side tries to find an issue they can run with. The media chooses a side and runs their spin. Whichever side convinces the most people to vote wins. Most people don't want to spend the time researching anything and just regurgitate what they hear from the media - scary stuff. The win really has nothing to do with the validity of the candidates position or the public's perception of their future performance. I don't know how it is among the circles you guys travel in, but in mine I am one of the few people who votes. In my opinion this is the real problem. Statistically, half the people involved in this thread won't vote in the presidential election anyway. Of the rest, an even fewer number will vote for House or Senate candidates and even fewer in local elections. The House is where the true evil lies...

Want to be surprised? Take this quiz and see which party you're most closely aligned with.

This is me:
1) Constitution Party 76%
2) Libertarian Party 71%
3) Reform Party 59%
4) Green Party 47%
5) Democratic Party 41%
6) Natural Law Party 41%
7) Republican Party 35%

__________________
1982 Mercedes-Benz 300CD
1982 Mercedes-Benz 240D - stick