Anti-war movement: bad in the long term for Democrats?

[UtahDan]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule

Krauthammer wrote an interesting piece arguing that the anti-war movement in the Democrat party will help them this fall, but once the "bad guy" (Bush) and other Republicans are out of office (as they inevitably all be at some point) they will stil be left with the fight against radical Islam which that ideology will prevent them from having effective solutions to.

Interesting take. I think there is some truth to it.

[fusnik11]

The democrats are a party who is dominated and controlled by the fringe.

I think the anti-war movement will be a huge negative for one reason:

There will always be unrest in the Middle East, and people take that unrest as a direct threat against us.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

The democrats are a party who is dominated and controlled by the fringe.

I think the anti-war movement will be a huge negative for one reason:

There will always be unrest in the Middle East, and people take that unrest as a direct threat against us.

For once we agree. It is too bad because I think there are democrats who have, or could have, important IDEAS to add to the discourse about how these problems are solved. Much of the party today, however, is first and formost anti-war. I think that this is just as obsurd as saying you are anti-terror: each is not an ideology or philosophy but a tactic to achieve and end. This offers no alternative solution to the problem so it simply denies, as it must, the existence of the problem.

This is not a serious view of foreign policy, though it may well be an opportnuistic view of electoral politics. The party of Kennedy was very tough minded on foreign policy, but since then it has become too much beholden to its anti-war faction. There are moderate dems out there. Here's hoping we hear them articulate some solutions.

My guess is, however, that they won't because there is no clear solution to the problems presented by militant Islam and neither party can get elected saying that (though it is the truth).

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

My guess is, however, that they won't because there is no clear solution to the problems presented by militant Islam and neither party can get elected saying that (though it is the truth).

Here is my hope and dream, a democrat who is not anti-war, but is anti-oil. Not the enviormentalist type that bemoans the evils of global warming, but a candidate who is serious about weaning America off of fossil fuels. A candidate who is serious about solar energy, electric powered cars, etc. I think by eliminating our need for foreign oil, we eliminate our presence, by eliminating our presence we eliminate certain levels of hate, by eliminating these levels of hate we eliminate terrorist attacks, by eliminating the threat of attacks we eliminate the war.

I don't see any other way out of the war against Radical Islam.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

Here is my hope and dream, a democrat who is not anti-war, but is anti-oil. Not the enviormentalist type that bemoans the evils of global warming, but a candidate who is serious about weaning America off of fossil fuels. A candidate who is serious about solar energy, electric powered cars, etc. I think by eliminating our need for foreign oil, we eliminate our presence, by eliminating our presence we eliminate certain levels of hate, by eliminating these levels of hate we eliminate terrorist attacks, by eliminating the threat of attacks we eliminate the war.

I don't see any other way out of the war against Radical Islam.

Not certain that is a viable candidate within the structure of the Democratic Party.

The interests contained within the Party will dictate who receives the nomination. The Party Heads must accommodate those factions that supply them with money and man power.

Where is the power of the Party?

From Labor.

From the fringe environmentalists.

From the Hollywood Elite.

From where else?

How will a Party elect the candidate you identified from the power groups above?

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Where is the power of the Party?

From Labor.

From the fringe environmentalists.

From the Hollywood Elite.

From where else?

How will a Party elect the candidate you identified from the power groups above?

It won't, that's why the democrats won't take a strangle hold on the political scene like they should be able to right now. The country dislikes Bush, dislikes the war, dislikes gas prices, dislikes goverment spending, dislikes healthcare, but you don't see them running to vote out the status quo.

The country needs strong moderate democrats in office, unfortunately with Howard Dean in charge that ain't happening.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

It won't, that's why the democrats won't take a strangle hold on the political scene like they should be able to right now. The country dislikes Bush, dislikes the war, dislikes gas prices, dislikes goverment spending, dislikes healthcare, but you don't see them running to vote out the status quo.

The country needs strong moderate democrats in office, unfortunately with Howard Dean in charge that ain't happening.

I don't know a lot of his political ideals, but would Barack Obama fit that bill for the Democrats? The guy seems to have a ton of charisma.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

Here is my hope and dream, a democrat who is not anti-war, but is anti-oil. Not the enviormentalist type that bemoans the evils of global warming, but a candidate who is serious about weaning America off of fossil fuels. A candidate who is serious about solar energy, electric powered cars, etc. I think by eliminating our need for foreign oil, we eliminate our presence, by eliminating our presence we eliminate certain levels of hate, by eliminating these levels of hate we eliminate terrorist attacks, by eliminating the threat of attacks we eliminate the war.

I don't see any other way out of the war against Radical Islam.

Terrorist attacks will continure until Radical Islam is either wiped off the face of the planet or has complete control of the planet. They don't care if a moderate Dem comes in and eliminates our presence. They see anyone that is not Radical Islam as infedels and the enemy.

I agree it's time to cut back on dependency of foreign oil as much as functionally possible, but until radical envioronmentalists stop being a pain in the ass, I don't know if that can ever happen.

It's not just the environmentalists freaks either. All Americans who own vehicles, be they SUVs trucks, cars, etc. need to do their part and stop driving unneccesarily. The trouble is that everyone has their idea as to what exactly necessary driving is. Consumer can force gas prices down by using public or alternate transportation (such as bicycles, etc.) and the oil companies will have to lower prices becasue demand is down. Simple economics.

The real question is are we, as American consumers, willing to give up our vehicles for buses, trains or bikes? If not, then we have no right to complain about gas prices. Oil companies are not beholden to the American consumer, but their stockholders. Their duty is to make as much money as they can.

Finally, I don't believe there is a viable candidate that fits your dream scenario from either party. There really is no difference between Repubs and Dems. Both are self-serving and care not one bit about the voters after they are in office.