Democrat Party doesn't reflect the diversity of opinion of its voters

[renard_ruse]

The Democrat Party has re-emerged as the dominant political party in the US over the past 20 years largely as a result of gaining an overwhelming majority of support from non-white racial groups. 90-95% of blacks always vote for it, and the well publicized support of over 70% of hispanics, and the less well known massive shift toward the Democrats among Asian-Americans who now vote for them at even higher rates than Hispanics do.

So, one can conclude there's some sort of racial or ethnic identity reason such high percentages are voting for one particular political party. Yet, this same party is extremely narrow, at least at the national level, in terms of its views on social issues and even to some extent on economic issues. It would be exceedingly racist to assume that 95% of blacks all support legal abortion on demand through the ninth month of pregnancy or that all Asian Americans support big government welfare giveaways or all Hispanics support allowing transvestites to teach school children or [fill in the blank issue].

If the Democrat party is going to be the dominant party going forward with a mostly token opposition from other parties, it needs to broaden its viewpoints to reflect the range of opinion among its voters. To continue with such narrow, partyline views, is a betrayal to political pluralism and democracy. The Democrat party needs to allow views other than orthodox liberalism to be worthy of being "America's party." We don't all think alike on controversial issues, Ms. Boxer, Mr. Reid, and Mr. President.

 

[about_average]

So? 44% of Republicans support same sex marriage, so obviously the republican party doesn't represent the diversity of the party members.
I'm not aware of any party that does.

 

[renard_ruse]

So? 44% of Republicans support same sex marriage, so obviously the republican party doesn't represent the diversity of the party members.
I'm not aware of any party that does.

There's no such thing as "same sex "marriage"." However, to your point, the Republican party is NOT the dominant party and is not trending to become the dominant party. Further, its a much bigger tent in terms of the range of views reflected. Its leadership actually doesn't differ that much from the leadership of the Democrats on many key issues.

There used to be various factions in the Democratic Party, which no longer exist at a national level.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Actually, the Democrats -- that is, the Dem politicians -- encompass a pretty broad range of factions.

Internal factions

While the Democrats have a substantial liberal wing among the public at large, the party's inability to coordinate itself properly results in a political platform that consists of rolling over to Republican schemes and failing to provide effective leadership. The sectarian violence appears below.

Progressive Democrats

European-styled social democrats. In the House they are organized in the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), the largest in the House of Representatives. Some are descendants of the New Left:
Sherrod Brown
Howard Dean
Keith Ellison
Russ Feingold (the only Senator to vote against the original manifestation of the PATRIOT Act)
Barney Frank
Dennis Kucinich
Barbara Lee
Jim McDermott
Cynthia McKinney
Bernie Sanders (self-described socialist; not a Democrat, but caucuses with them)
Pete Stark (the first openly atheist member of Congress[4])

Traditional liberals

Constitute half of the voter base, and take pain to avoid infighting between the separate Democratic coalitions. Centre-left, and don't share many differences with the progressives anyway:
Joe Biden
Barbara Boxer
Kirsten Gillibrand
The Kennedys
John Kerry
Nancy Pelosi
Jay Rockefeller
Elizabeth Warren
Anthony Weiner

New Democrats

The Third Way moderates. They've increased their clout since the Dems' neoliberal exploits from the 90s and onward, and are represented by the New Democrat Coalition (an affiliate of the Democratic Leadership Council):
The Clintons
John Edwards
Dianne Feinstein
Al Gore
Joe Lieberman (independent since 2006)
Some random black guy[5]
Harry Reid
Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Blue Dogs

Here's where the shit starts to break out. Those in the Blue Dog Coalition are often accused of being DINOs, siding with conservative thought whenever they wish, most commonly on social issues and deficit hawkery. Officially they are a coalition in the House but a few ideologically aligned Senators are listed as well. They're typically elected in Jesusland, and are considered flaming lefties there:
Joe Donnelly
Mary Landrieu
Gabrielle Giffords
Joe Manchin
Ben Nelson
Collin Peterson
Heath Shuler

Dixiecrat leftovers and boll weevils

To the right of the Blue Dogs. Not a significant feature in the party anymore, although occasionally one will turn up here and there as a failed Senate candidate, or a centrist Democrat will go haywire and swing far to the right.[6]
Virgil Goode (left the Democrats in 2000, was the Constitution Party presidential nominee in 2012)
Zell Miller

Random populists

These often vote with the progressive and traditional liberal wings of the party, but have their conservative quirky bits. Not easily categorized elsewhere:
Jon Tester
Jim Webb

The libertarians

Yes, they exist too, probably upset about Dubya's stance on civil liberties and the Republicans' constant juggling between pro-business interests and the Religious Right:
Mike Gravel
There is also an erstwhile "Democratic Freedom Caucus" influenced by Georgism whose actual influence in the party is negligible.

What element of the party's voter-base is not represented in that lineup?

 

[KingOrfeo]

There's no such thing as "same sex "marriage"."

Of course there is. But there is no such thing as the "Democrat Party".

 

[doctor_insanus]

There's no such thing as "same sex "marriage"." However, to your point, the Republican party is NOT the dominant party and is not trending to become the dominant party. Further, its a much bigger tent in terms of the range of views reflected. Its leadership actually doesn't differ that much from the leadership of the Democrats on many key issues.

There used to be various factions in the Democratic Party, which no longer exist at a national level.

Oh myyyy!

The Republican tent is where people go to watch freaks bite the heads off chickens.

 

[badbabysitter]

The Democrat Party has re-emerged as the dominant political party in the US over the past 20 years largely as a result of gaining an overwhelming majority of support from non-white racial groups. 90-95% of blacks always vote for it, and the well publicized support of over 70% of hispanics, and the less well known massive shift toward the Democrats among Asian-Americans who now vote for them at even higher rates than Hispanics do.

you're really obsessed with race

So, one can conclude there's some sort of racial or ethnic identity reason such high percentages are voting for one particular political party. Yet, this same party is extremely narrow, at least at the national level, in terms of its views on social issues and even to some extent on economic issues. It would be exceedingly racist to assume that 95% of blacks all support legal abortion on demand through the ninth month of pregnancy or that all Asian Americans support big government welfare giveaways or all Hispanics support allowing transvestites to teach school children or [fill in the blank issue].

or perhaps it's due to people like you that need to consider people with different skin pigments as " other" that drives different ethnicities away

If the Democrat party is going to be the dominant party going forward with a mostly token opposition from other parties, it needs to broaden its viewpoints to reflect the range of opinion among its voters. To continue with such narrow, partyline views, is a betrayal to political pluralism and democracy. The Democrat party needs to allow views other than orthodox liberalism to be worthy of being "America's party." We don't all think alike on controversial issues, Ms. Boxer, Mr. Reid, and Mr. President.

it's a two party system...people are going to vote for the party that supports their values more... and if you're the party that's losing it means that majority dont see it your way

you're right, we all don't think alike.. that doesnt mean we have to think like you

welcome to democracy

 

[badbabysitter]

There's no such thing as "same sex "marriage"."

denying it exists doesn't mean it doesn't exist

 

[KingOrfeo]

However, to your point, the Republican party is NOT the dominant party and is not trending to become the dominant party.

True.

Further, its a much bigger tent in terms of the range of views reflected.

False. Used to be, there once were such things as Liberal Republicans. In fact, when the GOP started out in the 1850s, it was like this:

But, since the 1960s, the Devil's bargain known as the Southern Strategy has made the GOP almost entirely conservative, therefore irrelevant.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

There are no poor or middle-income Democrats in the government.

 

[Liar]

Neither party represents the diversity of it's voters. That's the problem with non proportional representation. All you ever get to do is choose the type of bread you want on your shit sandwich.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

True.



False. Used to be, there once were such things as Liberal Republicans. In fact, when the GOP started out in the 1850s, it was like this:

But, since the 1960s, the Devil's bargain known as the Southern Strategy has made the GOP almost entirely conservative, therefore irrelevant.

Besides the shitty typography, gotta love the imbedded unabashed racism inherent in this cartoon. Just love it!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Diversity?

The only diversity that matters in America is how you manipulate the niggaz to pull your wagon for you.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

It's not even surprising anymore how these sad sack-born threads bait the shitstains of humanity into farting their brain blurts.

 

[kbate]

What element of the party's voter-base is not represented in that lineup?

that's nice, but meaningless.

P Name State Votes with: Party
D Tammy Baldwin WI 98%
D Max Baucus MT 77%
D Mark Begich AK 85%
D Michael Bennet CO 94%
D Richard Blumenthal CT 100%
D Barbara Boxer CA 97%
D Sherrod Brown OH 97%
D Maria Cantwell WA 99%
D Ben Cardin MD 100%
D Tom Carper DE 97%
D Bob Casey PA 93%
D Christopher Coons DE 94%
D Mo Cowan MA 98%
D Joe Donnelly IN 82%
D Dick Durbin IL 98%
D Dianne Feinstein CA 98%
D Al Franken MN 98%
D Kirsten Gillibrand NY 98%
D Kay Hagan NC 81%
D Tom Harkin IA 97%
D Martin Heinrich NM 94%
D Heidi Heitkamp ND 86%
D Mazie Hirono HI 98%
D Tim Johnson SD 95%
D Tim Kaine VA 95%
D John Kerry MA 80%
D Amy Klobuchar MN 95%
D Mary Landrieu LA 86%
D Frank Lautenberg NJ 100%
D Patrick Leahy VT 98%
D Carl Levin MI 97%
D Joe Manchin WV 72%
D Claire McCaskill MO 83%
D Robert Menéndez NJ 98%
D Jeff Merkley OR 90%
D Barbara Mikulski MD 99%
D Christopher Murphy CT 99%
D Patty Murray WA 99%
D Bill Nelson FL 97%
D Mark Pryor AR 78%
D Jack Reed RI 98%
D Harry Reid NV 95%
D Jay Rockefeller WV 95%
D Brian Schatz HI 99%
D Chuck Schumer NY 98%
D Jeanne Shaheen NH 92%
D Debbie Stabenow MI 99%
D Jon Tester MT 81%
D Mark Udall CO 95%
D Tom Udall NM 93%
D Mark Warner VA 92%
D Elizabeth Warren MA 100%
D Sheldon Whitehouse RI 97%
D Ron Wyden OR 93%



Not that the republican list looks any different. They represent their party with one or two exceptions, not the varied people across the nation.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

On the National Level they represent the ruling party.

The ruling party encompasses both parties.

Power corrupts and they are.

 

[KingOrfeo]

There are no poor or middle-income Democrats in the government.

What do you mean by "in the government"? I'm sure there are a lot of civil service jobs that don't pay that great.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Besides the shitty typography . . .

Not too bad for 1856.

. . . gotta love the imbedded unabashed racism inherent in this cartoon. Just love it!

Well, yeah. At the time, racism was the norm, and anything incompatible with it was on the defensive. The Republicans seemed like insane wild-eyed radicals or "barn burners" (from a story about a Dutch farmer who burned his barn to drive out the rats) for being even moderately abolitionist. Very different GOP from to day.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

They never looked as racist as the Democrat Party, the birth place of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and the KKK. Yeah, the Pubs looked real racist when the elected the first black members of the House and Senate decades before the Democrats. Give us a break.

Then the Republicans said "fuck it" and have now spent the last 50 years ignoring race issues and even outright exacerbating them. And they decided to welcome with open arms all the racist Democrats who left the party after the Civil Rights Act was passed.

Americans care what has happened in the last 50 years. Especially since most of them weren't even alive during the things you mentioned.

 

[MatthewVett]

They never looked as racist as the Democrat Party, the birth place of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and the KKK. Yeah, the Pubs looked real racist when the elected the first black members of the House and Senate decades before the Democrats. Give us a break.

If only the Republican Party had any accomplishments worth mentioning within my lifetime... So, let's say, since the Civil Rights Act, what has the Republican Party done to help out African-Americans?

Also: the birth place of slavery? Do you really think that slavery didn't exist until the Democratic Party was formed? Holy crap, your knowledge of history is terrible.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

No one gives a warm shit for race or African Americans; even blacks aren't keen on blacks. Like my grand-daughter said to me, WHY DO I WANT TO INVITE BLACK BULLSHIT IN TO MY LIFE? She's biracial, and when we talked about guys she made it clear that bruthas aint contestants.

 

[KingOrfeo]

that's nice, but meaningless.

P Name State Votes with: Party
D Tammy Baldwin WI 98%
D Max Baucus MT 77%
D Mark Begich AK 85%
D Michael Bennet CO 94%
D Richard Blumenthal CT 100%
D Barbara Boxer CA 97%
D Sherrod Brown OH 97%
D Maria Cantwell WA 99%
D Ben Cardin MD 100%
D Tom Carper DE 97%
D Bob Casey PA 93%
D Christopher Coons DE 94%
D Mo Cowan MA 98%
D Joe Donnelly IN 82%
D Dick Durbin IL 98%
D Dianne Feinstein CA 98%
D Al Franken MN 98%
D Kirsten Gillibrand NY 98%
D Kay Hagan NC 81%
D Tom Harkin IA 97%
D Martin Heinrich NM 94%
D Heidi Heitkamp ND 86%
D Mazie Hirono HI 98%
D Tim Johnson SD 95%
D Tim Kaine VA 95%
D John Kerry MA 80%
D Amy Klobuchar MN 95%
D Mary Landrieu LA 86%
D Frank Lautenberg NJ 100%
D Patrick Leahy VT 98%
D Carl Levin MI 97%
D Joe Manchin WV 72%
D Claire McCaskill MO 83%
D Robert Menéndez NJ 98%
D Jeff Merkley OR 90%
D Barbara Mikulski MD 99%
D Christopher Murphy CT 99%
D Patty Murray WA 99%
D Bill Nelson FL 97%
D Mark Pryor AR 78%
D Jack Reed RI 98%
D Harry Reid NV 95%
D Jay Rockefeller WV 95%
D Brian Schatz HI 99%
D Chuck Schumer NY 98%
D Jeanne Shaheen NH 92%
D Debbie Stabenow MI 99%
D Jon Tester MT 81%
D Mark Udall CO 95%
D Tom Udall NM 93%
D Mark Warner VA 92%
D Elizabeth Warren MA 100%
D Sheldon Whitehouse RI 97%
D Ron Wyden OR 93%



Not that the republican list looks any different. They represent their party with one or two exceptions, not the varied people across the nation.

What's your point -- that party discipline on floor votes exists? Of course it does, that is the whole point of having a party caucus. However, the diversity of views represented within the party makes a difference in the conduct of committees and the content of bills, in the stages before they come for a floor vote.

 

[KingOrfeo]

They never looked as racist as the Democrat Party, the birth place of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and the KKK. Yeah, the Pubs looked real racist when the elected the first black members of the House and Senate decades before the Democrats. Give us a break.

Errmmm, that was my point -- the GOP when originally formed was the least racist party in the field -- a fact which has changed.