Is there space in the Democratic party for conservatives?

I'm a conservative Democrat, a former elected official and a current elected county party official.

I could not get behind Obama, so I followed the advice of Old Thom Paine ("Lead, follow, or get out of the way.")  From convention to election, there was no lurking, no trouble making, no trolling and no sock puppetry from me.

Now that the election is over, I'm back and still a Democrat.  But, I still haven't bought "the dream".  I didn't fear the apocalypse, but I don't anticipate the rapture.

Instead, I see a normal political cycle.  Because of the utter stupidity and incompetence of a conservative administration that in 2000 was given control of all three branches of the federal government, we now have a more liberal government given control of two branches of the federal government.  

As a result, we have a Democratic president, but with little or no coattails (House up 20+?  Failed propositions in CA and FL?  No incumbent Republican governors lost?).  Not to be a wet blanket, but the economic collapse made this a can't lose year for any Democrat (the election was over when everyone received their third quarter 401K statements in late October).

In my view, taxes and spending will both increase, to be followed by immediate relief for the lower end of the economic ladder, and then inevitably followed by medium term discomfort for all ends of the spectrum unless the budget is balanced.  Eventually, whether in 4 or 8 or 12 years, the cycle will reverse as corruption or arrogance sets.  Apply, lather, repeat.  

That's where I'm coming from. I'm here to contribute to the discussion as a Democrat of decidedly conservative leanings.  Is there space in the Democratic party (and on this site) for conservatives Democrats (who post on Democratic and conservative sites)?

CROSS POSTED AT FAR RIGHT DEMOCRAT
http://farrightdemocrat.blogspot.com/
and anywhere else they'll let me

Update - In answer to your questions, I don't post comments because three or four of the usual bully boys have declared war, and TR/HR any comment I post. So, why waste my time if it isn't being policed?

Tags: 2008, conservative, liberal, meta (all tags)

Comments

65 Comments

Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

First define a conservative Democrat. Fiscally conservative, socially liberal or visa versa? Or are you both? The former makes you probably more moderate than conservative, the later  makes you a George Bush Republican and both just makes you a Republican.

by jsfox 2008-11-10 03:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

I'm a conservative. Which is why I've been voting Dem since 1984 (voted for Anderson, NOT Reagan in 1980).

I fear a big government with out of control spending.
I fear a big government that tramples on fundamental rights.
I fear a government that engages in unjust foreign wars.
I'm an avowed tree hugger.
I fear a government that wants control over a person's reproductive rights.
I fear a government that wants to invade your bedroom.
I fear a corrupt government whose only purpose is to maintain power and reward the powerful.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out where to cast a "true conservative" vote.

by Bob Miller 2008-11-10 05:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

My only issue with your comment, is the use of the word fear.

It tends to shut down dialogue. Being against something does not mean you have to afraid of it. It should mean, in my thinking, that you work to make sure it doesn't happen.

We have had eight years of government by fear and examples of it being used this cycle being  used ineffectually to defeat Obama and effectively to pass prop 8 and other like measures.

by jsfox 2008-11-10 05:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

Oh believe me, my "fear" caused me to work for Barack like never before.

by Bob Miller 2008-11-10 05:59AM | 0 recs
Actually...

the terms "conservative," "moderate," and "liberal" have all lost a lot of their meaning. I agree with you on every single issue that you mentioned, but I consider myself a liberal Democrat and I strongly supported Barack Obama since the day I stood in the bitter cold in Springfield, IL and listened as he officially announced he would run for President.

I don't know what your problem is, but if you lose the attitude, there's more than enough room for you.

by potus2020 2008-11-10 05:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

I'm with you completely, only I apply the term "I oppose" because fear weakens you. Opposition implies strength of purpose.

I tend to be more of a libertarian (small "L") in that I don't want my government to be my daddy OR my mommy. I want a government that works for the greatest possible good without trampling on any person's right to be left the f**k alone.

by Spiffarino 2008-11-10 06:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con
Stop pigeonholing. Fiscally liberal and socially moderate/conservative does not make me a 'George Bush Republican', unless you ask what I am fiscally liberal about, which are many social programs.
And once again, you would do well not to lump all socially conservatives into the same box.
There are a lot of other things besides gay marriage and abortion that make someone consider themselves socaily conservative.
by xodus1914 2008-11-10 05:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

Hmm not sure if I was pigeon holing or painting with to broad a brush. Either way I agree calling somebody anything with out all the facts is never a good idea. So apologies. However, I would still like to know kosnomore's def. of Conservative Democrat.

by jsfox 2008-11-10 06:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

He can't respond to you.  All his comments have been hiderated, as he has indicated elsewhere on this blog.  THAT may explain the tone of this diary.  Uh-oh, I suspect this comment will be hide-rated too, by the Usual Suspects....

by fireman 2008-11-10 06:52AM | 0 recs
Hey fireman,

do you happen to have any idea why I might have received three emails from someone named "fire man" with the subjects, "fuck you," "I fuck you," and "I want fuck you"? No body text. But interesting subject lines, don't you think?

by sricki 2008-11-10 08:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Hey fireman,

fireman's hot for you?

by ChitownDenny 2008-11-10 08:27AM | 0 recs
He's probably your sockpuppet, Denny. n/t

by sricki 2008-11-10 10:01AM | 0 recs
Re: He's probably your sockpuppet, Denny. n/t
You forgot to call me a troll.  Oh, and to ratings abuse me.
I'm certain under different circumstances, we could be civil toward eachother, if not friendly.  You decide.
by ChitownDenny 2008-11-10 10:33AM | 0 recs
Why would we be friendly?

You come here to stir the shit. I have no use for that sort of behavior.

by sricki 2008-11-10 10:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Why would we be friendly?

"Stir the shit"?  Who's rules; yours or this site's?

by ChitownDenny 2008-11-10 10:45AM | 0 recs
Much like TD,

you are not even worth engaging.

by sricki 2008-11-10 10:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Much like TD,
That's fine by me.  Stop the ratings abuse!
EOM!
by ChitownDenny 2008-11-10 11:03AM | 0 recs
I see your sockpuppet

uprated you again. No doubt that's what you created him for.

by sricki 2008-11-10 11:11AM | 0 recs
Re: I see your sockpuppet
HAHAHA!
OK.  Really.  EOM!  
Oh, I have no sockpuppets.
Now, really, really, EOM!
by ChitownDenny 2008-11-10 11:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Much like TD,

You're constantly downrating people just for disagreeing with you.  Anybody can check your history and see it for themselves.

You've ALWAYS done that.  You burst into diaries that you don't like and try to disrupt them.  You toss out TRs and HRs like it was your job.  

by Jess81 2008-11-10 08:47PM | 0 recs
That's not how it works, I don't think.

In order to reply to a comment, you need to be logged in.  If you're logged in, you can see hidden comments.  At least, you can if you're a trusted user.  Not sure if you aren't.

by Dreorg 2008-11-10 09:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con
It's cool. Somebody said on MyDd that labels went out of the window with this election and I agree. Both candidates were moderates in their own way. But one candidate was able to pull his wing to the center a little bit while the other candidate got pulled to the right.
I do know this. If the Democrats are smart, they need to listen to the concerns of the moderates and conservatives in the Democratic Party, because they speak for America. It's argueable on how much of America they speak for, but we can ignore at our own peril. There's a reason why America normally defaults to the Republican Party instead of us. Demcrats only get in if there is a great crisis or the Republican  just is not viable.
I think when it's all said and done, Obama will have governed closer to Clinton than anybody else.
by xodus1914 2008-11-10 07:57AM | 0 recs
You're misreading the situation

The question is not, "Why can't I come in?"

The question is, "Why am I not being welcomed?"

And the answer to that question has two parts. First, that you're being confrontational right out of the gate. It's hard for us to talk to you when you keep reminding us that you don't share most of our views and don't want to hear ours.

Secondly, you are making assumptions that don't have basis in reality and cannot be proven. None of us have any idea how Obama is going to lead, but thus far it has been further towards your side than our side. There was an Obama landslide, but he nearly got crushed by the socialism meme, which was responsible for what you were talking about. It wasn't Obama, Obama's team was responsible for getting out the vote and getting the biggest margin for any non-incumbent president since Eisenhower. If you want to gripe about how big Hillary's margins would have been, whatever, but understand that you have no freaking clue what you're talking about because there is absolutely no way to know. You were wrong about Obama's chances of winning back in June/July, you might be wrong about Hillary's now.

So if I had to sum this up, I'd say stop fighting with people, start tempering your unpopular views and trying to meet everyone halfway (since this is not a conservative site, you must address your audience), and stop presenting your opinions as givens. And honestly, you'd do best to just quit with the primary battle commentary anyway. Take that elsewhere, nobody here gives a fuck.

by vcalzone 2008-11-10 03:56AM | 0 recs
Second

The question is not, "Why can't I come in?"

The question is, "Why am I not being welcomed?"

Or, in other, less kind words, the problem isn't us. It's you.

So no, we will not move to the right to accomodate you. Our candidate and our platform were just elected President.

by iohs2008 2008-11-10 04:06AM | 0 recs
The answer is maybe.

Can you be more specific about what you mean by conservative Democrat?

I was canvassing director for Obama's campaign in my county during this election.  Two of the people who worked the hardest to help get Obama elected were a registered Republican and a registered Independent.  So yeah, we have a really big tent.

Except:  It's not big enough to include Joe Lieberman who actively worked to defeat the party's candidates at all levels.

by GFORD 2008-11-10 04:05AM | 0 recs
Re: The answer is maybe.

And there you hit on the difference between what is acceptable and unacceptable. We should be sure to include people who support the Democratic party. Doesn't matter what their political affiliation or personal beliefs, if they want to join up, we should welcome them.

But when they start demanding the party should move to them, that's unacceptable. Kosnomore seems to be suggesting that the party should change so that it is acceptable for him to be a part of. Just like Joe Lieberman wants the party to acquiesce to his wishes and allow him to be in a high leadership position when he knows he won't back us either way.

Anyone who wants to impose conditions on their inclusion and support can fuck off.

by vcalzone 2008-11-10 04:22AM | 0 recs
One other thing.

I agree with you about balancing the budget.  Perhaps that's why you are a Democrat as we actively strive to do so with out PayGo philosophy.

You might find this interesting:

In the last 80 years, we have had 40 years under Democratic administrations and 40 under Republican ones.  If you invested $10,000 80 years ago and experienced only the 40 years of Republican governments, your $10k would now be worth $11,0000.  That same $10,000 under only Democratic governments would now be worth $300,000.  If you leave out Hoover then the Dems still grow your investment 10 to 1 to the Republicans.

Can't remember where I read that but it stuck in my mind.

My point, if I have one, is worry less and have more faith.  The Democrats will bring peace and prosperity to this country.

by GFORD 2008-11-10 04:14AM | 0 recs
Dr. David Brin had a ton of stuff like that

on his blog, and he's a republican!

by RisingTide 2008-11-10 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: space in the Dem party for conservatives?

I believe in school choice.
While I don't have a strong view on low taxes, I do believe that we must curb wasteful spending FIRST, and then consider taxing people more only if absolutely necessary. I do not advocate saying we must raise taxes for the good of the country.
I support the death penalty.
I do not believe in too much protectionism as long as fair trade practices are in place.
I do not care one way or the other what happens to late term abortion as long as the health of the mother takes precedence.
I do not care about the term gay marriage one way or the other. I will go with the majority on usage of that term. Makes little difference to me. Though I strongly support the right to have a civil union.

I think I am fairly conservative on some issues.
Yet, the Democratic party is a lot closer to my comfort level than the Republican party.

And yes, I hate Lieberman because he gives war hawks a bad name with his stupid obsession with the middle east. I hate people who use the word moderate as code word for spineless.

by Pravin 2008-11-10 04:41AM | 0 recs
Re: space in the Dem party for conservatives?

LOL... I agree with about half of your stances, yet I have never voted for a Republican on any level (Though Jack kemp and Mike Huckabee appeal to me on some things). The thing is, we are both Democrats.

I once had a lively discussion on an airplane flight  with a conservative,so  back and forth we went, until I told him the Differnece between Democrats and Republicans:
*1. Republicans feel the best solution is the one that helps each person individually.
2. Democrats feel that the best solution is the one that helps the most number of people. *

Of course, he didn't say much after that.

by xodus1914 2008-11-10 05:56AM | 0 recs
Is there space in the Democratic party ....

If said space requires that the Democratic party continue on it's path to keep Americans like myself from being completely equal, then no, I think not.

Hell, given the rhetoric of all our leadership and the current path Democrats are on in regards to full equality for all Americans, perhaps a better question is  "Is there space in the Democratic party for queers? (other than working , contributing and being taken for granted)"

by emsprater 2008-11-10 04:55AM | 0 recs
No coattails?

I'm not sure what universe you live in that +20 members of the House (when Democrats are already up by 35) and at least 6 Senators (defining a clear operational, if not filibuster-proof, majority) isn't considered pretty good coattails for an incoming president.

What, you wanted a Democratic version of 1994, gaining +54 in the House and 8 in the Senate?  I'll tell you, between 2006 and 2008, Democrats gained 55 in the House and at least 11 in the senate, while Republicans lost 8 seats in the House and 2 in the Senate two years after their big year.

Republican Net, 1994 - 1996: +46 House, +6 Senate
Democratic Net, 2006 - 2008: +55 House, +11(+) Senate

There were a good number of factors that contributed to the last two Democratic cycles, but one big one was the emergance of Barack Obama as an unusual and powerful figure in politics in 2004.

Others have discussed your other points, but I wanted to correct your "coattails" argument.

by Dracomicron 2008-11-10 05:00AM | 0 recs
Re: No coattails?

To add to this, when George Bush came into office at the hight of "Clinton fatigue", Republicans lost seats in both the House and the Senate.

Likewise, in 1992 when Bill Clinton won the general election, Democrats lost seats in the House while having zero Senate seats gained or lost.

In 1988, George H.W. Bush lost seats in both the House and Senate.  The last President to bring coat tails with him into office?

Ronald Reagan.

In modern elections, what Barack Obama has accomplished is damn near unprecedented, especially for a Democrat.  Kosnomore clearly has no idea about what he's talking about, or he just wants to spin a narrative.  Doesn't matter which, but it's important to get fact straight.

by hello world 2008-11-10 05:38AM | 0 recs
Good point

I hadn't thought about that.  Clinton did pull a few congressfolks back to him in 1996, but he was the incumbant at the time (and, quite frankly, he and the Democratic congress wasn't always on the best terms anyway).

by Dracomicron 2008-11-10 05:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

Obama is a transformational candidate. He has expanded the party in ways not seen since FDR, carrying states that no one would have dreamed of four years ago. He has brought in NEW voters who, if history tells us anything, are very likey to remain Democrats. We are talking about nothing less than a political realignment in this country.

by fugazi 2008-11-10 05:18AM | 0 recs
It might be a big tent, but...

Is there space for conservatives in the Democratic party?  Yes, absolutely.  

Is it reasonable to expect the party faithful to suddenly change course on social justice and civil liberties issues to accomodate an influx of conservatives? No, probably not.

Is is reasonable as a conservative to post at a progressive website and expect to go unchallenged?  Hell, no.

by Dreorg 2008-11-10 05:38AM | 0 recs
No coattails?

After a wave election such as the one in 2006, 20 or so in the house and 6+ in the Senate is quite a big deal.

What kind of conservative are you? Socially conservative? Fiscally conservative? Both?

by LiberalDebunker 2008-11-10 05:39AM | 0 recs
Coattails

"Conservative" Democrat?

Well, the "conservative" part certainly explains your regurgitating of the Limbaugh & Hannity "rapture" drivel.

As a result, we have a Democratic president, but with little or no coattails

Here's what "no coattails" looks like:

1976 - Jimmy Carter Elected
Senate?  No change
House?  Democrats gain one seat

1992 - Bill Clinton elected President
Senate?  No change
House?  Democrats lose nine seats

1996 - Bill Clinton elected President
Senate?  Democrats lose two seats
House?  Democrats gain eight seats

************** ***

2008 - Barack Obama elected President
Senate?  Democrats gain (at least) six seats
House?  Democrats gain (at least) twenty seats

In fact, in the past 15 Presidential-year elections, only one (1980) has seen bigger Presidential coattails in the Senate.

In the last six Presidential-year elections in which a Democrat was elected to the White House, 2008 has seen the second-largest Presidential coattails in the House, following LBJ in 1964.

I am sick and tired of this "no coattails" bullshit.  Sounds like the type of nonsense I'd expect to hear out of the wingnutosphere, not from someone who likes to think of himself as a Democrat of any sort.

by Collideascope 2008-11-10 05:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Coattails

Obama's coattails extended past the House and Senate races in my NC county. All the Republicans were ousted from the county commission, the Statehouse and the state Senate, replaced by a slate of Democrats from top to bottom.

Those weren't coattails Barack was dragging...it was a cross-country choo-choo train.

by Spiffarino 2008-11-10 06:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party
If you're here to "contribute" to the discussion, why haven't you done so?
The fact that taxes will go up is kind of understood when you have a president that is actually interested in balancing the budget and paying off our debt to China and other foreign countries.
If you'll remember, Bush inherited a healthy economy with a budget surplus expected to last 10 years, and in the space of 8 years, he and the republicans managed to turn that into a trillion dollar deficit.
You may try to paint the Dems with the "tax and spend" label, but a simple perusal of the facts shows that Dems are more fiscally conservative than republicans.
by skohayes 2008-11-10 05:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic

Kosnomore, I'm conservative on a number of things myself - balanced budgets, abortion - but when those things clash with the folks around here, like abortion, I don't write about them here. Know thy audience. This is a site for progressive views and Democratic strategies. It sounds like you can join us on the latter half of that, and if you'd like to try and engage on the former, well ok, but expect folks to argue with you. I certainly hope they'll do so respectfully, but it is a blog, so I wouldn't get my hopes up too high.

by Nathan Empsall 2008-11-10 06:23AM | 0 recs
Why is this on rec?

It's a clone of the mutated concern trolls on freep and tnr. No new insight, no new info. Other than 'kosnomore' being an 'elected official'. Right.

Between that and listing his crosspost to a blog with like 50 total comments on it, I really have to wonder whether the HRC crap pack from the primaries have their rec privs back.

Obama hasn't even named any of his cabinet yet, let alone been inaugurated and you retards are already judging his administration? What. The. Fuck.

There is room in the party for conservative democrats, but no room for you. gtfo.

by notxjack 2008-11-10 06:41AM | 0 recs
You can look at the reccers

When "TexasD" is on the recomendation list, you know your diary is in trouble.

by Dracomicron 2008-11-10 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: You can look at the reccers

This diary was on the rec list with 3 recs.  It got bumped off the rec list by two diaries I rec'd.  Between all these horrible infighting diaries and the return of the trolls, nothing's been rec'd lately.

by the mystical vortexes of sedona 2008-11-10 07:37AM | 0 recs
I noticed that

We got burned out of the habit of reccing after the primary wars, it seems.

by Dracomicron 2008-11-10 07:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for

No coattails? What do you call Jim Martin forcing a runoff in GA? He had no chance at that a few months ago.

And who did you back this election? If it was McCain, please explain why. And explain why you are still with the party despite your conservative.

We cannot have a discussion if you do not take the trouble to give us a better picture of your views and where you differ.

by Pravin 2008-11-10 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

nope, sorry.  now is the time for pragmatism.  we need a leader who can pull this country back from the abyss before we end up in another great depression.  

how much i care about your self-labeling crisis>  zilch

how much these labels affect the quality of our government>  less than

by bluedavid 2008-11-10 07:05AM | 0 recs
response...

Before I answer your question, let's look at some of your key points:

"little or no coattails" - depends on how that is defined.  20+ seats in the House is very good, especially in context of a 30 seat win in 2006.  

"propositions in CA and FL" - Obama isn't a progressive when it comes to gay rights, and these anti-gay laws reflect his lack of leadership on the issue, so indeed their passage rode his coattails in that regard.

"no incumbent governors lost" - on the surface that seems telling, but let's take a look.  Which states didn't Repubs lose?  Red states Utah, Indiana, and North Dakota, of which Obama won only won, IN by 1%.  Vermont is the 4th, I believe, which was unusual as the Dems didn't have a candidate, from what I have seen.  Hard to base a "no coattails" argument on this data set.

If you're really a conservative, then you likely want fiscal responsibility, right?  You know that spending increased significantly under Reagan, Bush I and II, while taxes decreased, giving us this nice debt to finance.  Democrats may need to raise taxes on the wealthiest, as part of the overall economic plan, but at least they will use them to offset any spending increases.  And read the front page post about Robert Reich and spending - it will make sense why the gov't does need to spend more.

So to answer your question, if you're a fiscal conservative (which the Dems have been much more so for the last 30 years than the Republicans) and social progressive, then you're in the right party.  However, in my opinion, if you're not socially progressive, then you're in a tough spot because socially you belong with the Repubs, and fiscally with the Dems, though the Republicans would like us to think otherwise.  I realize it's not entirely this black and white, but I'm trying to simplify a bit here.

It's tough for me to make room for social conservatives in my Dem party.  Social progress is at the root of our identity and if we're not aligned on most or all of those values, then we're not aligned.

Curious to learn more about your perspectives...

by passionateprogressive 2008-11-10 07:23AM | 0 recs
Re: response...

"propositions in CA and FL" - Obama isn't a progressive when it comes to gay rights, and these anti-gay laws reflect his lack of leadership on the issue, so indeed their passage rode his coattails in that regard.

This is ridiculous.  Obama is for equal rights for everyone.

by Dracomicron 2008-11-10 07:42AM | 0 recs
gay rights

Obama is for equal rights.  I didn't say he wasn't.

However, when you look at gay rights specifically, he doesn't support gay marriage, and his quote to this effect, sadly, was used to drum up support for Prop 8.  

He does want to repeal don't ask/don't tell, he does support civil unions, but he doesn't support marriage equality.  The positions he's taken are safe in 2008.  Not that I want Kucinich as President, but in 2004 he was for gay marriage, when it was risky.  That is someone who is progressive related to gay rights.  Obama will be ok, but not a leader in this area.  

Find me something that tells me otherwise and I'm all ears.

by passionateprogressive 2008-11-10 08:00AM | 0 recs
Ugh

It was horrible that he was taken out of context on Prop 8, and I feel horrible about that.  I bet he's pissed about it, because he was in favor of the court decision that legalized gay marriage in the first place.

I can't find it at the moment, but early this year I found something from Obama where he discussed how marriage shouldn't be legislated at all; that government should leave the term "marriage" for churches to give out and only worry about "civil unions" for all couples, straight, gay, and in-between.

From a constitutional scholar's perspective, that makes perfect sense: giving religious personel the ability to grant legal rights and responsibilities is a clear (if traditional and generally overlooked) breach of church & state.

You're right that he's played it safe by saying that he, personally, believes that marriage is 1 man/1 woman, but he's also made clear that his personal belief should not impinge on the legal rights of a whole segment of the population.  His interview with Lavender went into this a little, if I recall.

Obama isn't going to give the Republicans a wedge issue to ride back to power in 2012 if he can help it; if any changes to the legal definition of marriage happen on a federal level, then it will happen in his second term.

I guess I agree with you that he's canny and careful, but disagree that this means he isn't a champion for gay rights.  DADT is a goner when he gets into office.

by Dracomicron 2008-11-10 08:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Ugh

And I agree with you - he does look at it and rightfully separates church and state.  I did tear up when he said "gay" at the convention and last Tuesday night.  That alone is a huge symbol.

I actually hope nothing happens federally before 2012.  If he wins a second term, perhaps.  Frankly, this issue will resolve itself in 10-15 years.  That's when older people will be less of the population and younger people will be my fine age of 40.  

And gay rights activists (of which I count myself a member) have had a much shorter fight than women and people of color.  We've made good progress.  I'd be happy if they recognized my Canadian marriage here!

by passionateprogressive 2008-11-10 03:59PM | 0 recs
Wow

:)  We'll get there.  I know it.

This is a lot more civil discussion than I had with that fella on Kos who considered Obama responsible for Prop 8 because he gave a job to that "ex-gay" (as if there is such a thing) gospel singer, Donnie McClurkin.

by Dracomicron 2008-11-11 04:55AM | 0 recs
I smell a troll

If you say Bush 43 was a "conservative" administration and you are a "conservative", why are you a Democrat?

Do you believe Democrats should implement "conservative" policies, like Bush's "conservative" policies?

What's the point of a two-party system if it's a choice between "conservative" party A and "conservative" party B?

by Carl Nyberg 2008-11-10 07:29AM | 0 recs
does kosnomore want to engage in dialog?

Seems like s/he's just attention seeking to me.

But read the comments history and you make your own decision.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-11-10 07:34AM | 0 recs
Re: does kosnomore want to engage in dialog?

Well, in their defense they are a former office holder... and I have never met someone who held public office who did not like attention...

by JDF 2008-11-10 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party

Of course there is.  Some of the most popular Democrats on the blogs are guys like Jon Tester and Jim Webb, hardly liberal idealogues.  We have Democrats like Jim Matheson (Utah), Brad Ellsworth (Indiana), and Gene Taylor (Mississippi) representing us in Congress, and there are never any calls to expell them from the party.

Now, Lieberman on the other hand...you see the difference?  Policy differences are not a deal-breaker, the Democrats have a pretty big tent (unlike the Republicans, who lose seats because they primary their moderate congressmen in swing districts).  The only thing that gets us to call for expulsion is outright lying about other Democrats and working to get Republicans elected.

Other than that, we recognize that not all Democrats have the same views of every issue.

by Skaje 2008-11-10 07:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic

I think any rational person would and should be welcome.  It really does no good to have our side become one ginormous echo chamber.

by thoughtfully ebullient 2008-11-10 08:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

There is space for conservatives. But not for those that regurgitate wingnut talking points.

Despite what Hannity et al would like you to believe  historically the equity markets perform better under Democrats, income growth and debt reduction and economic growth are all better under Democrats. With the market putting the final nail in the coffin of Reagen economics, the electorate has rejected the trickle-down, unregulated, greed is good, philosophy of the Republican party. This was most certainly a mandate.

Every government in the world is going to hike spending big time to prevent a deflationary collapse worse then 1929. Thanks to the "conservatives" wrecking the world financial system and creating $60 Trillion in garbage debt, we have no choice. So spare me the 'tax and spend' Democrat BS. No Democrat would ever have been so fiscally irresponsible and wantonly destructive of the nation and the economy.

Now that it's own neck is on the block Wall Street is screaming for government intervention and regulation. You know the stuff they called socialism last year. The country is right of center when bankers, Wall Street execs and CNBC are screaming for MORE government handouts and government intervention? If you believe that I have got a bridge in Alaska to sell you.

So conservative ideas are welcome in the mix. Discredited wingnut BS? We have had enough of that.

by hankg 2008-11-10 08:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the Democratic party for con

It is a big tent party.  

by ChitownDenny 2008-11-10 08:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Is there space in the

It strikes me as odd that you'd want to be a member of the Democratic Party.  If you're truly conservative, theres another party that represents your interests.  If by "conservative Democrat," you mean you're a moderate, then welcome aboard of course.

by XoFalconXo 2008-11-10 08:54AM | 0 recs
Room for Democratic conservatives?

Whooo. lt seems half of the respondents to this post got it, and the other half didn't. This guy only mentioned fear- nothing in his post said he was afraid- but for about half of you, just reading the word brought out the hornet swarm.

We are ecstatic, and naturally so, but I hear his warning. Don't let this election become a political rapture. Take a break and enjoy it, and give Obama some time to go to work. Then it's time for the rest of us to go to work changing the minds of a lot of fearful and uncertain people. We won some of them over, and we need to win more. That's not done by slapping anyone who calls themself a Democrat around, and it's not done by snarking on the other party.

I've always seen myself as a moderately liberal voice in a vastly conservative state- Idaho is among the reddest of the red.

There is much to core fiscal conservative principles that is necessary to good governance, and are seen the in much same way by moderates of either side. Clinton understood them. And so does Obama.

As a party, we got used to accepting all the social groups who were, or are, divisive to the conservatives.  We have grown used to understanding the folks who are gay, for example, can be just as conservative in their governmental beliefs as straight folks. We didn't build up our big tent easily; we overcame a lot former social divisions over a 40 year span.

During our party's last days as a social power, we blew it economically. Now, we have the perfect chance to get it right this time. As a party, we need to curb our militant instincts while keeping them intact for the vital fights that lie ahead. We must beware of becoming the blue version of the red Taliban the Republicans became.

I read Kos every day, and I'm not leaving Kos. But at the same time, I don't like Kos' bugle call to break the Republican Party's back. We need them, just as they need us... otherwise, the country will end up just like my beloved Old Mother Idaho, where the Republican party has been in control so long it has rotted at the stump. With all Idahoans, there is a natural tendency to conservatism; this is the way of Mountain West. Idaho was once solidly Democrat, back in the day when Democrats were generally more conservative.

If a Democrat is mostly Republican but says he's a Democrat, that's good enough for me, and should be for us all. We need conservative Democrats to man the heavy artillery and go after the most entrenched and most divisive institutions that have counted on public support. The ones that we have given up the to fight. Outfits like the NRA. Democrats who deeply understand these guys, and are the ones who can best confront their weaknesses.

The only way we will turn the country to a workable balance is to select our targets carefully. The Republican social agenda is all they have left, and the only way that will change is from within the Republican party itself. It we go for the roots of their social thinking, the rest will fall over all by itself.  We have to  accept our many shades of blue, because that's where our strengths truly lie.

Inch by inch. Old Mother Idaho just elected a Democrat again to Congress. He's not from my district, but I'm going to do my best to make sure he gets a second term if he proves up, and I belive he will.
All of us have to prove up on what we got this time. We need Democrats of every shade, and we have 'em. Don't pull the same purity tests that ruined the Republicans.

by banjomike 2008-11-10 09:17AM | 0 recs
Rockefeller Republican right here

Seems like a curious post.  Most of the old-line Republicans that were socially liberal and fiscally conservative are in the Democratic party right now.

Let's look at the wiki definition.  Sounds like a lot of Democrats right now....

Historically Rockefeller Republicans were moderate or liberal on domestic and social policies. They typically favored New Deal programs, welfare, and civil rights--usually promising to run them more efficiently than the Democrats. They were strong supporters of big business. In fiscal policy they favored balanced budgets and relatively high tax levels. They sought long-term economic growth through entrepreneurship, not tax cuts. In state politics, they were strong supporters of state colleges and universities, low tuition, and large research budgets. They favored infrastructure improvements, such as highway projects.

by Regenman 2008-11-10 12:57PM | 0 recs
Swear to god I read this first at RedState

You are free to associate as you like, Kosnomore.  I am not quashing your right to freely express yourself.  I am simply exercising the same right by saying this:

You are trying to justify your exit from the party.  You posted this at RedState hoping for a sympathetic ear.  You found it.

http://www.redstate.com/diaries/farright democrat/2008/nov/10/is-there-any-space- for-conservative-democrats/

Again, I'm not muzzling you.  I am responding to you.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-11-10 01:11PM | 0 recs
I would hope so.

I'm a Joe Lieberman Democrat who believes that George Bush was too dovish on foreign policy, but am liberal on domestic issues.  I'm very heartened that Obama has come to the conclusion that Lieberman should remain in our caucus.

I ended up supporting Obama in large part due to Sarah Palin, I have not seen anyone that unqualified and dangerous, not even George Bush at his worst.

by ClintoniteNoLonger4McCain 2008-11-10 01:44PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads