Some differences between Rep's and Dem's

Taken from another board, and posted with Mr. Swift's permission:

Jack Swift 8-12-07


"Can you have more influence on a political party from the inside or the outside?"

I'd suggest that each of the two parties that have all the power to determine an election are subject to the control of activist groups who in turn control money and blocks of votes. IMO the Democratic party doesn't stand for anything. It is an alliance of causes important to voting blocks. It caters to the interests of civil service unions such as the NEA and others by promising and delivering greater government spending. It caters to environmentalists by promising and delivering greater governmental regulation. It caters and delivers to civil rights causes by promising and delivering activist judges and "reform" legislation. It caters and delivers to the anti-gun groups by promising and delivering gun control. It caters and delivers to the anti-religion crowd by promising and delivering more separation by shutting down religious activities. It caters and delivers to the women's rights crowd by promising and delivering anti-descrimination legislation. It caters and delivers to the black vote by promising and delivering more welfare. It caters to the gay rights block by promising civil union reform. It caters to the anti-war block by promising and delivering peace at any price. It caters to the socialist block by promising and delivering more and more social reform in the form of limitation of BIG business, limitation of profits, and equitable redistribution of wealth. And, of course, it caters to the pro-abortion block by promising and delivering more and more liberal abortions. It is attempting to cater to the presumed Latino block by promising amnesty and benefits for illegals.

Republicans, on the other hand, find themselves largely defined as being anti Democratic programs aimed at satisfying demands of the same voting blocks. It is largely an alliance of interests and institutions under attack. Big business, the religious right, the second amendment crowd. In that context, the Democrats have the initiative which is always a tactical advantage. If allowed to, they can focus on one exciting issue of the moment. The only danger they face lies in the fact that they have too many exciting issues with too many enemies to those issues. When they goof, as they did in 2004 and put too many issues on the table at the same time, they lose big time because they rouse the wrath of the usually inattentive voters. I would submit that the only reason they lost in 2004 was that some dumb activist county clerks suddenly made civil unions an issue and brought out a landslide of conservative voters who would otherwise sit an election out, vote 3rd party, or protest by write-in. In short, Democrats win unless they overplay their hand and excite a big turnout in a particular election.

What all of this means is that our politics are being driven by activist groups who have figured out how to get inside the party apparatus and influence party decisions. If you would effect reform in politics and your political party you need to get involved and fight for your concern on the inside. Whining and snivelling about what the activists and pandering politicians are doing doesn't accomplish anything. You have to be involved, whether you are Republican or Democrat. The challenge is the same.

Unfortunately, that is difficult. It takes personal time and hard work. If you are not doing that, you are simply surrendering to those who will.

This speaks to the crux of the matter of differences between the Republicans and Democrats.....hill......