Does anyone else feel like we're still in the minority?

The polls have Bush at 33-39%, only 35% approve of how Bush is handling Iraq, and most people want to see the Democrats take over Congress. So why do I feel like Democrats are redheaded stepchildren in America? Is it because the Democrats in Congress are still afraid to confront Bush? Is it because the MSM still fawns over him, and gives him and his administration as much uncontested air time as they want? Maybe it's because the part of the country I live in has traditionally been Republican.

Does anyone else feel like we still have an uphill battle to fight?

We haven't been the minority in some time now.

Totally befuddling. Facts don't match the feeling.

I'm hoping we're just shell-shocked and that a delayed reaction will occur all at once, like a levee breech

that tucson is very democratic. i guess that's why kerry got 45% of the arizona vote. yes, it feel it's uphill. like you it might have to do with where i live.:eyes:

leadership, especially the elected officials, are so completely bassackwards when it comes to party ideology.

Out here in workaday land, I'm in a comfortable majority. Freak Republicans may be louder, but more and more people are laughing at them and worse.

Democrats can have positions that a majority of Americans would benefit from and that a majority may already agree with, BUT...
But the MSM tells everyone with a TV radio or newspaper/magazine subscription that really everybody agrees with Bush and the Republicans and that nobody but a few minorities agree with and identify with the Democrats. There is only one political party that is acceptable if you listen to MSM. Their favorite message is that Democrats must change or hide their message if they are ever going to be allowed to hold office. That's what they tell the country a thousand different ways every day. Would you vote for a party that you believed was unpopular, could not represent people like yourself, or HAD TO lie about itself in order to "sneak into" office? Probably not and convincing you not to is the MSM's job #1.

People may not trust MSM, but really that's irrelevant. Do people trust advertizing? Of course not, and yet advertizing is an effective, indeed essential, part of the glorious free market system--a system so free that if the brainwashing ever stopped for just 48 hours the whole thing would crash to earth. What's the most essential and critical element of advertizing? Repetition. And what does the MSM do but repeat variations of the message that big business Republicans MUST be allowed to run and re-order the government's policies and laws as they see fit, and that the Democrats cannot possibly take the reins of government without wrecking everything?

If you need to ask why MSM would paint such a distorted and one-sided picture of political parties and political sentiment in this country then explaining it to you probably won't help.

just so they could avoid extended media scrutiny when they took over control of DC in the next decade.

Right on! :thumbsup:

We are not the minority. They've just made people believe it is so. (Or dumbed far too many into shear and utter apathy.) :(

Only 33% approve of Bush, but given the choice of McCain versus any Democrat, a majority of the public would vote for McCain.

The public hasn't repudiated the right wing agenda yet--just its titular head.

The corporate media is a huge problem for us. They present Repug lies and propaganda without contesting a bit of it.

But our biggest problem is our own lack of leadership and unity. Every time the Democrats get an issue they can move forward on aggressively they cower, or a few Democrats go public with their support of the other side and shoot down all our momentum. If we presented the public with a unified party willing to fight for everything we say we believe in--and I mean FIGHT--we would be the majority party. Until that day, we'll get some bounce from the fact that they Repugs are screwing up everything. But that advantage won't last.

That fight now is from a very deep hole... and with water filling into that hole our time is very short unfortunately. Some may say we'll pay the piper before 2008... or 2010... or 2012... but in either case, we all will pay dearly for ignoring what Washington has become during these past few decades with our own ignorant dumbing down to them.

I no longer see any of us as a minority but only the suppressed and oppressed as a whole. Even those who feel that they are of the upper 20% of this greedy NeoCon totum pole, they too will fall to the destructive fall-out that is to follow just as the Roman Empire fell centuries ago.

The key word is NeoCon... in both parties. That's our target enemy if ever we wake up and survive that hole filling up with water. Pure oxygen anyone?

By Oct 2004, the NeoCon handwriting was on the wall.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

http://rense.com/general59/trep.htm

The 2004 Party Realignment
A New Progressive Era Or Neocon FasicstDictatorship?
By Webster Griffin Tarpley
www.tarpley.net
10-31-4


Washington, October 30, 2004 ­ If the 36-year cycles which have marked US history up to now continue to operate, next Tuesday's presidential election should mark a critical watershed election leading to a basic realignment in the power relations between the political parties, and to a new pattern of dominance in the Electoral College for the decades ahead.


THE ALTERNATIVE: NEOCON FASCIST DICTATORSHIP

On the other hand, if Bush retains control of the White House, we can expect a neocon fascist dictatorship or martial law emergency regime in 2005 or 2006, possibly as the result of synthetic terrorism. The neocons are in a desperate flight forward mentality which seeks to avoid the penal consequences of what they have already done with Valerie Plame, the Niger yellowcake forgeries, the Israeli mole scandal, and the Chalabi betrayal of state secrets. The neocon preference is for early war with Iran. War with Russia and China cannot be excluded somewhat further down the road. Bush 41 invaded Somalia even after being defeated at the polls, and this should remind us that the war and synthetic terrorism dangers will remain high even if Bush is defeated at the polls.


The divide between the ouster of Bush, followed by progressive realignment, and Bush victory, followed by neocon fascism, is beyond doubt the 9/11 myth. Bush has made the 9/11 myth the exclusive basis of the GOP convention and the current campaign; he has no other issue but the demagogy of fear and terror. If the myth crumbles or even erodes, Bush's ability to retain power is impaired. If the myth holds, Bush will be very difficult to oust.

OR ANOTHER NEOCON COUP?

Recent US political history has been punctuated by repeated attempted and successful coups d'etat. In 1995 Gingrich sought to seize control of the government by shutting it down, but was defeated by Clinton. In 1998, Clinton's impeachment was a successful oligarchical coup, but his attempted ouster in 1999 was a coup that failed, because of Clinton's popular support against the impeachers. The stolen 2000 election was a classic neocon cold coup. The synthetic terrorism of September 11 was another coup, this time carried out by the invisible government. The grant by the Congress to Bush of war powers in 2002 was a violation of the Constitution, as Senator Byrd stressed; this was another coup which succeeded. The Iraq war of 2003, illegal on the domestic and international planes, was yet another successful coup. The planned coup of 2004 called for more synthetic terrorism, a wider war, and another Bush stolen election. Countervailing factors have so far prevented a new wave of synthetic terrorism and the opening of a wider war, say with Iran. The great issue is now whether the planned stealing of the election through Diebold and voter intimidation can be checkmated.

the machinery of power.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I hope that once you read around, you may find that we really don't need to "brave face" what is clearly the country's slide away from the Thuggery. We do, however, have work to do to clear the bases.

:hi:

Welcome to DU! :hi:

and you, bear, may be in a category all your own if you believe:

"Progressive websites and blogs attempt a brave face everyday--we try to jolly each other along as we think up killer revenge fantasies"

Sounds more like a right-wing thing...and the fantasy becomes reality each and every day.

Bye! :hi: plant your memes, or column items, or whatever they are elsewhere.

God Bless America.

Edit: And done in 6...

for someone to use it.

:toast:

that some of the Republicans aren't happy with him. However, they are still Republicans and even if they are disgruntled with the way things are going they are unlikely to vote for Democratic candidates right now.

IMO, Bush will continue on his downward spiral until he is out of office, whether by impeachment, retirement or the end of his term. As more and more of his misdeeds are brought to public light, many of the people who voted Republican in 2004 are going to think twice before they vote that way in 2006 and 2008.

and we ain't got that.

The opinion that matters in this country is (a) that of the people actually in office, and (b) the consensus, the general opinion held by the great middle 40% that tips everything.

There is growing consensus, but it's not quite achieved yet, among the middle 40%- against Bush and the hardline GOP. But the press and political operators see this lack of consensus and assume, fairly accurately, that it is powerless. With its opposition, the office holders have rather free hand (even if it is very weak).

I think that's what we're seeing right now- weak office holders struggling against a building consensus against them, but not held accountable for the time being. And the office holders are running rampant, abusing this apparent freedom and trying everything they can to appease and cajol the masses their way again.

It's frustrating. But really, all that can be done is to wait for the consensus of opposition to form fully. I think massive media exposure is a good thing now, no matter which way it slants- it accelerates serious changes of opinion, even if they are initially the wrong way. It ups the pressure on the incumbents to deliver. We both know the Bush people can't deliver sh-t, so they'll get caught in an expectations game they can't win even if they get a little boost out of it all initially.