Jeff Greenfield: "I think we may see Moderate Repubs switch to Dem Party"

[snowbear]

He was just on with Wolf Blitzer.

Said he's been studying the changes going on across the nation and can forsee a lot of moderate Republicans saying .. "You know, I just don't belong in this party anymore"

Hope his hunch is right!

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

1. "Squishy Republicans Oozing Towards Democrats"

This was the title of a thread a wrote on DU about a year ago...between Schiavo and Katrina events.

At least where I live in suburbia of the Northeast, Republicans, including myself, have left the Republican party in droves. Nobody wants to be known as 'republican' anymore. The ones who haven't actually changed their registration yet use the "I'm really more of a Libertarian." to cover their asses from embarrassment.

[snowbear]

4. Greenfield also suggested Rudy Guiliani.. should he decide to run..

..would only win if he switched back to a Democrat. That he knows he could never win as a Republican in this environment.

Huh.

[speedoo]

5. Fuck Rudy.

He's a rethug, racist whore now and always will be. I would never vote for him, even if he were a democrat.

[Dr.Phool]

16. Do we even want them?

I don't. Nothing but a bunch of opportunists. Just like Rudy. These guys helped fuck up the country. Let them suffer the consequences.

[IndianaGreen]

34. The country deserves a moderate party, a progressive party,

and a Party of GAWD.

There are many issues that progressives can work alongside with moderates. Remember Jacob Javits and John Lindsay? The problem with the current political structure is that what passes for "moderates" is appeasement of the rightwing.

[lyonn]

18. It is the Dems that could possibly be tolerant of his

lifestyle cause those fundies sure would raise enough "hell" (play on words) to get his butt thrown out of the running. Ruddy appears too slippery for me. Rudy is fodder for the media it seems and Hillary falls in that category for the repubs.

[dtotire]

2. I think we may see Moderate Repubs switch to Dem Party"

This can happen if the Democrats nominate someone like Mark Warner.

[sendero]

6. Yeah..

.. but to call that a phyrric victory would be a major understatement.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

12. Gee, I'm a former Republican and I like Russ Feingold

And the former Republicans and newly self-described "libertarian" Republicans I know do not want any mincing of words or soft-spoken approach against this current batch of zealots.

In all fairness to Mark Warner, I don't know if he is a strong, outspoken critic of the incompetent, warmongering, overspending, corrupt, Rapturist Right, robber-baron lunatics currently in control of the WH and Congress, but if he is, I'd be willing to listen.

[lyonn]

20. I voted for Reagan twice (embarrassing)

and when he Finally stumbled out of office I was ready for the big change! Been a serious Dem. ever since. Must say my first vote was for J. F. Kennedy. I fluctuated through the years.

So people can make the change after something has been thrown in their face like trickle down economy, that was a good one. SARCASM

[Eurobabe]

33. Don't feel bad, I did too

and Bush I. Then I went back to college and got enlightened. I've voted Dem ever since. :)

[SharonAnn]

37. Wow, I voted for him once, then left for good two years into his term

I said "These are not my people!"

Then, I considered myself an independent voter for years and finally realized that "my people" were Democrats.

[Clark2008]

26. No more corporate whores.

Try Wes Clark: Southern, not beholden to corporations, former military. Yep. Republicans could get on board with that (just keep it a secret that he's really very liberal. Shhhhh).

[karynnj]

28. That crack is really not needed

Warner is more conservative than I would like, but I think it is beyond disgusting to call him a "corporate whore". What corporations is he beholden too? From what I've read, he is a very successful entrepreneur. Also you say "no more". Please tell me who you are referring to. Kerry, who is one of the few politicians who took no PAC money in any of his Senate campaigns? Gore? Neither of these men have ever been controlled by corporations.

Are you positive that none of the positions that Clark took since he left the military are linked to powerful money men? Did any corporations give money to his campaign? If, either of these are yes, it simply refects the role of coorporations and money in politics, not that Clark sold out. The same as for other candidates. You can support Clark without dragging the good names of other Democrats through the mud.

[snowbear]

29. I seriously don't think Warner is a corporate whore either..

He's a co-founder of Nextel (which is why so many Nascar fans even support him)...

... and he's heavily involved in the high-tech communications industry. He's a mega millionare (is one of the tops on Forbes richest politicians) .. but unlike others, it is all SELF-MADE.

I'm not declaring a favorite candidate yet (way too soon for me!) .. but I do think Mark Warner will do better than many on here think..

If he happens to win the nomination, he'll have my full support. (As will whoever winds up as our candidate!)

[karynnj]

31. As I had said, he's not my favorite either

I just thought the attack was unfair for the reasons you give. I also was annoyed with the "more", which suggests that previous candidates were bought.

[Eurobabe]

35. Warner was a damn good Gov. in the years I lived in VA

I'm willing to give him a look see.

[Jack from Charlotte]

43. Agree. Well said. (nt)

*

[Auntie Bush]

30. This can happen if the Democrats nominate someone like Wes Clark.

[speedoo]

3. Is he talking congressmen?

In a world without cowardice and untruth, we should already have majorities in both houses after people like Shays, Hagel, etc. swithched to the party that truly represents their views.

[snowbear]

13. He said it was huge that Mark Parkinson dumped the GOP to..

run as Lt. Governor with Democrat Kathleen Sebelius.

Also mentioned Shay, Guiliani, etc..

Interesting article in USA Today. "Kansas political shifts sign of things to come?"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/wickham/2006-06-05-kansas-politics_x.htm

[Jane Austin]

14. I heared Shays on Franken's show last year, and he is NOT

Democratic material!

His economic views - - laissez faire capitalism, as I recall - - are pure Republican.

[speedoo]

24. Lots of Dems believe in some form of capitalism.

Including me. But don't confuse me, or other dems like me with Bush Rethugs... they don't believe in capitalism as I know it. They believe in helping only the rich, and that is NOT captitalism, as capitalism is defined in classic economics.

[Jane Austin]

27. As a small-business owner, I am certainly a capitalist.

Laissez Faire capitalism is "anything goes" capitalism.

That's what these Republicans are after.

[kwolf68]

7. Maybe Lincoln Chaffee

Will move over...Chaffee is holding onto his classical view of his party and thinks his group can take it back. He's a fool and I think he knows that he is an outsider. His views on abortion, education, social security, health care, and the environment simply don't mesh with the current band of thugs and ghouls who run that party.

[grytpype]

8. Heh heh... call them "Bush Democrats!"

The opposite of "Reagan Democrats!"

[Supersedeas]

40. the core value's crew can no longer recognize itself

[MADem]

9. Hmmmm, wonder what ole Ronnie Reagan would be saying if he

were still around, and had his marbles? His famous line was "I didn't leave the Democratic party, the Democratic party left me." Well, it looks like the GOP is leaving all of those rock-rib types in the dust, these days.

Greenfield is pretty good on the analysis end. I think he might be right. Even those who liked the Raygun years have got to be shitting at this "tax cuts for only the stinking rich and spend, spend, SPEND" philosophy, because most of those bozos who vote GOP aren't stinking rich, they're just hoping to be one day. And they realize they're less likely to ever get stinking rich under BushCo. He's running the nation into the ground.

[lyonn]

21. Hoping to be stinkin rich one day is accurate

My youngest son likes to tell people that when he was in college he was a repub. but after graduation and starting looking for a job he became a democrat! Others have kidded about the same thing only there is truth in this statement.

[Monk06]

23. "Hmmmm, wonder what ole Ronnie Reagan .........."

"would be saying if he were still around, and had his marbles?"

He'd be saying, "Mmmm, I like butterscotch pudding, Mommy. Butterscotch is tasty."

Sorry had to say it. I hated the man since he double crossed Gorbi with
his Berlin/Walls of Jericho speech.

He supported that disgusting drunk Yeltsin who handed Russia over to a
bunch of gangsters. The result is Russia under Putin.

Nice trick. Instead of giving the New Russia a leg up they wrecked the Russian
economy, something ordinary Russians are never going to forget.

[MADem]

36. Well, his foreign policy aside, my point is that Raygun

...was a "small government" type on top of being a sabre-rattler of the first order. He'd make the odd batshit crazy remark off the cuff ("The bombing will begin in five minutes) and didn't hesitate to jump into a quick and dirty bit of military business, but I can't even see HIM misusing the military in the fashion that Monkeyboy is currently doing.

[AX10]

39. Will this bring the congress back under Democratic Control?

[Monk06]

44. Good point and the answer is no. Fixating on the Republican agenda...

is exactly what Rove wants the Democrats to do.

What Dems have to ask is, "What would the Big Dawg do?"

Clinton was the most admired US president for eight
years for a reason. He was the most intelligent and
best informed President since Kennedy and he new how
to cut a deal that gave something to the other guy on
on foreign policy. He was an alliance builder.

On the domestic side he had one issue and one message
that he hammered the Republicans with constantly.

"It's the economy stupid"

Look at any of the economic indicators over the last
forty years and the math shows that every time the R's
have been in power they have raided the Treasury and
increased national debt like there was no tomorrow.

Every R Pres has started a war or expanded a new one
starting with Nixon.

Add them up
Granada (training exercise),
Panama (first regime change war)
Iraq I (first oil war)
Iraq II (second oil war + regime change)
Iran (next oil war + regime change)

What stands out is that all of these are Republican Wars
not American Wars.

Non of these wars achieved lasting objectives crucial
to the direct interests of the US people. The only benefited
the Lockheed Martens, Reothons and now the big kahuna, Halliburton

Which brings us back to the Big Dawg.

The greatest threat to US national security today is
the $8.5 Trillion dollar debt. The Rs are bankrupting
the US. You can't lead the world if you're a beggar
holding a tin cup in your hand because you went into
debt to make Halliburton rich.

Let the Rs try to make an issue of gay marriage.
The amendment has little chance of passing in the
long run and won't even get out of the house and senate
before the election.

So Dems have to hammer the economy and tell the Rs
that the economic welfare of all Americans is more
important an issue in the next three years.

Whether gay people call themselves husband and wife
is a private decision and none of the government's
business. It is certainly not an issue crucial to
the national security of the US.

[janx]

42. YES, there is a direct relationship.

My mother left the Repugs after having voted for Reagan. She freaked when she saw the religious right take over the party. Basically, what Reagan did was welcome the Dixiecrats and religious fundies into the party--and why not, since he'd been a Dem himself?

In the last dozen years or so, the Southern Strategy has transformed the Republican party into one very ugly monster. The combination of the neocons (who are the opposite of the old conservatives in terms of foreign policy) and the fundies has made for disaster. And fiscal policy? Eegads.

[MissWaverly]

10. Oh, No!

That last thing I want is a 2 party system which consists of 2 Republican parties, the
extreme Republicans and the Moderates.

[Nimrod2005]

11. The fact that he even said it is very helpful......nt

[Wickerman]

15. I was at a Graduation Party this weekend

and was chatting with a retired couple. I knew him from various DFL activities, but didn't know her. She said she had been a moderate Republican all her life but could no longer stand by and watch what her party had turned into. She said she didn't see why others weren't like her as "there is no point standing alone in a party".

The Republican agenda is totally co-opted and bankrupt, morally and otherwise - now is the time we should be seeing the ship jumpers. The truth has been exposed for any thinking person to see.

[Kolesar]

17. Because they are pro-schools, pro-Social Security, & pro-environment

What could be simpler than that?

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

19. Pro-privacy!!!!!

Schiavo, pro-fetus, intelligent design, Gay marriage amendment, NSA spying....sheesh, not the values of moderate Republicans at all.

[Kolesar]

38. Pro-worker, pro-woman, and pro football

[sandnsea]

22. If we had a strong Green Party right now

The two key parties in the country would be Greens and Dems with the right pushed to the fringe. I told you guys this was the way to go after the election. It's not too late, I hope the lefties wake up before this opportunity passes us by.

[Zhade]

25. As long as they leave their anti-choice, anti-equality, anti-environment,

anti-worker, anti-compassion agenda behind, welcome.

Otherwise, they can fuck right off (and take the 'Dems' who share those views with them)!

[lastknowngood]

32. There is no such thing as a moderate repug. Your either with them

or you against them.

[janx]

41. This has been happening for YEARS.

These pundits are late about everything. :shrug: Although I must admit that some holdouts are probably "converting" now.

[Tactical Progressive]

45. Jeff Greenfield, kitchy right-wing fellator

has been "studying the changes going on across the nation"?

When a journalist say's he's been 'talking to people' it means simply that he's been blathering with his fellow talking empty-heads. And they've been getting more and more concerned that people hate them like they hate conservatives. That's the only thing they've been studying - what's good for them and what they think about it.

I don't trust them and I never will again.

If they're not on the right side, then fuck them.

If they are on the right side, then fuck them, because they're only on the right side when they figure it helps them with air-time on their network, or prestige within their clique, or the safety of the conventional wisdom from critics. In ten years you can count the moral stands they've taken on one hand between the lot of them.

If they aren't unabashedly progressive, through thick and thin; if they aren't standing up AGAINST right-wing reprobates at every turn, then they aren't trustworthy in the least. Jeff Greenfield is one of those that aren't even slightly trustworthy. Like pretty much the entire television and print media.