Last night at my High School reunion, i was surprised how many of the people I

[WCGreen]

thought would be republican were willing to talk some politics with me...

I would have to say that the crowd was more democrat than republican or perhaps better to say more liberal than conservative.

I think that 1975 was the sweet spot, the time when the 60's still hadn't lost all of there pull and the cynical years brought on by the energy crisis and all the other problems that crippled the Carter Administration.

Nixon had been forced to resign so people were happy with government.

The war was finally winding down and all the good stuff that Nixon and the democratic congress ushered in left people with a good sense about the future.

Well, there was disco...

Anyway, I posted this about what we did in the year after Kent State a while back but I added it to my Blog because of the reunion.

If you missed it the first time, I think this will show you why our class was a little bit different than all the others that came and went.

BTW, we won the homecoming float contest two of the three years and the other year we came in second.

And even I, the stoner and rebel, gathered in Beth's barn and stuffed tissue paper into chicken wire. We had a team atmosphere.

https://mylungtransplantyears.wordpress.com/about

[CountAllVotes]

1. thanks for sharing

class of 1974 here! :hi: :hi: :hi: :D

:kick:

[Mojorabbit]

8. 74 here too! nt

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. Great story as always!

And your up-to-the-minute comments are an excellent addition!

[jody]

3. IMO the middle 40% or so of voters are really independent with perhaps 5% each loosely identifying

with Democrats or Republican.

The one comment I hear over and over again on election day is "I don't like her/him {fill in Democrat or Republican name} but I'm going to hold my nose and vote for him/her".

I interpret that to mean many voters are really fed up with our two party system but find no alternative to break the strangle hold of the nameless "THEY" who really control our government.

Of course I could be wrong :shrug:

[WCGreen]

5. they are fed up but with a winner take all system, there is no

power that a smaller faction can weld unless they work through the party.

[jody]

6. Agree and working "through the party" doesn't unite groups divided & polarized on issues. IMO that's

the major reason the Blue Dog Coalition exists and is such a thorn in the side of Dem leaders in the House and Senate.

IMO those Blue Dogs come closer to representing independent voters among their constituents than do the Republican or Democratic leaders in a monolithic party.

ON EDIT ADD: Instead of trying to destroy Blue Dog Democrats, perhaps party leaders should try to understand what they offer that attracts independent voters to their positions which reflect local political expectations with some of the Democratic Party Platform.

Does the Republican Party have a maverick, contentious group like the Blue Dog Coalition?

[Drunken Irishman]

7. It doesn't help that the third parties are so ideologically polarizing.

Because the middle considers themselves neither left or right. They're in the middle for a reason. But most third parties aren't middle. They're either extremely left or extremely right. That's why they're third parties. They're there as an alternative for people who find it difficult to vote Democratic or Republican for ideological reasons. Well a moderate voter rarely will go out and vote Ralph Nader or some Libertarian candidate. Sometimes they do - but it's just not very likely.

So you've got to have a third party that is welcoming of all ideologies. And as we've seen here on DU and I'm sure you've seen on FR, if one of those third parties slightly caters to the other ideology, they lose a good number of their voters.

[jody]

9. Agree, IMO third parties that field candidates are on the left or right fringe. They don't really

expect to win but use political campaigns to publicize their fringe agenda.

Perhaps a better solution to elections as we have them today is to put every registered voter's social security number in a barrel and draw a random person to represent each congressional district in the House.

We could sell each senate seat to the highest corporate bidder, minimum bid several hundred billion dollars, with proceeds going into a welfare fund for the homeless.

To ice the cake we could elect presidents by popular vote based on public funded campaigns using paper ballots and a process of counting that minimizes fraud.

That couldn't be any worse than what we currently have.

[WCGreen]

10. It's a better idea....

The way we elect those who wish to govern us is ridiculous at best and destructive at it's worst.

The people in the country get pissed off and then go right out and vote for the same person who was fueling their anger...

[elleng]

4. Thank you.

:hug:

[texanwitch]

11. Class of 73.

Good times.