Coffee and TV

You continually patronizing me doesn't help whatever points you're trying to make. In 1976 he was seen as a pretty moderate Blue Dog Democrat. There was also little time since Nixon & Watergate (and Ford's pardon) and Carter was seen as very anti-Washington which helped him tremendously that year.

pun·dit    [puhn-dit] noun 1.a learned person, expert, or authority. 2.a person who makes comments or judgments, especially in an authoritative manner; critic or commentator. http://dictionary.re...m/browse/pundit I'd say the 2nd definition describes us both in this thread along. Pretty much everyone on this board is a football or basketball pundit as well.

Funny, because in 1964 that's exactly what they did.

McGovern being a poor candidate had a lot to do with it. There's also a really good book called Nixonland about how Nixon was able to use fear in politics (starting with civil rights) to help solidify Republicans winning in the south. Yep. Both he and Clinton were seen as more conservative Democrats, and they were southern, so it definitely brought over a few southern states back to blue. Right. The Civil Rights was the start. Proof positive in Wallace winning all of those southern states. The Democratic party always had its more liberal northeastern & west coast wing along with its more conservative wing. What helped start that split back all the way to 1948 with Strom Thurmond as the "Dixiecrat" nominee? Civil Rights. You don't need to remind me of how the elections went in the last 50 years, I'm very aware. It doesn't really prove your point. It was a slow process no doubt, but civil rights was the catalyst. Maybe in your head Americans are furious, but in reality his approval rating is sitting pretty high considering the economic circumstances we're in. The south has always been staunchly conservative, the difference being that the parties are pretty much reversed than what they were say....I dunno, pre civil-rights? Is that a good starting point for it?

Check the timestamp brah, that prediction was made an hour before the caucus began. And every political pundit revises their predictions until the last minute because things change on a whim. Between now and Tuesday Newt Gingrich could skinny dip in the Hudson River, and Rick Perry could cure cancer. You just never know man.

Me and Screaming Eagle aren't the same person...

That's exactly what happened. Civil Rights was pretty much the catalyst for the flipping of the southern states. Nixon's southern strategy 8 years later helped solidify it. Doesn't make the Democrats any better or the Republicans any worse of a party, its just what happened.

Revised New Hampshire Predictions: Romney - 44% Paul - 22% Santorum- 13% Huntsman - 9% Gingrich - 7% Perry - 4%

Brick walls.

Santorum will crash and burn like the rest of them. http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/05/opinion/obeidallah-santorum-sharia/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Right. NDAA, SOPA, disassociation of Occupy protests, complete disregard for investigating financial collapse, Afghanistan surge, continuation of neocon dentition policies & drone strikes. Yeah, super liberal there. I'm sure there's so much legislation you can point to that proves this statement. This is such utter ignorance I don't even know how to respond. Shit, NIXON was more of a liberal than Obama. But it hasn't stopped them from becoming more and more accepting of it, no matter how much money and hatred the other side fuels the fire.

How do they disagree exactly? I'm still not getting your point. There is no left party in America. Maybe because more people find themselves moderate or conservative, but I still don't see how you're proving me wrong. Incorrect. Its not as if the court just waved a magic wand and "shoved it down anyone's throat". A lawsuit challenged the law, and the federal appeals court ruled is unconstitutional (rightly so). Barely. Higher turnout among older voters, and very high black voter turnout because of Obama being on the ticket.

Disagrees with me how? I simply stated how I view the current political parties on the political spectrum. I said outright that America is a center-right country compared to the rest of the world. And yes, I would point out that your graph shows that there's shifts, so 2011 compared to 2009 might be slightly more liberal or moderate. But its not always how people identify themselves, but how they feel about specific issues: namely just look at the survey done recently that showed for the first time since they've been asking, that 50% of the country wants marijuana legalization. Or just look at the major shift in views on civil unions and gay marriage in the last decade alone. I don't get what you're trying to debate with me here...

What do I care about Arkansas State? He's a huge player that's transferring to a Sun Belt school, this is big news.

http://www.nationalfootballauthority.com/2012/01/auburn-tigers-rb-michael-dyer-filing.html

Any time I hear people bring up the constitution and the role of government I generally just dismiss them as absolutists. I mean when the Constitution was written having an anti-slavery view was seen as liberal or even extremist. In 1910 it was "progressive" to want women's suffrage. To try and identify where the framers and politicians of that era fit on a modern day political scale would just be impractical.

VS ??? Center-right as comparable on a world stage, but a lot of developed countries are further to the left than any Democrat in America. Conservatives in Great Britain, for instance, would be seen as too far left to be electable here.

I don't know, its presently not the late 18th century.

This is what I mean by brick walls. UNT90 is describing it as "socialized", yet Obamacare didn't even include a public option for buying health care coverage. The public option was a compromise that was suggested by Republicans in the early 90's as an answer to Hillarycare. Republicans. In the early 1990's. Obamacare doesn't even go that far. We have two parties: The Democrats which are the centrist party, and the Republicans which are the right/far-right party.

Don't bother dude, you're talking to brick walls. These people think that huge tax cuts didn't contribute to the deficit.

Disagree. New Hampshirens (wtf is the name for those people?) won't go for a guy like Santorum. If Huntsman wasn't putting so much time and effort into New Hampshire then Romney might be polling over 50%. And Perry apparently isn't backing off, so that changes the numbers a tad. I would think only an epic Romney collapse would allow that to happen, so yes it would definitely be the end.

Because you've offered so much yourself? Why should I have to defend who I'm voting for? Should everyone that posts in this thread or this forum do so? All I'm doing is posting a lot of predictions on the Republican primary, I'm not here to debate about who is better for the country or the economy or whatever else.

Give me a million dollars.

Before Perry and Bachmann officially drop out? Ok. I'll try. H8ter. Romney - 46% Paul - 22% Huntsman - 13% Santorum - 10% Gingrich - 8% Other randoms - 1%

Bow. Bow to your predictions master.