East Valley Tribune

June 19, 2013 | 03:45 pm
East Valley Tribune Facebook East Valley Tribune Twitter East Valley Tribune Mobile Version East Valley Tribune Facebook

Beydler: Democrats get the bounce from convention

Welcome to the discussion.

17 comments:

  • Engaged Voter posted at 1:17 pm on Thu, Sep 20, 2012.

    Engaged Voter Posts: 1070

    Opinions aren't factual claims, mrconservative.

    Neither are faith-based beliefs.

    So, now that you know (or were told AGAIN), please stop making factual claims with nothing to back them up but opinion or faith. Because to do so is a LIE.

     
  • mrconservative posted at 11:02 pm on Mon, Sep 17, 2012.

    mrconservative Posts: 398

    "wants" not "wasnts". [smile]

     
  • mrconservative posted at 10:59 pm on Mon, Sep 17, 2012.

    mrconservative Posts: 398

    Well, when I said that Obama hated Arizona, that was more my opinion tahn anything else.

    But he did have his Justice Department sue Arizon over SB 1070. He obviously doesn't like us much if he wasnts to sue us.

     
  • onerebel posted at 6:32 pm on Mon, Sep 17, 2012.

    onerebel Posts: 443

    Cerulean, I would venture to guess the boos were the result of three things. Many did boo the reassertion of Jerusalem into the platform. To think the nonbelievers of God didn't boo would be quite naive. However I would bet the majority of those that disapproved were more then a little angry that the amendment was approved AGAINST the will of the majority. Regardless of whether you supported the amendment or not, that should have been a red flag for all Democrats.

     
  • Engaged Voter posted at 2:01 pm on Mon, Sep 17, 2012.

    Engaged Voter Posts: 1070

    More specious claims (lies) from mrconservative...*sigh*.

    "They are NEVER honest"
    Dear boy, I wouldn't even say this about YOU with all your lies. I'm sure you are honest SOMETIMES (well, I have Faith you are, could be wrong), and to say you NEVER are would be a lie. Add another to your list.

    "Obama hates Arizona"
    Evidence for this claim, or it becomes Lie #14. Quite the list, and growing!

     
  • mrconservative posted at 9:35 am on Mon, Sep 17, 2012.

    mrconservative Posts: 398

    The Arizona delegates at the RNC convention had top-quality seats, whereas the DNC delegates from Ariz. had nosebleed section seats.

    Is it any wonder that Obama hates Arizona so much?

     
  • mrconservative posted at 9:33 am on Mon, Sep 17, 2012.

    mrconservative Posts: 398

    Jon, you don't put "Democrat" and "honest" in the same sentence. That'd be an oxymoron.

    They are NEVER honest.

     
  • mnjcpa posted at 9:26 am on Mon, Sep 17, 2012.

    mnjcpa Posts: 1067

    Exactly Accuracy - and it was it before or after Axelrod sued Gallup? I've met FAR too many Democrats that admit they voted for Obama before, but can't stomach it again. The emperor has no clothes and it's clear he wants a third world America.

     
  • Accuracy posted at 8:42 am on Mon, Sep 17, 2012.

    Accuracy Posts: 1993

    Jon Beydler: “So, a 9-percent bump is 9 million potential voters choosing Obama-Biden over Romney-Ryan.”

    In your dreams!!

    According to Gallup’s poll; President Obama grew his support by 3 percentage points during the Democratic National Convention, giving him a 6 percent lead over Mitt Romney among registered voters.

    But, an ABC News-Washington Post poll of likely voters showed the president had a 49-48 lead over Romney. That's basically unchanged from before the Democratic convention.

     
  • mnjcpa posted at 8:28 am on Mon, Sep 17, 2012.

    mnjcpa Posts: 1067

    cerulean - keep living in dream world, or as in this article's case Beydler's world because I suspect there's a whole lot of people in your own party that feel quite differently.

    geekete - It's interesting how low someone's self-esteem is when they make an assumption about people in an audience that they're part of a country club crowd. Seriously? My grandmother was a staunch Democrat and today's Democrat party is not one she would support. It's being governed by radicals, not the common man.

     
  • onerebel posted at 8:54 pm on Sun, Sep 16, 2012.

    onerebel Posts: 443

    The reference to both God and Jerusalem were in the same amendment. Thinking about two issues I mistakenly added the S to amendment. It was therefor a single amendment that was voted on three times. My error.

     
  • Cerulean posted at 8:49 pm on Sun, Sep 16, 2012.

    Cerulean Posts: 1385

    I would like to bring forth a quote by JNelson from a comment made on a previous letter by Paul Ingle. JNelson said, “Our Constitutional principles didn't come from a particular religious sect but from an accepted belief that certain of man's liberties are natural liberties and beyond the reach of government, thus attributable to god and applicable to all human beings. There is nothing particularly sinister in this, IMHO, because nothing in the Constitution itself decrees that individuals must follow any particular religious belief. Frankly, that is what freedom OF religion means.”

    I can live with that interpretation, however I do not believe that god need enter the dialogue. If you must, in order for people to understand the concept that all humans are created equal in the act of creation, fine. However, I do not agree that it is necessary and may even be demeaning.
    That said, the Democratic Platform chaired in part by a Methodist minister felt, along with the President that God gives us potential to work. And I saw no evidence that the language to include God resulted in boos. I think the boos were clearly about a Zionist Israel.

     
  • Cerulean posted at 7:38 pm on Sun, Sep 16, 2012.

    Cerulean Posts: 1385

    “get those amendments on God passed,” What amendments on God are you referring to? I only saw one about the “God given potential” of “working people”.
    Can you pluralize “those amendments on God” for me onerebel.

     
  • onerebel posted at 5:16 pm on Sun, Sep 16, 2012.

    onerebel Posts: 443

    "the Democratic convention came across as authentic, genuine, honest and flowing with peace and love while the Republican convention came across as angry, mean-spirited, phony, disingenuous and self-serving — not a recipe for expanding one’s base." Wow, does this guy have any concept of reality? I watched most of both conventions, both sides taking shot after shot at each other. Here is a few highlights just in case the Liberal used car salesmen tried this sell. The Democrats held a vote to add amendments to the party’s platform a reference to God and Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. When convention chairman and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa called for a voice vote to pass the amendments, it was clear they didn’t get the two-thirds needed to pass, but after three trys Villaraigosa called it so anyway. Then came the boos. Apparently they didn't even care what their own base wants.
    DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz falsely claimed President Obama intervened to get those amendments on God passed, that he had no idea the platform had changed. Schultz had spent last week claiming Mitt Romney was personally responsible for every word in the Republican platform.Then the truth came out – the President knew exactly what was in the platform and approved of it. Only after these omissions were reported and with a building backlash did he act. It was such a blatant lie that even CNN laughed, saying Wasserman Schultz lives “in an alternate universe.” Three different speakers even made comparisons of Republican's and Nazi's. So is that what Jon considers authentic, genuine and honest ?

     
  • Cerulean posted at 4:02 pm on Sun, Sep 16, 2012.

    Cerulean Posts: 1385

    Bravo, Jon, you have outlined a fair assessment of the two conventions.

    I recently read a blog by Mike McClellan, wherein he recognized Mitt Romney’s convention speech as the “best speech I’ve ever heard from him. Which suggests to me that he’ll be better in debates (given how well prepared he seemed for the speech) than I or others might’ve thought he’d be.”
    That may be, but when I read the Republican Party platform, I am disappointed by a lack of vision. So how does Mitt inspire a view of the future when his parties focus is planted in the past?

     
  • geekette posted at 10:18 am on Sun, Sep 16, 2012.

    geekette Posts: 83

    Jon,
    the biggest difference between the two parties was obvious when the cameras panned the delegates. The RNC showed us a country-club, gated-community crowd but the DNC showed us America.

     
  • chatmandu002 posted at 9:47 am on Sun, Sep 16, 2012.

    chatmandu002 Posts: 1051

    Jon,
    Don't plan on Obama keeping his poll lead for much longer. The HIGH point of the DNC was the vote against GOD and Israel. As for Clinton, the confessed liar and accused rapist, he has been pulling the wool over our eyes for years.

     
Welcome!
|
Not you?||
LogoutMy Dashboard
Loading…