[chimera]

Which brings up an interesting thought. I can't remember the last time a Democrat presented an actual plan to do something. They seem to have two tactics: attack Republicans, and attack the elections that put Republicans in power. I think they might need to rethink this approach (if Hillary lets them).

You are correct that the Rats generally excel at obstruction and destruction, but there is a paradigm we can reference that indicates what Rats will do when in power, and it ain't pretty. Recall the first two years of that long and dreary period of darkness known as the Clinton presidency. Remember that the Rats ran everything. Republicans didn't have the votes in either the House or the Senate to stop anything the Rats wanted to do that required only a simple majority vote. What did we get? Higher taxes, gays in the military, more abortions, scandal after scandal in the Executive Branch, a bunch of women and kids toasted in Waco, a debilitated military, and we almost got the national nightmare of Hillary Care. It was only the remarkable victory of the GOP in the '94 elections that stopped the madness, and on that score we have to be grateful to Gingrich and the others, in spite of their faults, for their prescience in coming up with the Contract With America idea of nationalizing what traditionally would have been locally dominated elections. That effectively neutered (if it only would have done so in other ways) the runamok liberalism of the Clinton presidency.

[ClearCase_guy]

You are correct about how they would govern. I was making an observation about how they campaign. Traditionally, political parties tell people in advance what they will do ("a chicken in every pot"). The Democrats stopped doing that a long time ago. Their plans exist, I'm sure, but they're fairly hidden. The Democrat campaign is one of attack and destroy -- nothing about proposing or building.