FDR.

JFK was a tax cutting conservative with a foreign policy focussed on being "Muscular."

LBJ was something of a centrist on certain social policies who still maintained the "Muscular" foreign policy which led to disaster in Vietnam.

Carter was a "Uniter" candidate who tried to reach for the centre and failed to get anything done. He is perhaps the closest to how Obama started out - but Obama has developed since then.

Bill Clinton, the next Democratic president, was famous as a triangulator.

Meanwhile, FDR was the president with the firmest track record for success in both elections and office in the last 100 years.

Now ignoring the campaigns, lets look at what this has meant:

America is currently in massive debt, with a well entrenched culture of avoiding paying debts. That is what the Republican ideology of "Conservative" really means - stiffing your creditors.

You see this on a national scale with the national debt, and on a personal scale with Americans getting into debt on what was a housing get-rich-quick scheme. Like most get-rich-quick schemes, it ended up in disaster.

You also see an ideology of every argument being a battle to the death - you no longer have disagreements, you have culture wars which either end up stifling debate or driving deep rifts between people who would otherwise respect each other.

On a national level you have this appearing in "Bittergate" the Wright scandal, Rezko, Clinton's last minute pardons, snipergate and Hillary endorsing McCain.

Any little thing to undermine the opposing candidate is used, while the big issues which actually matter, are ignored in the name of "Everything you believe is evil by association."

This is why I don't back down on calling for socialised medicine - just because communists did it doesn't make it wrong.

On a personal level you have religious chauvinism, as well as racism, sexism, homophobea and the various other small issues which have been so overblown as to lead to one not being able to honestly discuss them and at the same time, them being dividing factors while the idea that America's constitution is no longer relevant is ignored.

The atheist books you have seen appear over the last few years, guess what? They didn't appear in a vacuum. They appeared as a reaction to the precise same religious right nutcases who led America into a holy war in Iraq. They were a bitter reaction to liberal Christians who sneered every time atheists dared stand up for themselves and they scare the shit out of all religious people because there are no more disagreements.

There are only these petty culture wars over whether you say "Happy holidays" or "Merry Christmas" to a customer over the festive season. No prisoners get taken and no issues of consequence get solved, just more bitterness.

Obama is a liberal and he stands a chance of winning. Lets not undermine ourselves anymore, lets take a moment to reflect that while conservatism, which promises easy blame and excuses over solutions, which favours "Wedge" issues over duty, which calls for low taxes in the face of high bills, has won elections, liberalism has been right about every single major issue for the last seven years.

Conservatives may think they can win elections, but we liberals know we can run countries. It is time for us to stand up and point out that the so-called "Tough" the conservatives sell is nothing more than childish posturing. The "Morals" they stand for are nothing more than trying to shift blame. The "Economy" they talk about is an illusion.

And this does not make all conservatives bad people, or even stupid people. What it means is that it is time for issues to be recognised for what they are, and for America to move forward. It is time to argue.

What Obama said:

"either Democrat would be better than John McCain. … And all three of us would be better than George Bush.”

What Hillary said on crossing the "leadership threshold"

“I believe that I’ve done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you’ll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy.”

What Obama said

"This week, we found out that the presumptive nominee of the Republican party will be Senator John McCain [scattered boos in the audience.] Now, I believe John McCain is a good man and a genuine American hero. And we honor his half-century of service to this nation."

What Hillary said

"I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002."

Starting to see the difference between the two?

To intentionally cause terror, which is what these methods are, is evil in it's dehumanization of both victim and perpetrator.

Are you calling Stephen King evil? He attempts to cause terror.

Your point is an attempt to make a false equivelancy between the two sides. It is without merit.

Except that after four years, Congressional Democratic seats will be far from assured.

The Democratic Congress has proven singularly dissapointing now with the excuse of blaming Bush. In this next election, if it is a Democratic president that excuse will go away and the whole lot will lose seats as the dispirited electorate either gives up - allowing the Republicans back into power, or rebels and votes Green and Independent candidates in.