What do all these people have in common, other than all being democrats?
961282
They were all crooks close to Bill Clinton, who was obviously the leader of their pack.
1023839
Couldn't the same be said about all political parties?
274128
Thanks.  That clears away some thoughts of a dark conspiracy.  I believe in a strong two-party system (as the best of all checks and balances) while permitting unlimited small parties to come and go.  Both parties deserve to share the celebrities.  They can help draw attention to candidates who need to get their message out.  Celebrities are often strongly motivated enough to even get into politics and run for office (as any of us are free to do).  My main objection is that certain celebrities who are probably too involved with their careers to study the issues merely parrot the invective of highly partisan (and highly paid?) political activists and bring very little real information to the debate.  I wish they would just shut up and cast their one vote; just like me.  But speech is free.
704310
Democrats are liberals and they like gay marriages and abortion.\nRepublicans are conservatives but they like war just like the invasion of Iraq.
704442
Usually the Republicans however it is not exclusive, some Democrats do also.
545115
You found pro-lifers in the Democratic Party?  Wow, you must have really searched.\n\nThey all hate each other because they all want the biggest piece of the pie they can get, and screw everybody else.
1150496
you forgot Democrats.\nLiberals is the Republican "slang" for anyone that is not one of them.
927026
The 'STATE OF CONFUSION' experienced by nearly all DEMOCRATS.
994263
Yes, Republicans, not all, but most of the powerful ones have \n               much in common with Communists.\n1. They both like wars and hate it when wars come to an end.\n2. They like repeating, repeating themselves.\n3. They just love secrets, secrets make them feel cuddly.\n4. They like to go on golfing trips to Ireland? Go figure!\n5. They can't balance a budget.\n6.  And finally, just before elections, they produce lots of gas.
933158
The manifests of each party really are not that different.  The areas of major difference you hear are mostly rhetoric.  \n\nI was about to write about each in a nutshell but feel I would do it a disservice in this venue.  Suffice to say that when you hear the extremist views here and in the news you do not hear the majority.  Most people tend to the middle, want social programs for children and some adults, do not want high taxes but can pay some, and feel the military is very important.  The 'how' is discussed at length.  \n\nYou seem intelligent so here are the web pages for each party.  Look past the jargon for yourself.
565620
B/c generally speaking the democrats try to publicly align themselves to the "poor" and "minors".  This is what they say in public avenues, whereas their personal opinions sometimes turn out to be quite the contrary.\n\nBut look at Hillary Clinton on MLK day, she made a speech comparing the republicans to "plantation owners".  The democrats specificially target the poor and what are considered to be "minorities" because they make a large % of voters and thus they hope to get their candidates into office by playing those cards.
54448
There are generalizations for each; some are more accurate than others.  \n\nRepublicans are considered on the "right" end of the political spectrum while Democrats are on the "left."  The far right generally is pro-religion, anti-bureacracy, pro-military, pro-business and pro-personal responsibility.\n\nTo the far left of the spectrum are the extreme liberals, or the most extreme democrats.  Everyone pays taxes to equalize society.  Government should solve all problems and government should be counted on by people who can't take care of themselves.  Republicans might see this is bordering on communism.\n\nRepublicans, are usually considered conservative (fiscally as well as socially), maybe a litte pious, pro-business and against the bureacracy often associated with big government.  They see big government as wasteful and an obstacle to getting things done.  Their approach is very Darwinistic in that the strong shall survive, cream rises to the top, etc.  And the weak become Democrats so that they can get handouts from the government.  Work hard, obey God and life will be good.  In theory, this is a neat way to look at things and in an ideal world, this would be great, but it has a number of flaws.\n\nDemocrats are considered more liberal.  They are usually more educated and open-minded. . . maybe a little more realistic; maybe a little more cynical, depending on how you look at it.  Democrats often come from in or around an urban area and have more exposure to the realities of a life for those with diverse backgrounds.  Thus the likelihood of social liberalism among democrats.\n\nRepublicans expect people to take advantage of the fact that we are in a free society and, as such, they should take advantage of this opportunity to make wise, responsible decisions for themselves, which should ultimately trickle down and result in a better society.  \n \nDemocrats are smart enough to know that most people don't always make the best decisions for themselves (or society) so their position is that there needs to be more regulation, thus a more structured government.  This is kind of along the lines of Hillary Clinton's famous statement that "it takes a village to raise a child."  The village, many would say, is the government.\n\nRepublicans will say that Democrats want to increase taxes (and the size of government) in order to pay for wasteful social programs.  Republicans would rather funnel the money to churches and charities so that the government can be left to do what it does best.  Let the churches and charities take care of their communities.  Let the government take care of law enforcement, defense, etc.\n\nDemocrats will say that Republicans don't care for anyone but themselves (who are often in the higher echelons in terms of income) and that Republicans should share more of their wealth with society.  \n\nBut there is a ton of hypocrisy and an incredible amount of contradiction in both parties.  Both parties are right.  And both parties are wrong.  \n\nBottom line, as an earlier poster explained, people are going to support the political parties that are known to best serve their own, individual needs.  \n\nLow income urban minorities are more likely to support a Democratic agenda because it's in their best interest.\n\nMiddle and upper class rural citizens (whites and minorities alike, in many cases) are more likely to gun for Republicans because their agenda is friendlier to these types of citizens.\n\nWhen voting, your best bet is to vote based on the individual candidate as opposed to the party with whom she or he associates.  \n\nAnd it's your responsibility as a citizen to educate yourself so that you can make informed decisions.
935396
how come people of all political stripes, left and right, have such a distorted view of the other?
1179103
I don't think so.  Even if in theory they both agreed with this person's idea's and such I don't think Republicans and Democrats would admit to agreeing on the same person.  They are both too childish.  (and yes I am a republican)
918423
Majority yes!!!- are Democrats...but I see a shift towards the REBUBLICAN party...who knows the reason...among my BLACK  & WHITE  friends  is a trend....latelly they just vote for the man or woman ...they ignore the party...I wish the rest of us follow their example.
209761
Everything except Liberals.
1185882
I am a conservative and I have some liberal friends.  Though we differ on certain issues we do have one thing in common and that is we are patriotic.  There are extreme liberals that spew with anti American rhetoric and those that do not.