pudge's Journal: Democrats Split on Party Name

First it was Obama vs. Clinton. Now it's Democrat vs. Democratic.

Democrats have often taken it as a personal insult when their party is referred to as the Democrat Party, instead of its proper name, the Democratic Party. Their reasoning goes that the word "democratic" implies a positive connotation, and that people who refer to the party otherwise are intentionally trying to take that positive connotation away from them.

As Republican is both a noun and an adjective, the GOP doesn't have this problem.

And normally, this is not a problem on ballots either, as the parties used to define the party name for the government to put on the ballots. But with our new election system (and to be sure, it is not merely a new primary system, but a whole new two-tiered general election system), the candidates themselves write down whatever party they wish. And the Democrats themselves can't decide which is correct. Unless maybe there's a new Democrat Party that is not the same as the Democratic Party ... maybe it's a new way to confuse voters? I blame Karl Rove.

Of course, what this really shows is that most of the time when people say Democrat Party, it is not an intentional slight. We didn't really need this illustration of the principle, but some people did. And here it is.

(Thanks to Republican candidate for the 7th Congressional District, Steve Beren, for the tip.)

Cross-posted on <pudge/*>.

The older I get

[smittyoneeach]

Democrats have often taken it as a personal insult when their party is referred to as the Democrat Party, instead of its proper name, the Democratic Party. Their reasoning goes that the word "democratic" implies a positive connotation, and that people who refer to the party otherwise are intentionally trying to take that positive connotation away from them.

The less comfortable I am with deciding other peoples' motives for doing stuff.
Also, the willingness of others to assert hidden motives is increasingly

Re:

[pudge]

The less comfortable I am with deciding other peoples' motives for doing stuff.

We had our state GOP convention last weekend. I wasn't there, but I heard one friend who is a Paul supporter tell me she was annoyed that the McCain supporters (i.e., everyone else) assumed the RP supporters' motives in various (to her mind, incorrect) ways. Then I mentioned our county chair did something, and she said, "well, not at first, only later when she was shamed into it" or something. That is, she was angry that someone questioned her motives, and then she turned around and did the same. Not s