What is the appropriate term for dems in congress who go too far in going along with Traitor Trump?

[uponit7771]

What is the appropriate term for dems in congress who go too far in going along with Traitor Trump?

1. Vichy
2. CoLab
3. Asshole
4. Other?

I'd like to get this out now... 95% of what Benedict Donald does and says should be resisted, this fuck is as grabbing a US adversary who REALLY doesn't like the idea of democracy.

We should call those out who are too eager to go along to get along with a traitor


Your take?


tia

EDIT: I changed it to congress but the question can be extended to dems

[radical noodle]

1. Trumpocrats?

[uponit7771]

4. catchy

[TheBlackAdder]

48. Humpatrumps - Pooh's Heffalump likes seclusion, Humpalumps like to hang with others of their kind.

.





.

[radical noodle]

72. I like it!

[BeyondGeography]

2. D-serter

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. Fifth Columnists

[JSup]

5. Quisling

I read about those in a book at some point; it's what always comes to mind now in situations like these.

[uponit7771]

6. cerebral

[ProfessorGAC]

23. That's The First Thing I Thought, JSup

Norwegian turncoat! How'd that work out for him?

[HassleCat]

25. That's the accepted term

Quisling, as I recall, was a Norwegian prime minister who cooperated with the Nazis.

[lapfog_1]

26. Accurate.

[no_hypocrisy]

32. + 1

[Bettie]

33. My first thought too

Collaborators.

[GoCubsGo]

45. Same here.

Even before I saw the list.

[tanyev]

76. Twitlings

[Baitball Blogger]

7. Republican wannabes

[safeinOhio]

8. Appeasers

[Squinch]

9. I am one of the people who thinks that Trump voters are irredeemable and who

argues vehemently against those democrats who claim that many Trump voters are simply misguided. I think Trump voters, by their very act, are racist and sexist.

HOWEVER, I am completely willing to believe those Democrats who extend the benefit of the doubt to the Trump voter are simply misguided. I will not give the benefit of the doubt to Trump voters, but I certainly will to fellow Democrats.

ALSO, this seems to be the latest issue that we are allowing to disrupt our efforts. The fact is that the way THEY would go about convincing the Trump voter and the way I would go about convincing the voter that stayed home are probably THE SAME THING. So why don't we put aside this argument, for which there can be no winner, and unite on figuring out the methods that will get us somewhere?

[uponit7771]

12. 67% of Trump voters believed the UE rate increased at end of Obama terms, there's a sliver of hope..

... no?

tia

What about the label for dems?

I do agree that we should give dems in congress who go along with Benedict Donald less grace, they should know better

[Squinch]

15. Not sure what your comment about Trump voters has to do with this, or why you would

think that represents a sliver of hope.

How about we support those legislators who are not bending too far, and come up with plans to help them convince those voters who stayed at home?

[uponit7771]

16. True, looks like we have to decide what is "too far" ... that should be the first question... anothe

... OP in the future

[Squinch]

19. I think we could do something about this here. We are up on the news here. When

we find evidence someone did something enabling the administration in its efforts against us, we could alert all DU members from that location and we as DU members can right now pledge that when we hear the call, we'll contact that legislator, by mail, email AND phone, and say we will work to primary them if they follow through with the action.

People could use their facebook contacts to amplify the effort.

[uponit7771]

21. +1, Now I really think this should be an OP... this is a very good idea and an actionable way to

... keep folk in line vs just being mad and posting on a political forum (a very popular one I found out the other day, no wonder we were hacked).

I agree with this...

Tangible and measurable and time base

[Squinch]

42. I think we have something here on DU that we can harness.

I'd also like to find out what Schumer is planning with his new staff at the Democrats PR department, and I want to find out what the DNC is doing for outreach before the next election. I'm going to try to get some information. Maybe we can replace the "Postmortem" group with an "Action" group.

[elehhhhna]

10. The goddamn usual bad cop worse cop bullshit theatre.

[MsLeopard]

11. Collaborators

[bowens43]

13. Democratic Politician?

[Vinca]

14. How about "someone to primary next election cycle?"

[Squinch]

17. There you go. Let's just let them know that is in the offing. Better by far than a label.

But it would require that we have an organized and frightening movement to let them know. Ten thousand letters, a thousand phone calls when they enable the ridiculousness. That takes work. It is that work we should be doing right now, rather than coming up with nicknames.

[smirkymonkey]

20. Hear, hear!

[ReformedGOPer]

18. Trumptraitors

[uponit7771]

22. +1

[WhiteTara]

24. Collaborators.

[muntrv]

27. Trump Lite.

[RKP5637]

28. Republicans n/t

[Sanity Claws]

29. Quisling

I just someone up the thread said the same

[LuvLoogie]

30. Shit Head

[HopeAgain]

31. Why?

I just don't roll that way, we are going to need to lock arms as democrats, not start pointing fingers for things that haven't even happened yet... How do we judge someone as "too eager?" Senator Warren said: "President-elect Trump promised to rebuild our economy for working people, and I offer to put aside our differences and work with him on that task." Should we start throwing epithets at her now?

The tea-party destruction of the Republican Party through name-calling and attacks on moderates, or anyone who agreed with Obama on anything, helped elect a man named Trump. I hope we do better as a party.

[HassleCat]

34. Be careful with whom you lock arms

I'm not locking arms with anyone who helps Trump dismantle Obamacare, pass voter ID laws, build the wall, bust unions, vilify public employees, privatize social security, get us into a bogus war, etc. This may be tough, but we need to call out Democrats who do stupid shit like vote for the Iraq war. Some of them may need to be primaried from the left if they don't get the hint.

[HopeAgain]

43. So we should have been calling Hillary a name...

since she voted for the war? I didn't vote for her in the primaries mainly for that reason, but I think the Republicans did okay with the name calling without our help.

[HassleCat]

49. From here forward

We gave them a pass last time, even though they should have heeded the warnings. Anyone who gets fooled this time has no excuse. At the very least, they should admit they were wrong or afraid, and not offer excuses that attempt to lay blame elsewhere. If somebody says, "Yeah. I fucked up. Won't happen again," that's okay, but this business of going back and trying to invent a legitimate reason for killing half a million people should not be tolerated.

[HopeAgain]

77. My point wasn't so much about the vote on war

My point was that we shouldn't be quick to start attacking members of our own party if they end up voting their conscience and that happens to align with Trump on an issue.

This thread is about name calling, and Hillary voted in a way which I perceived at the time to be aligned with Bush, but I elected not to call her names or try to discredit her as a legitimate leader. When she became the candidate to try and stop the Trump fiasco, I was damn glad I didn't call her names before.

I really have no desire to act like the tea-party, nasty, alt-right, name calling reactionary school boys.

[HassleCat]

79. No names, ever.

I agree that we don't label Democrats evil scum, traitors, turncoats, etc. even when they might deserve it. But we condemn their actions in strong terms if we have to. To fall back on the war example, when Trump sends us to war, there will be Democrats who help him do it. We must stand up and say, "Senator Smith, you voted for a bogus war that will kill people on both sides, and cost us a trillion dollars. Please apologize for doing that and tell us you won't do it again, or we'll find you a nice primary election opponent who isn't so eager to see people die." We have to start holding Democrats accountable.

[HopeAgain]

80. Agree Completely n/t

[LisaM]

53. Except she didn't vote FOR the war, but I think you know that.

I get so tired of this.

[truebluegreen]

61. Sure she did.

Or do you seriously think Hillary or anyone else believed Bush could be taken "at his word", that he would go to the UN (and abide by any decision there), that he would "seek to avoid war, if possible." I call BS.

I knew, in a podunk town in East Jesus, Idaho, that Bush was jonesin' to go after Saddam, and was using 9/11 to do it. I knew, without benefit of a dozen+ intelligence agencies, that Saddam and bin Laden were enemies, not allies. And I certainly knew that Bush couldn't be trusted, particularly where oil interests were concerned (remember Cheney's little energy task force--practically the first thing they did?).

If I knew, how could Hillary not know? I'm sure she's much smarter.

[LisaM]

63. No, I didn't trust Bush, but I wasn't a sitting Senator in New York with a tough choice.

She also was hardly alone, and many other people who voted no on that particular resolution voted for the pretty similar Biden-Lugar amendment, and IIRC, that list includes (of course) Biden and Obama (Sanders was not in the Senate at the time).

This article explains it well, and Slate was no advocate of Hillary's during the primary. She also indicated that it was a very qualified vote and she spoke about her vote ahead of time, too.


http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

[truebluegreen]

67. Fwiw, Obama was still in the Illinois Senate in '02;

Bernie was in the House, and voted no.

I've read the article you linked, along with others, including this one:

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/01/27/five-lamest-excuses-hillary-clintons-vote-invade-iraq

And another more recently that I'm having trouble finding again: IIRC it was by Hans Blix, chief weapons inspector and resident of New York (and therefore a constituent, in a way). He tried repeatedly (according to the article) to contact Senator Clinton, by phone and in person, to warn her that the evidence did not support a WMD threat. According to him, she avoided him, wouldn't meet, wouldn't listen.

Didn't want to know, imo. Given her more recent stances on Libya and Syria, I stand by my opinion of her Iraq war vote, which I think she made because 1) she's a hawk; and 2) she was politically ambitious (and not alone in that). It is the reason I backed Obama in '08, and Bernie this time.

[LisaM]

69. Ah, I stand corrected on the Obama vote.

I guess it's because he ran on not having made the vote!

I don't think she's a hawk per se, though she's more hawkish than I am. Bernie himself is not a pacifist - I've heard him make the statement himself.

I actually used to like CommonDreams, but about four years ago, maybe longer, it became very, very biased and I don't read it much now. Pity.

[truebluegreen]

71. OK. I guess we'll just have to agreee to disagree.

But I have to say, disagreeing with you has been more civil than agreeing with some. It was nice talking to you. Have a good evening.

[uponit7771]

73. really?! This shit again?! Yaw out yah selves constantly

[doc03]

35. Chuck!

[libtodeath]

36. Primary them so the term is former congressperson.

[former9thward]

44. Who are YOU going to primary?

I love when people throw that word around like it is so easy. No one is going to be primaried. No matter what they do or say.

[tblue37]

37. Quislings. nt

[Trust Buster]

38. A TRUCOLD !!!!!

[OregonBlue]

39. Appeaser Dems.

[world wide wally]

40. #3

Asshole is a very diverse word that pretty much sums it up.

PS Why isn't anyone asking Trump what that "something terrific" is?

[Buzz cook]

41. Primaried

At least we can hope so.

[GoCubsGo]

46. Comrade.

Just as one should call Trump and anyone else associated with him.

[uponit7771]

74. +1

[leftyladyfrommo]

47. Trumpets. nt

[Budgies Revenge]

50. What about Brasshole?

Sort of like "Copperheads" from the 1860s but more trumpy.

[TygrBright]

51. Pathetic cowards. n/t

[CentralMass]

52. Schumerites

[Afromania]

54. Cliffords

like the dog they are big, red and obvious.

[trc]

55. Blue lap-dog Dems. n/t

[randr]

56. Fucking Brownshirts

[Chasstev365]

57. November Criminal?

[lunasun]

58. Well I've already called the new dem senate leader an asshole so I will stick with #3

[Crunchy Frog]

62. Wow. I posted something mildly critical of him a couple of weeks ago

And my post got deleted. Now I'm too much of a chicken shit to say what I really think.

I congratulate you on having better luck/getting a better jury than me.

[lunasun]

65. I think he was the lone dem to publicly speak out against the Iran deal and now , his public

statements on Kerry
You are right
hey I meant to call him a wild card
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/29/democrats-new-leader-suggests-john-kerry-just-emboldened-extremists-meet-your-2017-wild-card/?utm_term=.c516fa227f7e

[Chasstev365]

59. A Russia Dupe or FellowTraveler

[pandora nm]

60. PussyCrats

Like "pussicats"

[uponit7771]

75. +1

[ananda]

64. Redcoats

..

[Buckeye_Democrat]

66. Queefs.

The air they expel after Trump grabs them by the pus*y.

[backscatter712]

68. Quislings. n/t

[flvegan]

70. On DU? "Senator" or "Congressperson"

Any non-"bashing" like term is probably okay too. *Tucks rulebook back into pocket*

If I've learned that rule incorrectly, please enlighten me.

[HopeAgain]

78. thank you. n/t

[JCMach1]

81. #VichyDems

[uponit7771]

82. +1

[Generic Other]

83. Trumpbungers or Trumpunderlings

Both seem especially odoriferous to me.

[denbot]

84. Former..

Nuff said.

[Atman]

85. We've had Vichy Dems since the Bush years.

When you make nearly $150k to do jack shit, just going along to get along, it's pretty tempting to kiss the golden ass. Good people used to get involved for good reasons. Not any more. Congress is just a millionaires club for freeloaders who've figured out how to live for free and actually get paid for it.