Will we have "a life" tomorrow..........where are we going? A "General"

[KoKo]

who is touted on DU......as the "Second Coming....politically," a wonderful group of Dem Candidates being trashed and manipulated by the "Whore Media."

Questions from DU'ers that end up in "Flame Wars," with many of us wondering if they are "paid" operatives or "trolls," rolling discussion which doesn't end up going anywhere but marches off to "archives," anger over this thing and that thing, and "flame" wars, and "candidate wars" and meanpirited folks who bash people with "disabilities, "candidate loyalties," "information posters," "disinformation posters," "religious posters," "anti-religious posters," and whatever else is out there that we want to flame, trash, beat up on, and dissect, mull over, and regurgitate......as fur balls.

[seventhson]

1. Ahhh, Political Discourse, Koko...!!!

Thank God(dess) and Al Gore for the opportunity to do this outside of a tavern or beer hall.

It is really fun and we here at DU (for better or worse) will change the future of the planet.

So have heart...

The Battle for the heart and soul of AMERICA is being fought and won right here.

I think its cool.

The casualties, though, are very sad...

Keep the faith.

It's all good.

(So Far)

[Tansy_Gold]

2. I just hope the 2004 elections isn't one of the casualties

I don't post much any more because I get yelled at too often, but I am seeing the worst of my fears come true daily in front of me on DU -- the fighting, the bitterness, the anger, the sheer out and out hatred. If it's like this now, in mid-September, what's it going to be like in January, February, and March?

If Clark gets the nomination, will the Dean people come on board? If Dean gets the nod, will the Clark people walk out? If Kucinich or Sharpton leaves early, will their people choose someone else, or just walk away? I know DU isn't the entire country, but I think the feelings run both high and deep here, and it scares me.

Worst of all, what if the primaries don't produce a clear front-runner, someone with enough delegate votes to take the nomination on the first convention ballot? What happens if there are major floor fights in August and we don't have a candidate until a year from now, with all that extra time to heat up the animosity and bitterness?

I don't like this. I don't like it at all, and I don't know what remedy there is.

Personally, I have several candidates I prefer over others, but there isn't a single Democrat now in the field that I absolutely couldn't vote for. On the other hand, there isn't a single one of the ten -- or even eleven if you count Hillary or twelve if you count Gore -- that meets 100% of my requirements for the perfect Dem candidate. And then to look at it from another point of view, would the "perfect" candidate be electable? As tacky as that may sound, I do believe there are superficial qualities that a candidate might have that make her or him more electable even though her or his platform may not be as electable. This comes down to that whole perception thing -- for instance the belief by some people that Dean is way left liberal and others who see him as too conservative, too DLC.

But more than anything, I think the "spirited" debate on DU is becoming more destructive than constructive. I used to come here to get information, and now all I read is vitriol. Maybe it's better that it be confined to DU and not seep out into the wider electorate, but I don't find it generally encouraging.

But what do I know? I'm just a silly woman who once suggested McAuliffe and the candidates ought to hash this out and who was rounded assaulted for preferring "smoke-filled room" deals to "the will of the people" and who now fears the decision will end up being made in a smoke filled room anyway and the rest of us will just be too pissed, too angry, too tired, and too filled with loathing of our fellow Dems to give a damn.


Tansy Gold

[KoKo]

4. Tansy Gold.....a good post.....and true for many DUers as well as myself,

although......here's the problem......I can't stand MacAuliff...and am a DLC trasher.....and the battle may have started there.......and has just gotten worse.

But, you know....when we were just fighting over DLC and what it meant.....it was easier to understand that it was a battle over what many of us felt about Selection 2000. Now, the battle has moved on.....but with out an "underlying" group of support for moving it forwards.

I'm sorry you feel you felt the way you did......and if I was one of the one's who caused you to post less....I'm sorry.

Our divisions started there........but they've become much worse......and deeper and crueler to our fellow posters.......We need to "clean up our act." Even though discussion and "going at each other over differences of opinion" in the end is a good "sorting out for us, could have been healthy.." what's been going on the last month or so....is losing us our grounded Dems.....the people who tote the water....and do the work.....through experience and a sense of history that needs to be done.

I hear 'ya........Thanks! Peace :-)'s

[BeFree]

7. This here DU thing-a-mega-gig-a-byte

Is all new and growing. Now, for the first time ever, EVER, Millions upon Millions of Dems from everywhere get to sound off. Think about that: "For the First time Ever."

We're gonna go thru some changes, climb some hills, slide down into the gully and get right back up and climb that mountain again.

Hang on and hang in, it's gonna be one Hell of a ride. And in the end..... we will be rid of those sorry ass Squatters in the White House!

[diplomats]

6. Tansy, there is a poll on DU that I found encouraging

it asked Dean supporters if they could support Clark and Clark supporters if they could support Dean. Very few could not. It wasn't scientific, of course, but it did make me reassured a bit.

[Tansy_Gold]

8. Yes, I saw that poll, but it didn't really encourage me.

I could be totally wrong -- it's happened before, on a few very rare occasions :smile: -- but when I see a poll like that, I think of people responding who really "know" in their heart of hearts that it won't ever happen. Their candidate will of course get the nomination so they won't ever really be in the position of having to shift allegiance. And granted, I suspect that at least some of the people who respond are like me -- they will sincerely support whoever the Dem candidate is.

But yesterday or the day before, there was a thread regarding Clark's support or non-support of the Iraq invasion before it happened and during the invasion's first phases. I don't think I need to link to the thread or quote anyone in particular; I think most people will recall it and will remember how delicately each of Clark's statements was parsed. Things like (hypothetical, I'm not quoting here), "Well, he said he thought the three division leaner 'n' meaner strategy was the right call, but that doesn't mean he was actually in favor of the invasion." To me it smacked of the same kind of rhetorical acrobatics as Condi Rice engaged in when she allowed/encouraged the rest of us to infer that she linked al Qaeda with Saddam Hussein. I got the impression reading that thread that the Clark supporters -- and don't jump on me just yet -- were forcing their chosen candidate into the mold they wanted him to fit, rather than looking at his words and actions objectively.

Now, I also know that being objective isn't the objective /sic/ of partisan politics. And I only picked on Clark because I happened to glance through some of that thread and because it's recent enough to be fairly clear in my memory so it's probably clear in others' too.

But I suspect much of the same thing has gone on more than once on issues with the other candidates. Another example, and another candidate: Did Kucinich flip-flop on abortion just so he could get the endorsement of the real progressives? Can he be trusted? Has he really changed his position on that crucial issue? What kind of "debates" have been carried out here on DU on that tiny issue in the overall campaign?

There was/is another thread here today about Clark being a kind of GOP mole, used as a wedge to split the Dean supporters from the rest of the Democratic party. Gee, maybe the whole debate on DU is being started by GOP moles and Freeper trolls. . . .and it's being damned effective!

But I worry that the really good things that DU has done are going to be squandered by the infighting. I understand the line between debate and flaming is very fine, and I recognize that emotions are high on all sides, and the moderators don't want to squelch debate when that's what the game is all about. Worse, I wonder how much of the anger that's so evident on DU is seeping out into the campaigns, because DU has gotten more people active and involved.

I know, I know, Merton's latent and manifest results, unintended consequences, all that good shit. But the theory seems to be working in practice, too, and there sit all the bushnazis, still in power, still sending some mothers' children off to kill other mothers' children for no good reason whatsoever.

[KC21304]

3. Just political discourse indeed.

Don't worry about any of it. If you see your candidate called a traitor, murderer, just remember it is all good fun.

I'm so glad we are all going to be fine.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

[KoKo]

5. Yes, Kerryfan.....some are doing this and it's causing those of us who ask

questions without "flames" and name calling are getting thrown in with the group of those who are so hostile to any other Dem candidates than their own......that they question and attack the slightest request for info. The "hit and run" poster who doesn't logically or with links to information refute what they feel is false about their chosen candidate,..is the true saboteur, imho...anyway.

[OneBlueSky]

9. I'm posting this on all the Clark threads . . .

because I got so pissed off when I read it . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=11938

anti-war, indeed . . . more like Lieberman-lite . . .

[KoKo]

10. I hadn't seen that.....it's pretty disappointing......how does this square

up with being anti-war?..... Oh well......

[Pastiche423]

12. Hiow does it square?

It doesn't. clark was not and is not anti-Iraq war. In another thread, clark was quoted saying, he probably would have voted for the IWR.

[Terwilliger]

11. SLAP THE DONKEY!!

I say we all give up our candidates and support Al Sharpton!

Sharpton/Edwards '04!!!