Does anyone give a damn about what DUers think of the candidates?

[WilliamPitt]

That's what it is going to come to, you know. People here are just going to stop giving a shit about what others here think about the candidates. A solid majority of people here avoid the candidate threads like poison as it is, and that gulf will only widen.

In other words, DU will go from a place to converse, debate and organize to a place where a few howler monkeys howl at a few other howler monkeys, and the rest of us go get drunk in the Lounge.

Way to go. Group Dynamics in action.

[Gman]

1. Sounds like the Democratic Party I've always known and loved...

"In other words, DU will go from a place to converse, debate and organize to a place where a few howler monkeys howl at a few other howler monkeys, and the rest of us go get drunk in the Lounge."

[disgruntella]

2. In a way, you're right

I don't give a damn what other DUers think of the candidates. I'm expressing my opinion of the candidates as a DUer. So I'm not really out to sell anything; I'm adding my two cents (more like $20 in the last two days ;)) For the kind of debate you're talking about that is more about support and organization, I go to P&C.

Yeah, it's an ugly sport being played in GD lately, but I guess folks wouldn't play if it wasn't a little bit of fun. Then again I'm relatively new; for me, GD has almost always been this way. If there's a golden age I've missed out on, so be it.

[RichV]

3. What else is new.

This IS the Democratic Party we're talking about, right? The only political institution I know of that instinctively forms firing squads in a circle.

[Booberdawg]

4. After a while you get to know which posters

are truly informative and have some integrity. Then there are the habitually disruptive that post nothing but trash and wild innuendo. I think these folks reveal themselves pretty quickly and are not hard to spot. I don't use Ignore but there are some names now that I just skip over in a thread because I know they are spooks.

[ignatius]

33. Exactly, everyone has an opinion, some factual,some intuitive,

some just downright freaky. I don't ignore any,but am able to "choose" names which I scroll past quickly.

When we had 10,000 or so members, it really seemed as if more time and research was done by the individual posters, now research seems to be by some any crazy quote or opinion found on the internet.

None of the candidates is perfect, Senator Wellstone is sadly gone, but let's keep our goal in mind,that of getting rid of the evil bastards in control, and work hard to find valid points about the candidates.

As is badly needed with this administration, a little diplomacy and regard for each others ideas can go a long way.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[neverforget]

5. I'm fascinated by the vitriol some have for certain canidates. I browse

through them and have been tempted to post many times with a flame of my own but I would rather save my precious hatred for the real enemy: Bush!

[Katie]

13. Maybe thats why the Republicans have us on the run

when it comes to bashing our own candidates, we do their work for them. Micheal Moore described this as not an election, but a War. We have to find the most electable candidate we have, to get bush out. That might mean not getting everything you want, but God, Anything is better than bush.

Will Rogers once said: "I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat" I hope we dont blow this election. There's just too much at stake.

[Terwilliger]

6. The candidates started out very friendly

in truth, they started going after each other (granted Kucinich is somewhat of a hothead :-) )

Once Liberman attacked Dean attacked Kucinich attacked Kerry...etc. etc.etc....what are ya gonna do?

"I love Joe. He's characterized the whole left-wing of the party as `in the wilderness'...so let's have a positive discussion about tomorrow. Oh wait! He's going after Dean now...new information!"

I proposed a "no attack" rule long ago, where you could only post things that were positive of your candidate. Skinner said no.

[gully]

20. Wow, good for you Terwilliger...

"I proposed a "no attack" rule long ago, where you could only post things that were positive of your candidate."

:toast:

[AngryYoungMan]

7. Once again, you're critiquing the behavior of the entire community

Will Pitt, I respect you as an activist, an author, and as an important voice in the DU community, to whom I must, in certain specific ways, defer.

For this reason I have refrained from commenting on any of your posts, although I've been tempted to many times.

I'm going ahead and doing it, this time, not because there's anything especially bad about what you're saying here, but because of the cumulative effect, which is somewhat presumptuous.

I remember your blanket calls-to-arms back during the Senate's vote on the war, and during the midterm elections. You provided a healthy "shot in the arm" for those of us whose faith was faltering, or whose pessimism threatened to overtake us. I'm sure everyone would agree that your posts are almost always informative, inspirational, and useful.

But do you really have to weigh in like this every time you're disappointed by a trend in the polemics or the habits of the people here? We're arguing over Dean, Clark and the others! Let us argue! Let us have it out! Why do you have to scold us, or imply that there's a superior form of debate we should be having instead?

I really don't want to get into a fight here, since, as I've tried to make clear, I respect you a great deal. But can you accept at least part of what I'm saying...that you're perhaps guilty of, at the very least, an error in tone, here? That there's something a bit proscriptive about your remarks here? Isn't it up to us what kind of discussion we want to have, and not up to you? Aren't you, to some extent, striking a pose here?

Anyway, my $0.02. If everyone disagrees with me and I'm off the mark, then I apologize.

[WilliamPitt]

8. No fight. Good point.

But if we were 'arguing,' there would be one or two MASSIVE threads where people go back and forth - look at the forums at CapitolGrilling.com to see what I mean.

This isn't argument or debate. This is people posting reactionary threads in reaction to reactionary threads. Others read one sentence and sprint off to start their own threads. Real debate gets clobbered into the archives.

There's a difference.

[AngryYoungMan]

9. Fair enough.

Thanks for the courteous response. I appreciate it.

[WilliamPitt]

10. No sweat

My tone often sucks. I am as guilty of this Group Dynamics shit as anyone here, with the caveat that I use my real name. :)

[lynndew2]

14. I like the way you try to send your message

Will, You do not play pussy-foot and you are direct. If you see things that are wrong and BS, you speak your mind and thats that. I think all this infighting is doing nothing but causing disention and anger and you have been on top of that for a while now. I appreciate what you are attempting but, Sad to say, It seems to be falling on deaf ears. Thank you Will for trying!!!

[lynndew2]

15. I like the way you try to send your message

Will, You do not play pussy-foot and you are direct. If you see things that are wrong and BS, you speak your mind and thats that. I think all this infighting is doing nothing but causing disention and anger and you have been on top of that for a while now. I appreciate what you are attempting but, Sad to say, It seems to be falling on deaf ears. Thank you Will for trying!!!

[diamondsoul]

28. I echo post # 15 and add

Ah, Will, that's the drawback of being a fallible human being. None of us are perfect. I think the real ground is gained in trying to be better, and being willing to face our own shortcomings.

I falter a lot, and damn do I lack your talent for the written word, but I never stop trying to be decent. Tone sucks when humanity's shortcomings start to eat at us. You're a good guy, so stupid shit, people devouring our own does that to you in a hurry. It's understandable to anyone with a brain and some self-awareness, I think.

Keep writing, keep telling the truth, and don't worry about how much it hurts some. It's like ripping off a bandaid, it only hurts for a second and it's for the best. Truth is always for the best.;-)

[tridim]

11. DU is an experiment

and still a little wet behind the ears. We have absolutely no experience discussing a presidential primary. Maybe this is just how it works when a group of smart progressives get together and bet on a horse race. It's human nature.

That said, I'm not worried about the fate of DU. I think we'll all kiss and make up when we destroy Bush in '04.

[Evanstondem]

12. Differences in opinion actually make DU more interesting.

There's only so many interesting ways of saying that Bush sucks. I like the candidate threads that give me a better understanding of the candidates. I'm in total agreement with you on the howler monkeys though. That's why I spend most of my time in General Discussion rather than Politics & Campaigns.

[Logansquare]

16. Suggestion for a new GD rule: no candidate postings!

They all have to go in Politics and Campaigns. I'm sick of these sniping matches, and so many! Can't they just stick to one thread and foul it, instead of peeing on a new lamp post every half hour?

[buddhamama]

17. as of yesterday i am avoiding them like the plague

in a not so subtle post, i was accused of supporting war crimes and being an apologist for Nazis.

you speak to concerns or ask a question and you're accused of trashing/bashing.

discussion has ceased.

[bicentennial_baby]

22. That sucks, buddhamama

I saw the posts you're referring to, and for what it's worth, I thought you were right on in what you said. I am also making a concerted effort, starting today, to avoid those threads like the plague itself...too much for my blood pressure! :P

[buddhamama]

32. thank you, bicentennial_baby

i am still extremely upset about yesterday and frustrated by the blind knee jerk reactions.

the poster who reacted to my original post should have known better.
she, more than once,has thanked me for the DU/nuke weapons that i have provided over the course of the war. rational,realistic thinking goes by the wayside i guess, when all you are really interested in is knocking a candidate.

aargghh! my blood pressure just shot up.

see you around. :hi:

[watercolors]

23. no place is safe

not even the lounge or meeting room. I just don't read the posts anymore. I've become upset with the behavior and attitude of these posts, we all want one thing, to be rid of this administration. Why do we insists on all the negative accusations of the candidates. We had some great debates back in Jan 2001, Will you were my idol, I dropped out a few months ago because I was upset by the attitude here of late. Came back , and it seems worse than ever! ( formally 2458HR )

[diamondsoul]

29. Funny you should say that.

There have been a couple of threads now in the past few days I've posted intelligent (imo) comments to. Those went unanswered but flames were met head-on with horns in the lead!

In some ways I love the passion everyone is feeling but damn, when are we going to see the danger in unrestrained passion in anything?!

Anyway, the tough part, I think is in sifting through the flame-wars in search of legitimate discussion. That's what I find myself doing these days. It may come to giving up, but I'm not quite there yet. Here's hoping you just need a brief break from it.:toast:

[BiggJawn]

18. No. Because no matter WHO I'm interested in....

There's a thread stating "Did you know Candidate 'X' Skull-Fucks Otters for fun?"

I'm going to make up my OWN mind, and I seriously doubt I will be getting any guidance from a GD thread.

Soon, Skinner will ban ANY candidate discussion, or bannish it to a jungle/dungeon, like most gun and Zionist discussions...

[jsaro]

19. Howler monkeys or silverback gorillas?

Nasty, chest-thumping, name-calling flame wars have been GD's main staple for many months, IMHO, which is why I rarely post here any more. But one advantage of the current glut of threads is that you don't even have to click on a thread to see what the fights are about. All you have to do is read down the thread subjects. It's like a DU Reader's Digest! :-)

[gully]

21. NO damn given here!

I couldn't care less what people think about my candidate. What I do care about is that people vote for the most likely person to oust shruberella in 2004.

[bobthedrummer]

24. Good point, Will.

I read some of these threads but have stopped participating in them unless it's an obvious attack by a disruptor. I don't participate in the Israel-Palestine forum for much of the same reason, it's frigging pointless to debate or discuss sometimes here.

I will vote for the Democratic candidate in 2004, I use my available resources and energy to campaign for Dennis Kucinich until after the convention.
http://www.kucinich.us/

[tabasco]

25. I've started to not care

And I am inclined to visit DU less and less as I see the insipid comments about Clark and the other candidates. I'm getting the impression that many here are have little life experience.

[Friar]

26. omw to Lounge

:silly:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

27. Sure..the RW does and will use it in due time

Rumors that are spread here from remote sites that all refer back to one another with NO VERIFIABLE documentation of events EVER occurring will take off like wild fire once the campaign begins.

Pick any smear of any candidate no matter how obtuse it is and watch your post be picked up by the opposition next summer.

[rbnyc]

30. I've been getting drunk in the Lounge for...

...about a year and a half.

But seriously, I do care about what DUers think, but when the conversation gets too monkey-howler-like, I filter it out---and that's the way DU has always been. People freak out, people get better, people freak out, people get better.

[HFishbine]

31. And you know this how?

"A solid majority of people here avoid the candidate threads like poison"

???

[Forkboy]

34. I do

at least most DUers.