I feel the time has come for the Democratic party to split up.

[freetobegay]

We are now officialy wondering in the woods. We have in fighting between party factions.

My political needs have been put on the back burner for way to long. I have donated money & manpower since 1982 & I have gotten 0 on my returns!

I am not angry at anyone, just disappointed.

I am even going to form my own party (you have to start somewhere).

[DaveofCali]

1. The fighters need to split up from the passives

Fuck the passive Democrats, the ones controlling the DNC. We need the real passionate ones, the ones willing to be aggressive, to split up.

And we need centralized leadership in this new faction.

[davepc]

2. Marginalize, the new path to electoral success!

good luck with that.

then again, we're doing that now aren't we?

[Redleg]

22. LOL

EOM

[highplainsdem]

3. Just what the GOP wants us to do. Their aim: divide and conquer.

I'm sorry. I can understand the frustration. But the Nader campaign is an object lesson in the futility of third-party candidacies, and the damage they can do to the party nearest them in goals and ideology.

[demokatgurrl]

14. Exactly- it plays right into the GOP plan to ELIMINATE

the Democratic party. Yesterday, I was with you. Today I'm back in the party, ready to work my ass off to change it.

[Guaranteed]

17. Then the regressives need to shut the fuck up. nt

[ibegurpard]

4. Uh huh

Great idea. Let's all just paint targets on our foreheads while we're at it.

[Mick Knox]

5. We did long ago

We only came back for one quick vote - and we didnt agree there... but tried to vote togther, and we still lost.

We'll splinter again.

Doesnt matter anymore, the GOP is much better at unity in ignorance. I doubt we will win an election for decades.

[Sterling]

6. I don't see how the two paths most recomended here will merge.

One side wants to fight to the death the other one is ordering bibles.

[sangh0]

7. I hear there's a real shortage of third parties in the US

.

[TwilightZone]

8. No offense, but this was already part of our problem.

If there's one thing that the Republicans do well, it's screw us over as one organization. They relentlessly stay on message and they all have the same message.

We, however, have our own little sub-parties and cliques within the party itself. This was never more obvious than during the primaries and in the hours after Kerry conceded. We blamed everyone with a (D) by his or her name - Kerry, Edwards, Daschle, Pelosi, the DLC, and on and on.

Everyone except to whom we should really be targeting our anger - Bush, Rove, the media, electronic voting fiascos, etc.

If we ever decided to actually stay together instead of eating our own at the first sign of trouble, we might actually be dangerous.

[freetobegay]

10. Normally I would agree with you

But I am tired of being low man on the totum pole! Can you name any other group of people aout there that has been ignored more than the GLBT community?

[sangh0]

15. It's not about being on top

It's about what's the best way to achieve your goals.

Can you name any other group of people out there that has been ignored more than the GLBT community?

Yes, Muslim-Americans, criminals.

[freetobegay]

18. Well I disagree

They can marry, have health insurance together & the list goes on.

[UpsideDownFlag]

33. ouch, be careful now- well made points can cause a fight.

i think he was expecting name calling or the like.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sangh0]

35. Arabs can also be summarily imprisoned for life without trial or a lawyer

They haven't gotten that far with gays....yet.

[freetobegay]

38. Wanna bet!

[sangh0]

39. I'm sorry, but I don't understand

Bet about what?

[freetobegay]

40. Most people don't understand.

[sangh0]

42. Care to explain?

I'm all ears

[TwilightZone]

26. I think we're on the same side here.

Though, I realize that not everyone is.

As a straight guy whose best friend of ten-plus years is gay, I'm not going to claim to fully understand the intolerance with which the GLBT community is bombarded, but I've probably seen more of it than many have.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of attention the GLBT community received during the campaign was negative and derisive, thanks to Dick Cheney and his idiot wife. The problem is further complicated when people who claim to be Democrats blame the election results on the community, as well. That behavior is simply deplorable and leads me to question how "progressive" these people really are.

To answer your question (though I understand that it was largely rhetorical), Native Americans/American Indians might be as ignored or more so than the GLBT community. About the only attention they've received politically in the past four years was Bob Novak claiming that they stole the election in South Dakota in 2000 from Thune.

And, they happen to fit your mention of a "totem pole." :)

[MsTryska]

24. I agree with you......

i was disgusted by the attitudes i saw here yesterday.


i tried my best to make threads figuring out how to regroup but they got drowned in the hateful eat our own threads.


if y'all are gonna be petulant and stomp off when everything doesn't go your way, then you're not really cut out for the battle ahead.

so good luck and god speed.

[blondeatlast]

9. I believe the activists in the party share the social agenda with you.

I intend to fight the good fight to see that you are as represented as anyone.

Some are ready to turn their backs on some of the most active, savvy, and intelligent members of the party.

I'm ready to stand with you.

[LoZoccolo]

11. Good for you, man.

You should ask Lyndon LaRouche how to organize campaigns and what-not. He is a pretty serious candidate who no one thinks is a nut or a cult leader or anything.

[T Town Jake]

12. Bad, bad, bad, BAD idea, IMHO...

...we need to be reaching out to voters we lost, not splitting up. If the Democratic Party were to split up, the next EV total for the GOP would be 435-0. NOT the way to go.

[Frangible]

13. Divided we fall

nt

[dolstein]

16. I feel now is the time for you to study political science

If you did, you'd know that splitting the Democratic Party in two will not achieve the goal of taking control of the federal government back from the Republican Party.

[Guaranteed]

19. Look, here's the deal: Either the regressives shut the fuck up

and get with the game plan, or the people who are RIGHT are leaving. K? Very simple!

[T Town Jake]

21. No, YOU look - here's the ACTUAL "deal":

...splitting up the Democratic Party would be an unmitigated disaster on just about every level. It's the Republican's wet dream; and the only people celebrating such a move would be a small group of folks such as yourself (and even that would be a short-lived euphoria), and every GOPer on the face of the earth. Get real.

[Mike L]

31. Regressives?

It's "the losers" who should STFU. Prejudice against gun owners and people of faith won't cut it anymore in the Dem Party.

The G&L community isn't satisfied with coming from "don't ask, don't tell" to an endorsement of civil unions in 11 years? Well, isn't that special?

[sangh0]

41. STFU? How progressive of you

.

[freetobegay]

20. I have had on the job training with political science

No matter how I look at it I get screwed. It's timw that I take matters into my own hands.

[GingerSnaps]

23. Are you talking about

Starting a party for Gay individuals only?

A party for just Gay individuals would be torn apart 100 more then what the Christian right did to Clinton.

Hetro's and gays need to start with taking back our media and keeping the two party system that we are left with before we can start dividing this Country into 3'rds.

How do you think the hetrosexuals would feel if you decided to separate gays from us. I have many friends in the gay community and I would feel like part of my life was gone if we were divided.

If that is what you meant shame on you it is a very bad idea and hurtfull.

[freetobegay]

25. I will try to put this in plain simple words

I want a perty that will fight for my rights.

[DaveinMD]

28. the Dems fight for your rights

so much that is hurt us at the polls.

[GingerSnaps]

32. We got hurt by Diebold

It had nothing to do with whom you pick as a partner.

What about a group like the Long Cabin Rethugs where family members that aren't gay could work with the group. That would be a better idea because I don't want to be separated from a large group of my friends.

[Frangible]

29. Most of America is bigoted here

Change comes slow. We ARE fighting! But this will be a long battle that is not overnight. Do not panic and run. Dig in for the long haul. This must be won one person at a time. We need to connect with people on an individual level and help share our viewpoint. From understanding comes tolerance.

[GingerSnaps]

34. Not in my area

It hurts me to think that someone would want to divide me from my friends. Where I live it's tolerated and if someone doesn't like it then they can fuck off. :grr:

I love my gay friends and I would be hurt it they joined a political group where I was not welcome. :hug:

[GingerSnaps]

30. That's a very bad idea but

You should have a party that represents gays that is like the Log Cabin Rethugs.

Trying to separate us from us (example) is so divisive that it hurts my feelings and I am sure that it would hurt others. How about families with one gay member are they suppose to separate and because two separate parties?

Start something up like the Log Cabin Rethugs have because that is a great idea if that was what you were thinking of.

[Robeson]

27. I see your point, but don't think its an either/or proposition...

...I agree that blind party loyalty, can also NOT be healthy to our country. Carl Schurz wrote in 1884:

"Woe to the republic, whose citizens think of party and nothing but party when the honor of the Country and the vitality of their Government are at stake."

I read his statement, and I agree that I don't like the blind obediance attitude some have, as if it is some quasi-religious cult. However, there is a third way. And it will alllow us to maintain a party strength. If progressives want a counterbalance to the DLC, then we need to form a competing group within the Democratic Party. Or, the PDA is already a choice. It is made up of progressives. Now, if every progressive joined them, and donated to them as they did to moveon.org, or other organizations, then they would have clout and power in the party. They would have a large block of voters, that quite honestly, they could threaten the DLC with, as a counterbalance to the DLC's deep pockets. Also, if every Progressive went to a group like them, then they would have a block of voters that they could mobilize not only on a national level, but on a local level. It could effect who sits on schoolboards, or who the local alderman is going to be. Thats how these conservatives started back in the late 70's and early 80's. And now, conservatives control the Republican Party. If the DLC'ers on here love the DLC let them love them. But we who are progressives, need to be equally joined in an umbrella group that represents our interest. That can be done within the framework of the Democratic Party. We just need to quit talking about it, and do it.

[formernaderite]

36. I support the greens financially...

Howard Dean is the first democrat I've sent money to in a long time. I sent a little to Kerry, and figured depending on how he did I'd send the DNC money later. Now.....No way. It's time to support and build the progressive parties. It doesn't mean we have to vote for their candidate for president...but we need to get them into local offices.

[Robeson]

44. Good Points

[Dob Bole]

43. Why? It's ALREADY SPLIT UP!!!!!

That's the reason we're losing...we've lost the rural areas. Southern and Midwestern Democrats have left the party, and not just because of the Civil Rights Act 40 years ago. Unless we start running people from the butt-crack of Kansas or something, we're going to keep losing.

[rockydem]

45. Look this is what you do

You find a smaller party you like or form one or whatever. You work locally with that party. But nationally, and especially, on the presidential level you vote Democratic. The bottom line is that any politicaly party that doesn't have least a few representatives in the House has no business running a presidential candidate.