Another take on the Pew Research poll on Dean supporters

[wyldwolf]

"Looking at the party's future, Dean activists voice strong sentiment for the Democrats to move to the left. Two-thirds (67%) want the Democratic Party to reflect more progressive or liberal positions, while just 13% would prefer a shift to more centrist positions.

"These attitudes contrast sharply with the opinions of both Democratic officials and rank-and-file Democrats. A Gallup poll of Democratic National Committee members (in February 2005) showed that, by more than two-to-one (52%-23%) the DNC members want the party to become more moderate, rather than more liberal. That view is shared by Democrats nationally; in a January survey, Gallup found that 59% of Democrats wanted the party to take a more moderate course."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32379-2005Apr6.html

Bull Moose Blog comments:

As expected, the Deaniacs were far more wired than the average American. Their views are reflected in the prominent left wing blogs and those perspectives are probably just as representative of the views of the mainstream of the Democratic Party as they are. That is fine, but they are clearly in no position to speak for the "heart and soul" of the party. For that matter, right wing claims that the Democrats were a band of left-wing crazies were laid to rest by this survey.

At the end of the day, it will take a coalition of lefties and moderates for the Democrats to prevail. But this valuable Pew survey should put an end to the suggestion that the lefties are the ideologically pure representatives of the rank and file of the Democratic Party.

http://www.bullmooseblog.com/

Thoughts?

[LoZoccolo]

1. *crickets chirping*

Expect the thread to sink while we keep hearing how going left will get us back the Democrats who have moved right.

[wyldwolf]

2. here's something that might inspire some passionate response

...from the blog linked:


The Latte Wing

The Moose notes that there is now persuasive evidence that Deaniacs were suffering under the severe delusion that they represented the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party."

A Pew Survey that was released yesterday provides a fascinating portrait of supporters of the Dean campaign. It undercuts all of those self-righteous claims that it was the Deaniacs who were the genuine tribunes of the Democrats battling against those evil forces who would transform the party into "Republican lite". They have about as much in common with the Democratic mainstream as Tom Delay has with Christie Todd Whitman.

[LoZoccolo]

4. The thing is, I think Dean's a pretty cool guy.

I was even part of his campaign because I felt he was a pretty decent centrist who could dip into farther-left votes too, so he could expand on Gore's support a little bit in both directions and win.

What I didn't like was all the co-opting. I liked that a lot of people volunteered for his campaign, as I think it would be good to really have a base of involved people to do things as the Republicans do. But then it started becoming apparent that a lot of people were co-opting the campaign and putting their own further-left spin on his message to fit their own purposes, or putting their own coat of shrillness over it. As a result, people didn't think he had anything to say other than stuff against Bush*, which really wasn't true, but a lot of campaigners made it look like that. I really got disillusioned by the end.

[wyldwolf]

5. oh, yeah. Dean the politician is great

I agree with what you wrote.

[Cats Against Frist]

26. Why worry about Republicans when we can just finger our own as "extreme?"

With percentages and everything.

:eyes:

[LoZoccolo]

35. The question is...

...how to oppose Republicans. They are related.

[KoKo]

41. And climbing into bed with the Delay wing of the Repug Party isn't going

to elect any Democrats, for sure. Our Candidates tried the "quiet, non-confrontrational" approach in this last election fiasco and where did it get us.

Once the anti-war faction was effectively silenced and told to walk lock step with the ABB crowd...where did it get us. Swift Boat Liars and CBS firings. That's the tattered legacy of walking with the Repugs looking to pick off the undecideds, the supposedly swing voters. :shrug:

[LoZoccolo]

44. Becoming complete Stalinist communists isn't either.

Just thought I'd respond an argument with as much credibility as your DeLay one.

Kerry confronted plenty, even if Mary Beth Cahill screwed up on the Swift Boat Liars.

[KoKo]

48. Who's in danger of becoming Stalinist Communists?

:wow:

[LoZoccolo]

49. Who's in bed with the DeLay wing of the Republican party?

You missed the point completely.

[bread_and_roses]

3. If the Gallup Poll used the words "liberal" and "moderate"

what else would one expect? "Liberal" has become a dirty word among the populace. Now, ask the same people what they think about the Iraq war and a majority seem to think "it's not worth it" according to the Polls I'm reading lately. Ask them if everyone should have health insurance, if we should protect the environment, and if we should take care of the poor. Than try to reconcile those answers with what is being put forward as "moderate" these days.

[wyldwolf]

6. your argument is sound... but...

... it would have more merit if the three surveys in question weren't taken with purely Democratic respondants.

If the "Demcratic Wing" of the Democratic party really makes up the majority of the party, there would be no negative response to the term "liberal."

If they are not, then perhaps some did take the term "liberal" as negative.

[bread_and_roses]

8. It would greatly surprise me if rank and file Democrats

were immune to the demonetization of the term "liberal" that has occurred over the past twenty years or so. "Liberal" means "wild-eyed," "tax-and-spend," "soft-on-crime," etc. to them also, would be my guess. Certainly the Democrats I talk to every election while I am working on campaigns do not tend to define themselves as "Liberal." They (both candidates and voters) shy away from the word. So I am not going to take a poll that uses the words "Liberal" and "Moderate" without a skeptical eye. Of course, I don't know the actual questions in the poll and are relying on the reporting on it obtained through a brief news search. It's way too late and I'm way too tired to search any further.

Seriously, the words "Liberal," "Moderate," and "Conservative" have been so twisted by the Right Wing spin that they are virtually meaningless outside of that context. IMHO, we should just stop using them, especially among ourselves. I don't care what the DLC calls itself, they can call themselves Communists or anything else. What they call themselves will not change the the outcome of the policies they seem to support.

I have a litmus test. It is, "who will be hurt?" by a policy, a law, an action. If the answer is the poor, minorities, children, labor, then I know what to think of that policy/law/action. I apply that litmus test to the positions of the DLC (the little time I waste reading about them, that is), just as I apply it to everything else in the political/public realm. By their actions ye shall know them, as far as I am concerned.

immediate edit for spelling error

[wyldwolf]

9. ok, but let me stress my point a bit further

(your DLC bash aside)...if the Democrats who are not afraid of the word "liberal" really make up the bulk of the party as has been asserted, then the word would have had little or no negative connotations among the Democrats polled. Because, after all, there is supposedly more of them than not.

[bread_and_roses]

18. It is the positions, not the word, for which support is asserted

At least, in my reading here. I can hardly claim to read every thread, or even 5% of them. Sorry if you thought I was "bashing;" I merely state my own opinion, based on my own observations and analysis and that of people whom I respect.

[Guaranteed]

32. Exactly- Dean supporters are the ones with

the courage to use the word "liberal."

[TreasonousBastard]

7. Wanna open old wounds, do ya...

but, I suppose this is still an open discussion.

I can't help but laugh my ass off when I hear some things.

One of them is about returning to Democratic Party values. Are those the values of the racist Dixiecrats or of Tammany Hall?

Look what Teddy Roosevelt's Republicans got us. Johnson depended on Republicans to get a lot of what Dixiecrats wouldn't give him. Nixon got us the EPA and the Voting Rights Act. Eisenhower, of all people, was one of the more anti-militaristic of modern Presidents-- probably had something to do with a bit of first hand knowledge of what war really is.

Meanwhile, Democrats were mostly Jim Crow yellow-doggers or inner city crooks.

Now I'm partial to left-wing politics myself, but I just don't see how the Democratic Party can suddenly reinvent itself as left-wing at a time when the country has decided that left-wingers are nuts. It took a hundred years for the Republicans to get where they are now, and I'm not sure we Democrats really want to swim upstream and become the nutso left-wing mirror image of a nutso right-wing Republican Party.

I'd be happy if we were simply the adults in Washington, controlling the kids.

The other thing that cracks me up is the constant whining about Dean as a leftie. The "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" was a great slogan, but like all slogans essentially meaningless. Nothing in Dean's record as Governor, or anything else in his life, showed him overall as anything but a solid, competant, moderate. As with Clinton, the "liberal" mythos was created out of thin air by both his supporters and detractors for different reasons, but it managed to take hold with people who wanted to believe and had no interest in actually looking up facts that might destroy their cherished beliefs.

[wyldwolf]

13. no.

There were a couple of threads yesterday spinning the survey in a positive light. I'm merely showing where others have taken the same data and arrived at another interpretation.

As for "old wounds," you're right. This is still an open discussion.

It really doesn't matter at this point. The Dean campaig got many many people involved who were not involved previously.

That is a good thing.

And Dean has taken his fundraising and motivational prowess to one of the highest levels in the party. Another good thing.

[TreasonousBastard]

17. You got a point there...

and I hope the wounds are finally healing.

I do think Dean's one of the good guys, just not the God of Miracles some people thought he was.

He sure does motivate people, and that's probably the most important thing. Democracy is useless unless there are enough people out there who take it seriously.

Apathy is the real enemy.

[Cats Against Frist]

27. Left, right, schleft, schmite

Clinton or Bayh. Boxer or Feingold. Two-ply or one-ply. Lung cancer or butt cancer.

In the meantime, Rove is growing nads the size of bowling balls, and sending out the "fuck mes" (Malkin, Coulter, Ingraham) and the "whineys" (Santorum, Frist, Hannity), the philosopher kings (neocons), a team of flying blogger monkeys and the "otherwise doped, incompetent or crazy" (Rush, Noonan, Savage) to dangle false binaries and mythological emotional schlep in front of Rapture Pearl, BoDean Earnhardt, and Margie Matching Towels.

There is another path -- one that the Republicans obviously won't take, which is (drum roll)...

Decentralization, libertarian socialism and states' rights. That stupid ol' Constitution and your egalitarian, enlightened foredaddies.

Look into it. You can still be a flaming liberal and be a libertarian. Thomas Jefferson's corpse will love you. In the mean time, liberal strongholds will be awesome, and the knuckledraggers will be fending of the have-nots with the Oneida in Nazi-world.

You may say that I'm a dreamer.

***apologies in advance for all spelling errors -- it's late, I can't see my keyboard and I'm too tired to check all the names.

*** oh yeah, and here's how you can both please Howard Dean and Butternut dems.

[LSdemocrat]

10. For this Deaniac, it isn't about left or right, but STANDING UP to Bush

All too often too many Democrats tried to compromise with Bush, especially during his first term.

Compromising with Bush or trusting Bush is like compromising or trusting the Devil.

Above all, Dems need to stand up to Bush, I really don't care if we do it from a moderate or liberal position, we just need to stand up and not being afraid of telling Bush, "NO!".

For example, even though he is very moderate, I absolutely love the job that Harry Reid has done as Democratic leader in the Senate. Reid stands up to Bush in a way that Gephardt, Pelosi, and Daschle never have.

[Mass]

12. Really??

Bankrupcy Bill? Vote for Condoleeza Rice?? ... This look compromise with Bush to me.

If I understand correctly, it is enough to talk with a big voice, whatever you vote or succeed achieving??

I have to disagree with you, but I understand better some of your other posts.

[LSdemocrat]

16. We have work to do, but it's better than trillion dollar tax cuts and IWR

One big problem is that Dems have so few seats right now, we need to win seats and fight hard especially against quasi-moderate Republicans in blue states.

If we did block Rice, the Repubs would take away the filibuster, and we NEED that to block LIFETIME judicial nominees.

I'd also like to see a real Democrat take out Lieberman in the state primary.

[Jacobin]

11. About what I would expect from the WaPo and Pew

Vile spew attempting to brand Dean as some extreme left wing maniac. (Gee, sounds just like Paula Zahn, Leslie Blitzer, et al. Quel surprise)

Just read his positions. There is nothing radical at all about his positions. Barry Goldwater would have agreed with more than 75% of them.

This is more demonization of Dean by the junta controlled propaganda machine.

[LoZoccolo]

14. I don't think they say anything about Dean. n/t

[wyldwolf]

15. Maybe you misunderstood

They didn't comment on Dean but rather his supporters.

As was quoted, the poll laid to rest right wing claims that the Democrats were a band of left-wing crazies.

[lojasmo]

19. I wonder if the educational level of the dean supporters....

vs. the educational level of the general populace of the democratic party has any influence on the attitudes?

How did Kerry's running to the center work out for the democratic party, anyway?

[Mass]

20. Because Dean is a leftist??

[lojasmo]

21. Dean is not a leftist.

How is your post in any way related to my post?

[Mass]

22. Your point about Kerry running to the center

in the context of this thread seemed to suggest that you positionned Dean as a leftist.

Sorry to have jumped to hasty conclusions.

[lojasmo]

23. Ah. I see.

My take on Dean is that he's a progressive. I see him as an agent for change, and the movement he enabled will hopefully bring the party to the position of true opposition to the neocon agenda....an agenda which, too often, is adopted by the movers and the shakers within the democratic party....to their, and all of our, detriment.

[LoZoccolo]

24. Kerry was polling better than Dean against Bush* during the primaries.

That answer your question?

[lojasmo]

33. Polls are not reliable. So, I guess so.

Perhaps that's why all those folks bought into that worthess "electability" meme.

Fools.

[LoZoccolo]

34. I would say they're much more reliable than anecdotal whatever.

And still better than your unfounded assertion that Kerry's "running to the center" (I don't think he did) cost him the election.

[lojasmo]

43. Did you ever read Kerry's statements on....

Cuba, Venezuela, and the I/P conflict?

Could have come straight from the Bush whitehouse. Pathetic.

And Bush is in the Whitehouse. :shrug:

[LoZoccolo]

45. That still says nothing about winning the election.

So I guess I won this one.

[lojasmo]

46. Except Kerry lost, so I guess you did too. EOM

[LoZoccolo]

47. Kerry was polling better than Dean against Bush* during the primaries.

:boring:

[lojasmo]

50. Kerry was polling AHEAD of bush on 11-01

How did that turn out, anyway? As I said before, polls are CRAP. Keep regurgitating your talking points if you must, It doesn't really bother me.

[LoZoccolo]

51. And Dean could have done better how?

You still have failed to explain this.

I trust polls much more than someone's inclinations who dismisses poll results when they don't line up with how he imagines things should be.

[lojasmo]

56. Useless to speculate....but....

Like I said, Zogby had Kerry over bush the day before the elections, so you go ahead and trust those polls.

Like I said, Dean supporters are generally more well educated than democrats in general.

I certainly don't trust polls in the face of evidence to the contrary.

[LoZoccolo]

59. Evidence to the contrary where?

This is the third chance I've given to you to present said evidence. And your last. Dean could have done better how?

[lojasmo]

61. I never made that assertion.

My evidence was to the point that polls are worthless.

Zogby had Kerry AHEAD OF BUSH the day before the election.

Looks like lots of democrats get fooled by worthless polls.

[LoZoccolo]

63. "How did Kerry's running to the center work out for the democratic party"

Implication being, had we run someone more "left", we would have won.

Which isn't true.

[lojasmo]

66. That may have been your inference

But not my implication. I think if Kerry had run a left/center campaign with a little bit of a goddamned fight, we might well have won. Of course he had a three year history of kneepadding for bush (IWR, NCLB, patriot act) so I didn't have much hope for his turning things around during the campaign.

Your "which isn't true" is rank speculation, unfounded in fact.

[eridani]

73. And even more get fooled by hacked voting machines n/t

[d_b]

74. Haha, nice.

[rinsd]

68. Or that "screw the primaries Dean's popular" meme? (nt)

[lojasmo]

69. Wha?

[unkachuck]

25. not nice....

....to keep trying to minimize and dis the progressive-liberal-left of the Party....without the progressive-liberal-left, Democratic moderates can kiss Congress and the Presidency good-bye....do we really need two conservative Partys?....

....instead of rushing to the right because we haven't any new ideas, maybe we should invent a few, and try pulling the populace to the left....

[seaglass]

28. Um, we all need each other. The progressive-liberal-left

can't do anything without the Democratic moderates either.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[LoZoccolo]

36. Wow, look what hard facts'll do to someone.

:woohoo:

[MollyStark]

30. Pop some popcorn and enjoy the show.

They seem to be taking over. As someone else said on another thread: They are a mostly pissed off, highly educated Boomers with discretionary income.
Good politics are about convincing people to leave a dead end path and come to your way of thinking. I doubt that there is a thing the DLC or the republicans can do to stop this movement to take government out of the hands of the corporate rich and give the it back to the people.

[Guaranteed]

31. Yes, that old Gallup poll. The one that said that a vast majority

of Democrats want REAL OPPOSITION to the neocons. There was a lot in that poll that shows exactly how right Dean supporters are. That number they picked out was the only one that would give someone the idea that Dean supporters aren't in the mainstream of Democrats.

[welshTerrier2]

37. "it will take a coalition of lefties and moderates"

we keep seeing all these DU threads that whine about those who "bash" Democrats ... they often claim that those who criticize the status quo are "demanding perfection" ... a current thread even suggests that those who criticize certain Democrats should leave the Party ...

the point made in the BP is dead on the money ... we need to build a real coalition between the lefties and the moderates ... this DOES NOT MEAN that the lefties should be expected to "just go along and keep their mouths shut" ... nor does it mean that the left should expect to have absolute control over the direction of the Party ...

if Democrats really want to do the things necessary to strengthen the Party, real dialog, real coalition building and real reform of the Party's internal processes need to occur ... this is not a definition of "the ends"; it's a definition of "the means" ...

those who "bash the bashers" instead of calling for reform are doing a real disservice ... the differences we have are very real ... I believe, if reform does not happen soon, the Party could lose a substantial portion of those on its left wing ... it's not about perfection and it's not about "moving left" ... it's about a process that provides real representation to ALL Democrats ... if the left is really the minority in the Party, and this remains to be seen regardless of information provided in the BP, we still must not have a tyranny of the majority ... it's very simple ... if people don't feel the Party represents their interests and their beliefs, they will not support, or at least will not enthusiastically support, the efforts of the Party ...

no one likes to feel ignored ... a coalition in the Party can really happen if the right processes are put in place ... we need to be calling for reform; not criticizing those who disagree with elected Democrats on the issues ...

[Larkspur]

38. I was never surveyed by Pew and I consider myself a Moderate

so how do we know that Pew didn't skew the results or that the sample they chose is actually representative of Dean supporters as a whole?

[KoKo]

40. True....most of these surveys in these times need to be read with

a careful eye. It's not what they say, but their interpretation that's often the problem. The Democratic Center and Right just isn't capable of leading right now they are so in bed with the Corporations. So the Left will have to take the Lead. Someone has to. Right now Moderate Dems have no place to look for hope. :shrug: I was a Moderate to Conservative Dem before the first selection. Even supported the ideas of the DLC but, I'm now way to the left and will leave the Party if something isn't done soon.

[KoKo]

39. Uh Huh....just like the Republicans aren't the Tom Delay wing of the Party

but we somehow have a Religious Zealot with Imperial asperations installed in the White House with a flock of Neo-Con crazies and other zealots supporting him.

So, the Dean Wing of the party isn't representative of Democrats? Well, fine, I will be happy if we Deanie zealots manage to take back the House and Senate and install a President who isn't representative of the Democratic Party as a whole. I would be very glad to see that....:D

"We Have the Power." After all this survery shows we on the left have the techie skills and the intelligence to be the party. Let the rest of them go with the Repugs if they don't think the Democratic Party needs to get rid of the Corporate K-Street Crowd that runs it now. We've had enough of the DLC/DNC go alongs. Clinton (much as I loved and defended him) lost us the House/Senate and managed to bring scandal that has wounded us so badly we are in the fix we are in. He gave us NAFTA and Corporate Media Control. He had to cave to the Repugs. He managed to stall most of their crazier social agenda...but he and the DLC/DNC did us NO FAVORS.

I'm happy to be with the left and working with others in my own state for change. We are the ones who will shake things up and create a new party out of the old tired dead on the vine Democratic/Repug coalition.

Poo to the WaPo that bastion of Corporate Whoredom. The Bull Moose site is interesting though. Good satire from "Wormwood." :D

[deutsey]

42. Yep. And we never hear the GOP wondering if Rove is taking it

too far to the right.

Let's just see how that might look, by adapting the first paragraph from the above blog entry:

As expected, the Roviacs were far more wired than the average American. Their views are reflected in the prominent right wing blogs and those perspectives are probably just as representative of the views of the mainstream of the Republican Party as they are. That is fine, but they are clearly in no position to speak for the "heart and soul" of the party. For that matter, left wing claims that the Republicans were a band of right-wing crazies were laid to rest by this survey.

:eyes:

[XemaSab]

52. My take on this

is that we Deaniacs were FAR better informed than most dems about issues of policy, and we're more aware of how far to the right the party has really gone. The desire of the Deaniacs to have the party steer to the left has to do more with crafting a real opposition to the republicans than with the desire to turn the US into a social democracy.

As far as the "electability" polls go, that says nothing about who people actually WANTED for the job. If you asked me whether I thought John McCain or Dennis Kucinich was more likely to get the presidency in '08, I would say "Duh....McCain!" even though that might not be who I want personally. The electability polls are totally meaningless becuase they're based on people who know little about the issues or the candidates trying to handicap a race with limited information.

[LoZoccolo]

53. This strikes me as odd.

The desire of the Deaniacs to have the party steer to the left has to do more with crafting a real opposition to the republicans than with the desire to turn the US into a social democracy.

Are you saying that the leftward shift is just for show here?

So it's:

1. Not in line with what people want and subsequently...
2. Less electable, and to top it off...
3. It's all an unserious ploy anyways.

What good is it?

[XemaSab]

54. That not quite what I said

1. Most Americans don't know what they want because they're grossly underinformed.

2. Electable candidates are candidates who actually stand for something.

3. There's nothing more serious in this day and age than fighting the Bush administration.

[LoZoccolo]

57. And in response...

1. Take care of this first, and you'll have smoother sailing getting what you want than you will by trying to run through the Democratic Party with a machete using destructive tactics.
2. Did Dean stand for more than Kerry? Why was he polling worse than Kerry against Bush* during the primaries? Doesn't Kucinich supposedly stand for more than either one? Nader? This one is wrong.
3. If you believe this, you'll want to approach it realistically. Only real results matter when we face the kind of audacity when we're seeing.

[Capn Sunshine]

55. I think denial has left the Egyptian desert

and is flowing heavily through the insiders at the DNC .

How a poll of "democratic officials" --IMO part of the PROBLEM, and a group characterized by an insider oldschool dem blog as "rank and file" when they are closer to DNC , is the problem. Thisis more of the ongoing media campaign to portray the right wingers as both "reasonable centists" , when they are neither, and a "majority view of the party" which of course is , politely put, specious.

The sooner you guys come around the easier it will be. Why you have to be dragged into the 21st century kicking and screaming is a mystery to me, and our party would be better served if you guys saw fit to devote your formidable powers to other pursuits where we need the help instead of fomenting spiteful behind the back whisper campaigns. By the way this form of politicking is a major reason 50% of the electorate doesn't vote.

So the sooner you wake the F up and abandon your cliquish schoolkid behaviors over there inside the beltway, the sooner we'll see some REAL progress. Believe me, the Democratic Party did very well before the formation of the DLC, and as Howard Dean says " not one guy in the street can name one of those guys".

That the guy in the street, who is looking for the Democratic Party to actually take positions and define themselves and their differences now has a significant voice at that level seems to be the part that annoys the Bull moose style insiders the most.

What part of the guy in the street bugs YOU the most?

[Zhade]

58. Thoughts?

If that's what the Dems want, I'm glad I left. Hope they have fun bleeding membership.

I simply will not collude with anyone willing to give cover to illegal wars and fuck over the working class and poor. PERIOD. Nonfuckingnegotiable.

(That ire is not aimed at you, WW, but at those who use the appealing line of "moderation" to in actuality do the things I just mentioned.)

[LoZoccolo]

60. On fucking over the working class and poor.

That's what third-party voters do.

[lojasmo]

62. Actually, many of our democratic senators and congress....

critters do just that as well.

[Zhade]

64. Blah, blah, blah. Same old tired rhetoric.

Guess what? If a Dem sells out people like the bankruptcy bill, I WILL NOT VOTE FOR THEM!

I don't give a fuck HOW many times you try to attack or smear a person for voting their conscience. I simply will not do it.

[LoZoccolo]

67. That's because you have heat in your home.

LIHEAP was one of the programs George W. cut. But I guess there was still "little difference" between Gore and Bush* as Nader said?

Voting third-party is a white middle-class luxury.

[ulysses]

71. right, because NAFTA and 5-year limits on welfare benefits

are such working-class-friendly policies.

[Zhade]

72. You know nothing about me or my motives.

"LIHEAP was one of the programs George W. cut. But I guess there was still "little difference" between Gore and Bush* as Nader said?"

Considering I never made that argument, that is irrelevant.

"Voting third-party is a white middle-class luxury."

1) I never said I was going to vote third party. I said I will not vote for those who sell out the working class and poor and those who enable illegal wars. If you consider not voting for such politicians luxury, feel free to call it that, I really don't give a fuck what your opinion is. I'm following my conscience, and I will not send the message that Dems selling us out is okay.

2) I'm not white.

3) I'm not middle-class.

Shows how much you think you know, eh?

[JNelson6563]

65. Where's the mystery

Many Dems have wised up and are yanking the steering wheel out of the hands of those who have helped us lose lots of elections and are still trying to convince us that being Rethug lite and capitulating to the fascists is the way to go.

It's a loser plan and it's proponents are getting kicked to the curb. Deal with it Bunky.

Julie

[ulysses]

70. and I keep saying-

If y'all can do it by yourselves, then do so. I'll happily find greener fields elsewhere while you save the Republic.

If y'all can't, then you need to give progressives a seat at the table.

[MollyStark]

75. They aren't going to be in a position to give anyone anything

They may think they own the table, but they do not.
We all vote for who sits at the table and when the voices of change take over the DLC won't be able to pay people to post on message boards 99 percent of democrats never heard of.