There is a year and a month before election day

[hyphenate]

and the primary season won't officially begin for a short while. I know it would be impossible to have everyone smoke the peace pipe and play nice for awhile (though perhaps in an alternate universe that might be happening), but I would simply like to request that we try to keep the discourse about the field of potential nominees less libelous, and more accurate.

I.e., this would mean no rightwing website talking points; less use of inflammatory adjectives; reasoned and rational treatises on the differences between the potential candidates; no name-calling in a manner reserved previously for the wretched right; tactful and diplomatic arguments, not hellfire and brimstone about how Hillary is acting as a recruiting agent for some agent of Satan; courteousness toward other members of DU who support other candidates; but most importantly--know who the enemy is. Because truth be told, after coming here sometimes makes me wonder who the enemy really is. "I have seen the enemy, and he is us." Around here, that gets to be a serious question not just a possibility.

[rasputin1952]

1. Thank you, I have posted like OT's in the past, and am always

open to discourse and seeing where people stand w/their candidates and what they think.

Far too often, it has become the norm to just trash anyone who is "not in the loop" w/a particular candidate. Let us see if we can bring our level up a few notches and forget all of the inane babble about how "bad" another's candidate is...:)

[unkachuck]

2. 'makes me wonder who the enemy really is'....

....does it matter?....Hillary is our candidate and the next President of the United States....right?

[hyphenate]

3. I don't know

any more than you do! Regardless, whoever gets the primary votes will be the choice of the people in each state; if you recall from 2004, you saw that the voters were putting their hopes and dreams (and yes, fears) into the selection of a single individual. If it weren't for the GOP rigging the Ohio vote results, John Kerry would have been our current president--Mr. Kerry was a firm choice in most state primaries or caucases most likely because many voters saw him as a moderate, and that's who is going to win the 2008 election--the candidate who is viewed as a moderate, NOT someone who has been proven to be a complete liberal.

We here at DU need to keep that in mind--we are NOT the average voters. We are pretty much more left than most people in the country who have far less interest and knowledge of politics. I recall one of the late night show hosts in a mall, asking people if they knew who the vice president was--most of them didn't know. It's scary, but this kind of person is the one electing the president of the country, and it's their ignorance which rules the day, NOT those who are learned and selective.

In truth, this could help us a lot, if we play our cards right--just make people remember that Bush started the Iraq war and that he's a Republican. The visceral reaction of many will be to vote as opposite him as possible, regardless of who the opposition is.

However, to return to the original point, who the candidate turns out to be is wholly irrelevant--if we can't get along here at DU and complement each other in our choices without flame-baiting, we are not going to be able to communicate to the average man or woman on the streets who will be voting in the primary. And we also look mighty disorganized if we can't do that.