so why are we *agreeing* to let ourselves be torn apart?

[villager]

If that's "her" plan -- or even "his" -- or however you parse it, as part of someone's "devious" electoral strategy -- why do we cooperate?

Why go along with it?

We already went along with two bogus elections, and allowed -- collectively -- a pretender to steal the Oval Office.

Here, among progressives and Democrats, we don't have to "agree" to any such manipulation, if that's what it is.

We can refuse to go after each other's jugulars.

We can decide to stay whole, inviolate, a single unified mass, insisting that change will come to this country.

[babylonsister]

1. No we can't because there's a choice to make now, and it's important.

There are two candidates. Which one do you pick? What if I don't like that one? Once we get over the primaries, we can move on and come together.

We have GOT to move on!

[villager]

2. It's the lack of the "we can move on" perspective that bothers me...

We're not in disagreement -- you're not holding the general election hostage to the primary season...

[babylonsister]

3. I can only express myself on DU as I do and feel.

I think there's a major problem with getting the Dems to end this, but I have no say. Maybe later this week some people will get a clue and move towards one candidate or another, as Richardson did. That's what I'm hoping for.

[davidpdx]

4. villager

Good point, both sides (in terms of DU) have been nasty. Outside the DU box (I guess that's what I'll call it) and the internet, you are not seeing much of this. Pent up rage may start to describe what's going on online.

The other part of the problem is neither side wants to give in, both are running as if they will be the nominee. The truth is that can't happen. Hopefully by early June the whole thing will be over and with two (almost three) months before the convention we can unify.

The talk of a brokered convention scares the hell out of a lot of people (including myself). I've seen claims of BOTH sides planning to cause problems if their nominee doesn't win.

[crankychatter]

5. I've never been a PART OF, so I can't be torn

Take the money from Megapharms/InsuranceGiants/TransnationalEnergyCorporations/WarProfiteers

then DO WHAT THEY WANT with your Senate or Congressional votes... (lying about it later)

Provable or not, that is FELONY CONFLICT OF INTEREST

She'd have to grovel like Edwards to get off of MY SHIT LIST

I'M A DEMOCRAT - NOT AN ABJECTLY LOYAL LOCKSTEPPER NEOCON

[villager]

8. It's not being a "lockstepper" -- it's the feeding frenzy we obligingly

provide....

And I wonder how some "non-locksteppers" can make veiled threats to vote for McCrazed?

[IndependentDem]

6. there is nothing wrong with arguing or debating-- but that is not what has been going on here.

we have been spiting and kicking and bitting and pissing on each other. there is no need for any of that.

[villager]

7. I agree, ID!

n/t