Reconciliation thread.

[mmonk]

For those so inclined, feel free to comment and know we can't go into November with a divided party with people saying they will vote McCain. I will clearly state here I'm an Obama supporter and a democratic party delegate in NC. I don't won't to go to Denver for a divisive floor fight. I want a National Convention of speeches against republicans and republican rule. I hope people will want to heal our situation quickly.

[jefferson_dem]

1. We are Democrats!

Let's remember who the real enemy is!

Onward...!

[mmonk]

2. Yes. We have the potential of screwing up this historic opportunity

with what has been going on. I'm tired of what we've gone through these last several years.

[Bonobo]

3. Almost all of us have experienced "losing" our first choice.

I have 3 things to say:

1. Almost all of us have lost our first choice. If not this year, than in 2004, at least. We know how it feels. Get over it.

2. DU is NOT the real world. Being "divided" here has no affect on the real world. Stop confusing DU with life.

3. If the Hillary fans do not "reconcile", they will have to leave or at least stop attacking Obama. As the Borg say, "resistance is futile. Reconciliation is futile." The truth is get over it or don't. It's just a message board and it changes nothing. Stay or go. Who cares.

[LiveLiberally]

12. It's not enough, with all due respect, to say "get over it" ...

Bonobo -- you're right in that this is just an anonymous discussion forum and hence bears little resemblance to the real world.

BUT, you're wrong that our opinions expressed here change nothing. The 100,000+ registered members (trolls etc... excluded) represent many of the most active members of the democrat party. Not the party elite, but the precinct chairs, the GOTV volunteers, the county committee members. Their voices matter, if not as avatars on this board, then as flesh-and-blood party faithful whose opinions carry weight within their communities.

Of course, you'd still be right IF it were true that posting on DU is just a fun, leisure activity that none of us here really cares about. But the fact that we need a thread like this confirms just the opposite. If anything, many of us care WAY TOO MUCH and hence lose it when we feel that our candidate/cause is unfairly attacked. And -- if we were honest -- many of us would admit that it's not just about Clinton or Obama (or for that matter any of our former "first choices"). What is riling us up are the stakes in this election. They are just too high to leave it to the politicians (even the best of them) to resolve. And yet, as of now, we don't have much choice but to do just that.

Thanks mmonk for the thread.

[mmonk]

14. Thank you for your comments.

I hope for a scenario whereby reconciliation is as popular as the internal division unfortunately seems to be. Then I can feel comfortable again. I can't be silent with the prospect of republicans maintaining control of the executive branch.

[grantcart]

13. simple and excellent points

[Adelante]

4. k

:kick:

[Life Long Dem]

5. Well lets focus on asking "when is Hillary going to quit?'

Because as soon as we get her out of the way and the racist out of the way the better our party will be.
Blame this action on todays trolls and rude Hillary supporters.

I'm on a new mission. Ending Hillary's bid, and calling out the racist. Come on out of your little closets!

[mmonk]

7. Well, while I certainly would be for a scenario

whereby she concedes given my support for Obama, it's not really my position to insist on it. I wanted to start a reconciliation thread and would like a reconciliation process before we eat ourselves alive.

[zalinda]

8. On a reconciliation thread, you are still calling out people?

That is some way to heal the party. And, just for your information, not everyone who doesn't like Obama is a racist. And, in the same vein, not everyone who doesn't like Clinton is sexist.

Grow up! Your message doesn't nothing to put your candidate in a good light.

zalinda

[Life Long Dem]

11. And we don't need racist.

[zalinda]

30. Then you will lose n/t

[emilyg]

28. Yep.

[goldcanyonaz]

10. How ridiculous.

[one800progress]

15. For the good of the Party -- and winning in 2008

So is Hillary just hanging tough, selfishly refusing to withdraw for the good of the Party, denying arithmetic, sacrificing the 2008 election to Republicans in hopes of a 2012 shot, or any of the other narratives going around? Or has she got some grounds for thinking the super-delegates might choose her over Barack? Even choose her over Barack “for the good of the Party”? I think she does, and here’s why.

Like it or not, the next President will be selected by vote of the Electoral College, and the Party’s super-delegate mechanism is partly an attempt to bias nominee selection to reflect this reality. “Blue state” / “red state” nomenclature captures the fact that over three-quarters of the states (including DC, of course) reliably vote one party or the other except in unusual circumstances, leaving fewer than a quarter in play. Different handicappers may differ and the pattern will change over time, but the Rasmussen organization, for example, as of March 28 identifies just 12 states in marginal – the famous “purple” – categories of “leans Democrat,” “leans Republican,” or “toss-up” (their website describes variables used in the methodology). Now, assuming Hillary wins Pennsylvania, she will have been the Democrats’ choice in 60% of these “purple” contests; and these account for 66% of the Electoral College votes potentially in-play. That should give the super-delegates pause before simply endorsing the popular vote when deciding who to make the Party nominee.

In Rasmussen’s “toss-up” states – Ohio, Michigan, Nevada and Colorado – Hillary’s advantage is sharper. There, she’s already won 3 out of the 4 contests, accounting for 82% of the Electoral College votes in-play. Was Ohio, at least, “Operation Chaos-ed” by Limbaugh and company? Maybe, but should the super-delegates bet “the good of the Party” on that?

Naturally someone will ask, “OK, but what about all those primaries that Barack actually won? – weren’t there a lot of them?” The answer is, yes, indeed; Barack won 3 out of 4 of those contests in states that the Rasmussen characterizes “safely Democratic,” “likely Democratic,” “safely Republican,” or “likely Republican.” But so what? The Electoral College outcome from those states is likely or very likely going to be the same, regardless of either party’s nominee. (Those who still insist that Barack’s 72% sweep of those contests must signify something, might find themselves uncomfortably reminded by Hillary’s partisans that that the “sweep” amounts to a bare majority of just 55% of the possible Electoral College votes from those states, so Hillary’s 45% also counts for something, the contest between candidates is actually much closer, etc. But both positions imagine significance where none exists, because in these states it unlikely to matter whether Barack or Hillary is the party’s eventual nominee.)

That Michigan is a “toss-up” state and Florida a “leans Republican” – both potentially in-play – incidentally underscores the importance of resolving the disposition of those states’ Party delegates.

Hillary’s still got an argument to make.

[Life Long Dem]

17. One can dream.

[one800progress]

19. Unfortunately, your graph...

doesn't address my post at all. And - for the record - I didn't vote for Hillary in the CA primary.

[gaspee]

26. Who the fuck

Do you think you are?

And you just keep telling yourself that anyone who isn't an Obama supporter is a racist. Keeps things nice and simple for a simple mind.

You Obama people wanting a purge are sick in the head.

Oh, and good luck on your "mission" -- how are things at mission control? Don't forget to pick up your empty cans and Frittos bags.

[H2O Man]

6. Reconciliation

When summer time has gone
And autumn winds are threatening
To blow our love away
‘Tis then love will be tested
Arm in arm we’ll stand
Side by side together
To face the common foe
Who would tear our love asunder

(chorus)
Toora loora lay, toora loora laddie
Toora looralay, toora lay

All ye fair weather friends
Where are you now we need you
On dark December mornings
When hard times come around
Like dark and stormy weather
There’s only you and I my love
To shelter one another

(chorus)

Now there’s a time to fight
And there’s a time for healing
As the sun will melt the snow
On clear bright April mornings
Our fight has run its course
Now’s the time for healing
So let us both embrace
Sweet reconciliation

lyrics : Ron Kavana

(Note: This song is my favorite by Eileen Ivers & Immigrant Soul. It is about a couple's attempt to resolve a bitter fight, of course, but is actually about the people of Northern Ireland. On the CD, we hear the chorus being sung by the Omagh Community Youth Choir. Their community had recently been devastated by a terrible bombing, and the choir, which consisted of Catholic and Protestant children, was a powerful voice of conscience. The song has special meaning to me and my family, and I think others might enjoy it as well.)

[mmonk]

9. Thanks for that.

It adds real heart felt purpose in human struggle.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

16. Agreed. I like and respect both. K & R.

I wish posts like yours dominated the Greatest page.

Pulled from my journal.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/BleedingHeartPatriot/56

It's been a tough primary. I appreciate all my fellow Democrats, especially those who are longtime Democrats, who've been there for the good times and bad times, without giving up.

And, there's nothing more fun than a real world roomful of Dems. :bounce:

Thanks again, mmonk, you're one of the longtime posters here at DU I greatly respect. :patriot:

:kick:

[mmonk]

18. Thanks for your kind words.

At some point, success will be measured on how well we all pull our oars in the same direction.

[Shae]

20. A new tone is definitely needed.

This should be the place to come to discuss the candidates -- discuss their shining qualities; discuss their flaws.
But it shouldn't have deteriorated into being the place to tear up the other candidate's supporters.

I really believe most people at DU are good people -- no matter which candidate they're supporting.
But some seem to have suspended good behavior in favor of insults and oneupsmanship.

I expect a Clinton supporter's post to be biased for Clinton. This can always be countered by an Obama supporter's post.
Bias is human, natural. But it is not a license to abandon courtesy and civility.

"I disagree. I think you're wrong," and
"You're so full of shit it's coming out of your ears,"
are essentially saying the same thing. The difference is the level of respect you're giving to your listener.

After 7+ years of Bush, it is almost unbelievable that fellow Democrats are saying, "I'm not voting for Obama (or Clinton). I'll stay home even if it means McCain wins."
The Republicans love this. It's divide and conquer. And if you do stay home, you'll probably end up getting the President you deserve. The trouble is, the rest of us get him too.

[mmonk]

21. "The trouble is, the rest of us get him too."

Yep.

[Flabbergasted]

22. All for it. Apologies and hugs given lavishly.

[helderheid]

23. rec 4!

[LiveLiberally]

24. We could ask the Mods to create a "civility" forum....

They are actually quite trendy now on college campuses to encourage civil discourse on controversial subjects.

[mmonk]

25. No matter DU's differences in reference to these two candidates

(and I have serious differences with the DLC part of the party), when I look over at McCain and ask myself the question whether I will vote for Hillary if she is the nominee, the answer comes back to me in the words of a famous Beatle song, "Eight Days a Week".

[LiveLiberally]

27. I agree wholeheartedly....

otherwise come November we'll all be singing "Yesterday" (with yesterday ironically referring to NOW when -- despite the mudslinging -- it is I still believe our election to lose.)

[David Zephyr]

29. Yes, indeed!

:)