I am Not a Democrat. I am not a Republican. I Am an Independent...

[dEMOK]

...w/o needing to belong to any particular demography.

I hate hypocrisy.

I hate the attitudes of the sniveling little snots who only hope to belong somewhere. Grow the fuck up & stand on your own.

Don't look for a group to be accepted into -- speak your mind & find out who disagrees with you -- and Why!

You'll find that these people turn out to be far better friends than the ones you hoped to gain by being an opinion clone.

[sandnsea]

1. I stand in the Democratic Party

Because I know what I believe in and I'm not going to let any bunch of chickenshit Republicans run me out of it.

You're in a war dude. Pick a side already. That's taking a stand.

[Maru Kitteh]

142. Jesus H. The OP hasn't replied once in the whole thread. Is there a hit and run school somewhere?

Incredible. Wonder what else this prick has been up to.

[aquart]

2. And yet, you're here.

Pontificating and insulting.

[Old and In the Way]

8. I'll bet he's a big Ralph Nader fan, too!

Probably an anti-duopolist, if you will. :rofl:

[hfojvt]

10. We all owe Nader alot

I would like to take this opportunity to say 'Thank you, Ralph Nader'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GgDomql19k&mode=related&search=

[lazer47]

13. Yea''' Thanks Ralph Nader for pulling votes away from

John Kerry and helping GWB win another term,, we won't soon forget it.

[DutchLiberal]

68. That's nonsense

Ralph Nader attracted votes from people, because the people who voted for him thought he was better than John Kerry. The fault lays with Kerry, for not being able to interest those people to vote for him.

What is it with this urgent wish to slander and trash everybody who runs as an independent? That's a right every American has. That's how it works in a democracy. I bet it would be better for the country to have more than two big parties. Why do you want to force people to choose for a party/candidate they don't agree with??

[CreekDog]

87. Fault lays with Nader, who attracted votes by lying

If you think Kerry is at fault because Nader lied about him, you're crazy.

[DutchLiberal]

163. Heck, the GOP lied about Kerry too

But still, Democrats rather blame Nader for 'pulling votes away' than they blame the GOP. In politics and political campaigns, everybody lies nw and then, some more than others, unfortunately.

I'm not saying everybody should praise or even support Nader. I'm just saying it makes no sense, logically, to trash him simply for using his rights as an American.

[johan helge]

159. Nader-fans - stupid and/or shameless

Without Nader, Bush would never have become President. The stupidity and/or shamelessness of the Nader fans is amazing.

It's simple: If the left side of the political spectrum divides its votes between two candidates (Gore and Nader), this helps the main candidate of the right side.

[DutchLiberal]

164. More nonsense... AND insults!

Thank you for that.

And as far as your 'point' goes: it's this kind of thinking that will keep you forever trapped in the two party system where you can only vote for something you don't really like. And afterward, everybody always complains how the Democrats don't pick the right nominees, they're just Republican-lite etc. etc., but in the meantime they trash everybody who try to change this habit.

You shouldn't blame Nader for attracting votes. It's his right. I'm not a 'Nader-fan'. Heck, I know very little about him, but it makes no sense to say he's the reason that Bush got elected in 2004. You can blame it on the GOP's swift-boating of John Kerry; on election fraud; on Republican fear-mongering which drove voters into Bush's arms; on the news media who are heavily biased toward the GOP; on the 28% who drink the kool-aid Fox is handing out to them; on Kerry not doing enough to attract voters. But not on a candidate who's exercising his democratic right.

[Maru Kitteh]

140. I'd love the chance to repay that asshole exactly what we owe him.

The compost heap is always ready. The catbox. Whatevers left in the back of the bottom of my fridge.



We'll be giving guns to kids ........... to shoot whales......... Thank you Ralph Nader. :rofl:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

25. great post aquart

[zanne]

30. You're just looking for attention.

It's well known that, during a campaign season, Independents are coddled and get lots of attention from both parties. Being an Independent is more like being a TEASE.

[Horse with no Name]

3. Don't they have an Independent Underground for folks like you?

:shrug:

[blondeatlast]

22. No--they love to think they ARE the Underground. Rebel chic is big with them. nt

[spoony]

70. They're so underground they don't get wi-fi

:)

[Mythsaje]

4. Oh, I'm an independent too...

Little "I," mind you.

Ask anyone here whether I'm a "joiner." Hell, ask anyone anywhere. I stand with those who stand where I am, not just to belong.

But I know this--if I want to see something happen in this country, something good, the only ones with the power to make it happen are Democrats. All we have to do is empower the right Democrats.

THAT's why I'm here.

[hfojvt]

6. I'm just here for the coffee

I don't really have a drinking problem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e49hdIcSHX8

[BlooInBloo]

35. Come for the coffee! Stay for the independents!

[hfojvt]

5. me too

I'm in-duh-pendent

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyRxf46Hmmo&mode=related&search=

I couldn't find a video of Hermie though.

Just because I am a precinct person in the Democratic Party does not mean I am an opinion clone. I was arguing with the county chair just the other day. I said that our representative's turn to the right was sickening and she said that I needed to be realistic.

[Mythsaje]

7. Realism is for those who can't stand idealism.

;)

Funny, some of us might call that "selling out."

Realistic, my ass. Why do they think the majority of Americans don't vote? Because they don't feel like EITHER party represents them AT ALL.

Duh.

[Old and In the Way]

9. They have a civic duty to vote.

Too bad if they can't find representation they like...they could decide to get involved as a Republican or Democrat and change their Party from within or vote/run as an independent. The fact that they don't vote at all is more an indictment of the majority's not giving a shit about their form of government...or just too lazy/uninterested to vote. Anyone who couldn't be bothered to vote in 2004 will never convince me it was based on reasoned principle.

[Mythsaje]

20. Whatever...

Would you lay bets on a card game you knew was rigged?

I don't agree with them, but I can see their point.

[Old and In the Way]

26. No bet on that issue, but I play anyway...don't you?.

The only way to beat a rigged election game is to have overwhelmingly superior numbers that precludes electioneering in tight races .... and get those on the sidelines to do their civic duty.

[warren pease]

88. About that civic duty....

When the OP says basically the same thing, you respond in your previous post (#9, I think?) by rolling out the usual anti-Nader stuff and criticize those who voted their conscience when that conscience kept them from supporting a member of the duopoly you also apparently favor. However, I may have missed the irony in that post, which means most of what follows may be irrelevant. But plunging on...

First thing is, there's no way in hell Gore or Kerry were going to win those elections. Nader's just a convenient distraction and scapegoat, but the fix was in both times -- first in Florida, then in Ohio -- and the Supremes would have figured out a way to screw Kerry out of a win in 2004 if the Ohio voter caging strategy hadn't worked so well.

The November 11, 2001 NORC report on Florida election anomalies -- commissioned by a consortium of U.S. news organizations including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and Tribune Publishing which owns the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune and several newspapers in Florida -- determined that Gore would have won had he pursued his own preferred course of action re ballot counting, and not that of his legal advisers. Fortunately for BushCo, post-9/11 fervor had turned him from an idiot to a statesman and, just for good measure, another passenger plane went down that day, killing all aboard and quite a few people on the ground. Predictably, the NORC report was buried or ignored in nightly TV newscasts.

Then Bobby Kennedy Jr., drawing on the massive research and investigative resources of himself and one other guy, blew the 2004 results in Ohio all to hell in a giant article that appeared in Rolling Stone and got massive pickup -- mostly international, of course, but some here as well. Again, Nader didn't really make a difference in either election. Look at the exit polls from 2004, which show Kerry winning in a landslide which somehow failed to materialize when the votes were tallied. Fixing the system, rigging the game, guaranteeing the desired outcome -- that's what got Bush into the white house in 2000 and kept him there in 2004.

About that duopoly; look how wonderfully the two-party system performs under stress. We've got The Commmander Guy and his puppet master running the show, while the overly-loyal opposition party draws a line in the sand over a resolution that would sort of begin to kind of draw down troops in Iraq by some unenforceable future date -- while the bodies just keep on piling up like cordwood.

Meanwhile, The Commander Guy no longer gives a shit about Iraq. That's sooooo 2006. We've moved on; now the focus is on Iran and you'll notice a resolution validating administration "evidence" on Iranian misdeeds, and ratifying BushCo's position that Iran is an imminent "threat" to the US, passed the senate 97-0 the other day. It's Iraq 2.0; just do a global find and replace the "Q" with an "N," save with a new file name, print, copy, distribute, blather to the NYT about "we've got the evidence...," then go on Russert's show and wave a copy of the Sunday NYT around while saying, "but you don't have to believe me; it's in the Times." And the senate Democrats not only allowed this to happen; they enthusiastically supported it -- every single damn one of them except the guy who's too ill to make it for floor votes.

So which is it? Either people maintain party purity and only vote democratic, disgusting and insulting though that party's recent behavior has been, or they look at the corporate-approved candidates thrust upon them every four years by elites bent on protecting and preserving the status quo -- and therefore their revenue streams -- and decide they simply can't go on pretending these androids have their best interests at heart. That conclusion often leads to noses held while voting. Or it can lead to investigating third parties and trying to find an organized political group that shares at least some of their viewpoints.

So how can you, on the one hand, criticize people for voting their politics, their consciences and their hearts, while advocating in the above post that people just suck it up, get involved with one of the factions of The Business Party, and try to change the unchangeable? Or go independent, which seems to invite the Naders of the world back into the mix and unleashes the havoc third parties can create, which you seem to oppose in the prior post.

Seems to me the only way to build a functional counter to the insane GOP and the corporate-pandering Democrats is by getting a critical mass of voter registrations, leading to more feet on the street, leading to more awareness, leading to more campaign money (as hideous a goal as that is), leading to more air time, leading to more credibility, and hopefully leading back to step one and repeating indefinitely.

Absent a takeover of the Democratic party by real progressives -- the Kucinich types, not the frauds like Pelosi -- voting democratic is going to remain a source of deep frustration and unmet expectations for those on the left.

As to the GOP, may it implode into an omnivorous black hole and suck in all the bigotry and hatred and racism and religiosity and the rest of the crap those twisted bastards stand for, roll itself up to the brink of Mt. Saint Helens' crater, and let gravity take it all the way through the magma pool and directly to the molten iron core. Even then, garlic and wooden stakes may be necessary to prevent future infestations.

Anyway, just wondering about how your positions line up while seeming to conflict.



wp

[Old and In the Way]

160. First off, forget Florida/2000

look at NH/2000. Nader's 22,000 was clearly the difference between electing George Bush or Al Gore. Florida wouldn't have mattered. So we can say that 22,000 informed independent voters made a difference!


As far as Iran goes, I wasn't happy with this vote on Iran censure. It was more meaningless sense of the Senate stuff. We don't want Iran killing our troops. OK, I agree with that. Will this be misconstrued as an authorization to declare war? I doubt it, but, regardless, if the criminals in the WH want to start a war, what's to stop them? They'll do it without Congressional support.

By all means, vent your frustration by voting Independent. It's your constitutional right to vote for whomever you want. But the Republicans understand the value of running independents to the left of the Democratic Party and that's money well spent. With the Republican brand tanking, I fully expect them to make a serious effort at splitting the Democratic vote in 2008. You can pretend it ain't happening but that's the political reality.

[warren pease]

165. I'm a lowercase "i" independent...

Which just means I need to be convinced that I'm not wasting my time, effort, money and vote on some corporatist suck-up who calls him/herself a democrat but votes pro-war, pro-patriot act, pro-military commissions act, pro-Iraq supplemental funding authorizations, and right on down the rosy path to a special membership in the BushCo foreign policy coffee klatch.

Domestically, they're several centuries ahead of the GOP so I'm less disgusted by democratic positions on hot-button racist/bigot/homophobe/misogynist/jesusfreak kinds of issues, but that's as far as I'll go at this point. The refusal by "leadership" to consider impeachment of Bush and Cheney -- along with at least half a dozen others who so richly deserve a public flogging -- is absolutely unconscionable.

Even these dense bastards must realize that the only way to prevent war with Iran, get out of Iraq, and preserve what's left of the idea of a democratic republic is impeachment -- and yesterday would be better. They can have all the pajama parties they want, but what's required is orange jumpsuits for the perps in the white house. There is no reasoning with these vampires; there is only removal, conviction and imprisonment. And even then people will be taking three showers a day until the stench of BushCo is finally gone.

So I continue to seek options, as any reasonable person should do when the available choices are so completely unrepresentative of their values and priorities. One way to make third and fourth and fifty-third parties viable is to go to a proportional representation form of government, such as that used in much of Europe, where just about everybody -- no matter how weird -- has their views represented, even if only by one member.

Another way is public financing of campaigns. The current bribocracy excludes all candidates who don't pass corporate approval by denying them any access to campaign funding. Public financing would guarantee equal funds for all candidates who pass non-monetary benchmarks gaging public support -- and somebody else would have to figure out what those might be.

A third way is if enough people simply refused to accept the two-party nonsense and started voting (uppercase) in large numbers for Independents, Greens, New Agers or whatever the hell political entity represents them best. If nothing else, that would get the attention of the DNC, and possibly result in democrats occasionally honoring their pre-election commitments.

The GOP is hopelessly committed to wingnut extremism, and is therefore outside any discussion on progressive improvements in the viability of non-corporatist candidates.

Anyway, another long-winded essay comes to a close, when probably a few well-chosen words would have done the job. I need a good, merciless editor.


wp

[Old and In the Way]

168. Always enjoy reading your posts, wp....

I really don't disagree with having more choices in our political consumption. I know Democrat-Republican branding is viewed almost like Coke-Pepsi at the market. They both seem to buy up all the shelf space and limits our buying choices. But while I find there to be no discernable difference in drinking Coke-Pepsi (or Budweiser vs. Miller, if you prefer)...the present political choices available is significantly different. One product is inconsistant (good-to-bad policy), the other is just plain corrupt and evil. I'd love to have a fragmented multi-party system, but until we break up the current criminal syndicate masquerading as a political party, we split our political capital at grave risk to our well-being and that of the rest of the world. It sucks, but that's the reality we live in today. I do think if the Republican Party is decimated/discredited in 2008, I suspect the Democratic Party, if it doesn't heed the political pressure to reform and move to more progressive positions, it could well splinter into more voter focused party identities. I'd love to see debates focused on policy differences and budget allocations, rather than trying to stop a Party hellbent on world domination and the fundamental destructions of our political/social institutions and our civil rights.

[unpossibles]

152. I agree 100% - I hate not seeing people vote and pretending they are taking a stand

bullshit.

I understand not feeling represented. i do. Because I don't feel 100% represented. BUT, by not voting we create a system where the minority (The Republicans, who coincidentally try to discourage people from voting...) can rule.

By refusing to do our part as educated voters, we are lazy, and we allow someone to take over our system. Period. Not voting will not keep the person you don't feel represents you out of office, but it will make it easier for them to win.

Congratulations. People have the right to not vote, but by doing so are nothing more than loud-mouth fools, imo.

If I don't like my choices, I vote for the one I align with best, or I run myself.

[porphyrian]

31. Duh, indeed. Another helping of frustration? - n/t

[baby_mouse]

11. But I want to be accepted!

How can I know whether or not I'm an acceptable person unless I can find someone to agree with?

Sniff.

[LittleClarkie]

12. Who, exactly, are you calling sniveling little snots

and, if it's any of us, why would you think that we would then take any kind of advice from you?

[Cronopio]

158. That's the question people here should be asking.

A lot of people on this thread don't seem to understand the idea of a rhetorical comment or the use of the royal "you". Interesting given the fact that many posters on this forum have never shied away from loading their posts with rhetorical comments, and making statements for the royal "we" instead of just for themselves.

And if the OP *is* calling people on this forum sniveling little snots, then why are the members of the forum paying so much attention to their post? As you say, they have no useful advice to give in that case.

[Dogmudgeon]

14. I am Not a Democrat. I am not a Republican. I Am SPECIAL.

I hate hypocrisy, too.

Grow the fuck up & stop polishing your halo.

--p!

[Solon]

15. I give you +2 for being an Independent, and -1 for delivery...

Generally insulting partisans is just asking for trouble.

[blondeatlast]

23. Generally insulting any group is against DU rules, too. nt

[selfdestructive]

51. so insulting independents is against the rules?

well?

[Susang]

116. Insulting anyone in that fashion is against the rules

There are even rules against insulting and calling out trolls.

[luckyleftyme2]

16. ARE YOU REALLY

HOW DID YOU VOTE? HALF AND HALF? DID YOU SUPPORT BUSH? DO YOU SUPPORT UNFAIR TAX CUTS FOR THE TOP 5% OF THE COUNTRY. DO YOU SUPPORT BUSINESS TO RIP OFF THE HEALTH-CARE OF THE COUNTRY?
I'LL BET IF YOU MAKE LESS THAN $60,000 A YEAR YOU WILL VOTE MORE FOR DEMOCRATS THAN REPUBLICAN AND HAVE FOR YEARS.
BEEN THERE DONE THAT!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. He's Pan-Political

eom

[Hubert Flottz]

17. An Independent is someone who is too lazy or too goofy to...

study and learn enough about politics and the country to see the difference between the Democratic party and the republican party. Too unpatriotic to vote smart.

[selfdestructive]

32. people like you

are one of the many reasons i wont register a 'crat
we vote you moron

in my experience independents are usually more informed and less biased than any party walking zombie

[Marrah_G]

44. Thank you for your concern

[Hubert Flottz]

46. People like YOU are the reason I'm here to start with!

[selfdestructive]

47. im confused?

people like me are the reason youre here?
to pander to independent votes so they can see the error of their ways?
or
you blame them for how things are going in this country because they did or didnt vote?

please elaborate

[Hubert Flottz]

48. You are confused!

I agree...Bye now! []< ~~~~~~~~~~< >[]

[selfdestructive]

49. ahh very persuasive

toodle-loo

[Old and In the Way]

77. Your political intelligence obviously doesn't extend to ironic remarks.

Mr. Flotz is simply pointing out that the smart independent voters who bit on Ralph in 2000 ultimately created places like DU. And, just so you don't drag out the "it's SCOTUS's fault" card, please look at the smart Nader voters in NH who helped deliver 4 electoral votes and the election to George Bush in 2000. Had the majority of those smart independents voted Democrat in 2000, we'd have avoided 7 year horror show.

BTW, what do smart independents think of campaigns that are financed by Republicans, like Nader's, in 2004?

[selfdestructive]

78. i never voted for nader AND

id never vote for a liberterian...

its not the candidates.
its the system.

[Old and In the Way]

80. Excellent....let's blame "the system"!

That's the ticket! I get to slough responsibility, be an independent, and blame "the system".

Where do I sign up?

[selfdestructive]

81. yes i blame the system

i do not obsolve myself from personal repsonsibility to vote

p.s.
you dont really need to sign up...
wait 4 years or less and when you go to get your drivers license renewed and they ask what party you belong to...

say independent.

hope this helps

[Old and In the Way]

83. Been voting Democrat since 72.

I've been around the track long enough to know only Republicans and politically naive people promote "independent" parties in a 2 Party reality. Thanks for playing.

[selfdestructive]

84. being an independent does not mean i promote purchased candidates

you cant even get into a national election without a ticket

green party != independent
liberterian != independent
write in != independent

im well aware of the fact that i am a victim to a two party system...

[CreekDog]

92. And if we had a 3 party system all those problems would go away?

Now who is being naive?

[selfdestructive]

94. who said that?

not i...

i never said 3 parties would solve the problem

[CreekDog]

107. You rail against the 2 party system

As if the number of parties is the real problem.

[Old and In the Way]

97. When the duopoly becomes Democrat vs. Green, I'll be happy to become an independent.

Until then, I'll continue to vote the only sane option....Democrat.

[selfdestructive]

98. on a national level

i have never voted republican in my life
that does not mean that i have done so without any reservations...

[Old and In the Way]

109. This statement is contradictory.

"i have never voted republican in my life
that does not mean that i have done so without any reservations..."

But I am beginning to understand the thinking of independent voters more clearly now. :-)

[selfdestructive]

131. why is it contradictory?

as a voter i am posed with two rational choices.
i choose.
i am conflicted by those choices at times.

why is that contradictory?

[Old and In the Way]

144. Because your 2nd statement negates your 1st statement. nt

[selfdestructive]

145. so if i say that i voted republican on a local level

and had reservations about it, id be just as illogical?

[Old and In the Way]

161. Reading comprehension problem now.

I responded to your post with the subject line: "on a national level". On a local level, why would you have reservations? You've been extolling the virtues of voting independent.

Can you stop moving the goalposts so we can have a stationary discussion?

[Hubert Flottz]

86. I HAD to push the I button on that one!

BP is easing back into the black zone now....ahhhhhhh!

[CreekDog]

89. Study after study has shown that it is independents that are less informed

Better informed voters tend to have distinct ideologies and vote accordingly.

[selfdestructive]

93. half the population doesnt even vote

whose studies are these? any links? who financially backed them?

[NeedleCast]

100. You don't really need a study

to do the math here man.

The population of the US divided by the number of people who cast a vote in the last federal election gives you a pretty accurate count of who's voting.

[selfdestructive]

101. i was referring to the studies concerning independents

not on who votes or who doesnt.

registered or not id say at least half of those people not voting in america feel their beliefs are NOT represented.
granted, a concensus is the most you could ever hope for....
HALF of an entire population not exercising their right to vote?
i think that study pretty much represents that 50% of the population feels that no one running even comes close.

[DutchLiberal]

69. George? Is that you?

Too unpatriotic to vote smart.

[selfdestructive]

73. not one of you idiots

ever even bothered to know or ask how i have voted in the past
you are no better or worse than those you ridicule or espouse

for the record you got my votes since clinton
are you all going to embrace me now?

god damn you all are pretty f'n stupid

[ronnykmarshall]

105. I smell pizza cooking!

[Madspirit]

127. Calling us "stupid" is actually against the rules....n/t

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

141. What a wonderfully apropos username you chose. -nt

[selfdestructive]

143. im not trying to hide, especially over the net...

.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

148. Damn right you are about that. Pizza will arrive in 20-30 min. -nt

[RedCappedBandit]

72. BULL SHIT

[ecstatic]

82. Or the party closest to his/her ideals has let him/her down repeatedly nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. You Can Post

You can post at independentunderground.com

[Occulus]

106. amazingly enough, there actually is such a place

It's "down for maintenance" as of this writing.

[treestar]

21. Ultimately we are all a party of one

But reality is, in politics, you have to make common cause with people who disagree with you here and there.

The rethuglicans are dangerous to our democracy. There's a lot of disagreement on various issues I would put up with to at least have people in office who aren't interested in a police state.

Now is not the time to luxoriate in "My way or the highway."

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

24. Be Whatever You Want. Just Make Sure To Vote For The Dem Candidate Come Election Time.

You can call yourself whatever you want for all I care. All that matters is that come election time, you do the proper, intelligent, thoughtful, rational and helpful thing by voting for the Dem.

[yardwork]

27. That's nice, but this is Democratic Underground

The owner of this site - it is a private board - states that this is a site for people supporting Democratic candidates.

[selfdestructive]

38. little fyi for you

dem·o·crat·ic /ˌdɛməˈkrætɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. pertaining to or of the nature of democracy or a democracy.
2. pertaining to or characterized by the principle of political or social equality for all: democratic treatment.
3. advocating or upholding democracy.
4. (initial capital letter) Politics. a. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of the Democratic party.
b. of, pertaining to, or belonging to the Democratic-Republican party.

[yardwork]

108. The owner of this site gets to decide his own definition. fyi.

[selfdestructive]

111. as with all privatized institutions

that is not very democratic

[yardwork]

118. You're welcome to found your own site and make your own rules.

[BlackVelvet04]

28. So, what are you doing

at Democratic Underground?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

37. moralizing us clones

[Old and In the Way]

29. dEMOK, why aren't you defending your post against us opinion clones?

[blondeatlast]

34. He's too busy trying to start independentunderground.com. nt

[selfdestructive]

36. i could easily start a website like this

this is like grade-school computer programming.
what i DO NOT want to do is pander to people for money in order to keep said website alive

this site is great but thankfully there are more selfless people than myself who will make these sacrifices for the greater good of society

[blondeatlast]

43. Be my guest, then. You clearly don't care for the company on this one. nt

[selfdestructive]

45. why because you deem it as such?

that is a very ignorant statement

edit:
i already stated why id rather not take on the responsibility of a website like this..

[NeedleCast]

52. Oohhhh, I want to play too

this is like grade-school computer programming

So..what, couple years away for you still?

[selfdestructive]

54. scripting languages aren't even considered real programming languages

im not going to even respond further


keep up those arguments for why you want the independent votes though
im sure every independent here is rethinking why they are not registered as a democrat

[NeedleCast]

61. All the independents here?

im sure every independent here is rethinking why they are not registered as a democrat


Yeah, I'm sure the half dozen independents here are re-thinking their outlook right now.

I'm a registered Libertarian. However, I see the dire need to get the Republicans out of the office. Hell, I'll even go so far as to say that I think the two party system sucks.

What I don't do, however, is come to a website called Democratic underground and pick fights with democrats for being democrats. Because that would be stupid.

There's a lot of smart folk here. Lot of people I disagree with regularly too. I bet if you stuck around awhile, you'd learn something. I have.

However, I feel your tenure here will be short.

[selfdestructive]

64. so i should join your party then?

so its ok to be a libertarian and come here and disagree but as an independent my civil rights are somehow revoked?
do you realize how stupid that sounds?

what so you write names in when you vote, come here and pat yourself on the back because at least you stand for something?

my god. if my tenure gets eradicated and yours stays in tact...

[NeedleCast]

71. You're not paying attention, Kiddo

You don't have any rights here. This is a private message board with a private owner. Additionaly, I don't come here to disagree. I come here to read what other people have to say, and, occasionally participate. You're the one who came here attacking democrats for being democrats on a web site called Democratic Underground. If you'll read the board rules, things may become clearer for you. This web site is about getting democrats elected. Other discussion happens here as well, but the site's primary function is the election of democratic candidates. That's why I don't come here yelling about how everyone should be voting Libertarian (or independant, whatever that means).

what so you write names in when you vote, come here and pat yourself on the back because at least you stand for something?

Nope, beleive it or not, there are actual Libertarian candidates who run on libertarian tickets. Mostly at state and local levels, which is where I'm more involved anyway. However, chances are VERY good that I'll be voting for a Democratic candidate in the 2008 national elections and I'll definatly be voting for a democratic house rep at the state level over the asshat republican I've got right now.

[selfdestructive]

76. yeah im the ignorant one...

i read your post
i see your points...


p.s.
i have rights no matter where i travel as a U.S. citizen
you would know that if you ever made it outside your state lines
not all states have liberterians on the ballot lol

[NeedleCast]

90. Hehehe

I travel for work 270 days a year. I'd hazard to guess that I spend more time outside my state line in a year than you have in your life. I spent five years in the military and have traveled to several countries both as a soldier and as a civilian. Travel is really not a subject where you're going to want to take me on. Unless you are a Beoing 747, the chances that you've spent more time "outside state lines" is rather small.

And, No, you do not have rights in some places. On a private message board, your right to free speach exists only as long as the moderators choose to allow it.

You seem to be under the impression that becuase someone is registered as a Libertarian or a Democrat or a republican, that those candidates are the only ones they (can) vote for. I'm a registered Libertarian. Eighty to ninty percent of the votes I've cast over the last dozen or so years or so have been for Democrats.

[selfdestructive]

95. go post that on liberterianunderground.com

and see how long your tenure lasts...

[NeedleCast]

102. I find your argument

highly illogical.

[selfdestructive]

114. im not suprised

.

[Old and In the Way]

85. Reading comprehension isn't apparently one of selfdestructive's strong suits.

But he sure knows how to pick a name ID!

[selfdestructive]

91. sure it isnt

keep telling yourself that
i only tested higher amongst basically everyone around me in speed reading because i fail to comprehend

oh and yes it was a public school system filled with independent thinkers working cohesivly to educate their community's children to better enrich this country...

[Old and In the Way]

104. oh, my apologies then.

I just mention that because you seem to correct/rewrite every post you make on this thread.

How'd you test in English grammar, relative to everyone around you?

Big advocate of the public school system myself. But parents need to take responsibility in their child's education, too. Were your parents Republican?

[NeedleCast]

110. I doubt he has parents

Independents don't need them.

They arrive in eggs from outer space, you know?

[selfdestructive]

117. i add to my posts not edit them for grammar

.

[proud2BlibKansan]

33. And I hope you can be persuaded to vote Democratic in 2008

You don't need to join the party. It's your vote that counts.

[selfdestructive]

39. if republicans are turning against their own party

i highly doubt independents as a whole need much persuasion
just try not to alienate them before 08...

simply by staying away from:

wedge issues
candidate choices
cronyism

[LSK]

40. well it just so happens, AFTER WATCHING THOUSANDS OF HOURS ON CSPAN

That I agree with most DEMOCRATS.

Now what is your basis of forming your opinions?

[Marrah_G]

41. So we should all quit the Democratic Party- Thank you for your concern

[selfdestructive]

42. an independent will never tell you

how to think or feel or what to do with your life
those choices are yours and yours alone

now they may make a strong argument or valid points when it comes to why they think and feel the way they do
but telling you that you are wrong is not a tactic i find amongst many true independents

they usually influence through actions
not rhetoric

[Swamp Rat]

50. Watch out for the clones!

:hide:

[Ganja Ninja]

59. Ditto!

Oh wait, that's what all the "independents" that listen to Rush say.

[BlooInBloo]

53. DFTSOBD....

Different For The Sake Of Being Different.

[Virginia Dare]

55. Thanks for the two cent psych session...

grow the fuck up indeed.

[MrMickeysMom]

56. Geez, dEMOK, when it comes to it, everyone uses independent thought...

... and if there are a more complex group of party affiliated members, I would say it's the "love you and hate you" Democrats.

DU by any other name would be a draw to me, if the same people posted and the same streams of consciousness were shared...

(Chevy Chase... nah-nah-nah-nah-nah-nah-naaaa)

Have a donut! :donut:

[Norquist Nemesis]

57. Thanks for sharing!

:eyes:

[ourbluenation]

58. so because I'm a dem I'm an opinion clone? that's really obnoxious.

ugh

[selfdestructive]

60. im not trying to defend the OP

[ourbluenation]

63. my post was directed at the thread startin in-deependant not you

:shrug:

[selfdestructive]

67. i just wanted to clear up the fact i do not support the OP

:)

[Iris]

62. doubtful. The reason I generally don't like Republicans is because their values clash with mine.

But that's just me.

[selfdestructive]

66. statistically i agree

but that does not make me a democrat seeming as what seems to compose a democrat these days

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. I Vote For The Most Progressive Candidate That Has A Chance Of Winning

But my thoughts are my own...

[Vidar]

74. Good for you & shame on the "my party, right or wrong" bigots who

seem to populate this thread.

[mdmc]

75. Stop trying to make baby Jesus cry

Two party system uber alles!

[davsand]

79. I'm an independent that works to elect Dems.

How does THAT grab ya? I started working to elect Dems when Ronnie Raygun refused to mention AIDS while men I loved died, and when PATCO got busted up. I kept on working for Dems when I saw the stuff hit the fan in Iraq the FIRST time, and I am still working for Dems because I think the hope remains for this country to live up to the promise of equality made over 200 years ago.

I have stayed hard at work with the Democrats in spite of the times I have seen them make stupid mistakes, and in spite of the cronyism and narrow mindedness I have observed. I stay because the Dems on a national level are usually closer to my ideals than the GOP. THAT can change, and thus I call myself an independent.

I am not a robot nor am I mindless.


:kick:



Laura

[selfdestructive]

96. you can do whatever you want whenever you want

what a concept as an independent huh?

[davsand]

113. I bristle at the idea I'm somehow "mindless" in my politics.

I give money to the Dem party, I work Dem candidates, and I work for progressive causes both nationally and locally. I am also a person that makes the choice of who I support. It ain't "the party" I'm backing it is the ideals and the people behind those ideals.

Frankly, one of the things that scares hell out of me about this nation is the trend in politics that has made it so very personal and so very negative. I disagree with someone's ideas or ideals--not the person, usually. I honestly feel that most people start down the road of political activity with really good intentions and a vision of what they want this world to be. It is only AFTER those people get into the process that suddenly it becomes more about scoring points on the other guy than about positive movement to a solution.

We all make the choice of how our voice will be heard. We decide if we will be a positive or negative influence in the process. I'll tell you that it is a HORRIBLE strategic mistake to demonize your opposition because it makes YOU underestimate them.


Regards!


Laura

[selfdestructive]

115. i agree

never once did i attack anyone

[davsand]

125. That single thing puts you ahead of a lot of folks currently in politics.

I'm serious. I see it all the time both nationally and locally--that slash and burn sort of campaign. Amazes hell out of me that anyone bothers to vote in some of these races. We wonder why turnout is low at the polls--but we have campaigns (on both sides) that are just horribly negative.


Regards!



Laura

[Blue-Jay]

129. Actually you have attacked people throughout this thread.

Don't be a liar.

[selfdestructive]

130. i claimed people to be idiots when

they never bothered to know or understand what my voting history is.
sorry but if i voted for "your" candidate for 20 years and im being attacked for it i tend to view those attacking me as idiots.

other then that i have "attacked" no one.

[Blue-Jay]

132. Whatever, junior.

That's like saying "Other than crack, I'm completely drug-free."

[selfdestructive]

133. cool i wont vote in 08 then

cause people like you give me good reason not to
and the candidates you pick are a joke

barring maybe edwards/gore

oh AND Dean!
who voted AGAINST the war as well as Gore
which you all sit on this site crowing about DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY

some of you democrats are just as bad as republicans

[Blue-Jay]

134. You're ridiculous.

"People like me" are somehow giving you a reason to not vote? How's that?

What would it take to give you a good reason to stop breathing as well?

Wait. I just saw your edit: Are you saying that Dean and Gore voted against the war? That's a riot. :rofl:

They certainly spoke out again the war, but neither of them were in a position to vote for or against anything. And to think that you had the nerve to call anyone else an "idiot"...

[selfdestructive]

135. thank you for proving my point

.

[Blue-Jay]

137. You have a point?

Because I've yet to see you make a statement that wasn't a logical fallacy.

[Old and In the Way]

146. Careful Blue-Jay

You are up against a person who scored higher in reading comprehension that everybody around him. He's obviously blowing us away with his cutting edge insights on politics here. Better bring your "A" game if you want to have a debate with selfdestructive...

:rofl:

[selfdestructive]

147. good luck in 08

lol

[Old and In the Way]

157. Same to you....I assume you have as much to lose in this as we do.

Or is it more important that people feed your ego here?

[Old and In the Way]

124. Great post!

I think many of us concur with your POV. Assuming Democrats benefit from a tsunami that will roll over the Republican Party in 2008, rendering them politically impotent for the next 20 years or so, I have no doubts that many here will immediately start driving a progressive agenda hard in the Democratic Party. I suspect that many centrist Democrats really don't want to see Republicans lose too much ground because that will put the focus on their positions. If the Democrats don't respond, they will spawn their own opposition...from the left. But that's a battle that would be good for this country.

[LWolf]

99. I'm an independent-minded Democrat.

There are so many variations on political orientation, aren't there?

I am an independent-minded person. I've always made up my own mind, and been somewhat repelled by (and unwelcome in) organized groups. I don't do groupthink very well.

I am happy to support Democrats when they are doing the work I want to see done. I know better than to give any loyalty oaths to any political group. Political support for any group, or any individual, is earned, not owed.

I know this is an unpopular stand among those who value group identity above issues, and among those who can't see the difference between the two.

That's ok. I respect their need for the group, and their perspective. I just want my need to put issues and principles above group identity to be respected in turn.

[BlooInBloo]

103. That's what Lieberman calls himself! Cool!

[selfdestructive]

112. religion and politics should NEVER cross

same with money and politics

[NeedleCast]

If Money and Politics never crossed

only the ultra-wealthy would be able to run for office at the federal level.

That would be bad, right?

[selfdestructive]

139. only the ultra wealthy???

what do you see happening today exactly?
im sorry but i laughed

[NeedleCast]

154. Yes, only the ultra-wealthy

You understand that theres a vast difference between someone who has a million dollars and a Bill Gates or a Bloomberg, right?

So, care to elaborate on your position that money and politcs should never cross? How would a candidate fund a campaign?

[LWolf]

119. I'm glad you agree with me, lol.

There are so many variations on political orientation, aren't there?

That's the best thing about independence; no one independent-minded person has to have the same opinions as another.

Lieberman is independent in the sense that he is willing to take a stand whether the Democratic Party agrees with him or not. I'm fine with that. The fact that he's "standing" in a slime pit is beside the point.

Of course, non-independent minded democrats are usually willing to take a stand, too. The stands I see most frequently these days are:

"Our party, love it or leave it," and

"As long as the Democratic Party, or an elected Democrat says it or does it, we can find a rationalization," and, my favorite:

"We're Democrats. We're keeping our powder dry until the political rapture."

That said, I do appreciate the stands the party has taken on civil liberties in the past, which is why I am an independent Democrat, not just an Independent.

:hi:

[mdmc]

170. I just posted a third party thread

:kick:

[Justpat]

120. I hate sniveling little snots with a superiority complex. n/t

[LanternWaste]

121. On the other hand, I'm a Democrat...

On the other hand, I'm a Democrat because it more fully encompass my own political ideals than does any other party.

But hey, if people feel more self-validation by calling me a sniveling little snot, more power to 'em! And if that engenders me the label of 'opinion clone', I'll wear it happily-- might even get a t-shirt and matching ball cap with that same neo-trendy bit of bumper-sticker wisdom emblazoned on it in big, glittery letters.

I'm pretty well satisfied with my current friends, though (thanks very much for inquiring) as they don't attempt advance their own opinions and esteem by tearing down those of other people

[Javaman]

122. Another hit and run poster, stating how much cooler they are than us.

:rofl:

[Old and In the Way]

126. Perhaps deMOK had a few last night.

I know when I've posted under the influence, I was quite righteous and clear in my own mind on the point(s) I wanted to make...only to read, in horror, what I actually wrote the next day. ;-)

[Cameron27]

123. Self-congratulation proclamation eh,

I don't give a shit.

[Madspirit]

128. HIt and Run and probably hide like a bitty baby...n/t

[WI_DEM]

136. Nice hit and run thread. He calls us "sniveling little snots" who need to "grow the fuck up"

and then never replies again.

[Bluebear]

149. Pretty disgusting, ain't that? nt

[Cronopio]

155. Where in the post did the OP call *you* a "sniveling little snot"?

If you recognize yourself in the OP's general description of a sniveling little snot, that says something about you, not the poster.

Why should they reply, when your reply pretty much says it all?

A question for you to ask yourself: Why do you take someone's general statements of principle so personally?

[book_worm]

167. apparently a lot of people here did and reading the OP comments

myself it seems to as well. Also, ask yourself why he hits and runs and doesn't respond to any of the criticism. If it wasn't an indictment of much of DU--where is he?

[illinoisprogressive]

138. Demok, you don't know what people here are thinking or feeling to make judgement

I do not need to belong. I am actually one who does as I please and I happen to be a democrat because it's what I want. I like what they stand for. If I am indie then it would be a waste as i find I end up voting dem anyway.
It is my choice.
Until you know what the person is like you cannot make a group judgement. that is just immature.

[Bluebear]

150. "Independents" = more often, people who don't pay attention until day of election

Then vote on who is more telegenic. Ideologically ambivalent, needy ("please campaign for my vote!") fence-sitters. There.


('Sniveling little snots' indeed.)

[selfdestructive]

151. now theres a political campaign i can get behind

at the least the stupid independents will pick up on this and make the appropriate choice.

[Cronopio]

153. Un - mutual, un - mutual, un - mutual, un - mutual ...

Quick thread review:

1. OP states that he hates hypocrisy. (Check. So do I.)

2. OP states that he hates snivelers who join just for the sake of joining. (Check - same here. People who are joiners for the sake of being joiners are the first to betray the group when circumstances don't go the group's way, or when the fight gets serious. Unfortunately, entire groups can be populated with these snivelers.)

3. OP promotes the idea of finding a group you are already solid with by stating your own principles and seeing who agrees and disagrees with you. (Sounds like a winning tactic to me. Numbers can pressure one to betray their own principles if the pressure of numbers leads them into the wrong group. The right group will support your own best principles without pressuring you to compromise them.)

4. OP gets derided as a rebel without a clue or a touchy, angst-ridden adolescent. (When someone gets fingers pointed at them for stating their principles and not pointing fingers at other individuals, that person's argument only gains credibility in my book, and the attackers become the touchy, angst-ridden adolescents.)

Any group worthy of my membership won't be paranoid or elitist about independent thinkers who are strong enough to attach conditions on their membership. In fact, they will expect and respect it. If that pisses off a bunch of opinion clones, good for me.

[joeunderdog]

156. Love the Posters who make provocative, condescending accusations

then don't have the spine to back it up and answer some of the replies. If you want to call people out for being weak, you better be prepared to back it up. Looks like you're not.

Heeeellllllllloooooo! Where are ya, Demok?

[nolabels]

162. It's just a little hit and run

Some of the points are valid in that often people depend on others to do things that they should do themselves. As a person that likes to try be self sufficient as possible i have found that being self sufficient is not always a best way to operate either. Frustration gets to everybody and the original posters seems more like a call from a place of hurt that he doesn't know how to deal with (if them are really the OP's true feelings) We all may be born and die alone but no one has ever spent their entire life by themselves.

Yea society may be screwed up in many ways but it is the thing that produced each of us in our own unique ways and that is pretty amazing if you think about it :shrug:

[HughMoran]

166. Well, seeing as this was intended to get people going

I'd say the O/P was fairly successful :D

[mmonk]

169. I'm a democrat but no one calls me

an opinion clone for sure. I've been called a Green, extremist, and a purist before so I guess I'm considered independent minded, but I'm a democrat with no particular plans to leave.