Is DU that different from Democratic America - or is Dem America being lied to (or lied about)?

[RiverStone]

This is a cultural question --- in no way do I ask this question seeking to start an anti-Hillary thread. Plenty of those can be found in the archive's.

I wonder, do DU's politics which time and time again place HRC in the #5,6,or 7 spot in many unscientific straw polls here reflect the culture of the blogosphere at large, or just a handful of progressive liberal blogs (like KOS, Raw Story, DU)?

Is the MSM is wagging the dog by the tail - bullshitting the American people into believing what the corporations want them to believe, or is DU and a select pool of other blogs not representative of mainstream Dem views on our choice for President? Combining some of the other kindred blogs with ours may represent what...3,4,5 hundred thousand folks?

How is it the discrepancy between who we want for President on DU, or more specifically who we DON'T WANT for President, so damn different from every MSM poll after poll after poll...

Are we DU'ers that different, or is this some vast corporate/media cover-up? :shrug:


On edit: tried to simplify the question

[mmonk]

1. Time will answer that.

I honestly have no idea these days. The media is so blatantly dishonest and of poor quality.

[Louie the XIV]

2. "Mainstream" Democrats are more pragmatic and tend not to be driven by only 1 issue(Iraq)

HTH

[Richard Steele]

9. Nice talking points, Louie. Practically Lieberman-esque. nm

[mmonk]

12. I admit I'm not "mainstream" today.

I'm a traditional democrat. Mainstream today is too unrecognizable.

[Captain Angry]

3. I believe it's that the people online pick based on their true wants.

There is no need to compromise any belief or value when there is a candidate running that meets your needs.

In the major media, the major players have been talking to the media for years and have access. The lesser known candidates, the ones respected for doing the job, generally don't have that access.

So the media can only talk up the people they can talk to.

But that's just my take.

[Richardo]

4. DU is in no way representative of Democrats at large

And the closer we get to an election, the more rationality will disappear.

[RiverStone]

5. Then if that's true...

Who then do you think is closer to representing what a Democrat is Richardo?

Are they (Dem's at large) leaving us or are we leaving them? It gets back to how do we define what a Democrat is in July of 2007...

:think:

[countmyvote4real]

6. I don't know and I don't think it matters.

You ultimately should believe in the candidate of your choice. You are certainly free to go to as many sites as you want to gather information. I must recommend www.downwithtyranny.blogspot.com

Just pick the right choice for you and me and them and those people you don't come in direct contact with, but still manage to effect your bottom line. This is not a popularity contest. It should be about our Constitution. Read it. Think on it. Then decide.

[RiverStone]

8. It matters most to people who don't question authority

Maybe here it does not matter as much, but John Q Public tends to be way to gullible; I wish we could influence the telling of the truth to a greater degree. Alas, most of the time the folks that most need to hear what we say --- would never frequent (or even know about) DU.

Thanks for the link -

Here is one I frequent:

http://cpc.lee.house.gov/index.cfm?SectionID=1&ParentID=0&SectionTypeID=1&SectionTree=1

(click on Caucus Members to see who belongs)

[countmyvote4real]

11. Thanks for your link as well.

[silverojo]

7. People on DU tend to swing farther left than the average Dem

Even I, a moderate, lean farther to the left than most of the Dems I encounter. But here, I've been accused of being a Freeper on more than one occasion. DU is *very* left-leaning compared to John Q. Public, D-USA.

[countmyvote4real]

13. How much pinko leftist does one have to be to support Our Constitution?

It must have been a crazy conservative document after all.

[EST]

14. I think it might go some deeper than that.

There is a pretty broad spectrum of views here, ranging from aggressive foreign policy and pull yourself up by your bootstraps types-whom you would assume would be more comfortable with an "r" label until you discover them risking life and limb to rescue a box turtle from a busy highway-to very liberal, live in a cave and specialize in belly button lint characters.

One element is format. The fast pace and passion of the posters combine to keep it volatile and the fact that if you don't show up with a thick skin or develop one right away, you wind up being a lurker or don't stick around long.

Most of the people who hang out here are above average intelligence and have grasped the truth about the condition of the world and the country a lot sooner than the rest of the great unwashed. Because the truth appears so obvious to us and we can spot a lie even before the dirty political bastard has finished saying it, we tend to be a little impatient with foot draggers and those who are distorting other's views of reality for sinister purposes.

So we have -
Tough
Smart
Aggressive
Fast and quick
Really, really pissed off
Not too difficult to imagine why DU has a different flavor and character.

Or I could be full of shit.

[hfojvt]

10. we were not mainstream in 2004 primaries

DU was almost evenly split between Dean and Clark. Neither Kerry nor Edwards were very popular here. Then again, in most DU polls, the largest answer is 'not voting'.

Of course, that's not the same DU.

[qdemn7]

15. Yes it's that different.

When I see many people with post counts well over 5,000 posts, that is one hell of a lot of time to spent on just one discussion board. So I would say the people that have very high post counts are people who are deeply committed in a political sense. They are "activists" who eat, sleep and breath politics. Nothing wrong with that, just the way some people are. And ANY group of activists are going to comprise a group of people much further from the center.

And personally, and this part may get me into trouble, I think many of these activists here are people under the age of 21 who are full of piss and vinegar and discovering moral outrage at every turn. And that, to a certain extent, is a narcotic.

As someone who is 50 years of age and lived through 'Nam and THOSE protests, the Civil Rights Movement, the Assassinations, the various Riots, Watergate...the outrage is quite familiar.

The best advice I can give is all things pass.