Anyone here at Du who either votes for anyone other than a Dem or not at all....

[Roxy66]

explain to me why you are here at DU. If you are a true Dem...(This is Democratic Underground...right?)...than you will do anything to prevent another Republican from running this Country. PERIOD!!! If I am off base... than I do not belong here.

Flame away.....

I added this in a response down the thread, but I feel like I need to clarify my thoughts here.

"I am not advocating "banning" anyone...

Just wondering why people would spend their time trashing all Dems in Congress and the Dem Presidential candidates, advocate NOT voting at all, and declare they have given up....HERE at DU. I am all for freedom of expression, but thread after thread of negative thoughts and ideas just feed into the the idea of if you think it enough it will happen."

[VLC]

1. are you a new owner of DU?

And what about Democratic candidates who don't support progressive ideals, like all but 2 of them who don't support gay marriage, aka equal rights under the law? How unDemocratic and unprogressive do they have to be before we can stop supporting those ideas?

[BlooInBloo]

2. I agree, except for the "should not be here" part. But they are unhelpful in the extreme.

[Roxy66]

56. Your right... I changed it.

[BlooInBloo]

59. Coolio.

[eyesroll]

3. I voted for a Republican for county sheriff last year; should I leave?

:shrug:

[Roxy66]

7. I stated "Running this Country"...not County Sheriff

[Deep13]

12. So did I. I guess I'm going too.

He does a good job. The R. judge I voted for also does a good job. Neither candidate had an opponent.

I've never voted for a R. Federal official or state official.

[eyesroll]

This was my first R vote ever -- and he had a "Democratic" incumbent opponent.

I voted for the R because he was, at least, genuine. He came to our Drinking Liberally group to campaign and explain why, although he was a Republican, he'd do a better job against the incumbent.

The incumbent registered as a Democrat because he knew he couldn't win otherwise. He's a darling of talk radio, has written for conservative magazines, and actually rails against the Democrats at every opportunity. (Think Lieberman, only *admitting* he's not a Democrat except on the ballot.) The county Democratic Party actually supported his primary opponent (and the party can only get involved in primaries in narrow circumstances like this one) and did not endorse at all in the general.

[Justitia]

55. Just curious - if they didn't have an opponent, why did you vote for them? -eom

[Deep13]

74. Granted, it was a gesture with no practical consequences.

I just knew from personal experience that each official did a conscientious and professional job. I wanted to endorse that in a small way.

When I lived in Cleveland I voted for a few R. judges because I knew them. They had been appointed by the governor to fill vacancies and were, therefore, nominally Rs. I knew that they were knowledgeable and impartial and that their D. opponents had very little experience and in one case very little grey matter.

Of course the new governor is a D. We donated $5000 to his campaign so that he can fill judicial vacancies.

[Justitia]

76. I only ask because there are a few consequences in local races...

In local races, when the Dem orgs look for someone to run, we scrutinize past election results.

If a local race has an unopposed (R) who gets affirmative votes from a significant percentage of the electorate, we might not choose to run a race there - it shows strong (R) leanings, not worth the spending the $$$.

Versus:

an unopposed (R) not getting much percentage affirmative, the electorate might be looking for an alternative, maybe an opening.

Our favorite is when we have an (R) who past election results show a significant margin of others (Libertarians, Constitution, Assorted whoevers), but no Dem - that shows a protest vote and an electorate that is voting against the (R) party - an opening!

So, just keep in mind that whenever you vote, there are political advocacy groups that are scrutinizing your elections when they are determining whether to run new races /candidates.

Because of that, I never pull a lever for a republican and I always vote against them if they have an opponent (preferably a Dem, of course). Libertarians are very popular when there is no Dem running - ha, ha.

If a repub is unopposed, I skip casting a ballot for that race.

I also never vote straight ticket for this reason - I individually select each Dem, then I vote the others accordingly.

Something to think about...

[truebrit71]

13. YES!!! GET OUT!!! TRAITOR!!!

How dare you excercise your rights to vote for ANYONE OTHER THAN A DEMOCRAT???!!!

:sarcasm:


Sorry, but this 'Democrat or Death' shit is beyond stupid....What is this DemocraticRepublic.com?

People are going to vote how they choose, they will support whomever they choose, and they will attack whomever they choose...No-one is advocating to vote for ANY of the GOP candidates...at least none of the posts I have seen..so it seems to me there are two choices: join the circular firing squad or contribute something positive to the boards...

[Hydra]

4. Blah blah blah

I want real Dems- if those are on a ballot, I'll vote for them. I don't think that's a lot to ask.

[Javaman]

92. It's tough sometimes to tell the difference between those here on DU

and those on the freep sight.

blind obedience is a very scary thing.

[Roxy66]

95. Not blind obedience....just know not voting will lead to another 4 years

[Kelly Rupert]

5. That is expected behavior according to the rules.

Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office.

[Roxy66]

14. I am trying to get people to follow the true spirit of this wonderful site

"support Democratic candidates for political office"

[Reciprocity]

68. But not everyone who is a member, is here for that reason.

That's why we have tombstones.

[davekriss]

25. "Democrats and other progressives"

That "other progressives" implies to me that we are free to support candidates other than Democrats is the other candidate is progressive.

[Kelly Rupert]

26. Kind of hard to misinterpret

" and to support Democratic candidates for political office."

[davekriss]

32. Someone mentions Bernie Saunders downstream

Is it your opinion/understanding that someone should be booted from this site for supporting Bernie over a possible Democratic centrist candidate?

[Roxy66]

34. Bernie Sanders is not running for President...not relevant

[davekriss]

48. OK

Note my post downstream. Even though I am way left politically than most on this site, I have been a straight party-line voter since I began to vote (for Carter in 1976, btw). We live in a duopoly. I believed, for example, that a vote for Nader in 2000 was in effect a vote for Bush, and we all see what the consequences of that squandered vote.

The reason I am a straight party-line voter is that our representatives govern by coalition. The last thing I want to do is weaken our coalition. Wonderful if, after the primaries, I get to vote for Democratic progressive Presidential, Senate, and House candidates, but absent that option the centrist Democrat gets my vote every time -- because it strengthens the left-center coalition. Democrats will never vote lock-stepped like Republicans because, unlike them, we are truly the anti-authoritarian big tent (even includes as few authoritarians amongst us). My candidates might not vote yes on all items on my agenda (and not all my items will make the agenda), but the probability is the left-center coalition that my centrist Democrat is part of is more likely to represent my interests than the other side. Thus Democrats UNFAILINGLY get my vote.

Having said that, if Bernie was running for Senator in my state, I'd vote for him over a centrist Democrat, but Bernie/Vermont is an exception, not the rule.

My preferred candidate in the primaries is Dennis Kucinich. There is nothing wrong with any of us arguing his merits over the other candidates, even when that paints other candidates (those more likely to win) in a negative light. But when the primaries are done, I will rally around the Democratic candidate even if that candidate is the personification of a Republicrat.

We're still a two party system. Maybe it is, now, the Republicrats vs. Republicans, but I still value Republicrats for their perhaps marginal diffrence over the fascists that reign in the Republican Party. (Domestically, I think the difference between the two parties is huge -- on foriegn policy, I think the difference is slight at best.)

[davekriss]

52. "running this country"

I did not understand your post to be speaking of just the office of the President. IMO, Congress too is "running this country", but now I understand your point.

Given your limited scope -- of course. There is a role for third party candidates. Given that successful third parties split the vote on their side and both the third party and major party lose, the major party is forced to move a bit in the direction of the third party. However, given the current stakes, it would be irresponsible for a leftward third party candidate to run (ala Nader), and even worse for any of us on DU to vote for one. I felt that way before November 2000, I feel that way now.

[Kelly Rupert]

36. I'm not in favor of booting people for being stupid. nt

[davekriss]

43. So it's your opinion that voting for Bernie is stupid?

Hmmm. You must be one of those centrist "progressives" here at DU.

[Kelly Rupert]

44. In the general election? Of course.

I'm kind of surprised there's anyone who didn't learn from 2000.

In the primaries? Go for it; show some support.

[NYC Liberal]

79. Bernie Sanders is a unique case:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont_United_States_Senate_election%2C_2006#Independents_and_minor_parties

Since Sanders is allied with the Democrats in the House of Representatives, Democratic leadership successfully dissuaded any serious challengers from their party. Sanders was endorsed by prominent Democrats such as DNC Chairman and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. On February 13, 2005 Sanders received an endorsement from Democracy for America, the political action committee that was founded by Dean after he withdrew from the 2004 Presidential race.

The Democrats didn't run a challenger to Bernie and actively endorsed/supported him.

[puebloknot]

94. Consider this: We loyal Dems want to support Democratic candidates ...

... who are generally supportive of progressive ideals, not to include enabling an illegal war and the destruction of our civil rights by caving at every turn.

Things are not black and white.

[stranger81]

100. Note that the forum rules DO NOT read "Democratic Underground

is an online community for Democrats. Members are expected to support Democratic candidates for political office."

Folks like to ignore the fact that the rules explicitly state that DU is also an online community for "other progressives" as well, and that "members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals."

When the Democratic candidates part way from progressive ideals, I stand behind my ideals and not the candidate. Sounds like most folks on this board do the opposite. But at least acknowledge that both choices are within the letter and spirit of the DU rules -- it's not just your way or the highway.

** edited to fix typo **

[mikelgb]

6. if you are going to do "anything" to prevent it...

why chase everyone off?

honey/vinegar you know

[EFerrari]

8. What have you done with Skinner?!

:rofl:

[riqster]

9. Constructive or Destructive, that is the question. nt

[mikelgb]

10. LockStep Underground?

why doesn't DU just officially endorse Hillary now?

[Roxy66]

16. I do not support Hillary...but all these threads about NOT Voting..scares the shit out of me

[mikelgb]

18. scares me too, because day by day I get closer to that feeling of...

utter hopelessness

[Lost4words]

19. well I was scared on 12/12/2000 and no dem has stood up yet!

the invertebrate party.

[againes654]

21. I think some of the unconditional support for Hillary

scares the shit out of some of us. I can't in good concience vote for her. My hope is that someone other than her will get the nomination. I won't vote for Hillary in the GE IF she wins the nomination, if I need to leave DU, let me know. But as others have said the primaries are still a ways off, so I am not jumping ship yet.

[Rainbowreflect]

66. I will most likely write in Kucinich in the GE.

Of course my state will go red no matter how I vote. But I just cannot vote for anyone who supports or supported this or the next war.

[againes654]

78. Agreed on both accounts

My state, Texas, always goes red, so I don't hold much hope.

[stranger81]

102. if it scares you, why not try to engage those people

instead of telling them to take their toys and find another playground? Unless what you're really aiming for is your own echo chamber . . . .

[Raffi Ella]

33. No.

DemocraticUnderground.com.

The Democratic Party in all its facets and forms,including Gravel including Hillary etc.Two Party system.

WE are the DEMOCRATIC Undeground.Simple really.:shrug:

[bryant69]

11. I think that's a valid position - except the bit where you condemn others

The truth is it should be easy enough to see why someone would be tempted to vote for Kucinch (for example) should he go third party. And it's easy enough to understand why someone might not be able to, in good conscious, vote for Hillary Clinton.

That said, maybe we are creating problems before they exist; we don't know yet who will get the nomination, and perhaps over the next 3 months we will find out more about our potential candidates.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[cali]

15. I vote for Bernie Sanders every time

I voted for Jim Jeffords too. I vote for Progressives in local elections. Please tell me how I'm not a true dem.

[Bluerthanblue]

83. yeah, isn't Bernie

on the socialist party?

i really admire him regardless- wish we had someone like him here in nh

[TheUniverse]

17. I'll vote for whoever the nominee is probably...

But that doesn't mean I have to enjoy it. And about people who say they wont vote for hillary in the general, she hasn't won the primary yet, so that is a scenario that may or may not happen. No reason to ban someone on a "what if." Infact, I know Im in the minority, but no reason to ban someone period.

[Roxy66]

20. I am not advocating "banning"anyone...

Just wondering why people would spend their time trashing all Dems in Congress and the Dem Presidential candidates, advocate NOT voting at all, and declare they have given up....HERE at DU. I am all for freedom of expression, but thread after thread of negative thoughts and ideas just feed into the the idea of if you think it enough it will happen.

[porphyrian]

22. You don't get to say who should or shouldn't be here at DU. - n/t

[bellasgrams]

31. I voted for Gerald Ford

At that time I felt Ford had more experience at the job than a 'peanut farmer'.
I do like and admire Carter now, but I always fwlt Ford was in the wrong party.

[davekriss]

23. I am far left of most here...

My political compass score is about -9.5/-9.5. But I also recognize I live in a duopoly. I am extremely disappointed with the Democratic party but I am wholly revulsed by Republicans. I am, have been, and will always be a straight line Democratic voter even if it means voting for a near-fascist over a full-fledged fascist. I was ABB in 2000 and 2004 and will be anybody-but-a-Republican in 2008, 2012, 2016, on ad infinitum (well, at least until I'm dead and buried).

[OneBlueSky]

24. in your opinion . . . some may differ . . . n/t

.

[Raffi Ella]

27. Agreed.

DemocraticUnderground.com


:bluebox:

[Bitwit1234]

28. With what this republican administration has done

in my opinion, anybody that does not vote for a democrat, or does not vote because they do not like the candidate, is a turncoat. A traitor. And I do believe that they have to have a mental problem if they can not see the havoc bush has caused and want to correct. If we have four to eight more years of republican rule, we will have absolutely no social programs left. We will have continuous war and the middle class will disappear.

[TankLV]

29. you're off base - there's many valid reasons for some to do as you fear...

[lateo]

30. Uh...

When one has to give up various things they believe in and hold their nose to vote for a candidate it isn't good for them. Free-thinking, progressive people want real change in Washington not just a change in what party is in the White House. "Party loyalty" is what they are counting on to screw us over and over and over again. I don't know about you but I am sick and tired of it.

[lligrd]

35. I Dislike Bullies And Threats

even from Democrats. BTW I am planning to vote for a Democrat.

[never_get_over_it]

37. So I've been a Dem and a feminist for over 40 years

when as a little girl my mother ran for local office. My mother was separated from my father at the time and some repunk came to our home and said to her if you can't keep you husband how do you expect to hold public office. Now back in that time, woman didn't run for office all that much, and I really didn't understand it all but looking back I know that was the birth of my feminism AND my being a Dem. I have a BA in political science, I served as the head of the state PAC of an environmental organization for several years - been involved with the endorsement of MANY MANY MANY candidates for that organization 99.9% who were Dems, I helped get the first female Representative elected in VA - I have worked in countless campaigns - precinct captain in Northern VA for 10 years which meant EVERY YEAR (VA has an election EVERY YEAR) working election day from 5:00 AM to around 9:00 PM - given money - talked up Dems ALL MY EFFING LIFE

BUT

I, personally think Hillary Clinton SUCKS - I believe she stands for NOTHING but ELECTION. She voted for IWR and will not admit it was a mistake, she JUST two days ago voted for this ridiculous Iran LIEberman resolution, proving she has learned NOTHING, her health care plan is a BIG EFFING corporate give away - I believe she is bought and paid for and I could name a kazillion other things I don't like about her.

The fact that Hillary might or is most likely to get the nomination is a HUGE ISSUE in my life - because I have waited my WHOLE EFFING LIFE for a woman president - and this is what I get Jesus - and any one of the repunk candidates make me want to PUKE - BUT I still may not vote for Hillary because I'm tired of holding my nose and voting for the lesser of two evils

I completely understand your sentiments - BUT I find your judgemental "should not be here at DU" and "if you are a true Dem" bull shit - I AM A TRUE DEMOCRAT and have been for a LONG TIME and by the way I've been at DU since almost the beginning - so if you think I shouldn't be here or I'm not a true Dem because I HATE HILLARY CLINTON then bite me please....

[Roxy66]

42. You have my highest respect.....thanks for all you have done.

But just wondering if you are willing to risk another 4 years of this?

[never_get_over_it]

96. No

I don't want another 4 minutes of this - but for me the sad truth is - EXCEPT for the Supreme Court I really don't think there will be that big of a difference - ESPECIALLY when it comes to Iraq and God help us now maybe Iran - and that is the REAL problem - she is just TOO corporate for me - but I will most certainly grant you she is FAR better than any of the repunks - in the end it is far more likely that I will vote for her than not in the general - but voting for someone I truly don't like, don't trust and has broken my heart (because I use to like her - WANT to like her etc etc) is very bad for my soul....

Maybe I'll (we'll) get lucky and she won't get the nomination.....but this conflict has really turned out to be a HUGE HUGE issue in my life - I'm upset about it a great deal of the time - my fear is that after suffering EIGHT UNGODLY EFFED UP YEARS of this admin - thing aren't going to get any better - ALSO I have three young nephews and in five years the oldest will be military age and I SWEAR TO GOD he and his brothers will go in the military while insane war mongering people are in office OVER MY DEAD BODY.....

[Richard Steele]

38. I have a knee-jerk dislike of self-appointed authoritarians. Even "well-meaning" ones.

If you see something that you think "doesn't belong here at DU",
use the ALERT button. That's why it's there.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

39. What about if I vote..

for a Dem that is not the party candidate? I may be writing in my Democratic choice. :shrug:

[HughBeaumont]

40. IBTL.

Threats aren't allowed here. I'm allowed on this board as much as anyone.

My vote is MY vote. If Dumberica has to wait decades before it LEARNS, Goddamnit, NOT to vote against it's own interests and put corporation-favoring warmongers in office YEAR after YEAR, SO BE IT!

It all depends on the candidate. Principle HAS to matter. I will NOT vote for "who sucks less".

I voted for Kerry and Gore, BTW.

[TheWraith]

41. Kicked and recommended.

Look, I can understand being unhappy with the state of things as much as anyone, but holding one's breath and having a tantrum doesn't help anything.

[Roxy66]

45. This is telling.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1930181&mesg_id=1930181

[Raffi Ella]

46. isn't it.

I take posters at face value but I also keep in mind that anyone is allowed to join and post at D.U.

The thread you linked to reassures me that I am indeed in the right place.

:bluebox:

[Roxy66]

50. It does help reassure that DU is still the place for me.

I have been getting worried that DU has been taken over by defeatists and negative vibes. Now is the time to come together and make this happen...not, as some have posted....GIVE UP.

[Raffi Ella]

72. .

I've been feeling overwhelmed and like just not coming to D.U. after reading the Ahmadinajad lovefest,the Hillary(Dem)Bashers etc etc etc!

Posts like yours and Wills encourage and inspire me to NOT give up,to not take D.U off my list and to express my views,even if just to encourage and reassure others who may be feeling as I do but reluctant to express opposing opinions to do so despite the backlash and damnation(from people at D.U.!!).

This IS the Democratic Underground.It helps to remind myself of that lately.

[Zandor]

47. K & R n/t

[fenriswolf]

49. since both parties front runners have been bought

and paid for i am now a registered independant, because i do no think of the government as a commodity to be bought and sold i will not give my vote to someone who will hold the posistion thanks to corporate backers. I will vote for kucinich in the primaries and I will vote third party in the general and that is that.

[MiniMe]

51. This is probably worth saving until next October

The primaries haven't even started yet. Can't we at least find out who the nominee is first? Lets talk about who we WILL vote for in the primaries, and then worry about the rest after we have a nominee.

[Exultant Democracy]

53. I came for the Democratic, I stay for the Underground.

I support Chris Dodd (as a senator not for prez) but I don't support Lieberman. I also support my Rep Rosa Deloro. As far as the Democratic Party if they keep going down this road I am going to have to change my registration to I or G soon.

And I will never vote for a member of the DLC ever.

[Roxy66]

54. I have to say...If Lieberman was running against a Repug, I wouldnt vote!

It would be bad either way....it wouldnt matter.

[Exultant Democracy]

58. I put anyone who voted for Kyle/Lieberman in the same boat

just as scary, just as evil.

[libodem]

57. Hit me, beat me,

make me write bad checks, I vote straight party Democratic, every time. Sometime here in red Idaho, especially out in the counties, a Democrat will run as a Republik, just to get elected. You just have to know who they are and vote despite the 'R'.

[Roxy66]

61. Idahoans that vote "D"....Rock!

I'm in Eastern Oregon (Idaho lite).....where are you in Idaho?

[Marr]

60. Blind loyalty and support are two different things.

I would expect DUers to understand this more than most, after decades of being called "America-haters" for simply acknowledging the country's problems.

When I look at the Democratic Party, I see a party that's being fought over by corporatists (the DLC wing) and populists. I want the party to be an effective advocate for the people, and so I would very much like to fix it by kicking the corporatists out. That's why I will not vote for a person simply because they've placed a "D" after their name. I'll vote for and support populists-- and only populists.

I think this is the best plan for the long run.

[Roxy66]

62. So, start a "PopulistUnderground" site.

[Marr]

63. Kindly, piss off.

I'm not going away because you disagree with me. When did you assume ownership of this site?

[Roxy66]

65. lol

[jgraz]

88. Nail, meet Hammer

I think a lot of DUers were just waiting around for THEIR opportunity to be authoritarian. Maybe we should change the name from DemocraticUnderground to DemocraticOverlords.com

[jberryhill]

64. Because there are some folks here....

...pitching an entirely different agenda. It's not even a Republican thing... it's a loony far right thing.

[Rainbowreflect]

67. My question is should we vote for someone just because they

have D after their name? How far to the right can a "D" candidate go before we can stop supporting them? If they refuse to talk, act or vote like a dem should still support them just because that is what they call themselves? I am so disgusted by most of our "leaders" lately I can't see how I can support most of them. If they won't stand up for the people who supported them in past, why should we continue to support them?

[jgraz]

69. Maybe you can explain why you seek to suppress dissent on an open forum

[Totally Committed]

70. I am here to try and keep HRC or any DLC-er from getting the nomination.

As far as I know, I have until the primaries declare a winner to lobby against her/them, so I will do so.

Should she (or any of the other DLC candidates) get the nod, I will quietly withdraw from DU, and let those willing to back her have their chance to back her undeterred. I probably will not vote in the GE at all, though I am currently being lobbied by supporters of a couple of Dem. candidates to write in other names in the GE.

We'll see. But, HRC will NEVER get my vote.

TC

[txaslftist]

71. I'll vote Republican if the Republican is antiwar and Democrat is Hillary.

Because I'd like to avert World War III, and she doesn't seem to worry about it.

[Roxy66]

75. Say goodbye to SCOTUS and the right to choose then....

and Healthcare, and the economy, and.......the list is never-ending. We can all thank you later.

[jgraz]

77. SCOTUS is already gone. Thank the Vichy Dems for that.

Sorry, it's already a 5-4 conservative vote, thanks to the digusting capitulations on Roberts and Alito. The US Taliban can reverse Roe whenever they want, but they'd rather have the issue to run on.

As, apparently, would many Democrats. Too bad we've already lost. The DLC is going to have to find another bogeyman to scare us into voting for their crappy candidates.

[txaslftist]

82. Ya think?

We've had six interminable years of Bush and haven't lost the "right to choose". Healthcare is in the same shitty place it was six years ago.

On all of the domestic issues you seem worried about, a Republican president would have to deal with a Democratic congress (and Democrats will probably have a veto-proof majority after the 2008 GOP bloodletting that's about to happen). It is in the area of foreign policy where the president can pretty much do what he/she wants.

Hillary has communicated from the beginning that she's a hawk, and she voted for Kyl-Lieberman, which is about as close to an authorization to attack Iran as the president needs.

There is one GOP candidate who is antiwar and committed to bringing home our soldiers right away. He's not a corporatist, and is in fact despised by the GOP leadership, FOX, and basically all of the enemies we've been fighting for six years.

We, collectively, the American people, you and I, have MURDERED over a million people in the last four years. Four more years like this will mean a million more. And you can forget about national healthcare, because four more years like this and there won't be any money for it.

So for me there's one issue, and that's the war. I won't have more blood on my hands because the blood-spiller happens to put a D on the end of her name.

[Marr]

85. Well said.

I couldn't agree more.

[ieoeja]

73. Because of Australia.

A decade and a half ago, a group within the Liberal Party of Australia decided to emulate the electoral success of the Democratic Leadership Council by moving the Liberal Party to the "center". They did. And they won.

A few years later an investigative reporter discovered they were actually a front group for a group within the Conservative Party. Why would members of the Conservative Party help the Liberal Party win? Because a conservative policy by any other name is still conservative.

While the elimination of welfare helped a Democrat get elected in the United States, which side that does that make the real winner: the conservatives or the liberals?

Furthermore, by making Traditional Conservatism the New Liberalism, the New Conservativism became even more extreme. In 1980 the overriding debate was, "is moving forward too fast causing culture shock for most Americans?" Today the overriding debate is, "how far back do we have to turn the clock to recapture traditional American values?"

[baldguy]

80. "Democratic" isn't just the name of a political party

It's also a set of values & ideals.

If the nominee of the "Democratic" Party is just a better Republican, then what's the point of voting for her ... or him?

[LeftyMom]

81. Back to remedial Civics with you.

Your duty as a citizen is to make an informed vote for the best available canidate. No more, no less. This is why many of the founding fathers were uneasy about or opposed to the formation of political parties, they felt parties limited people's ability and willingness to make the best possible decisions on each canidate and issue.

[Jed Dilligan]

84. They'll change their tune once the nom is handed down,

or get TS'd. For now I am all for using this forum to warn Democrats that they will lose the support of the left if they veer too hard to the right.

FWIW I consider myself independent of parties; the parties are for the rich and powerful, and I'm not much of either. The choice is between an unfair status quo (Democratic) and outright piracy (Republican). I generally vote for the status quo with a clothespin on my nose.

[txaslftist]

87. Hmmmm. Be complicit in the murder of 100k Iranians or get TS'd from DU ....

such hard choices...

[Jed Dilligan]

93. If the war drums are beating that hard I will abstain too,

the point of now is to stop them from beating at all.


on edit: What you do and what you post are two separate matters. You can vote your conscience and keep enjoying DU; all you have to do is keep your choice out of your posts. Pretty easy.

[Vidar]

86. "Democratic" by its very definition implies "choice". If the party

foists some collaborator on me, I will do the "democratic" thing by exercising my choice to write in a candidate or vote third party. Sad that that the meaning of "democratic" is lost on so many.

[orleans]

89. i think a lot of the time people say things like that (they won't vote for the

dem, or they won't vote if..) when they are pissed off, discouraged, disgusted

venting or bluffing or threatening to withhold their vote

i think most of it is in the spirit of expecting our party to do better, do be the best it can be, not because we genuinely hate our party

[uppityperson]

90. Here are my reasons...

First of all, I believe that we all should be able to criticize anyone of any party in our government. I will continue to do that since they are supposed to represent us and we are supposed to let them know what we think and want. I am not trashing them, but feel it is my right, no, my DUTY, to criticize them all. And to tell them good job, which I also do.

Now, to the question of why vote for a non-dem candidate. If where I am is overwhelmingly voting democrat, and I don't like the democratic candidate, I may vote third party. I want more than anything to stop what has happened, stop the deterioration of our constitution and country, but, dependent upon the candidate and how voting has gone so far, I may not vote for the Democratic Presidential candidate. I reseve that right.

Why am I here, at DemocraticUnderground then? There is more to democracy, there is more to DU than blind support of Democratic party.

Finally, the bashing gets to me too. Sometimes insults and short quick answers are not the best way to discuss things, but they happen.

Peace and onward.

[leftofthedial]

91. I work tirelessly to prevent repukes from running the country

that's why I do not support Hillary

[LWolf]

97. Hi, neighbor!

I don't know if I'm voting for the Dem in the general election. It depends on who it is, and if I feel that candidate is worthy of a vote. That remains to be seen.

If I don't vote for the nominee, I'll consider any one of the following:

1. Write in a better Democrat. Which is still voting for a dem for the party purists.

2. Write in my dog, since she's a better choice than many who may appear on that ballot.

3. Vote for an independent or 3rd party candidate, if they stand on issues where I think the Democrat SHOULD be standing.

4. Write in an independent, if the choice on the ballot is not appropriate.

Why am I here at DU, and am I a true "Dem?"

Well, let's see. I've been at DU longer than you, and seen many true leftists/liberals/progressives move on as the site has grown out of "underground" status. That's what I am; a leftist liberal.

I am a registered Democrat, and have been since '01. That democrat registration makes me as much a democrat as you, or any other voter, candidate, or politician carrying the "D."

While I'm a Democrat, I don't worship any political party. I don't put a political party on a higher platform than people, or issues. The party is a tool, just like my hammer, my drill, my hayhooks, and my manure cart. The purpose of the tool is to get a job done. If the tool breaks, or is inefficient for the purpose, the tool can be repaired or replaced.

I don't do loyalty oaths, and I don't treat the party like a street gang, a klan, an exclusive or secret club, I belong to. The point of the party is to find common ground, and work on common goals. The platform isn't scripture, campaigns aren't sermons, and I'm not out to lynch, burn crosses on the lawns of, or make soap of the republicans.

So why am I here at DU? To find common ground and common goals. I don't expect to agree with everyone here. I don't even expect to like everyone here, although I can find something to like about most people.

That means discussions about issues. That means networking with people of like mind. And yes, there are some people of like mind here at DU. There are plenty of others who are not of like mind, but that recognize when we have common ground and common goals. I like productive conversation, and I like to hear different points of view when they are presented respectfully. I like thinking, and I expect my thinking, and my conclusions, to be constantly evolving based on new experiences and information. It's a wide world, and I think it's important to see the world through the eyes of others, as well.

It's hard to do that, of course, when a large number of people think that the only point of the party is to elect democrats. That issues discussions are secondary, or unnecessary. If too many people automatically assume that whatever the "D" position on an issue is correct, and therefore not a necessary topic of conversation, then there's not much to talk about. If too many people assume that DU exists to vent about non-democrats and elect democrats, and that issues are somewhere in the cellar in importance, then there aren't too many good, constructive conversations.

I think it's vital for Democrats to hold the party, and elected Democrats, accountable. I think it's vital to eradicate corruption in government, and that begins at home.

I think it's vital to discuss issues, and to focus on moving those issues forward. Complaining about the opposition is fine, but shouldn't be the primary focus. Campaigning is fine, too, but again, shouldn't be the primary focus. If that's all politics are about, attacking the opposition and cheering for your side, you may as well just buy season tickets to your local stadium. That's not citizen participation in the democratic process, it's a sporting event.

I am a true leftist liberal. I will do anything to move the issues I involve myself in politics to affect forward:

universal, single-payer, not-for-profit health care
peace
a living wage
healthcare, housing, and basic needs met for all as a right, not a privilege
labor rights
civil rights
human rights
protecting and defending the constitution
social and economic justice
environmental responsibility
sustainable energy and food production
a sustainable, stable, human population

I will do anything to advance those issues. The Democratic Party is one tool to achieve them. If I feel that the party, or some democratic politicians, are not doing the job, I will sure as hell say so. If I feel that some candidates will not sufficiently value those issues, and therefore shouldn't be in office, I will sure as hell say so.

Here at DU, I don't have to say that about Republicans. We already know that republicans aren't the answer to anything. Republicans aren't the issue I'm here to discuss. It's the identity and direction of the democratic party that is at issue.

[scarletwoman]

98. Wow! That was beautifully written! It deserves to be a stand-alone post.

You pretty much speak for me -- although I am at the point of being tempermentally incapable of saying those things so gently and politely as you have done.

In fact, every time I read another one of these "party loyalty oath" posts -- like that of the OP, and Will Pitt's recent magnum pontifornication, ad nauseum -- it's all I can do to not throw my shoe through my monitor, much less not let loose with a string of fervent imprecations in a reply post.

sw

[LWolf]

99. Thank you for the kind words.

I'd give it its own thread, but I've already spent too much time playing on the 'puter, and chores are calling. I have to shut down and get to work.

I'll put it in my journal, anyway!

:hi:

[IndianaJones]

101. it seems to be a magnet for extremely whiny types. nt.

[Forkboy]

103. It drew you here, so that might be the first thing you've posted I can agree with.