DUers no longer have the right to demand party loyalty.

[Zhade]

Not after demanding Meek drop out of the FL senate race to increase support for Crist. Endorsing and pushing a recent former Republican over the Dem (who is losing in part *because* FL Democrats refuse to support him, thus ensuring an "unelectable" feedback loop) and then demanding party loyalty is the height of hypocrisy.

You want to waste your vote hoping Crist won't turn his back on you once in office? That's your right. But I don't ever, EVER want to hear another demand that the Dem be supported without question. DUers have lost that right, thanks to DU's decision to break their own rule against advocating for third-party candidates over the Dem. Any argument predicated on a call for loyalty is already lost due to this blatant double standard, which shows what a profoundly damaging decision this was.

Again -- vote as you wish. You want to fuck over my home state by turning your back on the Dem to support a guy who might very well laugh at you and run to the Republicans after the election? Your call. But don't expect not to be laughed at for demanding party loyalty.

By showing your own disloyalty, you've made your argument a joke.

And the second a viable Green comes up against a weak Dem, this Crist business WILL be remembered by many here. And per DU's own stance, advocating for that Green should be expected to be permissible -- unless, of course, DU wants to foster a reputation for hypocrisy.

[veganlush]

1. it's crist or rubio for your home state.

which do you prefer?

[Zhade]

3. My stance should be clear -- if Dems who demanded loyalty were, Meek would be up over Crist.

Dems only have themselves to blame for Meek being behind, since they abandoned their own demand for loyalty to support Crist.

That's all I'll say in response to your type of question.

[mzmolly]

19. Democrats here, demand that progressives not enable

right wing candidates. This where our loyalty lies. It's about defeating lunatics and electing the most progressive, viable candidate in a given race.

[Zhade]

31. With FL Dems -- and the party -- abandoning Meek to support Crist, didn't that make Meek 'un-viable'...

NT!

[mzmolly]

96. So they're not party loyalists?

Isn't that what you want? Less party loyalty?

[Zhade]

190. LOL. No. You missed the point entirely. It's the hypocrisy I'm focusing on.

NT!

[mzmolly]

193. Me too.

;)

[Catherina]

53. Well with that simplistic view, let me know which of the three is more *progressive*

McCain, Boehner or our good girl Friday, Palin? By your logic, I need to know which one is sanctioned by the *Democrats here* on whose behalf you speak so authoritavely.

What a load of BS. And so the DLC keeps moving the party further right.

[mzmolly]

95. Obviously my post pertains to those running against

the right wing. I'm glad you no longer consider DU a place of party purity, however. I'll expect you to drop that talking point given the mass support here, for Crist. :sarcasm:

[Warren Stupidity]

149. this whole solidarity thing is very confusing

it seems more like "whatever we say is what is right".

[mzmolly]

155. What's confusing about a Democrat voting for Democrats and/or against

Republicans? :shrug:

[Mojorabbit]

51. nt

[sabrina 1]

29. And the reason for that was the abandonment of the Democrat.

What I hate most about the way this party has been operating is that they don't seem to want to fight for anything. Let's always take the easy way out. Republicans don't want a PO? Well, let's NOT go all out and kick their asses since we have the people on our side and everything, let's cave early so we don't have to work too hard.

It's a self-fulling prophecy. Of course Meek is behind. Does anyone even know who he is? Everyone knows who Crist is. Meek was abandoned early on by the party.

I agree with the OP. If party loyalty is demanded even to the point of never criticizing the president's policies, then it is the height of hypocrisy to refuse to even put up a fight for a Democrat and to declare him the loser months before the election, and push Democrats to vote for a Republican.

Worst of all is the attitude that those who decided to fight for the Democrat are going to be responsible if the teabagger wins.

Whoever decided that this was the best way to keep Rubio out should have calculated that many Dems would not go along with it. That is just a fact. And facts should always be calculated into any strategy. There was never going to be a lock-step agreement to dump a perfectly decent Democrat in favor of a Republican and nothing anyone says will change that fact.

Considering that, these geniuses should have tried to figure out how best to take advantage of the fact that there were two Republicans in the race and one Democrat.

I don't want to hear anything about FDL again either.

[Zhade]

32. Thanks for getting that point. Abandoning Meek set up his inability to win.

In fact, if one were paranoid, one would wonder if that wasn't the plan all along -- plant the idea that Meek couldn't win, get Crist to 'turn' (I'll bet he fucks us over after the election) and draw support from the Dem candidate that suddenly 'can't win'.

[Odin2005]

60. +1! I smell DLC bullshit all around this bullying of Meek.

[stevenleser]

123. Yes, this silly framing is tiresome n/t

[Tansy_Gold]

2. K&R because I'm in Arizona where the Democratic party couldn't even find

candidates for a lot of offices.



Hypocrisy is its own fertilizer.





TG, NTY

[Zhade]

4. Hell, if there's no Dem to run, that's one thing.

This hypocrisy is another.

[SeattleGirl]

5. That's an awfully broad brush you're using there

I know some DUers have done that, but not all of them.

Please don't put everyone in the same basket.

[Zhade]

44. Okay, that's a good point. I should have said "Loyalty-oath DUers"

Correction noted and accepted. : )

[mzmolly]

99. Those supposedly supporting Crist here, are not party loyalists.

That should comfort you.

[Bluenorthwest]

66. It is DU wide because the campaiging against Meek was

allowed here, and it started way back in the Spring. Not all DUers did it, but DU did it, and many of those most against Meek also demand loyalty out of others constantly.

[jobycom]

6. Walter

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zhade]

28. Republicans who gloat that Nader gave them FL are misinformed given that 200,000 Dems voted for b*s*

Ironically, another example of them violating the loyalty oath they demand others swear fealty to.

[cynatnite]

8. Meek's presence in the race is helping that teabagging repuke...

Crist is the lessor of two evils at this point.

Meek has zero chance of winning.

Don't tell DUer's what they don't have a right to do.

[MadHound]

75. Listen to yourself

You're essentially saying that a Democratic candidate is helping a Republican lose. That's exactly what you're saying.

Hypocrite much?

[cynatnite]

91. I'm a pragmatist...

The Dem has zero chance of winning. The only real choice here is the lesser of two evils. Crist is that, IMO.

I'm not a fan of Crist, but he's still better than Rubio.

[Chisox08]

133. Meek would have a chance to win if the Democrats were to have gotten behind him

If the Dems would have supported Meek from the start instead of saying over and over again that he can not win he would have a nice lead on both Teabagging Crist and Teabagging Rubio. While the Teabaggers and the Repukes split there vote between those two jackasses, Meek could have pulled it out.
At least with Meek we know he won't go running to the insane Republicans in the Senate.

[1monster]

184. Nobody on DU ever addresses the fact that Meek DID NOT CAMPAIGN AT ALL

in Northeast Florida and for all I know, didn't campaign in other parts of the state.

I had to ask DU who the Democratic candidate for Florida's Senate seat was because I couldn't find it even when I googled for it. During the height of the primary, the only literature I saw in this part of the state was negative ads from his opponet.

To date, the only indication of Meek's candidacy in this area was ONE sign placed where a Bernie DeCastro sign had been and DeCastro's sign had been pulled out and left on the ground.

Meek might have had a chance to win had he campaigned or found some way to get his name out there. He didn't. Why not? Why the heck not? How can you blame the Democratic voters of abandoning some one they couldn't find hide nor hair of in the first place?

Why didn't he campaign? Even on a shoe string budget he could have done a hell of a lot more than he did.

Answer that one satisfactorily for chastising voters for "abandoning" him.

[Dappleganger]

170. Yeah, what is up with that uppity democrat??

He should just fucking QUIT and let the republicans run the show as they obviously are winning!

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

174. And him dropping out would hurt the other Dems on the ballot

Sink and others like Grayson need the African American vote. To alienate them at the 11th hour would be fatal.

Florida Dems should accept they done fucked up in this race and try to win the others.

[hughee99]

9. Speaking of green, lot of love for Alvin Greene here.

:sarcasm:

[Zhade]

30. To be honest, that one went over my head.

NT!

[villager]

10. What about Obama advocating a vote for an independent instead of a Dem?

I guess he's broken DU rules, too!

[mzmolly]

24. Does he post

here?

[villager]

109. I guess you'd be the first to alert on him if he did!

n/t

[mzmolly]

113. If he were continually abusing the user rules,

I would. ;)

[villager]

129. Like... advocating votes for non-Democrats? (As he does, in "real life!?")

n/t

[mzmolly]

138. You mean like many 'progressives' here do, while complaining

when others do the same?

[villager]

145. Well, if it's good enough for the President, why can't fellow Democrats...

....have the same latitude on DU?

You trust his judgment, don't you? :shrug:

[mzmolly]

147. They do, according to

the OP.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

175. Which indy did he "advocate" for? (n/m)

[WillyT]

11. Party Loyalty Is Pretty Over-Rated Anyway...

:evilgrin:

And aren't you in Santa Monica???

:shrug:

[Zhade]

34. Home state. I don't live in FL anymore, but my parents live in Pensacola.

I'm from Fort Walton Beach, which BP managed to ruin.

(I should update my profile, since I'm in the SFV now!)

[CommonSensePLZ]

161. I LIKE that we don't copy the Republicans' weird behavior, kind of dangerous

They've almost turned political ideology into a cult, reminds me of the Chinese communist party. They have people swearing loyalty and to be far right beyond reason, it's creepy.

Encouraging that kind of behavior can make Blagojevich-types, corrupt people could run under the name of a large, powerful party then think they can do whatever they want because they expect the party will support them no matter what - That's what republicans usually do, we don't need to stoop down there.

[Kaleva]

12. There's not enough DUers to make a differance in that race.

So, even if every DUer who ever demanded strict party loyalty were to support Meeks, the end result would be the same.

Many Dems here at DU are of the pragmatic type who would love Meeks to win but are willing to accept Crist as a lesser evil then Rubio.

"And the second a viable Green comes up..."

Probably not in our lifetime.

[Zhade]

35. Sure, I get that. I'm more concerned with the double standard.

NT!

[mzmolly]

103. Then you have a double standard. You don't mind so called, disloyalty

when it's for a candidate you support. Remember the advocacy for Cindy Sheehan?

[Zhade]

192. Link to where I ever advocated for her and you'd have a point.

NT!

[Bluenorthwest]

69. Viable Greens by the district? Not a problem.

We could elect them here. Now. It took 'Green Dog' activism and votes to win for Obama here. Yes, we have Green Dogs. So unless 'our lifetime' means this month, you are simply wrong.

[ScreamingMeemie]

13. At least my Rec made you plus 1 for a little bit.

[Arkana]

14. I don't live in Florida, so I can't say who I would have voted for.

But I don't agree with the calls for Meek to drop out because it will keep Florida's voters from being presented with an actual choice rather than the "stagnant pond water v. pond scum" that is Crist v. Rubio.

[gateley]

15. Isn't keeping Rubio out of Washington a kind of party loyalty? It's doing what's best

for the party. :shrug:

It's a tough call. Not sure what I'd do. I'm so sorry it's come to this.

[mzmolly]

23. In addition to your point, I must be missing all the "Go Crist"

threads?

[Zhade]

36. There's one in GD right now calling for Meek to drop out...

...which the mods said last week was going too far. But it's still there. There have been others.

[mzmolly]

16. Who demanded Meek drop out?

eom

[Zhade]

40. I'm not falling for a call-out trap. Sorry, not biting.

NT!

[mzmolly]

97. Just post a link.

That's allowed.

[Kaleva]

17. An excerpt from a US News article published in late August.

"So far, the White House, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Florida Democratic Party, along with establishment figures such as former President Bill Clinton, continue to back Meek, denying any official support for Crist. Sabato anticipates that the party's unofficial stance may shift by late October. "The party has to give Meek every opportunity to do well," he says. "Then when he doesn't, and when the polls continue to show him in third place...then they can say, 'Oh, this is terrible. This is horrible. We did everything we could. It looks like now it's only Crist versus Rubio. Hint, hint.' ""

http://politics.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/08/30/meeks-florida-primary-win-may-boost-senate-bid-by-gops-rubio.html

[ChiciB1]

107. Now That IS One Prediction That Is SPOT ON! I Live Here, I Know What

I hear, and I KNOW what so very many, many Democrats are saying and doing. And don't think for ONE MINUTE that those in POWER in Tallahassee can be counted on to vote for Meek! Word is that what they are saying in public ISN'T what will be happening when they vote.

Urban Legend? I seriously don't think so. It IS that bad. Did I want this? No, but the Democratic State Officials got it wrong again by deciding that Meek was the best one to run. I suppose they felt that if they would run a DLC type Dem here in Florida they could win, but they were wrong. And this ISN'T the first time they've been wrong. I live on the west coast of Florida and too many people who don't follow politics like I do, didn't even know WHO Kendrick Meek was!

I have YET to see ONE road sign, I've gotten NO phone calls from the Meek campaign AND I received one flyer. And that flyer was generated here in this county giving notice to those of us here who was running. The campaign never really took off, so WHY blame the citizens here for the mistakes of others?

I can't remember voting for anyone other than a Democrat, but Meek has been 3rd from DAY ONE! No, I will do what I can to stop Rubio/Jebby because I DO believe Jebby wants to use Rubio as his stepping stone to becoming the POTUS! And I simply can't think of a worse scenario. The State Democrats knew a long time ago about Rubio and changes could have been made way back when.

It SUCKS, but it IS WHAT IT IS!!

[1monster]

185. I've been saying all along that Meek did not campaign but it has been

ignored. Instead, those who have decided that Crist is the most viable option for stopping Rubio from becoming Senator have been villified.

If Meek wanted to be Senator, then why didn't he work for it? Did he expect it handed to him as a gift? In Florida? Where the Dem has to fight three times as hard as the Repub for the vote? Where we barely have a Democratic Party?

[mzmolly]

18. Question 2. What viable progressive, have Democrats

prevented from taking office, while enabling Republicans in the process?

[readmoreoften]

21. Well I guess that all depends on what you mean by "viable"...

"Viable" usually means behaving as close to a Republican as possible while being a smidge less terrible.

[mzmolly]

22. Viable means, any candidate

who has a (demonstrable) shot in hell, of defeating the republican alternative. I wont hold my breath on an answer.

[Zhade]

41. That's one hell of a subjective standard you're proposing.

Here's something to consider: if the meme that Meek was unelectable hadn't spread and caused Dems to abandon him in favor of Crist, would Meek in fact have become unelectable?

[mzmolly]

94. The meme was that Obama wasn't electable,

remember? Eventually, he proved some of us wrong.

[1monster]

186. That wasn't the meme. Meek did not campaign. I wanted to vote for the Dem in this

race very early on, but I couldn't even find out his name until I asked on DU (some one from South Florida answered that). I tried. I googled several different ways and couldn't find it. I even did the Ask.com, Jeeves, and Dogpile thing. No luck.

If Meek is unelectable (and he's polling in the teens), it is because he failed to get his name out there. I've only seen one campaign sign and that only popped up a week ago.

Don't blame the voters for the candidate's failure.

[Blue_Tires]

199. in '06 a lot fell for Lieberman's scare tactics and abandoned Ned Lamont...

[myrna minx]

20. I find it quite interesting that the same folks who have

sneering hands on hips, who demand party loyalty when it comes to President Obama but have the exception of voting for Republican Crist. Notice that it's ok to advocate on Democratic Undergound for a right wing ambiguous republican, but not to the left wing anything.

[Zhade]

37. THANK you.

That's exactly my point. And those people? They can fuck right off, as far as I'm concerned. Their demand for party loyalty, like Fox News, is now wholly without merit.

[inna]

48. exactly. Crist is a right wing Republican, "Independent" in name only.

He's, like, 10 times worse than someone like Arlen Specter, for example, who at least made some nominal effort to act less Republican after his conversion.

[Skidmore]

62. Boy, that's a stretch.

[Poboy]

86. +1

[mzmolly]

100. Myrna, how many people here advocate against Democrats/the President and

for the Green Party? The answer is PLENTY.

[nashville_brook]

179. hypocrisy has a way of hoisting folks on their own petards.

[Joe Fields]

25. No none has ever had that right, and I laugh in the face of anyone who claims it.

[Zhade]

38. Fair enough!

NT!

[mzmolly]

26. Q. 3 ~ Does this also mean that some here no longer have the right to suggest DU-ers care more about

"party loyalty" than the issues? After all, if we're now "pro-Crist" the "party loyalty" talking point is dead.

[myrna minx]

43. Molly, are you really going to claim that the pro Crist

contingent on DU doesn't exist? The Republican Crist faction on DU has mocked and stomped upon Meek from the beginning and this has been sanctioned, because Meek has been deemed "unviable" from the get go from the DU admins. "Democratic Underground" is now "As long as they're not a liberal GREEN" but Democratic Underground supports Republicans et al. ,

[Mojorabbit]

52. I live here

He was not viable as soon as it became a three way race. If it was Meek vs Rubio or Meek vs Crist that would be a whole different scenario but it is not.

[myrna minx]

56. He was not viable as soon as he was abandoned by the party.

I guess the common wisdom of the solidarity action dems is that we should just give up on difficult races and not even try at all. Party loyalty now means voting for a republican. :crazy: Double plus good.

[Mojorabbit]

126. That is not so

I will repeat, he was not viable once it became a three way race. He does not have name recognition, has not run a good campaignj, and has consistently polled a distant third.

[dionysus]

88. a side note, meeks isn't viable because of what DU Admins say, he's not viable because his campaign

sucks and he's a running a distant third. carry on...

[mzmolly]

93. I'm asking where

it is.

[mzmolly]

27. "Meek: Clinton didn't convince me to drop Sen. bid"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_florida_senate_clinton

"The press report from Politico that is out there is inaccurate — at best," Meek said during a hastily called news conference in front of screaming supporters Thursday night. "President Clinton and I are good friends. He's continuing to be a supporter of this campaign. Any rumor or any statement by anyone that says that I made a decision to get out of the race is inaccurate."

[Unvanguard]

33. I have never argued against voting for viable Greens.

It's just that almost none of them are viable.

[Zhade]

39. That's fine. You didn't create the DU rule that explicitly said 'no third-party candidates'.

Nor did you later break that rule for a one-time-only special double-standard exception. (Which is ironic, considering that DU was founded after the SCOTUS made its own infamous one-time-only special double-standard exception in bush v Gore.)

[Unvanguard]

77. I don't know how the admins would react to a viable Green Party candidate.

Given that Skinner has explicitly justified the rule (and explained the "exception") in terms of trying to keep the Republicans out, I'm not at all sure that the third-party advocacy rule would bar advocating for a Green Party candidate in a Green v. Democrat election (e.g. San Francisco 2003.) Has someone asked him?

[kelly1mm]

148. There have also been posts (not op's) supporting Chafee in RI. nt

[Kaleva]

42. It may be a case of loyalty to the Party as a whole then to any one candidate

Earlier this year, many here were calling for Stupak's head. Saying he needs to be primaried and failing a defeat there, some even went so far as to say they hoped he'd be beaten by a Repub in the general. Mi-01 was considered to be a safe Dem seat as long as Stupak was on the ballot but it quickly was reclassified as a toss up when he announced his retirement. Others here at DU were saying that Stupak needed to be supported as he was the Dem's best chance of holding the district. For the Party loyalists, it was better to support Stupak in lieu of a candidate who had a far less chance of winning and holding the seat.

[Zhade]

45. There's no rule against advocating whoever you want during the primaries.

Saying you hope an asshole like Stupak is defeated is one thing. Using DU resources to stump for the Republican to defeat him -- which is what some DUers are doing with their support for Crist over Meek -- is another.

I don't understand the concept of loyalty to a party that itself breaks the loyalty oath it demands from its members. Isn't that the definition of a double standard?

[Kaleva]

47. I do see where you are coming from

The rule:

"You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website. "

It is not for me though to say if those who are advocating voting for Crist instead of Meeks are in violation of the rule. That is for the mods and admin to decide.

[Zhade]

49. Meek's the Dem. Crist isn't. Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

NT!

[AlabamaLibrul]

54. They should edit that to read "not... work for the defeat of the DLC or "independent" R candidate"

Just saying.

[inna]

46. damn right. k&r

[Bluebear]

50. 'By showing your own disloyalty, you've made your argument a joke.'

Can't argue with that!

[rug]

55. It's as hypocritical as defending the wars since 2009.

[NJmaverick]

57. Why are you insisting that the Republicans must always win and we must always go down in defeat?

I don't subscribe to your principle that we Democrats must always let the Republicans win

[Odin2005]

63. Crist is a Republican.

[NJmaverick]

64. Who is running as an independent and would cacaos with the Dems

Yet so many want the Republican to win, by keeping Meeks in the race.

[MadHound]

76. Do you honestly think that a Republican will caucus with the Dems

You are even more gullible than I thought.

[NJmaverick]

110. Are you talking about Senator Arlen Specter

You know snark and cynicism are poor substitutes for critical thought

[TheKentuckian]

67. Chain Gang Charlie Crist is a right wing Republican. I think his fan club is calling for a Democrat

to lose to him, no worse, for him to drop out and endorse said right winger.

Pushing a guy that calls him fucking self "Chain Gang" is an epic clusterfuck.

[NJmaverick]

68. Your plan ensures the REPUBLICANS a VICTORY

that is NEVER a good idea

[TheKentuckian]

81. Your's certainly insures just such an event. Chaingang Charlie is a rightwing Republican.

[NJmaverick]

111. There is no way for the Dem to win

the best you can do is get the non-affiliated former Republican. How hard is that to understand?

[TheKentuckian]

112. Your point was that My strategy would allow a REPUBLICAN to win.

Mine is that your's absolutely insures it. Crist is a Republican. Rubio is a Republican.

If you want to argue that Rubio is a TeaPubliKlan and Crist is an establishment right winger then maybe you have a case but they're all TeaPubliKlans now in my eyes.
So, the only option I would have is to support the rather "centrist" Democrat, uphill or not.

If given the choice between picking the best turd and buy a $1 scratch off, I'll buy the ticket. Turds are free and have little value regardless of how one "grades them".

[NJmaverick]

117. The point is you want the Republicans to win and have a non-independent

That is a terrible idea. I would rather they have to deal with a Liberman type issue that have a loyal party soldier

[TheKentuckian]

137. No, it is you who are carrying water for a Republican. Charlie Crist ain't new to me.

Roll on with you're nickle and dime attempts at wisdom.

You and your ilk bring these kinds of passes into being. Crist had no base at all but Democrats bailed on their nominee before the fucking primary and now the "sensible centrist" brigade is out campaigning and brow beating for their purportedly and born again by designation change magic for the guy they started beating the drum before a candidate was even selected.

It's nothing but the usual game of the breakneck race to the right.

Democrats win in a landslide in a three way race if they stay home. There is nowhere for Crist to get votes from to win. That's the math. Crist peels most true indies and "moderates" from the TeaPubliKlans and it is all she wrote and goodnight with the very real voter advantage.

You and your ilk have wanted a Republican the whole way, some back before he dropped from the puke primary. This isn't about facing conditions as they come but a willful scheme toward the hyperpartisan "sensible centrist" coalition of shifty shitbag corporate enabling whores and moneychangers pretending to be blowing in the wind but always fiscally in one direction by word and deed and socially in rhetoric only while continuing the far right's destruction on our civil liberties.

[Odin2005]

58. Yup. the hypocrisy is disgusting.

Apparently bashing the Dem is OK as long as the other guy is on the Right. :eyes:

[dionysus]

59. how about you guys build a state party that doesn't suck and keeps sending rethugs to washington?

:shrug:

[Skidmore]

61. You've been played....

by a weasel. You fell for Crist's hail Mary October suprise, or are helping him either actively or passively by falling for his crap.

If you are in Florida, get out there and vote for Meek and help people get to the polls on Tuesday to vote for him.

[jonnyblitz]

65. "Weasel" is his middle name! DAMN, I would love it if Meek

won! Bill Clinton makes me *sick* telling Meeks to drop out. I guess the weasels stick together.

[Bluenorthwest]

70. My feelings exactly.

No more voting for anti equality candidates out of loyalty, no more nose holding, after the Crist Twist anyone who tells me I have to vote for some McClurkin fan because he's the nominee will be laughed at roundly and soundly.

[AngryOldDem]

71. Damn -- I wish I could rec this more than once.

:thumbsup:

And, damn, don't I wish my state DID have a viable Green candidate for Senate -- then I wouldn't have to hold my nose on Tuesday while voting for the Dem.

[Skinner]

72. I think I understand the confusion.

Reading your post, I think you might be under the impression that we believe party loyalty is an end in itself. That's wrong. Party loyalty is a means to an end. The purpose is to elect the most progressive candidate with a chance to win, which is the Democrat in the vast majority of cases. I have put up a couple posts explaining this. Here's what I said:

Of Florida and Rhode Island (and party loyalty and independent candidates).

As most DUers are aware, we have (at least) two hotly-contested statewide races this year in which independent candidates are in a position to possibly beat the Democratic candidate, or even win. One is the US Senate race in Florida, where Republican Marco Rubio (43%) is currently leading Independent former-Republican Charlie Crist (32%) and Democrat Kendrick Meek (20%). The other is the gubernatorial race in Rhode Island, where Independent former-Republican Lincoln Chafee (35%) leads both Democrat Frank Caprio (28%) and Republican John Robitaille (25%). Rasmussen: Florida US Senate, Rhode Island Governor.

The United States has a stable two-party system, and we all know it is fairly uncommon for there to be more than two viable candidates in a general election. When there are third-party candidates or independents, they typically poll somewhere in the low single digits. They can occasionally influence elections by splitting the vote on one side and throwing the election to the other side, but they rarely have any chance of winning an election outright, or even coming in second place. So, if you are a voter who leans decisively to the left or right, voting for independent candidates is usually a self-defeating proposition (at least in the near term). The most you can usually hope to do is split the vote and throw the election to the other side.

This is why I am a loyal Democrat. Given that I do not want to split the left and potentially throw the election to the Conservative alternative, I will always vote for the more liberal of the two viable major party candidates (ie: the Democratic Party candidate).

But in a race between three viable candidates, this formula gets all messed up. Which candidate should you support?

* The purpose of voting is to elect the people who will hold government office.

* My goal as a progressive voter is to use my vote to help elect the most progressive candidate with a chance of winning.

If you live in Rhode Island, you are in luck. The two leading candidates for governor are the Democrat (Caprio) and the former-Republican Independent (Chafee). Both are more progressive than the Republican alternative. And here's the really great part: The combined support for Caprio and Chafee (63%) is MORE THAN DOUBLE the support for the Republican (25%). Assuming these polling numbers hold up, you can vote for either Caprio or Chafee with no danger of inadvertently throwing the election to Robitaille! Math: It's a beautiful thing. So, if you live in Rhode Island, a progressive voter can compare Caprio and Chafee and vote for whichever candidate you feel is better.

To be clear: This doesn't mean the Democratic President of the United States gets a free pass. Unless he has a good reason, I think a Democratic President has a responsibility to support Democrats (despite my uninformed earlier outburst). As far as I know, no reason has been offered for the lack of endorsement in this race.

If you live in Florida, you're not so lucky. In fact, it's tragic. This is a classic case of splitting the left (or, in this case, "splitting the non-Teabagger vote"), and helping the Republican candidate. I blame Charlie Crist. At this point, it appears that the only hope to defeat Rubio is if either Crist or Meek drops out of the race and throws their support to the other candidate. Or if the anti-Rubio vote could somehow spontaneously coalesce behind either Crist or Meek, but I don't think that's likely to happen. As a progressive voter, there are no good options. I think you have to weigh who has a better chance of pulling an upset (Crist) against who is better on the issues (Meek) and make a decision. I think the purely strategic vote is on Crist, except that we don't even know for sure if he'll caucus with the Democrats in the Senate. I don't envy you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9385361&mesg_id=9385361

And this:

It's shot down because it is usually political suicide.

Independent candidates on the "extremes" (left of the Dem or right of the Repub) have the potential to split the vote and throw the election to the other side. They are rarely viable candidates, just potential spoilers. If there is a viable Dem and a viable Republican in the race, voting third-party is usually self-defeating. The responsible thing is to vote for the major party candidate that is closer to you on the issues. Third party candidates from the extremes tend to only work when one major party fails to field a viable candidate. (eg: Bernie Sanders in VT, where Dems typically decline to field a viable candidate.)

Independent candidates in the middle (somewhere between the two major-party candidates) take votes from both the Dem and the Repub, but they are not a wash because they usually take votes more from one side or the other. If a centrist independent candidate gets enough support to surpass one or both of the major-party candidates, then it really changes the dynamic of the race in ways that are less predictable. (See RI Gov or FL US Senate.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9404114&mesg_id=9404306

If you accept the proposition that the purpose of voting is to elect candidates to office, I think the logic of my argument is sound. Furthermore, I believe it is not that difficult for any DUer to easily understand and appreciate. I would be more than happy to have a discussion of this on the merits. In fact, I believe you would be doing me a favor if you were to point out any errors or shortcomings in my argument.

Thank you.

[boston bean]

74. Is Crist a progressive?

[Skinner]

79. For the purposes of my argument, "progressive" is a matter of degree.

Is Crist more progressive than Rubio? Absolutely.

[boston bean]

125. So if there is a three way race for the presidency in 2012

and Barack Obama was polling 3rd with little chance of winning, we should vote for the "most" progressive candidate that has the better chance of winning, even if it's a right wing Republican v a Tea Party candidate?

[Skinner]

130. Let's wait two years and see where we stand in October 2012.

I highly doubt we will find ourselves in that situation. History shows (most recently in 1992) that a three-way race for the presidency is possible. If it were to happen, it is certainly possible that progressive voters might be faced with a difficult choice. But right now I cannot even imagine a scenario in which President Obama would be polling as low as 20%, effectively putting himself out of the running.

[boston bean]

131. I understand it's a long shot and not likely, Skinner, but the scenario is the same.

I'm not trying to be facetious or even claim to know the right answer, but my gut tells me it's wrong to allow full throttle support of Crist on a democratic board.

Who knows, three way races usually helps the other party, but that is not the case here. The repubs are gonna win either way. It could be some new phenomena or strategy who knows.

[Skinner]

132. Yes, I understand that the scenario -- if it were to happen -- would be the same.

And if it were to happen, it would suck just as much as the Florida Senate race. Actually, much more, because the stakes would be so much higher.

I can understand not feeling comfortable with this on a gut level. Believe me, I'm not happy about it either.

[Stinky The Clown]

146. I continue to understand your essential premise, but I still see it as a *very* slippery slope

Someone else in this subthread suggested that "progressive" or "liberal" (my own preference at self-description) are not sliding scale. While it is possible for a repubican or libertarian to be liberal, too, it isn't likely. At some point, a person is no longer liberal in any way, even comparatively.

I will grant that Crist's last few years in the governor's mansion have not been nearly as nutty as might have been expected going in, so in some ways he is not the model of a repubican. Neither is Meathead Arnie, for that matter. But what about Alaska? Right now, it appears the race is between Miller and Murkowski. (I am using this ONLY as an example) A recent poll showed Miller with 35%, Murkowski with 34%, and McAdams with 27%. The MoE is 3%. Assuming that's the number right now, a scant weekend before the election, what does one do? Consider Murkowski the more "liberal" and go for her tp stop the crazy person? Or do the right thing and vote for McAdams, even as I'd probably call him hopeless with a 3pt MoE and an 8pt deficit? Where do you suggest the line be drawn? A 10 pt deficit? A 4pt deficit?

The point I'm making is that we should be never be openly supporting any person beyond some certain point on the liberal <---> conservative spectrum. Hell, we have enough problems with conservadems. At what point do we just say fuck it and stop voting at all?

I also agree with your point that we need not worry about this at the presidential level. There will probably never be a viable third party, so talking about it is just masturbation. This is, however, a very real, and increasingly common, issue at the state and local levels.

Now, what about the upcoming primaries for 2012? What about advocating openly for a more liberal person than Obama? Not into the general, but in the lead up to his formal nomination? I know you qualified things with the word "viable." I agree with that, by the way. But *all* candidates are viable at some point early in the process, aren't they?

[boston bean]

153. "so talking about it is just masturbation"

why thank you Stinky, for your two cents. I didn't think it was likely either. I was making a point about how far one could take the strategy. Not unlike your point regarding more progressive candidates. I didn't think it was masturbation material.

[Skinner]

158. FWIW, most of the stuff we talk about here is just masturbation.

I enjoy a good hypothetical discussion as much as the next guy.

[Skinner]

157. The difference between Florida and Alaska...

...is that in Florida there is a chance that Crist will caucus with the Democrats. But he can't tell us which side he will join because if he does he will lose many of his voters. Indeed, if he were to announce that he would caucus with the GOP, then I would retract everything I've said. Another Republican is almost worthless for us in the Senate. In legislative elections, each new legislator on our side -- regardless of how moderate or even conservative -- is better than one more Republican. If we knew Crist was going to caucus with the GOP, then our only hope would be Meek.

In Alaska, Mukowski might be better than Miller, but both of them are basically worthless for us because both would caucus with the GOP. So IMHO, the only option in AK is the Dem.

As for the 2012 primary: I have always said that primaries are fair game. If you want to support someone other than Obama in the 2012 primary, you are welcome to do so on DU. The whole reason we have primaries is so we can decide who will be the Dem candidate. And we can do so without any danger of throwing the election to the GOP.

[2Design]

177. when crist got governor, I thought he would lean left (and come out) - he has NOT

I think him trying to undermine MEEK because he couldn't beat Rubio alone STINKS - I have voted third party in presidential races, they lost. I would rather vote for the DEM who might be more left than center than someone who is center to right.

My vote will go to MEEK. If Rubio gets in, this state is really super sick. To vote for Crist out of fear is like everyone saying Kerry was electable and not voting for DEAN who was progressive and had fire in his belly.

MEEK was approached by CRIST to throw in the towel NOT by Clinton. Crist has been trying to work the media.

MEEK did a press tonight to say he is in there to stay. HE said Crist called him at 4:30am to try to get him to drop. If Crist truly cares about this state, he will drop out of the race. We will have lost if we vote for a Republican out of FEAR. That is like our Congress and President selling us out - out of FEAR - no public option because they FEAR - yet the ads are all against us anyway - they all say the same thing

obamacare, liberal, etc.

Crist said he thought Sarah Palin was a viable candidate - shows me his judgement is not sane.

[Dr.Phool]

183. I ALMOST voted for Crist for Governor four years ago.

Note that I said almost. I was a DEC member at the time, and I was obligated to support and vote for Jim Davis, who was our nominee. I had supported Rod Smith (currently running for L.G. with Alex Sink)in the primary.

I knew Jim Davis personally. He was a conservadem. He was one of 27 "New Democrats" who sent a letter to Dennis Hastert urging him to hurry up and bring that horrendous bankruptcy bill to the house floor, so they could vote for it. And he publicly supported the Patriot Act, among other transgressions. He was a complete fucking douche-weasel in my book, and I had to support him, and I held my nose very tightly and voted for him. Even though, Crist, the repuke, was actually more (not much) progressive than Davis. I took my party loyalty oath seriously.

I am no longer bound by such constraints.

Believe me. We want to kill Rubio's political career, right now. He's a smooth little Jeb Bush protegee, who should be campaigning in a pre-Castro, Cuban National Guard uniform.

[stranger81]

144. "Progressive" isn't just a content-free term that's applied on sliding scale.

By that metric, Hitler and Pol Pot are progressives (simply less progressive than, say, Dennis Kucinich).

[BzaDem]

181. No, your analogy doesn't work, because it assumes progressivism is not matter of degree

when in reality, of course it is. All elections are matters of degree. You are assuming that progressive is somehow a yes or no question, when it obviously is not.

Now, when we are talking with like-minded people, most of us would be clustered on one end of the scale how the sliding scale was constructed. So we approximate and create a threshold, above which someone is progressive and below which someone is not (as if it is a yes or no question). But the only reason that makes sense in casual conversation is because most of us are clustered at the same point on the sliding scale (and most Republicans are clustered on the other side). So it makes sense to act like it is a yes or no proposition -- because that's how people fall on the scale.

But in the rare case where someone is not in our cluster of what we consider "progressive," but still more progressive than a tea party nut, it no longer makes sense to talk about "progressive" as a yes or no question AT ALL.

So rather than progressive being "content-free" because it is judged on a scale, I would say that a conception of "progressive" that is always yes or no question would be content-free. The yes or no question might be a close approximation to reality in most cases, but it does not apply in certain cases.

[ChiciB1]

115. I Live Here & As One Who Actually Campaigned Against Crist For Governor,

I have to say he's been much more moderate than I expected. In fact there were times I couldn't believe some of his decisions. I wonder how many know the dynamics of what happened with Jebby/Crist. Crist may "seem" to be a right winger to many here, and I once thought he truly was, but in reality he's made some pretty progressive decisions. I also think that he would have won as Governor if he could run again.

There are "other" factors under the radar that some may be missing too. I have hinted at this fact several times, but many may not know it yet. I think LGBT's might support Crist given his gender preference. He has stood up for gay couple adoption, he's against off shore drilling, he is now pro-choice and not a rabid ANTI-CHOICE Tea Bagger candidate. Did he change his mind on issues, for sure, but does that REALLY mean he's only an opportunist? A person has to make up their own mind. I DO believe that Jebby had a HUGE hand in pushing Crist out. He KNOWS Rubio is beholden to him and Jebby WILL expect his due when the time comes. He IS a BUSHIE after all, and don't we KNOW about how low they stoop already?? Crist went against Jebby one too many times and thus we have a Tea-Bagger looking down his rifle barrel at us! Crist has also appointed some fairly moderate judges which made Jebby mad too. He also has been better regarding education than Jebby ever was, this also made Jebby mad! There is more, but I can't recall all of it right now.

On the other hand, Meek came with some baggage too, and for those who think he's anything close to a liberal type or even very progressive, many of us here in Florida would beg to differ. As a person I like Meek, but I have NEVER felt he was the best person to run against the REPUKE MACHINE!

So, the likes of Crist stood up to THAT machine, which took a lot and that he has stayed in 2nd place throughout says a lot. I also don't think Crist can say he would or would not caucus with the Democrats, but I think he's feels more comfortable now as an Independent. Frankly it suits him better given WHO HE IS. I do think he still has his Repuke contingent who will vote for him, but he also has a large Democrats for Crist following too. I didn't join up with them, nor when they called did I say WHO I would vote for, but at least THEY called, quite a few times. Meek's campaign NEVER even sent out a flyer, let alone a phone call.

C'mon down, join the fun... we're just having one blast after the other, after all IT'S FLORIDA!! I DO understand why many don't get it, because I never would have thought I would be a cross-over vote, but I AM just THAT afraid of Jebby/Rubio and what it means in the future. Not only to THIS state, but to the Nation. Don't bet your last dollar on the fact that Jebby doesn't want to run for POTUS! He's says no, but he IS the real snake! His ego is too big NOT TO! And I would bet that he feels he can take on Sarah Palin ANY DAY OF THE WEEK. He has RUBIO, a Tea-Bagger in his pocket.

So, these are just some musing from a person that some say is a traitor. I did take a long long time to make up my mind, but Meek has been Weak from the get go.

JMHO!

[alcibiades_mystery]

83. +1000

But why would you be surprised that terminal idealists mistake a means for an end. They are unable to see any means as anything other than a concept to be fit into a conceptual system, so it's no surprise that they would consistently mistake means for ends in themselves, or focus so obtusely on so-called "hypocrisy," which usually signifies nothing other than a trivial appearance of contradictory concepts within their conceptual system. this has been the hallmark of pure idealists since Plato: mistaking means for ends, and focusing on apparent contradictions of ideas rather than material conditions of existence. You can pick these two features out in almost any post of the same kind. It's a pathology of thought.

[mzmolly]

106. Beautifully

stated. ;)

[BeFree]

188. well

I could see making such a decision if you actually could have any bearing on the outcome of the race in Florida.

Since that ain't gonna happen, the next position should be one that steers toward making sure that the principles of being a democrat are upheld, and in taking a longer range view.

Long range is that Meek is going to be around for a long time. And in recognizing that he is more like us than Crist will ever be. So support for him should be a no-brainer.

The support for the 'viable' candidate, Crist, undermines our principles as democrats. And has caused a great divide here as evidenced by the angst of many members over the allowance of this Crist support.

This is no time for fence sitting, and yall have frequently taken sides time and again on issues.

Your decision here and now leaves much to be desired.

The easy decision, were it mine, would be to stick with our kind of candidates through thick or thin. Til death do us part, as it were.

[Zhade]

194. No, Skinner, I am not confused. You are allowing a hypocritical double standard.

Per DU rules:

You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.

Democratic Underground may not be used for political, partisan, or advocacy activity by supporters of any political party or candidate other than the Democratic Party or Democratic candidates. Supporters of certain other political parties may use Democratic Underground for limited partisan activities in political races where there is no Democratic Party candidate.

Nothing in there about 'viability'. Nothing about 'pragmatism'. Nothing about 'special exceptions'. Just an iron-clad rule that you have allowed to be broken 'just this once' -- kinda like the SCOTUS decision in bush v Gore.

I can't count the number of times your mods burned and banned posters for advocating for, e.g., Greens. Yet you allow this Crist support despite your rules clearly making no exceptions whatsoever.

I'm not the one who's confused here.

[BeFree]

198. uh, yeah

Changing horses in the middle of the stream... much?

It's right there in the rules. I knew I'd seen that before.

[tjwash]

73. Pffft...half the people here lost that right when they started rah-rahing drone attacks

Thus proving that hey were not really against the bush/cheney wars, so much as they were against repugs having control of the slaughter machine instead of dems.

[sally cat]

159. Well said. Thank you.

[MadHound]

78. There is one thing I like about this Meek-Crist-Rubio dust up

It is showing the true colors of a lot of people around here. Showing up their hypocrisy, showing that all they want is a "win" at all costs, and it doesn't matter who provides them with that "win", a Dem or 'Pug.

Great post, great points, and you're right, a lot of people around here will not long forget this race, what it says about Dems, their supporters and their hypocrisy.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

84. Let's see how often they trot out the Nader bogeyman after this display of "party loyalty".

They must want Palin in the White House!


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[ChiciB1]

120. Jebby Will Wipe Palin's Ass & Do It Without Batting An Eyelash!

Jebby IS THE MACHINE here, make no mistake! I surely wish I didn't have to give him THAT much credit, but his name is everywhere in this state.

[sally cat]

160. Wow, great post. My first post here was about how shocked I am at the treatment of Meek here.

[progressoid]

80. A lot of DUers are as loyal to the Democratic Party as Democratic leaders are loyal to their base.

I'm not saying that the one caused the other but more that loyalty is a two way street. And a lot of us have taken a side street from time to time.

[alcibiades_mystery]

82. As usual

Much temper-tantruming about meta issues and so-called hypocrisy rather than material and practical assessments of actual conditions on the ground. The Left has its head in the clouds,m which is a shame, because the Left is supposed to be about the assessment of material conditions.

Instead, we get meta posts about an internet bulletin board, cheap theatrics, childish revenge fantasies, and other nonsense.

I hope your little conceptual systems attains the consistency you so desire. In the meanwhile, the rest of us would do well to focus on alleviating some of the real suffering happening here on earth.

[dionysus]

87. +1000000

[Mojorabbit]

128. +10000 nt

[Zhade]

196. Seems you missed the point. Figures.

Hypocrisy matters to me. Perhaps you're not as bothered by it.

[SidDithers]

85. Skinner's post on this very subject...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=9385361

In case you missed it.

Sid

[Lorien]

89. The same people who insist that we "hold our nose" and vote for conservative Dems

as the "lesser of evils" and NOT vote our conscious for a "spoiler" like Nader are now demanding party loyalty so that a TEABAGGER can become a Senator? Fuck that. I held my nose and voted for Kerry over Kucinich when Kucinich is the one who best represents my values. Crist's record isn't that bad. He's less horrible than many Blue dogs, in fact. It's either Crist or Rubio, and I'm NOT going to play the purity game in this situation. I'm voting for Crist because he has the best chance of beating a teabagger. Meek has run a lousy campaign and is too far behind in the polls at this point. I'm not going to waste my vote purely in a symbolic act.

[ChiciB1]

116. THANK YOU Lorien... And YOU Are Not Alone. And As One Who Lives

in Ruby Red Sarasota County, your comment is one that has resonated pretty clearly around here. I have lived in this county for 26 years and I can't remember ONE Democratic Commissioner that has EVER been elected.

The Democratic Party here is pretty lame, but the odds are generally against them anyway. The local party here doesn't seem to know what "push back" means so I no longer attend. Liberals are odd ducks to them and you find out how odd you are rather quickly. I think they're even HAPPY I don't participate anymore.

So, as you say it's hard to waste a vote FOR SYMBOLISM. Many can't wrap their head around this, but they probably never will.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

90. But you're not being PRAGMATIC.

:shrug: For a pragmatic Democrat it is all about Party and principles, until it's not. For them, a winning Republican is better than a losing Democrat.

[TreasonousBastard]

92. Sorry, but this is a load of crap...

Few, if any, have called for blind obedience or party loyalty-- the calls are usually to get past this nonsense of "principles" and "earn my vote." Voting is not a religious or moral exercise-- it is simply hiring the best person available to do a job. Sometimes, the best person available isn't all that good, but it's all you got.

In this case, Meek has absolutely no chance in hell of winning since the entry of Crist into the race has not divided the Republican vote so much as it's screwed the pooch and divided independents. And now Democrats, since they now have the Hobson's choice of Crist.

Whether or not Democrats supporting Meek earlier on is almost irrelevant. The popularity of Crist across all lines pretty much wipes out any advantage Meek would have had against Rubio alone. Meek is right that Crist should bow out as the interloper, but since that ain't gonna happen, a vote for Meek ends up as a vote for Rubio.

But, at this point it makes no difference. Meek has his supporters and they aren't moving since the ballots are printed and he's there.

If the polls are to be believed it's Rubio in for the win no matter who else does what, so maybe voting for Meek makes you feel better but still changes nothing.

[Fire1]

104. That's a piss poor argument . n/t

[Fire1]

105. That's a piss poor argument. n/t

[donco6]

114. "the nonsense of principles"

All I need to see right there.

[Valienteman]

98. There's also Obama's reluctance to endorse the Rhode Island Democrat

as a favor to an independent who endorsed Obama in 2008.

[Dappleganger]

101. In agreement with you.

And for the record, I believe that Skinner is wrong in this and in allowing these kinds of posts/support for a republican (and someone who has given ZERO evidence that he will even caucus with democrats), this will allow for DU to go even further to the middle/right. IOW, if you sell your soul to the Devil don't be surprised when he comes to collect.

[ChiciB1]

118. I Consider Myself A Liberal, Always Have... More Liberal Than Many Here

for the most part. I've even been attacked for some of my views, but I AM A LIBERAL, not just a Progressive. It may seem hypocritical, but the BIG SQUEEZE started a long time ago down here.

Living in Florida has been really difficult, especially since 2000.. but faced with Jebby/Rubio, well it's scarier than my former Representative Katherine "Cruella" Harris! I can't STAND what the truly right wing Repukes have done here, but I can't say I feel Crist is as right wing as so many are painting him.

FEAR = JEBBY/RUBIO! Real FEAR!

[ChiciB1]

119. On Edit... I Won't Say I'm Completely Correct About How Crist Will Do...

I just had to make a decision and I did.

[Fire1]

102. Well said, Zhade! I've been sayin this for the last month. n/t

[Iggo]

108. I've always thought...

...that was one of the most important rules here at Democratic Underground...that you couldn't advocate for 3rd party candidates in a race where there was a Democrat running. In fact, it was one of the overall defining rules that illustrated this site's identity and character. This exception should never have been allowed.

[Dappleganger]

121. +10000

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

122. Well, unlike the (EEK!) Greens, Crist can't be called "too liberal". K&R

[Catbird]

124. Viable Green vs. Weak Dem vs. Tea Party

Wait no longer. We already have this situation.

Tom Clements vs. Alvin Greene -- US Senate race in South Carolina
Of course everyone expects that Jim DeMint will win this race.

Personally I think the voting machines were misprogrammed or sabotaged. The precinct results for the primary just don't match the demographics.

[BeFree]

127. Yep

A big fuck up allowing Crist over Meek support.

[political_Dem]

134. I also don't envy the choice that Florida folks have to make.

But, it is a shame that Mr. Meek is being thrown under the bus just like Dr. Lani Guinier.

Party loyalty, indeed.

[apocalypsehow]

135. Zhade, you & I often disagree, but I believe I'm going to have to come down on your side on this one

Crist has already stated that he'll caucus in the Senate with whoever is in charge - be it the Democrats or the Republicans. In other words, he'll do what's best for Crist, and go with the winners/ones in charge. He's an opportunist, and a pretty conservative one at that - this notion that he's some kind of "progressive" is laughable.

Rec. :thumbsup:

[RagAss]

136. I can... I voted early and voted for Meek

[intaglio]

139. OK go start your own board

what you forget is that YOU want to "fuck over" your state by ensuring Rubio wins

[Fumesucker]

140. You are assuming that Crist would vote significantly differently than Rubio..

That's an awfully big assumption and not one that is necessarily valid either.

[pgodbold]

141. Hang on sunshine. Florida is my state too and Meek is in effect putting a monster in office. nt

[Fire1]

142. That's too bad. n/t

[Dappleganger]

172. Yeah, damn that uppity democrat!

He should've just rolled over like a good dawg for those republicans!

[1monster]

187. He wasn't "uppity" at all! Would that he had been! He did NO campaigning at all.

Apparently he thought that just getting his name on the ballot was enough. It isn't.

If anyone threw Meek under the bus, it was Meek himself.

I'm not taking the blame for him not trying. And the race card here "uppity" really ticks me off. I pretty much decided that he wasn't the one who could take on Rubio before I knew what color his skin was. He did not do his job as the candidate. That was his failure, not mine.

[Better Believe It]

143. 250,000 Florida Democrats voted for George W. Bush in 2000 and Ralph Nader was blamed for that!!

[MadMaddie]

150. Even Bill Clinton tried to get Meeks to drop out and apparantly

they are still putting enormous pressure on him.

This is bullshit...Christ is a Blue Dog or worst....I think he will be a Joe Lieberman....

Why the hell are leaders like Clinton doing this?

[Bluenorthwest]

152. Crist is not a Blue Dog! He's not a Democrat of any kind.

Lieberman was a major Democrat before going Indy. Crist was a Republican.

[MadMaddie]

154. My point is if he were to caucus with the Dems he would not

be reliable.

Watching Meeks on Olberman now and he is saying Clinton did not ask him to drop out. Interesting.

[H2O Man]

151. Recommended.

I am not impressed by the DUers advocating that democrats vote for the republican.

[WolverineDG]

156. I love it when those who don't live in a particular state start issuing orders, decrees & ultimatums

to those who do. :eyes:

Clean up your own backyard in California first before making such statements about those in other states.

To Floridian DUers, I wish you the best & support whatever decision(s) you have to make on election day.

dg

[sally cat]

162. Thank you for a brilliant, well thought out post. This situation is shameful. Mr. Meek deserves our

support.

[crikkett]

163. The days of party loyalty are numbered

I'm sorry you're upset.

[Blue_In_AK]

164. The election in Florida is much like the election in Alaska.

The difference is, while we've had some defectors, most Democrats in Alaska are standing proudly behind our man. Florida Democrats seem kind of fickle.

[LoZoccolo]

165. "But I don't ever, EVER want to hear another demand..."

I betcha don't, but what are you gonna do about it, tough guy?

[TheWatcher]

166. And what are you going to do, "tough guy", spank us? Insult us to death?

I suppose I will live in fear the rest of my life wondering what your life-threatening, punishing ridicule will be.

:eyes:

[LoZoccolo]

167. Alert splinterist posts so they get deleted.

And if enough get deleted they'll get tombstoned.

[TheWatcher]

169. Ah, good, I can go back to sleep now.

Have fun with your perceived "power."

On Edit: Looks like my previous post wasn't "spliterist" enough. And I tried so hard.

:rofl:

[LoZoccolo]

171. I'm not the one telling people they better not say this or that...

...with no means to back it up.

[TheWatcher]

173. Looks like all their posts are still here.

And no, you aren't.

You just hurl insults most of the time, and make bullying threats toward anyone who doesn't fall in line and goose step with you.

Is that splinterist enough?

[LoZoccolo]

176. I don't usually alert on every personal attack against me. n/t

[Zhade]

197. I'll point right back to this whole debacle.

Did it make you feel like a big man to sneer? Sad.

[derby378]

168. Uh, excuse me?

I never supported Crist over Meek. If you're gonna be a Democrat, then be a Democrat, for criminy's sake.

[nashville_brook]

178. big k and r. the system needs to be reformed to allow for runoffs to end spoilers.

[Name removed]

180. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BzaDem]

182. Though actually, of course, they absolutely have that right, because this is a private message board

that you do not control (where party loyalty in posts about general elections is in most cases required by the rules). Sucks, doesn't it. You obviously have the right to voluntarily leave DU, but that is about the extent of your rights to dictate to others what is acceptable on DU. If you were to start ZhadeUnderground, it would be a different story.

The admins have made it very clear what the difference is between supporting Crist in that election and supporting a progressive third party that polls at 5%. The fact that you don't understand this distinction may say something about your ability to understand basic concepts, but it does not say anything about the distinction somehow being invalid or non-obvious.

[Zhade]

189. *cough*

NT!

[JJ]

191. What R U talking about, we've always been the party of the lesser-evil!

[Dinger]

195. Wish I Wasn't Too Late To Rec, But I Can Give This A Kick :)

:patriot:

[mkultra]

200. uh, yes we do

we demand that you don't let crazy ass republicans win. Its simple logic. on the crazy scale it goes Rubio>Crist>Meek.

If Meek is clearly tanking, such is the case, then make the strategic move.