Just a friendly reminder, from the DU Rules:

[UrbScotty]

One of the most important ways which we can influence our government is with our vote. For better or worse, the United States is a stable two-party democracy, and in the vast majority of elections the more progressive of the two viable candidates is the Democrat. For this reason, we believe that members should not post messages that explicitly discourage voting, or that inadvertently help Republicans by encouraging people to throw away their votes on third-party spoiler candidates. Members may advocate for non-Democratic candidates ONLY in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative.

Emphasis mine.

At the same time, DU rules permit us to constructively criticize Democratic elected officials. Indeed, I have had my qualms with this President and with most Democratic elected officials. (I'm still a little upset about the whole 'no public option' thing.)

Don't you think we can criticize our President without threatening to withhold our votes? (It's not like Tim Pawlenty would be more liberal than Obama.)

[gateley]

1. Keep your eye on the big picture -- it's about more than making

a statement. We won't "show them" as much as dig ourselves deeper into despair.

Recommend. :thumbsup:

[LynneSin]

2. The Primaries are the time to find the right candidate...

The General Election is the time we unite together and get the dems elected.

[LiberalAndProud]

3. One can argue that the Democratic vote will be depressed

even if we don't intend to withhold our votes. I haven't made a final decision on that yet.

We can ignore the probably political fallout, but that won't make it go away.

[Bluenorthwest]

4. The only 3rd Party promotion I have seen here was for Crist

who had been a Republican 20 minutes prior to that. They pushed him openly, opposed the actual Democratic candidate openly, and advocated for the 3rd Party, in this case, the Recent Republican Reject Party.

[Fumesucker]

12. Well said..

The hypocrisy in that case was absolutely stunning..

[socialist_n_TN]

18. Yeah, that Crist thing surprised the hell out of me too

nm

[dbonds]

5. Asking for a Progressive primary challenger is withing the rules.

And we need an alternative. I have been so disappointed with Obama.

[nashville_brook]

6. congratulations on your promotion to uber-mod!!!

[mitchtv]

10. +1

thanks

[Starry Messenger]

28. lol.

I was going to ask when my dad signed up here, but yours is better. :thumbsup:

[Lifelong Protester]

7. The anti-sanity unrecc'ers are out, I see.

Your voice is sane. I saw a LOT of things here last night that made me hit 'alert' more than once.

[MichiganVote]

8. Stating what a member will do with their vote is not a violation of DU rules.

If a person says that they are not going to vote for a Dem. candidate on this board that's their business and it does not explicitly discourage voting. Nor does it encourage others to vote for a candidate of an opposing party.

Having said that, constructive criticism is fine unless you perceive that someone or some group is lighting you house on fire. People tend to react strongly to that.

Just sayin'.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

17. It is not explicit, but it is implicit. Not to mention, it is demoralizing and unproductive.

If you're not voting for Democrats, then you're wasting your time here.

[MichiganVote]

21. The OP is arguing it is "explicit". As for your claims-no thanks.

I'm not going to be a hostage to any political party that demoralizes and marginalizes American seniors. And that is my choice.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

22. Of course it is. I didn't tell you leave. I just think it's ridiculous that you're posting in DU

but you're not a Democrat anymore. Makes no sense to me, but to each his/her own.

[MichiganVote]

23. Well thank you for that rousing, rancourous and totally erroneous assumption.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

24. Well, then. Prove me wrong. Work to elect progressive Dems to office

We can't afford to lose more soldiers in the field!

[damntexdem]

9. It's a simple reality: if Obama attacks SS, he deserves to lose our votes.

We can fervently hope (as I do) that he doesn't end up doing it; but if he does, there MUST be consequences.

[lame54]

11. If I can't withhold it - it has no value

[saras]

13. Acceptance of the spoiler effect is capitulation - it's over then

[IDemo]

14. My state hasn't gone for a Democrat in the general election since '64

And it won't in 2012, with or without my vote.

[Tiggeroshii]

15. and what state is that?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

16. I've stated this many, many times, ad nauseum. Regardless of how we feel about Obama,

PLEASE, DU!! I am begging you!!

PLEASE. DO. NOT. PUNISH. GOOD. DEMOCRATS. RUNNING. FOR. LOWER. OFFICES. BY. WITHOLDING. YOUR. VOTE!!!

The biggest problem we have is NOT Obama!! It is NOT the Democrats serving in Congress, in either chamber.

Our biggest problem is with the GOP stronghold on most of our state legislatures. That is where most of the damage to this economy and this democracy lies.

Please!!! Support Democrats at the local and state levels!! PLEASE!!!

The Republicans are kicking our asses, stripping away union rights, abortion rights, voting rights; attacking immigrants, Muslims, gays, etc.

We really need to wake up and focus our anger and energy at THE REPUBLICANS!!!!

[socialist_n_TN]

19. Can't I be as angry at Democrats who do the same

things as Republicans?

BTW, even as a Marxist, I've ALWAYS voted Democrat (yes, I voted for Carter and Mondale both over Reagan) and I've never said not participate in bourgeoisie democracy. But do I vote for somebody just because of the team colors, even if they're to the right of Reagan? Remember I voted against Reagan BECAUSE OF THE POLICIES HE ESPOUSED not just because he was a Republican.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

20. That's not the fucking point!!! Work at the state level to elect progressives to office.

That's the fucking point!!!

[TheKentuckian]

25. What has that got to do with weeding the overrun garden?

It isn't binary.

[peace4ever]

29. nothing, they just like screaming, and cursing, freaking out, belittling DUers

and getting away with it.

it's a rush for them.

[Youth Uprising]

30. I agree.

If your only option is between a Democorp and a Republican, by all means, don't vote. But Progressives need our support. We need to vote for Progressive Democrats AND Green Party candidates.

[peace4ever]

26. voting for another dem is within the rules

[Union Scribe]

27. Our votes are the only meaningful and legal threat we can deliver.

If people threatened their leaders with those votes a little more earnestly, we'd have a better government. I don't owe my vote to anyone, and the candidate who wants it will have to earn it.

[LooseWilly]

31. No.

We can't criticize without threatening to withhold our votes. If we try, our criticisms will carry no weight, because our votes are guaranteed anyway... and I can't think of a single instance of a politician deciding to change his/her mind on policy issues based on criticism from a constituent who promises to vote for them anyway.

It's the way the system is designed. Voting/not-voting is systemically designed to allow criticism to be 'voiced' by constituents. What WASN'T designed to be part of the system is the political parties and unquestioning loyalty thereunto.

[LWolf]

32. DU is not a free speech zone.

It never has been.

Therefore, I limit my remarks to what is allowed, and simply don't include my votes in the discussion.

I not only can criticize the President, I have relentlessly criticized him since his first appalling appointment.

He's proved me correct, again and again and again. I get no satisfaction, and a great deal of dismay and fury from that.

I would love nothing better than to have Obama vindicate his presidency in my eyes. Let me know when the pigs grow wings.