General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs it time for a "fatwa" from Skinner?
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Skinner (a host of the General Discussion forum).
Last edited Fri Mar 28, 2014, 04:41 PM - Edit history (1)
Is it time to re-evaluate Admin's decision to be more open to conservative and non-progressive opinions?
In the early days of DU, many opinions now prominent on DU would have been short-lived. They would have been "tombstoned". DU was for progressive-minded folks because conservative thought was dominant everywhere. We did not need more of it on DU.
I understand that times change and sometimes decisions are made for economic reasons. Has DU somehow forgotten that it is radical conservatism that is the enemy of us all? There is no room for compromise.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Glassunion
(10,201 posts)Champion Jack
(5,378 posts)Boom Sound 416
(4,185 posts)Glassunion
(10,201 posts)Were they egg based?
Javaman
(62,439 posts)dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,278 posts)Whoever they are.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)wall_dish
(85 posts)Waterboard them until they admit their transgressions and then waste them for treason.
calimary
(80,693 posts)Glad you're here! It's a lovely fantasy, isn't it?
wall_dish
(85 posts)Lovely fantasy is right, but only a fantasy.
LongTomH
(8,636 posts)LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)YUMM.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)and a little more rare.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Last edited Fri Mar 28, 2014, 03:17 PM - Edit history (1)
...and you've got heaven (and a heart-attack) on a bun....
Bloody good thing they don't have a Fatburger 'round here...
Aerows
(39,961 posts)You are a no-holds-barred burger eater!
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...any more frequently than that and I'd be dead... :-D
CFLDem
(2,083 posts)RKP5637
(67,030 posts)CFLDem
(2,083 posts)you can accidentally get both. That's how I know I'm having a lucky day!
RKP5637
(67,030 posts)genwah
(574 posts)diced onion batter fried in oil is a fritter, I don't care how it's shaped.
JimDandy
(7,318 posts)The best fast food ones I've ever had were at Carls Jr and at Zips.
But, so I don't contribute to the thread hijacking, I am also getting awfully tired of having to sift through the tons of conservative, pro-corporate, pro-MIC and pro-NSA surveillance posts that are now all over DU on some days.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)Always fresh made.
blueamy66
(6,795 posts)Yummy bbq sauce and onions rings on the hamburger. For a buck!
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)Champion Jack
(5,378 posts)NickB79
(19,111 posts)The animal welfare/animal rights/environmental destruction-caused-by-meat arguments back and forth would go down in history here on DU.
calimary
(80,693 posts)I'll take one of those! Out back, and waste it!
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)QC
(26,371 posts)since I am a vegetarian and all.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)Best idea yet.
leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)seems to me everyone sittin around with like minds and like thoughts without any toleration towards others who are different than you seems a little right wingy.
"youre different therefore we wont tolerate you". what also seems to me is that there are many groups of various types that have and still hear this very thing and you want to bring it into the big tent?
kentuck
(110,950 posts)Democrats have to stand for something.
Hopefully something that resembles Democratic ideals, not DINO ideals.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)actually, just right vs left within the democratic party.
polichick
(37,152 posts)iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)the neo-cons to give up without a fight?
DU has been targeted by centrists groups for years now in an attempt to sway moods and thoughts in our community
a thriving website giving out liberal solutions probably isn't seen as a very grand thing to anyone not a liberal
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)on how much any current politician can do to move us in that direction.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)its the idealists that are causing all the trouble....you cannot have a strategy when all you want is some utopia that can never be achieved....they have zero ability to understand that their opponents are not going to just roll over and let them have their "utopia"...they don't care about that...even if they were able to get what they wanted...they would just shout and stomp their feet and throw more temper tantrums because even that wouldn't be good enough. The whole point is....as long as they are complaining...nobody expects them to do anything about it...easy peasy.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)If only he would have realized that his opponents were not going to just roll over and let him have his "utopia". How dare he protest and march. His complaining... sheesh... didn't he realize nobody expected him to do anything about it?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Do you have a complex? You think these are about YOU apparently.....
guilty conscious?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)President Obama and the Democrats would be the object of MLK's dissastisfaction.....right...keep telling yourself that.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)are YOU here to bash Democrats or support them....I don't care what your pet peeve issue is....answer the question...simple as that.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Warpy
(110,900 posts)and it's true of any party or any website. You should see the continental vs. English debates on my knitting site.
Still, I'd love to see the "underground" put back into Democratic Underground. It should be a haven for progressives, not a hospital for disenchanted Republicans.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)3 different people tried to teach me the English way over the years. It was hopeless, I sucked, never got the hang of it, the resulting scarf always looked terrible! Then, a friend said that some people had their brains wired for continental and taught me that way. Took me 5 minutes to learn and by the end of the week, I was faster than her friend who had been knitting (English) for 25 years. Now I can knit stuff that is adorable and complicated. woohoo!
Thought I'd bring the debate over here to DU (since I've never been on a knitting board yet...). Something has to compete with left v right, breastfeeding, circumcision, Olive Garden, pit bulls etc etc. Time for something new!
Warpy
(110,900 posts)and I'm a picker instead of a thrower, too.
Let the games begin!
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)Climate realists(those who understand the dangers of climate change but who don't buy into end-of-the-world theories and who realize that all is not lost) vs. Climate Doomers("It's worse than we thought! Worse than we thought! Wooooorrrssseee thaannnn weeeeee thooooouuuuught!". Y'know, stuff like that).
Here's a few more:
Those who disagree with "White Privilege" theory vs. its most fanatical defenders.
Those who know that Obama is trying to do the best he can vs. those who believe he's not "liberal enough".
Those who realize that a centrist Democrat winning is better than a progressive losing vs. those who believe that only running progressives will work no matter the political situation.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Last edited Sat Mar 29, 2014, 10:06 AM - Edit history (2)
over a liberal candidate in a Democratic primary, even makes a video for that Conservadem candidate, is definitely not "liberal enough".
MsLeopard
(1,265 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)There are heated arguments between left-wingers with different views on different issues, but there's virtually no-one on DU who could be described as a "right-winger", and very, very few who could even be described as "centrist" by American standards*; most of the debate is between people from the far, far left of American political spectrum, and in many of the disagreements it's not obvious which position is the more left-wing one.
Describing it as "left vs right" smacks of an attempt to grab the moral high ground by playing "leftier than thou", I think.
*Note that that's an important qualifier; by European standards many more DUers are centrist.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)I wouldn't mind at all. In fact, I'd pay money for it.
DFW
(54,050 posts)Even I was called a neo-con once on here. Your post could get expensive!
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)I didn't say right winger or even bring them up. I'm talking purely about the democratic party as a whole. I do see centrists as being very corporate friendly and more willing to embrace austerity, which is very anti-populist. They are simply to the right of liberals. I do not think centrists are liberals, but I do think they are more liberal than a right winger, especially when it comes to culture.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)I don't know who you're labelling centrists, but if you're talking about a significant number of DUers then you're wrong, almost all of them aren't centrists, they're liberals.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)I honestly see policies from Obama and Hillary as being centrist positions, and notice about half the site defending those policies, whereas the other half isn't. This is why I think there is a left vs right tug-of-war going on here. I do not think most of DU is that liberal, but then again, I am pretty far to the left. I may be wrong, I'm open to that possibility.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)There is no doubt that H Clinton and B Obama are the sorts of politicians who talk liberal and act center -- and often far right of center. I mean, we wouldn't confuse Obama/Clinton with Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders -- or even Barbara Boxer or Al Franken. That is plain for anybody to see. I don't think there would be any debate about that. And your argument is that there are a large number of people on the site these days who reflexively defend either Hillary or Obama practically 100% of the time.
But not everything Clinton or Obama supports is to the right of Nixon or Eisenhower. Some of their positions could certainly be considered at least a little liberal.
So I don't know how one makes a litmus test here. I would turn it around. Several of us have spent some time over the past few days identifying what a 2014 Democrat's version of the old Contract with America might look like. We came up with 9 points that any real Democrat should support. I'd like to think that about 95% of the people here could support this plan, and the other 5% really should be gone. This is not a far liberal agenda. It is actually positions that polls show us have 70% - 80% support across the American public. In other words, we don't have to pursue a radical agenda to make some progress in this country. We just have to pressure the leaders to work for the majority of Americans and not for the 0.1%. Here is that plan:
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)ForgoTheConsequence
(4,846 posts)I see the bigger issue as being the establishment democrats and the leftists being at each-others throats when in reality they probably agree 95% of the time. One side takes any criticism of Obama personally, whether it's legit or not, and the other side seems to think everything is Obama's fault.
That being said, I have noticed an influx of "conservatives" recently, especially when it comes to unions, there are always 2 or 3 anti union posts in almost any labor thread.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)The positive aspects of unions, what they do, who they help and why they are good.
TBF
(31,921 posts)I am older and have a dad who belonged to a union. How many folks who are under 40 in this country have had that experience? Not nearly enough would be my guess.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)including loyalists, firebaggers, Obamabots, moonbats, Vichy Democrats, milquetoast Democrats, conservadems, Blue Dogs, Red Dogs,Green Dogs, emoprogs, pseudoprogs, pseudopods and...
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)but I'm not even sure about that guy.
I like your sense of humor.
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)I don't really think "we" should be banning anyone who posts here in support of Democrats, either in office or running for office.
That seems to me to be basic good sense, somehow.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)riqster
(13,986 posts)LongTomH
(8,636 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Squinch
(50,773 posts)Can't believe the "let the Democrats die in the election" crap I'm arguing against here. People are overt about their wish for the conservatives to win. It's like Christmas dinner at my tea bagger relatives' house.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Squinch
(50,773 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)MineralMan
(146,192 posts)opinions being posted here. Can you point me to some of those with links?
I'm puzzled by your post.
kentuck
(110,950 posts)Al the comments that defend the Iraq War or those that attempt to justify that despicable episode. Just scroll down the threads.,
BeyondGeography
(39,278 posts)A comment that started with, "I was opposed to the Iraq war."
Can we stop with this bullshit already?
kentuck
(110,950 posts)That is progress if we can all agree with your opinion about the Iraq War.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)able to attack the President. They will stretch any statement to, and perhaps beyond, the breaking point to do so.
BeyondGeography
(39,278 posts)Progressive dog
(6,861 posts)steve2470
(37,457 posts)MineralMan
(146,192 posts)To tell the truth, though, I haven't seen anyone defending the Iraq war around here. I see people defending the President's words regarding it, but then, he ended that war and opposed it very early on.
But, I'm not seeing anyone saying the Iraq war was a good idea. I can't imagine anyone saying exactly that on DU.
I can imagine people here saying that it took time to end it, because that's a true statement. I can imagine people here saying that leaving that war was difficult. But, I see nobody defending it on DU.
Again, if you can point out someone saying that the Iraq war was justifiable with a link, I'll go have a look.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)Ever have a look in the gungeon? You notice all the opposition to feminism and discussions of racism? That all looks damn conservative to me.
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)I have noticed misogynistic posts and, as member of MIRT, have voted to PPR newcomers who take those positions. The whole gun issue is a morass, and I tend to stay away from it as much as possible.
In any case, I don't believe that's what the poster is talking about.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)now say they will not vote for Democrats.
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)then they are in violation of the DU TOS. That's an admin issue.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)because in the past couple of days I've seen a number of people say quite clearly they will not be voting for Democrats. It is a TOS issue.
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)If the admins choose to, they can take action. As individual DUers, that's really the only option we have, other than to bring up the issue in a thread.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)The admins should issue a fatwa?
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)we haven't had a pogrom for like, 12 hours.
Violet_Crumble
(35,954 posts)Can you last remember when we had a putsch? I can't, and I'm holding out hope the atmosphere could be rife for one...
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)They are posting about the prevaleance of conservative and anti-progressive values. Those here criticizing the president normally do not share these characteristics. Rather, its normally the defenders of the establishment, third-way, status quo position who do. I'm pretty sure the OP wants the establishment, conservative "democrats" banished. Right?
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)Banned. There are a number of people at war with the Democratic party. If someone refuses to vote Democrat and consistently bashes the Dems, it makes zero difference if they imagine themselves to be leftist or not. When their actions and posting suppresses the Dem vote and paves the way for GOP electoral success, they are the same as the Repunlicans as far as I'm Concerned. I don't care what their excuse is, nor do I necessarily believe it. What matters is what people do. If they argue the two partIes are the same and won't vote for Democrats, they might as well be Republicans since the results of their positions are the same: Increasing GOP power. I seriously doubt the OP wants to ban Democrats to make more space for self-absorbed nihilists who for some inexplicable reason only just figured out the US govt serves moneyed interests, something every single administration has done since the birth of the Republic.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Might not like what they hear. That includes me.
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)The sexist, racist, and anti-gay shit that is endorsed here is appalling, for a place that claims to promote Democrats and Democratic (sic) principles. The abuse of Obama, and yes, it's abuse and not constructive criticism, is mind-boggling.
Now if that's what the owners are satisfied with, fine. It's their website, they can do whatever the hell they want. But let's not kid ourselves about what this site actually is.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)If you DON'T "critique" this president in really hostile, volatile ways, you're subjected to hostile, volatile insults here.
It makes it HARDER to look with a reasonable critical eye at the whole picture, positive and negative.
I want to read useful information, learn when I'm missing something. There's too much complexity for one person to understand everything going on. But i don't want to be attacked because I haven't expressed enough hatred for PBO.....yet that's what seems to be the dividing line here now.
Also, the interpretation that PBO supports something because he doesn't use the snarky and/or incendiary language we use here is ridiculous. Asinine. Ignorant. Childish.
Also also, thinking that cowboy tactics are what we need to right the sick system that's developed over 30 and more years is about instant gratification.
/end rant.
PS on edit... The extreme PBO bashing doesnt help get more dems elected. Which is critical, because the pukes are dangerous. As in, malignantly, climactically, urgently dangerous.
====
I said this elsewhere; I'm sayin it again.
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)One group is screaming that Obama is a fucking so-and-so, the other is engaging in cult of personality worship at a disturbing level.
I have been bothered by a lot of what the President has done, or not done, so I'm no cheerleader. But I also know that he has to work within certain parameters and to expect more just isn't reasonable.
The main thing we, as a democratic community, need to do is work to get more Democrats elected. We need to outnumber them because that's basically our only hope for the time being. Republicans are indeed very dangerous, especially to women and minorities, and they MUST be stopped.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)I admit to liking him a lot, and being aware of the massive deterioration he's charged with managing, I feel more supportive than negative. Imagine that, I have to feel I must apologize for saying I like him, because I don't want to be attacked!
But if I'm going to develop a balanced opinion and make intelligent deductions, I need to read realistic critique and realistic praise. Explanations of what's going on......I can only speak about issues I feel I have some understanding about.
as you said, republicans are indeed very dangerous, especially to women and minorities, AND the planet...and they MUST be stopped. I agree, we have got to outnumber them. Breaking down the repuke media/network monopoly should also head the list.
I will say one "devil's advocate" thing, though----the intensity and talking points around here does make for momentary entertainment! Really pulls you in and appeals to emotions like anger, offense, defense, loyalty, tribalism.....
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Hekate
(90,189 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)llmart
(15,499 posts)Thank you for so eloquently saying what I've been thinking. This website has become a disappointment in many ways just because some people want to use it to stroke their egos. It's truly sad and yes, sophomoric and childish and serves no purpose in getting Democrats elected.
Number23
(24,544 posts)next to their name.
I'd rather flush a $20 than give money to web sites or any group that allows and even seems to encourage through the jury system the type of behavior that you mentioned.
Cirque du So-What
(25,812 posts)At one time, DU was a go-to place for actual research, and I was a proud contributor. Nowadays, I'd be really pissed if I were to consider that I was actually paying to support some of the pure-D shit I've seen.
Number23
(24,544 posts)BainsBane
(53,001 posts)I alerted on it, in fact. It came back 0-6 to leave.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)policy? Could you be "tombstoned" for supporting some specific position of a DEMOCRATIC President on the DU because it's in line with conservative thinking?
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,846 posts)And I think the reason for so much of the infighting. Obama himself said "Nixon was more liberal" on some issues. There is no doubt that Obama has some center-right ideas and policies, the question is, do we support those automatically because we support the president (and yes, I still support Obama) or is there room for criticism? Obama also asked us to hold his feet to the fire.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT 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). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.
I realize there's a 3rd party presence here, with some serious libertarian overtones, but unless the TOS changes, the mission of this board is & has always been to "Elect Democrats". When Skinner changes his TOS to "kentuck approved Democrats", we're all in trouble.
Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).
Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Along with racist, it is a catch all insult for anyone who disagrees with, say, TPP. See my Sig for more.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)I have noticed that the dinos, like Fox "news" addicts, throw out a lot of buzz words and dog whistles which have nothing to do with facts, but do get a lot of morons to nod their heads and chuckle.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)Hip_Flask
(233 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)you don't just toss in your cards thinking that you can't win.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)that those most hostile to the voices and concerns of subaltern groups also express the greatest opposition to the president and the Democratic Party. Radical conservatism is a good name for it. Self-absorbed nihilism is another. But yeah, I see posts as destructive in that they suppress the Democratic vote. Anything that paves the way for Republican electoral victory is bad news.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)But yes there are real world implications to losing the Senate or losing the White House.
Bryant
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Along with Orwell's negative nationalism.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)... they've decided that the system is so broken, a total collapse is what's needed for their version of Utopia to come into existence.
So rather than fight the GOP, they attack other Dems, those they deem unholy.
They don't really mind if the GOP wins and destroys things because that just accelerates the move towards their Utopia.
Of course, they ignore the fact that there is a part of the right who thinks that THEIR version of Utopia, a Christian Fascist version, rises from the same ashes after the collapse.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)because whatever emerges from such a collapse will inevitably be more authoritarian. Historical precedent demonstrates as much.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)... of the actual outcome from a total collapse, but I do see that basic perspective on DU regularly.
There's nothing we can do. TPTB control everything. Democrats are the same as Republicans. The collapse is coming.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)...in DU's case, a single-payer etc paradise.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)Just because people are conservative and are attacking progressives doesn't mean they should be banished in my opinion. They probably just need to be informed and educated
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Anonymity prevents that. Everyone online is a hardliner on whatever issue they're talking about
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Otherwise, no opinion at all.
Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)DU is it's true self, and the problem isn't that DU isn't "progressive enough."
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Stopped reading after the first paragraph:
Why do folks try to do this? Utter bullshit.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)Radical conservatism on DU?
I had to read that twice thinking I missed a word....
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)I didn't read any further.
Starting with the disingenuous premise, I knew it wasn't going to get any better.
TBF
(31,921 posts)Troubling. Having said that I could make a list of obvious Obama supporters who I really like. They may be a bit more conservative than I'd like. But I don't mind hearing their opinions. When push comes to shove we're all going to vote for Democrats so why exclude? I know I wouldn't feel very happy if they wanted to exclude me for being too left.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)nt
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)In particular:
Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).
Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.
Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT 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). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.
No bigoted hate speech.
Do not post bigotry based on someone's race or ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or lack thereof, disability, or other comparable personal characteristic. To be clear: This includes any post which states opposition to full equal rights for gays and lesbians; it also includes any post asserting disloyalty by Jewish Americans, claiming nefarious influence by Jews/Zionists/Israel, advocating the destruction of the state of Israel, or arguing that Holocaust deniers are just misunderstood. In determining what constitutes bigotry, please be aware that we cannot know what is in anyone's heart, and we will give members the benefit of the doubt, when and only when such doubt exists.
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)If you do, you can argue SOP issues with people who are making those decisions. There's always a discussion ongoing about it among the hosts of GD. You can be part of that discussion.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)claim to have an interest in the job, which is enforcing the SOP, do that job. That way I could pat them on the back and say job well done.
Ohio Joe
(21,655 posts)I never saw that... When did that happen?
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)as long as they're "respectful" about it. there is nothing respectful about being anti-choice.
Ohio Joe
(21,655 posts)And I assumed the Admins knew about them... I've seen their bullshit get the response it deserves and figured there must have been alerts, so they had to be aware... I did not know they had actually said anything about it. That is disturbing.
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)there is one poster who has proclaimed abortion is murder on more than one occasion and is allowed to remain here and spout that bullshit.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)porn, circumcision or at what age children must no longer sleep with their parents -- Then we can put the current ugly arguments aside for awhile
donco
(1,548 posts)what I click on and I read offends MY EYES, admin should THEREFORE sweep the vermin out.GOT IT.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)seveneyes
(4,631 posts)Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)flying rabbit
(4,612 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)A fat one?
I declare!
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)is whatever remains of left-leaning opinions.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)So no.
Maraya1969
(22,441 posts)we found one they lived a short life.
Now I am bombarded by them every time I come to this site.
There is an election coming up in 2014. All these anti-progressive post only hurt us.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)"A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى?; plural fatāwā Arabic: in the Islamic faith is the term for the legal opinion or learned interpretation that a qualified jurist or mufti can give on issues pertaining to the Islamic law."
In other words, a religious determination of guilt and condemnation.
What fucking website am I on?
And against whom would you direct this religious condemnation?
Who are you, and what have you done with my old beloved friend kentuck?
kentuck
(110,950 posts)Hoping to stimulate a discussion about what we stand for or should stand for as we approach the upcoming election. No, I do not expect a fatwa from Skinner but I would like to increase the awareness about why we are here on DU?
Is it a place for serious discussion or is it a place to see who csn come up with the most humorous unserious response? Do we want to see the Democrats win the next election and is it possible if we continue to criticize the leaders of our Party? Or has the Party crossed the Rubicon?
I think there is deep concern that the Republicans will take over the Senate and maybe the WH in 2016 and that is underlying a lot of the oresent dissension on DU.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Left-wing fringe trolls go on and on.
Sid
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Even ones that have little to add save insults and enemas.
Or at least that has been my observation.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Left wing trolls, regardless of their nationality, disrupt and sow FUD with impunity.
Sid
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Don't seem smart enough to hack in, my conclusion is: that they are here is self evident if not self identified.
What is a left wing troll anyway? Is that like a Red scare thing? You see son, the left in this country are called Democrats and by definition are not trolls on their own Democratic boards.
What party do you belong to? Is it anti-US-left only, or does your party oppose the left parties in Canada as well?
A leftist is only a troll when viewed by a righty conservative, the mask is very thin on most clowns and slips at times like these.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)but fringe left-wing trolls post on and on and on.
Sid
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(48,786 posts)You seem to have a very narrow understanding of what it means to troll.
Just because "left = good, right = bad" around here does not mean that lefties can do no wrong.
There is a well-respected lefty-progressive writer on here who made a spectacular statement that was as effective as any troll statement (though it was not intended or posted as a troll) when he called Obama a "used car salesman" (I don't know if "piece of shit" was part of it or not).
Some people troll on purpose by making such provocative statements. Other topics include women's issues (swimsuit issue example), guns, banks, capitalism vs socialism vs communism vs anarchy, etc.
Nope. Widen your horizon.
Corruption Inc
(1,568 posts)It diminishes everything with it's lack of credibility, associated bullying and trolling. It's so easy to spot too, repetitive sloganeering that appeals to emotional responses instead of rational thinking.
People can disagree about a million different things but allowing propagandists to outright call another DUer a racist and then have that post stand while the jurors insult the victim of the bullying is extremely discrediting to this site.
You can bet that most people are too annoyed to even bring that up too and will be avoiding this site because of it.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)There is a division on DU, that's definite.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)geckosfeet
(9,644 posts)Brigid
(17,621 posts)On more than a few occasions, two in one day. And I believe I remember once being on three in one day. I'm just sayin'.
LiberalAndProud
(12,799 posts)Sometimes they make it to the greatest page before they sink. But they sink.
Skinner has provided us with remarkable tools to tailor our own DU experience. For example, I have used the trash thread feature liberally in the last day or so.
I find that my agreement factor with a given DUer will vary from topic to topic. However, if you find your blood pressure rising while reading the opinion of some, use ignore rather that trying to dictate to Skinner how to run his site, for all the good that will do. (None, I would guess.)
We have very few right-wingers around here, and when the occasional civil war breaks out, I find myself agreeing with points from both factions. If it's your wish to stifle the discussion, this probably isn't the place for you.
SunsetDreams
(8,571 posts)Javaman
(62,439 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)KARL ROVE HAS BEEN INDICTED.
We were so united and full of hope, even in the face of bogus stories.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)It's a free-for-all right now, anyone can post almost anything and not only get away with it, but garner lots of "support". It's an endless feedback-loop of stinky bullshit.
The lack of "unrec" guarantees that long time Democratic DU'ers have no power at all when it comes to maintaining quality content on DU. Without it the crap rises straight to the top.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)If only because it would allow people to see what the general consensus is on any particular subject. I see a lot of threads with a shit ton of responses and it looks like it's a popular view on DU - until you click on the link and see it's all the same 6 people high fiving each other and carrying on. If one of those threads had 30 recs and 250 unrecs, we could see just what a farce that particular thread was. There is a good portion of DUers that don't dare enter into those threads for fear of being 'attacked' relentlessly. That might change with a view of recs v unrecs.
justabob
(3,069 posts)CBGLuthier
(12,723 posts)Burn the witches!!!!
I think in all honestly what it may be time for is this place to shut the fuck down. Before it becomes the mutual ass-kissing circle jerk echo chamber some folks would rather have.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)especially given the number of people who think Obama is an actual "liberal" as opposed to a Center-Right Republican (Rockerfeller/Eisenhower version), it gets tricky when you draw a line and say anyone of this side is "out of here."
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Ya, there is lots of wacky...but when the Inquisition Board starts to say yay or nay on "opinions", well......
yikes.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)bluestate10
(10,942 posts)have slipped out of the family somehow. Some of my kin are going to get water boarded until they confess to something they knew nothing about. Maybe that will satisfy the OP.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)BlueJac
(7,838 posts)and the Democrats have moved steadily to right. I guess they are leaving lots of good progressive minded people behind. I know I am one of them along with many of you here. I used to wonder where my country went but I have found out over the last few years, and it is to the right, right, right. Not a place I really want to be.
kentuck
(110,950 posts)I think a lot of progressives are torn over the direction the Party is going. At the same time, they have nowhere else to go. The "left" is dead. And they died just at the moment they were needed. They surrendered their few remaining principles for political expediency. The corporations are gathering their spoils,
BlueJac
(7,838 posts)big money moves politicians, I have always wondered what moves the people. From what I have seen here, is people following blindly just because they voted for them, and believed in their message.
I must be old school, because I believe in liberal principles and will turn my back on anyone that lets me down politically. I want them to hold the line and not let it slip, always to the right. I am done with that. The younger people are waking up but they must get involved in voting and not get discouraged. The Democratic party has catered to big money and that has been their down fall, their message is weak if even audible! Obama was always a corporatist and a free market guy, nothing should be to surprising. ACA is just a pay back to big business for acting like they are playing ball with health care. It is still insurance not health care, just a middleman that collects his unneeded share. Although better than what we had before. But not a victory.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)who claims to contribute $100K/year to the party in NC. He actually said, in his posts, that the party would like to get rid of all liberals, period.
I can't find it or I'd post the link.
So that's pretty much where we are, including the president and the entire Fan Club. They have decided that the party should be far to the right of Ronald Reagan, and will only keep liberals around to blame for the inevitable trouncing at the polls
riqster
(13,986 posts)His site, his rules, his call.
get the red out
(13,459 posts)Yes, just my opinion.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)They come here to disrupt, and you can see from the responses to this post who a few of them are.
There are very few forums for progressives and for liberal Democrats.
This was at one time a safe haven for us.
I agree that those who consistently espouse very conservative views should be encouraged to leave the site. I don't know how you do it without making very subjective judgments that could be wrong.
I believe in freedom of speech, but atheists are not generally invited to give the sermons in traditional Christian churches -- for a reason. And anti-gun people are not usually invited to give speeches at the NRA.
This is a forum for forward-thinking, liberal Democrats. The conservatives have their own forums in which they can develop their ideas (assuming they have ideas). This is for us and should be maintained as a safe place for us.
Thanks for posting this. Very hard to implement, but really important to think about.
We can start with eliminating some of the jokers with less than 5,000 posts who immediately responded to this post with nonsense posts. That is the technique that disrupters are using on DU now. If they don't like an OP, they start responding one after the other with silly, off-the-topic posts that make intelligent discussion impossible.
LongTomH
(8,636 posts)And, by the way, I've been around DU since the early days.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,149 posts)That should stop any effect of disruption that you see. You'll not see what they say again, or any sub-thread that goes where they want it to. You'll only see the posts from sensible people.
But I'd suggest that an OP basically calling for a purge should expect some 'nonsense' in return.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)RW views on guns and on women's issues and race because the party is supposedly a big tent and Democrats hold different views on those issues. Now we find out a lot of those people aren't Democrats and don't plan to vote for Democrats. So why do we have to keep putting up with them?
NutmegYankee
(16,177 posts)Forgive me if I think you are just repeating that to try to tarnish those you disagree with on certain issues.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)They will not be voting for Democrats. You can read the threads yourself to see who they are.
NutmegYankee
(16,177 posts)Care you provide some examples?
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)WIth the poll on the Democratic Party.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)underpants
(182,271 posts)kentuck
(110,950 posts)I doubt that the post accomplished anything, anyway.
underpants
(182,271 posts)I particularly liked your flicking-matches approach as opposed to the more traditional fuse method for getting the flame to the gasoline.
It was a good post. I agree.
Gman
(24,780 posts)(March 01) to be exact. As you know, the D in DU stands for Democratic (Party). All here were Democrats because we had nothing else at the time.
And as you know, I'm not a progressive, never will be. I've been called a corporatist (and your point is...?). and other things much worse. Like a great many here I don't always agree with progressive positions. I used to occasionally get PM's from people who agree with what I've said that's not popular with progressives but they don't want to put up with the pissyness and shittyness they'll get with their comment. You and I have talked and agree to disagree and I respect you for that. But calling DU a progressive site is wrong. It's not now nor was it in the beginning and shouldn't be now. DU has always been open to any Democrat.
But ban the RW trolls with their RW talking points presented as just another Dem opinion. OTOH. I don't much care for what is said in the RKBA forum, but I've got friends that own guns and they're good Democrats. I own a few shotguns, but no handguns. To each his own
I also have the women's forums trashed because I just don't want to hear it no matter how well intentioned they are. But to each his own.
So no, Skinner does not to call a fatwa. Just patrol the place BAU and we'll all be fine, as usual.
DFW
(54,050 posts)Wow, I only got called a "neo-con" and that only once. At least I know what a neo-con is, where I still don't know what a corporatist is.
But I think that Democrats who toss terms like that at other Democrats have to be consumed by anger and are letting that power their posts rather than reason. I have never yet used the ignore button, but that's because I don't need a button to ignore anyone who posts that I am a neo-con. I have to imagine that people like that spend their weekends alone in a dark room in front a screen, and by choice.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Particularly among those who can't even summon enough interest to scratch together $10 for a star.
KapUSMC
(2 posts)I have been visiting this site for a couple of years now, along with some Republican ones as well. I did actually read the terms of service, which is partly why I haven't posted previously. I'm a registered independent, and most of my views fall in line with Libertarian. I read sites from both side of the aisle, predominantly to see which "base" I tend to agree with more. Here are my personal observations, even though they will probably get me flamed:
You don't have a "right wing" problem here.... 95% of the infighting I see is between far left and left of the spectrum, and not between left and right. Routinely President Obama is referred on there as being a center-right Republican. He may have some moderate leanings, but he is definitely not on that side of the aisle.
There is very little tolerance for difference of opinion from party lines... Look at second amendment topics, it is pretty routine to attack another liberal just because their views on a single issue may differ from the party line, even if the one supporting is doing so solely based on a personal interpretation of the constitution. If the true goal is top secure more votes for the democratic party, it would probably be beneficial to at least listen to logically constructed arguments.
The upside is there is probably less name calling and infighting here as on GOP boards, but not by much. As someone who considers myself an independent this is the real problem I have. If the main base from each of the parties can rarely agree or concede with the other side, I have little hope that will come to as far center as I am.
And lastly, if the ultimate goal is to win elections, you should be trying to attract more people from the center. I haven't posted previously mainly because I felt if I didn't tow the party line I would be attacked. IMO that isn't fostering an environment to attract the centrist with the ultimate goal of winning elections.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)I'm personally left-of-center and describe myself as progressive but we kinda do need a "big tent" these days if we want to win elections.....and that may even include taking in a few moderates who lean right-of-center as well as left.
Thankfully, though, we're not quite as divided as we may seem at times, though. I do hope you'll be able to come around to our side of the pool one of these days.
The Magistrate
(95,237 posts)Welcome, and good luck.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)and puff out their chest.
The owner of the site is a mainstream Democrat and started the site to get more Democrats elected.
Things have drifted....
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Like they say, you can't score any runs without players on base.
RW majorities in Congress control the agenda. All of it. Period.
We would do well to keep that in mind.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Why, for instance, would someone whose job was lost to NAFTA, care if the current Dem party wins, when they boast openly about wanting to pass TPP? Why would an environmentalist work to elect a party that supports KXL, more drilling, and fracking? If you support the party adopting Republican stances on drones, defense budgets, for-profit health insurance, torture, trade, and the environment, then you can't expect all of the old voters to get on board.
polichick
(37,152 posts)kentuck
(110,950 posts)"you should be trying to attract more people from the center."
We have become obsessed with winning elections, I would agree. However, I am no longer sure that elections bring about the results that we want?
Also, should we assume that to attract people from the "center", we should become more like those on the right??
KapUSMC
(2 posts)The "if the ultimate goal is to win elections" came from the terms of service. And yes, personally I would be happy if the Democrats came further right... Or if Republicans came further left. When I lived in California I voted almost exclusively Republican and now that I live in Oklahoma locally I lean more toward the Democrats. The dirty secret there isn't a wide margin between a Republican in California and a Democrat in Oklahoma. They tend to be for more centrist than the rest of their party. Due to the two party system, and the current state of affairs, the two sides are moving further apart and willing to work together increasing less. So these days it is an all or none proposition. I have serious problems with the Republican party. I can't support a candidate that doesn't support equal rights, to include gay marriage, adoption, etc.. I also have a problem with someone that isn't pro-choice. I'm a Christian, and maybe I just messed up on interpretation but it isn't my place to enforce my morals on someone else. If someone wants to have an abortion, that is between them and their relationship with god. My view or opinion should have nothing to do with it. They should have their own religious freedom to do as they please. I despise the tea party tactics of "I'm taking my ball and going home". It is borderline criminal that they have routinely held the country hostage if they don't get their way playing chicken with the American economy. The minimum wage is hasn't kept pace with inflation... It needs to be addressed. The vast majority of republicans seem unconcerned with addressing socioeconomic inequality. It needs to be addressed. Dependence on fossil fuels and alternative energy need to be looked at more seriously, and many ignore it. But I have just as many problems with the Democratic party. I mentioned earlier I'm a Christian. I believe in god. That in itself causes many democrats (not necessarily elected politicians but for damn sure constituents) to address with outright contempt. I feel quite a few attack anything related to Christians (while they have no problem with support for Hindu, Muslim, Buddhists, anything NOT Christian). I mentioned the I am for a raise in the minimum wage, but those calling for $12 and $15 an hour are unrealistic. Should a high school kid bagging groceries make $15 an hour? And it is completely disingenuous the way it is continually said that a raise to an amount like that will have no impact on inflation, or the number of jobs, etc.. In 2011 the 83 welfare programs were responsible for a little over a trillion dollars. And that seems reasonable and doesn't need reform? Really? I also mentioned the environment earlier, but many of the restriction placed on American companies put it at a competitive disadvantage. More needs to be imposed at the G8 level / international treaty level. Democrats want to handcuff the US to save the planet, while China puts out about 25 times the pollution. I may disagree with the Tea Party tactics, but spending is ABSOLUTELY out of control. The medical industry as a whole needs reform, but the ACA is pretty terrible, and not going to go well. Anyway, I could continue but you get the point....
But now it is at the point where neither side is willing to comprise or work together on anything, and each base is pushing further from the middle. Its at the point now where if a Republican says the sky is blue Democrats wouldn't agree and vice versa. I have yet to meet a single person from either side that supports the NSA data collection but nothing will get done about it because nothing can be agreed upon. So to answer your question, yes... I want Democrats to come to the right. But I also want Republicans to come to the left. I can't stand O'Reilly, but you know what? I can't stand Bill Maher either. Nobody wants to have an actual debate or compromise. They just call the other side names, or automatically support or decry someone because of the R or D next to their name.
Anyway, sorry for the new guy rant...
Hippo_Tron
(25,453 posts)The Affordable Care Act is essentially the Richard Nixon/Heritage Foundation health care plan. In any sane universe, passing that rather than single payer is a compromise. Yet the right thinks it's socialism.
The current Tea-Party Republicans want to dismantle the Great Society and the New Deal. How does one compromise on that front without sending millions of people into poverty?
DFW
(54,050 posts)There is so much money blasting us from the right that we are lucky if elections prevent the extremist right from taking over completely. We can only hope to elect enough Democrats that we have a chance of holding and tipping the Supreme Court to the point where Citizens United can be overturned, and we can BEGIN to correct the course of our national history.
Karl Rove is evil, but he had vision. I am fully convinced that he foresaw the 2008 results years in advance, probably as early as 2004, which is why he selected Roberts and Alito as Bush's nominees to the SCOTUS. I also believe that the coming Citizens United suit and decision was discussed with both Roberts and Alito before their names were even placed in nomination to the court. Rove knew that Cheneybush had fucked up, and badly. He knew that in fairly held elections, his party was going the way of the Dodo bird. He needed to do something. His long-term strategy worked.
Every election since 2010, when we figured out what had really happened to us, has been damage control on our side, and until that damage is not only controlled, but repaired, the best result we can hope for in elections to Congress is a damage control mode, instead of an activist mode.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)I was a Republican into the 90s but left right before the 2000 election. I have never been a conservative. The Republicans advertised themselves as having minimal goals when I first joined: the government should do basically three things -- protect the borders, collect taxes and I cannot remember the third! But its overall statement of policy was there should be as little involvement in the citizens' personal lives because that was not the role of government. Key the Clinton impeachment.
During that time I became so ashamed of how Republicans conducted themselves, I could no longer allow my name to be associated with the party. So I joined the Dems and learned I should have always been a Democrat. I was really tuned into Election 2000 to the point I spent about 2 to 3 hours each day studying every detail of Gore's progress. When everything turned criminal and George W. Bush* was annointed by the Supreme Court, I was outraged. And then I found DU.
I arrived here attacking the Democrats and their failure to take a stance on the legal issues involved. I faulted them almost as much as the Republicans for their failure to take a stance.
Attacks? I cannot tell you how much I was attacked by railing against the Democrats, especially the Democratic Leadership Conference, known as the DLC. But I was just so upset I just kept making my points and hardened my backbone. Eventually, many people here then started agreeing with me.
On a personal level, it was one of the best things I have ever done for myself. I am not a fighter by nature, but I can handle just about anything now. Nothing and no one political intimidates me.
So here I am 14 years later still here, and nothing would make me leave.
There are many, many very intelligent people who belong to this site. It is not easy for newcomers to pick up on that because many of them no longer post here. I believe they have just grown so tired of the asinine shennigans they no longer bother.
But DU did not come easy during those early days. Not for the people who started it and not for the people who railed against the outcome of Election 2000. There is no other site I know of with a history like DU's. And certainly no site with as many intelligent, educated, sophisticated people as this one. You will see that during critical moments in politics and government, but in between those moments, you will see vanity posts, trolls abounding, people acting as if -- you fill in the rest.
I hope you stay around and post. You sound like someone we need. After awhile, you will build a coterie of DU friends, and they will show up when you most need them.
Sam
justabob
(3,069 posts)Everyone talks like there is some X number of voters that we are fighting over in the center, when there are millions of people to attract from outside who are not currently participating. Not all of those people are lazy, stupid, get-what-they-deserve-for-not-voting-people. They are folks who get shit on no matter who is in power, and often those sympathetic to the first group.... quit fucking around with the "center" and engage more folks.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)As is the Democratic Party as a whole, based on worldwide ideological spectrums. Sure, he's a Democrat, but Democrats and the Democratic Party are not progressive overall.
Gallup has done polls for years on the self-identified ideological makeup of each party. Democrats come out now as 40 percent liberal, 40 percent moderate, and 20 percent conservative.
Republicans come out as 80 percent conservative, 14 percent moderate and 1 percent liberal.
The parties are not two sides of a coin. Conservatism rules in this country and has for decades, the Democratic and Republican Party have both shifted significantly right. I don't think these are disputed observations.
For progressives like me, the goal isn't winning elections for a moderately conservative right of center party that stinks less than the whacko right. The goal is to convince the US as a whole and the parties as well to shift to the left, to convince them progressive ideas work best. Given who has the money and power in politics, and the way the game is rigged, I don't expect electioneering to do it, only a fundamental shift in culture will.
I don't mind compromise in politics, I just mind having to compromise between moderate and extreme conservatism only, and often no compromise at all from extreme conservatives.
I find a libertarian identifying as a centrist independent as strange. Libertarianism is a very ideological extreme on the political spectrum. It's like saying you're a Marxist. It's a utopian ideology based on theories that have no empirical grounding. That doesn't sound very centrist to me as I understand the word. I'd rather libertarians own up to the very extreme beliefs of their ideology, and many do, than pretend to be centrist.
Ultimately, libertarianism serves conservatism as Marxism serves socialism. Social issues are used as wedge issues that come and go. Some conservatives are already switching gears on gay marriage to "states rights and small government". Economic views are where you get to the real meat of an ideology, and that's where libertarianism shows it's just a subset of conservative ideology.
TBF
(31,921 posts)lol - we just elected Barack Obama TWICE. And we went plenty right to do it. Way more right than I would've advocated.
Skittles
(152,964 posts)I know the difference between legitimate criticism and "non-progressive opinions"
Shoulders of Giants
(370 posts)However, there are only two political parties. Therefore, it should mean that there would be a wide range of opinion in both parties. I don't know what viewpoints would have been banned in the past. However, considering the fact that there are only 2 parties, I would think both parties would want to welcome as many people as possible.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts).... with the absence of advocacy for Republican candidates. I have no idea whether (in the end) that is good or bad for DU (I do know how I feel about it).
Sexism, racism, homophobia is generally tolerated (with the exception of brand new posters) ... These are not progressive (liberal or Democratic ideals). I view this as a sea change .... admittedly, there has always been a little bit of elitism (I would guess that DUers are a little better educated, a little better employed and a little more culturally engaged than J.Q Public) .... but, there was not a tolerance for bigotry. As the admin of this site I wonder what the vision is for the site .... a place for ALL view points (including decidedly unprogessive sexist, racist and homophobic ideas) .... a place for liberal ideas, a place to solely support the Democratic party .... ? DU is defining itself .... and there still are bright spots (from a liberal point of view) .... but the blight has permeated DU.
I realize my post appears whiny .... or "meta", but I truly am looking for DU to redefine or better define itself.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Response to kentuck (Original post)
cherokeeprogressive This message was self-deleted by its author.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Deep13
(39,154 posts)...that conservatives are now the oppressed minority and that we should be more tolerant of them?
No, the whole power structure, including our slightly liberal POTUS are part of the capitalist, authoritarian power structure. Those who actively support that power structure remain the enemies of working people.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)if they don't conform to your standards for thought and you don't like seeing their posts? Seems like a simple solution to me.
pinboy3niner
(53,339 posts)Stand and Fight
(7,480 posts)This is one of the reasons I don't visit or post much anymore on this site. The integrity of the original structure of the site has been compromised by vapid conservatism.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)This is a broad and messy coalition we have, and the second that stops is the second we consign ourselves to being nationally irrelevant with only "stopping" power like the GOP has.
go west young man
(4,856 posts)the wars and stolen elections in the early 2000's...and we stayed. The place changed around us and is now much more centrist. That is where the confusion lies. We won a couple of elections and our guy got in. But the nefarious things we railed against still go on...Bill Moyers covered this well recently. The USA still needs a hard left turn into greener pastures. It needs a sea change and the real threat to world peace needs to be curtailed. Obama is obviously trying but he is up against a beast and sometimes he seems to simply cater to it. That threat is embedded in the neocon establishment, the think tanks, the MIC, and our own government. It's not DU that needs to be purged. It is the "Deep State" and we should all be working against it before it drags us into more unnecessary wars and sidelines all of "our" civil rights and right to privacy. Now matter how much that beast drapes itself in the flag, at it's core it is anti-American, for it does not represent what this country is supposed to stand for.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Censorship is self-defeating for any democratic enterprise. Conservative voices can and should be countered by reason and logic, and since they are always wrong for the American people, that is not hard to do.
To instead resort to blanket censorship of unpopular opinions only surrenders the high ground to those who are neither progressive or democratic. It would be nothing other than surrender of our core principles.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)This suggestion is chilling in both its intended effect and in its justification. Nothing could be a better example of "conservative and non-progressive opinions" than a call to silence all voices offering points of view the majority may not agree with.
If such an effort were to be actually undertaken, it might well become a narrow-minded exercise in self-destruction that would leave Democratic Underground a hollow shell. Do you really want the whole website to become nothing more than a bigger B.O.G.?