Shoud we have two forums?

[Onlooker]

General Discussion: Presidential rah-rah
General Discussion: Presidential discussion

The reason I ask this is because I am not the only one who has posted something critical of Obama and been attacked as being a pawn of the right. There are in fact at least three good reasons to post critical things about Obama in DU:

1) To make others aware of what right-wingers are thinking
2) To gather arguments from DUers to counter what Obama's opponents are saying
3) To use this site to put pressure on Obama to remain true to his progressive beliefs, rather than kow-tow to the middle

While the Obama campaign clearly needs its zealots, there should also a place for discussion and debate. Perhaps by having two forums, the zealots could visit their forum and simply laud and drool over Obama, while those of us who want to discuss the right-wing attacks on Obama or even criticize some of Obama's stands could post in another presidential forum.

[liberal N proud]

1. How about we not be critical of Democratic Candidates?

This is the DEMOCRATIC Underground.

Just saying

[baldguy]

5. The PUMAs need their own forum.

Otherwise it would be

SOOOOOoooooooOOOOOOOOooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!
UNNNNFAIR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[cboy4]

7. Who are the PUMAs?

Are you referring to DUers?

[Marrah_G]

8. I suggest:

Using the ignore function- things are going to get worse right up until the convention.

[cboy4]

9. It's really too much isn't it.

:eyes:

[Marrah_G]

10. Yes

Save your sanity. Don't let the troublemakers win. Put them on ignore and they can have their own private circle-jerk every time they think of the Clintons or, I suspect, anything seen as liberal.

You can almost picture them in their dark little computer rooms "I hate them, I hate them, pant pant, I have them I hate them , pant pant"

[LostinVA]

12. Apparently moi

[Arkansas Granny]

13. I don't know who you consider to be PUMA that is posting on this board.

Since the aim of PUMA is to cause division in the party, I would suggest that the over zealous Obama supporters are doing a better job of that than anyone else I see posting here. So, explain to me who is working for unity and who keeps opening wounds.

[baldguy]

14. Like people who think we need a seperate forum

to segregate out the "over zealous Obama supporters"? IOW those who support the Democratic nominee?

[redqueen]

16. Yup. Oh the irony!

:rofl:

[musicblind]

19. There is a difference between supporting the democratic nominee

and blindly ignoring any information that is contrary to your beliefs.

I support Obama fully, but am able to see the value in acknowledging his mistakes so that we can better improve our chances.

[Rockholm]

15. Ok...What is a PUMA?

[musicblind]

20. Anyone that disagrees with them n/t

[specterderrida]

33. BINGO.

[sharesunited]

21. Party Unity My Ass

[Rockholm]

26. Many thanks.

[rug]

11. How about we stop thinking?

[musicblind]

17. Exactly! Who needs rational thought!

It's not like Skinner has advocated constructive criticism or anything!

[OwnedByFerrets]

30. Your post reminds me of when Brittany Spears said

"We should just support President Bush in everything he says and does".:puke:

There is room for criticism of our candidate when it is justified. Otherwise we are no better than the repugs. It doesnt mean we dont support BO, nor does it mean we wont vote for him.

[vi5]

2. It depends on the tone I think...

I think we should be allowed to be critical of the way things are being handled. Many of us (if not most of us) have donated and invested in this campaign the same way we did for Gore and for Kerry, and we had to watch them make stupid move after stupid move, and cowtow to the right and the rigged media. At a certain point we just don't want to see that happen again and many times have something constructive to say.

On the other hand there are more than a few posts in GDP that have more of a "Nyah, Nyah, Nyah....told you so!!!" tone from Hillary supporters which don't offer anything constructive.

[ErinBerin84]

3. I agree.

[Balderdash]

4. .

Most of what I've seen from Obama supporters either preHillary or post Hillary is sarcasm and rudeness. Reap what you sow. The hypocrisy around here has gotten out of control as has the need for a new outrage.

Of course we need to take a critical look at at our nominee, he's our nominee. The Republicans aren't looking at him critically, that's our job and our duty.

[Beacool]

32. Hear, hear!!!!

:eyes:

[Honeycombe8]

6. I agree with you. I've posted plenty of posts questioning certain aspects of Obama's campaign.

And I've seen lots of posts doing the same. I and others have not been bashed.

It has to do with the overall tone, and maybe what you're being critical of, and how many things you're being critical of....and what things you mention that is good about the candidate and his campaign.

Other posters perceive whether it's a legitimate discussion or whether the poster is even in Obama's corner to begin with.

Not saying this applies to your posts. It's just what I've noticed. There are some posters who over and over post how Obama is not liberal enough, how Obama is anti-feminism, how Obama is a skank for voting this way or that. Those are not the sorts of discussion-lifting discussions of an Obama supporter in the first place.

[Bluenorthwest]

22. Perception or prejudice

you seem to assume the posters who wish to stop discussion have some ability to discern motive and truth, but frankly many -not all buy many- act from personal prejudices, not wisdom as to intent.
Cheerleaders are fun and all, but no cheerleader ever won a game. The players, and the coaches win the games. The coaches don't give the players a bunch of rah rah, they give hard truth that will lead to victory.

[Honeycombe8]

27. In all writing, there is a "tone" that gives away where the author is coming from.

Ever taken a course in writing? Ever read? Then you know this.

There's a difference between an Obama supporter with a legitimate criticism, and a troll plant who pretends to be a supporter but curiously is "very disturbed by"....and then names one or several of the Repub spins. And there again is a difference between those posters, and someone who hates Obama because their candidate of choice didn't win, and they post, repeatedly, ONLY criticisms of Obama.

I am an Obama supporter. I will vote for him. There is almost nothing he can do that would cause me not to vote for him. I've posted plenty of critical posts, but I make it clear that I am an Obama supporter. I have never been bashed for doing so. The tone of my posts, I guess, makes it clear that I like a LOT of about him and his campaign, but I am struggling with one certain thing or other. Example: I wavered in my support, and considered withdrawing it, after the second Rev. Wright debacle. I posted several posts about that. I was not bashed. (BTW, I worked thru the Wright issues, and I remain an Obama supporter)

[NashVegas]

18. This Should Have Been Done Back In December

At this point, there's not really much point in criticizing anything Obama does.

[BlooInBloo]

23. How odd. I've criticized Obama numerous times and no-one has ever accused me of anything....

I wonder what the difference could possibly be?

[apocalypsehow]

24. There already is a forum dedicated to #1 & #2 of your whining points: it's called Free Republic.

I won't post a link, but Google will take you right to them. Have fun.

[Beacool]

25. You got a point.

Too many good Democrats have been tombstoned simply because they didn't toe the line 100% and dared to criticize the nominee.

Dissension is healthy and it IS the democratic way. People use the alert button too fast and too frequently here. Well, it may work in the sub-real world of the internet, but it doesn't work in real life.

We have a nominee who has been losing traction in almost every poll lately and no one here wants to discuss it honestly.

[bunkerbuster1]

28. I'm gonna be nice

I'm not going to suggest we entitle it "GD: WATBs" or anything like that.

But seriously, perhaps we should acknowledge that concern trolling is real, yet actual concern about campaigns is real, too. How about "GD: Real-life concern", and be outright about it?

To quote from a Rachel Maddow voiceover: "Calling out Democrats when they f*ck up!" - it's ok with me if we do it. And maybe it should get its own forum.

[book_worm]

29. It would be okay if it weren't always certain people who seem to take glee in any poll that shows

Obama losing ground and then jump to the conclusion that he needs Hillary.

[jakem]

31. GD:STFU ?