I'm a populist; I'm no longer a Democrat.

[Supposn]

I registered as a Democrat after leaving the military service in 1959. I voted in every general and most primary elections since then.

Rather than negotiating and considering the long term consequences of what he’s done, President Obama had acquiesced and surrendered on too many issues. I re-registered as a Green Party member in 2010. (I do not share their priorities but I’m not opposed to their positions). I would only consider voting for a Democratic candidate that if they were also a candidate of a third party that’s not unworthy of my support.
Although President Obama was speaking of stronger populist stand 2012, he began doing so much too late; I greatly discount what candidates say within 3 months prior to Election Day. I did not vote for President Obama in 2012. I began to possibly regret my decision when the president continued to point in a populist direction.

It was a miracle that the Supreme Court did not invalidate the personal healthcare mandate. The president risked the entire act by surrendering the single payment concept. He should have surrendered it only if it gained him some Republican support if he gave up single payer. Otherwise, what did he gain?
The president will accept undermining Social Security’s age of eligibility and the method of COLA calculation. His intention to sign an agricultural bill that includes food stamp reductions is despicable.

Until the Democratic Party returns to its populist roots, I won’t vote for them.

Respectfully, Supposn

[1000words]

1. You should post more often

[cloudbase]

2. In before the

"enjoy your stay" crowd shows up.

Welcome to DU.

[Iggo]

51. He's been here 5 years.

[Hekate]

59. Here, but not here.

[Iggo]

66. I know, right?

[merrily]

74. He registered five years ago, but that doesn't mean he's been here for five years.

According to his OP, he was not posting here much while he was a Democrat. However, he has now shown up to announce that he is no longer a Democrat.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. I'm an Anarchist and a Democrat. I understand that there are Catholic, Vegetarian, Liberal,

Moderate, Radical, 3rd Way, and a whole slough of other brand name Democrats around here.

[LostOne4Ever]

4. I would rather the party became liberal

rather than populist.

[Tanuki]

127. Not necessarily

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_populism

[Lasher]

128. You are correct, but LostOne4Ever implied the two concepts are mutually exclusive. They are not.

A libertarian is more opposite of a populist. A conservative is the opposite of a liberal.

[LostOne4Ever]

150. No, I just said I rather the party be liberal

Populism can be either right wing or left wing. We don't need to support anything right wing no matter how much it is toted as being of the people. Some times the people are wrong and support things that hurt minorities or society as a whole.

[Lasher]

159. You said you'd rather the party became liberal rather than populist.

You presented a false dilemma since there is no reason to choose between the two general ideologies. But now you say populism can be either liberal or conservative, which is what you meant in the beginning, I guess.

[LostOne4Ever]

163. A false dilemma

Is a logical fallacy in which the speaker makes it look like those are the only two alternatives. I never said anything about those being the only two choices. Rather I stated my opinion.

But populism can be liberal, conservative, libertarian, authoritarian, or any philosophy in between. I am not a populist, I am a liberal. I will support liberal positions whether or not "the people" also support it. To quote Mark Twain:

When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to stop and reconsider.

[Ohio Joe]

5. If you are not a D and don't vote for D's... Why are you here?

[JaneQPublic]

10. Awaiting the start of Non-Democratic Populist Underground? (nt)

[greatauntoftriplets]

11. This isn't it.

[freshwest]

15. It might be. Watch the Recs go into the hundreds... n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

27. Wrong turn at Albuquerque Bugs Bunny?

[Mnpaul]

180. Or just the Populist Underground

the shorter version could be PU



I had to go there. I just couldn't resist the low hanging fruit.

[sabrina 1]

22. Maybe s/he's a Liberal? According to polls, this OP is by no means alone in their opinion of

where the Party, s/he has been a member of for decades, has gone. Fewer and fewer Americans are identifying with either party now. If the Party wants votes, maybe they should start paying attention to those who have supported them all these years rather than listening to the Corporations. Otoh, Liberals have been told they are not needed in the party, I can't think of one actual Liberal member of the President's cabinet but I can rattle off a whole slew of Republicans he has appointed to powerful positions in his cabinet AFTER we threw them out.

Maybe it isn't the voters who are wrong? Has that every occurred to you?

[Ohio Joe]

24. Well... If one wants to vote for another party... That is up to them...

If they want to change this party... That is fine as well... There are things I want/work to change about it... None of that has anything to do with what I asked.

This is a site for people who vote D... If one does not, and admits that they not only don't... But won't... And have no interest in working to change the party but rather want to wait until it happens by miracle... Why bother being here?

[1000words]

25. I always vote for the most progressive candidate on the ballot

Do I belong here?

[Ohio Joe]

30. Have you read the Terms of Service?

I seem to recall you were discussed during my MIRT term... I do not recall how I voted... It does appear you have not crossed the line yet though.

[1000words]

34. Yes

I have read the terms. I fully intend to honor them and be a productive member of this community.

Nice to be noticed, I guess.

[Bobbie Jo]

89. From the TOS:

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.

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.

[sabrina 1]

40. 'One' does not want to vote for another party. But more than one want to vote for

actual Democrats. More than one do NOT want to vote for Democrats and then see Republicans brought back into power, SOD eg. WE WON. When you WIN YOU get to appoint YOUR party members to powerful positions.

If voting for Democrats means getting Gates and Clapper and Hagel and Alexander and Bernanke etc, nothing changed did it? We still have those old Bush loyalists in positions to influence the way this country is going AFTER a majority of the people threw them out. If 'one' wanted to voted for Republicans, that is what 'one' would have done.

Can you name some Liberals in powerful positions, Defense, Security eg since voters elected Democrats?

Are there NO Democrats who are qualified to keep this country safe?

[Ohio Joe]

42. You do not seem to be reading what either I or the OP wrote

What you have there are all valid points... They don't have anything to do with the conversation though.

The OP openly states s/he has no interest in either voting for D's or working to change the party... They simply want to vote some other party... My question to them is if that is the case... Why be here?

[merrily]

77. You forgot Republican who re-registered Indie, but could not bring himself to register Dem.

Geithner, appointed Secretary of the Treasury when the economy was the nation's most critical issue, or arguably tied with defense, headed by Republican Gates.

IIRC, Geithner changed his voter registration while working for the government, some say as a condition of staying on after Clinton replaced Reagan in the Oval Office. Clinton, of course, was another New Democrat who loved him some Geithner (and some Summers).

[sabrina 1]

116. Thanks, there are so many Republicans still in this Administration. Then there are

the Democrats in NJ, elected Dems, who betrayed their own candidate, 61 of them, and voted for Chris Christie, leading Dem voters AWAY from the Democratic Candidate, the party leadership abandoned her, she got no money to help her win in a Blue State, and there are people here 'warning', threatening DUers that if they 'cross the line' and express a possibility of refusing to vote for any more Third Way Right Wing infiltrators, they 'will get a pizza'. I have asked them if those 61 elected Democrats in NJ would get a pizza for 'crossing the line'? But so far, no answer.

We elect Democrats, and get Republicans back in power. And they seriously believe that we should just shut up and vote even while elected Dems themselves are voting for Republicans. It's bizarre. I feel like I'm in the twilight zone here sometimes.

[merrily]

125. Well, if you bear in mind that some people post because

they are paid to do so or because it's part of their government job description, the twilight zone feeling diminishes somewhat. Money is a very un-twilight zone like motive.

However, I do also believe that some people are in the twilight zone or maybe Doublethink land, on a volunteer basis, poor dears.

Martha Coakley did not get much help from Democrats, either. (Come to think of it, some Democrat endorsed Brown then, too, but did not do so again when he ran against Warren. Hmmmm). Yes, I know Coakely was not a great candidate on her own, but maybe some help would have helped her hold on to at least part of her initial 30 point lead. Obama endorsed Chafee in Connecticut against the Democrat. Chafee is a good guy, but that is not the point. He also favor Specter over Sestak, as part of a deal and all but endorsed Crist over Meek.

After 2009, I donated only to individuals, not the DNC, but I don't think other Democrats donate to the Democratic Party with the idea that money will go to candidates who are not Democrats, or even long time Republicans who turned Democrat 5 minutes before their next Republican primary because they knew they could never win it.


As far as Christie, it seems his losing the 2014 gubernatorial was not as important to Democrats as his losing the 2016 Presidential.

[A Simple Game]

70. Why bother being here? Read your own post, maybe they want to change it.

You think things will change by giving them what they expect? They expect 90% of registered Democrats to vote Democratic. You change them by not supporting them.

I haven't voted on the Democratic line in 10 years, nor the Republican line in over 20 years. I have voted for Democrats, but not on the Democratic line. I do and will vote for the most liberal candidate available.

When I first came to DU it had a very liberal slant, not so now, this is now a right wing web site as far as I am concerned.

Please read the About section, linked at the bottom of every DU page.

[merrily]

81. It was easy to appear liberal when Bush was President, which is when you registered.

The About Section at the bottom of the DU page is to welcome people to the site. The terms of service are the rules to observe if you wish to remain at the site without risk of hidden posts or banning.


ETA: As far as I am concerned, you can post anything. I am anti-censorship, unless someone is being a total ass on a personal level or is posting right of center. I mention this only so that you are aware that people can alert on anti-Democratic posts, especially during election season, even if the post is leftist.

[A Simple Game]

122. I don't appear liberal, I am liberal, always have been and always will be. I am now too old

to waste my time supporting people that don't believe as I do. I used to be a registered Democrat, but watched the party go to the right ever since the late '60s, when they got too far to the right from where I stand I assumed they didn't want me anymore. Was it easy for our elected Democrats to appear liberal when they voted to invade Afghanistan? How about Iraq? I was vocally against both when 90% of the country was behind Bush, where were you? Vietnam spoiled wars of choice for me, but it seems our country has a short memory.

I'm not surprised that you didn't see where and how often the word liberal appeared in the about section, especially the mission statement, that word isn't very popular around here lately.

Alert away if it would make you happy, won't bother me at all, I had a life before DU, have a life now, and will have a life even after DU. If I took any of this that seriously I would have been gone long ago and have thought about leaving a few times because of the rightward tilt of DU lately. I have been the victim of liberal bashing a few times, wish you had been there to defend me what with your dislike of posts that are right of center. Good luck with being anti-censorship except if someone is posting right of center, you must be very busy on DU lately.

But if you think the best way to support the Democratic principles is to keep voting for the candidates they are now running, good luck with that. Do you really think you can change people by supporting them? Or are you happy with the party as it now is?

[merrily]

124. I meant that it was easy for the posters and the board to appear liberal back then.

I did not mean to suggest that you were not liberal.


As for the rest of you post, it's out of left field and not in a good way. If anything I am probably to your left and nothing I posted suggested I did see see the word liberal in the about section. I was clear that there was a difference between the about section and the tos section. Never suggested that I would alert on someone for posting they were liberal. Quite the opposite in fact.

Will know better than to engage you in a conversational matter next time.

[A Simple Game]

132. You're right nothing in your post suggests you saw the word liberal or that you

even know what it means. You obviously don't realize this was designed to be a liberal web site and has been hijacked by those on the right.

To the left of me? I doubt it.

You obviously were threatening me with the mention of the tos. Open up, most liberal bashers don't even bother to hide it anymore.

[merrily]

136. You have a reading comprehension problem and a rudeness problem.

Rant on.

[Ohio Joe]

88. So... You think a method to change the democratic party is...

To come here and profess how you have not and will not vote D?

Really?

[sabrina 1]

97. How do you suggest we change it? Here's an example of what is going on in the Dem Party.

NJ. It is a Blue State. Somehow Christie managed to get himself elected by pretending to be moderate which he never was. He is a Corporatist and an enemy of the Public School System. His handling of Sandy was abysmal among other things, not the least of which he was a known bully.

He posed for photo ops with Obama, anyone able to think for themselves knew he had ulterior motives for doing that. One, to attrack the left leaning Independent vote, and most of all, he wanted to get billions of dollars of funding after the Storm. He was thinking of his run for Republican President.

When he was running the second time, there was a Golden Opportunity for the Dem Party to put in an effort to replace him with a Democrat. It WAS possible.

So, what did the Dem Party do? They decided it wasn't worth fighting for that state. We heard excuses, we never even heard 'is it possible', just 'no, we're not going to put money into that race'. Then we started hearing how wonderful he was, for a Republican.

The Progressive Candidate got ZERO help from her party. A few cursory words from Debbie Wassermann and she was on her own, with not money from the party. And worse, 61 DEMOCRATS Endorsed Christie, the Republican. He boasted about it, making voters wonder how bad must Buono be if the Party was not even mentioning her.

So, here you are telling the OP he doesn't belong on this forum because his party has left him. He is not alone.

How do you change the party when they party itself is endorsing REPUBLICANS? Buono was a great candidate, I got nothing in the mail asking me to support her. I've had requests to support Blue Dogs though.

So before you go jumping all over this OP, and before anyone tells him he doesn't belong here if he doesn't want to vote for Dems anymore, ASK THE PARTY why don't THEY vote for Democrats, why don't THEY appoint DEMOCRATS to the Cabinet.

And that is not the first time the Party endorsed as Republican. So it's kind of lost its impact to be yelling at voters who WANTED Democrats, for finally giving up after watching these kinds of antics now for years.

[Ohio Joe]

99. Do you actually read posts?

"So, here you are telling the OP he doesn't belong on this forum because his party has left him. He is not alone."

Non-sense, I said no such thing... I'll repeat it again since you seem to be having trouble... I trying to find out why the OP is here if they don't want to vote D or try to do anything other the support a different party? Now that I see the OP has done an obvious hit and run that is plainly in violation of the ToS... I would hope MIRT is looking.

[sabrina 1]

102. I don't see any suggestions from you as to what we can do change the party, as you

suggested. I don't care where the OP is, he is representative of a whole lot of Dems whether you like it or not. To keep denying that is fruitless. The evidence is everywhere.

Would the 61 Dems who betrayed their own Democratic Candidate and voted for the Republican in NJ be violating the TOS if they were members here?

[Ohio Joe]

114. Again... You are not reading what I'm writing...

"I don't care where the OP is, he is representative of a whole lot of Dems whether you like it or not"

Have I said anything to contradict this? I've agreed with pretty much everything you have said... It is simply not related to what I'm saying... Or what the OP is saying. I'm not sure if you are ignoring this or trolling me or simply do not have the ability to understand plain language.

There are many ways to work to change the party... Giving up and voting for a different one is a theory some people have to do it... It is what the OP is doing and will continue to do... You seem to want to do the same... Which bring me to my point... If that is your way of creating the change, what is your purpose in being here? This is not a site for people that support and vote for other parties... They are considered trolls and often get a pizza... Are you actually supporting and voting for other parties? The OP is.

[sabrina 1]

115. 61 Elected Denocrats 'gave up,endorsed and voted for Republican Chris Christie

in NJ.' Would they be given a pizza if they were members of DU? That was a pretty important election and we LOST because the Dem Party in NJ voted for the Republican.

You don't seem to be reading my comments.

I have NO intention of joining another party. THIS party has been taken over by the right wing Third Way who have made the statement 'Liberals should NOT be the face of the Democratic Party'. Really? This 'Think Tank' formed, without any grass roots support but with major donors from Wall St, in 2005. Those are fighting words and should be to EVERY Progressive Democrat.

I support the new and VERY AGRESSIVE Progressive Democratic activist Liberal Orgs that have formed over the past several years, WITH grassroots support. They are growing stronger, receiving more donations and so far have helped recruit candidates and donated large amounts of money to, like Elizabeth Warren.

They are challenging third way candidates, in once instance forcing a Dem Candidate who alligned herself with the Third Way to drop that relationship. Iow, the new Left orgs are planning to take back this party OUT of the hands of Corporate tools.

You assume wrong regarding what my intentions are.

But you are ignoring something very important while worrying whether or not someone can post on a relatively remote internet forum.

So I'l try again. The OP is NOT alone. He represents huge numbers of Progressive Democrats who are either going to do what he has honestly admitted to doing, OR he can be persuaded to join the rest of us whose goal is to replace the Third Way Conservative Corporate wing of the party with Progressive Democrats who oppose Wall St Corruption, like Elizabeth Warren.

You are doing exactly what the Party has done, you are alienating possible voters who could be persuaded to vote for a real Progressive. But the Progressive Orgs will be more than happy to get these alienated Democrats to vote for DEMOCRATS, NOT by telling them to 'just vote, hold your nose because we need to WIN' That isn't going to work anymore, we heard it all before.

What the Progressive Orgs are doing is giving them candidates to VOTE FOR. The Dem Party has been hijacked by the Third Way and many voters are simply leaving, like the OP.

But many more are not only NOT leaving, they are planning to reverse the Corporate takeover and they have a whole lot of support, as seen by their success with Elizabeth Warren eg, to get that job done.

The OP and millions like him are all potential supporters of Progressive Candidates. If the Party doesn't want to try to get them back, which is what you are doing, then the growing, Progressive Wing of the Party will more than happy to do so.

[Ohio Joe]

142. Yeah... You don't seem to be able to comprehend what I'm writing...

You also seem determined to blame me for something when I've done nothing but agree with you... If you want to discuss some other topic... You should start a thread on it, I would participate. It's obvious though that you have no interest in participating here in any kind of good faith. Good luck with the anger issue

[A Simple Game]

120. When their membership gets low enough, they may get the idea that they are

doing something wrong. When a large number of registered Democrats don't vote for them they may get the idea they are doing something wrong.

Just keep voting for them, they expect it. Keep wondering why they don't get better, or maybe even change for the worse. How does their trend line look to you, headed in the right direction?

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

How are you trying to change the Democratic party, or are you happy with the way they are now?

[Ohio Joe]

144. How does any party get changed? Do you really not know how to get involved?

Do you just go out and vote for someone else and hope D's understand what it is you want?

If you have given up hope, that is your problem... I have no interest in trying to convince you on how to fix things... At least have the guts to give an answer to the question I'm actually asking instead of railing against me for answers to some vague question... Why stay here if you are determined to leave?

[A Simple Game]

152. I don't just go out and vote for someone, I vote for the most liberal candidate possible.

Do you know what is changing the Democratic party? Here's a simple fact for you. It's the Republican party that is changing the Democratic party. It appears that the Republican platform has more sway on the Democratic party than liberals. Please refute that if you can.

Do I really not know how to get involved? The Democratic party has come right out and said they don't want me, they don't want liberals. What would you have me do? Can you come up with any solutions that may not take 40 years, because, except for a four year break with President Carter, that is how long I have been waiting for the Democrats to stop turning to the right. I'm too old for the stock answer of change it from within, although that does work, ask the Republicans who have changed the Democratic party from within and outside.

If I have given up hope? I offer a solution and it could be a quick one. You have no interest in trying to convince me on how to fix things. Probably because you have no viable solutions or you are happy with the status quo. What do you offer except criticism?

[Ohio Joe]

154. Perhaps you should not have spent your time waitng and instead acted...

I'm real sorry you sat around waiting for something to go the way you wanted... It's a shame that so many wait instead of acting and then complain about it.

Good luck with your effort to promote another party here though... I expect it will end about the same as it did for the OP.

[A Simple Game]

178. So you didn't sit around? Then I can blame you for the problems with the party?

Then again I get the impression you don't think there are any problems. Where did you get the impression I just sat around? We did do some sitting around in the '60s, you can probably read about it, but I doubt that's what you're talking about.

Promoting another party? Which one? Point out to me where I promoted any party. I am promoting liberalism, and voting for the most liberal candidate, I care not for any parties anymore. I may be thinking of someone else, but aren't you the one that can't even find the word liberal in the DU mission statement.

Do you often try to slander other DU members? Read the tos.

[Le Taz Hot]

131. "This is a site for people who vote D."

Uh, no it's not. I don't always vote D, especially, as has happened in so many cases, I have no "D" for which to vote (thank you DCCC). And then there are the times when my choice is to vote fore a DINO (Feinstein) or vote for someone in another party not Republican. (There is no one or nothing that could make me vote for Feinstein.)

I'm here because I enjoy the information I receive, the debates I have, the interaction with (mostly) intelligent people and the reliable news links.

[Ohio Joe]

148. If you do not have a local D to vote for, that is different...

And the ToS addresses that as I suspect you know. The OP is talking about not voting for any D... Or wanting to work for any change... But rather that they have given up and now actively support another party.

I'm not blaming anyone who wants to go to another party... I'd love to see more parties in this country... If I find one closer to my ideals I would go join it myself. There are some things that would happen if/when I do such a thing... One of those things is I don't expect it will be ok to have DU allow me to promote them here... In fact, I would not want to be here, I would go to 'OJ's better party Underground' and promote them there.

I swear, I'm trying to be clear... My question to the OP is... Why stay if you are determined to leave?

[Scuba]

26. +1

[VanillaRhapsody]

28. Liberals have NEVER been told that.....but those who say others ARE!

Whole lot of "Third Way" etc.... epithets thrown around aren't there?

YOU are being disingenuous and hypocritical.

[RC]

107. There are a whole lot of 3rd WAY, DINO's & other Right of Center people here, hiding behind the (D)

They claim to be Democrats, but never say they are Liberals or Progressives, or even claim to be any kind of Center, let alone, Left of Center Democrats.
They seem to be OK with stuff like the Chained CPI, attacking Edward Snowden as a traitor, without saying much of anything about the damage the NSA is doing to this country, NAFTA and even TPP. They support the President no matter how much they have to twist facts, truth, and even reality to do so. What good is it to be a Democrat, when when the Democrats themselves support Right of Center Republican ideals?

[VanillaRhapsody]

110. Funny....I have never heard anyone call themself that except for Manny (of course).

but I have heard many use the LABEL and as a pejorative against OTHER Democrats. Just like you did right there....but you will claim you are totally innocent and never do anything like THAT...NOPE you are not purging at all!

[RC]

129. I can see where the 3rd Way, DINO's and other Right of Center 'Democrats' (Republican Lite) would

think the Liberal label as somehow derogatory. You know, for example, the corporatist, that put business over the people?

Actual Center and Left of Center Democrats, that put the people over money, not so much. Why? Because they are more Liberal.
Democrats by definition are supposed to be for the people and their general welfare, not simply codependent on the Republican's love of money and the corporate buy-up of what should be the government's responsibility. There are many here that hide behind that (D), whose politics fit the (R^Lite) much better. They are a good part of the problem in everything from charter schools to the very slow economic recovery, caused by our job losses, to our crumbling infrastructure.
Why vote for Republicans, when the Democratic Party themselves put up non-Liberal, Right of Center candidates?

[VanillaRhapsody]

167. Who are you directing that at?

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/barack_obama.htm



Certainly not the people that support the Liberal Left President I hope....

[RC]

169. Liberal Left President?

Brahahahahahahahah He may campaign that way, but he sure didn't govern that way.

Obama is a corporatist. That is not Liberal. Look at who his donors are.

JPMorgan Employees Join Goldman Sachs Among Top Obama Donors
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-20/jpmorgan-employees-join-goldman-sachs-among-top-obama-donors.html

By the Numbers: Who Did Wall Street Buy in 2008?
...and if you're an "anti-Big Bank USA" Obama supporter, you sure as heck won't like his numbers. Below, you will see a comparison between Obama and McCain's top twenty campaign contributors:
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katehicks/2011/10/12/by_the_numbers_who_did_wall_street_buy_in_2008

[VanillaRhapsody]

170. Go read it for yourself....or are you just going to stay myopic?

Every statement is right there analyzed....Go ahead and read them...I Double Dog Dare ya!

It's called "On The Issues" for a reason...

http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

[RC]

174. I prefer to think for myself.

I voted for the Liberal Obama ran as, not the corporatist he is now . I still remember all the caving and compromising Obama did up front, the first few month he was in office. The feeling of WTH, disbelief. That was not what we voted for. And for the most part still haven't.

[VanillaRhapsody]

175. So you don't read EVERY Single statement and vote ever made to

to decide....you just "make it up as you go along"? You think he just suddenly stopped and took an about face on his whole life...(or believe the truth that he is NOT magic and NO one on the Left could have done any better with the Great Obstructionist Party)

Makes perfect sense....and explains why you are being myopic.

[RC]

176. Projecting much?

It takes more than that (D) to make the decision for me. I read the bio's printed in the local papers of those running. If they are already in office, the have a track record to check. I don't need to make anything up. Being a Liberal, facts matter. Truth matters. Doing, or at least trying to do what you say you are going to do, does matter.
If nothing else, Obama had and still has full use of the bully pulpit. For the most part, it is still shinny, new, unused. Why doesn't he use it more? Instead of caving, why doesn't he call them out on more of their bullshit?

[VanillaRhapsody]

177. No projection about it...

I have proof...WTF have you got?

Getting something done instead of nothing is caving...yeah right...

"PBO has done nothing at all" .....THAT is how low you can go...you WANT to believe that ...but it is patently and verifiably FALSE!

[merrily]

75. Self-identified as a populist, not as a liberal, though.

Someone who became a Democrat in 1959 would certainly know the term liberal.

Registered at DU in 2009, racked up all of 14 posts in five years--while still supposedly a Democrat--but posts to say he or she is no longer a Democrat. Doesn't agree with the priorities of the Green Party.

I can certainly relate to the desire for a party with more populist economic policies, but I would not hazard a guess about the politics of this particular individual.

[truth2power]

126. Thank you. A voice of reason. But hey, let's support the very thing

that we ridicule the Republicans for - party over principle.

I guess IOKIYAD

[BainsBane]

29. I'm wondering that too

Or why the others so pleased he's renouncing the party are also here.

TOS

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.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

[Blanks]

67. I thought it was enough to be a 'dyed in the wool' democrat.

I didn't know I had to be a liberal democrat. I thought I was ok to be a progressive.

I guess I better watch my step.

[BainsBane]

69. These terms are all so subjective

From what I can tell, some of the loudest critics of the Democratic Party also appear to be the most conservative members of this site, though they don't see themselves that way.

[SwampG8r]

143. subjective is a good word

I agree with what you posted in part
one could say subjectively that those loud critics are criticizing policy not party, and they criticize from the left almost exclusively.
one could say that those who defend these criticized policies side with the right to defend the policies.
I guess its all on how you look at it

[BainsBane]

145. My version of left

Doesn't mean excluding and delegitimizing the perspectives of people of color and feminists. One can call that a lot of things, but leftist is not among them.

[SwampG8r]

146. i think

you may be commenting on something I am not in on
I was commenting on the overall DU but I feel you are referencing something specific

[BainsBane]

147. specific to a subset

It's an observation I've made, and you're right that you're not in on it.

[SwampG8r]

149. ok i am going to choose

"I prefer to remain clueless" for 1000 on this one alex

[NRaleighLiberal]

6. Terms of Service for DU

"Terms of Service

By registering a Democratic Underground account, you agree to abide by these terms. A single violation of any of these terms could result in your posting privileges being revoked without warning.

The Democratic Underground Administrators have a great deal of confidence in our system of citizen jurors and software tools, but we are well aware that trolls are constantly on the lookout for new ways to cause trouble and therefore on rare occasions it may necessary for us to revoke a member's posting privileges for reasons that are not covered by these Terms of Service. Because of this necessity, we retain the right to revoke any member's posting privileges at any time for any reason.

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."

Note the bolded statement above.

[msongs]

16. "community for politically liberal people..." that gets rid of the right wing/centrtist dems lol nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

32. Here is my proof!

this is exactly it....the purists think they determine who is or isn't liberal...for example...they DON'T think Hillary Clinton is a "hardcore Liberal"


However...On the Issues belies that belief..

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/hillary_clinton.htm

[BainsBane]

31. I should have read further first

You beat me to it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

95. I still have the archaic notion that my vote is owned by me. Not the party or a politician.

[NRaleighLiberal]

96. Your vote is indeed owned by you. This is about what Skinner et al created for guidelines

for this website...that's all I listed in my post.

[Lasher]

130. A lot of folks here are populists but I suspect many of them don't know it.

If you support the interests of the people in their struggle against the privileged elite, then you just might be a classical populist.

I empathize with you but you're wrong to write off all Democrats. As a populist myself, I know Republican candidates are almost always worse than their Democratic opponents.

[NRaleighLiberal]

140. Me - not lonely at all - and not as confused as you are. Yes, it is a requirement -

did you think I went through the trouble of making that all up just for you? It is a copy and paste from the DU site terms of service.

So, methinks you are in the wrong place after all...

[Le Taz Hot]

138. "Vote for Democrats"

Absolutely no way of enforcing that provided people don't announce that they didn't vote for a "Democrat" and even at that, it's pretty subjective. For example, many people have admitted they didn't vote for Obama in 2012 and (in California) Feinstein since her "yes" vote on the IWR and they're still here.

The OP's mistake was making a big announcement via a new thread. It got the party faithful's attention and the swarm, not unexpectedly, attacked.

Having said all that, his/her points are valid regarding what the Democratic Party has become as compared to where it came from.

[Agnosticsherbet]

7. So, if he refused to sign the bill and cutt off all foodstamps, that would be a moral stand?

Personally, I don't like it. But it was a bill supported by Democrats in the House and Senate.

[Agnosticsherbet]

166. Seems I missed another rant. Look, governing is messy. It is easy out here to

attack anything that doesn't fit perfectly with our ideology as evil. Sometimes, when we have a divided government, as ours is now, it is impossible to do the best thing, and we have to settle for what we can get.

If we get out and vote in a sufficient number of Democrats to control the Senate and take back the House, we will see better legislation. It will not be perfect, and probably will rarely ever be the best we can do. It will be better than what we do now.

If we cast a protest vote, or protest by not voting, it is quite possible that Republicans will have a good year, keep the House, and take the Senate.

In that case, it won't be cutting food stamps but gutting as much as possible the whole social safety net. We will see Republicans pass obscenities and the President veto them. The naked partisan warfare will escalate for the next to years while republicans try to damage democrats so badly that they can not win in 2016.

We have a two party, winner take all system. It is clunky and inefficient, as is any system designed for the 1700's would be 230 years its implementation. But it is what we have.

[Avalux]

8. So....were you ever a Democrat?

Your post is contradictory. Are you currently a Green party member and will you continue to vote Green? And what exactly does that accomplish except for helping Republicans?

Did you vote for Obama? If you didn't, then you have no right to criticize him.

[VanillaRhapsody]

33. particularly here....

[upaloopa]

9. Fine, most people don't bother to vote

Your in good company. Also it is they who complain the most.
For me Obama was a disappointment but Romney would have been a nightmare.
By not voting for Obama when you were opposed to Romney is a decision also. You are not absolved and then able to claim superiority over us chumps that bother to vote.
Elections are a zero sum game. Not voting has it's consequences too.
And as a personal message. You will never vote because no one can be good enough for you.

[VanillaRhapsody]

35. Why disappointed in a Liberal Left President?

http://www.ontheissues.org/barack_obama.htm




Not having any of this "not left enough bullcrap"

[upaloopa]

38. Are you asking why I am disappointed in Obama?

If so,
First he didn't even try for single payer and gave away the public option.
Second, went he had both houses of congress he had a week stimulus package. We could have never had as high an unemployment number as we had.
Third he kept trying to "work" with Republicans.
The majority of the liberal stands he talked about in his first campaign were never brought up in his first term.
Now I gave more money to his campaign then I ever gave to any political campaign or charity in my life. I was invited to both inaugurations. I was an original member of O of A.
To make it short. We are nowhere near where I hoped we'd be toward a progressive change in this country.

[VanillaRhapsody]

39. You just always leave out the opposition....JEEBUS....Chomsky himself couldn't have done any better

And we HAVE made Progress....You just want change overnight...it doesn't work like that.

The most successful Democratic President YOU have ever seen (even in light of the obstruction and bigotry he faces)....and he is a Liberal...yet you are disappointed....

[upaloopa]

46. Yes I am

I'm going on 68. I was born under Truman, I lived through Kennedy, Johnson sent me to war, Carter had his heart in the right place, Bill was a disappointment with NAFTA and welfare reform. The dot com bubble did more for balancing the budget than he did.
I gave up of ever seeing a new progressive movement in my life. The along comes Obama and I thought I was wrong and began to hope again.
I have seen more progressive programs from Nixon than I have seen in the last 5 years.

[VanillaRhapsody]

49. You expected Sparkle ponies and Unicorns and Flying cars then

that was then....this is now...Republicans ARE not the same....One Presidency is not going to change 30 yrs of bad policy.

[upaloopa]

54. You don't have to sell me on that. I had hoped enough

people were hurt enough by Bush and Cheney that they would demand a move to the left. I was wrong again. People are hurting worse now and we may lose the Senate. Americans are screwing themselves and I wish somehow Obama could lead us out of the darkness but he isn't charismatic enough.

[VanillaRhapsody]

55. Sell you...that's easy..

On the issues..



http://www.ontheissues.org/barack_obama.htm

[sabrina 1]

50. You don't like Chomsky either?

Interesting to see how almost liberal voices, some of the most respected, have suddenly been trashed her, proving the points being made about what is going on in this party. What about Chomsky do you find so objectionable?

[VanillaRhapsody]

52. Not what I said Sabrina....

You are just like the tabloids...

[VanillaRhapsody]

53. You know who else is a "Liberal Voice" you would deny....Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama!

Obama:



and Hillary:

[RC]

181. Boy are you wrong.

Hillary is a little to the Right of Obama politically. Obama himself is to the Right of Center in his governing.
Did you know Hillary use to be a Republican? William Clinton is a Southern Democrat, read moderate Republican. If you had studied your political history, you'd know that. Both Clinton's are now 3rd Way, DLC, which are the main problem with the Democratic Party move to the Right.
You are embarrassing yourself by repeatedly posting those graphics.

[VanillaRhapsody]

184. I didn't make that....OnTheIssues did....gripe to them...

I am not embarrassed....but YOU should be ashamed.

[RC]

185. Hillary more Liberal and Obama?

Not hardly.
And no I am not ashamed.

[VanillaRhapsody]

186. Yes and I have ALWAYS said so...its why I was for Hillary before Obama won the primary...

YES she is...the issues are all right there...


They are just not MYOPIC....the purity pity party only base their judgment on one or two issues....but go to the site...Every position she has ever taken is right there for you to see...

Denial is not a river in Egypt

Read them for yourself
http://www.ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm

[freshwest]

71. Thanks for the fact checking. Will read this one carefully. n/t

[Lasher]

155. Because the Democratic Party is populist leaning liberal.

Or at least it used to be. And that's pretty much the point of this thread. Populism is being left out of the equation by New Democrats like Obama.

[VanillaRhapsody]

168. Uh so is the President...I don't know WHAT you are talking about...I suggest some research...

Here...let me help you with that...



http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/barack_obama.htm

[freshwest]

12. The 112th Congress swept in with a Tea Party majority in 2010 is still happily destroying America.

[okaawhatever]

13. So then you do support having 16 states take advantage of a loophole at the expense of everyone

else? The reason I ask is because the "cut" was created by closing a loophole that 16 states used in their calculations. If Obama signs a bill that levels the playing field for all states that's a bad thing?

Perhaps you should change your party affiliation to a party that refuses to compromise. Let's see how that works out for ya.

[OilemFirchen]

14. Golly.

You can join ranks with one of the most famous Populists in American history:

Robert W. Welch, Jr.

[freshwest]

17. OMG! Inforwars hasn't changed one word from this guy! n/t

[OilemFirchen]

19. To this day...

it still comes down to Precious Bodily Fluids.

[OilemFirchen]

18. ... or, if you prefer a living, actual Presidential contender:

Stand with Rand!

[freshwest]

23. Yes... And counting on the populists inhabiting Broken Clocks...

http://www.timwise.org/2012/01/of-broken-clocks-presidential-candidates-and-the-confusion-of-certain-white-liberals/

[PowerToThePeople]

20. Lurker since Oct 2009?

I thought my post count was low for the length of time I have been here...

If you are legit, cool. Here is my first hello =)

If this is something else, enjoy your stay...

[libdem4life]

21. I am a Bleeding-heart, Left Liberal. I oppose the Two Party System. I think the Electoral College

stinks to high heaven. But there are 300 million, give or take, people in this country. The fact is that there is only one person at the top of the heap. How we get there is certainly circuitous and often shameful, but it's the best we have. And, frankly, there aren't very many, if any, better places to live, work, raise children, etc.

Always, always, always ... a non-vote is a vote. The failure to make a decision (vote) actually counts as a decision ... for the opponent. Always, always, always. Even worse, it convinces other weaklings just to stay home and not wrestle with their feelings and judgments and make a choice. It allows scoundrels to gerrymander, rig elections (New "voter" laws), steamroll the people (Citizen's United), write laws (ALEC). Just great.

Vote, please.

[Phentex]

43. Well said!

[Hekate]

62. +1

[Bobbie Jo]

91. Good post.

[RC]

182. Yes, well said.

I don't vote for someone just because I recognize the name, or they have a (D) by their name. I read up on them. Read the bio's printed in the newspapers, before the elections. Watch if and when they make the news. I vote for the person I think best for the job. Personalities don't blind me like they do some people. Anymore that (D) is not meaning that much.
What is the PERSON like? Does s/he do what they say, or do they say what they think you want to hear? Honesty, that matters a whole lot more that that (D) or (R) by their name. That (D) is no guarantee if anything.
Registering to vote was one of the first things I did when I became eligible after I moved to Kansas City. I haven't missed an election.
Yes, it does matter.

[Warpy]

36. I'm a socialist and I will vote for them

because the alternative, sitting things out and allowing a party that has gone stark staring crazy at the bottom and nakedly fascist at the top to win is simply unthinkable.

Allow me to be the first to wish you bon voyage.

[Tarheel_Dem]

37. Blah...Blah...Blah. Say hi to this guy, he's irrelevant too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

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.

[great white snark]

45. FUCK RALPH!

GOTV 2014!

[Tarheel_Dem]

64. You'll note that he didn't mention the actual "Socialist" in the Senate who voted for this bill.

[freshwest]

76. That last sentence says it all, no fooling around. This is an election year and it effects turnout.

Just as it's intended to do. The amount of negativity sinks into the subconscious and does its work all the way through to election day.

It's from Nixon's CREEP and Donald Segretti termed it as 'Ratfucking.' So many things have been debunked, but they set up an internalized filter that literally depresses the people hearing it and literally depresses the vote. History has shown the steady success of this psychological tool:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Segretti

The garbage we are daily assaulted here is not policy analysis, not philosophy but competing media memes. The opposite of outright RW propaganda is not populism and libertarianism, but that is all we are getting, one of the other.

Bashing without any solutions that we all know do not work and are not going to happen and is not liberalism. We have half the American population firmly opposed to our ideals.

Those who are shredding us are either in those camps, easy enough to read, or those who playing Segretti's game. And that is nearly 100% of media, no matter what they call themselves. They have no solutions because they will not answer questions with what they know as well as most of us will get done, and spend their time attacking those working to get things done in ane environment with a lot of opposing voices and a lot of lives at stake.

Some that claim to be liberal, are not willing to sacrfiice their currernt comfort for the good of the very poor or oppressed, which does not look liberal to me. Ignoring their plight while pursuing one's own benefit, squalling of losing a dime while others get nothing, shows they don't believe in equality except in slogans.

The ACA was an example, as one of its major goals was to give healhcare to those who have been dying for a lack of care altogether, not just to make those in the middle class better off. Those are the main beneficiaries, but they seem to just be invisible to the middle class online keyboard warrior. After all, they can't afford being online...

A non-vote or a throw away vote is effectively a vote for the strong and the powerful, that such claim to oppose. But no one is taking the part of the TOS you cited seriously:

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.

The other side doesn't have to be the official other, like the GOP. It can be several other groups, and it leads to the status quo.

Ain't buying it.



What do you think, Tarheel?

[Tarheel_Dem]

158. You're exactly right. And I love the kitty pic & the message is on point!

[JoePhilly]

41. So when does PopulistUnderground launch???

[Phentex]

44. PU????

Anybody want to be known for being a member of that?

[JoePhilly]

48. Smell the Freedom!!!

[greatauntoftriplets]

56. PU!!!!

[JI7]

58. their entire activism would consist of "PUing" Democrats on the internet

[Tarheel_Dem]

65. "PU"!

:

[JI7]

104. hahah

pretty much describes the op

[libdem4life]

68. PU meet TP. So many times I've wanted to write that with the alternate meaning. At least this is

Equal Opportunity Snark.

[Cali_Democrat]

73. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[jeff47]

47. What did he gain?

He should have surrendered it only if it gained him some Republican support if he gave up single payer. Otherwise, what did he gain?

Democratic support.

For example, Senator Lieberman, the senator from Aetna. Needed a "yes" from him to get past the filibuster.

[merrily]

83. Yet he kept his Homeland Security Chair.

He had a chair taken from him because he supported McCain in 2008, instead of Obama. But no one disciplined him for refusing to go along with the campaign promise of a strong public option.

Since Lieberman was not going to run again anyway, he was convenient to use as an excuse. No one on the outside knows the real truth. We can swallow whole the conventional wisdom fed us by Democratic politicians who needed an excuse for their base--and it may be true. Or, we can be very skeptical--and that might also be correct. We don't know for certain, either way. What I do know though, is that there is zero evidence that Democrats tried hard to twist Joe's arm, or that they were displeased.

[jeff47]

84. So you want to blame Obama for Reid's decision?

Since Lieberman was not going to run again anyway, he was convenient to use as an excuse.

Yes, it wasn't like he had a history of joining filibusters or otherwise getting in the way in order to get himself more TV time.

What I do know though, is that there is zero evidence that Democrats tried hard to twist Joe's arm, or that they were displeased.

Because Lieberman's response would be to lose his chairmanship, and then spend the next year crying about it on TV, while voting like a Republican. Why not? He's not going to run again.

Sometimes being a bully doesn't work.

[merrily]

87. Can you quote the part of my post where I blamed Obama?

Transparent.

ETA: No one worried about "bullying" Lieberman when they took away his chair over an election that was, by then, over.

[JI7]

57. what populist roots ? should the Dems go back to before they supported civil rights also ?

how about japanese internment ? vietnam war ?

the Democratic Party has never been what some claim it was when they talk about how it "use to be".

it's always been about moving forward often slowly.

things change, there is change in culture and some things become easier to pass .

[merrily]

85. Disagree. FDR was like an earthquake, even his first 100 days.

Truman dropped the atom bomb almost as soon as he learned of its existence (not good, IMO, but not slow, either) and integrated the military with the stroke of a pen. JFK was moving relatively quickly toward a civil rights revolution and had already changed the interstate commerce commission by executive order. LBJ passed both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the Great Society, which was like another two earthquakes.


It's not that they moved slowly toward civil rights, either. FDR did not wish to touch it, for political reasons. But, when Truman and JFK decided to go for it, they went.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

60. perhaps you have unrealistic expectations about the political process

or you are not getting your message across very effectively to the American people. Most people do not support an ultra-liberal social/economic agenda at the expense of other things we would necessarily have to trade off to achieve the Green Party paradise.

[merrily]

86. What the does "ultra liberal" mean? Sounds like things Republicans say.

The extreme left position is Communism, where the government owns and controls everything. That is not a liberal goal. And the poster said he or she does not agree with the Green Party.

FYI, though, the people do agree with a liberal agenda, when they are polled before the well gets poisoned with propaganda from the plutocrats of both parties. Public option and raising taxes on those making over 250K and a strong public option polled at over 70% after Obama ran on them in 2008. Minimum wage increase is polling very high.

But when both Republicans and Democrats see the polls, they know how to adjust their respective messages to get what they want.

[Rex]

133. +1

Some people hate liberals, even on DU. A liberal forum. Go fig.

[merrily]

139. Thanks. I just finished responding to a post

that said I am obviously a rightist and don't even know what liberal means, so I appreciate your post even more than I normally would.

Posting here is like a seesaw sometimes.

[valerief]

61. I'll only vote for Gemini Democrats--Gemocrats. nt

[sadoldgirl]

63. I am not really sure where you stand

The problem lies within our constitution. We are not allowing a parliamentary system, therefore we have to chose between 2 parties. I did not find in our President the person I wished for. Yet, I voted for him twice. A no-vote is not even recognizing that most of the time people have to chose the lesser of two evils. Yes, I am a socialist democrat, after 2010 registered as green, but I have no other choice than to vote for a democrat. My hope was that if enough discouraged Democrats would join the greens, for instance, it would drive the party to the progressive side. Maybe I was wrong,otoh not voting at all seems to me something no citizen should chose.

[krawhitham]

72. Your Concern is Noted

[G_j]

78. " I greatly discount what candidates say within 3 months prior to Election Day."

words of wisdom, though I would go back a lot further.

[ProSense]

79. It took

"Rather than negotiating and considering the long term consequences of what he’s done, President Obama had acquiesced and surrendered on too many issues. I re-registered as a Green Party member in 2010. (I do not share their priorities but I’m not opposed to their positions). "

...a whole year, huh?


"It was a miracle that the Supreme Court did not invalidate the personal healthcare mandate. The president risked the entire act by surrendering the single payment concept. He should have surrendered it only if it gained him some Republican support if he gave up single payer. Otherwise, what did he gain?
The president will accept undermining Social Security’s age of eligibility and the method of COLA calculation. His intention to sign an agricultural bill that includes food stamp reductions is despicable."

Does that even make sense? "Despicable"? You don't say?

Proof that people will rec anything anti-Obama.

[sheshe2]

90. The proof is in the pudding!

DU has become, by some an anti-Obama site. Whatever he says and does is a bad spineless decision. When was the last time you have seen a positive post from some of his detractors here? The same when an achievement has been made, do they rec it?! Nope!

They keep stirring the pudding, yet when you stir to much it will become overworked, stiff and spoiled!

[ProSense]

93. Yup,

look at these:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024450902
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024448040

Crickets.

[sheshe2]

94. Yup, Crickets!

Yet you get an OP like hmmm....

Obama, that Kenyan, Spinless Whimp!@#$%^&*()(*&^%$#@ I voted and worked for him twice! He Betrayed Me!!@#$%^&*

375 Rec's!

LOL, I think I made this one up, I sure hope it does not really exist. Yet you get my drift.

[freshwest]

100. Good doesn't sell at DU. Only bad. n/t

[ProSense]

141. More unimportant

stuff: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024453233

[freshwest]

162. Why do you keep posting policy instead of propaganda? LOL! Thanks. n/t

[chollybocker]

80. A Hit & Run Populist, en plus...

[lostincalifornia]

111. what does that say about conviction?

[JaneyVee]

82. The Republican party thanks you for enabling them.

[freshwest]

101. +1

[Historic NY]

92. Apparently you didn't notice this isn't the populist underground..

[Ron Green]

98. I support what you're saying.

More than 9,000 people voted for me, with a (D) beside my name, in Nov. 2012. I still give money to the local Democratic Party, and I gave money this week to our Democratic State Senator candidate.

But I've come to the conclusion that electoral politics isn't going to bring the transformation we need, partly for the reasons you name.

There are lots of armchair warriors with screen names on this site, but as someone who has done the real work, I hear you and support you.

[brooklynite]

103. Simple question: if you don't want to change the Democratic Party, why should we care?

And if your argument is that you do, why should we care if you're not willing to do the work yourself?

[lostincalifornia]

105. So what you are saying if Hillary is the Democratic nominee, you will not vote for her, correct?

[ecstatic]

106. yawn. *plonk*

There was a time when I enjoyed silly back and forth discussions of this nature... But not anymore. Too much at stake.

[liberal_at_heart]

108. education is what did it for me. There was a thread earlier today about a parent of a dying

child who had to prove her child couldn't take the state standardized test the school district was giving. And as a parent of a special education student I see my child struggle every day. I'm just done. There is nothing anyone can say to convince me to vote for a democrat who supports Obama's education policy.

[lostincalifornia]

109. This is pure flame bait. The OP posts to cause controversy, and then he doesn't post one response

on the thread he or she started.

What does that say?

[Rex]

112. Well you gave the ones that needed a snark fest their feast for the day

the ones that got a good laugh, the ones that needed a moment...great posts since 2009. Just 15...good to see you finally decide to post how you feel after so long a lurker! Thanks for serving btw! I did too, but in the 90s.



So are you now an Independent?

[Recursion]

117. Populism is an attempt to graft a veneer of class-consciousness on white supremacist politics

I'm afraid that leopard never changes its spots.

[Romulox]

134. LOL. And your brand of "progressive corporatism" is an attempt to do what, exactly? nt

[B Calm]

123. welcome to DU

Enjoy your stay

[Romulox]

135. You'll find you have no place here. This is a "centrist" website, through and through. nt

[MineralMan]

157. No. It's a website for Democrats.

It's right there in the title of the site. It's in the TOS, here, too. It's not complicated.

[NCTraveler]

137. "I'm a populist; I no longer vote for Democrats."

That is a declaration that you will no longer vote for Democrats, period. You need to go. There is no reason for you to be here, working to change the party, while helping to get Republicans elected.

[pintobean]

153. EarlG took care of that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=247871&sub=trans

[NCTraveler]

156. Thanks for pointing that out. Republican enablers should have no place here.

Makes me feel good that this right wing supporter was shown the door.

[Lasher]

160. Maybe he went too far but I hate to see him banned.

Good discussion overall, anyhow.

[NCTraveler]

161. Very glad to see them banned. I respect your opinion on it. nt.

[BklnDem75]

151. Then why are you here?

Oh hmm... Nevermind!

[MineralMan]

164. You're also no longer a DUer.

[SidDithers]

165. Kick for exposure...

Glad to see this is still Democratic Underground.

Thanks, EarlG.

Sid

[SunsetDreams]

173. Supposn that EarlG banned you?

What then?

Oh wait...he did

It's amazing that this OP would garner the recs that it did on a place called Democratic Underground.

[ProSense]

179. .

[ScreamingMeemie]

183. I am sorry I didn't get a chance to meet you. While, I vote for Democrats because we have

no other choice, it doesn't mean I have to like them. And a rare day it is when Democrats behave with Democratic ideals at heart anymore. We have mortgaged away our very beliefs for a football game of D vs. R...where only the very wealthy in both parties survive.