Why I don't worry too much about secessionists from the party anymore.

[LoZoccolo]

I still bat them around a little bit, but I don't get too frustrated with them, at least not individual ones here. Why?

1. I don't think many of them are serious. If they were serious, they wouldn't say things like they are going to entirely leave the party on account of 15 Democratic representatives.

2. If they are serious, it might be better that they leave now rather than sticking around constantly trying to undermine things intentionally or not, or ruin our credibility by generally employing the same kind of over-emotional logic that led to them threatening to secede in the first place in their political decisions and rhetoric, or generally wasting our time complaining.

3. Someone who's idea of activism is withdrawing their vote probably won't have many ideas in the way of making things difficult for us anyways, or much stamina to put their ideas into practice. They can threaten to not vote for this or that candidate based on this or that stance, but I have a hunch that they're unlikely to really do much research necessary to find out everyone who opposes them on this or that issue.

[MadHound]

1. Yeah, yeah, keep up with that line of thought there

And watch the Democratic party go the way of the Whigs.

What you fail to realize is that the left wing of the party always has been, and will be, the base of the party. While those DLCers can pull in the dough for their corporate masters, the folks who are out doing the real work in the front lines, who get out the vote, who do the serious grassroots organizing, and who vote in massive numbers virtually all come from the left wing.

Keep pissing them off while continuing to demand unconditional loyalty is a sure recipe for disaster. As we see now, a trickle is already starting to head for the exits, if it continues as is, that trickle will turn into a flood, and by the time '08 comes around, especially if Hillary gets the nod, there will be nobody left to do all that heavy lifting.

The Democratic party is on the cusp of a huge change. Either they can return to their leftist roots and let the DLC rot in 'Pug/corporate hell, or they can embrace 'Pug lite, and go the way of the Whigs.

[LoZoccolo]

2. That depends on your definition of base.

First of all, as far as the actual membership of the Democratic Party versus this new breed of activist, there's a skew that has to be acknowledged.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=240

Also, I actually do go out and do things for the Democratic Party, and people aren't nearly as moonbatty as the people here who constantly make threats to the party. The people who actually get up and do things are actually much more practical, and that's great because we can rely on them. There was one guy who showed up to our Illinois Dem Net function that started going on about how me hoped Dean would get snubbed for chair of the DNC, so that everyone who supported him would leave and strengthen the Greens (I call him "impeachment guy" because he also wanted to try to push an impeachment of Bush* through a Republican congress, and had a petition and everything to do this)...well, I haven't seen much of this guy lately, and I don't want to.

So as far as this assertion about the activist base, well...message on an anonymous message board vs. experience...experience wins.

I don't have to listen, matter of fact I don't have time to listen, to people who say things that go against practical logic. I don't want to depend on those people, and my experience tells me we haven't been depending on them anyways.

[LittleClarkie]

5. Define "the base"

please.

I assume that term doesn't merely mean "the majority" to you.

[MadHound]

17. In response to both posters 2 & 5, wanting a definition of "base"

Base I define in a few ways. One of course is numberically, and while I haven't seen any numbers of late, I would concede that the left wing of the party has lost ground in that regard, especially since the rise of Clinton and the DLC. I would put my best guess at the left making up somewhere between 35 and 40%.

However my second criteria is looking at those who are active in the party, on a consistent and regular basis. That most certainly goes to the left wing, for their demographics tend to skew towards younger, more idealistic, more dedicated voters who have more spare time to get out and about. Most of your moderate and conservative Dems skew towards an older, wealthier group of people who either can't, or won't get out on the streets and fight for the party. This is the province where the left wing really shines. When I was working the '04 election, seventy-eighty percent of the people I saw in the trenches were thirty and under, and this is a trend I've seen consistently throughout time, and in all different areas of the country. The DLC can bring in the corporate lucre, but it is those of us on the left who beat feet on the street. It is easy to write a check, but it takes dedication to go in the trenches.

My third criteria is that of the historical definition of what a Democrat is supposed to be. As I was raised in the party, it was beaten into my head that Democrats stand for the little guy, the working stiff, a bulwark against the wealthy and powerful. We worked for social justice, and to help people up rather than pushing them down. Sure, sure, we didn't always live up to these ideals, but we did always keep them in front of us as a guiding light. Nowadays, those from the DLC are willing to throw the little guy overboard and ignore any injustice, all in order to procure a continous stream of corporate lucre. Rather that standing up for the little guy, the DLC seems all too ready to bow at the feet of power. This is probably the most disturbing trend that I've seen in the reign of the DLC. I understand that compromises are made daily in politics, I've made them myself time and again. But you just don't chuck your core believes in order to pursue the almighty dollar, otherwise you are no better than Republicans, worse even, for at least 'Pugs are up front about it.

And to address LaZoccolo's point about the left's "moonbattiness", well, I think you are letting the RW propaganda get to you. Most of us on the left are quite normal looking and acting. And at one time, fighting for the working stiff, social justice, and a level playing field for all was considered mainstream. However the left wing has been tarred, with increasing success, as out of the loop, loony, tofu-eating, oh so politically correct, gun snatching, feminazis, among other epithets. In fact this RW smear job has been so successful that even those in our own party now believe this. Let me straighten you out friend, for once and all. We aren't all sixtie's rejects, still living as hippies. Hell, most of us were never hippies, and those of that were matured and got wiser. Don't let the RW smear machine addle you brain to the point where you can't distiguish the truth, for then they have won.

And you speak of experience friend, well quite frankly I will stack my Democratic creds, even now that I've gone Green, up against yours any day. I started working with the party when I was eleven, and have worked in every Presidential election from McGovern to Kerry, and many of the off year and local election campaigns to boot. And gee, many of the people I started out with are still there, those darn, ideologically driven hippies.:eyes:

You speak of practical logic there LZ, so answer me this. Where is the practical logic of the DLC taking the class warfare and economic inequities out of the political equation by becoming corporate whores? If one party is as bad as the other on class and economic issues, all that is left to decide on for voters is social issues, abortion, gay marriage, all those hot button issues that those red state voters used to overlook because it was the economic issues that made a difference with them. Get it?! The DLC, but becoming corporate whore, part of the coalition of the rich and powerful, threw away the most effective and damaging weapon in the Democratic arsenal, class and economic warfare! Where is the practical logic in that?

I hope that answers your questions, if not, I'll be around.

[katsy]

25. I applaud you!

:applause:

:woohoo:

[ChiciB1]

28. Yesterday I Started A Thread Saying I Was Thinking of Going Green...

and was roundly lambasted by most. What you just wrote defines my feelings exactly.

But what was most disturbing was the note by Skinner who said that I was welcome to Go Green, but that this website WAS NOT the place to do it. I assumed by the statement that I was to pack up and go away. But you say you went Green.

I only stated I was thinking of it and that I was starting a letter writing campaign, which I started today. So what gives??

My views are still the same, but I feel something has gone terribly wrong. I'm an activist, and I constantly "talk politics" and issues with almost everyone. AND I plan on being in D.C. on September 24th. If that makes me a secessionist then the name calling fits. I don't feel that way. I still plan to be "in your face" and very much an activist. I was called a whiny cry-baby! That's a load of shit! That's was NOT the intention of my thread.

Anyway, since you've gone Green and are still here, what shall I do???

[Talismom]

8. I agree with you MadHound! The DLC is responsible for the

impression that there is no difference between the dems and reps.We have to destroy that impression and stand up and fight for the progressive, liberal and values that have produced the major advances in this society. It's time for the corporate party and those trying to move the dems in that direction to take responsibilty for the damage and destruction that they've wrought!

[kweerwolf]

10. Well said, MadHound!

There are some potential Democratic candidates - for example, Hillary on the national level and racist/homophobic Jay Nixon on the state level here in Missouri - who I would absolutely not support and would even actively work against. And no appeals for "party unity" could sway me to vote for them.

I'll proudly accept the mantle of "single-issue voter" if it means I intend to vote for the candidate that best represents my issues.

As a gay person, that means not "moving to the back of the bus" simply because some politician thinks it's expedient to sweep my rights under the rug. If that costs some centrist/DLC Democrat an election, then so be it. Perhaps they'll think a bit harder next time before they decide my rights can be negotiated away (while hanging onto all of their rights, of course).

It strikes me as more productive for the DLCers and centrists to spend their time trying to split the moderate Republicans from the right-wing extremists than it does to try to enforce conformity among Democratic ranks and end up with an even more badly fractured Democratic Party than we have now.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

3. hmmmmm....

1. dead serious. If I support a party that won't offer a fight, and so constantly loses, why shouldn't I at least support a party that offers a fight?

2. DU ain't just for sheep. We are the cutting edge voice of the left, and if that means having to threaten to reshape it from outside the hallowed grift of the democratic party, then there we are.

3. True, 04's democratic debacle sapped my stamina, and maybe some of my ideas, but how original an idea is it to imply the democrats' non-opposition party is the only suitable place for leftists?

By the way, if the democratic party ever truly felt it were in danger of losing its base, its hardcore left, do you think it'd dare undertake half the right wing/centrist appeasement it does? Wouldn't it be nice if Dem officials feared losing the votes they take for granted as much as the votes they can't quite ever court from people who they can't quite reach?

[EST]

4. Those who wish to take their ball and go home have not

sufficiently thought the issue through. Apparently they consider themselves as outsiders, with no voice, rather than the fact that they, themselves, ARE the Democratic party. It is the rest of us whom they need to convince, rather than we who must kowtow to them to keep them involved.
Each single one of us must take responsibility for the entire party. Each one is the party and we all get together to iron out the differences we can and to acknowledge our individual responsibility for the whole. No matter how hard you try, you can't run away from yourself and you are the party.

Each of us is truly our brother's keeper and each is needed not only to keep himself motivated but also to see to it that the person next to us is honored and is able to see that what looks like another person is actually a mirror of our own attitudes, fears and confidence. I cannot seriously see someone whose big weapon is running away as being committed to the mission in the first place.



note:the pronouns used are for clarity, not as any sort of sexist statement.

[LittleClarkie]

7. Maybe it's because this is the internet

but such pronouncements on a messageboard look too much like the proverbial "dramatic exit" to me. Like the declarer is waiting for the proverbial "Oh no! DON'T GO!"

If a person doesn't think they can work positively within the Democratic Party framework, and therefore can only offer negativity (such as the negative campaigning against Bush, rather than positive campaigning for our candidate) then I say, please, go and find a place where they can work positively.

The Dem Party will be healthier without them, and they'll be happier.

My response for a while to "I'm leaving and voting Green" has been "bye".

[EST]

20. Hmmm...

Could there be a more inclusive response, such as finding a place within our common goals that the person threatening to leave could find a useful position wherein even their negativity might serve a powerful purpose?
I acknowledge the frustration that may lead to a "well then, don't let the door hit you in the arse" response, but sometimes it can be more valuable to dig out what is biting the quitter and suggest a solution. After all, many, many marriages are saved or lost on this very shoal.
The democratic party, as I'm sure you know, is not a thing, like a car or a house, but it is a process--a way for thoughtful, compassionate people to assemble in order to accomplish things that are way too big for any one of us to do alone. It isn't a thing we can leave, but, if a person finds no common ground within the group, it would be unnecessarily smothering to attempt to accomplish one's goals in that arena and maybe that person would be far more effective, not to mention happier, with a group more in tune with one's views.
I do feel, however, that attempting to coerce a group by threatening to exit that group is simply wrong and totally counter productive.
I find it useful to see our assemblage as a marriage, which, in a way, is true and all the things that govern a successful marriage do apply.
Sorry for the long-windedness of my reply. Sometimes it takes me more than three strikes to get a hit.

[ChiciB1]

29. I Think You're Still Missing The Message Here...

It's NOT our principles we are abandoning, it's the lack of activism on the part of the Leaders!

I have been talking to several Greens lately in a very Repuke county and what they want is NOT to simply have monthly meetings and DISCUSS issues. They want to get the grass-roots out marching and "preaching" (if I may be so presumptuous) what they believe in. And it's not so far off from what the Democrats are saying. From my experience with them, I would say it's uncanny how much the two parties have the same views.

I joined our local DFA and guess what... they've shut down for the summer! Not so with the Greens. And even the meetings at DFA didn't seem to be much more than limp lettuce! I almost felt like a Socialist there!!

It would be much more beneficial if the two parties could come together in some way, that would be powerful! Since I'm still in the novice stages of my foray with the Greens, I don't KNOW what I will find. But I do know I want ACTION and that's why I will go from Florida to D.C. to the Impeach Bush Rally! As MadHound said, some of us have been Democrats for a very long time. I started at 12 years old, so to bash me for wanting to take down "the corrupt ones" doesn't do much good. My vote will NEVER be thrown away, I'm not STUPID!! And I've said it here many many times, even though I consider myself a Liberal, if John Edwards is the Democratic nominee he HAS my vote!!

For someone to assume that because of frustration that it in turn means you throw your vote away is ludicrous!! All I want is some BACK-BONE!! Take a look a a lot of the threads here... a lot of them are saying much of what I'm saying! I just went further out on a limb.

A Whiny crybaby, I'M NOT! I'm sure I have more signs and bumper stickers still hanging around and being displayed than most! And I don't intend to let anyone push me around about them. And I don't need your SYMPATHY if that's what you think the real issue is!!

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

11. With all due respect, you can disagree with someone's

point of view without saying they haven't thought it through. And nobody's taking their balls home, just considering finding a better game. IMHO, the attitude that "we're the only game in town" is what keeps some of the left at home on election day. What would happen if the party courted them--seeing as how they're ALREADY predisposed to vote D--instead of courting the middle right? And, IMHO, we have much more power when we threaten to withdraw our wallets and votes than when we say, "Okay, you got me that time, but please don't move the football again when I try to kick it."
It's time for the Democrats to re-court the diehard left. They can't do it without confidently crafting a genuine opposition message that will ring as honest--instead of as a political mish-mash designed to be popular. It's honesty will tick fewer people off than it will bring home. And Democrats will never win anything nationally until they craft that message and stand for it.
Until they do, I'm looking for a better game.

[EST]

18. You make a lot of sense.

I do not suggest not having thought it through. What I said was sufficiently.
Who is it that represents the ones who should re-court the hard left? Me? The person next to me? Is there a they? Who are they? My point is - there is no they. It is all you. It is all I. There is no particular homogeneous they that I can point to. There is only you and I. Each of us, in the final analysis, is totally responsible for the content and direction of the group.
By the way, I, too, am convinced that we must accentuate and declare for those values that tend to be labeled as "hard left," not as a way to "win" something, but because that is what we are.
Thank you for the "due respect" and the pleasant discussion. I think the point that appears to be disagreement is actually a feeling of desperate powerlessness and sometimes it seem like a F*** you to whoever isn't listening is the only thing remaining that we have any power over.

[CWebster]

6. Look, quit beating this dead horse

People get frustrated and they want to have hope--and they just watch the Democrats failing to put up the fight. Day after day after day.

Now, you are lashing out at those who have been pleading for the Dems to grow a spine and defending those who follow a path forged by the Right.

Do you suggest the only option is for everyone to support this status quo? Why are you so afraid to demand representation and a hopeful future Party direction and purpose?

Gotta make some noise, you know, let the folks know there can be a better way.

[LoZoccolo]

9. I'm not lashing out at those who have been pleading...

...for the Dems to grow a spine.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

12. ...as long as they promise they'll vote D no matter what...

[Q]

13. 2004 was the end of the line for the Anyone but "--------" voters

...on the Left. We knew how important it was in 2004 to get rid of the most corrupt 'president' this country has ever seen. Many of us did indeed 'hold our noses' as we voted for one of the DLC's chosen ones. But make no mistake...after eight years of Bush and the corporate wing of the Dem party helping to keep his agenda alive...many, many on the left won't sell out their votes again so that a DLC Enabler can hold high office.

You should know that principles are just as important to the left as 'winning' elections. We frankly don't want a DLCer in office that would continue where Bush left off on many domestic and foreign policies.

In other words...we're going to vote for the best interests of our people and country...and not the best interests of politicians and their corporate sponsors.

[LoZoccolo]

14. The DLC is AWESOME!

AWESOME!

:bounce:

[LoZoccolo]

15. "We frankly don't want a DLCer in office that would continue..."

I know; you'd prefer a Republican who would continue all of Bush*'s policies. I've already heard.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

16. so, my only choices are between * and a * lapdog?

I'll take C.

[DaveinMD]

19. of course

this is false choice. You are never going to agree with anyone on every issue. The world doesn't work that way.

[LoZoccolo]

23. Well no, but suppose it was * and * lapdog for the sake of argument.

Then yeah, those would be your only choices.

[Generator]

21. With a few exceptions

The Democratic party has left me. It's not just a catchy phrase..it's what I really believe. Apparently it's okay for me to be more in the known about what the evil we are up against while they can delude themselves it's just a job, business as usual, 1992 or 1965 or anything but this new horrible world of endless war and terror and propaganda.

They DEMS have almost no power and what the do have the SELL AWAY. Ever heard of CAFTA, the Bankruptcy bill? They are holding strong on Bolton (thanks a lot to Kerry as he must know just how filthy Bolton really is) but what are they going do if Bush appoints him in the recess? Oh yeah, nothing. And somebody will say, "What can they do.?" I dunno QUIT. Make a crisis. A few bodies on the streets in protest would be a start. Be the opposition. It's not business as usual.

Here's an example:
My senator Ron Wyden voted for CAFTA. I thought he really cared about jobs, about the little guy. He voted against the IWR but can't be bothered (he's on the intel committee) to sign Kerry's DSM letter. He also voted for Condi Rice and explained to me that he "didn't want to hold her accountable" for Bush's mistakes. AS IF she isn't on the same team up to her eyeballs. AS IF she doesn't carry every bit of water she can for every lie they ever told. WHY DO I apparently get this bit of intel better than Mr. on the intel committee?

I don't believe the 2004 elections results anyway. So what does voting mean? I bet you a million dollars I will never have that a Democrat is never elected for President in this country again unless the crimes that this administration has committed are brought to light and brought to justice.

[JNelson6563]

22. Here's who you need to worry about

Those who decide to get involved and make the Dem party more to their own liking, as in fighting for the little guy instead of siding with the corporatocracy.

Trust me, there are lots of us out here and we achieve more power in the party structure every day.

Julie

[katsy]

24. I worry.

Yesterday while reading a number of threads on DU, I came across an interesting quote by Rove. Unfortunately, I didn't think to bookmark it. You can take me at my word or skip over this post.

Basically, Rove stated that 95% of all voters were the investor class. Even if the % is overstated by 30 or 35%, Democrats SHOULD worry.

IF people with an ounce of greed are voting their interests (tax cuts) and the disenfranchised, poor & cynical are not voting... the Dems better listen.

IMHO people who are stating their frustrations with the Democratic Party aren't necessarily angry about one-issue. It's not JUST about...15 dinos who stabbed American workers in the back (CAFTA); corporate lobbyists buying off their reps to pass the bankruptcy bill; deal makers to install rw ideologues in the courts; dinos making anti-choice noise; dinos signing on to bigoted anti-gay legislation or a host of other policy farces we have witnessed in the past 5 years.

My concern is the cumulative effect of all the above (plus policies I can't even remember at the moment) has on voters. Not one disillusioned, frustrated or angry voter should walk away from this board feeling that they don't matter or can't make a positive contribution to the Democratic Party. Sometimes that means spanking their Dem Rep and working against them by supporting someone who challenges them in a local primary. Encourage them to use this alternative rather than becoming a non-participant in elections. Sometimes just giving them a place to vent is enough.

Personally, I've made noise about walking away from the Dem Party. It was/is my way of venting under a mountain of frustration because of what I perceive is a systematic dismantling of our Constitution and State's Rights because of the WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA and free trade. IMO, globalization is the single most dangerous policy embarked upon by our government. With few exceptions, the Dems support globalization even if they support it in a way which softens the impact to the American working class. I may be pragmatic enough to support Dems as the lesser of 2 evils even if it frustrates me to no end having to choose between the gop (100% corporate owned) and Dems (75% corporate owned, my opinion only).

I truly don't believe the Dem Party should alienate itself from the Green Party or labor unions. I want Dem Representatives who would proudly state that they will represent working Americans and make corporations accountable for all environmental disasters. I want a Dem Representative who will fight for a Constitutional Amendment that strips corporations of "personhood". I want a populist representing me. Don't I belong here sharing my thoughts?

I'll work within the Dem Party thanks to support groups like DU and KOS. Blogs may really make the difference to a few of us. I'm glad a whiner like me has a place to go like this to vent my frustrations. I'm grateful to the people here who keep people like me motivated to stay involved and stick with the Dems even by pointing out the deeds done by the greater evil (gop). I wish some of you would pick up the torch and run for office!

Maybe instead of threads bashing the frustrated and cynical... they should be nudged to activism in some manner. I don't want to think that they'll drop off the map by not voting. I don't want to think that any individual is not worth DUs time or effort. In my sphere of influence, however tiny... I work like a dog to inform people about issues that would motivate them to vote. Ditto for informing the short-sighted who would vote gop hoping to change their minds. In sheer frustration and exhaustion, I come here to remind myself that it's worth it.

[election_2004]

26. I don't appreciate being told who to vote for

The "either you're with us or against us" mentality is a real turnoff to those of us who identify as Independents or non-partisans.

I will not support or vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances, because the party elitists are trying to coronate her just because "she's a woman" and she has a "rock star" image amongst partisans. Yet, she has done NOTHING while in Congress to warrant this preferential treatment.

[LoZoccolo]

30. I don't appreciate Republicans taking over the government.

So should you.

[ulysses]

27. not worried, but perhaps a tad obsessed?

:silly:

[Geek_Girl]

31. I have several friends and family members

that have left the party and either no longer vote, vote republican or third party. They basically see the democratic party as a watered down version of the GOP. If you don't believe that many people have left the party for this same reason.

Then you have your head in the sand.

[LoZoccolo]

32. I take it they have no opinion on the Iraq war.

Seeing that that was part of the miniscule difference between a Gore and a Bush* presidency.

[alarimer]

33. Well our good Democrats

just helped reauthorize the Patriot Act and helped pass Cafta. So I don't have any faith in our so-called leaders anymore. They obviously only represent their own interests and not mine or anyone elses. Fuck this party.