I was recently successfully alerted on for saying something similar.

enjoy Manchin while you can. He's a good moderate conservative and we need more of them. But he may be of no use to Pelosi or those across the aisle after January 1, 2019.

Countdown to midterms: 280 days.

moderate conservatives. Even Nixon was left of them.

But let me expand the idea, we need more moderate conservatives elected to the Republican caucuses.

And, itm, at least conservative Democrats can be used as delivery systems.

Democrat offered under Democratic cover. And the answer, of course, is no. One Democrat commenting on another.

For smiles:

The most liberal Republican Senator votes with us about 25% of the time. We lost the 2014 Senate election in West Virginia by a large margin. Capito won that election and votes with Trump 100% of the time.

Manchin is far more likely to be reelected than any non-incumbent Democratic candidate is to win a Senate seat from West Virginia at this point.

Manchin had the nerve to team up "with Republican Sen. Pattrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania on legislation that would expand federal background checks for firearms for commercial sales." And he thinks we shouldn't sell guns to people on terrorist watch lists.

He also voted against the tax heist but of course broke with the Democratic caucus to vote with Ryan to fund the government a couple more weeks.

This is according to Roll Call a couple days ago, but no doubt Manchin is trying very hard to mend his relationship with the NRA.

values shared by by far most Democrats; and when his votes and speeches sabotage them, it's not a betrayal. It's what his Democratic constituents elected him their Democratic congressman for.

Who's the other politician you're talking about?

that I just absolutely LOVE and have TOTAL RESPECT for anyone who self-describes as a Democrat. If they have a "D" after their name I will carry their water without regard to how they vote or how much aid and comfort they provide to Trump and his minions.

(Are they smiling?)

I've always found the prohibition against doing so to be strange. But a fair number of people here think criticism = bashing. Some is, I suppose, so the actual wording matters.

I also found it unusual that we are all supposed to support all Democrats, but when the Democrat is pro-life we are not supposed to support them (see the mayoral election in Omaha last year).

That 75% is important, true, but it might be more important to determine when he is in the 25%, on what issues and what bills. If is the determining vote on some heinous GOP bill, then we should be angry with him. I fully expected him to vote to kill the ACA, but thankfully he didn't.

..if that 75% of the time includes lots of bullshit bills of no consequence, or only when his vote didn't actually matter for anything then why should we commend that. Especially if that 25% includes things that really, really hurt people who are supposed to be our base and the people who count on our side to protect them.

I'm going to guess if after November if we find ourselves being only 1 vote in the majority that Manchin will all of a sudden become MUCh more conservative and that 25% will likely increase since he will become the most important man in Washington DC.

One Senator from West Virginia votes with us 75% of the time. The other votes with Trump 100% of the time. Explain how you think a purer Democratic candidate is going to win state wide.

Keep in mind Clinton, Obama and the Democratic candidate for Senate in 2014 lost by double digits, but Manchin is considered a slight favorite to win reelection in 2018.

...I'm talking about the unspoken DU rules. I'm not saying primary him or kick him out or whatever the fuck ever. I'm just saying Manchin, who holds a lot of power and has a very public and widespread forum for his words, criticizes Dems and defends Trump, and all of a sudden there is a specific set of rules and standards for which that is o.k. according to the very serious and "adult" DU posters.
Yet heaven forbid an anonymous or powerless person on a stupid message board dares to say the most innocuous and arguably factual boo about the Democratic party and all of a sudden they are being called Putin lovers or Russian bots because they are "bashing dems" and "demoralizing the party or whatever. It's a ridiculous double standard.

And as I mentioned, it's another thing for him to be a useful idiot for getting to a democratic majority, but as we saw when we've previously held slim majorities, the problem I have with someone like him is that the most conservative Democrat, regardless of how much in the minority he or she are, and regardless of how out of step they are with the party as a whole, gets a de facto veto power over Democratic legislation.

certain folks see it. Thanks for the common sense and plain talk.

Manchin's not very popular here, and can barely win in WV. Still, he votes with the Democratic Caucus most of the time. A Republican would not.

generalizations or divisionary remarks are made, such as encouraging people not to vote for the Democratic candidate over the republican candidate at election time when issues start to arise

fans from alerting on the OP

I find most of the alerts silly across the board. It's rare that I vote to hide a post.

forget I even could alert.

When people are launching repetitive attacks on Democrats from DU, though, it's better if the administrators take notice sooner rather than later.

Countdown to November 6 midterms: 280 days.

alert an OP to 'punish' the opinion. I've been on many juries where that was clearly the goal of the alerter.

"Constructive criticism is always welcome, but our members don't expect to see Democrats viciously denigrated on this website..." (from Terms of Service).

I admit though, that the line between the criticism and bashing may be a difficult one for a dogmatic mind.

I am actively supporting a progressive Democrat in a primary this year. Have zero issue with it because the progressive is the best choice by far.

Who has no chance of winning a general over a moderate democrat who may well win.

If we insist on purity we will enjoy the minority status forever.

I find it ironic how so many DU members pine away for Howard Dean Style 50 State Strategy but bitch when we actually try to
Enact it.

That strategy means supporting Democratic Party members who can actually win rather than ones who meet a laundry list of progressive positions.

seemed to be saying. It seemed to imply that there was something wrong with being a progressive. Perhaps I misunderstood. Then again, maybe being a liberal in a DEEP red area has made me defensive.

I have no clue how you read that in my post. I am supporting a more progressive Democrat against a sitting Democrat that vote with republicans more than I am comfortable with.

Thanks for the clarification.

Maybe asking what I meant would have worked if that was not clear.

I will add that I've always thought that people who speak of "true" Democrats---or Americans or Christians or patriots---do so for the purpose of belittling those who don't see the world exactly as they do.

People who don't like BS are criticized by DUers who consider themselves Dems and often alert and hide the criticisms made by Dems. All here in this political microcosm.

That is usually enough to free a person up to say something awful, but still sound measured and thoughtful.