but if facebook and the blogosphere are any indication, it's global.

they're not.

So, what you see tends to reflect what you already believe.

Similar thing with the 'blogosphere' which is usually shorthand for "the blogs I read or follow."

National and state polling, for all its flaws, are the only real ways of measuring this stuff. Next best would be to follow what happens in Democratic primaries, local elections, etc.

but I have lots of facebook friends through my work and they span the spectrum of democratic ideology. My feed suggests many of the same divisions found here on DU.

I'm betting well-paid trolls have more to do with what happens on DU than any differences in the Big Tent.

They're paid to divide, disrupt, spread Nonsense...

nt

- mostly because I think they would be so unsuccessful that it would not be worth it.

The only time that I saw people who seemed to be professional trolls was in the pre primary of 2008. The problem was that none of the people I suspected took any time to understand the way things were typically done on DU. In addition, I don't see many real opinion leaders on DU. Think of whether there is ANY poster(s) whose opinion would cause you to change yours except in cases where they provide information from what you consider legitimate sources that make you realize that what you thought was wrong. That is a measure of how independent we are.

I do think that what has happened is that subgroups of posters, who start with a lot in common, have sometimes become stronger advocates for their position (or in the case of a primary - their favorite) as they learn from each other.

Thinking some are trolls is the only way I can explain to myself why a decent number of posters here are.

1. Pro Zimmerman
2. Anti woman
3. Anti labor
4. Anti all gun regulation
5. Global warming deniers
6. Anti science when it comes to things like obesity or mental illness.

These are the issues that allow Conservatives on this site to get 1000's of post.

Some libertarians and some Republicans, also.

At first, they could see that they were greatly outnumbered by the Democratic posters, liberals and moderates.

But they gradually infiltrated sufficiently to disrupt the ways of the old DU. Many actually adopted a few liberal ideas just to fit in. But they were never liberals. Just my opinion.

They now occupy about a third of the board would be my guess.

to shut out any opposing voices. There are far Left leaning Independent voices like you and some other posters, there is the loose Moderate group of posters that I identify with, there are posters that are truly non-aligned to any group or ideology. In sum, it is impossible for even organized efforts to bend opinion on DU, mostly because of the vast, vast political spectrum that the democratic party and democrat aligned web poster cover. No one group can dominate the other because at any given time, the group attempting to dominate will get simultaneously attacked by several groups, each attacking group being a collection of like minded individuals with none of the groups being in agreement with one another.

was to permit some conservative voices. That it might get a little tiresome listening to the choir all the time.

It is just an estimate but I would say about of the third of the posters here now are conservative or libertarian conservative in their viewpoints. It used to be that the far left would argue with the moderates but those discussions had their moments also. Now, we have to compete with folks that may not think like Republicans, but it is still difficult to try and understand their logic sometimes..

Just look at how the juries go a lot of times. I'm thinking it must be a majority by now.

I think it has to do with trolls pretending to be Dems.

It's people who haven't gotten over the 60s vs. those of us born after them.

Please elaborate, thank you.

I'm fascinated.

vs those of you who put party over country and principal?

Yes, yes, we know everything was better back then and you're the only true liberals. These damn kids today, etc. I could also say "we got tired of watching your candidates get their asses kicked over and over again". Neither is particularly helpful.

Now, can we move on?

Did you vote for Dukakis or Mondale or Gore?

But then again Gore was a founding member of the DLC, ran as a centrist, and won the election in 2000.

More trade treaties, more drug war, more surveillance, more for the 1%?

goals that are similar in purpose, but vary in degree of pace. There are paid or purposed posters here whose mission is to distort and disrupt, but they are ineffective, at best.

So anyone who doesn't agree with you on everything is a troll?

I myself do not think that everyone who disagrees with me is a troll. Most trolls seem to be easy to spot. Recently joined, always trying to stir things up, some take both sides of the discussion and always seem to post things that anger the other side. They use right wing slurs like "Obummer", seem to always have the right wing talking points, and seem to have a habit of posting huge numbers of posts every day even though they only signed up recently.

Everyone has a right to complain about things, and that does not mean they are trolls, but if you really take the time to watch, you can spot a lot of the trolls. I will admit there are probably some trolls that aren't as obvious as others.

I myself notice a huge difference between Democrats IRL and those on DU. IRL, I'm considered an extreme liberal, holding strong pro-woman, pro-worker, and libertarian social views (end drug war/support marriage equality, etc). On DU, I've been called a right-winger because I own a gun. Never mind that nearly the entire Town Democratic Committee does as well in this rural area. I've told people about how I was treated on DU after Sandy Hook and they were bemused that I would be treated that way on a Democratic message board.

I shook it off, but never again will mistake DU as representing real life opinions of Democrats.

I have been called a lot of things to lately, simply because I don't agree with some poster, but calling anyone a troll simply because you disagree is wrong, as well as calling people names of any kind because you disagree with them.

I too do not thing DU represents real life democrats. In real life people will disagree with things the president does, but usually will admit they still think he has done a good job since he was elected in changing things, not everything, but he has done a lot of good, in my opinion. Here on DU there are those who will encourage you to stay home and not vote because they are upset with the president, and that's just asinine. There are also a lot of posters who seem to be more libertarian than democrat here.

I also own a gun, but I am no gun nut. I think assault rifles are for the military, not the average sportsman. I don't believe every person that owns a gun is some kind of a nut, although a lot of teabagger gun owners seem to fit that that label.

Look no further than the recent Amash amendment vote. Many Democrats voted on both sides of the issue. Need we have any more proof that the divisions that are causing rifts here on DU are national?

nationally Democrats tend to see the NSA as only one of many issues, and not nearly as important as the economy or climate change or health care.

--because the issue is so divisive.

There is more agreement on economic issues.

DU is nothing like the national party. It's not even representative of the liberal wing of the Democratic party.

Mainly because a large percentage of people here are third party/former Democrats.

Sid

that stopped me...what an outlandish statement. Care to explain?

If it's not I guess I should be somewhere else. But where would I go?

not even close on DU

what they don't want to be so.

I can bitch about him but I am not fond when the opposition does it.

on edit that is for the past year. Before that it was only a couple of times a year. Husband does not answer questions and says we are not interested. I like being polled and do answer.

Not every lies to pollsters. Why do that?

And most people don't get called by pollsters, so appearing to claim you are called a lot and that you lie to them every time is not credible.

who are they? And how do they differ? Seriously. I have no idea what you are talking about.

Now it's mostly party loyalists who couldn't give less of a shit about progressive ideals as long as as many office-holders as possible have a D after their names.

Because Obama's victories prevented the worker's revolution that another Republican administration would bring.
I always considered myself very liberal - but by DU standards I seem to be downright conservative.

is a quote from Will Rogers.
Unfortunately these days, I see the main riff between rank and file Dems and the Dem politicians in office who don't abide by these principles.

Might want to have that checked out

talking points the Paulbots throw at progressives.

"Are the elected officials and Congress serving the American people? Is Congress serving America or only the lobbyists with the most money, that push for more crony capitalism and more wars and more foreign involvement that serve only themselves? Corruption between the political and corporate interests has become pervasive and it is inevitably at the expense of average Americans."

Really?

If those are "Paulbot" concerns I guess I'll need to sign up.

ground" with liberals. problem with it is what it leaves out. Talk of getting rid of "crony capitalism" leaves out the fact they believe in an all hogs to the trough capitalism with no environmental regulations, worker safety regulations or even a minimum wage. The talk of opposing "more foreign involvement" again needs to be looked at in the context of what that really means in the RW Libertarian world - it means no foreign aid to starving people, no AIDS work in Africa, etc.

So yes, those are very much the deceptive by omission "Paulbot" talking points I have seen before. And as geektragedy pointed out, the "party realignment" preface is a dead giveaway.

"Fuck you"? And the Ron Paul horse you rode in on?

Nooooo

No Paulbots here.

Does that worry you?

Saw a jury result yesterday 0-6 letting someone referring to DU'ers as slime balls stand (not one hide) and now today a 'fuck ron paul' gets hidden.

Fuck Ron Paul is used as a banning message on MIRT---seriously wtf is going on here?

EarlG coined the term, FFS.

Sorry about your first reply, your first post did not deserve that.

and say "hi" to the rest of us. You make excellent points, I'm looking forward to more posts from you and welcome to DU.

right there. +++

And indeed that is part of it

This thread got 100 recs (http://www.democraticunderground.com/100251866) and this one got 150 (http://www.democraticunderground.com/100219446), and then there was this (http://www.democraticunderground.com/100256245).

Obama won by a landslide.

BBI

Those threads show the divisions but the majority still support the President.

That means were are not a monolithic group.

The younger generation looks at SS as something we prob wont benefit from given the current state of things.

The younger generation is much more Likly to adopt new technologies and are much more environmentally conscious.

Heck look at gay marriage just 2 years ago or so the leader of our party Obama was straddling the issue of gay marraige.

The younger generation has little to no relationship with organized labor.

Teach for america has been declared an enemy of the NEA in many states eventhough most teacher I know they teach for America are superstar educators and don't see themselfs as union busters.
NEA does not like the gate foundation and other efforts and school reform but most people under 30 know a college educated minority who benefitted from the gate foundation and the scholarship program.

Younger generations fully embrace technologies even disruptive ones while the older generation is more protectionist. Look at hybrids, Internet, teleworking, alternative energy.


I can keep going in forever.

If nowhere near interested in politics to follow it close, much less make the effort to find a place to talk about it online.

I don't think you can can a group that by their actions show they are more passionate and more educated on politics and extrapolate anything about the entire party from how they act.

Updated to reflect our age, of course.

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

That, and more. Things proffered by Occupy, such as affordable education/eliminating student loan debt, housing rights for all (13 million empty homes with 3 million homeless people = something horribly wrong), money out of politics NOW, ending corporate influence (ALEC/TPP), etc.

If that's not too far left.

since Clinton, who was the first to sell out Democratic values. Lefties are either registering third-party or "no party affiliation" (the fastest growing category in CA). I think, for the most part, the people who are left will, no matter how pissed off they are at the Democrats, will ultimately, still vote Democrat regardless of what piece of corporate meat they offer up. And the party knows this.

...meanwhile we have very little actual voice in government. We just get to rail against injustice from outside the gates, beg and plead for crumbs from a position of little power.

What category we register to vote is secondary. "No party" only indicates an unwillingness to actually work for any party, but one will still vote for one or the other, most likely.

Ask--are my views represented in government? For many of us liberal progressives the answer is "Nah, not really."

cuz there ain't no other option.

I'm one of those who recently changed to "no party affiliation" but will likely hold my nose and vote Democratic because the alternative is much worse.

And with each successive election, the number of people who'll vote for an empty label decreases.

The mantra for so many of us has been: "I didn't leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me."

That is SO spot on. (Great screen name, btw).

...for many who don't live, eat and drink politics this is the "off-season"...there's no big elections and there are plenty of other circuses (Zimmerman) to keep the water cooler buzzing all summer long. In today's non-stop campaign world we're seeing people tune out politics until there's a big election and even then the attention really doesn't kick up until the final 2 months of the campaign. The other day I saw a poll regarding Snowden and a majority either didn't know who he was or had an opinion...that shows the lack of interest many people have in the stuff that people here on DU hold as so near and dear...

n/t

I had a conversation on line a couple of weeks ago with someone in here.. they live in an area where everyone is basically a Democrat or liberal.. all their elected officials are Democrats.. and so they could not wrap their heads around what it is like to be a liberal living in Steve Kings district..

So the party reflects the area of the country it is situated in.. The Democratic Party in Iowa is going to look different from the one in Vermont..

It is going to look different from the one in California.. or the one in Mississippi.. etc etc.. and so the different people from different parts of the country are going to sound different

That is one reason

The other is many many many people who post in DU are not Democrats.. They maybe liberals, indys, libertarians, etc .. but they are not Democrats.. this is not a Democratic Party site.. so they do not have an investment in trying to move as many people along to get things done in the party system.. its a different vibe..

it was an interesting conversation..

There have been efforts to purge the Party of its Left-wing in the past. In 1948, the onset of the Cold War led the Harry Truman liberals to push out the Henry Wallace Progressives. That led to a 3-way split with the Strom Thurman Dixiecrats also exiting stage Right. Truman was narrowly reelected, but we got into the Korean War and eight years of Ike-Nixon beginning in 1952.

During the Vietnam War, there was a similar split which led to the 1968 Chicago Convention that saw the Daley Democrats heckling liberal speakers, along with an open battle on the Convention Floor over the seating of the Mississippi delegation. Meanwhile, outside the Chicago Police literally cracked heads as the smell of teargas permeated the arena. Nixon again.

This is nothing new.

looking for microcosms.

Once again-- I grew up in Tammany Hall NYC, about as far from "democratic ideals" as you can get. I lived in Elizabeth NJ for years, where there were three Democratic Parties, two of which were trying to displace the county leader while stealing half the town. I traveled down South where the yellow dog segregationists were all Democrats until Johnson showed them the way into the Republican tent with civil rights law.

Democratic ideals my ass.

I am on our local central committee and running for office here as a Democrat. I think that gives me some feel for how Democrats around here, and in the rest of the state, work. On issues, we tend to agree and lean toward the left, but we don't talk much about the grand issues. We talk about organizing and getting elected. We're unfortunately obsessed with the minutiae of politics and local rules. Obamacare? we think it's a great idea as a start, but none of us have any say in it. We have two Senators we hardly ever see and one Rep who's good on most issues and we leave that stuff to them.

And I'm one of the few who bother to post on any board. Some of the others are on Facebook, but that's it.

Last edited Fri Jul 26, 2013, 11:06 AM - Edit history (1)

But, there are more of us "regulars" here than you may think. And, we do tend to be liberal/progressive.

I think DU is fairly representative of the range of views within the larger party, and know that it is the top reported Democratic board in terms of Google coverage of many issues, which today is everything in terms of reaching a wider audience.

This schisming isn't just a DU thing. It was almost inevitable, considering what's going on in the wider world. Take the slow drowning of much of the middle-class and the simultaneous slog toward another set of wars in the Mideast/Persian Gulf, for instance. While it isn't commented on a whole lot, these bigger cancers are there eating away at party unity.

For months upon months, you searched the web for articles to re-post that served as little more than Dem and Obama bashing. For months you spread a discord, a ton of frustration and defeatism, you provide a veritable smorgasbord of divisionism, that then ask why the party appears divided?

Of course the old "feet to the fire" will come out. Seriously, when will it occur that there is a huge difference between defeatist crying, name calling, and spreading lies, to constructive activistm for policy change. There is a pretty simply psychology to team building, and the months of threads such as you and a handful of others have been wont to post isn't it.

Sure, your threw out the occassional breadcrumb...but the general tone had been well established. It would be pretty interesting to see how the tone of DU would change with more posters building the anger and frustration where it belongs~at the Reps, and encourage activism or at least getting out to vote to get the assholes out of office, rather than preaching "what is the use". When it gets hard to differential the regulars from the trolls, you know that there is massive manipulation going on.

I see your favorite group is the "Barack Obama" group. Need I say more?

your linear thinking is pretty piss poor way of judging people. How many posts do you see on each of the pages I frequent? I find it hillariious that you deems to degrade and assign motivation to a person who visits a Dem site and is supportive of a Dem President.

This is EXACTLY your MO and continued actions towards creating division. Pretty ironic given your OP don't you think?

It is you who "deems to degrade and assign motivation to a person"...

I will admit I am not a cheerleader. I call it like I see it. Put me on ignore if you don't want to read it.

you call for unification in the op, yet make fun of Obama supporters, provide negative article after article (even when the article if full of 1/2 truths and false premis/innuendo that had been prove false) and tell me to put you on ignore....is that what you call team building and trying to unify?

You are one of the biggest hypocrits around today. You don't like the light of day being directed at your posting habits? Why not put me on ignore instead? you will be a lot happier.

and supported him in both elections. I have a right to criticize him if I please. When he does stupid shit, somebody has to call him on it. In fact, he said that we should hold him to it. I'm only taking his advice. But I have to admit, the suck asses that never find anything to criticize really burn my ass. Those are your hypocrites. They are not Democrats. They are sycophants and cheerleaders and do nothing to help our Party or our candidates. They are poopy- heads.

and you fail to read upthread that NO HAS SAID DON"T CRITISIZE, and especially not me. Instead you check out DU profiles with which to try and bsh people

Playing the martyr "I voted, I'm disappointed, I'm entitled to demoralize everyone but I'm not allowed to say it...whaaa waaaa" bull crap doesn't work any more.

You want to team build? You want to portray yourself as a person with issues and policy concerns that can and is willing to work towards getting them resolved rather than demoralize? Well, do you? Your long term MO doesn't do that. Your concerns over your perceived sycophants doesn't do that. Your name calling and negativity without contrstructive input and ideas doesn't do that. How I wish the OP was genuine.

Go cry to your mother.

Sounding more and more like a repuke

That's a big load of sheepshit.

besides, you laugh about demoralizing, but isn't that your hope? Aren't so freaking excited that you may be instrumental in guiding one or more persons away from the voting booth because "there is no point". Seriously, admit it. it gives you a hard on, right?

Judas.

disagreed with his positions on President Obama and democratic policies, but view those positions as coming from a principled point of view. There are a handful of other posters on DU that incessantly attack the President and Democrats who I am not charitable toward and frankly have no use for. As I wrote, Kentuck, on the other hand is a person who I disagree with on policy, policy pace and tone and duke it out with often, but largely like and respect. I don't agree with your general assessment, but accept that you can have such a view.

The Democratic party is a big tent. I suspect the diversity of opinion "out there" matches DU to some extent (I certainly know plenty of Dems who support the president unhesitatingly, and plenty who are deeply disappointed in him; plenty on either side of the NSA question; plenty on either side of the drone question; etc.).

Where DU differs is not in the kind of disagreement, but the intensity: I know of no Dems in the real world who are threating not to vote Dem at all if Hillary gets nominated, but I see that here all the time (of course, it might just be bravado, the way all the I-m-never-voting-for-Romney talk was on Freep); nor do I know any Dems in the real world who would excoriate those who question the president as naifs, or traitors, or saboteurs -- but I see that here all the time, too.

So maybe face-to-face discussions are more temperate, or maybe I just hang around with a less extreme class of people. But I do think that's the difference: same divisions, less rancor.

that the Democratic Party is not "divided." I think DU is not representative of general Democratic Party thinking.

of nervousness about economic uncertainty. Republicans also lied through their teeth about Obama-care and it's content and outcome. Now republicans are in a stew pot and Obama care is the firs that is slowly heating up under that pot. Republicans have no choice now but to obstruct any positive change and pray that the economy turns south big time. Republican efforts will fail, American business, as republican as it is, have tired of republican tactics. The world economy can't afford republican tactics. The majority of American voters have tired of republican tactics. The stew pot should be boiling hot when November 2014 roles around and republicans likely will get cooked.

save for those engaged in social issues and within the blogosphere and various punditry. Most of my fellow dem friends do not keep up with current news much less the political machinations behind them. Many are content to buy the msm version of everything.

For example, the President has a roughly 85 percent approval rating among Democrats and a roughly 90 percent approval rating among liberals in the real world. It is more like 50 to 60 percent here on DU. In the real world the Democratic Party isn't divided in any real sense at all, much less as much as on DU.

The biggest issue right now is surveillance, and there DU and the Democratic Party at large are deeply divided (see Amash amendment vote).

On DU, the places where we all agree are less interesting to talk about, and so we probably spend more time on the more contentious issues, making it look as if we are more divided.

Here is the problem...the base is starting to realize the elite does not represent it. And the party at the top is indeed divided between the business wing and the people's wing, as I like to call them.

The Filner scandal helped to discover locally how deep the rift actually is.

And if some of our more eccentric members ever got on a national stage, it would do major damage to our brand.

Also:

Some of the issues are generational. There are things that are becoming obsolete due to changes in technology that makes it absurd to try and protect. And the irrational fears of some new technologies are standing in the way of progress.

And perish the thought...social security.

I believe minimum wage should be between 10 and 15 dollars an hour, but prefer 15.

When people raise the fact that this is all talk

So there.

I guess you are a liberal dem in social issues, and a conservadem in national defense...why you trust big brother and believe raising privacy concerns are non issues.

Do you include Alan Grayson in that membership? Surrender to technology. It is harmless. Or is it inevitable? And how do you define "progress" in regards to technology?

You are worried about the "brand". To your side it is all about appearances, positive messaging and looking good.

This is is exactly why your side wants to pillory Snowden; you couldn't care less about the spying (because after all it is being done with cool new technology which us old folks don't get anyway) but the message threatens to damage the "brand". Therefore the problem is with the messenger, not the message.

So excuse me for being an old fuddy-duddy who still has quaint ideas that the Constitution is more than "...just a goddamn piece of paper."