resign. After Jones takes Alabama.

Opposing the "Cult of Personality" means allowing Franken to resign because if I object it's because I have a crush or something on him? Do you hear what you are saying? Blindly allow a senator to resign because he is a person, and any objection must be personality-based?

That does not sound like a way to avoid a "cult of personality", it sounds like a cult of personality in reverse. It's the same thing.

that it would be good for the Minnesota Governor to reject Al Franken's offer to resign.

I don't know cult of personality from blue oyster cult or how either relates to what you and I were discussing.

Al has made up his mind to resign. He's announced it. Despite what some might want, he's not reversing that decision. Now, could Dayton try to keep Al in office by refusing to name a successor? Sure. But Al could call Dayton's bluff by saying he's resigning on X date whether or not Dayton has named someone.

That's not going to happen. This has all been carefully coordinated.

Who gets a say in that decision? In a democracy?

It's a night for celebrating, so I will leave it at this: why not simply accept that there is strong disagreement with the approach taken? Is that so hard to accept that straw arguments are necessary to belittle people's views?

The next time we celebrate an election victory, maybe it can be with even greater party unity if we actually make an effort to accept sincere differences of opinion.

stated calmly and reasonably.

I agree with the main premise 100%. We need to quit harping over Gillibrand vs Franken. Mainly because Franken HASN'T resigned yet and because as Democrats we will support Guillibrand if she is nominated at the next convention, right?

In the interim, regardless of whether we campaign for Guillibrand or Franken (and I can whole-heartedly support either one) its three years away and we still have to take the Senate and the House next year and 2020 and Frankin still hasn't left the Senate and may well not leave.

All the poster of the OP said really is:calm down and get down to the job in front of us. Whats to nit pick?

Whenever Democratic posters on a Democratic site are calling supporters of another candidate a cult of personality, that's a problem. Remember the primary wars, which may have contributed to Trump winning? All of us should push back against the slandering of supporters of other Democrats. I don't think there's been strong criticism of Gillibrand supporters by the Franken faction, only of Gillibrand herself. I am seeing much more direct criticism of Franken supporters, which may deepen the current divide on the site.

I am also not keen on being asked if I will vote Democrat in 2020. There's a hint of passive aggressiveness in that question. We're all here on a Democratic site posting on election night, so chances are that we are voting Democratic. 2020 is three years away, as you mentioned.

Everyone knows there's work to do. In the meantime I think there's serious underestimation of the rift, hopefully temporary, left by the resignation of Franken and how it went down. I think that the architects of this action have some work to do still to help minimize the rift.

I am still quite incensed about how this resignation went down, but at the end of the day, the Democratic Party is the only viable and sane party that can win national elections, so I will continue to support it with my volunteerism, votes, contributions once these events are in the rearview mirror, and connections with officeholders. I don't mean at all to be overly confrontational, I just have many objections to how this happened. Some can stay calmer about it, good for them.

Peace and congrats on Doug Moore.

Do what you do, as will I. PEACE

And I would much rather a good Senator resign for his mistakes & not have to worry that the Right can throw HYPOCRITE in my face when it comes to standing up for women. I really like Al Franken but what had to be done looks like it is going to be done.

Now Sen. Gillibrand is being accused of being a whore for campaign donations by the POTUS for calling for him to resign!

... want to contact the Alabama SPCA and get that poor horse some counseling, and make sure it wasn't violated worse than what we saw on TV.

Otherwise... Good luck here, man. (edit: actually in to avoid juries on this thread.)

but he was a senator willing to stand up for the people. Not the corporate persons, but the actual human people.

He has been a thorn in the side of the Republicans, in a way none of the others have been.

If I thought that someone else would take up, say, the fight for net neutrality, I'd feel less awful about him being gone, but they won't.

We lost a fighter, which our side sorely needs.

Gillibrand? She's making a political point and only went after Trump when public opinion turned in a way she clearly did not expect.

So, we lose a strong, smart senator who was willing to ask hard questions and then to push against the other side. One of very few who make waves. That is a big loss.

And 99% of us who are angry have said that if she were the nominee for president, we'd fucking vote for her, so what is the issue here? Why do we need to somehow worship HER for taking out a strong voice on our side?

is not Al Franken or even Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren is Gillibrand.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/

2020 to sacrifice our own. Doing things that could potentially cause a schism in the party is political suicide. Trump is already very unpopular and by 2020 he will be even more unpopular and therefore there is no good reason to sacrifice our own.

...for a "chill the F out" message.

People are pissed at a major -- and unnecessary -- screw-up. Overblowing descriptions won't help any.

They are doing little more then posting about their being pissed off.

"If you are very angry about the Franken situation , what are you going to do?
Are you going to post in ALL CAPS?

Are you going to follow the footsteps of MLK, Gandhi, and Cindy Sheehan and engage in peaceful civil disobedience?

Are you going to fill your posts with angry or sad emoticons?

Are you going to dedicate almost all of your disposable income and/or free time to the political fight?

What are you going to do?

Actions taken ought to match the rhetoric otherwise the rhetoric is just grandiloquent language. "

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/10029944647

but it's human nature not to place one's life style at risk or make dramatic changes for a cause that isn't important to them. If it really was important, we'd be reading about protests, arrests and such.

"This will hurt me more than it hurts you".
"It's for your own good".
"We lose money on each one but we make it up on volume".

It was an unusual Democratic act done by Democrats against another beloved Democrat. I say let people mourn, brawl, seek revenge, gain wisdom, pour a drink into the dirt, come together (maybe). Also, Sen. Gillibrand seems to like to brawl; she and her die-hard supporters (are any of them recent die-hard Clinton supporters whose husband she also knifed in the back?) will need a good ass-kicking to see if they're ready for 2020. After all, it's just hard-ball politics, amirite?

... "sacrificing one of our own" was pointless. It gained us absolutely nothing - other than a lot of very angry people on our own side.

"But we demonstrated that we have the moral high-ground" seems to be the reasoning of some - but there isn't a voter who voted for the pussy-grabber, or his party, that is impressed with morality.

can we stop that one too?

either godhood or devilry for either senator.

I'm angry at Gillibrand, and think that what she and the others have done will do more harm than good.

I don't think this sacrifice was either necessary or beneficial at this point, and will continue to say so.

she stabbed a great senator in the back

what is so fucking hard to understand?

she was willing to sacrifice Franken to push herself into the spotlight? Fuck that noise.

there is no CULT OF PERSONALITY here - just people who believe in common courtesy

your response proves it.

DONE HERE

Thanks Skittles...

+1000

don't care whether he's guilty or not; either way he should just deny, deny, deny and stay in office, and all dems should unite in lockstep behind him. look at all the people here turning him into a saint and a new dem superhero, when at the moment we don't know for sure whether he's guilty or not; to do that trivializes the whole issue of sexual harassment. if he wants due process he should have it, but a lot of people here are acting like the multiple charges against him don't even matter, or even worse, are something that works to his credit.

PERIOD

It was a cynical ploy and we lost an advocate for a better party. Why was that? I don't see where we won anything from this.

fatso's going to drag, attack and go after Gilliebrand (She's a Dem but her being a woman gets fatso's blood boiling because he's a misogynistic, racist, ignorant PIG), and his cronies: Bannon, the rest of the GOP will sink it's fangs especially into a woman's throat. They're all woman-hating assholes.

Which is sad, because I've said all along, that's what the "get rid of Franken" movement was all about. Didn't I say that from the start? Yes, I did.

He was TOO popular, he sucked TOO much of the media attention from the others, he was TOO noteworthy and TOO successful a senator. He had to go. So when this opportunity arose, they jumped on it. It's just ironic that she doesn't have much of a chance, in the first place.

You know who's a strong contender for the Presidency? Someone who is noteworthy in his or her own right, without having to figuratively kill someone else so s/he can get attention.

and by that I mean Sessions, to admit he lied. Franken, Warren, and Sanders were leading the party in a better direction. Who among them is even backing up Warren now, or ever. Sanders is dealt with as an Independent. Some high road.

I don't need someone to try to convince me that it's the ethical thing to do to sacrifice a member of the family so that a favored person can get ahead, or without proof of serious wrongdoing.

No one is saying she hasn't stood up for women...but Franken did more, if you're counting.

But right is right...and wrong is definitely wrong. She did the WRONG thing in a fit of bad judgment, in her desire to get ahead, IMO. It's not a "culture of personality." It's stating that she has shown she's a follower, not a leader, and has bad judgment. Good judgment is a requirement of the Presidency, as is being a leader.

She's a Senator from NY with the voice of a young girl, who didn't convince her own party that the sacrifice of this better, more popular and beloved Senator, with more accomplishments, in the face of anonymous allegations, should be canned. That's pretty much it in a nutshell. That's not saying that she's not a nice person otherwise. Or educated or smart.

But there are others who are far more viable for the Presidency, for many reasons, among which is the fact that they didn't jump on the bandwagon.

I saw Rep Jackie Speier speaking on television, for example. She has more going for her, IMO. She's someone a person would listen to, someone who makes a cogent, persuasive argument. And being in the House, she didn't jump on the bandwagon to get rid of Franken.

BTW, you don't ever sacrifice a member of your family without a very good reason and proof of serious wrongdoing, IMO.

I'd give it more pluses, but that would be fruitless.

That's a sexist statement.

I was angry about the trump tweet about her. But I haven't bothered to come to her defense on twitter.

It was a calculated move, IMO. It's a GIVEN that whenever someone says or does something against Trump, he lashes out on Twitter in a vile, personal way. She knew that. I knew that. Don't we all know that? No one is too big or too small for him to attack personally. He loves to do that.

We didn't know WHAT he'd say, but didn't we all know what he'd do? He does this every single day.

I think it will leave a bad taste in the mouths of many.

:wtf

That's the ticket!

we will become like the GOP

When we become like the GOP they shall roux the day ...

For the sake of unity, get rid of the personalities who feed the high horses! I love them both (no sarcasm here), but towering as these figures are on the left, they have become, perhaps inadvertently, magnets for divisiveness and keepers of high horses. With both of them out of the picture, achieving unity is so much more likely!

That's why all threads about this are going straight to the trash can. I'm staying out of this - I can see both sides.

You make a great point, though, on how we shouldn't create cults of personality around our Democratic leaders - it's something I find extremely ugly when the RW does it and we should strive to be more sober and rational than them.

One thing I really liked about Obama was that he was so rational and his personality didn't lend itself to being worshipped. He's still kind of immune to that thing. You could tell that he didn't want a cult of personality around him - he wanted to be recognized for what he accomplished.

"Cult of personality" and "not perfect" is the same crap targeted at Hillary Clinton in the last election. Nice touch telling us we have to stop beating our chests about how the party let us down -- suddenly the Democratic Party is above criticism. HA!

Or read the some of the replies in this thread.

And since this site's purpose is the promote the Democratic party as a whole and not any individual, the answer is yes.

The answer is no.

Your OP is a masterpiece in self-defeating cynicism.

It typifies vividly the sorts of attitudes and tortured reasonings that turn people off politics altogether.

If there were prizes for it, you'd be well up there. But we're not at year end yet, so the jury's still out.

Sorry if you can't accept reality.

We can go on like this all night if you like. I'll keep the phrase handy in my clipboard.

You have nothing but your cynicism.

Kindly keep it to yourself and quit patronizing and scolding the rest of us on how we must see the world and your warped version of "reality".

I'll wager I've seen a damn sight more elections and have a hell of a lot more life experience than you have, and that will no doubt be true of many others who've disagreed with you.

But an acceptance of political reality. Unfair, yes but still reality.

If you excuse this recent witch hunt - and worse, scold others for not happily going along with it - one wonders what you'll excuse next in the name of political expediency.

That's cynicism.

Anyway, don't you have your own little "cult of personality" you should be stoking? - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029979005

As good as Franken was, he was rapidly becoming a political liability.

And why do you have a problem with someone posting facts. Don't you like facts?

BTW I guess you missed these: https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029871550
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029851249
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029850032

I've been around the block a more times than it's decent to remember.

One thing people who know me never call me is "naive".

You have a slim grasp on reality, let alone what you apparently consider "facts". And the hamfisted way you framed this OP screams "tyro", so forgive me if I'm not interested in your lecturing.

We could go back to "No I didn't"/"Yes you did" if you like. It would more productive.

Now, don't you have your own "cult of personality" you should be stoking rather than wasting your breath on me?

and you're being very naive and ignoring political realities.

I have no cult, I'm just posting facts. But I guess you don't like those.

How many exchanges above under this OP have come down to "No I didn't"/"Yes I did" or the constant chant of "You're naive" or the delicious "You don't like facts" when all you're really presenting is your opinion?

If you're not quickly learning that those are entirely counterproductive debating tactics, then you're in for a long, long curve, and you'll find that few have the patience to let you keep practicing on them.

Take a look through my Journal.

That is but a tiny glimpse into what I'm about and what political realities I'm interested in.

Not that I have to answer to you, of course. Nor does anyone else here. They have their own - entirely valid - realities to tend to.

Look around, above you, below you.

Others have their own takes.

Yours is no more valid or important.

But you're the one who started a scolding thread.

Either accept it or don't.

Read a post from someone who isn't and actually gets it: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9979367

Just shows you have a closed mind.

And welcome to DU.

I'm still figuring out whether this is a five-minute argument, or the full half-hour.

is the first step in dealing with it.

It was overreaction.

But he was becoming a political liability.

that can be considered, but with the PGIC in the WH, it is still hard to claim it a "liability." It seems many voters don't care. Not that it is good, but they don't seem to.

been accused of sexually harassing grown women instead of little girls? You think that might have been worth 2% in a state like Alabama? I sure do.

Totally.

if they would've had an ethics investigation before demanding he resign by 2020 when he was up for re-election the whole thing would've blown over and he would've been re-elected.

must learn to not sacrifice. We are not in the mode of "destroying the village to save it".



Cult of personality does not apply. The Senate democrats can't expect blind fellowship. If that is what they expected, they miscalculated.

We are building a democracy, not a dictatorship of representatives. The Senate democrats are not a private club. Placing themselves above the people by forcing the resignation of a duly elected senator is not a win for democracy. It is an act of arrogance.

Republicans win elections for a variety of reasons. They too lose elections when then disgust their voters.

If we want to win elections, hard decisions are required.

However if you think a hard decision was made, accept the consequences. Hope the senators making what they think is a hard decision are not going to whine about reactions start comping that constituents are nice.

People who want to make hard decisions need to understand the lay of the land, anticipate negative reactions, and prepared.

Do you want to win elections or self righteously sit on your high horse?

Authoritarianism is not my thing.

If you're resorting to an intellectually dishonest argument like that, you've admitted you can't defend your position.

You sure are a smug arrogant one. What has gone so wrong in your life that you feel the need to take to a message board and preach at others as the self appointed know it all that needs to school the little people because you and ONLY you knows the truth. Which party do you support again? I've seen this arrogance somewhere before, now where was it.

I know that I've made a good point that you can't logically or factually refute.

some of the reactions to his decision to resign have been way over the top. Reminiscent of the reactions I saw from some here during the primaries in terms of threatening to abandon the party, stop giving money, etc etc.

Al is not the only Democrat who mattered. He is not the only Democrat to stand up to the Trump administration. In terms of votes, for example, there have been nearly 40 votes in the Senate this year in which between 1 and 12 Democrats stood apart in opposition to whatever was being voted on -- appointments, amendments, cloture motions, etc. And of those 40 or so instances in which a tiny number of Democrats stood alone in opposition -- none of them were instances where Al joined in.

I can remember folks wanting to throw Al under the bus for some of his votes on Trump's appointments. I thought those folks were being foolish.

And I think those that now want to throw under the bus Gillibrand and/or any of the other Senators that called on Al to resign also are being foolish.

Move on. Elect Democrats.

Thanks for getting it.

If you want to be in a a party who requires it's followers to just say "get over it, move on" when they make a colossal mistake, I know of one who would love to have you. They require nothing but blind loyalty with no questioning.

then you won't have much of a party left.

I'm not suggesting people don't express their disagreement with how things played out. But there are folks threatening to withhold support from the party and its candidates because of it, which is classic cutting off one's nose to spite one's face behavior. The kind of behavior that probably helped get us Trump.