I'm here like, "Oh hey, these guys actually make some sense" and decided to register. Been paying attention to politics since I was about 14-ish, so about eight years roughly-- not new to message boards, though this format took a lot of... Getting used to... [I just hate commented/nest-based message-boards, I'm a lot more used to sorted by time, phpbb type forums.]

... Hillary and/or other Democrats (especially for Congress) as is desperately needed, in the likely event that Hillary is the nominee

I have seen at least one post that sneered at the "no compromise" supposed teabaggers of the Left who were only helping the Right etc etc

I myself have been on DU for more than a decade and well remember all the nastiness in the 07-08 primary cycle (as an Obama supporter and neoliberalism opposer) as well as this time around. I was hoping Bernie would run -- and in the primaries rather than as a 3d party/Independent splinter candidate -- even before he announced and have supported his candidacy from day 1 including with a number of (modest) donations

I surely do NOT want Trump (or anyone that remotely possibly could be nominated by the GOP) in the White House, and also support the effort to wrest both Houses of Congress from the repuglican party. If Bernie is not the nominee, I will surely join him in supporting the nominee (Hillary) as well as other Democrats, also w/donations to Dems in key House & Senate races which I have already done a scattering of already.

But this kind of attitude -- relishing the idea of purging all those Bernie supporters (who although getting only about some 45% of the vote in the primaries are probably a majority on DU) -- only serves to INCREASE the likelihood of alienating Bernie supporters on and off DU from voting Democratic in November. And of course, the policy of automatically purging those who would at least consider voting 3d party or staying home or whatever means that those very people won't be around to be convinced (not that the Hillary crowd here on DU would be likely to win any Bernie supporters over anyway). But Bernie supporters who also feel that neoliberals, while I oppose them, are preferable to protofascists in power MIGHT be able to convince some.

I would propose, including to Skinner and the other powers that be on DU that, if and when the time comes that Hillary is the nominee, with Bernie of course supporter her in that situation as he has promised he would, DU set up a specific group or forum for Bernie supporters from the primaries only where (alone) Bernie-or-bust folk could remain and keep posting. ONLY other Bernie supporters, including those like myself who want to see the Democrats win in November, while also looking to a longer term progressive mobilization with Bernie & others in the leadership, could also post & argue w/the Bernie-or-busters. Then after November the Bernie-or-busters would be allowed to return to the full DU board

But this urge to prematurely "call" the election & purge the Bernie supporters, sneering at those who are recent comers to DU as well as all who might have serious qualms about ever voting for Hillary ONLY IS LIKELY TO MAKE THAT PROBLEM WORSE

It is OBVIOUS that we have some right wingers having fun here at the expense of Democrats. Is that 10%, 43%,? Not sure...

What will be clear is when they go full on FUCK IT mode post GD-P knowing they will be kicked off the board and seeing how many more jabs they can get in.

The tactics, the censorship, the refusal to entertain information and ideas they don't like (just like Fox viewers). . . totally from the GOP handbook.
Not to mention the rainbow chart, indicating where the candidates are on the issues.
Clearly right wing.

And although you "joined" in 2011- your posting history shows...


Number of posts: 2,917
Number of posts, last 90 days: 2882

Very Nice ...or , interesting

I wonder why it says I joined in 2011. I just joined a few months ago. Strange.
But the 11 hidden proves the fact that the people here want to keep their heads in the sand. In my perspective it shows censorship and the inadequacy of that jury system. I saw one post hidden where all the person said was that Howard Dean had sold out. I see that as an indictment of the system and not of the poster.
The last one I got was I posted an article from Salon.com and it was hidden. Those juries are really irrational and illogical. I can appreciate the necessity for some system, but this one is broken.
And you, how typical, have NOTHING to say about that chart, the ACTUAL CONTENT, you have no ability to address. But have to find some side issue to make yourself feel good. Isn't that special.
Why not try to address the issue? You guys have no answers.

just a couple days ago, I got two hides for posting the same publicly available info that you just did.

Any purge would be those who come here ONLY to trash and bash, not to discuss issues. The ones who constantly say they will NOT vote for Hillary is Bernie loses. The ones that spew right wing talking points daily. The ones who push the "both parties are the same" meme, and of course the obvious trolls that just want to stir things up and divide the boards. Bernie or Bust is a right wing tactic, probably used by Karl Rove, so why on earth should there be a special group that would push that kind of crap?

You might try reading the terms of service posted at the bottom of the page.

I saw one hidden where all the guy said was that Howard Dean had sold out.
If this site can't handle that, if that information or concept must be removed from the sight of decent people . . . I think that points to problems with that system

to be the Dem nominee in decades.

Why do you think so many people registered as Democrats this primary season in order to vote for Bernie in the primaries? These folks are sick of voting for candidates they consider to be the lesser of two evils.

Witness:

late in '02. Became a member in January of '03. After a lifetime as an independent, I registered as a Democrat in '01 to protest the selection. As a leftist independent, I never voted for Republicans, and voted for many, many Democrats, so I figured it was a decent fit. Note the name: LWolf is "Lone Wolf;" I couldn't get the system to take both words.

I'd been reading Michael Moore's forum, and it closed. I looked for something else. I felt like, having lived my entire adult life in hard red regions, I needed fresh air. DU was that for awhile.

That had changed drastically by '08.

When I got here in '03, I was a moderate relative to the rest of the board.

By the end of '08, I was the radical loony left who got thrown under the bus.

Interestingly enough, none of my positions on anything have changed at all.

And yes, after I vote in this primary, I'll be going back to being an independent. DU has taught me that I'm not a good fit for the Democratic Party. I'm too far left, and my priorities put issues above partisan loyalty. I gave it 15 years. I learned that Democrats care more about winning elections than winning issues, and that positions on issues are fluid, based on what works to win an election, not what works for the people elected officials are supposed to work for. I don't seem to have that gene that causes so many to want to follow party leaders down a bad path.

I'm sure I'll still be voting for a lot of Democrats: those who earn my vote. I just won't be one.

He lost.

Your response doesn't seem to address what I said.

For example..."change of what?"...the change I referenced clearly refers to the change in the tenor of the board since the early years.

"He lost?" Who lost? This primary isn't over, and my post about the changes in DU over the years clearly have nothing to do with Sanders anyway.

I answered the OPs question about what brought me to DU, and how that has changed. Since you weren't here then, I can understand if you haven't experienced the changes yourself, but I think I was pretty damned clear about what changed.

Not new to boards/forums but this and disqus are the only ones remotely political. And yes this is the best in regards to the election.

And to your last question. Yes I'm aware but sad that people are cheerleading that action. Especially when people are quick to use the block function.

The gaming of the economy by the super-rich is what brought me to DU.

I suspect that other issues like discrimination, gun control, gay marriage, and even who gets to use what bathroom, are distractions and would actually be luxuries to think about, compared to the threat posed to the country from the income divide.

If America again had a strong enough economy for the middle class and if there were opportunity for the poor to escape poverty through affordable education (why should education cost a fortune, except to make money for the lenders and for the universities, when Marva Collins showed that with books and desks salvaged from dumpsters, you can make scholars and successful adults out of the most incorrigible kids?), then all those other issues that distract us would be easier to resolve, because it's human nature when people are hurting, for them to lash out at those who look different or think differently from us.

There is only one issue we should be concerned with, an issue that exacerbates all our other conflicts: the great income inequality in modern America, and a system gamed by the rich to make them richer and richer, while the rest of us grow poorer and poorer and fight among ourselves.

I remember reading in Will and Ariel Durant's "The Story of Civilization" about how the members of an ancient, prosperous society probably regarded each other the way people in all prosperous, happy societies have: with tolerance and respect.

Look at how Fascism and the persecution of minorities flourished in Germany as a result of the terrible economy between the two world wars.

America needs a real economy again, one in which work and thrift are rewarded, instead of an economy of legalized Ponzi schemes.