If you won't vote for a Dem president in November you don't belong here....

End of story. Good night and good luck.

Uh... vote Wetzelbill/Kurovski in '08.

I live in a red state. No way our electoral votes will go to the Dem nominee. I can afford to vote third party if I choose.

I am sort of like Lieberman. Since it looks like I won't get the nomination I'm just going to subvert the process and run as an Independent. :)

Actually, I was mainly messing around with those who absolutely refuse to vote for somebody besides their chosen candidate when there isn't much of a difference between the two, and there is a huge difference with McCain. Most Americans have too much to lose to play games like that.

But!

The only way to push this party back to the left is to cost them votes. I've voted straight-ticket my entire life. I don't take this stuff lightly.

ideologically and strategically than Hillary and Obama do. So, in answer to your OP: if there's a Democrat running in November I'll vote for him. If it comes down to the two moderate Republicans, I'll have to consider a protest vote of some kind.

for them if they have a letter D in front of their name or you are a bad person, it was your fault and you need to go away. I think thats what is being said...not sure?

What are you talking about?

:wtf:

they will be banned. It's in the pinned post.

I'm fairly certain we'll have a nominee by then.

AFTER August???? "As far as I know" it was the last time I looked at a calendar

Yeah... I'll start holding my breath.

I AM a Clinton supporter, and very proud of it.

I will, however, without any hesitation, replace my Hillary sticker with an Obama sticker, and my Hillary lawn sign with an Obama lawn sign and stump the district for Obama if he is the Democratic nominee.

I am a Democrat. I will always be a Democrat. I will ALWAYS vote for the Democrat! ALWAYS!

and going around lecturing ONE group of supporters on their "hate".

I've voted for Dems all my life. Straight-ticket, every time. Oh well...

:toast:

It is succinct and precisely right.

Democrats vote for the Democratic nominee. Period.

get on the damn bus.

And I vote for the candidate I believe best fits my values.
This year that person is Obama.

I hope that you choose to become a democrat. In the meantime, avoid the temptation expressed by so many of your fellow Obama supporters to kick out those who have already chosen.

My state will not be blue in November. This sad fact gives me latitude as well. My vote won't make one iota of difference on SOTA or Iraq or the gas pump. (sigh)

:cry:

:evilgrin:

so I could amuse myself by laughing at the most berserk replies or anything would you? :) I mean that is kind of a scoundrel thing to do. :)

Which is what most threads garner on primary days. As if there were reams of undecided voters out there who come to DU on election days to have their last-minute uncertainties laid to rest by the matchless civility and dispassionate fact-laden discourse GDP is so renowned for. Then again, maybe their firewalls won't let them get through to magic8ball.com. ;-)

That sounds perfect to me. You could have an ambassadorship or at least a few no-bid contracts in your future.

:hippie:

--From a Clinton supporter who's voting Dem no matter what

Overly simplistic?
that tells me you are a republican...go away, we vote for the DEMOCRATIC candidates.

I can see no reason, NONE, to vote for those lying, cheating fascists.

reason. A President McCain. Only somebody who views this as a game would wish that on the American people. And no, I'm not a Republican, but it sounds like you want one to be president.

Otherwise, why bother to vote for a DINO. This isn't a game where you want your team to win, it's our country. And we want someone as president who will actually address the issues and problems we all think are critical. We do not need someone who wants to obliterate Iran, is willing to pander on damn near every issue and who has run a Rovian primary campaign.

I will not reward this type of campaign with my vote in the GE. Actions have consequences. The consequence of this type of campaign is the loss of support from Dems with an actual moral compass. It's not a team sport. If the team wins but the country loses, how is that a better outcome?

n/t

When does it become obvious a democrat is not a democrat?

get on the damn bus.

And she goes on Fox News to solicit even more Republican support.

Within the Dem party itself, she wins the low information voter by a large margin.

So you're saying we're supposed to let the least informed Dems plus some disruptive GOPers determine our nominee?

I think not.

You just won the Elitism bingo award. Every twentieth user of the phrase "low information voter" wins a pony. You got bonus points by demonstrating your own information deficit by not knowing how Obama got his frontrunner status.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/14/nevada-flier-by-obama-pre_n_81451.html

x

If the Dittoheads so fuck with our nomination process that we are stuck with a republican, then I am not obliged to vote for anyone.

Sure neither is ideologically perfect, and but compare - and you mean Hillary- her voting record to McCain's. Look at it all, especially domestically. She's way better economically than McCain, light years more progressive. Now yeah, I have issues with some of her comments and actions, I have a problem with how she has run her campaign. But, if anything, on economic issues she's more progressive than Obama, albeit not by much. DINO is a term that gets thrown around so much it's beginning to have little value at all.

my campaign was only veering to the Right so I could look good for the GE. Plus, when you have a gay VP candidate you need to go far to the Right just to make up for it.

and anyone who thinks there is no difference between either dem and Mccsame needs to look here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5833626

and here:
http://themiddleclass.org/files/MC%20scorecard%202007%20press%20release.pdf

I think the majority -- maybe even the vast majority (maybe not) -- will vote for whomever the party nominates. But there's more than just voting. If, for example, Obama gets the nod, I don't know how many Hillary supporters will be keen to send money, put up yard signs, put bumper stickers on cars, etc. I think, in many cases, these voters will either sit out that aspect of the campaign, or concentrate their organizing and donating for Senate and Congressional candidates.

The challenge for whomever we nominate will be to bring back that heady excitement of January and February when Democrats were showing up to the primaries in 2-1 and 3-1 ratios over Republican voters. We will have to quickly go about the business of defining the McCain campaign as more of the same policies that 71% of the electorate already disapprove of.

because then I added more to it. Like that you should vote for me. :)

Currently, she has no viable path to nomination, so it doesn't look to be a concern.

Policy wise, they are razor-thin. Now you might object to campaign tactics etc, I know I do, but there isn't all that much of a difference policy-wise between the two. Compare that to McCain. Massive difference.

Lots of Dems with Dem voting records voted for that. LBJ started a war on a nonexistent Tonkin Gulf incident and he was a helluva lot more liberal than either Hillary or Barack. Being a war hawk has nothing to do with a political party, the general status quo school of thought is fairly similar in both parties. Hillary or say Joe Biden are not so far to the Right on foreign policy that they cease to being Democrats. Or John Edwards, who voted for it too. You're just making something up. Look at their domestic policies, check out their health care plans etc. I could say since Barack voted for Dick Cheney's energy plan or argues from the Right on parts of his health care proposal that maybe he isn't a Democrat either. But that wouldn't be true. They are both Democrats, and pretty progressive ones. Not ideologically pure, by any means, but it hardly makes them Republicans.

And because of her vote (and lack of any remorse on
her part for her vote), Hillary is right out as far as I'm
concerned.

Sorry!

Tesha

Oh Really ???

Is Hillary a Democrat ??????????
Hmm...I have to think about that...

name only & will not vote for her. I guess we need an official "green" party or similar. I'll be happy to leave if that is how it plays out. I am only interested in voting for progressive candidates.

We **can** take back the party. If we relegate ourselves to third-party hell, it's all over.

Despite the current McCain lovefest, no one over there is all that happy with him. Social conservatives (read: evangelicals) have invested a great deal in the GOP and not gotten much of substance in return. Deficit-hawks and small government types are looking at the earmarks and deficit spending and wondering exactly for what the Hell they voted. Meanwhile, the Democrats were given one simple mandate in '06 -- end the war. They couldn't do this simple thing, even with a majority of both houses of congress. If they can't end the war, how the Hell will they get us healthcare or a better trade agreement.

I would not be shocked to see the DLC depart, and join with people like Bloomberg, the Governator, to try to form a party to grab the political center.

and prevails because of it, that is a deal breaker for me. Sorry. If she prevails via the rules in place, I'll vote for her, but I won't like it.

but let's be honest, either way Kurovski is in charge. I'm merely an empty suit looking to abuse the office to vacation and pick up women. OMG, that would be just like having a third Bill Clinton term!

red state that would not support Hillary even if she could steal the nomination (which she can't). Under those circumstances, wouldn't you still belong here so long as you didn't use the forum to promote some candidate running against the Democratic nominee?

But yes, that works. I grant you immunity. Or something like that. You can write me in if you want. I give out cabinet posts like candy.

Thats the safest way to guarantee Democrats will vote in the GE.

because it's the closest thing to our ideals? What happens when voting democratic becomes no different than voting republican? Do we continue to vote democratic anyway, or do we rebel? That is the question.

Nader sold us the bill of goods that there was no difference between Gore and Bush. Even given that Gore is not a model progressive (as defined in DU), there clearly was a difference.

Economically, you would not see a huge difference between a Clinton and a McCain administration. Both are free-traders and neither will radically alter economic regulation. Socially, there is a world of difference; Hillary will put pro-choice, pro-gun control, anti-torture, and most likely anti-death penalty nominees into the federal courts -- including the SCOTUS. McCain will nominate more Alito/Roberts/Scalia clones.

We are allowed to think for ourselves. Anyone who says otherwise does not belong here or anywhere else.

I don't even know that I'm getting at.

But seriously, say hi to President McCain for me.

Both Barack and Hillary beat him in polls. Sure depending on which ones they are tossups, but look how early it is. Polls now are relatively insignificant for the GE. He has so much going against him he's in an uphill climb either way. Polls don't account for turnout either, and Dem turnout is dwarfing Republicans. Right now, McCain has had a free ride and he still can't make much headway. Yeah he could win, but it's not likely and definitely not "quite likely." He's saddled with 8 years of Bush and no amount of Jeremiah Wright or Hillary wanting to bomb Iran will make up for that. He just has too much going against him, just like how the GOP was in the 2006 midterms. Tough to fight against a current that strong. The bottom line is McCain isn't well-liked by his party, Independents still think he's a Maverick, but that's changing and he'll never get a significant number of Dems to vote for him. Plus, he'll fair terribly in states like Pennslyvania, Ohio and Michigan and because of economics, and he needs those. He's a weak candidate whose only merit right now is the media loves him, but that hasn't even got him that far. He's the de facto nominee because George Allen and Bill Frist imploded a few years ago and Rudy, Mitt and Fred Thompson ran campaigns that were historically terrible. He doesn't have much going for him in the end.

...but I'm not going to get my hopes up very high. :(

Tesha

I mean obviously, we have Bush in office right now. That doesn't exactly speak volumes about the judgement of the media and voting public in this country. But Bush had certain things going for him. He came around at the end of 8 years of peace and prosperity, plus he has his family name, and the Republican Party loved him. The media also treated Gore and Kerry like shit, while Bush got a free pass, largely because he lowered expectations so much on his intellect nobody challenged him much and because he stayed insulated from tough crowds and reporters. McCain has a media advantage, but he can never escape youtube and things like that. So while the MSM will coddle him, he still makes mistakes that people see time and time again, he may yet have a Macaca moment, and at the rate he gaffes, I wouldn't doubt it. Bush also had a country united around him after 9/11 and a base and some Independents rallied around him for Iraq. He had a few a big midterm win in 2002 as well, so he had tons of things going for him. McCain doesn't have most of that.

His party is tepid about him as the nominee. Dem turnout is outstanding. And right now, the economy is in the tank and people are sick of Iraq. About all McCain can do is try to use the same old GOP tactics, "cut taxes", "gays will steal your guns and bibles" and "Liberals will surrender to Bin Laden." That could work if this was the past, but it's not. Dems won resoundingly in '06, only GOP dead-enders support Bush, and he'll be like an albatross on McCain. Also, McCain of 2000 was a more charismatic seeming guy, but now he just seems old and angry. The media could play Gore/Kerry out as stiff eggheads and Bush as some kind of downhome regular guy who has some charisma, but they can't do that as much in an Obama-McCain matchup. Obama makes McCain look old and uncharismatic. I saw when McCain followed an Obama speech on one of the earlier primary nights. Not pretty. He wreaked of the past. And Hillary makes him look bad often too. She's up on him 9 points in a recent national poll. At this time in history and at his time in life, he's not much of a candidate. He'll still hang in there because of the way the electoral college is set up and all, but he's a definite longshot.

The media wants a close race; that's they way they get viewership
and sell the soap ads. So they manipulate the coverage to assure
that no candidate can run away with the race, even if that candidate
*OUGHT* to run away with the race. (So, for example, even though
either Gore or Kerry should have wiped the floor with Bush-the-
moron, the media arranged the story so that there seemed to be
grounds to consider the candidates almost-equivalent.)

And the same thing is clearly happening here. In our primary, Obama
pretty much sealed the deal quite a while ago, and there's very little
to suggest that Hillary can gain the number of delegates she would
need to triumph (short of a coup d'etat by the Superdelegates). But
the media continues to give us the narrative that it's "neck-and-
neck" because (again), that's what sells the ads.

And they'll play the same game in the General Election. Our candidate
could be heading towards a blow-out of record proportions, but
the media will report it as if its close. And they'll emphasize (or
de-emphasize) stories so as to try to make it close. So if we're
ahead, expect to see lots of dirt about our candidate. And if
McCain is ahead, expect to see lots of "But the Democrat could
catch up!" stories, making it seem like a cliff-hanger.

The narrative is everything.

Tesha

I see a few daily, so since we're not democrats to begin with...

We've staggered up to the voting booth and chosen Democratic presidents for years and will do so again. Then we've seen our votes stolen and our candidates concede too quickly. And I am still very angry about Kerry in 2004 not even waiting 48 hours-- cuz golly he didn't want to seem like a bad loser. Even as we were seeing on the scene reports of a variety of vote stealing and nullifying methods coming in by the hundreds. Very sad...

But maybe you can sit around and talk to your fellow baby boomer George Bush and all the BBs who voted for him and wax about how much smarter you are than everybody and let us know how that's going for you.

Here is the thing, if somebody is so invested in a personality, either way, that they will absolutely refuse to vote for someone else who advocates almost the exact same policies, well, that doesn't say too much for that person's ability to be rational. As for me, I like both Hillary and Barack and will be voting for either this fall. I'd rather not have a President McCain.

I just saw this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080506/pl_nm/usa_politics_mccain_judges_dc;_ylt=AorH_8obAPUpo1CVnaXaG1jCw5R4

:scared:

And there are many more reasons IMO..

nominees like Alito and Roberts are far less likely to offered
even by a Republican President. So many voting from fear has given
us the government that we have had over the last two election cycles.

Many of us will not be blackmailed once again into voting for someone whom
we cannot stand, who does not share our democratic values and who supports
militarism with a hugh M. This time Clinton has gone too far. She has
left this party and what it stands for in this campaign, not us.

For me, not voting is like not caring. I can't see McSame offering anyone near acceptable, even with a Democratic majority.

Anybody who will is Morally Bankrupt.

If this race isn't overwhelmingly voted for the Democrat, whomever that is, the GOP will steal yet another election and we will have four more years. The price will be paid by us all.

isn't going to lead to any measurable difference. The people who refuse to stand against it NOW, are the ones who are creating the problem in the fall. Not me.

She's not stealing anything. The laws are old and probably due for updating; however, you cannot continue saying she is stealing and expect people to believe it... repeating lies is a GOP tactic and we're better than that.

Edited to say, there's nothing we can do about it on such short notice. It's time to get moving on changing that now, before the next election.

then you support election theft. Morally Bankrupt. You. Deal with it. Don't sit here and tell me you want an end to crony corrupt government - and then justify what she's doing. There isn't any way to do it. Morally Bankrupt. That's all there is to it.

Anything less than playing by the rules is morally bankrupt.

If we don't play by the rules we have no say when someone else breaks them.

and stop pretending MI & FL ought to be seated, or that there is such a thing as a popular vote, or any of the other bullshit she's floating to get people to excuse the supers overturning the nomination by the people.

The supers need no excuse as long as they are following the law. Clinton and Obama can say whatever they choose and I'll still say we need to unite behind the party, stop the childish bickering, and support the entire party. We either do it now, or we risk losing everything to the GOP.

It's no longer a matter of which candidate is superior to the other, it's a matter of getting enough votes for the Democrat in the GE. To continue in this divisive mode is suicidal at best.

That's just a pack of lies. It just is.

Please, enlighten me.

You'll have to tell me what motivates you to pretend you're adhering to the rules while you're blatantly ignoring them.

You've lost me completely.

You're not stupid. You know exactly what I'm talking about. Why do you go on and on pretending you don't? Disruption? Money? What? I really can't understand.

My family were among the first here... my people met my people at Plymouth Rock. I love my country.

Again. What rules am I breaking? I have no clue what you are talking about.

Either way, a Democrat will be getting my vote for President in November.

It's Democrats.. I bought clothespins for anyone who will need one.. Just put one on and vote for that Democrat whether you like them or not....

in a GE. Never. But I basically agree with most Dems on most issues, and there is a huge gap between Dems and Republicans on things like economics. It makes a difference in people's lives. I was a DK supporter, and Kucinich is light years more progressive than either HRC or Obama, but, you know, they're still pretty good and will still help lots of Americans who need it. Obama and Hillary are pretty close on policy, there is virtually no reason, if you care about good public policy anyway, to not vote for one or the other in the GE if your candidate loses out. This all or nothing stuff is hardly proactive, it's childish.

Just look at the facts. 9 out of the last 10 recessions have occurred with Republicans in the WH. When Republicans are in the WH, health care costs, tuition, food prices, oil prices, they all go up. Inequality increases, crime increases, even abortion rates go up. The best Republican on job creation and economic growth in the last century was Ronald Reagan. The worst Dem was Jimmy Carter, and Carter was better than RR on both counts. Our worst is better than their best. That's the difference between Republicans and Democrats. Under a Republican president, people suffer. Bottom line. And I'm from an Indian reservation, I see those people who suffer, I know them, I am related to them, friends with them, hell, I'm even one of them. Voting Dem makes a difference, and I'll take a Dem I may not totally agree with over any Republican anyday.

I can relate about the reservation as my Grandmother grew up in Cherokee NC on the reservation... Having an Indian name is commonplace for every girl in my family... I know the plight of my people and it's funny, but it never gets mentioned....


Here is the link for the editorial:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=357238&mesg_id=357238

:woohoo:

I admit it. I'm power hungry. :) Well, Kurovski is, but I'm just a puppet.

Self declared Wetzelbill/Kurovski delegates, like myself, are thugs! :rofl:

I will vote for the nominee whomever it is. But if it's not Hillary, I am glad I'll be voting absentee from France. :)

Just keep waving that White Flag, pinko. I only eat Freedom Fries! :)

Assuming the stated RULE takes priority, then the place becomes one big Hillary camp, and either the 90% who despise her leave, or they stay and support her. They're not going to support her. They may not vote for McCain, but they won't vote for her. At least that is my impression from reading this board. In many ways, Hillary is a bigger threat to DU than to the Democratic party, although her continuing attempts to steal the nomination do threaten both.

Fortunately, she's not going to get the nomination, so all we'll lose are the people who are coming in under radar as faux Hillary supporters, and a few dozen hardcore Hillary supporters.

There's nothing progressive about Hillary, which is the word I most associate with DU. The DLC is what Democrats look like without progressive in their mix.

face it, he has won or will.

I will proudly vote for the Democratic candidate in the GE!

I am no Lee Mercer!

However, I still would like your vote.

I won't be voting for the Dem candidate in November. I'm not allowed to vote in US elections but I'll happily support whomever the candidate is.

If Clinton is the candidate I will stop following the campaign very closely. I'm moving around August or September so it's possible that registration deadlines will pass me by. I plan to vote for her but I'm not sure I actually will. It won't be a matter of very much importance to me, since my state is going to the Democrat no matter what.

but you know, I'm hardly mainstream nowadays, Sara.

Why not get your facts within the party straight. People who act like the other party, destructive to it's own members, villainous in the ability to undermine the vote should not be in the Democratic party.

Just how far apart are Obama and HRC in terms of policy? Are they so far apart that you believe the American people should be left to the darkness of a McCain presidency? Hillary campaigns like a Republican, sure. She trys to outmacho Republicans, without a doubt. But does she advocate and vote for the same type of domestic policies that McCain and Bush advocate? No she doesn't. If anything, she's more to the Left of Obama on domestic and economic issues, maybe not much, but she is.

The difference is, a Democratic president, either Hillary or Obama, would do a whole helluva lot of good for the American people, people who most need the help, people who hurt and struggle. John McCain will do even more damage. So is it more important to boycott voting for Hillary because she's a dirty campaigner and roughed up another Democratic candidate, or is it more important to vote for somebody who will be much better president than John McCain. In the end, I don't care so much about the Democratic Party, as I do about the people of the country who have suffered for 8 years. The Democratic Party will survive Hillary Clinton and/or Barack Obama and this battle they've been waging, but lots of people won't survive a McCain Presidency.