Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:00 PM Sep 2014

Does today's Democratic Party speak for you?

I'm not encouraging anyone to switch affiliation - for one thing, there's no better alternative. But I am curious as to how many folks feel at home in our party, vs. feeling like strangers.

As a favor... Please keep this kicked so we get a good sample.

Thanks!


95 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
I feel very comfortable with today's Democratic Party
2 (2%)
I mostly feel comfortable with today's Democratic Party, but would like to see some changes
5 (5%)
There are a few elected Democrats that I like, but the Party as a whole is disappointing
64 (67%)
The Party is a disaster
20 (21%)
Other (please elaborate)
4 (4%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
152 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Does today's Democratic Party speak for you? (Original Post) MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 OP
Other... Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #1
Wonderful quotes, Tierra_y_Libertad. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #30
Perfect! nt adirondacker Sep 2014 #48
I think I like your answer best of all. woo me with science Sep 2014 #91
+1,000 Scuba Sep 2014 #103
I'm comfortable with the parts of the party Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #2
I wish you could "like" posts here Depaysement Sep 2014 #43
Welcome to DU, Depaysement! calimary Sep 2014 #74
Thank you for the hello! Depaysement Sep 2014 #84
I had changed my affiliation to Democrat after Obama's election. Maedhros Sep 2014 #65
The question is Does anyone speak for me oldandhappy Sep 2014 #3
Make that two of us that feel that way. n/t A Simple Game Sep 2014 #23
Do you speak to the Democratic Party? duhneece Sep 2014 #53
yes yes and yes, smile oldandhappy Sep 2014 #110
Thank you. I have the hope of an old activist. duhneece Sep 2014 #152
I am disappointed, but who speaks for me more than Democrats? merrily Sep 2014 #4
I'm with you on this. The Democrats makes me despair sometimes, QC Sep 2014 #5
Democratic policies have devolved into fascism, too. woo me with science Sep 2014 #8
Well, sometimes it's a matter of ineffectual hand-wringing QC Sep 2014 #13
So you are saying we're all fascists now Progressive dog Sep 2014 #21
"So you are saying we're all fascists now" Hell no, but nice try. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #24
You took it back, so we're not fascists according to you Progressive dog Sep 2014 #31
You are tricky. You continually try to put words into the mouths of others. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #38
I just attribute their own words to them, Progressive dog Sep 2014 #51
So you think we live in a democracy where meeting the "others" part way will rhett o rick Sep 2014 #64
It's possible to compromise with most Americans, Progressive dog Sep 2014 #67
Well most Americans don't run the country. Our conservative president couldn't negotiate rhett o rick Sep 2014 #73
Holy cow, we have Democrats in Name Only, Progressive dog Sep 2014 #82
Sorry but you seemed to have gone off the edge and I am tired of playing rhett o rick Sep 2014 #85
"You continually try to put words into the mouths of others." QC Sep 2014 #95
Spot on. Perfect translation. woo me with science Sep 2014 #102
Yes exactly. Also, if you'll notice, they ask a lot of insinuating questions and rarely if ever rhett o rick Sep 2014 #109
Yep! n/t QC Sep 2014 #111
+1 woo me with science Sep 2014 #127
+2 bobthedrummer Sep 2014 #153
I bet a progressive cat would not have done that. n/t bobduca Sep 2014 #71
I think someone doesn't understand what the word "progressive" means. rhett o rick Sep 2014 #76
I think some people use that word as protective coloration. QC Sep 2014 #97
I very much noticed. I am glad others notice also. nm rhett o rick Sep 2014 #107
It happens way too frequently, and it is painfully obvious. nt stillwaiting Sep 2014 #132
It's a pretty amusing phenomenon MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 #135
No, "we" most certainly are not all fascists. I'm certainly not. woo me with science Sep 2014 #33
How does having fascist policies differ from being fascist? Progressive dog Sep 2014 #46
Silly question. IMO we are not living in a fascist state yet. However, IMO we do live in a rhett o rick Sep 2014 #69
Corptocracy, is that even word? Progressive dog Sep 2014 #78
No, what is being done to this country is not woo me with science Sep 2014 #86
The legislation coming out of government, Progressive dog Sep 2014 #149
Too true! Corporations and the 1% are not content to support Republicans against Democrats. Dustlawyer Sep 2014 #62
Amen. woo me with science Sep 2014 #88
They are going to use any means from stopping campaign contributions. I hope their efforts will Dustlawyer Sep 2014 #101
You are never going to get the exact candidate you want. merrily Sep 2014 #10
Sometimes I just about do need CPR. QC Sep 2014 #16
Exactly!!! I saw this and my immediate reaction was - "a HELLUVA lot more than the GOP does!" calimary Sep 2014 #60
I am confident Bernie will do nothing to help Republicans. merrily Sep 2014 #63
Seems to me that Hillary is the one JEB Sep 2014 #113
Mostly- if it didn't would I be on DU? TexasProgresive Sep 2014 #6
the party's set up to allow the liberals a voice and a place, but mostly to keep them pulling the MisterP Sep 2014 #7
The system is set up that way, not only the Party. merrily Sep 2014 #17
The progressive caucus is where it's at:) grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #9
They are Democrats. merrily Sep 2014 #11
Yes! Much larger than the TEA naggers, yet ignored by the media... And many Dems. grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #14
Much larger than teabaggers, but merrily Sep 2014 #15
76 strong: grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #66
But ordinary Americans don't know they exist. woo me with science Sep 2014 #92
Today's Democratic Party does a poor job of speaking for itself... kentuck Sep 2014 #12
+1 Enthusiast Sep 2014 #120
Great idea for a poll. nt adirondacker Sep 2014 #18
Plus 1 nt SomeGuyInEagan Sep 2014 #41
That's kinda assuming there's one "voice" for the party. jeff47 Sep 2014 #19
IMO ...there are 3 parties. Republicans, Democrats and ..............Centrists. L0oniX Sep 2014 #20
I'd say, but more accurate would be... vi5 Sep 2014 #26
"Centrists" BlindTiresias Sep 2014 #27
I'd say Democrats, Republicans, and the John Birch Society RufusTFirefly Sep 2014 #42
Well, at the risk of annoying by posting this yet AGAIN, woo me with science Sep 2014 #96
By all means please keep up the annoying! L0oniX Sep 2014 #98
kick phantom power Sep 2014 #22
the state of the democratic party is awful. nt xchrom Sep 2014 #25
Same old thing Eatacig Sep 2014 #28
Good catch! Manny is a notorious right-winger RufusTFirefly Sep 2014 #36
Damnit, Manny! They're on to you ... SomeGuyInEagan Sep 2014 #44
Bastards. MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 #68
Prove it n/t leftstreet Sep 2014 #40
Au contraire MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 #99
I like grassroots Democrats and I support Democratic Principles rhett o rick Sep 2014 #29
That captures a part of it for me SomeGuyInEagan Sep 2014 #47
It certainly speaks for more people than it would have in the past YoungDemCA Sep 2014 #32
I am a Democrat... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2014 #34
There's a serious disconnect between the rank and file and the leadership RufusTFirefly Sep 2014 #35
I'm disappointed but I'd much rather see Democrats in power than Republicans. Louisiana1976 Sep 2014 #37
I almost went with "The Party is a disaster"... 99Forever Sep 2014 #39
Voted with the overwhelming majority. City Lights Sep 2014 #45
This am I watched Tom Harkin locks Sep 2014 #49
Other, of course Warpy Sep 2014 #50
As DU polls go, this one is getting a good number of responses. merrily Sep 2014 #52
Today's DU doesn't speak for me still_one Sep 2014 #54
How so? MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 #79
You are always so polite Manny. It was just my way of saying that folks should be critical thinkers still_one Sep 2014 #114
I wish the Democratic Party used science and statistics for policies. ZombieHorde Sep 2014 #55
+1 Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #81
Woo me with science, ZombieHorde! woo me with science Sep 2014 #90
The 21,000 hungry dying might be undeserving based on their boot strap performance. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #121
There's two so I went with a few, but I agree the party is a disaster. Autumn Sep 2014 #56
impossible to fix this as it is..2 parties, owned by money for the most part and corrupt to the core xiamiam Sep 2014 #57
Yes, Manny, the Party speaks for me. Jackpine Radical Sep 2014 #58
K & R MoreGOPoop Sep 2014 #59
Other. H2O Man Sep 2014 #61
On the edge of "Party is a disaster" BlindTiresias Sep 2014 #70
I can't say "disaster". Feral Child Sep 2014 #72
The party has done a crappy job with messaging, especially since Wasserman-Shultz became chair MerryBlooms Sep 2014 #75
+1 You nailed it. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #123
Mario Cuomo's Son is a Quintessential example of what happened . orpupilofnature57 Sep 2014 #77
Amen! QC Sep 2014 #100
Precisely. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #122
+1000 orpupilofnature57 Sep 2014 #140
They speak for me rock Sep 2014 #80
Air strikes are aggressive . orpupilofnature57 Sep 2014 #141
Actually, I speak for the Party..... brooklynite Sep 2014 #83
Talk about what and with whom ? orpupilofnature57 Sep 2014 #87
The head of the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee... brooklynite Sep 2014 #115
Perhaps you can give us some advice then. MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 #117
Through what means do you talk with the DSCC? Enthusiast Sep 2014 #124
Actually, they do... brooklynite Sep 2014 #130
Oh. So because you have donated they called you up to discuss the issues? Enthusiast Sep 2014 #131
But surely, his contributions are $50 here, $25 there MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 #137
I can no longer afford much. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #139
Internet forums, by their nature, are apolitical. joshcryer Sep 2014 #128
This message was self-deleted by its author orpupilofnature57 Sep 2014 #142
Nope. The Party is a disaster. (nt) bigwillq Sep 2014 #89
Other: the thought of a political party as home seems strange. Starry Messenger Sep 2014 #93
the two party system is killing this country KG Sep 2014 #94
It doesn't seem like we have two parties. Autumn Sep 2014 #106
We have two fake parties, woo me with science Sep 2014 #108
I believe you are correct. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #125
K&R minivan2 Sep 2014 #104
They speak? RagAss Sep 2014 #105
Why should it? treestar Sep 2014 #112
Why I didn't pick the "disappointing" option Jim Lane Sep 2014 #116
I realize I must seem like the least likely DUer to kick this, but I will Algernon Moncrieff Sep 2014 #118
The Democratic Party establishment is most akin to Vichy France. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #129
Let me guess... LuvNewcastle Sep 2014 #144
LOL Algernon Moncrieff Sep 2014 #147
84% disappointed or disaster grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #119
60+% haven't read the platform. joshcryer Sep 2014 #126
LOL! The question was not "Does the Dem Party Platform speak for you." merrily Sep 2014 #133
100% have seen the actions and results MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 #134
Very few Dems speak for me. 840high Sep 2014 #136
I said "Mostly Comfortable" RadicalGeek Sep 2014 #138
Obama and Chomsky agree - Obama would be considered a moderate Republican bananas Sep 2014 #143
Noam Chomsky talks more like a 70's Dem, than the orpupilofnature57 Sep 2014 #145
More than disappointing Babel_17 Sep 2014 #146
It's better than the alternative Prophet 451 Sep 2014 #148
Bombing Syria, dragnet NSA spying, Bankster bailouts! What's not to love! nt Romulox Sep 2014 #150
No - but that is largely because we have 2 major parties. TBF Sep 2014 #151
 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
1. Other...
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:03 PM
Sep 2014
"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, 1789.

"Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,...to take a part with either would be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man." --Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, 1795.

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."
John Quincy Adams

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
91. I think I like your answer best of all.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:39 PM
Sep 2014

The two-party system is a tool now, used to keep us divided and unable to fight back.

We need to move beyond thinking about parties, to thinking about people.

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
2. I'm comfortable with the parts of the party
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:04 PM
Sep 2014

who are pro-labour, anti-capital, pro-environment and renewables, anti-fossil fuel, pro-peace, anti-war, pro-social justice, anti-police state.

Unfortunately, that's a far smaller percentage than it would take for me to be 'comfortable' with the party as a whole.

Disclosure: I did switch affiliation, and am currently a Democratic Socialist. If the party finds its way back to being the party of the poor and downtrodden, I'll find my way back to the party.

calimary

(85,008 posts)
74. Welcome to DU, Depaysement!
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:22 PM
Sep 2014

Glad you're here! This is one of the long-running debates here at DU. LOTS of passionate feelings - on each side of it. I always fall toward the Machiavellian side. Whatever ensures a WIN. 'Cuz it's more than just the White House being in our tribe's hands. It's the SUPREME COURT. Guaranteed - if the GOP wins in 2016, the ensuing Supreme Court nominees will NOT be to your liking. And they'll probably be younger so they'll unfortunately last a long time. bush/cheney clearly understood that. We're gonna be stuck with frickin' alito and roberts for a LONG time. And because scalia wasn't exactly of retirement age yet, when reagan stuck us with him, we STILL aren't free of him, and that was three decades ago!

 

Maedhros

(10,007 posts)
65. I had changed my affiliation to Democrat after Obama's election.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:00 PM
Sep 2014

After that, the Party told me loud and clear that it didn't want my vote anymore, so I switched back to Pacific Green.

duhneece

(4,285 posts)
53. Do you speak to the Democratic Party?
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:25 PM
Sep 2014

Do you work to make it better? Do you work to become informed about the legislation supported by your state's Democrats? Do you work to become informed about city/state/county issues and the solutions being discussed and offered? \
Those questions come before the original poster's for me.

oldandhappy

(6,719 posts)
110. yes yes and yes, smile
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 07:47 PM
Sep 2014

on the board with my local dem club, register new voters, walk my precinct, donate ...

duhneece

(4,285 posts)
152. Thank you. I have the hope of an old activist.
Tue Sep 16, 2014, 01:44 PM
Sep 2014

If 63 is considered old!
My county commission is a Bundy supporting one and the more I learn, the more I'm motivated to walk, call, etc.
Then NM's Governor makes me so angry I could spit...then I get my lists together.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
4. I am disappointed, but who speaks for me more than Democrats?
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:08 PM
Sep 2014

Republicans have been offering us nothing but crazy and every kind of bigotry you can imagine.

I have no clue what Greens are doing at the national level with that shadow cabinet stuff.



QC

(26,371 posts)
5. I'm with you on this. The Democrats makes me despair sometimes,
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:14 PM
Sep 2014

but the Republicans are little better than fascists, and I live in a swing state, so I can't stay home or protest vote. Sometimes that means holding my nose when I vote.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
8. Democratic policies have devolved into fascism, too.
Reply to QC (Reply #5)
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:17 PM
Sep 2014

Now it is a choice of fascism with and without mandatory transvaginal ultrasounds.

QC

(26,371 posts)
13. Well, sometimes it's a matter of ineffectual hand-wringing
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:24 PM
Sep 2014

in the face of Republican fascism, which is not much better.

"Gee, we would really like to do ___, but those mean ole Republicans over there won't let us. Sounds like you just want a king anyway. A king with a magic wand!!!"

Progressive dog

(7,318 posts)
21. So you are saying we're all fascists now
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:09 PM
Sep 2014

Would this be like Mussolini or do you think Franco had a better kind?
I thought that we were Democrats.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
24. "So you are saying we're all fascists now" Hell no, but nice try.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:36 PM
Sep 2014

I take it back. Not even a good try to disparage the poster.

How do you feel about the Democratic Party?

Progressive dog

(7,318 posts)
31. You took it back, so we're not fascists according to you
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:48 PM
Sep 2014

I'm a Democrat, I vote for Democrats, I do not attack Democratic leaders for being fascists as some do.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
38. You are tricky. You continually try to put words into the mouths of others.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:01 PM
Sep 2014

Seems to me you are saying that you support all Democrats no matter what they say or do. Speak up if I am misunderstanding you.

I am a Democrat and I vote for Democrats, but I do not vote for all Democrats and think that those that do are doing the Party a major disservice.

I assume you read the study that says that we no longer live in a Constitutionally controlled Democratic Republic. Now I don't think we have reached the point of a fascist state yet but won't argue that we aren't headed that way.

What are your thoughts about our "democracy"?

Progressive dog

(7,318 posts)
51. I just attribute their own words to them,
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:25 PM
Sep 2014

they just think that's tricky. Sometimes they then try to put words in my mouth, usually because they do not understand how meeting others part way is necessary to decision making in a democracy.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
64. So you think we live in a democracy where meeting the "others" part way will
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:00 PM
Sep 2014

gain us something? You can't bargain with terrorists, Republicans, and DINO's.

Progressive dog

(7,318 posts)
67. It's possible to compromise with most Americans,
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:08 PM
Sep 2014

we have very few terrorists but of course we do have those who think their own party is fascist.
I'm just curious, how do you reconcile thinking your fellow Democrats are DINOS (and even fascists) and voting for any of them?

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
73. Well most Americans don't run the country. Our conservative president couldn't negotiate
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:20 PM
Sep 2014

with the more conservative Republicans in Congress.

Once again you try to put words in my mouth. I never have claimed that my fellow Democrats are DINO's. There are definitely DINO's in Congress. I don't vote for anyone that doesn't have Democratic values and principles. I don't believe a person can have Democratic values and still vote to authorize George Bush to invade, kill and torture Iraqi's, nor supporting fracking. In DU there are some that admit they are willing to forgo their Democratic Principles to insure a winning candidate.

I believe unless we get some "change" (as promised) we will slide into a fascist state.

Progressive dog

(7,318 posts)
82. Holy cow, we have Democrats in Name Only,
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:57 PM
Sep 2014

but they don't call themselves Democrats. My head is spinning.
How did all these DINOS, even the President, get elected by all these real Democrats? Are real Democrats really that stupid? I guess you must think they are. Then the DINOS vote to invade Iraq and they get re-elected. How in the world did they ever get a majority, when you tell me their whole party opposes them.
Those Democrats just have no membership standards. They think if Democrats have primaries and you win, you must be a Democrat.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
85. Sorry but you seemed to have gone off the edge and I am tired of playing
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:15 PM
Sep 2014

whatever game you play.

QC

(26,371 posts)
95. "You continually try to put words into the mouths of others."
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:49 PM
Sep 2014

You've noticed that, too, eh?

I always get very suspicious when a reply begins with, "So you're saying...." It means, basically, "I got nothing so I'm going to misrepresent you and hope no one notices."

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
102. Spot on. Perfect translation.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 06:16 PM
Sep 2014

A long time ago, I used to visit a discussion board where the owners (who were wickedly funny) automatically replaced certain strings of words with other words. They did it for common phrases, and especially dull attempts to insult or disparage.

So, if someone used the word "idiot," it would come out saying something like, "left on the tilt-a-whirl a bit too long"

If I had my own message board, I'd replace "So you think..." with exactly what you just posted here.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
109. Yes exactly. Also, if you'll notice, they ask a lot of insinuating questions and rarely if ever
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 07:34 PM
Sep 2014

make statements. Insinuating questions is a Fox News technique, ala: "Do you think Obama was born in Kenya?" If you don't have a good argument, make an insinuation via question.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
76. I think someone doesn't understand what the word "progressive" means.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:24 PM
Sep 2014

Continuing the war in Iraq isn't progressive. You can't be progressive and still support the status-quo. Just sayin'.

QC

(26,371 posts)
97. I think some people use that word as protective coloration.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:52 PM
Sep 2014

Ever notice how the posters with the most ostentatiously lefty usernames generally have the most decidedly non-lefty opinions?

And if they are using that Che avatar....

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
33. No, "we" most certainly are not all fascists. I'm certainly not.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:55 PM
Sep 2014

Last edited Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:15 PM - Edit history (2)

Neither are all the good people trying to stop Wall Street from installing in *our* government more puppets for predatory corporatism, secret government, secret laws, secret courts, antidemocratic "trade" deals that allow corporations to overrule democratic laws and protections, government-corporate espionage, mass surveillance, "kill lists," indefinite detention, intimidation of journalists, brutal suppression of protest and political dissent, assaults on fundamental Constitutional protections, militarized police, massive private prison industries, persecution of whistleblowing, and the security state.

Corporatism in the Democratic Party was never a grass roots phenomenon. It is and has always been a deliberate, corporate-bankrolled infiltration into the party, with the goal of shifting party interests from the people to the banks. So is the vile propaganda on behalf of it.

And, yes, this vicious corruption, which used to live in one party but now lives in two, is pushing us into fascism.



When the DLC connections to the Koch Bros. became well known, they just rebranded the infiltration
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4165556

When you hear "Third Way", think INVESTMENT BANKERS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024127432

GOP Donors and K Street Fuel Third Way’s Advice for the Democratic Party
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101680116

The Rightwing Koch Brothers fund the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414

Same companies behind the GOP are behind the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1481121









Progressive dog

(7,318 posts)
46. How does having fascist policies differ from being fascist?
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:20 PM
Sep 2014

I think most people don't see fascist as a synonym for capitalism. Likewise they don't immediately think fascist when they hear third way Democrat or Democratic leadership council . Besides, free enterprise and corporations are outgrowths of allowing individuals to own property, they existed well before anyone thought of fascism.
In Britain, they used to have monopolies granted by the king. We even let foreign corporations compete with ours. Our federal government doesn't charter corporations. Our state doesn't even slightly resemble the actual fascist states that existed.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
69. Silly question. IMO we are not living in a fascist state yet. However, IMO we do live in a
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:12 PM
Sep 2014

corptocracy and the Democratic Party leaders are not doing anything to change it for the better. Goldman-Sachs blatantly gives H. Clinton $400,000 cash for her personal fortune as a down payment for her future services. I further believe that a fascistic state would be ideal for our corptocracy to morph into. Capitalism thrives in a strong authoritarian run state. I believe China is the leading capitalistic state today.

The Democratic Party leaders need to back away from the domination of Wall Street and the NSA/CIA Security State.

Progressive dog

(7,318 posts)
78. Corptocracy, is that even word?
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:42 PM
Sep 2014

Ok I found it in the Urban dictionary. So you are saying those people at my polling place are figments of my imagination or are you saying they're multi-national corporations in disguise as humans?
Selling hatred of capitalism would be pretty tough in most of the developed world.
You do know that Christianity prohibited interest on loans for a very long while. That might be why European economy stagnated for centuries after the collapse of the Roman empire. Certainly, in recent times, the growth of the Chinese economy can be attributed to capitalism, I'd agree with that. The trouble with China is, they still have the old authoritarian government, unlike the USA.
I'm going to ignore the NSA, CIA stuff. If you believe the US government is plotting against you, I am certain that there is nothing that would change your mind.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
86. No, what is being done to this country is not
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:17 PM
Sep 2014

Last edited Mon Sep 15, 2014, 05:46 AM - Edit history (1)

just another flavor of capitalism within an essentially functioning democratic government.

It's not.

As a former president of the United States put it, we don't have a functioning democracy anymore.

We are witnessing an ongoing process of merger of state and corporation (one definition of fascism) that is truly frightening. The very foundations of our democratic system are being actively dismantled by the corporate politicians you defend.

We have lost much of the Bill of Rights. There is a secret, unaccountable government operating alongside the one we are taught about at school, and it has the power of mass surveillance and dossiers on citizens, secret laws and secret courts, the power to smear and lie and disinform, to suppress protest and political dissent, and to indefinitely imprison and even murder American citizens without transparency and without due process.

Our intelligence and security agencies have been co-opted and are being used to surveil peaceful domestic protest and to engage in corporate espionage. Our purchased government actors are using every means possible - the courts, "trade" agreements, legislation, executive actions - to restructure and rig the system to pass power to corporations that used to belong to the people of this nation.

Journalism has been hobbled through intimidation/abuse of espionage laws and by active consolidation and purchase by corporate entities that parrot the party lines....and our precious internet is being handed over to those same corporations as we speak. Whistleblowers and potential government whistleblowers are under unprecedented surveillance and assault. Our police departments have been militarized, and peaceful protests federally surveilled *in cooperation* with Wall Street and brutally suppressed.

Legislation coming out of our corrupt, purchased government bears no resemblance whatsoever to the popular will and hasn't for a long time. And the wealth of ordinary Americans is being looted, and our commons are being looted, to fill the pockets of the billionaires, bankers, and corporations who are building this new corporatocracy hurtling into fascism.

We hear a lot of lies and propaganda and Newspeak, most likely funded through our own tax dollars. We are told that our system is functioning, that we need only vote harder next time. We are told that the politicians perpetrating these assaults on our nation are "centrists" or "moderates," with the safe, warm connotations of those words. How could anything "moderate" or in the "center" be dangerous? But these are extreme, even fascistic policies, and it is time we called them out for what they are.

They are assaults on democracy itself. They are assaults on our Constitution. They are assaults on every one of us.

And it needs to stop now.

Progressive dog

(7,318 posts)
149. The legislation coming out of government,
Tue Sep 16, 2014, 07:28 AM
Sep 2014

is written by those we elect. If you think that we are so stupid that we continue to re elect those who are trying to harm us, then there is no hope. If there is no hope, then whether I am a Democrat makes no difference. I would think the only solution would be to hide in a basement.
How does it work that government opposes the popular will but government needs propaganda to change the popular will? Either what is done is the popular will and we're going to vote our convictions, or we are too stupid (with you as one of the few exceptions) to recognize propaganda when we see it.

I hope that was intended as humor.

Dustlawyer

(10,519 posts)
62. Too true! Corporations and the 1% are not content to support Republicans against Democrats.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:58 PM
Sep 2014

They played the sure thing and co opted both parties. Democrats and Republicans take turns being the Harlem Globetrotters vs. the others sides Washington Generals. They both agree on the outcome ahead of time (example: no Wall Street prosecutions), but have us distracted by BS with the help of their media conglomerates.
Campaign contributions (bribes) are ruining our country and allowing control of our government by the Plutocrats. Like Bernie Sanders says, "We need publicly funded elections to end legal bribery of our (former) Representatives." He should know, he sees it everyday! Help spread the word and let's peaceably protest outside TV stations to get our message out!

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
88. Amen.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:36 PM
Sep 2014

I think the PTB will use any means at their disposal (and I mean any means) to prevent Bernie Sanders from using the bully pulpit he knows is necessary to turn this around.

There are many more of us than there are of them. We need a peaceful revolution.

And we need money out of politics.

Dustlawyer

(10,519 posts)
101. They are going to use any means from stopping campaign contributions. I hope their efforts will
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:59 PM
Sep 2014

inspire others to join this very necessary fight!

merrily

(45,251 posts)
10. You are never going to get the exact candidate you want.
Reply to QC (Reply #5)
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:18 PM
Sep 2014

If my name were on the ballot, I'd even have mixed feelings.

Based on that, I'm guessing most people hold their nose when they vote. It's a matter of degree.

Hopefully, you don't have to hold it so tightly that you need CPR.

QC

(26,371 posts)
16. Sometimes I just about do need CPR.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:38 PM
Sep 2014

The Panhandle is basically Teabagger Heaven, so even the Democrats here can be pretty repugnant.

For years, I did have a Democratic congressman here, Allen Boyd, but he was the only Democrat in either house of Congress to support Bush's Social Security privatization effort. He wasn't quite right wing enough for this district, though, so he was defeated by Steve Southerland during The Great Teabagger Tantrum of 2010.

Southerland is a wingnut of the worst sort, except that he's at least not openly hateful. He was born into wealth but imagines that he clawed his way to the top through sheer force of will, something that most rich kids think. Southerland famously complained during a town hall meeting that he was not being paid enough for what he has to put up with as a member of congress.

Can you see why I had no choice but to vote for Boyd, even though I had to hold my nose so hard I nearly suffocated?

calimary

(85,008 posts)
60. Exactly!!! I saw this and my immediate reaction was - "a HELLUVA lot more than the GOP does!"
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:53 PM
Sep 2014

OR the libertarians. CERTAINLY more than the teabaggers! Not the Socialists, or even the Greens or Peace & Freedoms. The Independents? Meh. They wind up being little other than spoilers when it counts the most. Remember: we can thank Ross Perot, TWICE, that Bill Clinton was a two-termer, especially the first time! So that helped our side. But it can work the same way, the other way, too!!!! That's what terrifies me about a Bernie Sanders campaign.

PLEASE understand - I LOVE Bernie Sanders!!! He dovetails a lot more frequently with my views than even Hillary does!

But I'm also realistic. Wish it weren't necessary! But it IS!!!

I fear, seriously, that if Bernie Sanders runs as an independent, he will mess it up for the leading Democrat - presumably Hillary Clinton. It will be close, no matter who it is, just by virtue of the avalanches of money that the bad guys can spend and we can't. Their money WILL be an advantage. Which means we ARE gonna have to fight for this one. Even Hillary, the alleged "sure-thing," won't just cakewalk her way into the White House - it'll be a fight. Between now and then, rand paul has plenty of time to sweet talk the know-nothings and lull to sleep those with some reservations about him. So does marco rubio. So does ted cruz, for that matter! And if romney sees an opening he thinks might be easier this time, don't count him out, either. SERIOUSLY.

I want to WIN again in 2016. Sending some sort of "message" for the sake of purity doesn't get you into the White House. I wish that's all that was needed. But we've got to get some of theirs to vote for our side to make sure it works. Remember, there are some asshole voters out there - YES. I SAID IT. They're ASSHOLES if they don't get out there and vote EACH AND EVERY time they get the chance to do so - there will be those in 2016 who figure "Hillary's (or whoever it is)" got it in the bag. Think I'll just kick back, today..." or some such lame-ass excuse. Sorry to be crude but there it is (besides, they deserve it!). I guarantee you some people, especially on our side, will stay home that day and not vote. And if there's ANY way the bad guys can wriggle in, that would help because I bet the kochs and shel adelson will be willing to bet the house on this. They've lost twice in a row and they don't like losing, so they're gonna go ALL OUT to win it this time.

And the "message" you'll send... is only the one that comes back to you from the OTHER SIDE's guy whose win YOU enabled with your "message." That message coming back at you and the rest of us will be - "Thanks, CHUMPS!" Guaranteed. They can't wait to wipe their muddy lug-soled boots on you! And they're PRAYING you'll help them. They're doing that THIS ELECTION, TOO. Bet on it.

AND ONE MORE THING:
I wouldn't be surprised if there are GOP operatives at this very moment, making sure Bernie Sanders gets more than the usual campaign donations. It wouldn't be the first time that's happened, either, where the bad guys come in and shore up the spoiler who's gonna make it a sure thing that the leading Democrat doesn't get enough votes to win.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
63. I am confident Bernie will do nothing to help Republicans.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:59 PM
Sep 2014

He likes them even less than we do.

 

JEB

(4,748 posts)
113. Seems to me that Hillary is the one
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 08:06 PM
Sep 2014

that is willing to help Republicans. Especially if they are big donors.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
7. the party's set up to allow the liberals a voice and a place, but mostly to keep them pulling the
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:16 PM
Sep 2014

lever for a leadership that can be described as "Dubya without the gay-baiting"

merrily

(45,251 posts)
17. The system is set up that way, not only the Party.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:54 PM
Sep 2014

Republicans and Democrats both want us to keep voting for one or the other. Of course each of them would like your vote, but, most of all, they don't want the system opening up.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
11. They are Democrats.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:21 PM
Sep 2014

Sanders is still a member of that Caucus because there is no counterpart of a progressive or liberal caucus in the Senate. New Democrat Caucus is all there is in the Senate.

 

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)
14. Yes! Much larger than the TEA naggers, yet ignored by the media... And many Dems.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:35 PM
Sep 2014

lol. 'Naggers' was a typo... But I'll leave it!

merrily

(45,251 posts)
15. Much larger than teabaggers, but
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:36 PM
Sep 2014

their numbers dwindled. In 2008, there were about 100. Now it's about 70.

kentuck

(113,103 posts)
12. Today's Democratic Party does a poor job of speaking for itself...
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:22 PM
Sep 2014

...let alone for anyone else.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
19. That's kinda assuming there's one "voice" for the party.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:05 PM
Sep 2014

The Will Rodgers quote is more apt than ever.

I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat.
 

vi5

(13,305 posts)
26. I'd say, but more accurate would be...
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:38 PM
Sep 2014

Republicans, Democrats and liberals.

The Democratic party has been consumed whole by the Centrists since even though there are some nominally liberal folks still in the party, only the "centrists" get a voice and the liberals have to get in line or be marginalized (see what happened this past week in one of the most safe blue states in the country, New York for the prime example of what has happened to the Democratic party).

RufusTFirefly

(8,812 posts)
42. I'd say Democrats, Republicans, and the John Birch Society
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:13 PM
Sep 2014

The "Democrats" are the generally marginalized members of the corporation known as the Democratic Party. They sometimes self-identify as "progressives" and also make up the bulk of the Congressional Black Caucus. The "Republicans" comprise the bulk of the Democratic Party (the corporate Democrats) plus those members of the Republican Party who have been marginalized by their own party for being moderates. The "John Birch Society" is made up of the most vocal members of the Republican Party.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
96. Well, at the risk of annoying by posting this yet AGAIN,
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:51 PM
Sep 2014

Last edited Sun Sep 14, 2014, 07:09 PM - Edit history (1)

right now there's pretty much one party with any power:



Two arms of the Corporate Party that purchased/infiltrated/cannibalized the original Republican and Democratic parties of this country.

Meanwhile, out in the country still live all the traditional Democrats and Republicans who are either unaware and confused, or angry as hell at how their parties have been co-opted and no longer represent them.

 

Eatacig

(97 posts)
28. Same old thing
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:39 PM
Sep 2014

Right before every election right wing starts posting things like this to discourage Dems from voting. Works every time.

RufusTFirefly

(8,812 posts)
36. Good catch! Manny is a notorious right-winger
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:00 PM
Sep 2014

He's fooled a lot of people, but he can't fool you!

I see you've hung around long enough to notice the ugly truth.

(Aw geez. Do I have to? Oh, OK. )

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
68. Bastards.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:12 PM
Sep 2014

They can say what they want about me... but the figurines? Those are off limits.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
99. Au contraire
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:57 PM
Sep 2014

I might have something in mind, but not what you're thinking... stay tuned...

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
29. I like grassroots Democrats and I support Democratic Principles
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:41 PM
Sep 2014

but I do not support the Democratic leadership that has abandoned Democratic Principles and bow down to Wall Street, General Clapper, and the MIC. The highly touted "recovery" is a bad joke. No one "recovered". The 1% continue to steal our wealth.

SomeGuyInEagan

(1,515 posts)
47. That captures a part of it for me
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:20 PM
Sep 2014

Grassroots and local level, yes. State level - DFL in Minnesota - still yes. Starts to fade nationally. The leadership, nope.

 

YoungDemCA

(5,714 posts)
32. It certainly speaks for more people than it would have in the past
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:49 PM
Sep 2014

Unless you want to go back to a time pre-feminism, pre-civil rights, and pre-LGBT rights.

 

Dr Hobbitstein

(6,568 posts)
34. I am a Democrat...
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:55 PM
Sep 2014

If the Democratic Party didn't speak for me, then I wouldn't be a Democrat.

RufusTFirefly

(8,812 posts)
35. There's a serious disconnect between the rank and file and the leadership
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 02:56 PM
Sep 2014

The rank and file serve the people. The leadership serves the paymasters.

In 2004, an overwhelming number of delegates at the convention were against the illegal war in Iraq. Yet we chose someone who was for it. The famous salute was the coup de grace.

“In a crisis like this, I feel Freedonia needs a new leader, a progressive, fearless fighter, a man like Rufus T. Firefly.”

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
39. I almost went with "The Party is a disaster"...
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:01 PM
Sep 2014

... because there are so few what I consider to be actual Democrats left in the party. I wish it were different, and I fear if the Democratic Party doesn't return to the values that it had before Reagan sent this nation on a slide into corporatism, we will not survive.

locks

(2,012 posts)
49. This am I watched Tom Harkin
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:22 PM
Sep 2014

and about wept, not just because he's retiring but at his disappointment with the party and the administration. He believes Dems are more liberal/progressive than we are being portrayed. Just hope and wish he's right!

Warpy

(113,131 posts)
50. Other, of course
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:23 PM
Sep 2014

There needs to be a shakeup at the top to decrease the power of the DLC/New Democrat coalition, a coalition that knows best how to lose elections. They're the ones who muzzle candidates so they won't scare right wingers and who misallocate resources to safe districts instead of spreading them around so people in red areas don't feel abandoned. It's a coalition that is owned by Wall Street, by and large, and that makes the party no friends among people who see their purchasing power decrease year after year as hedge funds stripmine the economy.

Most of our people in Congress are tolerable, especially considering how frustrating it must be to have to try to work with raving lunatics. The Democrats defeated in 2010 were Blue Dogs, by and large. While that should have sent a message to the leadership, they have failed to heed it.

still_one

(97,074 posts)
114. You are always so polite Manny. It was just my way of saying that folks should be critical thinkers
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 08:14 PM
Sep 2014

ZombieHorde

(29,047 posts)
55. I wish the Democratic Party used science and statistics for policies.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:39 PM
Sep 2014

For example, ISIS kills about 30 people each day while hunger kills about 21,000 people each day. However, the Democratic Party is much more concerned about ISIS than hunger. Why is that? Sure, we could do both, but we're not. Why?

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
81. +1
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:52 PM
Sep 2014

And when you write new laws, always include the reason for the existence of the law, include 'trial periods' and mandatory data collection and analysis, with a second mandatory vote after the analysis as to whether or not to keep it.

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
121. The 21,000 hungry dying might be undeserving based on their boot strap performance.
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 05:25 AM
Sep 2014

You know. That's the Rightie® theory.

xiamiam

(4,906 posts)
57. impossible to fix this as it is..2 parties, owned by money for the most part and corrupt to the core
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:42 PM
Sep 2014

I voted other..which means that it can't be fixed, like just dig out the rot. Its become theatre...same play every night


Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
58. Yes, Manny, the Party speaks for me.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:46 PM
Sep 2014

I really wish they wouldn't though, because I don't agree with a lot of what they're saying.

And, as a matter of fact, even less with much of what they're doing.

MoreGOPoop

(417 posts)
59. K & R
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:51 PM
Sep 2014

Our base is massive. It should behoove our representatives to resist
Koch/Bank/Oil/MIC pay-off in the face of our numbers. There is a new
economy to be built, from the local level on up, by putting our taxes
into hiring workers to manufacture and install solar, wind and broadband
systems. As more and more Truth is leaked about our oiled climate, their
petro-dollars are worth less and less, anyway. I submit that the Democratic
Platform and many in the party do speak for me, but it is time for the others
to stand up and be counted.

H2O Man

(76,036 posts)
61. Other.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 03:58 PM
Sep 2014

I remain a registered member of the Democratic Party, but am not able to identify with the "leaders" -- elected and non-elected -- at the top. I am not represented, in any manner, by corporate politicians. Sadly, that includes both the state and national level.

For most of my adult life, I've been proud to consider myself a "Kennedy Democrat." I believe that JFK was the last US president of high quality. Still, my values are far more in line with what RFK represented in 1967-68. I'd note that it is not possible to accurately define him in the usual labels of "liberal" or "conservative." He went beyond that. Far beyond those restrictive definitions.

At this point, I believe that our nation must undergo the revolutionary change of values that Dr. King spoke of on April 4, 1967, in order to survive. And that can only become a reality from the grass roots up.

Great OP & thread. Thank you for this!

BlindTiresias

(1,563 posts)
70. On the edge of "Party is a disaster"
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:15 PM
Sep 2014

The number of good democrats dwindles every year, I am not sure what the future holds for the Democratic party overall.

Feral Child

(2,086 posts)
72. I can't say "disaster".
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:17 PM
Sep 2014

It's apparently satisfying some people, since it continues to exist.

I don't feel that it speaks for me, however. I vote a straight Dem ticket because it isn't Republican.

If the Party continues to disregard the core issues of it's platform, I'll probably revisit that stance.

If it continues in it's downward spiral I'll probably abstain from voting. The two parties aren't indistinguishable yet, but the gap is certainly narrowing.

MerryBlooms

(11,903 posts)
75. The party has done a crappy job with messaging, especially since Wasserman-Shultz became chair
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:22 PM
Sep 2014

and the silence lately has been terribly disappointing.

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
122. Precisely.
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 05:33 AM
Sep 2014

Those that inherit great wealth often imagine themselves to be great achievers. They often have contempt for those of lesser achievement.

rock

(13,218 posts)
80. They speak for me
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:50 PM
Sep 2014

But do not act nearly aggressive enough in fulfilling their promises. But. of course, the repiggies do not speak for me at all!

 

brooklynite

(96,882 posts)
83. Actually, I speak for the Party.....
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 04:58 PM
Sep 2014

rather than mutter darkly on blogs about what a lousy job it and it's elected officials do, I talk to its officials and candidates about the issues I care about, and work to make it more representative in areas or concern.

 

brooklynite

(96,882 posts)
115. The head of the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee...
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 08:15 PM
Sep 2014

The head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee...

The head of the Democratic Governor's Association...

29 current US Senators (including Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren)

4 Senate candidates

5 Governor candidates

3 House candidates (races close to me; we've pull out of the House campaign to support the Senate effort).

I talk issues of concern to me and many others: marriage equality; gun control; tax policy; foreign affairs; social security; banking reform...

Bottom line is that I understand the reality of getting things done and don't fret that everything on my list isn't happening immediately.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
117. Perhaps you can give us some advice then.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 09:18 PM
Sep 2014

How can the rest of the 99% gain access to the Democratic Party elite? Is it just a matter of sending emails or making phone calls?

Thanks in advance.

 

brooklynite

(96,882 posts)
130. Actually, they do...
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 06:14 AM
Sep 2014

...my wife and I are regular financial supporters; Senator Bennett of Colorado has called me directly to talk about issues and the state of the campaign.

Now, that means I don't stamp my foot and say "I'll never give them another penny" over some political issue; I balance the result of getting today's Democrats elected versus the alternative. I use my access to push a responsible and realistic Democratic agenda.

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
131. Oh. So because you have donated they called you up to discuss the issues?
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 06:23 AM
Sep 2014

They need to make commentary easy for both contributors and non-contributors. Maybe they could attract some contributors if we thought we could influence policy for the better.

Many of us have a problem with the rightward movement of the party. Based on the issues they are now to the right of what would be accurately thought of as centrist.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
137. But surely, his contributions are $50 here, $25 there
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 09:06 AM
Sep 2014

The kind of money that many of the rest of us 99%ers could afford to pitch in.

Not the big bucks.

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
139. I can no longer afford much.
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 09:48 AM
Sep 2014

Prices are going up. I will afford even less once they nail us with Chained CPI.

joshcryer

(62,513 posts)
128. Internet forums, by their nature, are apolitical.
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 05:40 AM
Sep 2014

They're not really a driving force for the party in any significant way.

Response to joshcryer (Reply #128)

Starry Messenger

(32,376 posts)
93. Other: the thought of a political party as home seems strange.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 05:43 PM
Sep 2014

There are only two serious ones, if you are on one side or another on most issues, voting with one side is a means to keep the other side out.

Most of my political feels of solidarity come from my union, which also acknowledges that electing Democrats isn't really the whole point of elections, but to get candidates in that will be more friendly to working people than to corporations. The Democratic party itself is a mixed bag, but they mostly line up against the free-market agenda.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
108. We have two fake parties,
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 07:14 PM
Sep 2014

owned by the same people, who use them to keep us divided and unable to fight back.

minivan2

(214 posts)
104. K&R
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 06:29 PM
Sep 2014

I'm a registered democrat and I love Warren, but I agree with Sanders on a majority of issues.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
116. Why I didn't pick the "disappointing" option
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 09:14 PM
Sep 2014

Maybe I'm quibbling over terms here -- but I can't say I'm disappointed overall because I never had very high expectations to begin with. I knew that neither Obama nor anyone else likely to win the nomination would, if elected, press for single-payer health care or any other significant progressive change.

I vote for Democrats to stop the most outrageous Republican excesses. In that, they usually don't disappoint me.

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,961 posts)
118. I realize I must seem like the least likely DUer to kick this, but I will
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 12:02 AM
Sep 2014

My feelings about the party are hard to put into words, so I provide this movie clip as a metaphor:



Symbolically, the Republicans would be the Germans. The diverse group of everyone else would be the Democrats.

Nobody is symbolically Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren. That's a different movie, Manny.

joshcryer

(62,513 posts)
126. 60+% haven't read the platform.
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 05:39 AM
Sep 2014

That's highly disappointing. DU used to be much more versed politically than this.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
133. LOL! The question was not "Does the Dem Party Platform speak for you."
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 06:30 AM
Sep 2014

So the poll does not tell you who has or has not read the platform.

Some of us have grown weary of being diverted by words and count only deeds.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
134. 100% have seen the actions and results
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 08:12 AM
Sep 2014

And given that the platform lauds the TPP, I'm not sure that reading it will gain converts.

bananas

(27,509 posts)
143. Obama and Chomsky agree - Obama would be considered a moderate Republican
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 10:32 AM
Sep 2014
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2961768

Obama and Chomsky agree - Obama would be considered a moderate Republican

"Obama: I Would Be Considered Moderate Republican In 1980s - ABC News"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101793318

"Noam Chomsky: Obama Would Have Been Called a ‘Moderate Republican’ in Recent Decades"
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/noam-chomsky-obama-would-have-been-called-moderate-republican-recent-decades


This is for todays 10,000 newbies:

 

orpupilofnature57

(15,472 posts)
145. Noam Chomsky talks more like a 70's Dem, than the
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 11:07 AM
Sep 2014

President or any other Dem after President Carter, pandering to the media did this .

Babel_17

(5,400 posts)
146. More than disappointing
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 11:45 AM
Sep 2014

Though some good, even great, things have been accomplished, I give credit in large part for that to activists, and people who just plain go out and vote, as much as I do our elected Democrats.

Given a choice between using the label "disappointing", and that of "a disaster", I chose "a disaster".

TBF

(34,951 posts)
151. No - but that is largely because we have 2 major parties.
Tue Sep 16, 2014, 07:32 AM
Sep 2014

Pick a centrist party - either one.

It's not much of a choice.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Does today's Democratic P...