How can we takeover if were not unified?

[Daylin Byak]

Allright, voting machines aside, how are we supposed to takeover if were not unified. I mean come on The Democratic party has too many idiotic wings, DLC, Blue dog and your typical DINO's. I we win the House and The Senate we'll fall apart cause were not going to be on the same page, you'll have "real" Democrats(Who are becomeing the minority anymore) will most of the time will be in the best intrests of the american citizens. Then you'll have the DINO's, blue dog collaition and the DLC who will be in the best intrests of the republican party and big business which would would be a big blow to the party.

Let's face it, our party is getting torn apart and destroyed because of idiots like mike ross, stephanie herseth, jim matheson, steny hoyer and joe lieberman

[Warpy]

1. The left has always been plagued by factionalism

but has managed to come together when it counts.

Funny, the people generally calling for lockstep unity and the abandonment of most issues on the left are the party conservatives.

I wish the religious nuts would hurry up and form their own party so that the GOP would go back to being the party of do nothing, scared of change, fuddy duddies. Then the Blue Dogs and DLC types would go back to the GOP and we'd get our party back.

I do know that the party conservatives don't have a logical leg to stand on in appealing for unity under their programs. Their programs and platoforms lost us all three branches of government.

[wiley]

2. The TIREDEST Thread EVER

[skipos]

20. Yes. nt

[0007]

3. The pigs did it by making laws.

Who is the government?

1. The People

2. The corporations (has big ties with the media, like ownership)

3. The Executive Branch.....(White House)Media does what the White House wants, because corporation support the media.

[mmonk]

4. By backing in?

[sopmod]

5. Where did the REAL democrats go?

Moderate Southern Democrats created/financed/legitimized this party and have been completely abandoned.That's why you have Bluedogs voting Dem locally and then going "Bush League" with their presidential vote.

The whole point of being a Democrat is domestic social conscience,not "side issues" like Israel/Palestine,Gun Control,Prayer in School.

We lost the Jews by being Pro-Palestinian
We lost the Southern Democrats by being Anti-Gun
We lost the "oldtimers" with Alt lifestyle measures


I am more interested in things that will help the most unfortunate segments of this nation rather than the pet "side issues".

Pay the poor a living wage,
Make the rich pay their damned taxes,
Stop exporting jobs,
Stop trying to bury people of color,
Give our children a decent education

other than that everything else is a "side issue" that is letting oil companies control the
whitehouse..

[newyawker99]

10. Hi sopmod!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Douglas Carpenter]

13. 76% of Jewish voted for Kerry//24% voted for Bush//

That is down some from 92, 96 and 2000 but hardly lost. Actually it is much higher than 76, 80, 84 or 88. See link:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/jewvote.html

As far as being "pro-Palestinian" ?? That confounds me.

According to the Interest group ratings of Jews for Peace in Palestine and Israel (see link below) -- there are no more than 12 Democratic members of both houses of Congress who score + 5 or higher - the vast majority-like most Republicans actually have negative ratings. (on a scale of -10 to +10) This is a moderate pro-peace Jewish-American organization

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_detail.php?sig_id=003538M

_________________

But I do agree that the Democrats need to emphasize bread and butter issues a whole lot more. And we do need to be unified more. I don't mean to be rude
----------

And welcome to DU. Again I apolgize. I agree with most of what you said and again welcome.

[Selatius]

6. It's hard to unify when you get destroyed for being too far left

I am a moderate libertarian socialist. I am registered as a Democrat. I voted for Kerry in the last election. I volunteered with the Young Democrats of Mississippi to try and get out the vote. I remember staying up virtually the entire night wondering what the hell was happening in Ohio that night.

I put my ass on the line in a state that still has Klansmen and still has a problem with tolerance of leftists of any kind, nevermind minorities. Some of my friends were victimized by arson. I worked, and I, as well as other socialists here on DU get slammed by those on here, especially one thread in particular tonight, for being too far out of the mainstream and advocating a losing position. I never thought ideas such as universal health care or being against war were extremist, marginal positions. The polls don't show that either, but you would guess otherwise if you read the thread in question I replied to earlier tonight.

But they ignored the fact that it was good folks who put in the hard work, put up the money in the desperate hours after the polls closed in Ohio to sponsor another recount, and voluntarily chose to hold off on voting Green so Kerry could hopefully unseat Bush. It wasn't blind obedience to party that got the ball rolling in Ohio because YOU KNOW DAMN WELL IT WAS NOT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WHO FIRST BEGAN MOVING ON A RECOUNT IN OHIO.

It was God-honest people trying to do what they thought was fucking best for this country, and the thanks we get for being progressive but not necessarily being loyal to the two-party system, especially when we think it's gone wrong, is being shit upon and blamed for the atrocities of these corporatists when the corporatists are solely responsible for their crimes.

They like to attack us when it appears we are at fault. I see threads like that more often. They never give us credit for getting the ball rolling with movements outside the Democratic Party such as the Populist Movement of the turn of the century or the Labor Movement or the establishment of the ACLU, originally founded by socialists of the era. I don't often see threads like that. It was these movements that pushed the Democratic Party left, and many of the reforms pushed through by FDR were first envisioned by socialists, as well as everybody else who gave a damn, in this country decades earlier who also put their lives on the line back when it was illegal to strike and where you could easily get beaten by company guards for even trying to organize.

We put in the same hours as everyone else here. We have blood, sweat, and tears invested in this country too. We fought in the trenches alongside many of you in the past when it came to these issues, but it seems we get less recognition when things go right and most of the blame when things go wrong.

[Skittles]

7. if unified means goose-stepping like republicans

it ain't gonna happen

[snowbear]

8. "Not unified" or... "All over the map" is MEDIA ((( SPIN)))

Don't worry about it..

:grouphug: :grouphug: :grouphug:

[No Exit]

9. Everyone should drop all the high-flying talk and just admit

that there is one easy way, one obvious thing, that unifies us: we all abhor Shrub and Shrubbiness. We do!

People don't want to make that their defining theme. "Oh, let's not rally around something NEGATIVE." "We need something positive--like 'America can do better.'"

There is one thing we can all agree on: we don't want Shrub in the White House. We have good, legitimate, reasons for feeling this way. That's good enough for me.

[Critters2]

11. Except we all don't.

There's the Joe Lieberman wing of the party, that loves the Neocons. The best way to unify the party is get them to admit they're Republicans.

[No Exit]

12. They are so transparently anti-democrat, though.

Hell, Lieberman RAN AGAINST Shrub!! What the hell was he THINKING??

Or should I say, what the hell IS he thinking??

Lieberman is like some sort of fifth columnist within the democratic party. You're right--he needs to just officially change to republican.

He's a total sellout.

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. just look at Lieberman's voting record in Congress

Now don't get me wrong. I am no friend of the DLC. Mr. Benchley and Mr. Wyldwolf will vouch for me on that. Nor am I a fan of Joe Lieberman. I particularly resent some of Sen. Lieberman's resent absurd comments about the War in Iraq and Democrats who oppose Bush's war policy. And I am definitely NOT a Hillary in 2008 supporter. But don't take my word for it. Compare their records on a broad range of primarily domestic issues. Let's just compare the records of Lieberman, Clinton and Mr. Moderate Republican himself, John McCain

This is courtesy of project vote smart - link:

http://www.vote-smart.org/index.htm
_____________________

"2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League 0 percent in 2004.
__________________

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 78 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 83 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 22 percent in 2003-2004.
_____________________________

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 95 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 75 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 35 percent in 2004.
__________________________

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 83 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 33 percent in 2004.
_________________________

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 110 percent in 2004

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 92 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 9 percent in 2004.
__________________________

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Education Association 85 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the National Education Association 88 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the National Education Association 35 percent in 2003-2004.
______________________

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 88 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 88 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 25 percent in 2003-2004.
_____________________________________

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 100 percent in 2003-2004

2001-2002 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 94 percent in 2001-2002.(for some reason 2003-2004 was not available for Sen Lieberman)

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 15 percent in 2003-2004.
___________________

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 100 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 95 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 14 percent in 2003-2004.
_____________________________

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 25 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 50 percent in 2004

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 0 percent in 2004.
__________________________

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Family Research Council 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Family Research Council 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Family Research Council 67 percent in 2004.
____________________________

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Christian Coalition 83 percent in 2004.
_____________________________

2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 0 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 0 percent in 2004

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 72 percent in 2004.
____________________________

2003-2004 Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Concerned Women for America 7 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the Concerned Women for America 8 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Concerned Women for America 100 percent in 2003-2004."

______________________

for McCain link:

http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=S0061103

for Clinton link:

http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=WNY99268

for Lieberman link:

http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=S0141103

[win_in_06]

24. One Problem: Bush ain't runnin' in 2008.

[wyldwolf]

15. read the wording of your post

In the same paragraph, you ask how we're supposed to be unified while at the same time saying we have to many "idiotic wings, DLC, Blue Dog, and typical Dinos."

Your post betrays a real lack of understanding of national and regional politics and party history. He're a clue for you:

There have ALWAYS been moderate to conservative Democrats in the party.
Liberal Democrats won't win in red states.
There has never been a "progressive" President. (FDR included)

To paraphrase what YOU said, "Let's face it, our party is getting torn apart and destroyed because of idiots on the left who...

... abandoned Harry Truman not once but twice because he wouldn't play nice with the Communists.

... protested the nomination of JFK in 1960, demanding Adlai Stevenson instead.

... protested the 1968 Democratic convention because you preferred Gene McCarthy over Humphrey and continued to not support the Democratic nominee... Richard Nixon won that year, by the way.

... abandoned Jimmy Carter in 1980 and hiched your horse to Ted Kennedy - bringing your "fight" to the convention floor that year. Ronald Reagan won that year, by the way.

... who bought into Ralph Nader's BS and voted third party - abandoning Al Gore..

... who to this day think they know who "real" Democrarats are to the exlusion of others.

Sorry, people who think like YOU are the DINOS.

[tx_dem41]

17. Post of the year, wyldwolf.

People....you only have 14 posting days to beat this one.

[tx_dem41]

16. Our party is being torn apart by people that call the DLC, Blue Dogs,...

Mike Ross, Stephanie Herseth, Jim Matheson, Steny Hoyer, and Joe Liberman idiots.

[...of J.Temperance]

18. What is interesting about your original post is that

It's called "How can we take over if were not unified?"

So you then go on to bash a great portion of our party, which I don't think is in itself showing what your OP title is calling for.

The majority of the nation is Moderate...the majority of the nation isn't Far Left.

In various posts I've stated that I'm willing to reach out to the left of my party, willing to put aside whatever our differences are and find a way in which we can unify around something and go forward. The one single thing that should be able to unify us all, that's the ousting of Bush Inc.

As a Centrist, I've offered the olive branch, some have agreed to take it and move forward with us...and some have refused to take it.

So who's trying to destroy the Democratic Party? I want us to form a consensus and go forward as a united unit toward our common goal.

If you purge the Democratic Party of the side that you say, that would leave us with just the Dennis Kucinich and Sheila Jackson Lee side of the party...and then do you really think the Democratic Party is ever going to win the WH and the Senate like that?

On Edit: Dammit spelling error.

[tx_dem41]

21. Kucinich/Lee in '08!!!!!!!!!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

"America is Ready!!!!"


:eyes:

[mmonk]

19. Something else is taking over America

and some dems agree with it.

[Zynx]

22. Democrats can only hold together coalitions by papering over certain

issues. Quite simply, we cannot have a truly unified around either a pure leftist or pure centrist platform as either one would make the other split. Thus, we are facing the classic Democratic dilema and this is why since the Civil War the Republicans have been in power for many more years than Democrats at least at the presidential level.

[Douglas Carpenter]

23. let's look at how the right came to dominate the GOP

I look how the far right working from the aftermath of the Goldwater landslide defeat of 1964 changed the big tent Republicans into a distinctly right wing party; so right wing that poor old Barry wasn't even welcome anymore. But, to do this the right wing did back in general elections candidates and then Presidents who were clearly not their ideological soul-mates. Richard Nixon would be a socialist wacko by current Republican Party standards. But, it was the Nixon era that gave real rise to to the longterm agenda of the right wing.

Since we do not have a system such as exist in much of Europe which is accommodating to third parties and there is realistically no possibility whatsoever that will change anytime prior to the collapse of the current order which I do not anticipate will happen anytime soon--we have no choice in my opinion but to work with what we do have.

Furthermore any survey of actual congressional voting records will demonstrate that with the exception of the likes of Zell Miller almost any Democrat including Lieberman and definitely Clinton are still much more progressive than any "moderate" Republican.

Anyway, that's my take on it. We all have to decide for ourselves.

[Hyernel]

25. "Unified" need not mean "lock-step" agreement

The common goal of restoring government of the PEOPLE should override any piddly differences on one issue or another.

Defeating the Robberbaron neocons and the theocratic fundies is paramount.