Why was I talking about purges in the first place?

[Renew Deal]

I want to talk about why I started the purge post. I have been talking with frustrated_lefty and she has some great ideas.

I was personally frustrated with the Drudge charges against Kerry and my perception of Dean supporters hoping it was true. I have never hoped that anything like that is true against a Dem. I don't understand how that is possible. But that goes to some deeper issues.

I am trying to figure out what it will take to really unify the party. I feel like the far left feels like they aren't being listened to. They are being alienated by a party that has moved further to the center. A party that has voted with the pukes in some occasions.

frustrated_lefty has some great questions and I do not feel like I am the best to answer.

What needs to be done to unify the party?
Why are so many democrats angry with each other?
What can be done to rectify that?

Note: My post revolved around party unity and beating Bush is more important than ideology and issue positions. Being left, right or center should have nothing to do with it.

[AngryYoungMan]

1. We can prioritize our agendae.

Liberals are notoriously bad at this.

What I mean is, Liberals are not good political pragmatists because their core beliefs are rooted in morality rather than expediency.

Example: Dean's "confederate flag" "gaffe." What he said was, We need to get all those rednecks with confederate flags in their trucks (basically) to vote Democrat. (In other words, get more votes from swing voters etc.)

What happened? The DEMOCRATS attacked him for seeming to endorse the confederate flag. This is typical leftist lunacy. (And I'm as Left as they come). No Republican would ever think this way, because no Republican would ever object to a vote in his or her favor on purely moral grounds.

To refuse to solicit someone's vote (as Dean's opponents seemed to be implying was "the high road") is what I mean by "bad prioritization." Like, I have a friend who refuses to admire FDR because of the way he treated his wife.

Conservatives are strong because they are unscrupulous. I'm not saying Democrats need to become unscrupulous too. I'm just pointing out that we can be our own worst enemies for the best of reasons.

[Cheswick2.0]

9. what liberals are you talking about?

Are you talking about the liberals who are supporting Kerry, Clark, Edwards or Kucinich?

[MurikanDemocrat]

2. My response

GD Primary is NOT representative of the majority of the Democratic Party as a whole. The Democratic Party has never been MORE united, than it is right now. It just doesn't look that way here in DU's GD Primary. Democrats are united more than ever in their mission to remove Bush from the White House in November. They are angry as hell - with BUSH.

Which goes for your second question as well. In the REAL world, there aren't "so many" Democrats angry with each other. If Nader does decide to make a run, he will get far fewer votes than he did in 2000.

I'll pass on your last question.

[Cheswick2.0]

10. tha party has never been LESS unified

that is propaganda from the Terry McAwful office. I am sorry to hear people are buying it because it will not solve the problem to gloss over the real issues.

[Renew Deal]

22. I don't agree with that.

There might be a (separatist) militant wing of the party, but we are bigger and collectively badder than ever. Try to answer these questions. Frustrated_Lady had some good ideas.

[MurikanDemocrat]

34. The facts show otherwise

The driving force behind the rank and file of Democratic Party that have turned out in record numbers thus far to cast their votes has been anger with George Bush and a desire to drive him out of office. Democrats, swing voters, Independents, and even some Republicans. Are angry – with George Bush.

The majority of Americans are NOT making IWR and the PATRIOT Act a litmus test for their choice of candidates. The purpose of the election is to elect a Democrat who can begin to FIX all the mess that the current dimwitted neocon sonovabitch and the rest of his criminal cohorts got us in to.

The Democratic Party does not revolve around Howard Dean. This election does not revolve around a complete restructuring of the Party. Those with a different agenda are going to be disappointed.

[WonderGrunion]

15. We are united

In the same way that Roosevelt and Stalin were united. When our personal Hitler is deposed, do we enter a Democratic cold war for the next 40 years?

[Renew Deal]

23. Great analogy.

I hope that isn't the case. Try to tackle those questions. Everybody whines, let's see if we can take it forward.

[IrateCitizen]

25. To be quite honest, I most certainly hope so

One of the biggest failings of progressives during the Clinton years was the way in which they largely sat back after his election, believing that the true evil had simply been twelve years of Republican rule, and that things would be all rosy again with the capture of the Presidency.

We all see how that worked out, with a Democratic President embracing many of what were seen as primarily Republican issues (corporate-controlled trade, welfare "reform", continued reduction of government programs that made mobility from poor/working class to middle class more attainable, etc.) and moving the overall party platform further toward the center, and even toward the center-right as the Republicans under the likes of Gingrich and DeLay moved their party even further to the right.

I refuse to allow that same mistake to happen again. Should a Democrat win in 2004, the effort has only begun. The heat then needs to be turned up on the Democratic Party -- not for the purposes of denigrating it, but because politicians are followers rather than leaders, and it is up to us to let them know that it is not only politically feasible for them to pull back toward progressive reform -- but it actually works against their political self-interest NOT to.

IOW, use the carrot and the stick. Let them know that there is a vast populace out here who is looking for change -- if they are willing to articulate that change and fight for it. Also, let them know that if they refuse to adopt progressive reform and instead continue to embrace the rightward drift, that they will be continually confronted, denounced, challenged, and primaried until they either get with the program or are thrown out into the street.

[LSdemocrat]

3. Take some time. We're still in the heat of battle.

Once a candidate receives enough delegates to secure the nomination, things will start to cool down.

We're still at that point where we're focused on defeating the other Democrats in this race, as we should since this is a primary. And given the hard-fought nature of this primary, emotions are running EXTREMELY high. Once the primary battle is effectively over (It isn't quite yet), give people around here a month or two (hopefully it will take less time) and probably 95% of us will come around support the nominee and unite to hopefully defeat Bush.

It will also help if people try to show some understanding of where people are coming from. People on all sides of this battle are acting on principle and strongly held beliefs. Most of us believe that our candidate is far better than any other candidate and that we have some hope of winning the nomination.

[emanymton]

4. Just Because I Join You ...

to help defeat an evil, does not mean I accept your whole argument. I am a progressive liberal who wants to be left alone. You cannot unify me.

I'll help you put out the fire burning in your house; but never like the fact that you helped start the fire in the first place.

[BL_Zebub]

5. "beating Bush is more important than ideology and issue positions"

This very statement can't be logcally supported. If a candidate opposing Bush does not have an ideology and issue positions different from Bush, then he gives voters absolutely no reason to vote against Bush.

I don't want to hear John Kerry talk about Vietnam. I don't want to hear his supporters talk about his supposed stellar "liberal" accomplishments over the years. For me it comes down to this:

Since the constitutional government of the United States of America was overthrown in a "bloodless" coup on December 12, 2000, Senator John Kerry has voted WITH the illegal Bush Fraudministration time and time again, helping them do damage to this country which could take years to repair, if it can be repaired at all. The Iraq war. The Patriot Act. Tax cuts for the rich. All poor children left behind.

The ideology and issue positions which John Kerry has practiced for the last three years are virtually identical to that of George Bush. The voting record does not lie. And someone who has voted with the Fraudministration cannot possibly debate Junior, nor can he realistically give any voters a reason to vote for him.

So why are so many democrats angry? Same answer. Beginning with New Hampshire, with 95% of the delegates still up for grabs, we were all told to fall in line behind this weak candidate who doesn't have a leg to stand on, while the PNAC driven party machine, the media whores, and the unelected fraud in the White House assassinated the more worthy and more qualified candidates.

Wanna unify the Demoncratic party? How about nominating someone who doesn't vote lock step with the Bush/PNAC agenda?

[maxanne]

7. amen to that

brother devil!

Don't give me a terrible candidate and tell me I HAVE compromise my principles and fall into lockstep.

I still cherish the foolish notion that in a democracy it's MY vote, and no one gets to demand that I use it to support a candidate I detest.

[Cheswick2.0]

12. I have never detested a Democratic candidate before

never. But what is even worse is that the party organized against one candidate because they don't want to change anything either.

[Cheswick2.0]

11. BRAVO

<<Since the constitutional government of the United States of America was overthrown in a "bloodless" coup on December 12, 2000, Senator John Kerry has voted WITH the illegal Bush Fraudministration time and time again, helping them do damage to this country which could take years to repair, if it can be repaired at all. The Iraq war. The Patriot Act. Tax cuts for the rich. All poor children left behind.

The ideology and issue positions which John Kerry has practiced for the last three years are virtually identical to that of George Bush. The voting record does not lie. And someone who has voted with the Fraudministration cannot possibly debate Junior, nor can he realistically give any voters a reason to vote for him.>>

This is exactly the point. Terry McAsshole must think he is dealing with a bunch of morons when he says we are unified. I know what the party has been up to. I know how they have tried to manipulate this process. Saying the party is unified is just one more lie.

Just look at the percentage of people voting in the last few primaries. It has dropped off significantly since they have forced everyone to get behind the WORST candidate in the field. I am not falling in line like a good little soldier.

The best part of getting all those letters begging me for donations is that I keep sending the envelopes back with flyers from the Dean campaign and a small note saying that I am not falling in line. I will send them money when Dean is the nominee for President. If the party had not run this primary season the way they have I might be someone who could be persuaded that 4 years of bush is actually worse than eight years of Kerry.

[Guaranteed]

13. That's exactly what I thought. It's literally illogical.

Why does Bush need to leave? His ideologies are all wrong (morally). So how could the issues not matter in choosing his replacement?

[goobergunch]

30. *wild applause* (n/t)

[chyjo]

6. If I wanted a purge

I would write in Joe Stalin

[Cheswick2.0]

8. what the heck makes you think this is about "the far left"?

First you might try understanding were Dean's support is coming from. I am a liberal, Dean is a centrist, the people at my meet-up are libertarians, Greens, REPUBLICANS and democrats of every stripe.
This isn't about right and left or left and further left. This is about right and wrong. When you understand that you will have a better idea of what is going on and what it will take to unify the party. Hint: nominating John Kerry is not the ticket to that unity.

[Armstead]

14. Amen

One of the biggest frauds in this process has been the lie that Dean is some far-left radical and his followers are all Greenie college kids.

The fact that a moderate like Dean sees that things are really screwed up in Washington is part of the core of his appeal.

Kerry is part of the myopia in Washington that has lost touch with the real issues, and with the basic need for reform. Whether one is libral, radisal left or moderate that's a fact of life these days. Once the Democratic Party realizes that it needs to open the windows, and actually does it, the better.

[WiseMen]

16. I Agree. Issues are more Ego that Ideology. Understanding of Issues and

the dynamics of the American political system would not lead to
the venom against Kerry that is apparent.

Kerry's crime is that he has been a disciplined leader and
campaigner who is seeking the best interest of the country rather that doing a personal vent.

[IrateCitizen]

26. WTF are you talking about???

Issues are more ego than ideology.... :wtf:

Once again, WiseMen, in your effort to exonerate John Kerry and elevate him in Democratic Party sainthood over the rest of us, you resort to complete strawmen and innuendo to support your lack of an argument.

Issues are not about "ego". Issues are about substance, about meat and potatoes, about how political process actually affects people's lives. What you talk about is really more "image" than "issues" -- and that is the big problem with political discourse in this country. It's not really much different than a popularity contest for high school class president -- except there's a lot more at stake.

For me to say that I take issue with Kerry's stances on war and peace, "free" trade, corporate reform, etc. is not "ego". It is because I am a citizen of the United States, and am gravely concerned about how these issues that he has supported are affecting the other Americans I live with and see every day. I'm concerned about how it will affect that single mother working two jobs just to get by. I am concerned about how it will affect that middle-class family who sees their income steadily eroding. I am concerned about how it will affect that machinist about to lose his job of 25 years to "outsourcing". And yes, I am also concerned about how such policies will affect me, and my future.

To be quite honest, I am not overly hopeful that a person who came from a wealthy background and who has spent the last 18 years in the Beltway cocoon really has a grasp for how his policies affect all of these people I listed above. I don't say that because I believe that John Kerry is a "bad man" who doesn't care about these people. I simply say it because I believe that he is so disconnected from people like this that he really doesn't understand how many of the policies that he has voted for adversely affect them. And forgive me if I see this as a big problem for how he might seek to govern as President -- but there are people's lives and livelihoods at stake here.

As Paul Wellstone famously said, "Politics is about the importance of people's lives." That is what "issues" are, at their essence. "Electability" doesn't meet this criteria. Nor does "image." In the end, it's all about ISSUES -- no matter how much you would like to disingenuously portray it as otherwise.

[quaker bill]

18. Exactly

People can't seem to get past the right - left paradigm. This is why we have been favored with posts about Dean being too conservative or too liberal so often on the same board on the same day and sometimes even in the same thread.

The way to unity is listening to the concerns of others and beginning to understand where they come from. For such a process to be meaningful, you have to give people credit for having made a well considered choice in accordance with their conscience. Phrases like "kool-aid drinkers" have to drop out of the vernacular.

I do agree though, nominating Mr. Kerry will make the process of unification very difficult.

[HFishbine]

17. LOL

You were trying to figure out how to unify the party? You were trying to figure out why the left isn't being listened to? And your answer was a purge. I am laughing.

[Renew Deal]

19. Well what's your answer?

You know a lot about local politics in NC. You are on the commitee (I think). So, what do you see?

[HFishbine]

28. Thanks for asking

What I see is a tendencey toward the status quo -- the safe choices. But let me propose an alternate route and see what your reaction is.

Instead of a purge. Instead of actions that try to re-inforce and hardden the, in my opinion mistaken positions taken on a number of issues, why isn't the dem party looking to add support instead of fearfully trying to distance itself from an active portion of what should be its base? Maybe this will come, I'm holding out hope, but here is what I think the dem party needs to do.

It needs to take concrete actions that give legitmacey to the progressives. If the eventual nominee is one who voted for the IWR, it needs to nominate a VP who opposed the war. It needs to set as an ultimate goal, even if not reflected in near-term policy, universal health care. It needs to embrace the the idea of taking influence ot of the hands of the current corporate-controlled power centers and putting it in the hands of grassroots organizations. It needs to be willing to acknowledge that equal rights for all people is the morally correct position and even if the polls are against us, it must have confidence that good leadership will lead people to the morally proper place.

Now, would you disagree with any of those things? If not, then let's fight to put some backbone in the democratic party instead of allowing it to capitulate to the lowest common denominator. That's how we'll win -- build a coalition through the process of addition.

[bigtree]

32. I do think it will be the responsibility of the nominee

to reach out beyond his own rhetoric and positions and adopt the concerns of those he would have vote for him.

Understanding that a nominee may not initially hold or recognize your views, will you be receptive to an adoption of your positions, a preelection conversion? You won't scorn him for that will you, if that occurs?

I fully expect the eventual nominee to seek to broaden his base of support. I think that your insistence and backbone will be required more than ever if the nominee decides to gravitate to far away from left of center in that broadening; not a heckling type of advocacy, but an instructive one.

Good for you!

[HFishbine]

33. Of course

As I said, I'm hoping what you articulate happens.

[quaker bill]

21. Yes, a purge is the surest path to defeat.

The thread had a bit of the "I'm intoxicated with my newfound power" feel to it.

I find it funny when a person creates a thread that is by nature polarizing and then is "shocked" by the nastiness of the responses.

[Padraig18]

20. This is not the time to gloss over fundamental problems.

The calls for 'unity' completely ignore the num,erous and valid reasons why there IS disunity, and no cosmetic 'patch' is going to produce unity, nor will any 'get in line' appeal. Like a laceration that becomes infected, further inattention to the dissident voices within the party will lead only to a massive case of 'party septicemia'--- ignoring it wil NOT make it better!

We are upset with the DLC and rightly so. They completely failed to assist PRESIDENT Gore in 2000, and they led us to a disastrous mid-term showing in 2002. Why should we now heed their calls? If their past performance is ANY indication, their advice is much more likely to lead to an electoral DEFEAT in November than it is to a VICTORY.

The party needs to take it's finger's out of its ears and open its eyes; we have legitimate complaints that need to be addressed, and addressed sooner, rather than later.

[quaker bill]

24. Well stated

The only way to restore unity is for the victors to begin to listen the concerns of others in a more validating way.

So far, I have little confidence that this will happen.

[Terwilliger]

29. Nader was right

it took getting a potted plant like Bush into office for Dems to "see their problems" and everything I hear in these threads suggest that Dems still haven't addressed them at all

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DU GrovelBot]

31. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##

RUN C:\GROVELBOT.EXE
 
This week is our first quarter 2004 fund drive.
Please take a moment to donate to DU. Thank you
for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.

[edzontar]

35. Here's my proposal: All who propose or promote purges should

THEMSELVES be purged.

Or shunned, at the very least.

[Renew Deal]

36. Aren't you then proposing purges?

[ngGale]

37. The party is unified but...

annoyed at being pushed around. After Nixon the candidate that could win did not work and why will it work now?