What, exactly, is a “real” Democrat?

[MurikanDemocrat]

I am a died in the wool Democrat. I have believed in and stood for liberal causes since before I became politically aware and started voting. I have seen my way through several Democratic primaries, and while my initial choice of candidate has not always been the collective choice of the rank and file of the Democratic voters, I have always supported the nominee with my vote, without question. I am a Democrat first, afterall, and my singular will does not supercede the collective will of the majority.

My credentials as a life long Democrat have never been questioned – that is, until I found GD Primary. During the Clinton years, and during the impeachment charade, I had to put up with a lot of CRAP from Republicans FOR being a Democrat and for calling the endless 100Mil investigation into Clinton’s underwear for the witch-hunt that it was. Jesus H on a hockey stick did Democrats put up with some egregious bullshit during those years. But my status as a “real” Democrat was never called into question.

I liked Kerry as a candidate long, long before the Iowa caucus. Many weeks before that I resigned myself to the realization that he was not doing well and had all but been written off as dead in the water. I was disappointed in his campaign thus far. I placed the blame on Kerry, not the media or a conspiracy theory. The blame for poor campaigning at that point rested squarely upon Kerry and his campaign.

But Kerry retooled his campaign, and with some work he pulled his ailing campaign out of the dumper. In the 10 days before the Iowa caucus I watched with amazement as his numbers rose daily. I held my breath. I’ll be damned; I thought to myself, he did it!

My purpose in bringing that up is simply to point out that I made a conscious choice to support Kerry long before his winning streak, and to fend off any suggestions that my support of Kerry is not due to my being an uninformed “sheeple” allowing the media to choose a candidate for me. This is not the case.

Now I find myself in DU and GD Primary, and a vocal minority question my credentials as a “real” Democrat daily, and sometimes viscerally. The idea being, if you chose “right” candidate, meaning the one they choose, then you are really a Democrat. If you choose a candidate they do not agree with, you are really a Republican, or Republican-Lite. I began reading here a few weeks before the Iowa Primary and I do not know what took place here beyond that. Just in the past week I have seen:

Threads started saying a certain candidate is the only “real” candidate (Read: Democrat) left in the race – one that can take out Kerry, of course.

Threads suggesting forming a 3rd Party because the only “real” Democrat is losing.

A thread suggesting the supporters of the “real” Democrat go on a strike.

Several threads salivating over an unsubstantiated rumor from a right-wing crap source like Drudge, a known liar and Rove hack. Threads desperately trying to spin a story out of a rumor that the mainstream press won’t touch, because they think by doing so it would revive the losing candidate’s ailing campaign. (It wouldn’t help, BTW)

Numerous posts from said “real” Democrats that prove to be less interested in Bush losing, (which is the point of the upcoming election for the rank and file of the majority of Democrats), than in their candidate winning the nomination.

So, I asked a friend of mine, who is a Democrat, what is a “real” Democrat. She originally supported Gephardt, and is most ideologically aligned with Kucinich. Her response was:

“As far as I'm concerned, the only real Democrat in the race is the one who can defeat George Bush*. Is this a cop-out? Maybe. But I just don't want to live in a country with four more years of Bush*. It is almost too late. I just cannot imagine the further erosion to our civil liberties and environmental protections, in favor of special interests, that this clown will come up with. It truly scares me. A true Democrat is anybody that can defeat George Bush*.”

I looked up Democrat in the dictionary, and this is what I found:

An advocate of democracy
Democrat A member of the Democratic Party
One who is an adherent or advocate of democracy, or government by the people.

Nowhere in there did I see that being a Democrat revolved around any one candidate. I believe I still fit that definition.

I am a real Democrat.

What is your description of a real Democrat? Please, could you describe it without including any particular candidate in your definition?

[salin]

1. long standing DU tradition

every group seems to do it. Member of group A... refers to members of group b as "not real democrats". Centrists do it to progressives. Progressives do it to centrists. Dean supporters do it to Kerry supporters. Kerry supporters do it to Dean supporters. Etc.

Very old, tired, and insulting tactic that often gets thrown around - but ironically thrown by just about every group at one time or another and thrown at just about every group at one time or another.

[DaisyUCSB]

8. uh, not really, I never see centrists or moderate saying that lefty's are

not real democrats, but I constantly see the reverse

Same thing with Dean supporters to Dean's oppenents supporters. The Dean-supporters, many of them at least, make a habit of accusing Dean's opponents of not being real democrats, and Dean himself does that. But not the other way around

Even though I don't really see how Dean is more left than his opponents other than Lieberman

[GreenArrow]

12. you're right

Lefties are "fringe extremists," "purists," "naive," etc.

[salin]

17. Actually

these posts occur periodically - from moderates refering to the "fringe left"... requests for purging them from the party (they drag the party down), etc.

Its been going on from all directions for more than two years. Sometimes we only see it when it is targetted at our own designated group - but it happens in all directions.

[MurikanDemocrat]

9. I see

A long standing DU tradition. I erred in thinking it was just about this primary.

So, I guess I could look upon this as my initiation. :)

[salin]

19. and it is a heated one

;-)

Fortunately (outside of the primaries... here it appears to be in perpetual motion)... it goes up and down in cycles. When the news is real bad for the bushies... the in-group fighting drops... When it is stagnant (no new bad bush news making the airwaves) it can flare up from time to time... and so on. Hardest thing is to try to hold on to perspective and humour when it gets going. Many of us (self-included) get sucked back in... even though we know better.

Consider yourself initiated :hi:

[Goldberg]

2. Well...anyone who strongly believes the Democratic agenda

is a true Democrat. The only one who I don't see fitting into that description is Zell Miller.

[JVS]

15. That begs the question: what is the Democratic agenda?

[MurikanDemocrat]

18. Here is the 2000 Democratic Party Platform

2000 Democratic Party Platform
Adopted by the 2000 Democratic National Convention on August 15, 2000

The 2000 Democratic National Platform:
Prosperity, Progress, and Peace

http://www.democrats.org/about/2000platform.html

[tobius]

21. how about Ed Koch? n/t

[Robb]

3. A real Democrat:

You. Clearly. All of us, except the trolls. :)

[patricia92243]

4. I don't know. What is an "un-real" Democrat?

[The Traveler]

6. Zell Miller

provides a pretty good example of what a non-Democrat looks like.

[KC21304]

5. I agree with all of the above.

[DaisyUCSB]

7. Someone who's registerd as and consistently supports democrats

beyond that it's a big tent, which noone has the right to proclaim the party's ideals are based soley on or with their own

[eyeswideopened]

10. According to this forum ... someone who supports Kerry n/t

[MurikanDemocrat]

13. Actually

That's not the group I see questioning other people's Democratic credentials.

[vi5]

11. Well according to some people at least on this board....

You're not a real democrat unless you support a particular candidate who they deem to be the embodiment of all that is democratic.

So I've been told I'm not a real democrat or that I'm gullible or that I'm a sheeple or that I'm brainwashed, despite being very well educated, very well informed and despite voting a strict Democratic ballot every single election for the past 17 years of my life.

The worst part about it is to later come to find that many of these people questioning your commitment to democratic ideals and the democratic party are either too young to vote or at least too young to have voted in a presidential election.

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. Well,

by the definition you posted... government by the people It doesn't exist. The nominee was not elected by the people, but instead, he was selected by the DNC and the media and shoved down our throats.

I will be an Independent after this election. I'm finished with this bogus party. Democratic Party is a figment of our imagination. Terry McAuliffe proved that when he said 3 weeks ago that he couldn't wait to see Kerry and Bush debate...with Kerry and his chest full of medals. I didn't know Kerry won the nomination 3 weeks ago, did you?

[MurikanDemocrat]

22. Well, technically

the nominee has not been elected yet. While it is apparent to most who the nominee is going to be, the primary process must continue until the required number of delegates are earned.

In the end, however, the nominee will still have been elected by the people. While you and I may not agree on the collective choice made by the rank and file of Democratic voters, it cannot be denied that in the end it is going to the polls and registering their votes that determines that determines the winner.

[lovedems]

16. I don't think there is any such thing as a real democrat. Why?

Because democrats are not bound by a "certain idealogy" like the republicans are. Democrats are a diverse group with a diverse range of beliefs. We are always hearing how the "this is the most I have ever seen the democrats united, they want GWB* out of the WH". Democrats are not one issue voters like most republicans and there are a wide range of idealogy within the democratic party. I for one, think that is great. I think the "essence" of being a democrat is the desire to protect the vulnerable of society. I will never understand some of the posts who say "if you don't like my candidate you are not a real dem". On the contrary, that makes us real democrats. We don't have to think alike to be a democrat and that is the beauty of it! Look at freeperville and the grief caused to dissenters! That is a republican strategy, not a democrat so let's welcome the difference of opinion. It is what makes our party such a great party.

[MurikanDemocrat]

20. Points noted, and I agree with most.

I do see one issue voters here though. I have seen several posts from people indicating they will go 3rd Party, stay home, or vote for Bush, based soley on the IWR vote.

[Nederland]

23. What Ever I Say It Is

Hey, at least I'm being honest :)

[arewethereyet]

24. you want the textbook Democrat ? John Kennedy.

he's no longer a candidate, hope thats OK.

[MurikanDemocrat]

26. I was too young to fully appreciate John Kennedy. My loss.

[vision]

29. Nah Thomas Jefferson :)

He was the first and he had plenty of flaws but he also inspired and believed in a better future.

[depakid]

25. It's easier to define what a real Democrat isn't:

and a Picture is worth 1,000 words:

[Ficus]

66. wow

you're right about that whole 1,000 words thing.

[MurikanDemocrat]

27. kick

[cally]

28. A real Democrat is whoever supportst your candidate

and your view of the world. The only candidate and supporters who seem to avoid this are Kucinich supporters but I think they would have the accusation sent their way if Kucinich started to win primaries.

I posted a similar thread when my candidate, Clark, was a realistic candidate. I was called Repub-lite, not progressive, I supported American imperialism, I supported PNAC, and on and on. I, like you, have never voted for a Republican and have supported Democrats and liberals my entire life. Some of the attacks at DU are just absurd.

[bushwakker]

30. For starters you have to vote for John Kerry in November

the rest is negotiable.

[MurikanDemocrat]

31. And I take it you would, like me,

vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is if Kerry should be squashed by a bus before then.

Just wanted to clarify the point of standing by the Democratic nominee, whoever it is.

[maxanne]

34. blind party loyalty

is what is expected of "real Democrats?"

Does thinking for oneself make one "unreal?"

[MurikanDemocrat]

35. Well, not exactly. I don't think so. Do you?

I take it your answer was a complaint.

Before I respond to this, could you be more specific about what you mean by "blind party loyalty"?

As far as thinking for oneself, I wouldn't presume anyone that identifes themselves as a Democrat as incapable of thinking for oneself. I assume they all do.

[maxanne]

42. I was responding to

bushwakker's post #30, informing us that "real Democrats" have to vote for Kerry in November.

That's blind party loyalty. Telling me who to vote for is no different from the kind of arm twisting Republicans do amongst themselves. Knee jerk partisanship, in other words.

Does questioning this make me an unreal Democrat?

[MurikanDemocrat]

45. Well, that opens a can of worms for me then

We essentially have a two-Party system. Regardless of splinter Parties on either side, the election is going to won by either the Democratic or the Republican Party.

If Kerry is the nominee, then the only Democratic option available would be Kerry. Clearly, the other options are non-Democratic Party choices. In my opinion, a vote cast for any other Party is one cast for the opposition, and a person casting such a vote is not what I would personally consider a "real" Democrat.

I vote for the nominee chosen by the collective will of the rank and file of the Democratic voters. I don't feel like it's being shoved down my throat, my arm is being twisted, or that it's a knee jerk reaction. I do so fully aware of my actions and willingly.

As I pointed out in my initial post, if the nominee is not my preferred candidate, I do not take the position that my will supersedes the collective will of the rank and file of the Democratic voters.

Perhaps not the answer you were looking for, but that's my opinion.

[maxanne]

47. oh, goodie

I'm being purged. After 30 years as a Democrat, after all the campaigns (including my own run in 2002), the toil, the freezing outside a NH polling place - here I am learning that I'm not a real Democrat. My conscience screams that Kerry is a horrible choice - but in order to stay real, I must compromise my principles yet again. I sure do wish I could remember an election where I wasn't voting for the lesser of two evils. I guess it doesn't matter any more. Questioning is bad. Obedience is good.

thanks so much Murikan. Your ilk is going to make it so much easier for me to march in and change my voter registration after all these years.

[incapsulated]

49. Look

It is one thing to question the Party, it's leaders and the direction it is going in. I have done all this and more the past few months.

It is another to say, I refuse to vote for the Democratic nominee because I have such serious problems with the Party's choice.

Now you are talking about leaving the Party, not about whether you are a "real Democrat". I don't think anyone can honestly say that they refuse the nominee and won't vote and say they are any kind of Democrat except the kind with one foot out the door.

Which is fine, if that is your choice. You can try to change the direction of the Party or you can leave it. But every Party, Republican, Democrat, Green, Socialist, whatever, has rules and votes and you either accept them or you don't. To accept them is part of being in the Party, to reject them is to reject that Party.

[maxanne]

54. the party

no longer accepts me. As the party swings further and further to the right, and gives us empty suits as candidates - more and more will become disillusioned and unhappy.

I find your thought process interesting, however. Are the unhappy Republicans who voted for a Democrat in the primary now not REAL Republicans?

[incapsulated]

63. Of course they aren't

How can you vote for a Democrat and call yourself a "real" Republican? You are at best suspending your Republican status until you vote Republican again. Perhaps you can call yourself an Independent voter. Now, a lot of people occasionally vote for members of another party in local elections. I would give slack in that area, as long as this isn't a common habit, in which case you really are an Independent, if you switch allegiance so often.

Look, stripped of emotion, it's really quite simple:

If you actively vote against your Party in this election, ie, vote for another party, you are no longer a real member of your former Party. You are helping to get another Party to win. Which means the Democratic Party would lose.

If you sit out and refuse to vote at all, you can certainly still consider yourself a Democrat, you are at least not voting against them, but I believe you are hurting both the Party and yourself by doing so. At least in this election.

If you leave, for whatever reason, you are gone. You are no longer a member of the Party. Whether you blame the Party for that or not is beside the point, I would imagine most people who leave their former Party put the blame on the Party itself.

This has nothing to do with your 30 years of being a Democrat in good standing. Nobody is disputing that. I was so angry when Clark dropped out, I was feeling similar things, that I would vote the ticket this year and then re-evaluate whether I wanted to stay a registered Democrat, which I have been for 20 years now. This has to do with what you do now, and what that means.

[MurikanDemocrat]

51. What you are saying, in fact

in your previous post, and this post especially is that you have rejected the Democratic Party. I have not rejected you; rather you have actively taken steps to divorce yourself from the Democratic Party altogether.

I am not dismissing or discounting your status over the past 30 years. I am not suggesting you compromise your principles. I am not questioning your right to take your vote and change your voter registration as you see fit.

If you feel your interests are best served by another Party, then I support your right to vote your conscience as you see fit. But I don't see how one can vote for an opposition Party, which results in aiding the enemy and hurting the Democratic Party, and really be a Democrat. That person is either ideologically a Green or a Republican.

That is just my opinion. I am sorry it makes you angry. It was not my intention to start a flame fest either, and I hope one doesn't start now.

But I also don't appreciate those such as yourself who are unhappy with the Party that would direct their resentment with the Party toward me with angry emotional appeals and expect me to change my preferred choices and values to appease yours. So, it cuts both ways.

I respect and support your choices. I would appreciate it if you would respect mine in return.

[maxanne]

55. actually

the party has rejected me.

Apparently I missed the much touted respect you were offering me when you informed me I wasn't a "real" Democrat.

Please don't call what you're offering me "support."

[blondeatlast]

57. You have every reason to be upset if the candidate you worked for,

supported with your heart and possibly money and time, will not be the candidate chosen. But I saw nothing in Murikan's post that indicated he expects "blind obedience." IMHO, it's an honest, but terribly misguided, question.

My candidate hasn't a snowball's chance in my hometown in July (zilch, that is), and having been thru dozens of unsuccesful campaigns for all levels of office, I know the hurt, I really do.

With all due respect, though, there is no such thing as an "ideal candidate." Even DK (my guy) makes me queasy with his flip-flop on the abortion issue (I am 100% pro-choice,fwiw).

I also think there is no such thing as a "real," big D, Democrat. I have never NOT voted Dem, but don't think for a moment I've lived comfortably with my choices every time (#42 being a particular case in point).

In a sense, we must always vote for the lesser evil, even if we are given dozens of choices. If politics were perfect, there would be no need for it.

And once again, maxanne, I understand the bitter feelings you have. Vote your conscience, always. I always have, even though I've had to settle for the lesser evil every time; that's my conscience, yours may be dirfferent, but stay with it. At least YOU will know you've done the right thing for YOU.

[maxanne]

59. thanks blondeatleast

but yes, Murikan did say that not voting for Kerry would make me not a real Democrat - which sounds like blind party loyalty to me.

I thank you for offering the kind of respect and support that Murikan spoke of, but did not actually project.

This really isn't about my candidate - it's about what the party is becoming. Every time we move further to the right, it costs us more seats in the electorate. 2002 was a terrible debacle that we've learned NO lessons from. There is no willingness on the part of the upper party echelon to change things, either.

[BruinAlum]

32. Good question. I think it varies from person to person

Obviously there are varying degrees of political awareness and involvement among Democrats, so each person's description will vary.

Hell, I don't know how to answer this, but I know I'm a Democrat. I think it's more than wanting to beat George Bush. I fit with your description of supporting liberal causes and always supporting the choice of the rank and file of the Democratic voters with my vote, even if it doesn't agree with my personal choice.

I wonder if this is the first election, or first experience with a lot of political involvement for a lot of people. That might explain why they take their choice of candidate so personally. I'm just speculating.

[Rhiannon12866]

33. I agree with both you and your friend

We have to stop the squabbling and sniping among ourselves if we are going to take back the White House in the fall. George Bush* has ruined the economy, turned back the clock on environmental protections, given in to special interest groups, eroded our civil liberties guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, appointed right-wing judges, cost us hundreds of American lives and squandered the good will of the world community engendered by 9/11. He just needs to go.

We owe it to our country to get behind whoever is the choice of the party and turn out in record numbers this time. We have to stick together. We cannot afford the protest votes of a third party candidate. I have my favorite candidates, as we all do, but I will support and vote for the Democratic nominee. He may not turn out to be my first choice, but he's certainly going to be a hell of a lot better than George Bush*!:grr:

[MurikanDemocrat]

36. I agree, the amount of damage he's managed to do in just 3 short

years is already devastating. Just the USSC and other judge appointments alone will change the politcal landscape for the next 2 generations. I'm convinced were are headed for war in Syria and Iran as well if he gets another term. Those things won't happen if a Democrat is elected.

[Rhiannon12866]

52. The most frightening thing about a possible war with Iran

Is that they are so populous, compared with Iraq. Just ask Saddam Hussein what it was like to take on the Iranians. He would have had no chance, if not for American support. And the casualties were astronomical. Iran is already headed for democracy if we just let well enough alone. They once had democracy, back in the '50s, until interference by another British-U.S. coalition led to installation of the Shah, one of the most brutal and repressive regimes on the planet. And we wonder why they hate us.:shrug:

[Edwards4President]

37. Bravo!

[RichM]

38. A "real Democrat" is a supporter of the weaker faction of the American

Big Business Party. Usually, this person is under the charmingly innocent delusion that he/she supports the "party of the people." A great deal of fuss is typically made by the "Democrat" about the supposed moral superiority of his faction.

As Chomsky writes in Necessary Illusions, "Most {Western democracies} have not achieved the U.S. system of one political party, with two factions controlled by shifting segments of the business community."

[MurikanDemocrat]

39. I take it you don't have a particularly friendly or approving view

of a "real Democrat".

[RichM]

41. It's friendly, with generous measures of sympathy & understanding.

[DebJ]

40. unlike Terry McAuliffe, I believe in the right for ALL to vote. Maybe I

will not be able to be a Democrat anymore unless we can get one day primaries.

[Dr Fate]

43. You poke them with your finger...

...if your finger makes contact, then they are real...

[genius]

44. FDR, JFKennedy, Dennis Kucinich.

Kerry's okay but I wish his re-evaluate his position on free trade. That's one reason I'd like to see Kucinich or Edwards on the ticket if Kerry gets the nomination.

[Adelante]

46. It's worse when your guy's the frontrunner

Unless you are a Clark supporter, in which case you get it no matter what. :eyes:

From your number of posts, I suspect you weren't here in the fall? There were not a lot of Kerry supporters then, which is when I came in, but those brave few were steadfast in their defense and determination. I'll never forget it and I really admired them for it. They were beat up hourly, but they never gave way. :thumbsup:

[paulk]

48. I was working in Nebraska at the height of the Clinton impeachment

so I understand what you're saying about putting up with crap. I always thought I was pretty liberal until I discovered DU. I've been called a Republican more than once here.

There's a group of people on this board who aren't Democrats, Republican, or of any real political stripe - they're just reactionaries. Since it's all anonymous there's a lot of abuse. You have to just learn to ignore it - sometimes even to a "liberal" use of the ignore feature.

I don't know anymore if there is a description to fit a real Democrat into - my main issue in this campaign is the defeat of GW Bush.

[MurikanDemocrat]

50. I am from Nebraska as well

The Clinton impeachment was unbearable. Irrational hysteria. I thought it would never end.

[TexasSissy]

53. Someone who is registered as a Dem & has voted that way for years

is no doubt a "real" Democrat. Those with a short history of it are probably trying to find their way.

As a registered and voting Dem. for about 30 years, I consider myself one of the "real" Democrats. I welcome anyone in the party who registers and/or votes Democratic. And I am a died in the wool....MODERATE! Yes, that's right. To the right I am a liberal, to the far left liberals I am a Republican. But actually, I am what being a Democrat is all about, and most of the registered Democrats are like me.

But I don't think Kerry is moderate. He's pretty liberal. More so than Dean. So you'd think voters would have voted in Dean and Kerry out. But they voted Kerry in for other reasons...electability, it seems. And a large, smooth campaign machine. And his ability to dance with the media and respond to attacks appropriately. All these things. Dean wasn't voted out because he's too liberal (he's not). He was voted out because he just wasn't up to the task of operating at a level high enough to compete with Dubya for the highest office in the land. Too many gaffs. Too hostile. Too hot under the collar. Too sensitive to attacks. Which is all inexperience, I think. Kerry's had over 20 years to learn to handle attacks. Note that Kerry changed campaign managers BEFORE Iowa, when it mattered. Dean changed campaign managers AFTER Iowa, presumably because he couldn't see the problems were as large as they were. Experience.

[maxanne]

56. correction

Kerry has the reputation for being liberal. A look at his voting record reveals otherwise.

[paulk]

60. you mis - characterize Kerry's record

He has the highest lifetime liberal rating of anyone currently serving in the Senate.

It's one thing to let your anger over the failure of your chosen candidate color your thinking toward his opponent; it's another to actively distort the record of that opponent.

[maxanne]

62. if that's the case

no wonder the party is in trouble.

He voted for IWR, Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, and failed to provide a vote or leadership on the Medicare Reform Bill. He voted to confirm Antonin Scalia. He voted for Welfare Reform.

Some liberal.

[paulk]

64. The party is in trouble?

The party is unified like never before, with one overriding goal - the removal of GW Bush from the office he usurped.

The votes you mentioned have been discussed endlessly on this board, with many good arguments made in defense of Kerry's voting record. You have rejected these arguments, which is your right. However, that you mention a lack of leadership and failure to vote on the Medicare Reform Bill, shows a clear bias in your conclusions. You claim to have run for political office - you do understand how the Senate operates? You do know what a cloture vote is?

Antonin Scalia won nomination by a vote of 98-0, so I guess none of the Democrats in the Senate live up to the standards you set. Same with the Patriot Act, which passed 98-1.

The only candidate still running who opposed the 1996 Welfare Reform is Al Sharpton. All have promised to provide more investment in support services.

NCLB had strong bipartisan support. Once again, all the candidates recognize it's failures, and have pledged to fix it.

The IWR - you can either accept Kerry's explanation or not. Not every liberal accepts that a "yes" vote constitutes support for what Bush has done in Iraq.

You don't think Kerry is a liberal. You are welcome to that opinion - but keep in mind that the vast majority of liberals disagree. Once again, Sen. Kerry has the highest lifetime liberal rating (93%, ADA) of anyone currently serving in the Senate.

[maxanne]

65. as I said

and you have so clearly pointed out, the Democratic party is in trouble. Everything you've said illustrates it quite beautifully.

That Kerry couldn't persuade any of his Democratic colleagues (especially Diane Feinstein, who is on his steering committee) to vote against the Medicare Reform Bill shows a distinct lack of leadership in my opinion. It is also my opinion that he should have been there that day, shouting loudly in protest against the Medicare Reform Bill, cloture or no cloture.

I'm glad you see party unity like never before. I need to borrow your rose colored glasses, because it sure isn't visible anywhere I go.

[paulk]

68. I have pointed out no such thing.

Your advocacy for a particular candidate has blinkered you to the real political landscape. You don't need my rose colored glasses, you need to remove your blinders.

So Sen. Kerry was unable to convince another Senator to change her vote? Surprise! Two Democrats who don't agree. Perhaps that's the definition of a Democrat - we agree to disagree.

To paraphrase Will Rogers - the Democratic Party is not an organized political party - we're a coalition of sometimes very disparate groups. Who get together every four years and try to put a member of one of those groups in the White House.

We, as individual party members, often end up voting for someone who doesn't represent even a majority of our personal political belief systems. Why? Because the alternative is even worse. And as long as the two party system remains dominant, this is the choice we're stuck with.


John Kerry is not the ogre you seem to think he is. His fundamental ideals are liberal, and would be a huge step in the right direction for the country.

[blondeatlast]

58. No offense, but the ? is misguided. In a true party of the people,

there is no such thing

For instance, I'm a DK supporter, and yet I am concerned this GE with strongly reducing the deficit.

In this GE, we are concerned with many traditionally Conservative issues:

The erosion of the strength and spirit of the Constitution;

The rampant disintegration of the middle class;

The Supreme Court is CRUCIAL, which goes back to the erosion of the Constitution. The Repubs have always considered this in their GE candidates, now we must politicize it, too, as much as I find it painful to say so.

Destruction of our civil liberties on a grand scale--Dems have always been considered "soft" on these; it's time we proved that it is OUR issue, and we will uphold them.

[MurikanDemocrat]

69. No offense taken. Perhaps the question IS misguided.

This was exactly the point I was making in my initial post. This is not a question that I initiated; this is a question that was imposed upon me in this forum. As a lifelong Democrat, I was to discover that my credentials as a “real” Democrat were in question because, according to a vocal minority, I support the “wrong” candidate. Not only that, in order to be a “real” Democrat, I have only one choice of candidates, who according to this wisdom, also happens to be the only “real” Democrat among the candidates.

To state the obvious, THAT declaration that describes a “real” Democrat as revolving around a choice of a specific candidate is ridiculous. And I similarly reject arguments suggesting there is only one “real” Democratic candidate, because the others are really Republicans. All of the candidates in this primary are Democrats. One may take issue with some of the positions they have taken, but they are still Democrats. I suppose you can even hate them, but that doesn’t make them Republicans.

You centered your response on issues and consequences as opposed to a specific candidate, which to me seems most reasonable. And I agree with the points you made, most particularly about the Supreme Court.

[Snivi Yllom]

61. it's like a Unicorn

A mythical fleeting creature that we hear stories about but never ever really see.

[tobius]

67. Question reminds me of " are you a real American? n/t

Education is a method whereby one acquires a higher grade of prejudices.
Laurence J. Peter (1919 - 1988)

[Forkboy]

70. Exactly!

[MurikanDemocrat]

71. good analogy

[Rhiannon12866]

72. Being a "real Democrat" is one thing

Being a "real American" is another. Too many of us, these days, are being accused of not being "real Americans," by not supporting the Iraq war or the Patriot Act, by the fearmongering Bush* administration. I am as patriotic as the next American, but I oppose both. I consider myself a "real American," but will support any Democratic candidate that can defeat George Bush*.:shrug:

[tobius]

73. Thanks-