Should saying "I'm voting for Nader" get you tombstoned at DU?

[progressiverealist]

I say it should at least be worth a warning from the mods. It's not all that different from saying "I'm voting for Bush." That would get you bounced. This is Democratic Underground not Nader Underground or Free Republic.

Go ahead and vote for Bush or nader but get the hell out of here if that's what you want to tout.

[anti-NAFTA]

1. No.

As much as I hate Nader I don't think the moderators should be any more strict.

[mhr]

2. No, Your Bias and Personal Prejudice Is Showing

eom

[yorgatron]

7. it IS democraticunderground

don't they have a greenunderground they can go to instead of wasting our time over here?

[mot78]

12. To be fair to Greens, Nader isn't one of them

[youngred]

17. Wow, that line hasn't been used about 4,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times

:eyes:

It also says they welcome Dems and progressives of all stripes here.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html

[mhr]

66. I Live In Texas And Will Vote For Kucinich In The Primary

IMHO he is the only Democrat running.

I reserve the right to Vote for anyone I please in the fall if the eventual democratic nominee is not Kucinich and does not embrace the progressive wing of the democratic party.

If voting your principles gets you banned then so be it.

However, I will not be forced into voting for someone that is shoved down my throat.

'nuff said.

[AgadorSparticus]

131. just curious....what if Kucinich endorses kerry/edwards?

would you vote for the johns then?

[littlejoe]

97. Yes. Not only is he not a democrat, but he is using and

abusing democrats for his own egocentric ends. Anyone siding with Nader should get the hell out. They could start their very own "Green Underground."

[youngred]

3. No

and yes it is different

What's with all the pro-censorship my-way-or-the-highway fools around here?

[GreenArrow]

73. "what's up with all the pro-censorship..."

it's the Dubya syndrome, and it's infected most of the nation. The only cure is Armageddon.

[LandOLincoln]

153. Don't look now, but there seem to be a (very) few Kooch supporters

who are sayin that very same thing themselves, i.e. if you're worried about Nader then vote Kucinich and--VOILA!--Ralphie will go away.

How is this NOT "my way or the highway?"

[Dookus]

4. People are free

to find any website that welcomes them. But anybody who wants to destroy the chances for a Democrat to win on a website called Democratic Underground shouldn't be suprised to be shown the door.

Skinner et. al. have no obligation to provide the bandwidth for people who want to destroy the Democratic party.

[Gman]

5. Anyone saying they will vote for Nader should be banned

Especially when they go into the long drawn out drivel about why. We ban RW trolls. There's no difference here. Nader supporters and the RW are both the enemy.

[Maddy McCall]

6. It will after we have a nominee.

Skinner said he won't let DU be used to promote third parties. (or Republicans, but that's a given.) :-)

[Kahuna]

92. Can't wait.

:7

:hi:

[Maddy McCall]

117. Nor I...

Skinner said "sometime in March" in AtA. Wooohooo...Naderheads are on borrowed time!

:hi: back atcha!

[fujiyama]

120. Good News!

I'm glad. Whatever Nader will have to say, has been said by a more reliable liberal by the name of Kucinich. Unlike Nader, this guy actually did LEAD people in CONGRESS to vote against the Patriot Act and the War. He's also spoken out regarding trade issues and the military.

We don't need Nader supporters telling us that voting for the only possibility to get rid of Bush is a bad thing. I have no interest in hearing how both parties are the "same". A democrat in office will NOT continue this administration's reckless and psychotic policies. We need change, and even if that change doesn't make things perfect, that change will have a positive impact on many people. The only way to get ANYTHING done is vote democratic.

I myself personally couldn't care less if someone votes third party in say, Texas or Utah. If you're in Ohio or New Mexico though, and you participate on this board, you sure as hell better be voting dem!

[maxanne]

8. those who fear free

speech and the civilized exchange of ideas will doubtlessly agree with you. It sure is scary when some people won't queue up, isn't it?

[Maddy McCall]

16. I financially support Democratic Underground....

even though it looks like Nader Underground tonight.

If you want to be a Bush enabler, I respectfully submit that you find a site that is geared that way.

[Duder]

60. If you want to be a Bush enabler...

...nominate Kerry.

Most of us are adults and should be able to handle political discourse of any persuasion. If you can't, then perhaps you're the one that's on the wrong site and not maxanne.

[Democat]

85. Do you support allowing Bush supporters on this site?

If not, then your argument is worthless.

You either believe it's ok to allow banning of certain people or you don't.

Which is it?

[Duder]

103. A weak Democratic nominee is supporting Bush, imo.

Do you consider policies now put forward by mainstream Democratic party candidates such as universal health care, anti-corporatism, local economics, criticism of globalization and defense of the environment, Bush policies? Those are policies from Nader's 2000 run now incorporated into this year's Democratic primaries. This is why I think your analogy is flawed but regardless of partisan politics, you would be correct in believing that I don't condone fascism.

[Samantha]

132. I definitely agree with you but I am having a tough time with our

new definition of terms. I have referred to Kerry and politicians like him as a Bush* enabler for the duration of time I have been at DU -- not too long after its inception. That term seems to have taken on a new definition within this thread.

I certainly have no intention of voting for Nader, but I think it's healthy to learn why other liberals are supporting him. I guess it could get out of hand, and this site could be virtually taken over by an onslaught of a third-party's supporters; but with the ever increasing aggression of current posters, I think there would be no problem beating the interlopers back without the help of the moderators.

I hate to think of this website, of all places, becoming narrow-minded and intolerant.

And on that rare occasion when a poster here states he or she will be voting for Bush* -- I am so startled I usually have to read it twice. It's been educational, though, reading the reasons why because quite frankly I have never understood how anyone could vote for that man. Since I never visit the freeper websites, I think it is educational to have a diversity of opinion here within reasonable limits. Reasonable limits is defined as within boundaries that do not destroy the essence of this place.

In any event, you and I are substantially in agreement.

[maxanne]

83. oooh, pulling financial rank

jchild. I'm a free speech enabler. I'm anti-censorship. I'm in favor of open discussion.

Perhaps you can use your clout to have me banned.

[Maddy McCall]

105. Open discussion? Of WHAT exactly?

A cursory search of your posts in the past 24 hours shows that your "free speech" and "open discussion" has consisted of nothing but pessimistic whining and moaning about DU not allowing free speech.

In fact, no post by you in the past twenty-four hours consists of anything more than a few sentences damning DUers who support Kerry or who are ABB.

I'm all for open dialogue, and would welcome reasoned debate with you, if there were anything to debate. If you want to support DU so that you can inseminate the forum with whiny, piss-and-moan posts about how restrictive the site is, more power to you. Not much substance for discussion, IMO. Edited to add: the irony is intriguing.

Sure, feel free to contribute to DU in whichever way you feel most successfully promotes your position, whatever that is.

:eyes:

[maxanne]

113. there is no reasoned

debate with you, jchild. You are a quick alert, I'll give you that.

[LandOLincoln]

154. What's scary is the self-righteous blindness and sheer childish

arrogance of some so-called progressives, who'd rather enable an avowed Bush enabler than (gasp!) admit that half a loaf will at least keep a body alive to fight another day...

[bushwakker]

9. Yes. This is not Green Underground.

[LandOLincoln]

155. Please don't tar the Greens with Nader's brush. Unlike some

who should know better, the Green Party has learned its lesson and wants nothing to do with Ralph.

Ironically, his attempt to destroy the Democratic Party has actually strengthened it, while at the same time damaging his erstwhile sponsors the Greens. Be assured they will not be making the same mistake twice.

[mot78]

10. No but actively campaigning for him and starting flame wars should

[janx]

11. No. And I'm no Nader fan.

Especially this time, we ought to take a look at these discussions--DU can archive them--to see what's really happening. DU isn't representative of the country, of course, but a record of this repeat situation would be valuable.

[poskonig]

13. Up until November, yes.

Republicans will troll the boards under the shield of Naderhood. In addition, raison d'etre of the Green party is to destroy the Democratic Party.

[Darranar]

14. NO!

[Frances]

15. Tonight on network news I heard that Bush-Cheney

has raised $150 million. That means that every time I turn on the TV I will see anti-Democratic ads.

I want a safe place to come to so I can be with other Dems.

I think that 3rd party candidates should have their own website. I think this website should be for Democrats.

[youngred]

20. actually they have $200 Million

breaking every single fundraising record ever. And the RWers complaind about Clinton's fundraising

[absyntheNsugar]

18. Yes

And I'll tell you why. This is "Democratic Underground" - not "Leftist Underground."

And even if you say the Democratic part is more the method of election than the party, it still stands to reason that a vote for Nader=a vote for Bush=Martial Law.

How can I make it any fucking clearer? General Tommy Franks has said thats the direction things will go! Bush has said he would like America to be a dictatorship and he the dictator MORE THAN ONCE! Cheney has already set up a shadow government!

Kerry and Edwards have not done any of these things and even WRITING parts of the patriot act does not a dictator make.

[ulysses]

19. absolutely!

Anything that disturbs the peace of DU centrists should be banished, after all.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[ulysses]

29. "that's what ulysses embodies" - ROFL!

I don't, actually, but what if I did? Dear lord, don't let it breed in the washroom!

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[ulysses]

50. what failed policy would that be?

Or were you just looking to smear someone without having to back it up?

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

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

[ulysses]

62. I suppose I have my answer.

Still, I'm quite serious. What failed policy it is that you put in my lap?

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[Darranar]

82. When?

[ulysses]

1. no, it hasn't been tried worldwide.

2. no, it hasn't failed.

3. I'm still not a socialist.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

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

[ulysses]

90. I'll do that.

:hi:

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

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

[youngred]

32. hahahah

so who were you before? honestly. You've been posting about shutting down debate, the rules and the old days all day long. Come on

actually I do love socialism, becuase it makes more sense than Capitalism

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

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

[youngred]

43. I'm hardly a Naderite

in fact I quite despise the man...

But calling for Keph to be banned and saying Uly = Socialism. naderites aren't the only ones who are amusing :eyes:

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

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

[youngred]

55. actually he isn't

and alright not banned, but censored

"I can't wait till the rules take effect and you won't be able to say these things any more."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=369176&mesg_id=369197&page=

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

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

[youngred]

75. fine

I'm just clarifying what you yourself said.

'Uly is a socialist', he isn't
'can't wait for the rules so you can't say that', censorship

[Slice]

ok?

lol

[ulysses]

72. the irony, of course,

is that you're by far the better socialist than I am, Zack. :)

[ulysses]

56. you and I both wish.

I just felt the need to point out that ulysses is a socialist.

I'm a liberal, yes, and in my better moods I've called myself a democratic socialist along the lines that IrateCitizen enumerated a year or so ago, but I doubt that the socialists would have me.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

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

[youngred]

67. not in a land where its reviled and treated as Satanic

Socialism gets more votes around this world than the Democrats and the Republicans combined

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

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

[ulysses]

68. you tired of flinging that red herring around yet, ace?

You're no end of amusement here, but I wouldn't want you to pull anything.

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

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

[ulysses]

74. yes, well,

you won't be the first.

[Slice]

78. or the last

http://sp-usa.org/

There you go, sir. ;-)

[Adelante]

142. I think that takes the record

For the longest series of deleted posts.

[JVS]

160. Isn't that what timeouts are supposed to prevent?

[liberalnurse]

79. I just spit coffee all over the keyboard.....

:scared:

[Slice]

81. hah

looks like someone did not want to respond to my response to her rude pm. Oh well.

[liberalnurse]

84. Nothing left to say......

Apparently my sincere sentiments were brushed off......

[Slice]

86. My pm wasn't rude

I was very polite to you. If you didn't think so, then alert it. I somehow doubt you will. :hi:

[PVnRT]

40. Wow

You're quite in the know for someone with 175 posts. Do me next! What do I represent?

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

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

[WillyT]

34. LOL !!! --- Me Too Uly, Me Too !!!

:yourock:

Ah, the anal retentive of the left. Not a pretty site, I think !!!

:evilgrin:

ooo... just saw the pun\misspelling. Would love to claim it intended, but can't.

:silly:

[PVnRT]

24. Exactly!

Everyone should just shut up and do what they're told to do.

[ulysses]

58. no one asked us, Doc, so why bother?

[Shanty Oilish]

21. Yes.

The site's for Democrats and the admins are under no obligation to air opposing views. It's disruptive on its face and endorses the withholding of one's vote from the Democratic candidate.

[goobergunch]

23. No.

This is Democratic Underground.

[southerngirlwriter]

25. yes, it should.

If less than 1 percent of Nader voters in just one freaking state had voted Dem, we wouldn't have 500+ dead soldiers, thousands of dead Iraqi civilians, 3 million+ lost jobs, and on and on and on and on....

anyone who wants to repeat what happened in 2000 and give whistle-ass another term should get the hell out of the DEMOCRATIC Underground.

[youngred]

30. yeah

and if 10,000 Long Beach Jews hadn't voted for Pat Buchanan
and if voter roles weren't illegally purged
and if Gore hadn't run a miserable campaign
and if The media hadn't given Bush pure fellatio coverage
and if they'd actually counted the votes
and if the Supreme Court hadn't been comprised of Republicans
and if Bush's Brother wasn't the governor of Florida
and if Gore had managed to win his own home state

Placing all the blame on Nader is ridiculous

[cosmicdot]

77. don't forget the Log Cabin Republicans - they were quite pleased

with their contribution to bringing on Shrub ...

just think if 1/2 of this vote knew then, what they know now, it might have helped

according to LCR's analysis:

Much of the post-election analysis of voting bloc trends has focused on the African American vote going heavily for Al Gore, and the narrowing of the "gender gap" between Gore and Bush. However, an analysis of the gay vote in the 2000 Presidential election reveals an interesting new layer to voting bloc trends, and demonstrates the value of George W. Bush's break with GOP practices of the past in his outreach to gay voters.

A summary of the data in this review:

--BUSH CAPTURED 25% OF THE GAY VOTE (1.1 Million Votes) NATIONWIDE, A RECORD NUMBER FOR A GOP PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE

http://www.logcabincolumbus.org/VOTE%20ANALYSIS.htm

[DuctapeFatwa]

26. No, because that person is doing the Democratic party a favor

He is saying, I want a choice. I came to you, and you offered me the status quo with extra hair mousse.

And this after taking me for granted, blowing me off, promising me Arpege and giving me a pat on the head and a sneer.

He is saying you disenfranchised me, you trivialized me, you demonized me.

When I said I'm sick and need a doctor, you told me to use some of my many piles of cash and you'd give me a tax credit.

When I said I work 3 jobs and can't afford rent you said, how bout another dollar fifty an hour.

When I said stop killing those kids in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and yes, in Palestine, you called me an anti-American, a terrorist, and then you signed away my civil rights, my constitution.

When I said I'm homeless you said don't worry, we'll give your city money for extra police so they can lock you up.

When I said there are millions of poor people like me, you said, oh yeah, I know, that's why I'm lowering capital gains taxes.

That person is reminding you that the US is not supposed to be a one party system, not even one disguised as a two party system, that the only people who benefit from the status quo are a fraction of a fraction of those who vote, and most people DON'T vote because there is seldom a real choice.

The person who says I will vote for Nader is empowering you to give him a choice. He is trying to save the Democratic party before it destroys itself.

[mot78]

31. "save the party before it destroys itself"

If we don't stop * he the party WILL be detroyed.

[DuctapeFatwa]

39. At the moment, the party isn't trying to stop him

It's trying to duplicate him.

Its' going after the people who like bush's policies, but don't like bush, and leaving the disillusioned majority to its own devices.

[snoochie]

100. Nice to see there are some clear thinkers around

:thumbsup:

[Mairead]

80. BRAVO DF!

:toast: :yourock:

[bicentennial_baby]

115. Bravo!!!

:toast:

[jazzsammich]

122. DF, you rock so hard.

Ye're givin' Arundhati Roy a run for her money with that post. ^_^

--jim k.

:bounce::headbang::bounce:

[Tinoire]

136. Whew. O have book-marked this one. That was damned to the point!

:thumbsup:

[JVS]

161. Someone get this guy a Cable access show!

:thumbsup:

[Walt Starr]

28. Yes, and let's ban everybody who doesn't immediately fall in line

and swear all fealty to Kerry and the Democratic Party.

Let's also ban anybody who says, "The vote is taken by secret ballot and I will keep my vote to myself, thankyouverymuch."

[HowdyDUit]

33. Who appointed you God of DU?

I'll vote for whomever supports the RIGHT of gays to marry and if that makes you want to get me banned then drive on.

[Maddy McCall]

41. The God of DU says this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=120&topic_id=13677#13678

And no one had to appoint him. This is HIS board, and he makes the rules.

[HowdyDUit]

54. progressiverealist is Skinner?

Color me dumbfounded.

[Maddy McCall]

108. No, but I would wager that Skinner is a progressive realist.

;-)

By the way, welcome to DU, Howdy! :toast:

[edzontar]

148. I guess some people just like to be bossy.

It all seems pathetically defensive and paranoid to me.

Since any number of sensible arguments can be levied against a Nader run, it seems to me to be silly to ban people from discussing it, or even advocating it......not that I have seen much of that yet, actually.

[DeepModem Mom]

35. From "Ask the Admins": guidelines for after the convention

SPECIAL GUIDELINES RELATING TO THE 2004 ELECTION

Perhaps the most critical question currently facing progressives is who should receive the Democratic nomination for president in 2004. In order to encourage a robust and thoughtful debate on this topic, we are instituting a few simple guidelines.

Negative attacks are an unavoidable part of any political campaign, and therefore they are permitted against any Democratic presidential candidate. However, once the Democratic party officially nominates its candidate for president, then the time for fighting is over and the negative attacks against candidates must stop. The administrators of this website do not wish for our message board to be used as a platform to attack and tear down the only progressive on the planet with any hope of defeating George W. Bush. Constructive criticism and even outright disappointment with the candidate may be expressed, but partisan negative attacks will not be welcome. If you wish to contribute to the defeat of the Democratic candidate for president, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website. As the election season draws closer, we may expand this rule to include Democratic candidates for other political offices.

Democratic Underground may not be used for political organizing activity by supporters of any political party other than the Democratic party. Supporters of certain other political parties may use Democratic Underground for limited partisan activities in political races where there is no Democratic party candidate.

[youngred]

45. However

those rules are not in effect yet and won't be until the Candidate is chosen.

Try again

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html

Read the who is welcome to post part.

[DeepModem Mom]

53. My subject line specifies AFTER the convention --

when, I assume, Democrats and other progressives will be welcome to post as always, but not in support of candidates other than the Democratic nominee, or parties other than the Democratic Party.


On edit, youngred:

It's unclear to me whether posts in support of candidates other than the Democratic candidate will be allowed, but attacks on the Democratic nominee apparently will not.

[youngred]

57. correct

which means Nader supporters are allowed here for now

[Slice]

37. No

I think they should be allowed to stay.

But it should get you laughed at.

[Paulie]

42. Yippe, another PURGE thread!

:puke: :puke: :puke:

Ralph Nader Oooga Bugga

If someone who gets less votes than Kucinich scares you, then perhaps you should rethink your canidate selection, nes pas?

[arwalden]

102. That Message Makes No Sense To Me

Why should someone "rethink" who they support because the find it alarming that someone else would vote for Nader? I don't follow that bit of logic.

-- Allen

[mitchum]

44. Yes, of course (unless he is the Democratic nominee)

[tobius]

47. This site can make the rules as they see fit, it is their bandwidth

that we are using.
My 2 cents for what it's worth- I would rather see debate as open and raw as possible, a site that has only people holding hands and patting each other on the back is waste of time.

[zoeyfong]

Right; the Democratic Party - Love it or Leave it! NOT.

[Democat]

49. Nader and Bush are working for Republican control for the next four years

Why should Freepers be banned but not Nader supporters?

This is Democratic Underground.

If you're trying to defeat the Democratic Party and working to help Bush, then why do you have a right to post here?

[zoeyfong]

64. So is Kerry and a lot of democratic voters.

If you want america to get out of iraq are you 'trying to defeat america?' Most of us complaining now are loyal, long-time democrats who would love to be enthusiasticly voting dem in nov. I would hope that most of us could agree that democratic rule is not an end in itself; it is merely a means to end, and right now it has seriously lost its way to that end.

[Democat]

88. You are not helping America get out of Iraq by supporting Bush!

What world do people live in where they think that helping Bush get elected will help get America out of Iraq or stop future wars?

Whatever bad things you think about Kerry, Ralph Nader will be helping the candidate who you know is worse than him.

If you support Nader, you are helping Bush. That means you are helping the guy who started the Iraq war. How hard is that to understand?

There are only two options. The Democrat or the Republican. Idealism will get you nothing but more dead Americans.

[NV1962]

51. Yes

You can always exercise your right to leave.

[LWolf]

52. No.

I didn't vote for him. I'm not voting for him. But if stating who I vote for gets me tombstoned, I don't want to be here anyway.

But since I am, I'll tout DEMOCRACY. As often as need be, or the mood takes me:

I can vote for whoever I want. I can discuss my vote. If that's not "democratic," then just what is? I support democracy. Which includes my right to vote my conscience even if you don't agree. It includes the right to discuss my choices. Even if you don't agree with them. I'M TOUTING DEMOCRACY HERE. I BELIEVE THERE IS STILL A PLACE FOR DEMOCRACY ON THE DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND.

I am not the left side of the republican coin, mirroring them in the attitude of exclusion.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

89. No

But I'd really rather persuade them not to.

[carpetbagger]

91. Yes or No, they should be called on their disloyalty.

Since 1994, we've been locked in a bitter battle for the future of this country. This is no time to put talking about a progressive future above acting to create a progressive future. Witholding your vote from the Democratic Party does two things: it leaves the GOP one less vote away from victory, and it drives our party to the right in search of the extra vote.

[ulysses]

94. disloyalty?

And a good evening to you, Senator McCarthy.

[carpetbagger]

139. Yeah, I meant that. Disloyalty.

Hang out at a place called Democratic Underground and then they vote against the democrat in an election that is about everything that most democrats stand for.

It's disloyal.

[AntiCoup2K4]

140. You certainly have the year right (1994), but you're missing the point....

The 94 election and the 2002 election, and the fact that the 2000 election was close enough to steal, came down to one thing....

A right wing corporatist faction of Republicans posing as "Democrats" began their plan to destroy this party gradually from the inside until the only difference between "Democrats" and "Republicans" is the name. They have come damn close to realizing that goal, and the systematic destruction of the most viable candidate in this race is proof of that.

John Kerry is a useless candidate against Bush, because he voted for the Bush Criminal Empire's agenda. There's no issue he can debate against Bush. I don't see his chances of winning as very good at all, nor do I see myself voting for a tool of these corporatist Puke Light saboteurs.

I have voted for the Democrat in every presidential election since 1984, even the ones I knew wouldn't win (i.e. Dukakis) but I can't vote for Kerry when win or lose it won't make a damn bit of difference, and Kerry's voting record under the BCE occupation proves that.

Does that mean I'll vote for Nader? I doubt it. But I couldn't honestly blame anybody who did make that choice, under the circumstances.

[formernaderite]

143. That's right 1994 was the pivotal signal that....

....replicating the republican party, which Clinton was doing via triangulation does NOT promote democratic candidates for office. The voting public thought, why vote for a pseudo-republican when you can vote for the real thing?

I'm afraid there will have to be some sort of moral/ethical upheaval within the democratic party. Otherwise we'll continue to see our candidates becoming marginalized, except perhaps in hardcore democratic states.

[snoochie]

93. No

I can't believe this.

[arwalden]

96. Abso FUCKING lutely. (It's Also Not "Wistful Progressive Underground")

...as a smart DU-er once said.

Anyone who brags about and encourages this type of behavior is effectively helping the criminal Bush to remain in office. Perhaps a warning or two would be a fair thing before outright banning someone.

-- Allen

[ulysses]

99. wow.

Guess you never know who your friends really are, huh?

Hey, let's see if we can get the rest of the gang in here...

[arwalden]

101. I'm Not The "Friend" Of Someone Who Advocates Action That Benefits Bush

-- Allen

[ulysses]

104. so, you have ongoing problems with the DLC?

Glad to know we at least share that.

Whatever, Allen. If it makes you feel pure to join in with the harpies swooping down on anyone who might even remotely consider exercising their democratic option to vote for their preferred candidate, then you be you.

[arwalden]

110. Pity You See It That Way, Ulysses

Of course you know I think you're wrong... and in your heart, I think you know your wrong too. (I have no clue what your comment about me having "ongonig problems with the DLC" is supposed to mean.)

-- Allen

[ulysses]

107. and anyway,

who among the DU left particularly strikes you as "wistful"?

[arwalden]

112. I Think You Already Know The Answer To That Question...

and "calling-out" is against DU rules... but you knew that already too. No, I'm not going to fall for that trap.

-- Allen

[DemBones DemBones]

111. Wow, I'm glad to see someone agrees with me!

I posted without reading even the headers on the replies and now I can't believe so many want to allow Naderites to post here. Nader is a disaster if he takes votes from the Dems this year. At least in 2000, people could say they didn't think Bush would be that bad. No excuse this time!

[The Magistrate]

125. There Is No Doubt, Ma'am

The overwhelming majority of forum members agree with you.

The wreckers are loud, and cry up their cause continually, because a form of self-hypnosis is involved, and if the chanted din they make should cease, there is a danger they will find their minds beginning again to work, and the promptings of common sense would make the idiocy they promote seem untenable even to them.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Meldread]

98. No.

It's been stated time and time again that this is a PROGRESSIVE message board and all PROGRESSIVES are welcomed here, that would include the Naderites.

People would really be hurting if the rule changed to "should the flaming of all progressive candidates be auto-bannable"? Seeing as how Nader *IS* a progressive, at least 1/3rd of this board would be banned.

I am sure the founders of this board are wishing they had called it ProgressiveUnderground instead of DemocraticUnderground. In all reality Nader isn't a threat to the Democratic Nominee. Although it will give Kerry a hard time because he can't take all of Bush's positions AND all of Naders at the same time. It ruins his campaigning tactics! :P (That is such a low blow. :P)

[LandOLincoln]

156. Nader IS NOT a progressive. Why is that so hard for some of you

to grasp?

[jonnyblitz]

106. hell no. n/t

[DemBones DemBones]

109. Absolutely! The rules say that you can't work against

the Democratic nominee, once we have a nominee. As close as that's getting now, I'd support a ban NOW on criticism of any of the Democratic candidates, and a ban on promoting Nader or any other third party candidate, and a ban on promoting write-ins.

I think we'd do well to stop discussing negatives about any Democrat now, or any alternatives to voting for the party nominee. None of those will help us win the general election and it's crucial that we win this year. If you don't see that, you must be in the wrong place.

This IS Democratic Underground, and in this context "Democratic" is intended to refer specifically to the party of that name, not to someone's idea of what the party should be.

[adadem]

119. You're absolutely correct

This is Democratic Underground not the Communist Party Underground or the Green Party Underground or the Independent Party Underground.

[BootinUp]

114. No, I believe it is important

that people left of center can discuss their differences in a place like this.

[corporatewhore]

116. oh yeah like my vote in texas is going to sway it for bush

:eyes:

[mdmc]

118. no only praising Bush should get you banned

I'm a democrat, but our party needs a :kick:

[Exgeneral]

121. I thought the purge was complete

and come to find out there's a whole new group to go after.

Purity is a marvellous environment for coincidence.

[The Magistrate]

123. Yes, Mr. Realist, Absolutely

It is interchangeable with a declaration of intent to vote Republican, in the current situation.

Those who make that declaration do so with the intent to inflame and disrupt, and in support of the enemy, and ought to be dealt with accordingly.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[BootinUp]

126. I must disagree, Sir (sorry)

Might I remind The Magistrate that this is a free country, and this is a website that allows progressive viewpoints not necessarily in perfect alignment with the democratic party. Even if I agree with your political views, I must allow others to express their views. This site allows Green party or Nader supporters to express their views without censure as long as they abide by the rules.

[The Magistrate]

128. You Are Free To Disagree, My Friend

It may well be to your credit that you do. But my view of this question will not alter.

Electioneering for Nader intends to harm the prospects of the Democratic Party candidate, and brings direct benefit to the criminals of the '00 Coup, making persons who carry it out interchangeable, as a matter of practical fact, with persons who are electioneering for Republicans.

Liberty is one thing, Sir, but turn-coating and false-flagging is quite another. Naderites are nothing but the left-wing auxiliary of the Republican Party, and need to be treated as such.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[edzontar]

135. Excuse me, but didn't you call people who supported Dean "traitors"

When he was still in the race?

I seem to recall that.

If people voting in primaries against your candidate are guilty of treason against the party in your eyes, I am not surprised that you are anxious to ban third party people.

[The Magistrate]

144. The Statement To Which You Refer, Sir

Was that Gov. Dean's use of distortions in attacks against Sen. Kerry was "reprehensible to the point of treason." The identical line of attack was used, simultaneously, in a widely noted Republican National Committee attack mailing over the Web. That statement seemed apt to me, and I stand by it. It became a focus of attack from some persons who chose to take it personally, and that is something beyond my control, but certainly persons who played up a line of attack the Republicans were already using against the figure who will certainly be the Democratic Party nominee for President, and one that is based on deliberate distortion, cannot be said to have been doing any other thing than attempting to injure the prospects of success for the Party's nominee in the fall.

Persons who conduct electioneering for Nader here are certainly acting, as a matter of practical fact, to further the interests of the Republican Party. This forum is not a place for persons to campaign to the benefit of the criminals of the '00 Coup, and it does not matter to me if persons who are bending their efforts to the assistance of the criminals of the '00 Coup proclaim themselves leftists, or acknowledge they are reactionaries. Their efforts here achieve only inflamation and disruption, as even a cursory glance at the forum tonight shows, and that is the intention behind their efforts here on this forum, just as their intention in the larger world is to harm the prospects of the Democratic Party nominee in the general election. It is my conviction they ought to take their resolve to harm the prospects of the nominee of the Democratic Party elsewhere. The decision is, of course, not mine, but Administrator Skinner's, and I will abide by whatever he decides.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[edzontar]

146. Well so much and worse was said about Dean here for months which also

Could have been used by the GOP--and was, in fact.

Meanwhile, would you join me in condemning the post that describes "Dancing on Nader's grave"?

See below for that piece of truly inflammatory rhetoric.

[The Magistrate]

151. Not Be Me, Sir

Remember that my prefered candidate was Gen. Clark, accused by vociferous supporters of Gov. dean of everything from war crimes to being a covert agent of the Republican; all accusations it ought not to be necessary to add, were utterly false and slanderous, yet raised in hue and cry time and time again. After that, it has been my lot to defend Sen Kerry against deliberate distortions and lies of similar character, largely emmanating from the same sources.

As for the thing you mention, it remains unread, but it would surprise to find it too dis-similar to my own feelings tonight.

Nader is a damnable and pernicious pig, who deserves nothing but the contempt of any who sincerely desire the defeat of the worst elements of reaction in our polity.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[BootinUp]

138. I must appeal

Mr. Magistrate, I am fervently in favor of unseating the Bush Administration. However, if we cannot win over the Naderites by explaining our positions clearly and honestly, and looking for common ground I feel we have lost the ability to govern this great country as much as the Bush Administration has done so.

[The Magistrate]

149. You Will Not Find Reason Of Much Use In This Matter, Sir

It is unfortunate, but it is so.

You will be opposing a position that is not grounded in reason, but in deliberate discard of reason; a position not grounded on fact, but on deliberate dis-regard of fact; a position taken not with an eye to finding common ground in compromise, but with an emotional rejection of the very concept of compromise at its core.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[IUBloomingtonLIBERAL]

124. I'm voting for Nader

if Kucinich isn't on the ballot.

[corporatewhore]

130. Myself i am voting for david cobb (green)

[Castilleja]

127. No

No

[JackRiddler]

129. No. You should think about

what kind of reaction will actually help the cause you want to promote.

Go on a mouth-frothing jeremiad against Anybody Who's Not ABB? (The usual reflex at DU.)

Or engage, defuse, work to convince?

The non-Democratic left is not your enemy.

But never mind, I already know which reaction is inevitable and I expect to be banned again, like last election - not for criticizing the Democratic candidates but for defending many of those who will inevitably get banned.

What will happen, actually, is that most people who are critical of The Candidate will know themselves what's coming and disappear.

Then you will be left in a self-reinforcing echo chamber and for some reason this actually helps The Candidate in the election.

QUESTION: Why not strive for a solution similar to GD and GD 2004? A forum where all progressives are still welcome to debate the actual merits of their cases?

[flowomo]

133. NO

enough with the gag rules.

[edzontar]

134. No. I do not support Nader, but think that discussion is better

Than censorship and banning people.

Count me out of the firing squad brigade.

[Old and In the Way]

137. Absolutely.

What's the difference between "I'm voting for Nader" or "I'm voting for Bush"? They are effectively one and the same.

Frankly, I'm bored with the silly anti-Democratic elitists on this board who demand that Democrats follow their choice or they'll take their marbles and leave. Leave already.

[ButterflyBlood]

141. yes.

n/t

[edzontar]

145. No, but I would say that people who post about "Dancing on his grave"

Should be tombstoned or at the very least should attract a little constructive criticism.

But here the post sits, in a thread about Nader filled with acrimony:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&...

Posted by tedoll78:

"And for the record, yes, I hate Nader. I will dance the happiest of dances when he rots in his grave."

And here is my response in that thread:

"This sort of language is unacceptable and inappropriate.

I am not planning to vote for Nader and would prefer that he not run.
But we live in a democracy--at least in theory--and the man has a right to run if he wants to.

Further, Mr. Nader was a student of my father's in the 1960s and I have met and spoken to him, especially after my father passed away, and he was a most gracious and decent individual.

To come to a supposedly progressive and enlightened site and read this sort of trash is really, truly shocking and disgusting.

You do a profound disservice to Sen. Kerry posting trash like this."

I would hope that all of my colleagues here, whatever their position on this issue, would agree that this sort of language is WAY over the line.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

147. Unnecessary. They can just be ignored. A tiny minority, no matter how

stridently self-righteous, just doesn't matter. And the percentage here is orders of magnitude greater than in the real world.

[mountainvue]

150. Yes.

This time it's a whole different ballgame.

[Endangered Specie]

152. Hows about a warining or limit to one thread... this is DEMOCRATIC U.

[John_H]

157. No. It should get you a free brain transplant.

[Piperay]

158. I agree nt

[w4rma]

159. Fine with me, either way. (n/t)

[La_Serpiente]

162. No

Just wait for the MTP interviews.

Take a chill pill :P

[MadHound]

163. Oh my heavens yes, let's ban them all right now!

God forbid we get the sheep stirred up, or put even one independent thought into their head! Lord knows then they won't be fit for the shearing they're about to receive, and their meat will become all tough an chewy.

Yes Yes, by all means, ban all who dare to question the authority of our great corporate shepard, and who dare to disturb his flock.

:eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes:

[Guava Jelly]

164. yes

these fairweather du'ers who wish to see bush reselected need to find a nice board of their own to support Bushs reselection Maybe free republic will welcome them

[moondust]

165. Okay by me. Let them post at a Nader site.

Consider them another brand of freeper.