OK, here's a question for all

[Sebastian Doyle]

From the DU rules....

"You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website."

This particular passage was quoted often on Tuesday evening when it was announced that Blanche WalMart "won" her primary, even though that "win" is in serious dispute. Let alone the actual politics of the candidate in question.

Yet if this rule means that Lincoln's candidacy is not to be questioned because she is now the "official" nominee, then would this not also apply to the winner of the South Carolina senate primary? And what of the Florida senate race? Is it permissible, under this rule, to openly support "former" Republican Charlie Crist, over the Democratic Candidate Meeks?

The DLC openly supported Joe Lieberdouche over the Democratic nominee Ned Lamont in the 2006 Senate race.

Does DU require support of the Democratic nominee, or only Democratic nominees who are approved by "the powers that be".

[villager]

1. Another good question might be how we define "work for" from "discuss..."

n/t

[Sebastian Doyle]

2. Well, I just saw a thread openly cheering on Charlie Crist.

I'd say that qualifies, for purposes of a discussion board.

[sandnsea]

6. PM me that link

I really want to see who is doing that. That's nuts.

[Sebastian Doyle]

9. Here it is.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4423182

26 recommendations too.

[sandnsea]

41. Well I'll be damned, 42 recs now

That's crazy. I alerted.

[Laelth]

73. What's crazy about that?

I recommended it too. Isn't it worth celebrating a veto of a heinous bill that attacks women's rights, even if the veto came from a Republican?

I think that is worth celebrating. This doesn't mean that I (or anyone else) supports the Republican Party. It means that we support a woman's right to choose.

That must be OK on this site, don't you think?

:dem:

-Laelth


Edit:Laelth--clarity.

[awoke_in_2003]

45. people responding...

may be advocating Crist over a dem, but the OP is getting recs because Crist vetoed a very bad bill. The veto should be celebrated.

[freddie mertz]

66. I think what is happening is that party lines are being blurred in some places, and in some races.

As the Repubs moved to the very very far right, a lot of liberal and moderate Republicans dropped out or at least changed their voting pattern more toward Dems and Independents, especially moderate Repubs like Arnold or Independent, former Repubs like Bloomberg, and now Frist.

Specter is another product of this shift.

At the same time, the institutional Dem party has been moving away from the left and toward the "center," as we have seen with this presidency and much of the recent legislation out of WDC.

This has alienated traditional pro-labor and liberal Democrats (you the ones, who are always being told to "shut up" by certain White House "officials") in the process as well.

So it actually makes sense that 1. Some Dems would be moved to oppose and declare a non-vote for Blanche Lincoln and 2. some Dems would be moved to vote for the very moderate, Obama-friendly Charlie Crist.

Maybe we should stop the hand-wringing and name-calling for a while and try to discuss, in the most civil and accommodating terms, what is happening out there, as if we were ADULTS endowed with the ability to think critically and consider other people's opinions.

[Greyhound]

3. Hmmm...

IBTL

[TheKentuckian]

4. Anybody that might for an example demand my loyalty to some crappy blue dog

or even a rank and file Democrat over Bernie can go sit and spin but that exact attitude is growing. Anybody stupid enough to vote for an Evan Bayh over a Bernie Sanders doesn't deserve to call themselves a Democrat much less have the audacity to bark orders to real ones.

[sandnsea]

7. Now that would be a true DU dilemma

And I wish every electionn had such choices, with Republicans running for cover.

[sandnsea]

5. Hmm, let's see

DU supported Ned Lamont in the 2006 senate race

The SC Senate candidate, Greene, will be supported against whoever the Republican is, if it comes to that. His legal troubles may cause him to quit.

Meeks should be supported over Crist. I don't know why anybody would be saying anything different.

There's no double standard. Blanche Lincoln is the Arkansas candidate. You don't have to say a positive word about her, or give her money, or anything else. All you have to do, AT DU, is stfu about that particular race. Why is that so damn hard to understand??

[FiveGoodMen]

14. "stfu about that particular race. Why is that so damn hard to understand??"

Yes, we all came to this site so that we could take our concern for the future of our nation and stfu.

[sandnsea]

43. If you can't support the Democratic candidate, yes, stfu

I can't believe anybody is supporting Crist over Meeks, for instance. What the hell. Do what you want in your own time, but this is supposed to be a site FOR Democrats, with a BIG D.

[EarlG]

8. DU supported Ned Lamont in 2006

And will support Blanche Lincoln, Joe Sestak, Kendrick Meek, and all other Democratic nominees in 2010.

It is not permitted to use DU to support Charlie Crist over Kendrick Meek. As for Alvin Greene, well, the rules don't force people to post support for candidates. The rules just prevent people from advocating against candidates. So as long as you're not going around posting "Jim DeMint 2010" I don't think there will be a problem.

[cliffordu]

10. How about:

"Jim DeMint for parole violation, 2015"???

Sorry...can't help myself....

[Sebastian Doyle]

12. I could support that campaign

:evilgrin:

[Sebastian Doyle]

11. Thanks for the clarification, EarlG

Might want to check this out....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4423182

Definite Crist advocacy going on here.

[monmouth]

31. Since I am conviced Meek is a loser, in more ways than one, I guess

my vote for Charlie will be my sign-off to DU...

[freddie mertz]

67. That is the dilemma. If a Dem candidate is almost certain to lose.

But a relatively decent independent is running who could easily win... and the alternative is a raving Repub nut-job, what is a voter supposed to do?

Divide the vote and help the Repuke teabagger win the race?

I totally sympathize with your dilemma, and would think (and expect) that this ethical and moral dilemma would be something grown people could talk about without hurting anyone.

[KonaKane]

13. From what I have seen lately, DU is becoming lax on enforcing its original mission

I'm seeing more and more attacks on Democrats, especially this president. I realize the value of self criticism, but it when it starts to stink of self sabotage, its time to step back and look at the big picture.

[caledesi]

26. Yes KK. "THEY" are trying to "dumb-down" DU! nt

[freddie mertz]

70. Yes, we keep hearing that over and over.

But there are reasons why the political situation has become a bit confused and gray around the edges.

I tried to write something sensible about it above.

I might suggest that you be a little more patient, since there will probably continue to be choppy seas out there.

[sinkingfeeling]

15. How in the world is Blanche Lincoln's win 'in serious dispute'?

[Sebastian Doyle]

16. Uh, maybe because it was blatantly STOLEN?

And the DLC criminal who was responisible has already resigned, which is an implied admission of guilt, as far as I'm concerned.

[Warren DeMontague]

18. I keep hearing this, too. I'm not challenging the assertion, but I'm curious where it's coming from.

can you post some Links to pertinent articles, data, etc?

Not all of us live down there, we aren't all up on the story.

[Sebastian Doyle]

20. Here ya go

http://bluearkansasblog.com

[Warren DeMontague]

23. Thank you!

:hi:

[Ignis]

62. Thanks for that link.

[sinkingfeeling]

29. The lawsuit about the number of polling places open for the run-off has been dropped.

http://www.wreg.com/news/sns-ap-ar--1stnewsminute,0,7244686.story

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — A lawsuit aimed at nullifying Tuesday's election results because of a limited number of polling sites in Garland County is being dropped. A lawyer for three voters who filed the suit says it's being withdrawn after the resignation of the county's election commission chairman.

[Sebastian Doyle]

33. Well that sucks.

I wonder which DLC official paid off the lawyer :evilfrown:

[freddie mertz]

71. Interesting that this man decided to "resign."

If this had been an election in, say, Iran, or Sudan, or some such, with international observers, I wonder what they would have said about it.

[sinkingfeeling]

24. You're barking up the wrong tree. Blanche won by 10,000 votes out of the 251,800 cast.

If every registered Democrat that voted for either Blanche or Bill in the primary (May 8), repeated their vote, it would have only gained Halter 479 votes. The problem was, as always, voter turnout. Only about 20% of registered voters did their thing in the run-off.

Forgot the link: http://www.votenaturally.org/electionresults/index.php?ac:show:contest_statewide=1&elecid=221&contestid=4

[Sebastian Doyle]

27. What's the population of Garland County?

More than 10,000?

[sinkingfeeling]

34. Yes, including all those Repubs. There were only 12,258 Democrats voted there in May and 7,286 in

the June Run-off.

http://www.votenaturally.org/electionresults/index.php?ac:show:contest_countywide=1&elecid=211&countyid=26&contestid=3

************************************************
May 18th. Primary
Results for all contests in Garland County
Outstanding Overseas Ballots: 0
Last Update: Wed May 26th, 2010 3:49 PM

U.S. Senate - Democrat - Uncertified Track


Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter (Democrat) 5,425 44.26%
U.S. Senator Blanche Lambert Lincoln (Democrat) 4,951 40.39%
DC Morrison (Democrat) 1,882 15.35%


************************************************
http://www.votenaturally.org/electionresults/index.php?ac:show:contest_countywide=1&elecid=221&countyid=26&contestid=4

June 8 Run-Off
2010 General Primary (Runoff) Election
Results for all contests in Garland County


Outstanding Overseas Ballots: 0
Last Update: N/A

U.S. Senate - Uncertified Track


Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter (Democrat) 3,620 49.68%
U.S. Senator Blanche Lambert Lincoln (Democrat) 3,666 50.32%

[Sebastian Doyle]

38. So if 12,258 Democrats had only 2 polling places to vote in, instead of 40

How many of them do you suppose would actually be able to vote? ;)

[sinkingfeeling]

39. Apparently all of them since that's the election results. There were no reports of

people being turned away from the polling places. Just 59% of those who voted in May, returned to vote in June.

[glitch]

35. 88,000 total population

http://www.google.com/search?q=Population+of+Garland+County+Arkansas

44.93% of the people in Garland County, AR are registered as Democrats. 54.13% are registered Republican
(assuming adults)
http://www.bestplaces.net/county/Garland-Arkansas.aspx

[sinkingfeeling]

36. So. Only a grant total of 18,444 of them voted in either the D or R primary in May .

[glitch]

37. What you mean is a grand total of 18,444 votes were counted in either the D or R primary in May.

Which may or may not be relevant to this election.

[sinkingfeeling]

40. OK, then let it be known that only 7,286 Democrats in Garland County voted in the run-off.

[Sebastian Doyle]

42. So does that mean that at least 4,972 Democrats in Garland County were unable to vote in the run-off

because DLC criminal Charles Tapp wouldn't allow the polling places to open?

[yella_dawg]

17. General Election

The issue is a primary. Two dems. Gotta root against one of em.

[Sebastian Doyle]

19. The issue is NOT a primary.

And Crist is not a Democrat.

[Blue-Jay]

22. I believe EarlG addressed your concern.

If the issue is the upcoming Florida election (Meeks-Rubio-Crist), you should alert on any threads that suggest Crist is a better choice than Meeks.

That doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to say something nice about Crist, mind you. Hell, I applauded his veto of the recent abortion bill.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[Sebastian Doyle]

32. Going by your signature, I see you have some serious issues

Reading comprehension is one of them. Self hatred may be another.

[starroute]

21. This is not the attitude towards the Democratic Party I was raised with

I come out of a background that was about as fanatically pro-New Deal, Roosevelt-worshipping Democratic as could be imagined.

But the belief I learned at my parents' knees was that being a real Democrat meant working overtime to improve the Democratic Party -- generally by supporting good Democrats and actively opposing bad ones.

My father belonged to a Reform Democratic Club in Manhattan whose purpose was to bring down the Tammany Hall machine -- and they succeeded. That is still my ideal of what politics ought to be about.

For me, merely supporting the current set of Democratic candidates marks you out as a fair-weather, go-to-church-on-Sunday Democrat -- somebody who'll go out there on Election Day to pull the lever but doesn't much think about it otherwise.

Being a *real* Democrat means getting hands-on, taking an active role in holding the party to a higher standard, supporting third party candidates when they say the things that real Democrats ought to be saying but aren't -- and trusting that all this will result in better and truer Democrats the next time round.

That is a full-time commitment, and not one that ends when the primary results come in.

I'm not sure I can get behind any nominally Democratic site that isn't taking that sort of role. I thought the "Underground" part of "Democratic Underground" meant just that -- but apparently it doesn't. Frankly, I'm not willing to settle for a lot of the sell-out, pro-corporate Dems we're saddled with now -- and it DU isn't the place to work on changing that, I'd love to know of an alternative.

[Blue-Jay]

28. DU has never allowed anyone to advocate a third-party candidate over a Democrat.

That's the way it has always been.

You're free to campaign and vote for whoever you want. Nobody has a problem with that. Just don't do it on DU. Them's the rules.

[liberal_at_heart]

55. Then this board does not advocate true democracy.

[Blue-Jay]

58. OK.

The fact remains that the DU rules have not changed.

[liberal_at_heart]

59. okay. That still won't stop those of us who do support true democracy.

[Blue-Jay]

60. Stop you from doing what?

[sandnsea]

44. If you've been here since 2001

you ought to know the rules by now.

[starroute]

46. The issue has never come up the same way

As long as it was about getting back control of Congress from the Republicans, things were pretty simple. But now we've got the majorities -- and we're still being frustrated by the Blue Dogs and corporatists.

That raises an issue that was never there before. Basically, it's a matter of "I want my party back."

And if that issue, and the tactics to deal with it, can't be discussed at DU, then DU is very quickly going to become a fossilized relic of 2001-08, with less and less current relevance.

Once again -- if you get to support anyone you like in the primary but have to close ranks behind the winner once the primary is over, then you've handicapped yourself from the start if your objective is to take back the party.

I'd like to see someone address that question rather than telling me I ought to know the rules by now.

[sandnsea]

48. You can argue policies and platforms

without opposing individuals.

And your question has been addressed every month since I got here in 2003, and probably since you got here.

You don't work for the defeat of a Democratic candidate AT THIS SITE. It's a really simple rule.

[Laelth]

74. Hear, hear! Well said, and I concur.

Being a good Democrat often means that you have to fight bad Democrats.

That is not meant to imply that I endorse Crist, only that I would like to be allowed, here, to challenge Democrats who are failing their constituents.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Strelnikov_]

25. ,,

[liberal_at_heart]

47. My loyalties do not lie with the Democratic party. My loyalties lie with progressive ideas.

If some people on this board don't like that they don't have to read my posts, but I won't shut up just because they want me to.

[Dinger]

49. +1,000,000,000

Me too:)

[sandnsea]

50. Ideas don't run for office

People do. At this site, you can't promote the people who would defeat a Democrat. Very different than promoting progressive ideas.

[liberal_at_heart]

51. Well I guess that means I can say I support single payer healthcare

And I won't vote for any politician that won't support it.

[sandnsea]

52. People say that every day

But if you're referring to a specific candidate who is in a current campaign, then much further than what you wrote would be against the rules.

And as I said elsewhere, have you looked at Boozman??

[liberal_at_heart]

54. I haven't heard of Boozman. Is he/she progressive?

I do support progressives but they have to be willing to fight for progressive ideas. The problem I have with most democrats is that they compromise too much with republcians or they take money from lobbyists and then make policy based on what the corporations want them to do.

[sandnsea]

56. Boozman is running against Blanche Lincoln

She looks like the worst thing since George Bush... until you look at this guy..

http://www.boozmanforarkansas.com/

And that's where we're at in some of these elections. It's reality.

It's bad enough around here during presidential primary season. If we had that 24/7, this board would dissolve in a month.

[liberal_at_heart]

61. Well I don't live in Arkansas so I won't be voting in that election

But I can tell you that I will only be voting for progressive democrats in my local elections and on the national level also. I will not vote for democrats that are not progressive.

[sandnsea]

64. Then the rule is

When you come to DU, you advocate for the progressive Democrats that you plan to vote for and shut up about the campaigns that you have a problem with. Regardless of how bad some of these other Democrats are, the list of Republicans up for election make Commander Cuckoobananas look like Eisenhower.

[treestar]

69. In my estimation you can say you header

But are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth to say the content if it means you are voting against a Democrat.

[Sebastian Doyle]

53. The people who have done more to defeat Democrats than anyone else

...are known as the DLC. :evilfrown:

[sandnsea]

63. Since the discussion is differening political views

Could you please explain to me why you say someone who supports regulated capitalism and fair trade, can't be a Democrat? If they're good on civil rights, environment, women's rights, education, children, health care, but just don't believe in a socialist economic system -- why are their views less valid than yours?

Or maybe they believe in a highly regulated economy, free education and health care, but also think there's been enough affirmative action. Not a Democrat?

Why do people on the left call themselves the true liberals, when they would like to purge as many people out of society as teabaggers would.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

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

[Blue-Jay]

65. 2/10

It could have worked, had it not been so obvious.

Here's a question: Why did you recently sign up for DU when you already knew that DU was not "liberal" enough for you?

Amateur.

[treestar]

68. The Democratic nominee

You certainly cannot shill for the Republican. It does not matter what the DLC does, DU has its own rules.

That's pretty clear.

[Laelth]

72. That's a very good question, and there is no good answer.

This rule has always been interpreted very loosely and, from what I can tell, this site still hasn't decided whether it wants to be Democratic underground (with a capital D) or democratic underground (with a small d).

If this issue ever comes to a head, I hope the site's owners choose the small d option, but my opinion on that subject doesn't really count.

:dem:

-Laelth