Skip to main content

Daily Kos is one of the biggest political blogs for Democrats. As such, the opinions expressed here are diverse, ranging from pragmatic centrist to democratic socialist. Some people on both ends of that spectrum seem to think this place should be more monolithic, and get frustrated and leave or tell other people to leave when debates get heated. But I think the diversity of viewpoints is part of what makes it worth being here.

I'm here because I'm an idea guy, and I like to find ways to translate good ideas into action. Debating the ideas and approaches to politics is exactly what the left needs. We need to argue with each other -- hopefully in a civil manner -- and really think deeply about each others' views and the reasoning behind them.

It's easy to stop participating in discussions when people disagree with you. It's harder to stick around, keep articulating your ideas and trying to persuade others, listen, learn, and be open to letting them persuade you if their arguments are sound. In the long run, this kind of healthy debate is more rewarding than being in an echo chamber -- at least if the participants share some common values.

I think it's safe to say that just about everyone on the left believes that society should do more to help people who are disadvantaged or struggling. We agree that the government should promote the general welfare and ensure equal opportunity for all, rather than serving powerful special interests. Beyond that, however, there's not much consensus among "liberals" or "progressives" about what are the most important priorities and how best to achieve them. That's exactly why the far left and the center-left should keep talking. Maybe the exchange of ideas can help us figure some things out.

Despite its flaws and frustrations, Daily Kos is one of the best places currently available to do that. The ideas and approaches to political and social change discussed here range from the conventional (activists running for office), to the radical (protests at the White House), to the thoroughly unconventional (eco-friendly alternative currencies). I enjoy reading and having discussions on this site because the many intelligent bloggers and commenters here make me think. Sometimes they make me question some of my assumptions, and even occasionally change my mind about significant issues. Open expression of ideas and dialogue between people with different points of view is how both learning and persuasion happen.

Having said that, I do think the American left is becoming more internally divided -- and the growing animosity expressed on Daily Kos between the pragmatic and idealistic factions is evidence of that. If a social democrat such as Bernie Sanders decides to run for president against a centrist candidate such as Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary in 2016, this site will likely fracture so badly that the damage would be permanent. A large percentage of liberals in America are simply done with the mainstream establishment that controls the Democratic Party, and are ready for a radical economic populist movement that would be viewed with horror and disdain by many of the loyal supporters of Barack Obama and the Clintons. Sides will be taken, will harden, and will probably tear this community apart. The owner of Daily Kos will have to decide whether this place will become more of a home for establishment Democrats or a new liberal insurgency, based on the tone set by himself and his editorial team.

Until that time of reckoning, I hope Daily Kos will continue to be one of the biggest and most interesting places on the internet for Democrats to come together for learning, networking, and healthy debate about issues and strategies for progressive political change -- and for so much more.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  time for the big tent to explode (8+ / 0-)

    I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

    by jbou on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:07:43 PM PDT

    •  Doesn't have to. (7+ / 0-)

      As a staunch progressive, I'm excited about the idea of Bernie running just to broaden the public debate. I'd be very surprised if he beats Hillary in a primary and I don't think that he wants to run as a third party candidate and split the Dem vote.

      At the same time, if it looks like it would be at all close between Hillary and her GOP opponent, I would vote for Hillary in a heartbeat. We don't need a repeat of 2000. A flawed Democrat is far preferable to anything the GOP has to offer. Bush was a big enough disaster, I don't think this country would survive an increasingly radical and out of touch with reality GOP in the White House for even 4 years.

      You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.

      by MikePhoenix on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:39:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think so either. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MikePhoenix

        If HRC gets the nomination we must stand behind her, firmly and unequivocably. She is intelligent, she is capable, she is familiar with raw power, and above all, she is relatively sane. The same cannot be said for any of her prospective GOP opponents.

        I don't like Hillary. I think she's crooked and sleazy and largely bought by Wall Street and the MIC... but at the same time I think we would do far worse, by any Republican alternative.

        It's not a question of who we want to be our next president. That is not how American political machinery works. It runs mainly on raw power, influence, and money, not on popular opinion, nor even reasonable opinion. I don't like it, but that's the way it is. And the only peaceful way to change it, without upsetting our entire apple cart, is gradually, step by step.

        Evolution, not revolution. We don't need everything we want, all at once. As bad as things are, we should keep in mind that they could get worse, much worse, if we are not careful.

        •  IF she gets the nomination.. (5+ / 0-)

          At this point, we dont have to decide between Hillary and some Yet to Be Annointed Republican. Our job at the moment is to encourage as many Democrats as possible, who are sane and informed, to run. IF she wins the nomination, then the majority of Democrats will support her, because any Republican is bound to be enslaved to the Corporate Money Power. Hillary may be as well, but she has a conscience, and may be able to resist it at some crucial moments.

          There was a time period when Democrats felt that every race was... a race. Anyone who ran a good campaign could take the primaries and win the nomination, due to the McGovern reforms. Of course we ended up second guessing that process since Reagan won. That is because authoritarianism always has an advantage over democracy.. the decisions seem swift and sure. They are not, but they seem that way. Less commotion and less controversy, confusion and all that.

          And so.. I only partially agree. But I dont agree that she should just be "chosen" now. Let's have the process be a vigorous and lively one, and then we will know we have made the best choice. Maybe this year is NOT Hillary's year. Maybe things have moved dramatically leftward and a more Howard Dean or Russ Feingold or Bernie Sanders style Democrat is more in tune with the moment. Let us find out.

          Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

          by OregonOak on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 07:32:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm with you 100%. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MikePhoenix, Maverick80229
          •  Almost entirely correct (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MikePhoenix

            except for one key point. The Tea Parties have declared open war on the Wall Street Corporate Money Power, and the feeling is mutual. Even though the Tea Parties are mainly funded by other branches of Corporate Money Power that are apparently willing to crash Wall Street completely in pursuit of destruction of the government.

            This is not a two-sided fight, even though it plays out in a two-party system.

            Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

            by Mokurai on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 10:13:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes. The Corporate Money Power is NOT (0+ / 0-)

              a monolith. It appears to be at war with itself along two or three main fault lines, and this makes the game wide open for fluidity. One reason there are so MANY Corporate Money Power Democrats is that there are sections of it which have a Social Conscience, and seem to be less authoritarian than Wall Street and Pyramid Scheme Sectors of the CMP. (Can we coin a new phrase here? Corporate Money Power, or CMP)

              Democrats realize that to condemn the entire CMP is not helpful since a significant chunk of funding at this point comes from these less authoritarian sectors. They play ball with it, and this is Realpolitic for them.

              Both Dems and Reps must operate within a broad coalition, the differences between them being less than the differences within each coalition.

              Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

              by OregonOak on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 05:57:45 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Portents of doom for this site are unwarranted (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MikePhoenix

        because I seriously doubt Kos is foolish enough to muzzle free speech here. Things will probably heat up even more, as should be expected, but it's actually good and healthy, provided we maintain some modicum of civility and respect for each other. Since I'm a Jeffersonian in that I think people are basically good (and that goes double for liberals and progressives), I trust that we'll come out of this in one piece. Other than that, I thought this was a fairly decent diary.

        It appears people here who are critical of some aspects of the  Democratic Party and/or would support a more progressive candidate are often unjustly maligned as not being pragmatic, although I find little evidence to support that view. I don't see the crowning of a Democratic nominee at this embryonic stage as being pragmatic, and I think vociferous criticism of broken promises and betrayals of progressive ideals is a pragmatic way to affect the changes the vast majority of us here support. The high level of honest introspection is what separates us from--and what helps make us superior to--our opponents.

        •  most of us weren't here during the Obama-Hillary (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MikePhoenix

          wars.

          They didn't kill us.  

          Neither will the Hillary-Whoever wars.  (shrug)

          Pie fights are a constant feature of the left. The one thing we have always done best is fight with each other. It's a feature/bug that will never go away.  So get used to it.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 07:04:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not to mention all the other ongoing battles. (0+ / 0-)

            I see we are in agreement, then.

            As for getting "used to it," that's not much of an issue, having been around the block a time or two. Having discussions/debates with Dems is far better than with our counterparts.

            Although, I must say it seems things are a good bit more shrill and less civil here than my usual experience in exchanges with other Dems elsewhere. So, while I may be used to that kind of thing, I still think the discourse can be greatly improved, despite divergent views on strategies and issues, if enough of us here made the effort. I will continue trying to do my part towards that end.

            •  you've never seen faction-fighting until (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              AnnetteK

              you've been in a room full of Leninists.  ;)

              The only part that really disturbs me at DKos is the seemingly increasing tendency for so many of us to label anyone who disagrees with us (in whatever way) as a "troll" or a "paid shill" or a "corporate-agenda supporter" or an "NSA spy" or an "FBI infiltrator" or a "disruptor" or a "Republican" or a "plant". There is one particular diarist and his acolytes who are particularly apt to play that game (and he was recently called out for it by Kos himself), but it also happens in many other diary areas, everything from NSA diaries to GMO diaries to Hillary diaries to Fukushima diaries to I/P diaries to gun diaries to anti-vaxxer diaries.

              It is nothing more than an attempt to shut down debate and eliminate criticism by delegitimizing it without ever responding to it. It is no different whatever than the Goppers who yell "Socialist !!!!" at everything they disagree with.

              It is silly and stupid, it should not be tolerated by any person on any side of any issue, and I am very fucking sick and tired of seeing it. At best it is unsupported CT nuttery, at worst it is simply an attempt to squash opposition.

              It should be a bojo-able offense.

              If anyone here has evidence that anyone else here is a paid corporate Republican infiltrator for the NSA or whatever, then let's see it.  Otherwise, sit down and STFU. This isn't InfoWars. Leave the silly tinfoil-hat horse shit to the wingnuts--I don't mind if THEY look like mouth-foaming fools.

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 08:37:03 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  We all have our own bias (0+ / 0-)

                But being fairly new here lends me a somewhat unjaundiced eye. From what I've seen, there's enough blame to go around, but it seems to me some of the detractors of the critics are more often guilty of the rudest and most disruptive behavior, and appear the more likely ones to engage in disingenuous tactics. That's just my observations and perspective, though, so make of it what you will. I freely acknowledge there is much prior history here I haven't been exposed to, so there is that, too.

                I do agree that opposing sides need to avoid applying labels to each other. Applying them to politicians or the strategies, policies, or arguments is, I think, unavoidable, and thus shouldn't necessarily be discouraged. To do so would be too constrictive of free speech. But let's not make it personal among us. As I've said before, it's sometimes easy to forget we're all fighting for mostly the same things, but we need to keep that in mind when exploring our differences.

  •  You have to wonder about the increasing (14+ / 0-)

    animosity and recent reports that the government is engaging in trolling to disrupt groups.

    That said, the Will Rogers quote is still timely.

  •  dont think this site would fracture (7+ / 0-)

    we are progressives we dont give into blind emotion

  •  I'm glad you are here Eric. Your point of view (27+ / 0-)

    adds a lot to our community.

    I wish everyone would stay. It always makes me sad when people leave, or we attack one another.

    Maybe it's a spiritual thing, but I was brought up to believe we should save our rancor and hostility for the Republicans.

    "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

    by HoundDog on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:09:36 PM PDT

    •  Thanks HoundDog, you too. Let's all keep writing (19+ / 0-)

      and sharing ideas for activism and positive action, and channel most of our anger into fighting for what we believe in rather than the kind of empty pissing contests that so often erupt on political blogs.

      The most serious problem in American politics today is that people with wrong ideas are uncompromising, and people with good ideas are submissive and unwilling to fight. Change that, and we might have a real democracy again.

      by Eric Stetson on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:16:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I should have put a snark-humor tag on my comment (12+ / 0-)

        as my spiritual background does not actually encourage rancor and hostility to anyone -- I was just going for a cheap joke on the side. I hope it didn't distract from my agreement with your post.

        You know me well enough, to know I aspire to be Bob Johnson, Jr., but others may not. 9 years ago, or maybe 5 I wrote a really funny snark suggesting we make hidden comments visible to anyone in a special section that you could only get to going past a screen of a steaming pile of bullshit.  

        It was as serious proposal, because we were having so many people trying to prove their "worthiness" to become "trusted users" they were forming roaming vigilante gangs of troll busters.

        I ran it by Wee Mama first, who politely told me, "in the nicest possible way" I should wait until I had as many accumulated recs as Bob Johnson before trying humor here.  Like it was some kind of informal site rule, or at least advisory guideline.

        He had over 38,000, so it seemed impossible. But, I wanted to be a good member of the community, so I went to work accumulating recs. But, have been getting subversively snarky in comments to hold me over.

        Well, I finally got that many so I was getting a funny post ready, but thought I'd check, and that slippery rogue, Bob Johnson, now has over 80,000 accumulated recs!!!  

        I'll never catch up. Now I'm wondering if Bob and Wee Mama have some kind of racket going?   (humor alert!)

        "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

        by HoundDog on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:30:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  save it for the enemy (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      duhban, slowbutsure, VPofKarma, Eyesbright
      I wish everyone would stay. It always makes me sad when people leave, or we attack one another.

      Maybe it's a spiritual thing, but I was brought up to believe we should save our rancor and hostility for the Republicans.

      As they said during World War II, "Save it for the enemy!"

      That said, as I pointed out in my last comment on this diary:

      we Lefties have always been this way, and always will be. We have honest differences of opinion on how to obtain the fairer, more just, and more humane society that we know is possible and desirable. And we cuss, discuss, argue, and battle about these ideas. Out in public, in front of God, Ceiling Cat, and everybody.
      Perhaps some of us need to watch the rancor and hostility somewhat. But snark is a part of the process of "cussing and discussing" we Lefties will always engage in. Again -- at least in my humble opinion -- that, too, is as it should be.

      But this malice between those who should by rights be allies should indeed go by the wayside. Save it for the enemy, brothers and sisters!

      And that last sentence s NOT snark.

      "It's high time (and then some) that we put an end to the exceptionalistic nonsense floating around in our culture and face the fact that either the economy works for all, or it doesn't work AT all." -- Sean McCullough (DailyKos user thanatokephaloides)

      by thanatokephaloides on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:23:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  i agree with this (21+ / 0-)
    Having said that, I do think the American left is becoming more internally divided -- and the growing animosity expressed on Daily Kos between the pragmatic and idealistic factions is evidence of that. If a social democrat such as Bernie Sanders decides to run for president against a centrist candidate such as Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary in 2016, this site will likely fracture so badly that the damage would be permanent. A large percentage of liberals in America are simply done with the mainstream establishment that controls the Democratic Party, and are ready for a radical economic populist movement that would be viewed with horror and disdain by many of the loyal supporters of Barack Obama and the Clintons. Sides will be taken, will harden, and will probably tear this community apart. The owner of Daily Kos will have to decide whether this place will become more of a home for establishment Democrats or a new liberal insurgency, based on the tone set by himself and his editorial team.
    And I don't think many of the political analysts here -- I mean the enfranchised ones -- understand the depth of disgust long time Democrats are feeling.

    How can anyone grow up in post WWII America and think incrementalism is even sane?  We had most of what we needed to move forward by the end of the 60s.  We've been losing ground since then.

    Racism is not better; sexism is not better; classism is not better.  Marriage equality is a poor substitute for lack of movement on poverty and the above.

    racism looks different; sexism looks a little different; classism is probably worse; near poverty for the middle class is not forward movement.

    •  Incrementalism, whether necessary or not, is (6+ / 0-)

      certainly not sufficient without more efforts to

      take advantage of shocks

      like this year's Snowden shock, and this week's CIA-M.Udall-Feinstein aftershock.

      Similarly, non-electoral demonstrations, whether necessary or not, are not sufficient with more efforts to

      elect more Progressive Senators (like shock-seizing and-amplifying 2014 candidate Shenna Bellows), and Congresspeople, and candidates for local office.

    •  I don't understand this (10+ / 0-)
      Marriage equality is a poor substitute for lack of movement on poverty and the above.
      Why is it necessary to imply that its one or the other, or that marriage equality wasn't or isn't important relative to economic justice? The two are very different and its not a case of choosing one or the other. They're both equally important, especially to gay and lesbian people.

      Marriage equality isn't a poor substitute. Its an important civil right and achieving it isn't done at the expense of solving other important issues.

      I saw a similar comment to  yours a few days ago. I hope this isn't some sort of new meme thats being tossed about. It sounds to me like "We didn't accomplish improvements in the economy, because gay rights". That to me is very divisive.

      KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

      by fcvaguy on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:11:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That meme has been around a long time. (6+ / 0-)

        When I first joined Daily Kos, I remember LGBT activists being routinely told to "wait their turn". Even from front pagers.

        Pope Francis: the Thumb of Christ in the eyes of the Pharisees.

        by commonmass on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:15:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  One of the problems is that (3+ / 0-)

        it is genuinely difficult to talk about both at the same time and with equal focus. It is not just gay rights. This dichotomy pops up with all of the organized issues dealing with women, POC and LGBT. There are people who are economically comfortable who suffer unreasonable indignities because of bigotry. I am also inclined to feel that bigotry has extra economic impacts on the lives of people. It's complicated.

        •  Yes, but as the President once said, (6+ / 0-)

          it's possible to focus on multiple tasks at one time.

          Pope Francis: the Thumb of Christ in the eyes of the Pharisees.

          by commonmass on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:18:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I don't agree Richard (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          thanatokephaloides

          We don't say, "we can't afford to focus on civil rights because we don't have the money to do so, or because of the economy". Giving someone equal rights doesn't have anything to do with the economy.

          I think the argument that some want to make is that we've not made enough progress on the economy and economic justice, and poverty because we spent so much time on marriage equality, and civil rights, and Lily Ledbetter, or even healthcare. That to me isn't an argument that makes sense.

          Ironically, I believe advancing civil rights for all and even the time spent on healthcare provides economic benefit to all. Aren't people who have taken advantage of the ACA saving money?

          And, I'm not suggesting thats good enough. Obviously, the economy and specifically the widening income gap is the elephant in the room. But, I think we can talk about that and work on that without silencing or slowing progress on other fronts.

          KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

          by fcvaguy on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:36:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What exactly is it that I said in that comment (4+ / 0-)

            that you disagree with? I most definitely did not say we should choose one over the other. I said that it is difficult and complicated to keep them both in balance. Is it your opinion that it is easy and simple?

             

            •  You're right (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Richard Lyon, thanatokephaloides

              I thought I had misunderstood and had to go back and read your comment a few times. I still don't understand exactly what you're saying, but its clear that my interpretation was wrong.

              KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

              by fcvaguy on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:43:00 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'll try again because (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                fcvaguy, thanatokephaloides

                it is an issue that I am very concerned about and I don't have a simple answer. I am a gay man. I was a white southerner active in the black civil rights movement in the 60s. I have been involved with women's groups working on domestic violence and sexual assault. There are times when I am still shocked to find racism, sexism and homophobia lurking on the fringe of my thoughts. I would also describe myself as some form of generic socialist. I at times have difficulty putting all of those pieces together in a balanced equation.

                I have no doubt that Meg Whitman has to deal with sexism in her life that she should have to put up with. A poor lesbian of color with children to feed has to put up with sexism too along with racism and homophobia. The second person needs economic support along with support in the battle with bigotry. I want to focus on the problems of the second person. There is not a single simple tidy answer to all of her difficulties.

                There definitely are people who are trying to saw the baby in half, but I think there are others who find it difficult to talk about all at once.

      •  marriage equality and poverty (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fcvaguy
           Marriage equality is a poor substitute for lack of movement on poverty and the above.
        Why is it necessary to imply that its one or the other, or that marriage equality wasn't or isn't important relative to economic justice? The two are very different and its not a case of choosing one or the other. They're both equally important, especially to gay and lesbian people.
        I don't know about you, but that's exactly how I read that first message.

        The situation the first writer was complaining about can be epitomized by a newly-married same-sex couple who are now married, but may as well not have gone to the trouble as they still face employment discrimination as LGBTs.

        You're right, fcvaguy. We must accomplish both. NOW.

        "It's high time (and then some) that we put an end to the exceptionalistic nonsense floating around in our culture and face the fact that either the economy works for all, or it doesn't work AT all." -- Sean McCullough (DailyKos user thanatokephaloides)

        by thanatokephaloides on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:34:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  or, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          thanatokephaloides

          like saying gay marriage is a waste of time because instead of being two poor single people, you will be poor married people. Its a silly idea to conflate economic status with gay marriage. It serves only one purpose - divisiveness.

          KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

          by fcvaguy on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:38:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  just to clarify to all the posters above (6+ / 0-)

          i wasn't suggesting waiting: i was saying that touting progress on certain civil rights issues should not be a substitute for other issues.

          but it does seem to me that the 1% have cleverly deduced that it is okay to enfranchise some issues which do not touch the basic economic structure, thereby gaining support for continuing human rights abuses in other categories.

          and even the way my phrasing was parsed bothers me because there is no perfect way to write this stuff, especially in a blog.

          apparently Kos said something about putting human rights first was a white privilege issue.  i didn't read it.  i might not have it right.

          but the implication is that if a poster doesn't toe the line in some way, s/he is a racist, but i'm not even sure what that line is.

          and i'm not sure why a diary about realizing that the military is a killing machine that our children to into to kill other human beings is verboten.  i didn't read the threads in that diary, but i did think the diarist was making a good pacifist point.

          hmmmm

          are pacifists not welcome on a Democratic blog?

          None of these pixels are helping at all.  I don't want to aniot anyone president especially before s/he is running

          yellow fever kills people

          so does orange fever

          •  This is a perfect example (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            thanatokephaloides, Eyesbright

            of how difficult it is to talk about this and as you point out how easy that makes it for elites to use it for the purposes of political manipulation.

          •  That's not what the diarist was saying (0+ / 0-)

            And it sure as hell was not what I was specifically told in the diary. There is a difference between saying that the military is a killing machine and saying that soldiers are murderers. This is especially important because many people join the military because they see no other way out. Calling them murderers for that is incredibly offensive.

            Time is of no account with great thoughts, which are as fresh to-day as when they first passed through their authors' minds ages ago. - Samuel Smiles

            by moviemeister76 on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 01:56:19 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  And I still don't understand (0+ / 0-)

            Are you saying we should celebrate no progress at all?

            Time is of no account with great thoughts, which are as fresh to-day as when they first passed through their authors' minds ages ago. - Samuel Smiles

            by moviemeister76 on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 01:59:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, that sounds weird. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fcvaguy, thanatokephaloides

        ...Son, those Elephants always look out for themselves. If you happen to get a crumb or two from their policies, it's a complete coincidence. -Malharden's Dad

        by slowbutsure on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:40:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  i replied below in more detail (0+ / 0-)

        there is no suggestion of one or the other being more important

        this is how you are reading it.

        we didn't accomplish human rights across the board= economic rights are human right; civil right are human rights.

        It is all tied together.  just hittin on one major victory is not sufficient for the planet

    •  This... a bazillion recs if I could: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      YucatanMan, Maverick80229
      And I don't think many of the political analysts here -- I mean the enfranchised ones -- understand the depth of disgust long time Democrats are feeling.
      I haven't given up altogether, but I must say, that pretty much is how I feel.

      I'm a dem socialist, but work with and vote for dems. Have been registered as a dem for almost all my 42 voting years. I just re-registered as an indie.

      I want the dems to WORK to keep me. I want them to know that I left the disfunctional right-trending tribe for good reason.

      I will NEVER vote GOP or indie, but I might not vote for a dem for president, either.  I will pick who I support and go from there downward on the ticket.

      I've compromised for decades. Now I'm just pissed that, looking back, my best interests were often sold out by the dems, Bill Clinton, who I otherwise respect tremendously, included.

      There is just so far I can be pushed.

      I'm that far, now.

      The only hawk I like is the kind that has feathers.

      by cany on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 07:10:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  One of the underlying issues in this (22+ / 0-)

    is what divides the left from the center. I don't think that everybody in the Democratic party or everybody at Daily Kos is accurately characterized as being of the left. Sure, they are all to the left of the Tea Party. What does that word really mean?

    Politics in the 21st C is multi dimensional. There is the politics of personal identity and civil rights. There is economic and foreign policy. People's views and positions don't always or even often match up on the same political ruler. Part of the arguments that are going on here are a matter of people who think that one of these dimensions should trump all of the others.  

    •  Good point. This may be a big part of the problem. (13+ / 0-)

      The Democratic Party today tends to be a party of coalitions of various interest groups, rather than based on a systematic ideology. That has its pluses and minuses.

      I favor a stronger philosophical underpinning for political action based on an overall economic populist and humanist perspective. That puts me more in the "idealistic" camp. However, I also sometimes find myself sympathizing with the "pragmatic" camp because of their focus on trying to achieve specific goals. In many cases the philosophical left neglects to come up with and advocate for specific workable strategies to create the kind of positive change they believe in so strongly on an intellectual level. That's part of why I think we all need to keep talking and listening to each other.

      The most serious problem in American politics today is that people with wrong ideas are uncompromising, and people with good ideas are submissive and unwilling to fight. Change that, and we might have a real democracy again.

      by Eric Stetson on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:25:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That is what the Democratic Party (10+ / 0-)

        always has been. The party of the New Deal was an unwieldy monster composed of Jim Crow segregationists and northern socialist. It's reforms were piece meal and pragmatic. The McGovern debacle came about mainly because organized labor decided to take its ball and go home.

        Your pragmatic crowd often sound like their only goal is getting elected.  

        •  Holding electoral office does come with power (7+ / 0-)

          to try to change government policy. That's why many pragmatists are so focused on winning elections.

          As I said, I can sympathize with their point of view, but I think we need a strong underlying philosophy and a passionate commitment to making change based on a coherent worldview, or else winning elections only advances the careers of the officeholders. Power should only be sought as a means to an end, not an end in itself. Too many politicians (especially Democrats) seem to lose sight of the philosophical purpose for which they sought office in the first place.

          The most serious problem in American politics today is that people with wrong ideas are uncompromising, and people with good ideas are submissive and unwilling to fight. Change that, and we might have a real democracy again.

          by Eric Stetson on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:37:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Well, getting elected (3+ / 0-)

          is a first step, you know.  

          Otherwise you are left out in the cold howling.  

          It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by Radiowalla on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:08:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  And that was because of Environmentalism.. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Eric Stetson

          and Gender politics. Mainline Union guys with hardhats had almost nothing in common with the LGBT and Green parts of the Democratic Party. Events may have overtaken that schism now, since we have outsourced our manufacturing, largely, and LGBT people are known to everyone now. That schism is unlikely to re-appear.

          The schism which threatens the Democratic Party now is the Monied Interest Democrats, who see nothing inherantly evil with snuggling up to Corporate Money types, as long as they are socially liberal, but who do NOT see a role for taxation as a social good, and the Working Democrats, who cannot contribute much money or time or even turnout because of their diminished lives in this era, but who are suffering from a tax system which puts all the costs on them, and provides no benefits worth mentioning.

          The Working Democrats NEED The Corporate Money Democrats to help them.. badly. Very badly. The Corporate Money Democrats NEED the Working Democrats to help them with turnout, enthusiasm and labor. Numbers.

           There should be plenty of room for agreement, but Hillary serves the former and Sanders serves the latter. They NEED to get together and discuss a strategy for a campaign which emphasizes the symbiosis of both halves, sometime soon. Elizabeth Warren and Warren Buffett need to be involved. People who represent the best of both halves need to get involved now in talks to see if there is a shared strategy which will allow for a new Progressive Era.

          Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

          by OregonOak on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 07:43:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A seat at the table for the working class Dems (0+ / 0-)

            and anti-bank progressives would be a good start. As of right now, we are not being allowed any input into policymaking, and thus have no choice but to try to force our way in through aggressive primary challenges, e.g. what Sanders is contemplating.

            It is the responsibility of the establishment to offer a seat at the table of influence to populists, because the establishment has all the power. If they won't willingly give up some power and seek compromise with the economic left, then there literally is no other choice but to do battle between the factions.

            The most serious problem in American politics today is that people with wrong ideas are uncompromising, and people with good ideas are submissive and unwilling to fight. Change that, and we might have a real democracy again.

            by Eric Stetson on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 08:14:33 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It may not be their REsponsibility to offer a seat (0+ / 0-)

              but it surely is in their practical interest. In politics its best to see things as just practical, I think. Without the Working Democrats, the Corporate Democrats are just a sideline to the Republicans, only they are few in voting number, despite Bill Clinton's efforts. They NEED the Working Democrats on Board, Bought In, and Revved up and Ready to Go. Obama understood this as an ELECTORAL strategy, not as a GOVERNING strategy, until, perhaps, lately.  

              At this point, we have already established what they are, we are merely haggling over the price, to paraphrase Sir Winston in a response to a lady offered a million dollats to sleep with him. This is JUST a negotiation.

              Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

              by OregonOak on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 08:38:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Can Dkos be both a coalition & competition between (5+ / 0-)

        strivers for more Democrats, and

        strivers for better Democrats?

        A big problem with the Democratic Party coalition was highlighted by its establishment unveiling itself after Joe Lieberman's primary loss as

        •    less willing to hold their nose in one general election, than

        •    they had demanded DFHs do in thousands of general elections.

        •  The challenge is that in some cases those 2 goals (3+ / 0-)

          are incompatible. For example, sometimes the only way to get better Democrats is to unseat a safe incumbent in the primaries, which sometimes result in losing the seat in the general election.

          The Republicans have focused on trying to elect "better" (i.e. more conservative) politicians in recent years, and as a result have ended up with fewer. But I think they have more influence than ever before, despite having a few less seats, because most Republicans in office now know that they can never move to the left and must only move ever farther to the right, or else they will be removed by their own party's voters.

          The most serious problem in American politics today is that people with wrong ideas are uncompromising, and people with good ideas are submissive and unwilling to fight. Change that, and we might have a real democracy again.

          by Eric Stetson on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:04:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A portfolio of electoral tactics shd include IMHO, (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Eric Stetson, thanatokephaloides

            targeting of one Redder-Than-District incumbent in each cycle.

            At the possible cost of one seat per year, this should help incentivize a much larger number of Democrats to avoiding being selected as the one to be targeted.

          •  A very interesting observation (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Eric Stetson, thanatokephaloides

            I think that we could all agree that a Congressional super-majority composed of "better" Democrats would be the ideal. We almost have that in California right now. Almost. We have the super-majority, but not all of them are "better".

            But would it be better to be in the minority with all "better" Dems, or have a majority with a mix of Dems including a bunch of Joe Manchin/Joe Lieberman clones?

            Look at the Republicans now. As you state, they have more influence now because they are able to run the debate, at least in the media. They have common talking points (no matter how silly they are), stick to them, and run the debate. Taxes bad. Moochers are taking your money. Government regulations hurt business, Etc.

            Even though being in the minority means that you can't set the congressional agenda, or become committee heads, maybe running the public debate is more important.

            I don't have the answers here, just the questions. And of course there is the Supreme Court to consider.

            And also of course, we need to have a unified political philosophy to be able to capture the debate.

            "If you lose your sense of humor, it's just not funny anymore" Wavy Gravy

            by offgrid on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 06:04:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  It Means Hard Conservative, Just Not Rightwing. (8+ / 0-)

      The party supports mildly tweaked Reaganomics: free trade, deregulation, negligible anti trust, negligible media regs, order-of-magnitude outsized military, lukewarm 3rd world warfare, bank and other financial gambling at public risk, privatization of education and much of the commons, individual taxation allowing indefinite gains of the wealthy well beyond the growth of GDP.

      This is a rightwing agenda anywhere in civilization.

      Then we have citizenship for immigrants and marriage equality, progressive ideals supported by many conservatives around the world.

      Around 2/3 of the policy fighting within the Democratic Party is over the pace of winding down the middle class, which Democratic policy on individual taxation or trade alone are sufficient to ensure.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:59:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, there's also the uncomfortable fact (5+ / 0-)

        that the "middle class" as we know it, or knew it, was a result of being on a permanent war footing for over half a century. It's unsustainable. In a way, free trade agreements and all of that kind of stuff was a great folly. But we'll still argue about it.

        Back to what I said about the power of "left wing pressure": the President has refused to fast-track the Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement AND the Keystone Pipeline.

        Just like he moved his official policy on marriage equality back to his actual, personal opinion on marriage equality.

        It's because we spoke out, and didn't stop doing it.

        Pope Francis: the Thumb of Christ in the eyes of the Pharisees.

        by commonmass on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:13:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You put your finger on the biggest challenge: (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        thanatokephaloides, cany

        The perception that the Democratic Party is liberal to the same degree as the Republican Party is conservative. It's not. As you said,

        The party supports mildly tweaked Reaganomics: free trade, deregulation, negligible anti trust, negligible media regs, order-of-magnitude outsized military, lukewarm 3rd world warfare, bank and other financial gambling at public risk, privatization of education and much of the commons, individual taxation allowing indefinite gains of the wealthy well beyond the growth of GDP.

        This is a rightwing agenda anywhere in civilization.

        This is why it's so galling to see President Obama called a "socialist" by conservatives, when in fact he is center-left by current American standards and center-right by global standards.

        But the only way we can change this is to encourage more debate among Democrats. If the real democratic socialists and hard-core liberals decide to stop debating with the center-left, and give up hope of making political change, then the result will be to further entrench the centrism in the Democratic Party and make it even less hospitable to the very liberal.

        Ultra-conservatives succeeded in taking over the GOP. I still hold out hope that the very liberal could do something similar in the Democratic Party. But I have to admit, I have much less hope of that outcome than I did before the Obama presidency, because its main result has been to cause many liberals, especially young liberals to become so frustrated that they're losing interest in politics or even going libertarian. However, the recent comments by Sanders about possibly running for president has reinvigorated my hope somewhat.

        The most serious problem in American politics today is that people with wrong ideas are uncompromising, and people with good ideas are submissive and unwilling to fight. Change that, and we might have a real democracy again.

        by Eric Stetson on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:29:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  lefties (0+ / 0-)
      I don't think that everybody in the Democratic party or everybody at Daily Kos is accurately characterized as being of the left. Sure, they are all to the left of the Tea Party. What does that word really mean?
      You yourself made a good running start when you mentioned "to the left of the Tea Party".

      Basically, if you are of the persuasion that maintains that:

      we're better off doing certain things in common rather than for corporate profit;

      everyone has a right to a full and equal chance for success;

      we, as a nation, are better off spending our limited public moneys helping people over here than killing them over there;

      (etc.);

      then you are among the American Left, and need to come to some terms with the fact.

      "It's high time (and then some) that we put an end to the exceptionalistic nonsense floating around in our culture and face the fact that either the economy works for all, or it doesn't work AT all." -- Sean McCullough (DailyKos user thanatokephaloides)

      by thanatokephaloides on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 06:26:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I lived through the McGovern election (9+ / 0-)

    (I walked precincts for him) and through the Humphrey-Nixon-Anderson election.  The left was ready for change then, but hitched its wagon to candidates who had no nationwide appeal.

    We lost and lost badly.  

    I would like not to repeat that.   The Nixon, Reagan, Bush years were quite enough for me and I don't think we can survive another Republican administration.  So I plan to vote for the Democratic candidate whoever that may be and continue working on the issues I care about.  

    It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

    by Radiowalla on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:19:14 PM PDT

  •  it might be interesting to add a poll (9+ / 0-)

    asking people here who they'd vote for if the choice were between Bernie Sanders and HRC

    We're shocked by a naked nipple, but not by naked aggression.

    by Lepanto on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:19:37 PM PDT

  •  Agree 100% sir. (10+ / 0-)

    I've lurked here for years, but only recently started throwing my voice into the mix from time to time. I've been a spectator during several arguments of the kind you mentioned, and it always makes me a bit sad. The discussions that happen here are fascinating, drawing in people from vastly different expertise and walks of life. Emotions run high anywhere among the passionate, but I certainly hope this community can hold it together through these next few election cycles. This is an important venue for discussion and debate, and I think it will become ever more important for the left to convene and develop our ideas together. Tipped and rec'd.    

  •  You just beat me to it: I was about to write (17+ / 0-)

    the same diary.

    I describe myself as being in the Socialist wing of the Democratic Party. I am also a pragmatist. Why can't I criticize the President or other centrist Democratic politicians from within my own party?

    I participated in the Occupy movement. I like Elizabeth Warren and, while not technically a Democrat, Bernie Sanders. I also think the left wing of our party can deal with people like the President--who has actively asked the progressive/Socialist wing of the party to "pressure" him. Like the Tea Party pressures the GOP.

    I feel, very deeply, that we are on the verge of turning this country into a "second world" economy--if we haven't already. We're not going to turn that around by staying home at the polls. We're not going to do that by writing some of the nastiness I've seen here in the past days--written, by the way, by some people I not only respect but have actually met in person. We need to have a healthy debate.

    At the end of the day, a Democratic elected official is only as good as their base. We need to let Democrats know we expect them to be Democrats, not oligarch-lite.

    However, the debate and conversation is truly necessary. Working out solutions takes serious policy intercourse. If you can't stand the heat, as Harry Truman liked to say, get out of the kitchen. I like to cook. I can take the heat.

    Pope Francis: the Thumb of Christ in the eyes of the Pharisees.

    by commonmass on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:37:59 PM PDT

  •  We debate and we grow stronger (6+ / 0-)

    As I said before, if HRC is the nominee I will focus in local races but even that is part of the mission of this site, more and better Dems at ALL levels.  I am here because we can work together, after we debate.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:44:27 PM PDT

  •  very good diary; well done (11+ / 0-)

    On your hypothetical - if Bernie runs in the Dem primaries against Hillary, I see it as a good thing. Yes, there will be major pie fights here. But, it won't be/can't be any worse than what happened here in early 2008. It was pretty ugly between the HRC/Obama/Edwards contingents.

    The problem I have is that these pie fights get really nasty and personal. Many of us have been called conservadems, right-wing Democrats, Republicans who have migrated to DailyKOS because the GOP has become so crazy, and neo-liberals.  They can say that all they want, but its bullshit.

    As things stand RIGHT NOW, of the six candidates who have expressed interests, my preference would be in this order:

    1. O'Malley
    2. Schweitzer
    3. Sanders
    4. HRC
    5. Biden
    6. Dean

    I put the Governors at the top because I think executive experience is going to be important this time and O'Malley is the most electable AND the most liberal of the 3 governors on that list. Dean is at the bottom because he had his chance and blew it. Schweitzer is more of a libertarian Dem. And, I believe libertarianism is taking hold more now than ever.

    Sanders is a populist Social Democrat in the classic European tradition. He is definitely the most liberal of the crowd, but in 2016 he will be 75 years old. Biden will be 74. HRC will be 69, tying Ronald Reagan as the oldest president ever elected.

    Thats my simple logic 2 years before the first primaries. I'm sure as the final list develops, I'll be changing my mind a few times. Right now, I don't plan to support HRC.

    Thats where my head is it, yet I'm labeled a right wing extremist, neo-liberal.

    Some people are hell bent on creating these artificial divisions amongst like minded people. Its not about politics. Its about cliques and personalities.

    KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

    by fcvaguy on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 04:46:33 PM PDT

  •  We call the Republicans intractable (5+ / 0-)

    and yet we have people pulling the same crap here. If we can't debate issues important to us in a decent manner, then we have no call to get upset when the TP congressmen refuse to debate honestly.

    This topic comes up periodically. When will we ever learn? If you want a monolithic blog, start your own. If you want to elect more and better Dems, don't run off the people who work for that aim.

    •  Tell that to the folks that believe, actually, we (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MillieNeon

      should be run off or that the party should be monolithic.

      I sure don't need the lesson, but I think some others might.

      I depart for clearer waters, occasionally, but during elections I return because there ARE good minds here.

      But honestly, when someone tells me to leave because I have issues with a candidate, it sure doesn't do much for party cohesion.

      Discussion isn't a rant. Discussion is discussion.

      The only hawk I like is the kind that has feathers.

      by cany on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 07:31:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  It should fracture. Neoliberalism should not (3+ / 0-)

    be a plank in the Democratic party platform.  Its natural home is with the Republicans.

    Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

    by The Dead Man on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:02:32 PM PDT

  •  The Left always needs a healthy debate, Eric. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    commonmass, offgrid, Eyesbright
    Sides will be taken, will harden, and will probably tear this community apart. The owner of Daily Kos will have to decide whether this place will become more of a home for establishment Democrats or a new liberal insurgency, based on the tone set by himself and his editorial team.
    Actually, I do not see Markos and his staff as having to make such choice as that, ever.

    Why?

    Because we Lefties have always been this way, and always will be. We have honest differences of opinion on how to obtain the fairer, more just, and more humane society that we know is possible and desirable. And we cuss, discuss, argue, and battle about these ideas. Out in public, in front of God, Ceiling Cat, and everybody.

    And I'm quite certain Markos knows this. He's smart enough to know that this is the way the Left has always been, that it is the way it always will be, and that if Daily Kos shows us liberal types arguing hither and yon all about the site, it's doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing, and he will be quite happy to "let it ride", forever.

    Or, to state it just a touch more laconically, "if it works, don't fix it."

    And -- at least in the humble opinion of this leftist, Daily Kos works.

    It works quite well indeed.

    "It's high time (and then some) that we put an end to the exceptionalistic nonsense floating around in our culture and face the fact that either the economy works for all, or it doesn't work AT all." -- Sean McCullough (DailyKos user thanatokephaloides)

    by thanatokephaloides on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:11:16 PM PDT

    •  I'm starting to believe he really doesn't pay (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      thanatokephaloides

      much attention, as long as the clicks and the money keep rolling in.  Once upon a time he declared that Internet coalitions and activists would "storm the gates."

      Today, he tells us that HRC is the nominee in 2016 and just stuff it.  That's not someone who is paying much attention to the content of debate "on the left."  It sounds more like someone who knows where he bread is buttered.

      "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

      by YucatanMan on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 08:40:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Even unhealthy debate is hard to find elsewhere (4+ / 0-)

    so this site is a scarce resource.

    Ideally getting called every type of rightist, leftist and idiot on this site would

    •    thicken our skins,  

    •    add toughness and nuance to our arguments, and

    •    better enable us to persuade non-Kossacks, who have not self-selected to participate on a site advertised as seeking more and better Democrats.

    •  Oh no, I disagree completely. (0+ / 0-)

      When someone comes here and reads a diary telling them to "go away", it doesn't make thick skin (and really, is that some kind of benefit????) it makes someone just click away and find a less hostile environment.

      It's not about that and, imho, we shouldn't BE about that.

      The only hawk I like is the kind that has feathers.

      by cany on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 07:37:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I sincerely hope that Sanders is smart (3+ / 0-)

    enough not to repeat the mistakes of 1968. Having said that I am not sure how big of a 'fracture' there really is. What I think you are seeing is that a contingent of daily kos having long become accustomed to bullying to get their way are seeing a pretty big push back against said tactics. There's still a lot of healthy even civil disagreement but many many people here have had enough of the paranoid 'you are with us or against us' mentality. Never mind the not so subtle third partyism that is being justified based on crystal ball reading about a woman who has not even declared her intention to run much less won the primary.

    The fallout of all this will likely drive some people away. Some of them might even wear that on their sleeves like a badge of honour. However I have always though this subset is much much smaller than they would like to believe.

    Der Weg ist das Ziel

    by duhban on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 05:28:01 PM PDT

  •  DKos is a priceless resource for liberal politics, (5+ / 0-)

    surely we can all agree on that. Many participants here are, or have been firmly embedded within "the establishment" for one reason or another. There is a great deal of expertise available here, from folks who are or have been active participants in "the system" in one way or another. I find the input from them to be extremely valuable, and their opinions to be well worth considering.

    The fact that Markos keeps this site open to widely divergent sets of views is very much to his credit. The more extreme the arguments DKos is able to embrace, the more interesting and credible it will be. Those who insist upon excluding opposing viewpoints are, I think mistaken.

    The very architecture of DKos is its primary genius, rather than any specific political orientation. There is room here  both Big Al in Washington, as well as duhban from wherever, and they can yell at one another to their heart's content, and we can read all about it. I don't think this is a bad thing, I think it is a wonderful thing.

    The notion that DKos, as a whole, should present a unified force to augment and further the ambitions of the Democratic Party was, at one time, an important objective. Specifically during the reign of the Shrub. However, I think that the site has evolved, at least somewhat, beyond that.

  •  Compared to 2004? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thanatokephaloides

    Any debates which might erupt because of a contested primary for the Democratic Party Presidential nomination won't be any more intense or "fracturing" than those we saw during the run-up to the 2004 primaries and election.  Anybody who was on the DailyKos during the fall 2003 and early 2004 can easily recall just how heated the discussion became.  For the most part, those debates were not rechewed constantly once the candidate was selected and the campaign proper began.  Just how would this campaign be any different?  Why?

    "Love the Truth, defend the Truth, speak the Truth, and hear the Truth" - Jan Hus, d.1415 CE

    by PrahaPartizan on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 06:42:52 PM PDT

    •  2008 was no different. n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      thanatokephaloides
    •  I think internal division among Dems is worse now (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cany, YucatanMan

      than in 2004 or 2008. The reason is, many liberals feel betrayed by the presidency of Barack Obama. As a result, they are unwilling to support an "establishment" candidate who would continue his policies. I think a major revolt is brewing within the Democratic coalition, and that a lot of economic populists might refuse to support a Clintonian type of candidate if nominated; they might sit out the election or go third party. We can debate whether or not such actions would make any sense if it comes to that, but the possibility is more real in 2016 than in either 2004 or 2008. JMHO.

      The most serious problem in American politics today is that people with wrong ideas are uncompromising, and people with good ideas are submissive and unwilling to fight. Change that, and we might have a real democracy again.

      by Eric Stetson on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 07:01:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  However, I wasn't on DKos in 2004, so I don't know (0+ / 0-)

        how fractured this site got during that election. I was here in 2008 and saw some of the Obama vs. Hillary vs. Edwards arguments, but I was not a member of this site at that time, only a lurker.

        The most serious problem in American politics today is that people with wrong ideas are uncompromising, and people with good ideas are submissive and unwilling to fight. Change that, and we might have a real democracy again.

        by Eric Stetson on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 07:03:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Dean Versus Kerry (0+ / 0-)

          The debate got pretty hot during the late fall 2003 and winter 2004 period when the Dean and Kerry camps went at each other in full partsan roar.  As one might imagine, some bitterness was generated by the end of that contest, but it didn't go on for a long time.  With regard to the differences in tone, just remember that Dean v. Kerry was much different than Obama v. Clinton v. Edwards.  Most of the participants felt that Dean and Kerry differed in policy and personality much more than the differences between Obama and Clinton.  Despite that, the left wing of the party still engaged in 2008 and 2012 and the centrist wing didn't fold up its tents and go home either.

          "Love the Truth, defend the Truth, speak the Truth, and hear the Truth" - Jan Hus, d.1415 CE

          by PrahaPartizan on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 09:04:34 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  it's called (3+ / 0-)

    "freedom of expression" for a reason.

    If we don't embrace the concept,
    who will?

    •  amen (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jamess, Radiowalla, Be Skeptical
      it's called "freedom of expression" for a reason.

      If we don't embrace the concept, who will?

      And if not here, where? And if not now, when?
          -- Paraphrase of Rabbi Hillel

      "It's high time (and then some) that we put an end to the exceptionalistic nonsense floating around in our culture and face the fact that either the economy works for all, or it doesn't work AT all." -- Sean McCullough (DailyKos user thanatokephaloides)

      by thanatokephaloides on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 06:58:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  There's a word I'd like to put in this title... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Maverick80229

      I posted this in another diary today I'll post this here also.
       Before I speaketh I'll state I don't mind the debate Liberal vs not so liberal. Here's my point from my age, of 63 years, experience.
       Finesse
       I don't do diaries just yet but I wish someone would do two diaries:
       1st: HRC vs. the Democratic Party
        It's two fucking years away! If we keep memeing Invincible, Inevitable, the Independents let alone the repukes are going to vote THIS NOV. for repukes because the media meme as long as I can remember in my 63 years is "balance between the branches" as if there is anymore or WAS, to start with. Can everybody stop falling into the RW media talking points trap and STOP talking about HRC until AFTER NOV.?
      2nd: Is Obama an asset or liability for campaigning in THIS NOV.'s election?
       There is a finesse to winning. I've seen WAY too much losing by Democrats in my lifetime from not having the finesse to NOT fall into the repukes media defined Modus operandi of stenching mud.
       The getting caught in their RW talking points SPIN, is getting caught in the mud! FOUL that mud is!
       I'll add in the BIG meta going on right now, in the few years I've been on DKOS, sue/rue, whatever in the f that was and 11th dimensional chess seem to have went to some other dimension, maybe delusional. I'm joking... the name of the D :) I don't think things are as bad as they were. Just my opinion.
       I see an hr coming,  me oh my...

    March AGAINST monsatanOHagentorange 3/25/13 a time warp

    by 3rock on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 08:12:02 PM PDT

  •  I'm new here and I'm staying - an invitation (3+ / 0-)

    Hello all, I didn't bother reading most of the meta diaries, but something happened today that spurred me to take a different tack.

    I've grown at Daily Kos, as a writer, as a consumer of news, as a citizen willing to engage the pressing issues of my day. Although I've voted Dem, almost my whole life, I'm still very new to political activism. Through the generosity of Daily Kos writers and readers I've learned everything I know about html and much of what I know about political contests outside my home state of New York.

    I'm new here and I'm staying. Why? Because America is afraid and we can't go it alone...

    It's an invitation to join the experimental conversation called Firearms Law and Policy. We recently passed our 6 month milestone. Please feel free to drop by and say hi; let us know how we're doing.

    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

    by LilithGardener on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 08:15:53 PM PDT

  •  Why would you want to damp down the pie fights? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Maverick80229

    Many people consider them our best feature. ^_^ Besides, you can skip them. I mostly stick to the evidence-based Diaries, but not exclusively.

    I am personally looking forward to the coming Republican implosion, and the following fight between the Progressive and Corporatist wings of the Democrats. Because breaking off the rightmost two-thirds of the Overton Window will give us so much more scope to talk about reality, and even to do something about it.

    Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

    by Mokurai on Wed Mar 12, 2014 at 10:05:58 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site