Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

secretdj

(81 posts)
53. When did this rule come up?
Sat May 5, 2012, 12:44 AM
May 2012

Last edited Sat May 5, 2012, 04:27 PM - Edit history (1)

While it is Presidential campaign specific I think it resonates at a deeper level and not in a good way. Back in the dark days 10 years ago I remember DU being for the lonely few who thought Democrats should act like Democrats, not Republican Lite. I nearly got my ass kicked at local establishments in Wisconsin for saying I was a Dem, or that Fox News wasn't news. Meanwhile the state and local parties lined up behind those who could raise money and appeal to soccer moms. The Repub Lite approach led to a lot of losses 10 years ago. We on DU were the only ones with the balls to say we were Democrats when mealy mouthed candidates would never speak of big "D" Democrats, and often said they were independents while gaining local party endorsements. This lead a few local DUers, myself included, to take over the local Democratic party. Its been successful ever since.

But now it's Democrats uber alles and do what you're told? Wouldn't that make this site "Democratic Overground"? "Democrats Above Ground"? Or some other word play on "under"? I feel this approach leads to local and state parties also initiating the above "don't challenge our incumbent," policies as we back slide away from where the Democratic wave crested and broke in 2008. This approach would have added to the official state party chorus that thought it was bad to primary an incumbent Democratic Wisconsin State Senator in 2010. But without one important primary victory people would never have heard of the WI 14 or its young freshman Senator Chris Larson. Instead the conservative Democrat he defeated would have sat on his ass and given Gov. Walker everything he wanted last February, choking off the bargaining rights protest movement in its first week .

I know we must consider the practice of Republicans running sock-puppet accounts. Their goal is to sew seeds of discord not by arguing to vote for Romney or Paul, but instead unendingly advocating to not vote for Obama (or the Democrat in question), usually ending with a, "that'll teach the Dems to listen to us," statement.

I've seen the conservative memos outlining this very strategy. It is a real tactic. But it is a desperate tactic of a conservative party devoid of any ideas other than to suppress our ideas and our votes. These sock puppets are easy to spot by an experienced moderator, but banning these obvious plants sometimes leads to knee-jerk banning of all dissent. I'm sure some are questioning my loyalties with this post, being singled out because of my low post total and disagreement with other commentators. As a rule over the years I didn't post on DU if I was working on a campaign. And I was always working on a campaign. The few times I wasn't I only posted when I felt I had something substantial to add (I thought this qualified) and not just my opinion on every topic du jour. If old DU moderators on the Wisconsin boards hadn't stepped to my defense, because they knew me personally, I'm quite sure the ban hammer would have come down on me.

The question comes down to not one single candidate, but rather what kind of party do we want, and this forum as a reflection of that party; free and questioning, or monitored and sycophantic? The DU label always meant swimming against the tides of big money, a resistance to the party machine and comforted insiders when that machine began going against the party's platform and liberal/progressive values.

I say all this as someone who volunteered for and worked for the Kerry campaign in Iowa and Wisconsin starting in 2003, was a organizer of "Draft Obama" starting in 2006 (if you got a call from them there's a 75% chance I talked to you), and was at the Wisconsin capital during the working class uprising last year. I've worked for and won for Dems up and down the ticket and around the country. I do it because our ideals and our values, centered around equality, are stronger than bumper-sticker conservative talking points.

Support those ideals and values and within that framework foster ideas, especially those that are counter to the opinion you hold. That is how we advance causes, beyond what we think can win, and grow fuller movements that Democrats can act boldly on. Shutting down dissent without thought will lead to stagnation in any effort to advance forward.

Thank you for your attention. Obama 2012.

Did I mention I'm from Wisconsin?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Thank you Admins!!! Scuba May 2012 #1
Possible big Elephant in room. loggerboots May 2012 #78
Good. JNelson6563 May 2012 #2
+1 Number23 May 2012 #42
Could you tack this JustAnotherGen May 2012 #3
I second the request to pin this. dixiegrrrrl May 2012 #16
K & R Scurrilous May 2012 #4
thanks for this and I hope just hope all the members read the announcement forum maddezmom May 2012 #5
This is very fair and very reasonable n/t Prism May 2012 #6
Obamas gonna wipe the floor with Romney Skink May 2012 #7
I didn't think Bush would win. aquart May 2012 #20
+ 1000 nt abelenkpe May 2012 #26
At this point, there are much better ways to affect change than to throw your vote away corkhead May 2012 #8
K&R... SidDithers May 2012 #9
Ditto to that! Tarheel_Dem May 2012 #31
And this: RC May 2012 #36
And this:... SidDithers May 2012 #39
I don't have to worry. RC May 2012 #40
After what happened in the 2010 mid-terms... one_voice May 2012 #10
Fair enough. I don't see women doing well at all TBF May 2012 #11
can the TOS option in jury duty be more apparent? Whisp May 2012 #12
Amen, Skinner... It's hard enough dealing with them on other sites. This is our HOME. secondwind May 2012 #13
I don't believe Ron Paul has conceded yet Enrique May 2012 #14
Fuck Ron Paul ellisonz May 2012 #17
Nawww. I am so looking forward to the Republican convention. aquart May 2012 #22
I'd really prefer not to. Crunchy Frog May 2012 #25
+1 freshwest May 2012 #76
True abelenkpe May 2012 #29
For all we know, he conceded 25 times during Newt's televised pity party. gkhouston May 2012 #32
Don't just vote! Get out the vote! MineralMan May 2012 #15
Certainly anyone who comes here to advocate for Mitt Rmoney should be banned! Dawson Leery May 2012 #18
I doubt if they're even enthusiastically advocating Romney on THEIR sites! As someone posted, gateley May 2012 #41
Thank you for the clarification. AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #19
If your post Jakes Progress May 2012 #59
Some will demand loyalty oaths. AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #67
And some don't mind Jakes Progress May 2012 #71
I just hope legitimate policy criticisms aren't taken as suppressing the vote mmonk May 2012 #21
I think yesterday's spate of posts are a good test case frazzled May 2012 #24
LOL mmonk May 2012 #27
Thank you admins! FlaGatorJD May 2012 #23
I alerted on an OP where a poster said he was not voting for Obama proud2BlibKansan May 2012 #28
As of today, Friday FredStembottom May 2012 #33
Third Party Advocacy has ALWAYS been against TOS obamanut2012 May 2012 #38
Technically only if it threatens the electability of the Democrat. quakerboy May 2012 #55
You might want to check Skinner's comment here: JTFrog May 2012 #61
I would take that to mean that its not a time dependant rule quakerboy May 2012 #66
Clear violations of community standards or rules that are accepted by jury rhett o rick May 2012 #35
That juries left it alone doesn't reflect necessarily on what the rules require. NYC_SKP May 2012 #49
When did this rule come up? secretdj May 2012 #53
Pretty sure it has always been a rule. JTFrog May 2012 #63
Well said AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #68
K&R! classof56 May 2012 #30
...and those us who say: FredStembottom May 2012 #34
Let the season of banning of trolls begin! nt Javaman May 2012 #37
I will be voting for Democrats! kurtzapril4 May 2012 #43
i do not support obama... tomp May 2012 #44
If you feel that strongly, how about a vote to cancel out a Romney vote? dmr May 2012 #45
I live in New York tomp May 2012 #60
I honestly love this rule. Jamaal510 May 2012 #46
As I suspected. The system is working. joshcryer May 2012 #47
I endorse the above message usregimechange May 2012 #48
Thanks, Skinner! SunSeeker May 2012 #50
A refuge from all that slogging-through-crap is the way I see it, too. pacalo May 2012 #56
Great. Let's not support ANY Republican policies like cutting SS! grahamhgreen May 2012 #51
Whoa. Let's not go overboard. AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #69
I'd appreciate more guidance. snot May 2012 #52
Here's your answer Lil Missy May 2012 #54
I am not happy with alot of Obama's decisions and choice Suji to Seoul May 2012 #57
I'm still expecting big changes. BlueIris May 2012 #58
Post removed Post removed May 2012 #62
Skinner: Could you consider adding an additional exception? beyurslf May 2012 #64
Pauls has a primary opponent! proud2BlibKansan May 2012 #65
Really? Does her opponent have a website? beyurslf May 2012 #72
His name is Eric Bishop. He just announced this week. proud2BlibKansan May 2012 #73
I don't usually go to Demofest or anything. I know I should go, but it always seems to fall when I beyurslf May 2012 #74
Sometimes. proud2BlibKansan May 2012 #75
Good idea! AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #70
I agree with every word of that. UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #77
Latest Discussions»Help & Search»Announcements»According to the DU Terms...»Reply #53