The notion that there are "2 wings within the Democratic Party", as someone posted, is dangerous.

[Garrett78]

And it plays into Republican hands. It used to be that people would talk about how the Democratic Party is a big tent. It always went without saying that some platforms or campaign strategies play better in some districts/states than others.

But now I'm seeing more and more people highlight this notion that there are 2 distinct wings within our party. By some of the same people who, rightfully, bash 3rd party voting. They don't seem to realize that the dichotomous rhetoric risks driving people, particularly young people, toward the very thing they abhor. It's that very rhetoric that feeds into an existing narrative that there's "corporate" Dems and "progressive" Dems (never the twain shall meet; no gray area whatsoever).

As frustrated as I am with Bernie Sanders (primarily for his dismissal of the role racism played in Trump's rise, and for contributing to the misunderstanding of the relationship between social justice and economic justice) and (to a greater extent) many of his divisive celebrity supporters, the knee-jerk reaction to all things Sanders or "progressive" is not healthy. Again, it promotes the same kind of divisiveness for which Sanders is criticized.

The Democratic Party should engage in critical self-reflection, but not dichotomous rhetoric. That may be a tricky balancing act, but it's necessary. The Republican Party (in spite of being a batshit crazy institution) has the White House, the US Senate, the US House, a clear majority of state legislatures and a clear majority of governorships.

Race-based gerrymandering and race-based voter suppression are two big reasons why. But has the Democratic Party been as vocal as it should be about those issues, or has it fallen victim to the bashing of identity politics (by Republicans but also the likes of George Lakoff and Sam Harris)?

The media is also complicit (with its false equivalencies and habit of suggesting there are no facts or falsehoods, only opinions). But has the Democratic Party been vocal enough about that, or has it been continually on the defensive for the last several decades as the Republican Party successfully/strategically bashes the "liberal media?"

Has there been over the years too much emphasis placed on converting Reagan Democrats or Trump supporters, and not enough on inspiring the base (while taking persons of color for granted)?

Are such questions off limits on this "underground" site?

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. THere arent, there is the D party and then there is a bunch who support someone

who like to take shots at the D party all day long, usually offering NO workable solutions.

[Garrett78]

2. I agree that there aren't. The rhetoric suggesting that there are 2 distinct wings is not helpful.

[kentuck]

3. Bernie and his type of politics ...

...have a lot of supporters on DU. Are they not part of the Democratic Party?

[Garrett78]

5. Of course they are. That's my point. It's a big tent party, not a dichotomous party.

But there's been a massive amount of rhetoric that suggests otherwise, which is anything but helpful. As I wrote, it risks driving people (especially young people) toward the very thing many of us rightfully abhor (i.e., apathy or 3rd party voting).

[kentuck]

7. If we're not a big tent Party...

...then we will be a Party with no tent.

[Garrett78]

9. Or a much smaller tent at least, as more and more people are pushed out.

[NCTraveler]

10. If Democrats feel they are being pushed out,...

As we are running under one of the most progressive party platforms in history, isn’t that on them?

Considering the platform Clinton ran on, and the current party platform, I think it would be the center feeling pushed out.

You are telling me that as the party is moving left that it is the people on the left feeling pushed out? Makes me think they weren’t honest brokers to start.

It is one party. People will come and go.

[Garrett78]

11. I'm saying the dichotomous rhetoric feeds into a dangerous/counter-productive narrative.

There aren't 2 distinct camps: progressive and anti-progressive or leftist and moderate. Yet so much of the rhetoric suggests that there are, and that's not the least bit productive. It will bite us in the ass.

Anyway, I wish there was more discussion about the questions I pose at the end of the OP. Perhaps those questions should constitute a separate thread.

[crazycatlady]

12. Unfortunately there are a lot of organizations that support the latter

And they were once organizations that (sometimes) offered or endorsed 'establishment' candidates.

[Civic Justice]

4. There is not two wings, but....

There is such things a Right Leaning Democrats, Middle of the Road Democrats and Left leaning Democrats. in that mix, its still all Democrat but it does not mean they all personally support all the policies, but as we see, whether they support or do not support various policies, they will vote Democrat for the sake of Party.

Geez... people need to become honest about what actually does exist, therefore we need to understand the expanse of our makeup as a party.

Republican have Right Leaning Republican, they have Middle of the Road Republicans and they have Left Leaning Republicans.
in that mix, its still all republican's but it does not mean they all personally support all the policies, but as we see, whether they support or do not support various policies, they will vote Republican for the sake of Party.

People seem to be in this site, unable or unwilling to deal with subject matter that addresses the whole of things that exist in society, as if being Democrats not wanting to realize that some think different about certain things as individuals.. That does not mean they vote against the party, but as individuals.... some in this site is so sensitive as if they think we are some "angels"... when fact is... there is no perfection... there is just people... with a wide range of personal likes and dislikes, personal appeals and personal elements of biases and much else, and there certainly is the reality of race that play out in many ways still within a society that is only 50+ yrs from the era of segregation.

No questions should be made off limits because a few people get sensitive or pretend they don't understand the question, rather than simply answer the question, or skip it if it troubles them to answer it.

Being Real with what is Reality is what works.... Democrat or not....

Back in years earlier, all democrats were not like the Southern Democrats, that's why the distinction was made as to Blue Dog Democrats.... there were Western and upper Mid Western State Democrats that were nothing like the Southern Democrats of the past era.

Thank goodness many of the Blue Dog Democrats/ Southern Conservative Loving Democrats moved over to the Republican Party post 1969.... but that does not mean all of them did.


I work with a guy who told me his family has always been Democrats in the South, but when election time came, he was a staunch Trump supporter and he voted for Trump. He was put off by the term Deplorable and went into a long litany of things about why he thought Trump was his ideal choice. Yet, he still claimed he was a Democrat.
We have no idea how many people across America who made such choices during the election.

The more truth we deal with, the better chance we have of backing Democrats as which I just described, to help them vote Democrat.. That's why I always speak about the need for dialog, for sure in this site, but in society as well, and PROMOTE the Democratic Narrative, to ensure it become the talking points in society. Jokes and Pun's do nothing to promote talking points unto people as I just described.... jokes and pun's only play to people who don't need dialog. But if this site expects to grow its democratic populace, then it needs content them gives people information, talking about the challenging things in society, and seek to discuss the resolve about what the values of the party's value actually stand for and why they stand for what they stand for.

[Garrett78]

6. Even those groupings (right, middle, left) are not wholly distinct.

There's a human tendency (at least within our society) to engage in black-and-white or dichotomous thinking. And I've been seeing a lot of it on display within the Democratic Party.

To my other point, there's also this fear of critical self-reflection (partly, I suppose, due to people vastly overestimating the impact DU posts have IRL, as the kids say). The questions I pose at the end of the OP can and should be asked. It's healthy to consider such questions. And those types of questions do not place one in a certain camp (such as right, middle, left, progressive, pragmatic, moderate, etc.). They are just questions worthy of exploration. Would anyone deny, for instance, that the "liberal media" narrative has been strategically successful? Is it not wise to ponder whether the Democratic Party has provided enough pushback over the years?

It seems to me one can't lament insufficient focus/effort on GOTV, while at the same time refusing to consider how the Democratic Party might do some things differently (that's patently contradictory).

[Civic Justice]

8. Thank you.... !!!! 100%

Last edited Fri May 11, 2018, 06:50 PM - Edit history (1)

They are just questions worthy of exploration.


The people who want to censor everything, and block and delete posting of which they can't deal with... is a negative for the site and the VAST array of people who utilize and visit this site, it is not a good scenario for the overall.