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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "Does this site ONLY welcome those who voted for HRC in GE?" [View all]pat_k
(9,313 posts)64. I suspect that the percentage of...
...of people who voted third-party, wrote in Sanders, or withheld their vote entirely in some kind of protest, or whatever, who have since become staunch Democrats is very small, but not non-existent. People can, and do, evolve politically.
Skinner's blanket statement that "This site only welcomes people who voted for HRC in the GE" does not reflect the Terms of Service I agreed to abide by as a member. I agreed to this:
Do not post support for Republicans or independent/third-party "spoiler" candidates. Do not state that you are not going to vote, or that you will write-in a candidate that is not on the ballot, or that you intend to vote for any candidate other than the official Democratic nominee in any general election where a Democrat is on the ballot. Do not post anything that smears Democrats generally, or that is intended to dissuade people from supporting the Democratic Party or its candidates. Don't argue there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats.
Why we have this rule: Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government, and as such we expect our members to support and vote for Democrats at election time. Rare exceptions are granted at the sole discretion of the DU Administrators. (Current exceptions: None.)
Why we have this rule: Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government, and as such we expect our members to support and vote for Democrats at election time. Rare exceptions are granted at the sole discretion of the DU Administrators. (Current exceptions: None.)
As I read the above, if you do not advocate, and cannot foresee a situation in which you would consider voting for anyone other than a person running as a Democrat in a general election AT THE TIME you join or post, you are welcome. If your position changes, and you choose to support a candidate running under a different party banner in a general election, you should terminate your membership.
Here's the clarification I need:
Does "This site only welcomes people who voted for HRC in the GE," mean that a person who voted for Stein, or didn't vote, who, at the time they join or post, is committed to doing everything in their power to make sure Democrats prevail in future General Elections, and who has no intention to advocate voting against Democrats, is nevertheless violating terms of service by virtue of their past action?
If it means that, the terms of service need to be revised to reflect that.
And if this restriction is made explicit in the Terms of Service, it must necessarily be a blanket restriction, because the belief that underlies it is that people are incapable of evolving politically, and anyone who ever identified as a member of another party, or who voted against (or failed to vote for) the Democratic candidate is forever suspect and stained, and therefore barred from participating on this Democrats Only site. To apply the restriction to some, but not all elections, would be capricious and arbitrary. By what objective criteria would you draw the line? who decides which elections of the past many decades it was ok to vote "Not Democrat" and which it was not? Do we bar all Nader voters? Do we bar all Perot voters? Do we bar all Anderson voters? McKinney voters? Is the restriction based on results? Is the problem that Hillary lost? Would you bar all "not Hillary" voters if she had won? If the objective criteria boils down to results, it would be a rule meant to punish in a way that strikes me "nasty" and therefore inconsistent with DU principles.
I need clarification because I may well be a member in violation. In 1980, I voted for John Anderson. In 2008, in the GE in NJ (where Obama led by double digits), I voted for Cynthia McKinney. I did not advocate voting for McKinney here, but she was running on vital issues and I wanted to be counted among the people supporting them. I am not, and never have been "a Green." In NJ Obama's victory was safe. I didn't vote for McKinney because I had turned Green. It was cast purely to demonstrate support for principles and changes that, as a Democrat, I believe the Democratic Party should be stronger on. If that vote makes me a traitor to the party who needs to be ostracized, I would like to know it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
135 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
at a minimum, those who would have voted for hillary but couldn't due to age, non-citizenship,
unblock
Aug 2017
#4
There is nothing I would believe from them except, "Here's why I voted for Trump:
Squinch
Aug 2017
#47
And I believe that is all bullshit. No one voted for Trump(R) for those reasons. They could not have
Squinch
Aug 2017
#117
Yes. If someone voted for Trump(R), we're never going to get them, and frankly we don't want them.
Squinch
Aug 2017
#48
After a few informed discussions is perfectly rational and strategic to "move on" - some are so
bettyellen
Aug 2017
#35
IMHO, DU would not survive another period like the many months of hell that we experienced in 2016.
kstewart33
Aug 2017
#18
The nastiness was driven by people that never bought into democratic core values.
Blue_true
Aug 2017
#86
Yup...Progressive Underground is not the name here...and the election rules are clear too...
Moostache
Aug 2017
#30
Seems like the poster took the hidden thread and posted it again verbatim in another thread!
Squinch
Aug 2017
#52
wish that statement would have been made BEFORE I donated... wont make that mistake again!
kcdoug1
Aug 2017
#49
I did realize that Skinner wrote the sentence. I regret not specifying that you were not the author
John1956PA
Aug 2017
#128
Nothing against those who posted, but 3 simultaneous threads reiterating the same basic concept
MrPurple
Aug 2017
#60
"I'm sure it will die down" and "smattering of dissent, complaints, and whattabouts,"...
pat_k
Aug 2017
#68
Your argument is probably something best taken up with Skinner, not me. Although...
NurseJackie
Aug 2017
#70
Gee my friend, if that was a death scene in a movie, would would have needed another shooting. 😳
Blue_true
Aug 2017
#88
There's a super wide variety of people in the world. Of COURSE there are people who could...
LAS14
Aug 2017
#93
It is very clear. Anyone who voted in 2016, and refused to vote for the Democratic nominee in
still_one
Aug 2017
#114