Beware of Wolves in Sheep's Clothing, Folks.

[MineralMan]

As there were in 2016, there are some people pretending to be "progressives" or "liberals" who are giving exactly the wrong advice right now, with regard to Democratic politics. They do not have the success of our party at heart. Instead, their true goal is to dismantle it and give the country up to the right. They do not seek victory, but destruction, dissolution and defeat.

Many such people are either not what they say they are, and are only pretending. Others are so far away from mainstream politics that they think total destruction of our system of government is the key to building a new political reality. We need to be very, very careful who we listen to and follow, I believe.

Stay alert. Stay awake. Stay the course and work for victory, not defeat. That's my advice.

[stonecutter357]

1. K&R

[MineralMan]

2. Thank you.

I hope we all wake up and look at what is actually going on. If we stay blind to it, we will lose everything.

[musette_sf]

3. K to the R

[MineralMan]

4. Thank you so much!

[Maraya1969]

5. You have got to be more specific. We all don't keep up 100% of the time.

I deleted a post about Cenk Ugar after I found that he is not really a progressive but I didn't know before that so how the heck should I know about anyone else.

What kinds of things do these people say?

What do they have in common?

Do they use specific code type words?

[MineralMan]

7. There are several strategies.

Today, it's about forcing Nancy Pelosi out of her leadership position. Tomorrow, it will be about something else. Anytime someone is recommending weakening our party, they are working against us. Period.

Cenk? He's never been on our side.

[Enoki33]

55. Thanks for this. Wondered what the hell was going on with trying

to blame Nancy Pelosi and proposing stuff that only creates problems.

[Maraya1969]

87. Some of us need reminders if we are not paying that much attention at a particular time

I'm reading your information about trolls now. I would love that you would post some occasionally in some threads where they might be pertinent. As long as you don't direct it toward one particular poster it should be OK

[SleeplessinSoCal]

99. How about Michael Moore who seems to have his finger on the pulse of middle America?

I fear Pelosi is too coastal for the tastes of those in the wide open spaces. I've defended Pelosi every year until now. And even now I am open to her remaining in a leadership position. My question - if not her, who?

Btw, is Tom Perez making headway? Are the young Vets being heard?

[SleeplessinSoCal]

112. Another veteran - Pete Buttigieg - is on Seth Meyers now.

An Afghanistan War Vet and mayor in a very red state. Ran for DMV chair who I wish had been the choice. Maybe he'll run for Congress next year.

[dalton99a]

113. +1

[Bernardo de La Paz]

34. Concern trolling is one technique. Pairwise scuffling is another. Propagating fake new too.

Look for DU members with high post rates after joining in 2016 from June leading up to the election and joining after Trump's Inauguration. Caution: most members with such characteristics are good solid Democrats / progressives / liberals. We can be suspicious, but it takes a lot to make a case to pass MIRT scrutiny.

Concern trolling is where a member / bot / tweeter / FBer will say something like "I worry that Pelosi is ineffective after four losses in a row. Republicans like having her around to kick around." (Again, caution, well-meaning members might sincerely make a statement like that.)

Pairwise scuffling is where two bots gin up an argument in an effort to draw in other members and drive wedges between them. It is divisive and destablizing and it uses up time and energy members / tweeters / FBers could use to get real news out and organize resistance.

Propagating fake news (in many guises some not so obvious) uses up members time and energy knocking it down and arguing about it.

There are undoubtedly many other techniques. It would be interesting to see a compendium of them. Here's an ancient one I bookmarked from 2002: http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killfile/anti_troll_faq.htm

Finding some:
http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll-tactics.html
https://www.google.ca/search?q=recognizing+trolls

[question everything]

37. My worry about Pelosi, and Sanders, and Hillary and Biden

They are all in their seventies, or close to. We need newer blood and I don't see it anywhere. Cory Booker is the only one.

When you realize that besides Trump, the others who won states are Cruz and Rubio - both are 46 - and many among the clown car who were in their 40s and 50s we should worry.

No, I don't think that Pelosi should be removed; not unless there is someone waiting and capable and I don't know that there is one.

I would hope that all of them are busy traveling the county searching and encouraging young people to join.

And, no, Ossoff was a gamble that failed. Came from nowhere with nothing to offer. No meat on bones developed from experience.

Sure, Franken came without elective office but he is rare. And, first time around won by 300 votes. We need to encourage some to start at the school board, or the water board, city hall, planning commission, park and recreation - something. To learn about political life to learn about walking the streets, knocking on doors meeting citizens face to face.

As I posted the day of the GA defeat: Trump notwithstanding, voters prefer some experience. And even that is not always enough.

Look at MN 3rd. Terry Bonoff was a successful state senator easily winning her elections. But Paulsen presented himself - at least while in the minority - as not a rabid one, never endorsed Trump. Now, of course, it is different.

As with Ossoff, the DCCC poured millions into that race and she lost. She ran as anti Trump and this was not enough. And to add insult to injury, her senate seat was taken by a Republican.

For a while I thought that we, Democrats, should go to these special elections and vote for the Democrat, any Democrat. Now I see that it is not enough. We have to seek good candidates. And I hope that our elders - listed at the title - could lead this mission. Take Obama along.

OK, shoot

[Bernardo de La Paz]

42. I think you accidentally replied in the wrong thread. . . nt

[question everything]

83. Sorry about that. Will repost (nt)

[Maraya1969]

96. John Ossoff did increadibly well as EarlG showed with his photo. That bright red state

lost by double digits leads in 2016. John lost by 6 points. We are closing in on the r's and they are running scared.

So I call bullshit on what you say about John Ossoff

[onit2day]

103. He didn't lose.The votes were stolen.

Thousands were purged from the rolls with Cross Check. Thousands of registrations are on the floor at the registrars office in Georgia that just never made it to voter rolls. Handel purged the voter rolls when she was SoS and it was she who came up with the voter ID law in Georgia and helped gerrymander the district. 10,000 vietnamese registrations were blocked. And I'm not even counting the screwed up machines (see Greg Palast's report) Put all together...the election was stolen. Ossoff, a conserv-a-dem,, won and until democratic leaders change the corporate vote counters and get rid of Cross check and this "red shift" they will continue to lose elections. Do your fucking job or else make voting mandatory like Australia did

[Iplayoneontv]

110. Thanks for adding this in.

Yep.

[Hekate]

105. If you don't see "young blood" coming up, you're not paying attention. Schiff, the Castros...

... Kamala Harris, and quite a few others are coming right along, and they are all young. None of them will be either Speaker of the House or Senate Majority Leader overnight, as those careers are built over years and years, just as Nancy Pelosi built her base of support. It's hard work, and you have to earn it. Which is why the most senior people are generally...older.

[Maraya1969]

86. I just had a post hidden because I bitched at someone who looked like a troll.

Pissed me off. AND I did check and this person was a member from 9/2016 with a high post count.

Of course we are not allowed to accuse them of being trolls.

Also certain trolls would says things like, "That won't work" to ideas that we progressives would have. It is all about getting you to lose your enthusiasm

[Alice11111]

91. Robotic arguments. I see people who will push some inane

argument the entire thread. Everyone will argue w him.His arguments are stupid and robotic, barely on topic.
I do think tbere are a few bots on here.
It's healthy to argue and discuss sometimes, but there is a clear difference w these bot like people. They just say outrageous things to keep an argument going, but offer no real info. It reminds me of someone working the phones in a sex call center, where they just switch from one caller to another and change their voice or topic slightly. ( Seen in the movies.) I think bots are doing that on here. Switching thread to thread and provoking arguments without lending useful information.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

48. What makes Cenk not a progressive?

I haven't listened to him since he left MSNBC, but what sort of views or positions does he hold that are no progressive?

We also have to be careful that we aren't the Left's version of McCarthy. Having differences of opinions are okay. It's not the end of the world if we have disagreements.

[LiberalLovinLug]

82. Good post

Some sanity in this sea of paranoia.

This self perpetuated shrinking of acceptance of allies against Trump and the GOP because they may be also critical of Democrats in some areas as well is disturbing. Liberals and Democrats have so little media shows that support our same values left that it pains me to see so many here that are comfortable with helping to shrink our Resistance army by not only refusing to hear concerns from other progressives (yes I'm sure Cenk would say he considers himself that) but then to slag them on boards that are fighting for (even if just most of) the same things. Same goes for Sanders. Makes no sense.

Maher is too rude
Cenk said something critical about Obama once
Sanders doesn't wear the proper letter

Shrinking the tent is NOT the answer.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

100. Thank you, and agreed regarding your excellent post. :)

[klook]

114. Thank you. We need all the help we can get.

Shrinking the tent isn't the answer.

[OnDoutside]

88. Could Cenk not be a progressive who hates the Democratic Party ? There are a few around like that.

[Wounded Bear]

6. Sage advice, my friend...

[MineralMan]

13. It's simply based on observation.

Some of the things that are being promoted, like shoving Nancy Pelosi to the sidelines, are completely transparent to anyone who knows where Pelosi stands. The distortion and motivation for such advice are clear.

We are beset from all sides. We must stay alert and reject false positions.

[Beartracks]

26. And sometimes "all sides" includes the "inside" as well.

Thanks for the OP.

============

[Fantastic Anarchist]

49. I'm not happy with Pelosi.

Since she decided to "look forward" and let the Bush/Cheney administration go. I'm not happy with her position to ignore single-payer or even the Public Option.

So, are my intentions clear?

Am I not a progressive?

[MineralMan]

51. I have no idea. You call yourself an "Anarchist."

A "Fantastic" one, at that. So, I'll take you at your word on your political leanings. Pelosi didn't want to attempt an impeachment of Bush, because it wouldn't have resulted in his removal and would have consumed all of the attention of Congress. Since removal of a President requires a 2/3 vote in the Senate, following a majority vote in the House, there was simply no chance of it being successful. There were many other things that needed to be done in Congress.

Nancy Pelosi rightly opposed that process, because it would have wasted time needed for other actions. Similarly, a single-payer system or even a public option was not going to get passed. That was obvious. So, she supported the compromise ACA bill, which provided healthcare coverage for millions who would not otherwise have access to it.

Nancy Pelosi is about getting things done that need to be done and can be done. She has been very good at that.

I do not know if you are a progressive or not. In my experience, anarchists are not progressives. They are destructives.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

54. Anarchist philosophy is quite diverse.

From Tolstoy (peaceful) to Bakunin (violent revolutionary). We are all socialists. We are all progressives. Anarchists paved the way for integration, workers rights, led advances for equal rights for women and for minorities.

We've been at the forefront of the progressive cause in the anarchist tradition since the 1700s.

But that's irrelevant to what I asked.

The Public Option was the compromise - but I don't want to rehash old arguments. I only asked the question because of your opening post, if well-intended, sort of reminds me of a reverse-McCarthy. We will have different opinions and ideas on how to advance the progressive cause. Well intentioned or not, it implies dogma, which itself is dangerous.

For what it's worth - I came out of my voting hiatus in 2008 to vote for Obama. I've voted for the Democratic Candidate in every election since then.

I'm not happy with Pelosi, but I didn't even realize there was a push to have her removed. If there is such a push, I may or may not support it depending on what the merits of the argument are.

I am a Sanders supporter but voted for Clinton because it was the pragmatic thing for me to do. It's sort of like the ACA, I'd rather have more insured now and get rid of the pre-existing conditions rule than having nothing. Though, I'm still unhappy with it and would support an aggressive push for single-payer. And sort of like the ACA, I would have rather had Sanders as President, but the alternative was too horrible to think about, so I voted for Clinton. I do not, however, begrudge anyone who voted for Stein. I think their decision to do so was not smart or pragmatic, but I can't hold them at fault for doing what they truly thought was right.

I also think that all of the different factions of the Left need to unite and work together without acting suspiciously about each other. We have a monumental fuck up in the White House right now, but all I can glean from these types of posts are that they may turn potential allies away.

I also encourage that if a strategy is failing, we may need to examine and reassess said strategy. Many others think the same way. That doesn't mean they are "fake progressives."

Who knows, I just don't think it's all that helpful.

[sprinkleeninow]

66. Yes to your word 'pragmatic'. I'm glad you expanded your dialogue and explained your screename.

Peace be unto you. Whatever form it takes.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

74. Thank you and peace unto you!

Peace but keep up the good fight!

[Hekate]

106. Thank you, MinMan, thank you for explaining this issue yet again...

I am sick to death of this argument, and I cannot comprehend why it is so hard for people to understand the realities. You are very patient to keep explaining.

[WoonTars]

8. You are so right. Sticking to what we've been doing so far is an excellent idea.

It is sure to reap rewards eventually. We just have to stay the course.

[MineralMan]

11. The same people I'm talking about are why we have Trump

instead of Hillary Clinton in the White House. They won that round. We must not let them win any more rounds in this fight.

[WoonTars]

29. So let's stick to the plan!

..

[Fantastic Anarchist]

50. Yep, that "winning" strategy!

!

[sprinkleeninow]

69. Hay now! I was kind to youuu! eom

[Fantastic Anarchist]

75. I was agreeing with you! :)

I hope I didn't come across any other way!

[sprinkleeninow]

81. I musta took it wrong. Apologies.

It sounded snarkified at first look. As in, yeah how about them 'winning' strategies of your'uns. Ya know with Jon in GA , Rob in Colorado, SC, the other Dem in the southern state race. I gave to all of them and am gived out. Disappointed, but not discouraged.

Joining forces with people of one mind and one accord to restore life as it should be to our magnificent country!

[Act_of_Reparation]

80. Sounds good to me!

Been doing the same thing for thirty years. Why stop now?

[KPN]

115. So you obviously think DUers include people who supported/voted for Trump

or Stein, or someone else. Has anyone here at DU ever posted that they did that? I haven't seen a post to that effect.

I appreciate your calm, thoughtful logic but this particular OP reminds me of McCarthy frankly.

[MineralMan]

116. There is no way to know that.

DU isn't just today. It has been online for a very long time, now. Before the election, there were, indeed, DUers who rejected Hillary Clinton as the nominee. Some of them left DU or were removed. I think some of those are actually still here, perhaps under different names. There are also DU members who have joined since the election. I have no doubt that there are DU members who did vote for Trump or Stein or did not vote at all, but I don't know for sure how anyone here voted except for myself. I don't know of any way to know that, frankly.

Your McCarthy reference is odious, frankly, as well. I actually remember the McCarthy era. Do you?

[KPN]

119. Well, what you just said satill sounds like the things McCarthy was saying.

I can appreciate OPs that say we need to stick together. Those make good sense. But with all due respect this particular OP strikes me as -- well, odious. ... No, I don't actually remember it as it was unfolding. I was a very young kid. But I do know and have read enough about it to draw this analogy. The OP is veiled. If you have some proof, provide it. But veiled references are damaging to the whole.

I feel good about the future of the Democratic Party -- and that's in large part to the new energy being brought to it since 2015 in the form of our kids generation. We need to be open and welcoming to them. We also need to be open to those of us who have been around and voting for the past 40-50 years who hold views that differ from recent leadership views. We don't necessarily have to adopt them, but we also shouldn't stifle or cast suspicions over them.

[MineralMan]

120. Oddly enough, nowhere in my original post did I call

for anyone to be kicked off DU. Nor did I call for any action against anyone at all. I advised careful watchfulness. If you think that sounds like what Joe McCarthy was up to, then I recommend more reading about that period on our history.

[KPN]

121. McCarthy started with generalities.

BTW, I edited my prior post while you were responding.,

[MineralMan]

125. OK, so you think I'm like Joe McCarthy.

OK, then. You will think what you think.

[seaglass]

122. No they wouldn't post it here, they'd get banned. But 2 who are here posted on JPR that they

voted for Bernie in the GE.

[JHan]

9. K & R

we have people claiming to be "democrats" who are unwittingly or deliberately the GOP's fifth column. It's nauseating to watch.

[MineralMan]

14. Thank you for recognizing the pretenders.

They need to be called out.

[Trial_By_Fire]

10. They are not pretending to be 'progressives' or 'liberals'...

They are pretending to be Democrats.

Demeaning progressives and liberals is also something we should 'beware' of.

[MineralMan]

12. I'm sorry, but you are incorrect.

Many of them are pretending to be progressives and liberals. Many even call themselves by those labels. I would never demean a true liberal or progressive. I'm one of those. I will, however, attack those who use those labels, but who fight against progress and liberal ideas, even if they do it in subtle ways.

[obamanut2012]

17. Wrong -- Dems are progressives and liberals

And liberals and progressives are Dems.

And this Socialist votes Dem and thinks Pelosi is an effective, progressive leader.

[MineralMan]

22. In any binary election, I vote for the Democrat.

That's the only thing that makes any sense. Some did not, or did not vote at all. Trump is the result of that folly.

[Trial_By_Fire]

31. I believe you misinterpreted my post...

The people attacking democrats are pretending to be democrats. The
OP improperly characterize these people as 'progressives' and 'liberals' -
they are not dems, progressives, or liberals.

I believe DU is under constant 'posting' attack by republicans and Russians. We
need to know the difference between real progressives and liberal who post about
progressive and liberal democratic policies and issues.

[MineralMan]

38. No. You are the one who misunderstood my post.

I said they were "pretending to be progressives and liberals." Please read it again.

[Trial_By_Fire]

44. Your thread would have been more accurate to read...

...'pretending to be democrats'.

I see your choice of words as slighting real progressives and liberals and
using the phrase 'pretending to be democrats' would be more accurate and inclusive.

Edited for clarity.

[MineralMan]

47. You know, I think I'll write my own posts my own way.

I meant to say exactly what I said, and nothing more. Someone who is pretending to be a progressive or a liberal is not actually a progressive or a liberal, so my words were in no way a slight of progressives and liberals. They were a warning about those who only pretend to be those.

"Democrats" is a different word. I used it, as well.

You have misinterpreted what I meant, so I have explained it to you.

[Cha]

108. Don't be so defensive.. MM posted what they are doing..

"..they're pretending to be progressives and liberals"..

His choice of words is accurate.

[BainsBane]

124. which is why the attacks on Pelosi raise concerns.

and demands for her to be replaced by someone significantly to the right of her.
She's a very effective minority leader and has held the Democratic caucus together, preventing them from peeling off to vote for Trump's agenda. Obviously that does not serve the interests of the GOP.

[retrowire]

15. Notice this Berniecrat is staying the hell outta this one lol nt

[MineralMan]

19. I notice. Thanks!

[retrowire]

24. Yeah I have this skill

It's a skill called "shutting the hell up when you don't understand the situation" lol

So I'm just listening and reading.

[defacto7]

98. I wish I had that skill. nt

[sprinkleeninow]

58. Hay. A cute fellow came to our third floor apt. where we were living just before the primaries.

He was door knocking for Bernie. I listened to him and assured him if he was the nominee, he'd get our votes.
God Almighty! I blessed him with a benediction to stay safe and be successful. He was so grateful he hugged me! I got that maternal aura, I guess. Sooo, HRC became nominee. And she received our votes. Gerry rigging, voting machinery, rabid fake crap emitting from media, etc. aside--
we vote straight Democratically ALWAYS. Our family doesn't get to promote candidates to run a race. After HRC, the next viable one was Bernie. God Almighty! Who in their right mind would even give one millisecond of a thought to wackoman.
I'm not making sense, am I. The Dems in the know with the ability and power are the ones to groom then promote those who can handily demolish the opposition.
And praises go to Nancy Pelosi. She uses her best experience judgments in her capacity.
I didn't make a lot of sense. My head hurts today moreso.
-sprink
(The repukes offer the voting public tons of Oh My Dog! picks to run. Carson, CRUZ, etc. Oh my aching head! And repukables go hmmmm, let's see who appeals to me?
The tide must turn. Colossally.)

[Demsrule86]

63. personally I am a Democrat. nt

[retrowire]

73. Me too....? Nt

[Demsrule86]

76. I just hate the term Berniecrat...so many use it instead of Democrat...I know you are a Democrat.

We should not have allegiance to one guy...not saying you do.

[retrowire]

77. It's not an allegiance so much as an alignment

That's how I see it anyways.

[Demsrule86]

79. I don't get that...not criticizing please understand my point.

I listen to many different viewpoints and then make up my mind...I can see both sides of most issues. But I owe allegiance only to my party in terms of politics. I supported Hillary Clinton (voted for Bernie in the primary in OH) but don't consider I have allegiance to her. I always vote Democratic...in Georgia when there were often no candidates for a Democrat to vote for...I used to write in "yellow dog". I am liberal (yes liberal!) but have come to believe the country has moved right. We need a big tent...and purity politics needs to go. My entire goal is to take back Congress in 18...and get rid of whatever GOP is in the White House in 20.

[retrowire]

85. This, yellow dog is your alignment

Bernies platform is mine.

[Demsrule86]

93. Bernie's platform is a Democratic platform ... and I thought you would get the yellow

dog reference..It goes "I would vote for a yellow dog before a Republican"...there were no Democrats running in Georgia 6 which happened quite often when I lived there. I agree with much of what Bernie says ...not on social justice though...and am a liberal. I would vote for any Democrat over any Republican. And my loyalty is with my party ...the only one that can stop the Republicans...no offense but Sen. Sander's can stop them. Tim Ryan can't stop them...only a united Democratic party can stop them.

[obamanut2012]

16. As soon as someone rails against Pelosi, I know they are a wingnut

Even if they possibly don't think they are because they like Sanders.

[MineralMan]

20. A number of people who supported Sanders turned against

him when he endorsed Hillary Clinton after the convention. They went on to vote for Jill Stein or to skip the election. As soon as Sanders was no longer useful to them, they simply bailed.

I would gladly have voted for Senator Sanders if he had gotten the nomination. He'd have been a good President. So would Hillary have been a good President.

Trump is a decidedly BAD President.

It's a damned shame, is what it is.

[obamanut2012]

23. Yup, agree

It's a bad, bad time when I'm sitting here and wishing Romney was President.

[MineralMan]

27. It is a bad, bad time.

As a philosophical Socialist, there is much that I mourn, but the election of Donald Trump is impossible to bear. Why that happened will forever weigh on my soul.

At age 71 (almost 72), there is little time for me to hope for a correction of our horrible mistake. However, I do hope. That's why I'm here on DU. Today, I've posted a warning. I posted it before, several times, to no avail. I hope people learn from their mistakes. That's all I can hope for, really.

[Hekate]

107. MinMan...

We're close in age, and I feel the clock ticking.

[safeinOhio]

33. Roger that

Feel the same and think our party leaders are better than the other side. If she had the the gazillionirs on her side, we'd never loose again.

[ananda]

18. Maybe the leaders should have some town halls ...

... and see what the people have to say about winning
elections.

I don't expect any of them to just step down. That's kind
of ridiculous anyway.

But they need to hear from US! We need to do our civic
duty and make our leaders listen to us.

My message would be this: stand stronger against 45
and Reeps. Obstruct Congress and the Senate if you
have to.

Use the rules against them!

Show some spine!

[Fantastic Anarchist]

53. Exactly what I would like and would like to send.

[NCTraveler]

21. K&R nt.

[Caliman73]

25. I have to agree.

Sometimes it is difficult to tell. I do believe that there are legitimate concerns with how the Democratic party as a whole has operated in some areas. There were certainly disagreements I had with some of the messaging and some policies with President Obama and with SOS Clinton, HOWEVER, there are definitely those who take every opportunity to bash without offering constructive solutions.

I think that we can have discussions about how we can improve without resorting to name calling and calls to "burn it all down". I do think that people who are constantly saying the latter are either nihilists or trolls for the rightwing posing as progressives.

[Dream Girl]

28. Exactly Mineral Man! We need to be vigilant...they are all over the place.

[docgee]

30. To say the fate of the world depends on this exact thing is not

an exaggeration!

[byronius]

32. If it smells like borscht it's probably borscht.

Plus, some regular folk who drank the vodka.

[BainsBane]

123. well put. nt

[Honeycombe8]

35. Is this a veiled attempt at attacking posters whose views are different from yours?

I have seen no Republican posts, and in fact, those that even smack a bit of Republican are quickly removed.

Thus, DU posters see virtually no posts by non-Democrats. The Democratic Party, however, is not just the progressive wing, but also the more moderate wing. There is a spectrum of ideas in the Democratic Party.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

56. Your post needs to be more visible.

[KPN]

36. This is a broad brush generalization. In that regard ...

it potentially undermines legitimate, committed Democrats and their views. While it makes sense to be wary of "trolls", "anarchists", "intruders", "infiltrators", "moles", whatever, etc., sounding this alarm can also hurt us, the Democratic Party in my view.

Who exactly is and how does one spot a "wolf in sheep clothing"?

I hear ya', but given some of the differences among genuinely committed party supporters here at DU, just sayin" ...

[Fantastic Anarchist]

57. It's dangerous.

Please see this exchange because I agree with you (well, accept the "anarchist" part, but I attribute that to common misconception).

My first reply.

My second reply.

[melman]

70. It's meant to be

It's meant only to shit-stir, insult, and point fingers at 'them'. As usual.

[Honeycombe8]

72. +1. nt

[mcar]

39. K&R

[SecularMotion]

40. When the Alt-right and Alt-left go to war Democrats will hold the center

[orangecrush]

41. I am truly embarrassed

I was reading stories in sources like the Washington Post and the New York Times saying that some were not happy with the direction the party was taking, and I fell for it.

Republicans never question their leadership or engage in introspection, why should we have to?

I learned a hard lesson, and am thankful to those who were kind enough to correct me.

[MineralMan]

45. To answer your question, here's a link:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus

I'm just a member of this forum, not the adminstrators. They have explained what it is about at that link, so I refer you to it.

I won't comment on the rest of your reply, though. I'll just leave it sitting there.

[RoBear]

46. Thank you. Incisive as usual...

Many of us forget the enemy is within.

[sprinkleeninow]

52. You wrote a 'mouthful'!

You are appreciated! 🤗 󾓦🗽

[Madam45for2923]

59. Stay alert. Stay awake. Stay the course and work for victory, not defeat. That's my advice.

Absolutely! Thank you.

[bdamomma]

61. K&R

good advice.

[Demsrule86]

62. We have them here...I see them post GOP friendly crap all the time.

[Left-over]

64. The Karl Rove Strategy...

It is called "divide and conquer" . Unite...Resist...Do not get caught up in rhetoric.

[bdamomma]

65. kicking this thread

for exposure.

[MineralMan]

67. Thanks for the kick!

[mreilly]

68. That's exactly what the assholes over at Jackpine Radicals seem to want.

... and given the fact I never read a single thing on that shithole of a site worth my time, the strategy is as incoherent and ridiculous as they are.

[MineralMan]

71. I haven't read anything over there since the election.

I'm surprised it's still online.

[Else You Are Mad]

78. I may be misinterpreting your point...

If someone criticizes the Democratic party and has legitimate concerns and voices such concerns they are not really liberals or Democrats and should be ignored? If that is the case, that is an absurd stance to take and it will lead to ruin.

That said, I don't disagree that there are people that want to see the Democratic party burn and want to do it from the inside but I have a feeling that there are far less of those here than you think.

[orangecrush]

84. ...

[DFW]

109. If there are enough of them out there who think DU was worth attacking and shutting down

Then there certainly enough of them around to try and stir up disputes among those of us who would otherwise have about 99% the same goals and sentiments.

DU is just a tiny corner, but if we get visited by Thom Hartmann and Alan Grayson, we are obviously not entirely unknown or unnoticed. A solid, united voice with a little variation is something the radical right fears. Saying that our leaders "must go" is music to their ears. They agree wholeheartedly.

[Cha]

111. Excellent point, DFW!

"If there are enough of them out there who think DU was worth attacking and shutting down.."

[broadcaster90210]

89. Good advice but ...

America is too stupid to ID actual wolves. They are easily fooled by sheeps clothing.

[Gothmog]

90. For example a large number of posters on JPR are trump and Putin supporters

The number of russian lovers and Putin defenders on that so-called progressive website is sad

[Heartstrings]

92. Huge Kick!

[XRubicon]

94. Good advice.

[nikibatts]

95. YES!!!

[MineralMan]

97. Thank you, everyone, for the replies and recs.

Almost 100 recs, while the threads calling for Pelosi to go have maybe 10 or 12. That tells me that most DUers are on the right track.

[David__77]

101. I don't think it's the "left" that's destroying this system of government.

...

[brewens]

102. Above all, we must place wealthy to upper middle class Democrats well being. We must not

frighten them by threatening to rock the boat in anyway, hoping to make government work for all of us. "In Goldman Sachs We Trust" should be on our money.

[Hekate]

104. We had a swarm fly in thru the windows at DU yesterday, too

Gaaah

[Paladin]

117. Great advice. Never doubt it, folks: We are under attack right now. (nt)

[MineralMan]

118. Absolutely.