I thought we supported democrats here

[SocialDemocrat61]

and not attack them. Attacking democrats a week into new administration is like attacking Churchill for not launching D Day in July 1940. The new DNC chair hasn’t even been elected yet. And remember…

[WhiskeyGrinder]

1. Is it an attack to critique a public figure's public work?

[SocialDemocrat61]

5. Having a temper tantrum because

public figures are not also having a temper tantrum is not a critique.

[Think. Again.]

8. I think people would be upset if elected Dems were having temper tantrums.

I really don't think not having temper tantrums is the problem.

[SocialDemocrat61]

26. Then what is the problem?

What are the expectations for a party that has no control of any branch of the government?

[Think. Again.]

32. I would have to see the specific posts you're complaining about...

...to tell you what problems are being raised in them.

[SocialDemocrat61]

42. I was asking about your post above

[Think. Again.]

51. That post says not throwing tantrums isn't a problem.

[SocialDemocrat61]

52. Then what is the problem?

Tell us what you think is the problem?

[Think. Again.]

57. Did I say there was a problem?

[SocialDemocrat61]

69. You said

I really don't think not having temper tantrums is the problem.

Which implies that there is a problem and you know what it is. I apologize if I misunderstood your meaning. So do you think there is no problem?

[Think. Again.]

74. I think that not throwing tantrums is not the problem.

[SocialDemocrat61]

86. The what do you think is 'the problem'?

Or do you think there is no problem?

[DV1]

122. Control of government is temporary.

Even dead dictators would tell you that.

[choie]

244. The problem is

they seem not to have taken Project 2025 seriously and didn't take the weeks between the election and the inauguration to plan their strategy or their response. Thats what the problem is.

[SocialDemocrat61]

246. Then what strategy do you recommend?

Any advice that would be effective and legal is welcome.

[choie]

248. I'm not a politician

nor a policy specialist, except for public benefits. Our congress members are supposed to be the experts. They certainly should not vote for trump's vile nominees.

I expect them to be prepared for this moment. And they're not.

[SocialDemocrat61]

249. Exactly how are they not prepared?

Please elaborate.

[choie]

250. Lack of a tactical response is not being prepared.

Governor JB Pritzker is an example of someone who knows how to respond.

[SocialDemocrat61]

251. What do you consider a tactical response?

And what has Pritzker done that no one else is doing?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

10. What does a temper tantrum look like in this context?

[LexVegas]

12. Like this...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219954800

[Think. Again.]

33. Well done.

[SocialDemocrat61]

43. Any thing with blanket attacks

on unnamed democrats without any specifics.

[sop]

67. Like most generalizations, that blanket doesn't cover the bed.

[samsingh]

113. i think it's important to criticize ourselves and learn

we have lost two winnable elections which i believe could have been won with small shifts in messaging.

[dwayneb]

235. Ding Ding Ding

It's important to look at the FACTS surrounding our losses and to soberly reflect on our strengths and weaknesses. Candidates, strategies, methods, messaging, voting blocs - all of it. It's called continuous improvement.

If we can't or won't do that - we are doomed to repeat our failures.

[DeepWinter]

2. To my knowledge

constructive critisism is allowed.
We are at a point and place we need to discuss what is working, and what isn't. Who is defending us, and who isn't.
Honest but difficult conversation should be allwed.

[SocialDemocrat61]

6. I would welcome constructive criticism

But most of what I’ve seen are temper tantrums.

[angrychair]

156. You say you want specifics

Which we cannot do. Don't even feel comfortable with this whole conversation.

[SocialDemocrat61]

165. Why not?

I’ve seen many democrats criticized here for specific votes or statements. From members of the Squad to John Fetterman.

[angrychair]

190. True

But it can also be reported on because I believe calling out a Democrat leader by name can be considered bashing Democrats but I'm by no means the arbiter of that nor am I in any way being critical of any rule.

[SocialDemocrat61]

192. Yes

I think it depends on context and the type of criticism. Like "I don't agree with AOC's vote on X bill", opposed to "AOC sucks". The first is acceptable, the second is not.

[dalton99a]

3. Step aside if they are not willing or able to do the job

[SocialDemocrat61]

7. How are you defining their job?

Just because it doesn’t match your political agenda doesn’t mean they’re not doing their jobs.

[Autumn]

83. This is what Democrats aren't understanding. They think that the republican electorate

will step away from Trump. They won't , right now they are enjoying trumps revenge porn. Not untill it's too late. Trump has the house and senate Republicans and the complete media backing him, he doesn't need the people. This is what every fucking person in power on the right has had wet dreams about for years. They are not going to give this up.

Democrats sitting back, taking the high road, ignoring the carnage and focusing on the economey is what will fucking end us.

And yeah I will go to my grave pissed off at Jefferies god is on the throne bullshit.
Deal with it.

[SocialDemocrat61]

85. I didn't like Jefferies post either

And criticism of it is fair. But there are too many blanket attacks on "the democrats" with no specifics or any rational ideas for what effective actions to be taken.

[Autumn]

99. The Democrats are playing a wait and see game. They're going to tune out the

noise. You know that noise that happens to be a big fucking siren going off. They are going to focus on economics and ignore everything else. Just like they did when the black lady was going to give voters 25 thousand to help them buy a house. How did that work out? All democrats can either fight this shit or roll over. So far only a small handful of Democrats are out there railing against trump while leadership and entrenched democrats sit there fucking silent.

[SocialDemocrat61]

100. Exactly what can be done to effectively fight?

Please be specific.

[Autumn]

102. Take a cue from AOC, Jasmine Crockett, Jamie Raskin for starters.

None of them are silent neither are they voting for trumps unqualified nominees and trusting in god. They are doing their jobs

[SocialDemocrat61]

121. All three are in the House, not the Senate

So they can’t vote for or against any of the nominees. And I’ve seen other democrats speak out as well. While speaking out is nice, it’s not always effective in stopping republicans.

[Autumn]

123. No they can't vote for them but they sure are exposing them.

[SocialDemocrat61]

125. Great

But will that stop republicans in the senate from voting to confirm them?

[Autumn]

126. One last response to you, then I have things to do. The road to fascism is lined

with people telling you to stop overreacting. You might think about that.

[SocialDemocrat61]

130. Not what I said

But you can’t fight fascism without effective actions. You might want to think about that.

[Bobstandard]

153. And yet you propose none. nt

[SocialDemocrat61]

158. Neither are those

attacking the Democratic Party.

[Think. Again.]

137. ⬆️⬆️⬆️THIS⬆️⬆️⬆️

[2naSalit]

96. And yeah I will go to my grave pissed off at Jefferies god is on the throne bullshit.

And I asked a number of times in the temper tantrum thread about that...

Just WTF was he responding to with that message?

And NOBODY even responded let alone informed me of what the temper tantrum was all about, just a knee-jerk bunch of ranting about a xitter post... one that I suspect was not authentic.

So what was Jefferies responding to that set you guys off like that? Mind elaborating on that?



I don't get the part where people believe everything they see on that fucking platform they should have evacuated months ago.

[choie]

252. Do you depend on SNAP to eat?

Do you depend on Medicare and/or Medicaid to access health care, home care, etc.?

I work on behalf of older adults who do just that, and demand that our representatives get their shit together and fight.

[SocialDemocrat61]

253. What exactly do they need to do to fight?

[LeftInTX]

46. So, we just fire them and replace them with what???

We are not CEOs. We have elections, but we will have to wait a few years to fire them. Then after we have fired them, they will be replaced with likely Republicans. We are already probably gonna lose Henry Cuellar's seat because he's going to club fed. That seat is a blue dog seat. They will not elect a progressive.

That is not away to deal with Trump's fascism. We can't "fire them". Are you suggesting a coup to overthrow the Democrats? Surely, the GOP would welcome that type of coup.

[Irish_Dem]

4. Yes we must be reminded that God is on His Throne and all will be well. Amen.

Praise all of our righteous leaders, bow down before them.

[dalton99a]

9. Trust the Lord. He works in inscrutable ways

[Autumn]

41. Yes, god is on his throne and we should shut the fuck up

He got this

[Think. Again.]

11. Are you suggesting we should not hold our representatives accountable?

[maxrandb]

15. Quite a lot of us don't have Democrats as our representatives

Maybe we hold the party that actually has power "accountable" for a change.

I guarantee you that my Retrumplican reps office is hearing from me everyday. Surprised they haven't blocked my number yet.

[Think. Again.]

27. I believe the OP is referring to Dem Representatives.

[allegorical oracle]

64. Bugging the crap out of the locals is key, imo. This a.m., the political ice just

cracked between our staunchly Repuke legislature and Ronnie DeSatan. He's pushing for more stringent deportation and the legislature is balking.

We're making calls. But more importantly, so are the agriculture, dairy, and beef industries. In addition, three hurricanes have left homeowners and insurance companies in a major labor shortage bind. Not enough roofers, electricians, carpenters, etc.

In my experience, politics is inextricably bound to whatever ox is being gored. We need to be patient while time erodes and exposes the serious failures of Republican policies. Yeah, it's frustrating.

[maxrandb]

75. I am making so many calls to Retrumplican "leaders"

I may get "disappeared" in Donnie Dipshits 'MuriKKKa".

Say a prayer for me?

[mcar]

169. What a concept!

Over the years, when I've suggested the same here, I've been told that there's no point in holding Republicans accountable because we know they are not.

But, holding a sit-in in Speaker Pelosi's office (for example) to pressure her to support the Green New Deal, as AOC did her first day on the job, made no sense at all. Ditto the folks who would protest at the Joe Biden's White House about climate issues.

We were the ones doing something about it. The protests gave the media and the Rs ammunition.

[SocialDemocrat61]

17. No

But would rather see thoughtful criticism than blanket attacks.

[maxrandb]

13. No...see...we shouldn't ask; "where the fuck are the Republicans"?

ya know? The ones that actually have the power to put the brakes on this shit.

It's the Democratic Party's fault. If only Democrats were screaming louder.....

[brush]

18. One week into the mad man's 2nd admin and some are demanding Dem leaders do something...

instead of waiting to see if the rethugs drop more orange turds in the punch, or try to stop the fool.

One week and some are demanding Dem leaders to stop EOs.

[SocialDemocrat61]

20. Exactly what can they do?

Open to any constructive suggestions.

[Gore1FL]

78. Not voting for bullshit would be one thing they could do. There should not be one Democratic vote for any of this.

Telling me "God is on the Throne" is something they can stop doing, too.

[SocialDemocrat61]

92. OK

Who voted for BS? Name them and what BS they voted for. That is perfectly fair. But blaming all democrats for the actions of one or a few is not.

[Gore1FL]

103. Let's start with putting dog killers in charge of DHS:

Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania
Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia
Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey
Senator Gary Peters of Michigan
Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire
Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan

[SocialDemocrat61]

110. Thank you

I'm all for naming specific people for specific votes or actions.

[Wiz Imp]

116. And if those Senators all voted against Noem, it would have changed nothing

she would have been confirmed anyway. Having those Senators vote against noem would not have not have been constructive or productive. It would have changed NOTHING. I want Democrats to do things that actually make a difference or at least might make a difference. Unfortunately, many people here are demanding symbolic purity BS which accomplishes absolutely nothing.

[Gore1FL]

117. One change would be my respect for the senators listed wouldn't be diminished. nt

[Wiz Imp]

134. That is fine. Criticize them for their votes if you don't agree with them.

Just don't act like they betrayed the Democratic Party by not casting a no vote when changing their vote still would have had no impact on ultimate Democratic policies.

[Gore1FL]

138. I live in Missouri and voted for Harris despite MO not going blue.

If I voted for Trump would that be OK because of the lack-of-impact, or would I be a contributor to the problems at hand?

[Wiz Imp]

139. I would criticize you for voting for Trump.

However, I won't be screaming about it or calling it a betrayal. I recognize it would have made no difference in the ultimate result. And in Missouri, it was obvious before the election that Harris had 0 chance of winning the state. I'd focus my anger at Democratic voters who didn't vote for Harris or didn't vote at all in states that Harris had a chance to win, like Wisconsin & Pennsylvania.

[Gore1FL]

142. We are going to have to live with this disagreement, then.

I believe in doing the right thing even if it doesn't seem like it will make a difference.

[Emile]

118. Are you saying voting for Noem is constructive and productive?

[Wiz Imp]

129. Nice strawman there. You know I wasn't saying that.

Some actions, whether you like them or not, have no impact on what happens. Complaining about every little thing that ultimately has no impact accomplishes nothing. Even Bernie Sanders and the other most progressive Democrats know that you need to pick your battles and focus on things that actually have a chance to accomplish something.

For example, voting against every cabinet pick is pointless because most of them will get every single Republican vote. Focus on those who are truly dangerous where there is a chance that enough Republicans can be convinced to vote them down.

Democrats did that with Hegseth. Unfortunately he still passed, but he is the type that needs to be opposed at all costs. That should happen with Patel, Gabbard & Kennedy as well. It may or may not ultimately work, but these are the type of constructive actions that could make a difference.

Noem, as terrible as she is, was never going to get any Republicans voting against her. Hegseth did and Patel, Gabbard & Kennedy likely will.

[Emile]

140. No strawman asking you a question. Your

Last edited Tue Jan 28, 2025, 02:24 PM - Edit history (2)

exact words, having those Senators vote against noem would have not have been constructive or productive.

Speaking for myself, I DON'T AGREE that voting for any of these cabinet members as constructive or productive.

[Wiz Imp]

143. You have an error in logic. Saying voting against a nominee is not constructive does not mean

that voting for is them is constructive or productive. Voting for them is also not constructive or productive.

If a is not equal to b it does not automatically follow that -a = b. In fact in this case, -a is also not equal to b.

[Emile]

147. Well I see you can't answer your own logic. Speaking of strawman argument,

your reply is what is called a strawman argument.

[Wiz Imp]

151. OK. If you say so.

[Emile]

152. I do say so and you are still not answering your own logic.

[SocialDemocrat61]

119. Exactly

They what performative feel good actions versus anything that is effective and actually makes a difference.

[Emile]

141. and how is voting for them effective and actually makes a difference?

[SocialDemocrat61]

146. A handful voted

Not the whole party. Criticize the handful not everyone.

[Emile]

149. Your words, not mine. You said

versus anything that is effective and actually makes a difference. How is it effective and making a difference?

[SocialDemocrat61]

162. So democrats criticizing

a democrat elected official for a specific vote or policy is not effective, but attacking the whole party for that one officials actions is effective?

[Emile]

173. You are still not answering your own logic.

[SocialDemocrat61]

174. I'm not understanding your question

or what “logic’ you’re referring to.

[Emile]

176. Do I have to copy and paste what you said in every reply?

[SocialDemocrat61]

177. It would help

[Emile]

178. LOL 🤣

[angrychair]

161. Im not an expert

Nor do I control anything but my understanding is that naming specific Democrats and being critical could be considered as bashing Democrats which is against the rules. Again, no criticism of any rules or anything people are saying, just expressing what I thought was how it's interpreted but that is a question better answered by others.

[SocialDemocrat61]

167. I think it depends on context

and how it’s expressed. Like “I disagree with John Fetterman going to see Trump” vs “Fetterman is the devil”. There’s a difference.

[Marigold]

81. They should be out everyday

On every media outlet countering the Republican agenda. Pointing out what is a lie, what is a violation of law, the constitution, the real world repercussions of these orders, over and over again just like the Republicans speak with one voice. I am sorry, but Presidents come and go and God is on his throne does not cut it. Presidents may come and go but dictators do not. We have lost the MSM except for a few anchors on MSM and they are not reaching anyone but those already in the echo chamber. Speaking truth to power is not a temper tantrum.

[SocialDemocrat61]

94. Who is 'they' exactly?

And do you think 'they' should just barge into TV studios to do so? TV and cable channels usually don't put someone on camera unless they are invited to be there.

[Marigold]

107. "They" is the Democrats

I'm pretty sure the news media would allow them some time. And if not, nothing stopping them from scheduling press conferences. If MSM choses not to cover them, they keep doing it anyway until it becomes a story. Are only Republicans invited on TV and cable news? I'm not talking Fox or NewsMax. I see plenty of Republicans on MSM. I also see Dems saying wishy washy stuff like God is on the throne or they are going to write a letter. AOC and Jasmine Crockett seem to communicate their indignation more effectively.

[SocialDemocrat61]

108. Who are 'the democrats'?

Please be specific.

[Marigold]

112. Nevermind. Pointless discussion.

[SocialDemocrat61]

114. Have a nice day

[Scrivener7]

154. What do you mean by "the?" And when you say, "be," in what sense are you using that word?

Hmmmmmm?

[SocialDemocrat61]

159. You can find definitions here

https://www.dictionary.com/

[Scrivener7]

164. Yes, but I really don't have a sense of how you are using them.

So I'll just keep asking, because the purpose is to shut down conversation, isn't it?

Just following your lead.

[SocialDemocrat61]

168. The definitions are

https://www.dictionary.com/

[Bettie]

87. They could not vote for the fuckery?

And they could speak up instead of offering platitudes about god fixing things and 'this too shall pass'.

[SocialDemocrat61]

95. Who is 'they'?

Please be specific. And who voted for f**kery? Again, please be specific.

[Scrivener7]

155. What do you mean by "who?" Please be specific. And your use of the asterisk.

It could mean many things. Please be more specific. Otherwise I'll just keep asking inane questions designed to shut down the conversation.

[SocialDemocrat61]

163. Definitions are here

https://www.dictionary.com/

[Autumn]

49. We fucking KNOW where the republicans are. As to who the ones are

that actually have the power to put the brakes on this shit ? They ARE the ones doing this fucking shit. They aren't about to put the brakes on.
So fuck us and don't stress the Dems by picking on them amirite?

[NewHendoLib]

14. Oh good grief...

[Autumn]

37. It's getting ridiculous on all fronts.

[NewHendoLib]

44. I have a feeling it can get worse still!

I'm going hiking with my wife and dog - need to clear the synapses.

[Autumn]

72. Oh yeah it's gonna get a lot worse. Leadership needs to pay a lot more attention

and start getting their ducks in a row.

[OneGrassRoot]

93. Looks like we should have sent Dems in Congress a copy of On Tyranny.

In spite of their words during the campaign acknowledging the danger, it seems we're much more prepared intellectually and emotionally than they are. They seem stunned and that makes absolutely no sense if one was paying attention. That's the crux of my frustration and, honestly, disgust.

[gab13by13]

16. How many of Trump's EO's are illegal?

He is neutering Congress, he is gaining control of the purse strings.

What are Democrats doing to stop the illegal EO's?

If they are telling me they can do nothing then they need to resign and put someone in who at least fights.

What is the mission statement of Congressional Democrats? They had a chance to elevate AOC, a fighter, but they voted no to a fighter.

Chuck Schumer gave permission for Senators to vote for a bad immigration bill. I have noticed this about Schumer, every time he addresses the Senate he has to read from a paper, not inspiring to me.

I fought powerful people back in the 1970's in my small town. They wanted to strip coal and frack on our watershed. I was told there was nothing I could do because Dick Cheney deregulated federally. They were wrong. I mobilized the entire town, we had the largest number of people attend a council meeting. We got the fish commission involved, we formed a group that met regularly and we hounded the local newspapers to attend our meetings. We did not listen to the people who told us the law was against us.

We ended up getting so many restrictions put on the strippers/frackers that we protected our watershed. For my part, my county Democratic chair asked me to run for council, I did and I won in a red town. While on council I asked members of our zoning council to go with me to a University to attend a zoning seminar. We got a model flood plain ordinance, went back to our small town and drew up a flood plain ordinance that restricted what could be done in a flood plain.

When you have a good cause to fight for the people will come to have your back, just like they showed up in my small town. We are waiting for Congressional Democrats to give us our marching orders. I guarantee this; not fighting is a sure recipe for losing.

[brush]

22. Prey tell, how do you stop EOs, especially Dems who are not the party in control?

[SocialDemocrat61]

24. Democrats need to wave their magic wand

to stop them. At least that’s what some expect.

[brush]

35. Exactly. I say let's see how far the mad man goes.

We've seen him before and he fucks up. Now without the Generals from his first go round, the adults in the room who control his crazy impulses somewhat, this fool is going to fuck up with the disastrous clown car cabinet whispering dangerous shit into his ear...like appointing a Russian asset as Director of Intel, a drunk rapist as Sec'y od Defense and an FBI director who has been know to undermine the very Bureau he will be in charge of.

We should understand there will be massive fuck ups.

[dwayneb]

241. Yes I am puzzled

By this whole "conversation". I understand some people are upset, but I don't hear any coherent plan or strategy to counter Trump's pogrom. Democrats can speak up all day long but unless we elect enough representatives to overcome the tyranny of the minority it won't matter.

Reality is that this is frustration from people that are beginning to understand that the deck is stacked against them. Our "republic" has always been designed to cede the power to white Fascists. Through the Electoral college and the Senate, and via gerrymandering in the House.

In my opinion? There will be blood. This is not going to end in a peaceful way.

[SocialDemocrat61]

243. That's the problem

some are condemning all democrats for not making useless gestures. I want real effective actions. And you’re right, we need to elect more people like AOC and Jamie Raskin.

[gab13by13]

45. So Democrats should look the other way

to all of the illegal EO's?

Just like people told me back in the 70's, you are giving me a deja vu. I was told that federal law supersedes local law, there was nothing I could do. Well, I fought and I am ready to fight again, I do not subscribe to the terrible strategy to let them destroy our country.

[electric_blue68]

205. A powerful story, good on you, and people who joined in.

Also e mailed Schumer (my Senator) said keep strategizing, but I wanted to see some passion when talking about such import issues affecting peoples lives. Passion doesn't have to mean shouting.

[C0RI0LANUS]

19. These two Democratic Congresswomen have been attacked on Democratic Underground.

[SocialDemocrat61]

23. Not okay

As far as I’m concerned.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

90. So you're saying they got out of line?

Were you elected arbitrator of who is and who isn't available for criticism?

[tritsofme]

120. Uhhhh....seems like you are trying to play that role!

[LeftInTX]

36. So has Nancy Pelosi. But that's not what either of this is about. This about people who are basically

"hating on all the Democrats" and basically implying that they are worthless....That they are spineless, lazy, money hungry. They sound like what Fox News says about Democrats.

[FakeNoose]

55. We need to use the "Alert" button whenever we see a skeevy post on DU

The Alert button triggers DU's standard review process and other DUers will judge whether a particular post needs to be taken down. The judges don't always agree, but that's how our process works.

I've been a judge many times in the last 8 years, and I've also alerted posts (or replies) more times than I can remember.

[LeftInTX]

65. They are being alerted on! Too many jury members must think "shitting on Democrats" is OK.

We're probably getting some of the people that used to be here that hated the party returning back.
That's all I can think of....

In 2016, we all had to sign a TOS agreeing to support the Democratic nominee for president. We were fairly united in 2017 because those that did not sign the TOS could no longer post.

[Think. Again.]

201. I guess DU is not a cult.

[betsuni]

204. They're probably feeling optimistic what with all the Democrat-bashing, but they failed to take

over the Democratic Party and they'll keep failing because their ideology is based on things that aren't true.

They think Democrats are supernaturally all-powerful old centrists controlling everything even when out of power, will stop at nothing to defeat the "anti-establishment," rig primaries and appoint DNC chair and so on without what really happens (voting), but then say how spineless, stupid, incompetent, weak, don't fight, do nothing, ignore everybody, are easily corrupted by small amounts of campaign contributions, etc. Democrats are. Which one is it, then? Can't be both.

[mcar]

171. Attacked or criticized?

They deserve criticism for their attacks on President Biden and VP Harris - and many of their constituents will suffer for it. And, they will see Palestinians displaced and Gaza turned into a Kushner resort.

They deserve criticism and we are allowed to criticize Democrats here.

But, a free for all attack on Democrats is unproductive, to say the least.

[MayReasonRule]

21. Ultimately Matters Such As This Will Be Decided By Moderators Applying Site Rules

That being the case... perhaps send an email to the Administrators regarding your inquiry.

Utilizing the alert system is always an option well.

Happy Tuesday y''all.

Main Contact Information
General Email:
[e-mail]

Discussion Forum Administration:
[e-mail]

Postal Mail:
Democratic Underground
P.O. Box 342453
Bethesda, MD 20827

The DU Administrators
EarlG
David Allsopp
Co-founder, Forum Administrator
[e-mail]

Elad
Lead Programmer, Forum Administrator
[e-mail]

[Think. Again.]

29. Perhaps you were wrong about your alerts?

[LeftInTX]

30. Thanks for trying. I think this points to how the juries are thinking, which is not good.

I'm dismayed by it.
We lost.
So let's just shit on the Democrats.
It's already bad, but let's demoralize the Democrats even more....Let's really give them nothing to fight for!
Geez this is Democratic Underground, not "shit all over Democrats Underground"

Talk about demoralizing.....

[SocialDemocrat61]

34. Well said

I never thought that a post in this forum saying to not attack democrats would get so much pushback.

[LeftInTX]

39. I know...It's not constructive.

[Think. Again.]

56. I agree, this OP is definitely not constructive.

[MayReasonRule]

82. Happy Tuesday Y'all Perhaps Contact Administration Directly

My limited understanding is that is what's preferred instead of moderation discussions occurring in forums.

Main Contact Information
General Email:
[e-mail]

Discussion Forum Administration:
[e-mail]

Postal Mail:
Democratic Underground
P.O. Box 342453
Bethesda, MD 20827

The DU Administrators
EarlG
David Allsopp
Co-founder, Forum Administrator
[e-mail]

Elad
Lead Programmer, Forum Administrator
[e-mail]

[demmiblue]

28. ...

[boston bean]

38. I support democrats. Have my entire life. I support them in many ways.

Sometimes even asking them to do the right thing. Giving them the strength to and political capital. Which others want ascribe as an attack.

[SocialDemocrat61]

47. Exactly what do you want them to do?

Please be specific.

[boston bean]

70. Lead. Not silence and acquiescence.

However they can manage that fine. Don’t tell us Jesus is at the wheel.

[SocialDemocrat61]

73. And exactly how would that stop any EO?

Please try to be specific.

[boston bean]

76. No one is stating they can stop it. But vocally and vociferously speak against it ok?

That ain’t happening.

[LeftInTX]

84. Where I live they are working hard to mitigate it. It's quiet and behind the scenes. (ICE raids etc)

Yelling and screaming won't do much good. But trying to mitigate and quietly work behind the scenes is what needs to be done. Not everything needs to be out in the open.

[SocialDemocrat61]

89. I've heard several Dems denounce them

So it is happening.

[kacekwl]

105. It seems to me

that when a Democrat is in office every move they made including EO's was met with multiple lawsuits and resulting stays and holds and pauses by the courts. I have heard of some lawsuits by various outside groups but not from the Democratic party. I don't know if that is true.

[SocialDemocrat61]

109. That's an exaggeration

While there were many lawsuits filed against Biden's EOs, it wasn't every single one. And almost all were by outside groups or individual states, not by the Republican party.

[kacekwl]

111. Great good go know.

Thanks.

[Doodley]

179. We are seeing our nation being dismantled. I'm not sure if you are arguing against Democratic lawmakers doing

everything they can to speak out. Our very democracy is at stake. Everyday, huge damage is being done to our country. Never in our lifetimes has it been more important for lawmakers speak out.

[SocialDemocrat61]

180. Speaking out is great

But doesn’t really accomplish anything in the long run. Democrats have been calling Trump a fascist for years and he still won the election. I want to see real effective and realistic actions.

[Doodley]

186. So no voters need to be educated about what is going on? Nothing can be done? Unbelievable.

[SocialDemocrat61]

187. Never said that

But attacking democrats doesn’t educate voters.

[themaguffin]

40. I support Democrats. I don't support "Democrats" who attack Democrats or enable trumpism or the GOP in general.

[SocialDemocrat61]

50. I have no problem with criticizing

individuals such as Fetterman for his recent actions. What I’m talking about are some blanket condemnations of unnamed democrats with no specifics.

[Jilly_in_VA]

144. All righty then

Cite chapter and verse, and don't just come out with blanket statements in such posts. I get royally tired of this kind of thing. I will criticize Democrats by name if I think they have done something wrong, but saying., as you did in your OP "I thought we supported Democrats" is just asking for trouble and a lot of angry replies. So please try not to do so in the future.

[SocialDemocrat61]

150. Never thought making a statement

supporting the Democratic Party would be so controversial in a forum dedicated to supporting the Democratic Party

[mountain grammy]

48. Whatever Truman said...

Right there!!! Just seeing his face first thing gives me comfort. He integrated the military ! Maybe the blob will repeal that too and we can blame Democrats but Democrats aren’t doing it. Time to blame and shame the racists.


Executive Order 9981, Desegregating the Military

[atreides1]

63. Well

I'm waiting to see if Trump will override Executive Order 9981!

[gab13by13]

53. There is a big difference regarding "attacking Democrats."

I voted and donated money to my Senator John Fetterman, but lately I have criticized his positions on several issues.

Is that attacking Democrats? If it is we are stifling free speech here.

Do not tell me that Democrats can't do anything to stop or at least fight against illegal EO's.

IMO the people who are saying Democrats can do nothing are the ones attacking Democrats.

Once again, I do not subscribe to the strategy to let Trump burn everything down.

I now donate to the ACLU, Southern Poverty law Center, and plan to donate to AOC and Jasmine Crocket, they earned my money and my respect.

[SocialDemocrat61]

60. Criticizing Fetterman or any other democrat

based on their votes, actions or positions on specific issues is totally fair. But blanket condemnation of “democrats” with no specifics is not.

As far as the EOs, what exactly can be done to stop them? Please be specific.

[gab13by13]

77. I get it that Trump is president and can issue EO's.

I am talking about all of the illegal EO's that Trump has issued. Do not tell me that Democrats can do nothing to stop illegal EO's.

When I faced a big issue in my small town back in the 70's I was told the same thing I am hearing now, federal law supersedes state/local laws. That did not deter me from fighting. I acted to protect our water supply and I acted to protect our water supply in the future. I went to a university to educate myself what could be done. I am not a Congressman, many are lawyers, I don't know what their options are? I would hope that they don't subscribe to the idea that there is nothing they can do?

[SocialDemocrat61]

97. Then please tell us

what should be done? What EOs are illegal and what specific actions can be taken?

[mcar]

172. Check it out

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143382702

[BeyondGeography]

54. Yeah, well, when you lose two of three elections to Donald Trump

and the one you won was thanks to a pandemic, expect incoming.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

58. Not blindly. NT

[Hotler]

59. I'm not accepting any appeasement. The issue is simple for me. You either honor your oath of office and defend

freedom and democracy or, you fail your oath and side with fascism and dictatorship. There is no in between on this. No middle of the road. Voting to go along to get along won't cut it. We will remember at election time, if we have another one.

We should be seeing a historical united resistance from our members in both chambers. And it should be an angry resistance, IMO.

[SocialDemocrat61]

61. What appeasement are you referring to?

Who is failing their oath? Please be specific.

[Hotler]

131. IMO. They all failed for not even trying to declare the orange one a domestic enemy.

If they tried it would have made the news. It might not of worked but it would have been up lifting to see them try.

Appeaser may be the wrong word. These are some that IMO are too cozy with the fascist right from the start.
Full List of Democrats Who Voted To Pass Laken Riley Act
https://www.newsweek.com/full-list-democrats-voted-pass-laken-riley-act-2019432

Senator John Fetterman.

Colorado's U.S. senators break with environmentalists to support Trump's energy pick
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/colorados-us-senators-break-with-environmentalists-to-support-trumps-energy-pick/ar-AA1xJZb4

[SocialDemocrat61]

135. All?

So you what feel good performative stuff instead of effective actions?

[Wiz Imp]

148. Right. And these same people that are complaining because not all Democrats are voting against everything

would still be complaining even if every Democrat voted against everything. Why? Because the Democrats didn't stop it. It's like people have a need to lash out at someone for not stopping Trump even though with most things right now, there is nothing they can do to stop Trump.

A few Democrats voting with Republicans in some cases is certainly disappointing, but voting differently still wouldn't stop Trump which should be the ultimate goal.

[Voltaire2]

217. Voting for any of his cabinet appointments.

That is an act of appeasement.

[SocialDemocrat61]

219. And those who did deserve to be criticized

But it’s unfair to attack a whole party for the actions of a few.

[Voltaire2]

220. Rubio 99-0

[SocialDemocrat61]

221. So the actions of 47 people

mean the entire party should be demonized? And is Rubio unqualified?

[Voltaire2]

222. Lol.

It was the entire Democratic Party senate caucus.

[SocialDemocrat61]

223. And thats still on 47 people

and it's only appeasement if Rubio is unqualified.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

62. Thank you for posting this

[Renew Deal]

66. Trying to silence legitimate criticism doesn't support Democrats.

It allows the party to get stagnant. Democrats generally oppose censorship.

[SocialDemocrat61]

71. I'm all for specific criticism

But name a specific person, issue and actions. Not just blanket attacks.

[kerouac2]

68. Unfortunately, the issue isn't the will of Democrats

It's the ability.

Democrats are legislators and people focused and skilled in governing and making decisions for the good of our entire country.

The gop is lead by cut throat ceo's, anarchists and crooks with expert skills in media and manipulation.

We simply do not have the media network, skill in manipulation and evil minions like they do.

And now we can't even use the law, because they essentially own that too.

So frustration with Dems has a lot to do with something Dems can't really do much about, because they are not evil people surrounded by more evil people skilled in manipulation and willing to do anything, legal or not.

[Bettie]

79. How about an example or two as to what exactly you are

upset about?

Is your point that there is to be nothing but cheerleading, stating that we are in the best place we could possibly be in and everything is awesome?

An example or two (without a call out of any individual) would be helpful. You could reference what has been said that you find offensive.

[SocialDemocrat61]

106. You can just read this thread

and several others posts in the forum to see what I'm referring to.

[Omnipresent]

80. The party seems to have fallen asleep and let a Republican majority get elected.

We were all for Harris, but we didn’t know how deep of a hole she had to climb out of, just to narrowly lose.

[doc03]

88. We can't speak out when we disagree with a Democrat. That sounds like the Republicans theatening

to primary anyone that speaks out against MAGA.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

91. Correct.

Sounds exactly like Musk.

[doc03]

98. I had lots of complaints I heard from the MAGAs viewpoint as to why Harris lost and Biden's

polls were underwater for 4 years. But can't express them without being attacked.

[SocialDemocrat61]

101. A democrat, yes

I have no problem with criticizing a specific democrat for their actions or positions. It's the blanket attacks on 'the democrats' in general that I was referring to.

[hadEnuf]

104. No, it's more like postponing D-Day until 1970 because "we don't want to be like the enemy".

n/t

[SocialDemocrat61]

115. How so?

Has any democrat said nothing should be done until after Trump leaves office? If so, who?

[hadEnuf]

195. We have been keeping our powder dry and now we are flooded. We should have been hammering the GOP with everything we had

but we waited and waited and here we are.

I'm sick of waiting for the "right time". Fitzmas was the right time. Mueller was the right time. Garland was the right time.

At the very least the Democrats could mount a united front against this fascist onslaught and not blink. Stand for what's right, even if you lose. That would resonate with the American people a lot better than the go along to get along.

Kamala Harris was a great candidate and did an amazing job with the time she had, but how did the Dems throwing Biden under the bus over a few flubbed debate lines look to the American people?
One thing you've got to give the GOP is they don't give up, they stay on message, and they stand behind their own.

Maybe thrashing on some Democrats may wake them up to draw a line in the sand and fight.

Win or lose.

[SocialDemocrat61]

196. How have democrats been keeping their powder dry?

Democrats have been calling Trump and republicans fascists for years and they still won the election.

And losing accomplishes nothing. We need to win. To smart effective strategies are needed, not performative feel good actions.

[Septua]

124. This is kinda' off topic but I got sick...

..of hearing pundits and some DNC officials trying to explain why Kamala lost, placing the blame on 'messaging'...IMO she lost because she is a 'she' and Black. The 6M votes she lost from Biden's 2020 total is why she didn't win the Presidency. I'm not sure if Trump's 3M gain was half of the 6M or not but could well have been some of them.

And as I have been preaching, the Trump/Repug/Conservative/MAGA propaganda machine is massive and highly effective. And the Democrats have yet to come up with an equally massive and effective counter weapon. It's still butter knives vs machine guns.

[niyad]

127. But your posts criticizing DU posters for daring to criticize

our employees are okay?

[SocialDemocrat61]

133. I have no problem

with criticizing specific democrats for specific positions, statements, votes or actions. It’s the general “democrats” are bad generalizations that I’m talking about.

[niyad]

193. Hmm, for some reason I keep thinking of Lady Violet.

[SocialDemocrat61]

194. Lol

[betsuni]

128. They hate a fictional Democratic Party, why all the dramatic emotions, conspiracy theories, passive-aggressive

vague accusations. One Democrat says something and that person suddenly represents the whole party. The glee and lust to attack Democrats.

That "Oh, gee whiz, calling Democrats stupid, out-of-touch, corrupt, immoral, elite establishment who aren't doing anything and the party doesn't 'give a shit' or 'care about us' is constructive criticism." Saying things makes them true! While Republicans are allowed to stand around their own mess innocently as if they had nothing to do with anything.

Really obvious what the goal is here. The gullible are vulnerable to the manipulated message (and it's repeated every day all day), people who live in reality and know the history and people of the Democratic Party are not. There are other forums, lots of other things to do.

[claudette]

132. Where are they?

[alarimer]

145. Give me a break.

We do not pledge fealty to the party, right or wrong. We are SUPPOSED to call them out when necessary.

[Oneironaut]

160. This

I think most people here support Democrats because they’re the best of this country, not because we feel some kind of team allegiance to them.

[SocialDemocrat61]

170. Sure

Call out specific democrats for specific actions. That’s fair. Attacking the entire party with a blanket condemnation is not.

[stillcool]

157. all gone.

but it does seem the same usernames, are posting the same stuff, over and over...even using the same words, or talking points. No discussion, just accusations. I do think that a lot of people would prefer the Democrats behave exactly like the Republicans, but without all the wealth, power and free access to all the tools needed to bring down a country. I'm going to try and find some humor in all this bullshit. There is no other value.

[mcar]

166. I found the attacks on Hakeem Jeffries

from the other day way OTT.

We are in this position, in part, because of yet another group of supposed Democrats who didn't vote for VP Harris to "send a message." I had hoped people had learned from the 2016 election but they seem to make the same mistakes, over and over again.

[Emile]

175. Who are these du democrats you are accusing for not voting for Harris?

[mcar]

181. The "uncommitted" who regularly trashed

President Biden and VP Harris.

[Emile]

182. Well you must have an idea who they are.

[mcar]

183. It'd be easy enough for you to Google

Have a nice day.

[Emile]

184. So you won't answer.

[mcar]

188. I've answered - and nice try

[Emile]

191. No you didn't, not even a nice try.

[LakeArenal]

185. I will never understand disagreeing with elected leaders over things important to us is called bashing.

I am very upset with the actions of at least two of our most incumbent leaders. Saying so and pointing to exactly who those leaders are is considered bashing.
When what those lofty Democrats have done is bash two of the most popular leaders of my life.

[SocialDemocrat61]

189. Calling out individual democrats

for actions and votes is fair criticism. Attacking all democrats for the actions of a few is not.

[Think. Again.]

202. There are times when the Democratic Party is, and should be, seen as a whole....

...and that whole is defined what individuals within it do.

[SocialDemocrat61]

206. Demonizing a whole group of people

for the actions of a few has always been unjust.

[Think. Again.]

212. There's a big difference between "demonizing" and holding accountable.

[SocialDemocrat61]

213. Yes hold individuals accountable

for specific actions. But blaming the whole party for one person’s actions is completely unfair.

[Think. Again.]

214. You don't seem to understand that when a majority of any given group act...

...that act can reasonably be attributed to the entire group.

Even when one player fumbles an important play, the whole team loses.

[SocialDemocrat61]

215. You don't seem to understand

that attacking a whole party for one person’s actions, damages the whole team and makes it less effective going forward.

[Think. Again.]

216. I beg to differ...

...the bitching we've been doing the last few days is getting through.

More Dems are finally showing some guts and starting to oppose the nazis.

[SocialDemocrat61]

218. Don't kid yourself

They were doing that already. But if you want to give yourself a pat on the back to feed your ego, go right ahead.

[Think. Again.]

224. If they were doing that already....

...there wouldn't have been the outcry the OP disagrees with.

(And just a note, when a poster resorts to personal snark, they can lose credibility for their position and it's usually a sign they know their argument is weak.)

[SocialDemocrat61]

225. They were doing that already

and numerous examples were noted in this and other threads. But some will still complain because nothing is ever good enough.

(And just a note, sounds like I struck a nerve.)

[Think. Again.]

226. Oh, so they were doing it SECRETLY, like garland did his job...

....got it.

[SocialDemocrat61]

227. No, publicly

Don't deny reality.

[Think. Again.]

228. Again, if they were being proactive publicly...

...there would not have been such loud calls for them to be proactive.

[SocialDemocrat61]

229. Again, for some it's never enough

and just like to complain, holding democrats to an ideal of perfection so they can feel good about themselves.

And don't pretend democrats were not speaking out.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/january-6-pardons-senate-democrats-condemn/&ved=2ahUKEwjHtIP2_5qLAxVplYkEHQKxHWQQyM8BKAB6BAgREAE&usg=AOvVaw3QibIaPL6_heQ9yByAB6_A
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://theflintcouriernews.com/democratic-legislators-condemn-house-gop-passage-of-anti-worker-bills-blocking-minimum-wage-increases/&ved=2ahUKEwjEwYWMgZuLAxXawvACHa_sFSY4ChDF9AEoAHoECBIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1TNXetGPG-HsrFlV6qM4O_
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/democrats-wildfire-aid-20033764.php&ved=2ahUKEwjEwYWMgZuLAxXawvACHa_sFSY4ChDF9AEoAHoECBkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1kpIja_dMBf5rMHTG6U_H5
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5107000-house-democrats-condemn-trumps-inspectors-general-firings-in-letter/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjEwYWMgZuLAxXawvACHa_sFSY4ChDIzwEoAHoECBgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1AjKI1bOJ_mtt0plG7Ujbm
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://patch.com/new-jersey/eastbrunswick/amp/32116543/house-dems-condemn-release-of-j6-rioter-who-assaulted-brian-sicknick&ved=2ahUKEwjx7PK5gZuLAxWHrokEHe57DRo4FBDIzwEoAHoECA4QAQ&usg=AOvVaw1x6oM6LfNookUAlVsnpN2r
So let's end the fiction that democrats weren't speaking out.

[Think. Again.]

230. Well, they're STARTING to speak out now...

...thanks to the widespread calls for them to do so.

[SocialDemocrat61]

231. No they were doing it already

Every article linked were from days ago, so stop denying reality.

[Emile]

232. Including the one when Biden was still President?

[SocialDemocrat61]

233. So they were only allowed to speak out

against Trump after he was sworn in?

[Emile]

234. LOL

[SocialDemocrat61]

236. Have a great day

[Emile]

238. You made my day, thanks.

[SocialDemocrat61]

239. You're very welcome

[Ping Tung]

197. I don't sign or believe in Loyalty Oaths. I''d rather think for myself.

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." --

Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, 1789.

[SocialDemocrat61]

199. Who said anything about loyalty oaths

But broad blanket attacks are unfair and counterproductive.

[betsuni]

208. Loyalty oaths, cult, blind allegiance, bow down, worship, toe the line, hive mind,

the party is always right, genuflecting, pay fealty, marching in lockstep, rah rah cheerleaders, echo chamber.

All popular Democrat-bashing insults in 2016.

[SocialDemocrat61]

210. Too many just want

useless gestures to make themselves feel good rather than effective actions that helps others.

[betsuni]

245. Ironic that they're the "Democrats can be too big of a tent" "there's no standard" people -- purity tests and

loyalty oaths and everyone repeating the same slogans or you're out! As if the majority of the U.S. is deep blue. Ridiculous.

[Skittles]

198. LOL

UM, ELECTING REPUKES ALREADY FUCKING HAPPENED

[SocialDemocrat61]

200. And they will continue to win

if everyone continues attacking democrats.

[Skittles]

203. we support them

we don't goosestep to them

[SocialDemocrat61]

209. Never said anything about goose stepping

But trashing all democrats because one, or a few, did or said something we disagree with, will only help republicans.

[Renew Deal]

240. Just get it over with and say you want total obedience

People in this country are not happy with the status quo. We need to be thinking about how to solve people’s problems differently.

[SocialDemocrat61]

242. Never said I want total obedience

So please don’t put words in my mouth.

And I’m all for hearing constructive ideas to help people.

[Skittles]

269. that hardly describes the situation

DONE HERE

[SocialDemocrat61]

270. True

since no one asked for goose stepping.

[Elessar Zappa]

207. How do you define "attacking"?

Criticism is allowed here and welcome, imo, as long as it doesn’t become completely unreasonable or vitriolic (or results in pushing 3rd parties).

[SocialDemocrat61]

211. Post that

don’t mention an individual person or specific actions that just attack “democrats” in general without any details.

[doc03]

237. Some deserve it nt

[SocialDemocrat61]

247. Some do

But not all.

[CrispyQ]

254. I think there's some latitude in the rules depending on if we're in an election season or not

Also, we're not lockstep like the other side so some criticism is always allowed. If you feel someone has overstepped you can always respond to their post, send them a PM, or alert on them.

There's a ton of frustration right now. Vote to save democracy we were told in 2020 & then again in 2024. Some of us feel the democratic response to boxes & boxes & boxes of stolen documents was weak. And let's not forget that insurrection, too. The wheelers will be here soon, to explain why everything about those timelines was hunky-dory. Yet here we are.

A true opposition party would never have let it get to this point. The dems are 45-60 years behind the 8-ball. Our electoral process has been turned into a for-profit industry & can never elect true representatives of all the people & the people who can change it, are some of the very ones who benefit from it.

Democracy was always going to be harder & harder to hold onto as climate chaos gets worse. Globally, it took a huge blow when Trump got in again.

[SocialDemocrat61]

255. I have no issue with

specific people being called out for specific actions. My issue is with posts that are blaming all democrats or claiming that they are not doing anything or enough. There have even been posts calling for a third party. These are unfair and not productive.

[CrispyQ]

258. I guess I'm one you'd take issue with then cuz I agree, as a party, as a unified voice, they aren't doing enough. -nt

[SocialDemocrat61]

259. What should they be doing?

Please be specific.

[CrispyQ]

260. A unified no vote for all of his nominees would be a good start.

We can be the party of herding cats when the fascists have been dealt with.

Have a good day.

[SocialDemocrat61]

261. Are they all unqualified?

And what would that accomplish? Most would get through anyway. Any suggestions on something actually effective?

[CrispyQ]

264. I'm not a political strategist so maybe they should hire a few. Also, you're exhausting. Bye. -nt

[SocialDemocrat61]

265. Why?

Because I’m asking for specific, effective actions instead of vague demands?

[claudette]

256. I thought

they supported us.

[SocialDemocrat61]

257. Are you saying they don't?

How so?

[claudette]

262. No

I’m not saying that. But I do wonder why they’re so silent now. Hope they’re planning something

[SocialDemocrat61]

263. How are they silent?

I’ve seen democrats like AOC, Jamie Raskin and others speaking out every day.

[claudette]

266. Guess I mean

ALL Democrats should be just as loud. I hope they’re planning something

[SocialDemocrat61]

267. All democrats don't get the media attention

And a new DNC chair has to be elected until serious planning gets underway.

[claudette]

268. Ok