Do you think DU is the Democratic base?

[BL611]

I am curious as to how many of you think that DU represents an accurate cross section of the Democratic party, or even the liberal wing of the DEmocratic party.I personally believe it is not, but am genuinely interested in what people think. Please do not flame this, its an honest question...

[wakeme2008]

1. all of DU yes...

lot of different opinions on here

[BL611]

6. fair enough

but the prevailing opinion on DU.

[Tellurian]

23. NO...NOT AT ALL..

Too many divided factions posting here-

DU is a Hate Hillary magnet! Doesn't speak too well of even representaion..Does it?

Even though, I think Hillary is our best candidate.

[BL611]

26. Yes I agree

but am curious to see what others think.

[bluehighways911]

2. Important Yes, Base, No

As with all the netroots. They are an important tool that one day will over take the scum media in getting out imformation.

But netroots better learn, they need other sides to win races.

More people, even Democrats are brainwashed by the media.

[Monkeyman]

3. Dam right we are

[90-percent]

17. my opinion

because we're all heavily on the internet and know how to "go around" MSM, I think DU'ers are MUCH BETTER INFORMED than the average democrat. I also think we as a group are a SMALL MINORITY of democrats and we as a group do not accurately reflect the make up of a "typical" democrat, who may rely on MSM newspapers or TV to get their info. And this info would be skewed or outright propaganda.

DU'ers are well beyond getting stonewalled by MSM and we are basically a "cult" within the democratic community.

-85% jimmy

[BL611]

25. No disrespect

But with regards to DU people being differnt because they are "better informed", I find that to be a little arrogant, and not quite true.

[fujiyama]

83. I think it's clear those on this site

are better informed than the average American on most issues - and that includes the average Democrat.

Most people don't spend a few hours of their day - or even an hour or so - dedicated to discussing politics. And often times on DU, these discussions are based off current day to day news events.

[leyton]

119. But DU is an echo chamber.

DU represents a very small portion of the policy debate. If someone got on here and presented a cogent case for staying in Iraq... who would listen? I really don't think coming here to have one's political views reinforced is much different from the ideologues who make policy in the White House by conferring with other ideologues. In other words, yes, the poster above who called out the previous guy for arrogance was right on target.

[fujiyama]

120. I agree about the echo chamber comment

but I still think DUers are better informed of news and current events, regarding politics.

Granted, many DUers are also very idealistic as well - leading sometimes to a dismissal of pragmatic solutions.

[Mrspeeker]

4. I thought it was about being Democratic....

and Not so much about being for the Democratic party.

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. Good question!

Personally, I think it represents a good cross section of the Democratic Party with its members as a whole. But there are times that I think there are a large number of active posters who are "the far left" and not part of the Democratic Party or the Democratic Party's base. It makes it seem that the Democratic Party is something much more extreme than it really is.

JMHO :)

[movonne]

24. What makes a person extreme?? I mean what subjects makes them

extreme..

[Norquist Nemesis]

32. It's Subjective

I really wanted to avoid any pointing of fingers and start a derailing of the thread, so I'm going to dodge and just say one person's extreme is another person's umm...passion. But 'extreme', at least for me means a my way or the highway let's just throw the baby out with the bathwater type of things.

[DURHAM D]

45. I can not recall ever seeing any "far left" posts on the DU.

Extreme - yes.

Positions on impeachment, immigration and the war not thought through - but not far left.
Positions on candidates wildly passionate - but not far left.
Frustration with the congress and judicial branch - but not far left.

Could you give me an example of a far left position that is regularly discussed on the DU. Example - Nationalizing oil and gas. I have never seen it discussed. National Health Insurance is not far left - it is mainstream.

[BL611]

46. I am a shall we say

casual visitor to DU and hace ssen many far left posts. Its seems only recently that the prevailing opinion on DU that Hugo Chavez is mother Theresa.

[John Q. Citizen]

68. The terms left and right are reletive. If you believe that John McCain is a centrist,

then I would imagine that you would also believe that many of the posts here at DU are far left.

What do you have against Hugo Chavez?

[Le Taz Hot]

113. He/she means people like me

who refuse to goose-step to the party line and do the rah-rah thing for candidates who we can't stomach but nonetheless are being shoved down our throats. People like me who look closely at the Ethics Bill and ask, "What the hell has changed?" People like me who throw up their hands in disgust when we see non-binding resolutions while watching an escalation of an illegal war. People like me who will never understand why impeachment should be off the table when we have WAR CRIMINALS in the White House. In 2007, we are "extremists."

[skipos]

7. DU does not represent an accurate cross section of the Dem Party

Look at Nelson's approval ratings from Dems in NE, they are sky high. He is hated here.
Kucinich will dominate polls here, but probably only get a few % in the primaries. He came in 6th place in 2004.
Hillary dominates national polls of dems, does very poorly on DU or KOS polls.

[cali]

29. Then again, Bernie Sanders just got elected

with a large majority in Vermont, and Pat Leahy's approval among dems in Vermont is also sky high. Not that I think DU is representative of dems in general or even the base.

[skipos]

34. But I think DU would give Sanders and Leahy big approval

while DU really dislikes the Nelsons (in general).

DU is more progressive than your average Dem.

[John Q. Citizen]

71. Hillary and Obama are statistically tied right now in the latest Rasmussen poll.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3123465

2008 Democratic Presidential Primary
Clinton 28% Obama 24% Edwards 11%

And Hillary at 28% isn't what I would call dominating the national polls. It means 72% of Democratic voters prefer another candidate or haven't made a choice yet.

Nelson also gets good approval ratings from Republicans. Neb. (as of last spring) had about 570,000 registered Repos and 375000 registered Democrats. Yet Nelson won with around 60% of the vote. So we can see who supports Nelson isn't just the Dems but also a large amount of Repos and Independents.
And of course, I doubt NE is representational of Dems nationally.

How can begin to demonstrate whether DU is a representative cross section of Dems nationwide or not?
You have no data, just opinion. Which is fine, but don't confuse the two.

[skipos]

79. Actually, it isn't opinion.

Look at the DATA of poll taken on DU and compare it to the DATA of polls of Dems nationwide. Though it will not far from an exact science, it is a FACT that you will find a pretty big difference. That doesn't bother me, but I am guessing it bothers you.

Clark and Kucinich are HUGE favorites here and on Kos, and they are barely a blip nation wide. That's a fact, not an opinion.

Please check out the data here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=118329
And the data here:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/scorecard/index.html
It is obvious DU is not representative of national Democrats.

"Nelson also gets good approval ratings from Republicans."

Which doesn't have anything to do with what we are talking about. There are plenty of conservative Dems that are well liked by the states they come from, and they are all pretty consistently loathed here.

"And of course, I doubt NE is representational of Dems nationally."

Correct, just as DU isn't representational of Dems nationally.

[John Q. Citizen]

91. Your confusion is understandable. Polls posted at DU or any other

on line "fun poll" sites are not scientific. They have no margin of error, for instance.

Actual scientific polling is done very differently. So trying to use "fun" polls is meaningless. But it's fun.

To compound the problem further, you present delegate totals from May 4th 2004 while the fun non scientific poll you present as "data" is from Jan 2004

And third, the choices we are given to vote on, and who we would vote for are always two different things. For instance, in the CNN results link you posted, a number of the candidates are listed as "out." It's impossible to say when they dropped out, but if they dropped out before a state held their primary then people who supported a candidate that was now officially out might very well vote instead between the candidates who were still in.

You can hold any opinion you want, I don't care. But if you can't back that up with data, then it's just an opinion. And fun online polls are not data.

[skipos]

93. YES!!!

DU TOTALLY REPRESENTS NATIONAL DEMOCRATS! Hillary, Obama and Edwards are their top choices for the nomination, Hillary, Obama and Edwards are OUR top choices for the nomination! Only 10% of them want Gore to get the nomination, only 10% of DU wants Gore to get the nomination. 10% of them voted for Bush in 2004, 10% of DU voted for Bush in 2004!

YOU WIN!!!

:woohoo:

[John Q. Citizen]

97. Just because you can't support your opinion with data doesn't mean I win.

I have no way to determine who the 100,000+ members of DU prefer as a candidate or in what statisical quantity.

Neither do you, but you like to think you do. And that's fine with me. If it's fine with you.

You win, because you say so. Congratulations.

[skipos]

103. Congrats! You are the only person on my ignore list!!!

YOU WIN!!!

:woohoo:

P.S. DU = typical American Democrats, and don't let ANYONE every tell you otherwise!!!

[John Q. Citizen]

107. Ha ha ha. Thanks, I feel honored. You may yet outgrow the fragility you

feel about your opinions, assuming you recognize the benefits of being honest with yourself. I'd check out the passive/aggressive thing as a starting place.

I haven't ever put anyone on my ignore list. What's it like? Does it make you feel powerful?


How do you define "typical American Democrats?" Is there a known (I mean to the greater world, not just in your mind) description that encompasses what that means?

[IsItJustMe]

121. I really admire your ability to have a command of the facts and articulate them precisely.

And you are absolutely correct about the polls here at DU. They are fun, but, in real terms, pretty much useless in getting a real handle on just where this group stands on any given candidate or position.

Just understanding statistics is overwhelming.

[Hippo_Tron]

101. Neither do the Democrats in Nebraska

Seeing as many of them probably voted for Bush.

IMO, the basic criteria for membership in a political party is supporting that party's nominee for President. That includes third party voters. If you voted for someone besides Kerry in the least election, then you left the party. Of course I have no problem with you coming back.

[skipos]

102. Please point out where I said they did.

18% of NE Dems voted for Bush. So a large majority of NE Dems voted for Kerry and a large majority of NE Dems approve of the job Nelson is doing.

[paulk]

8. no

not even close

a significant number of the members of DU are not even Democrats

[demnan]

9. No I don't

I do believe it represents a lot of Liberal belief but DU is not all Democrats. There are a lot of Independents here. I don't believe that it is representative of the Union groups and I think there are fewer minorities than are in the base of the Democratic party. Like most of the Internet, DU is weighted toward affluential Democrats who own computers and are at ease with them, but many people who are the Democratic base can't afford computers in their homes.

[Connie_Corleone]

10. Nope.

[wyldwolf]

11. neither the base nor a cross section of any importance

The "polls" on DU sort of show that.

[napi21]

12. Yes, but the Dem base is very difficult to describe.

There really isn't much EVERYONE agrees on inside the Dem Party. I don't meanNOTHING! It seems all Dems are united AGAINST the Iraq occupation, but even on THAT issue, there are many different opinions on how to leave.

The Dems don't really have a base like thelock-step Pubs...THANK GOD!

[madfloridian]

13. Cute....you are referring to my post about catering to the religious right.

and those who tend to be that way.

Guess you needed to make a point.

[BL611]

21. No it prompted a question

And so I asked that question independently ,making no reference to your post in another thread, which I responded to in that thread.But I'm glad you find it cute.

[Adelante]

14. Parts of the "base" only

The base, no way.

[PresidentObama]

15. Base? GOD I HOPE NOT!!!

No offense :hi:

Sometimes I come to the board, and just want to...

:spank: :argh: :grr: :banghead:

[DURHAM D]

16. Not at all - I proudly place myself in the lunatic fringe of the party. n/t

[LeftishBrit]

18. Just to note that a significant proportion of DU-ers (about 20% I think) are non-Americans

All of us are here because we oppose Bush and would like to see him replaced by a Democrat, but we obviously aren't the Democratic 'base'.

[Demi_Babe]

19. absolutely not

[kenny blankenship]

20. "Cross section" is not "base"

ask a stupid question...

[BL611]

22. OK

I meant to say an accurate cross section of the base.The spirit of the question is fairly obvious, is it not?

[kenny blankenship]

78. You may mean that now but it isn't what you SAID

you used cross-section in reference to the Democratic Party. You also used base in reference to the Democratic Party.

In no party whose membership is large enough to overflow a classroom would the base of the party have all its attitudes and policy preferences mirrored by the average or full cross-section of its membership.

Questions can only be clear if the terms used in them are clear. You can't interchangeably use two terms whose meanings are strongly contrary to one another and still be clear.

Unless you want to be clear about being willing to use duplicitous and misleading language to bludgeon the base into silent submission to the cross-section. On that score you and your question are ringing out like a silver bell.

[waiting for hope]

27. What is the base?

I hope to God it's nowhere near the fanaticism ideology of the right's base. To me a Democrat is someone with concern and shows compassion for those disenfranchised, someone that may not always agree with how civil liberties are applied but understands that what is good for one is good for all, someone that understands history and is quick to realize it when it repeats, someone who is an independent thinker and recognizes the dignity that is all human life, someone that actually gives a crap about the environment and has the foresight to realize the future....

[The Magistrate]

28. One Thing Can Be Stated With Certainty On This, Sir

Persons who routinely state they will bolt the Party over this matter or that cannot be counted part of its base: the base consists of those who can be relied on to the support the Party.

[Alamom]

40. Well said & very true.

Voting for Democrats for 34 years and always will no matter who the candidate is. :*

[madfloridian]

30. I think you posted this because of my post. Link.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1090

You did not get the point.

I never said DU was the base. I am saying the Democrats are selling out their party base to pander to the other side, especially the religious groups.

And by the way, many here are very moderate...though some will not admit it.

[BL611]

31. No I posted it because looking over that

thread, It struck me as an interesting question, and enough of a digression on that thread that it deserved its own. It was not an attempt to refute you personally. Although I do think it is somewhat revealing that you refer to religious groups as "the other side", but again that is best addressed in your thread...

[madfloridian]

37. Well, when they want to dominate women...they ARE the other side.

I am sorry more don't feel that way.

I was raised in a home that was truly religous, not the false kind we see so often lately. We were Southern Baptists for generations, but finally we left after being called unpatriotic for not supporting the war.

Something is wrong when our whole party is tiptoeing around trying not to offend people who want to control women and deprive the gay community of rights.

When someone brings it up...others twist it so that person is said to be attacking religion. It was brilliantly done. Kudos.

:applause:

I appreciate skill with words when I see it.

[BL611]

38. I would rather address this on you're thread but

You just called religious people (making no differentiation between the many diverse theological and political beliefs espoused by religious people)the other side, did you not? How am I twisting you're words?

[madfloridian]

39. You are very good.

You read my post, and you know exactly what I am saying.

You are twisting it to make me sound anti-religious.

:applause:

Well done.

I may be upset with the party's pandering to the extreme religious right...but I am honest. I post honestly.

You are good.

:applause:

[BL611]

44. I'm glad I'm so good

Although I'm not sure what I'm so good at, I have given you several opportunities in both threads to differentiate between religious theocrats, and people of faith. You have seemingly resisted that differentiation seemingly implying that progressive Christians like Jim Wallis are also theocrats because they do not subscribe to the NARAL position on abortion.If I am interpreting your statements incorrectly, you are more than welcome to clarify them, rather than being in awe of my incredible goodness.

[madfloridian]

48. How do you feel about women's rights in general? Is your view..

that we are a subsection of the party and country that needs to be managed and watched and controlled?

I don't know where you got the Jim Wallis thing. Maybe because Vanderslice posted there to condemn Dean for being too secular. I posted the link.

So, how about that? Should we control mens' access to viagra? Should we realize that it takes two to have a rape situation? Should we keep an eye on men to be sure they are controlling their sex lives? Where do we go from here?

Just what was it that made you think I was against religion in general?

Just what do you think of Democrats who tell women what to do with their bodies?

I think our Democrats are catering to the religous right too much, and as a result women will suffer, gays will suffer, and it is letting the extremists get a foot in the door.

And you twist it to say I am anti-religion.

[BL611]

52. No I am asking you if you

differentiate between all religious people and religious theocrats, and you STILL have not answered clearly. I asked you about Wallis in the other thread and it seemed as if you called him a theocrat.
Regardless of my own views, no I do not think every pro life person is theocrat, and if you're going to lump all pro life christians in with Falwell and Robertson, yes I think thats not fair to large swath of the American public.


And how exactly have the Democrats catered to the religious right?

[madfloridian]

53. See, you did not read my post at all. Cleverly done...pretend I am NOT the base.

And you did not see where I said that South Dakota just passed an abortion ban. And you did not read it and are calling me anti-religion.

You are very clever to start this thread. You are implying I am not the base.

[BL611]

55. Sir/ Madame

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about at this point. I have asked you several times on two different threads do you differentiate between different religious people of different theological and political beliefs (even if they are not 100% in agreement with you), a simple yes or no would suffice rather than testifying to my incredible acumen as an evil genius. As far as this thread goes I can assure you that while it was in part inspired by the discussion on your thread, it was in no way, shape, or form meant to prove a point to you or any other poster for that matter.



Ohhh, umm BWAAAAAHAHAHAHA BWAAAAAHAHAHAHA

Happy?

[madfloridian]

59. I'm a she. I am a religious person who knows bigotry is destroying us.

So you play your words games.

[BL611]

61. Umm

OK I'll do that...

[wyldwolf]

82. you always become what you argue against

Last year, you abruptly became a moderate. Now you're suddenly religious when just earlier today you were not:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3122116&mesg_id=3124331

[madfloridian]

84. I separate religion and political stuff in my mind. You are obsessed with my posts.

I find it amazing that you can find anything I ever posted. I consider it a compliment. It means you value my posts enough to care.

Thanks, wyldwolf.

I think people can read my posts, read your posts, which just go after others and have little substance....and make their own decisions.

[wyldwolf]

85. You were religious, then you weren't, now you are again. All in mere minutes.

[madfloridian]

87. That's pathetic, ww.

[wyldwolf]

90. I know! Why are you so transparent about it?

[AuntPatsy]

95. She is right, _word games, in no way does her post say she

is no longer religious, she simply states she is no longer souther baptist, as you and I both know, religion comes in many forms with more than enough different demoniations to play dress up.

[madfloridian]

98. Thank you.

Religion is personal, and I thank you for that.

[AuntPatsy]

99. Your welcome, I understand completely, I feel the same.

[wyldwolf]

111. Sure she does

She says she used to be a Baptist, but now she is a secularist. Secularism is NOT religion.

[Beaverhausen]

33. No way. And we get more out of step every day

I strongly believe there are many trolls here- some paid by candidates and other "groups" - who skew the results of the issues we talk about.

[Alamom]

47. Thank you for this reply. I was thinking the same thing, but didn't know

for sure. I signed up the first time after Kerry was the nominee in '04. Things were good until 11/07.

I left a while after the election and re-joined with a different name once things cooled off. Couldn't remember the old password, etc.

Everything had been pretty good for over a year and now :mad: :mad: :mad: all the time.

I've seen very questionable OP's (lately) that once would have "immediately" been called BS.....
Instead they get mass replies agreeing and they are vicious.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

112. I also feel there is an increasing number of candidate paid operatives attempting to influence.

discussions and opinions. Also, the working class and minorities (heart of our party) are under-represented because of practical factors like time and access. Many of these people can't participate while they are at work.

[AtomicKitten]

35. Not by a long shot.

[zalinda]

36. Actually, I think yes.

But, very few of them post here, having 100,000 members proves that. It took me a year of reading DU before I started posting. Those who are very vocal here, are more left than the majority of dems. And these people can be quite mean. Those who are moderate, rightly are afraid of posting and getting their head ripped off.

And then too, those of us who agree with what a poster has written, don't always have to speak up with a "me too" comment.

zalinda

[wyldwolf]

42. Zalinda... can I just comment on your thoughtful post?

Those who are very vocal here, are more left than the majority of dems. And these people can be quite mean. Those who are moderate, rightly are afraid of posting and getting their head ripped off.

Then there are those moderates who've grown tired of that shit and are slinging it back. And, of course, those that are more left leaning here are beside themselves over it.

[AtomicKitten]

49. according to my recent polling

... they represent only 29% yet they are the loudest, incessant, most strident voices here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3082057

[wyldwolf]

51. ...and I think over 300 votes in a DU poll is good sampling of DU

[Alamom]

50. Indeed. n/t

[wyldwolf]

62. do you remember that kid on the playground who went around hitting people?

Day after day, the kid would play rough and hit the other kids. He got so used to doing it that he did it without thinking. Eventually, he came to believe he was doing nothing wrong.

Until the day another kid popped him back.

Then the bully cried and moaned and wailed! "How could someone hit me? What did I do?"

Welcome to the real world, kid. It was just a matter of time.

[Alamom]

66. Insightful analogy.......

I take it, you were never the bully. Me either. :)

[wyldwolf]

67. I had this nasty habit of...

bullying the bullies. Sort of defending the weaker kids?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

115. Reporting for duty, sir!

Actually, I'm not that moderate at all, but I like bringing this place back to earth.

[Marrah_G]

116. Thank you for saying that.

Many times I want to post my opinion on something but I stop because I know it will just end up with a couple people hijacking the thread and smacking down anyone who disagrees with them by was of insults and accusations. On the other hand I find myself more and more, posting anyway, even knowing in advance that some asshole will start a flamefest over it.

[pnwmom]

41. I don't think you can be the base if you're constantly

making threats to vote against the Dems, as too many DUers often do.

[sampsonblk]

43. Absolutely

DU represents the die-hards that believe in the cause. At the end of the day, those are the only ones the party can count on for sure. The others that some of you have mentioned are swing voters in a lot of cases.

My vote doesn't swing. I suspect that's true of most of us here. So yes, we are the base. *The base is not a cross section. That, IMO, is impossible. Are Freepers a cross section of those who support Republicans? God, I hope not.

[madfloridian]

54. The DLC and New Dems and Blue Dogs are the base...

or so they tell me when I complain. Like when I called about the bankruptcy bill. Or the war vote...or silly things like that.

They say they are the base, so I guess since they have the money we must believe them.

[PassingFair]

105. They ARE base, Mad.

They are not THE base...

I go to meetings. I talk to party chairs.
THEY are THE base. The RANK and FILE.
The designation "progressive" had to be
coined to SEPARATE the base from the
corporate whore centrists who are selling
out the citizenry.

And DU members ARE more informed than the
AVERAGE dem.

[Strawman]

56. No. More of a discursive vanguard

For discussing/contesting ideas that might eventually be adopted by the elites as elements of the party platform.

The real "base" are big, mobilized, organized constituencies like the unions. That's not to say that union members aren't represented here, but they're not organized that way in this space.

[niyad]

57. you may not consciously have intended the question as flamebait, but since you brought this up in

connection with another post entirely, it does look as if you are looking for an argument.

what is the point of your question? what does it matter to anything if DU represents a cross section of the democratic party, the democratic base, or anything else? DU is a self-selected group of people who have a particular interest in various subjects. not all members are dems, and there are a lot of trolls here. and, unlike certain other boards, we actually interact with people who have very different viewpoints, no matter how sheeple-like they can be.

[BL611]

60. No if I brought up in connection to another post

posted on the other thread or provided a link to the thread it would be intended to be connected to the other thread, it was a completely independent question that occurred to me as worth asking while reading the other thread. I was not aware that it was a heinous crime to extrapolate on something I judged as interesting from another thread and ask it completely independently in another thread for the simple sake of the question with no intention of drawing any connection to the other thread.

There is no point except to see people's view of where DU stands in the context of the larger Democratic party.

What does it matter to anything? What does any question here matter to anything? It's something I found interesting enough to post on, you don't think it matters, don't post on the thread. Sheesh.

[Alamom]

69. The OP is an excellent question which has brought out some very

interesting, surprising and insightful responses.

Thanks.

[TheWraith]

58. No, no, hell no, f--k no, and THANK GOD, no.

Don't get me wrong, DU is great sometimes, but we have WAY, WAY more than our share of the party's absolute psych-cases. If the people here accurately represented most Democrats, we'd never win a damn election because every candidate would have to everything exactly right for every person, or they would walk away and find the third-party candidate most likely to lose. :banghead:

[mtnsnake]

74. I think yours is the best post of the entire thread and then some...

On top of what you said, DU has become a magnet for some of the whiniest, most difficult to satisfy, biggest complainers on the planet...people who, when they're not ranting about their own couple of special interests as if it's the only thing that matters, they're spending the rest of their time complaining and exaggerating about everything else under the sun, but who would never actually lift a finger to get anything positive done.

[JNelson6563]

63. I don't think the real world base

is as prone to hysterics.

Julie

[leftofthedial]

64. across the board, yes

among active political posters, DU might be slightly farther left than the mainstream Democratic population of the US

and FAR to the left of the "Democrats" in Congress (with few exceptions)

[bluehighways911]

65. Let's Talk Hillary

Why is she leading in the polls? Think she would lead in any poll on any left wing site. I doubt she gets 5%.

[Catchawave]

70. As a moderate, yes :)

I think there are very few "squeaky wheels" who demand we go MORE left or get stuck on ONE issue, but I love them all :toast:

[applegrove]

72. Base as in non Regan Democrats..yes. That is in fact the base. Does

it represent all people who will or have voted democratic? No. Not enough centrists. But they are represented.

[ShortnFiery]

73. You betcha! Without the M$M Corporate Spin. n/t

[ripple]

75. No, DU includes some of the base

but the dem base is probably far more moderate than what is represented here. I like that DU is further to the left, because that's where my politics are, but DU is definitely not representative of the dem base.

I would even go a bit further and suggest that most political blogs in general are probably further from the middle on either side of the ideological spectrum. Some of that might be attributed to more youth involvement, but I also think that people who comfortably ride the middle often don't become excited enough about political issues to participate in the blogosphere. Also, much like DU threads that get a lot of hits, the more provocative blog entries are destined to get more hits than the safe, middle-of-the-road topics. For that reason, it stands to reason that the more provocative sites in general would be more successful on the web.

[welshTerrier2]

76. a few points

first, the OP question is a bit vague. it asks whether DU IS the Democratic base. "IS". for starters, what is meant by base? there are maybe 1000? 5000? whatever active DU'ers. many of them post mostly in the lounge or in other sub-forums. so, if we think of the question in terms of there being maybe 1000 or 2000 DU'ers, just by mere statistics we can't say we ARE the base. the "base" might be 60 MILLION Americans. so, by that definition alone, DU'ers are not the base.

then we broaden the question to ask whether DU'ers represent a cross-section of the Democratic Party. and again, we need to be a bit more specific in our response. Many DU'ers, I'm sure many here would agree, could be considered VERY INTO POLITICS. with some, it might even be called an obsession. is this very different than the general population. I sure think it is. So, by sheer time and energy, DU'ers are not an accurate cross-section.

and finally we come to what i suspect is the real question being asked. is the political philosophy of DU a representative cross-section of the Democratic Party. my gut response is to say that it's really hard to know the answer to that. more informed. more vocal. but different in some way along some kind of a political spectrum? i think the answer is probably "yes" but i have to tell you i've been more than surprised at how conservative i've found things on DU.

for example, i took a little poll a few days ago. it asked whether cutting off funds so bush couldn't continue the war in Iraq WAS EQUIVALENT to cutting off funds FOR THE TROOPS (paraphrasing from memory). About 1/4 of the respondents said the two were equivalent. I consider that a right-wing hawkish view. your mileage may vary. the point is i was very surprised any DU'ers had that perspective. so i certainly don't see this to be the far left bastion some seem to believe it is.

i would like to believe that DU is NOT even a little bit representative of the broader Democratic community. why is this? it's because of what i want the purpose of DU to be. i want DU to change the status quo to something more progressive. i do not want it to be a mere reflection of the status quo.

as for comments that DU is "not important" (especially those who say that because they think DU is "far left" and irrelevant), it's more than clear that progressive online bloggers have been having a huge impact on the national discourse. it's almost absurd to even have to address this silliness anymore. you think it's unimportant? the candidates don't! they've got their little puppy dogs all over the web. irrelevant you say? i can't begin to tell you how often all the tv and press coverage includes statements from bloggers. so, if the argument is narrowly limited to "just DU", we are very small. but don't for a minute underemphasize the importance of citizens just like DU'ers actively participating in the national dialog. we reflect a hunger for real democracy and participation and only fools fail to see what is now only in its infancy. the web and those who participate are fast becoming the new media ...

[Stinky The Clown]

77. We represent all views commonly held by 'the base' ....... BUT ........

we over-represent the uberliberals and under-represent the conservative dems.

[k_jerome]

80. bwahahaha. by and large, hell no. nt

[fujiyama]

81. Not quite

DU consists of activists and passionate people, many driven by a strong ideology. Most are to the left of the party in general, on social issues especially.

I'd probably say it's better educated than the base, simply considering the fact that people here are discussing politics in the first place. Politics doesn't come up all that often as a topic of discussion in day to day activities. Also, considering many have a computer with high speed internet, it's indicative of some wealth.

That's not to say DU doesn't represent diversity. It does. There are people here of different incomes, races, and ideologies...

But of course, in that same vein, many here aren't the base - some live abroad. Others are socialists, etc.

[Geek_Girl]

86. DU seems to be a very diverse group of people

I would say that it is a pretty good sampling of the people within the democratic party.

[MaineDem]

88. Absolutely not

First of all, it only comprises people who access the internet.

I don't think it's a good cross-section at all.

[juajen]

89. DU is not the democratic base

It is, however, an excellent baromometer, and a great place to hang out.

[MonkeyFunk]

92. not even remotely

[brentspeak]

94. No way

There are some pro-free-trade paid posters running around the boards. Then there's the RW trolls who pose as far-left wackos to stir up discord. Then there's the NRA volunteer operatives. And there's the genuine ultra-far-left kooks who aren't even Democrats. Etc.

Some of the Democratic base is here, of course, but only some.

[Le Taz Hot]

117. "Ultra-far-left kooks"

You called? :evilgrin:

[AuntPatsy]

96. I agree with the Magistrate, you cannot call all of Du the Dem

base when it is so diverse to the point where many say they won't vote for a Dem nominee if he or she is not to their liking, I fail to see how following the pack is nothing short of doing what so many have made fun of Republicans doing, if one does not agree, should they not stand up and be able to speak without fear of getting flamed and or branded say a traitor to a cause?

But I don't agree with ignoring the rights of women in general simply based on religious doctrine or ensuring any law is based on religious doctrine since NOT all Americans are religious, one can live their private lives the way they deem fit, no need to ensure your neighbor must follow you.

[madfloridian]

100. In a big tent party, we would be included. And who gets to define the "base"?

I just assume we have a broad enough base to include all of us here of all stripes.

Someone today here remembered when I came here. They know I have made a lot of mental and political journeys since 2002.

I think the purpose of posts defining the base is to leave people out, and this is unconscionable.

[Hippo_Tron]

104. The base is widely considered to be people who will NEVER EVER vote Republican

So trolls, aside DU members basically fit this criteria. When you add in people who vote for a third party, it gets a bit more complicated.

There's nothing, however, that says that the base can't stay home because they're unexcited about the candidate. That is why candidates are supposed to do and say certain things to excite their base.

[Redneck Socialist]

106. No n/t

[JeremyWestenn]

108. Hell no!!!

It's completely clear by the amount of anti-Hillary threads on here. There's more, a lot more, but that's your red herring.

[aaronbees]

109. It's certainly part of the base....

and fairly representative of the longtime, committed push for real Democracy in this country. But I don't think it generally encapsulates the Dem mainstream or perhaps a better word for it is the "medium point" on the spectrum of Democrats in the country. I believe that spectrum has tilted right for a while now, at least in terms of the party leadership; Howard Dean is helping to realign it, I believe, back to values the people, rather than pollsters and insiders, want to see active in government. I think DU is generally more progressive than the "average" Democrat, but that's not a bad thing. Tactically speaking, though, I think it's important to remember. I'm generally to the left of most Dems (at least I think so) but pragmatic in ways when it comes to trying to get things done. This is an inclusive party, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

[Clarkie1]

110. LOL. I'll stop....but only because looks to me someone else has dug the hole.

:rofl:

Excuse me while I get up of the floor....I need to go to bed and rest.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

114. Fuck no.

No more than FreeRepublic is the base of the Republican party.

[AZBlue]

118. Not even close.

DU, on average, is far more left than the average Dem citizen.