Why I hate daily kos.

[poughies]

No, i'm not going to go into a tirade, but just a comment or two. The reason i don't like daily kos (not kos himself) is because it parades around as something it is not. It says it is for electing democrats nationwide and creating a democratic majority, but it all it does is too go on tirades about impeaching bush. At the same time, it seems to care much more about defeating lieberman than ford winning in tennessee. In fact on numerous occasions, I have heard my people on there stating that they could care less if Ford won, and want Lamont to win more. How is it that there are no threads on the Maryland debate on MTP on the site right now that I see, but the Lieberman rasmussen thread has 241 comments about Lieberman?

[Beet]

The daily kos has a number of nuts there. I would take that site with a grain of salt.

[Sam Spade]

The daily kos has a number of nuts there. I would take that site with a grain of salt.

^^^^^^^^^

[afleitch]

It's still easier to read without wanting to shout at the monitor than FreeRepublic

[Conan]

I dont like him because he thinks he has influence over our leaders when he doesnt.

[Eraserhead]

I like the site to some extent and I do like what they did for Lamont and Tester.

[Conan]

I like the site to some extent and I do like what they did for Lamont and Tester.

Lamont and Tester would be where they are today with out him anyway.

[Jake]

Lamont certainly wouldn't.

[Conan]

Lamont certainly wouldn't.

I am pretty sure he would have. He was basically thrusted into the race by MoveOn and DFA, not dailykos. They have no influence on everyday people. A blogger doesnt, organizations do.

[Jake]

The blogosphere pulled what they pulled for Hackett, rallying for him and bringing attention to the race. The liberal PACs helped of course, but Lamont wouldn't have been where he was without the leftist blogs backing him. Take a look at Democrats on this site's reactions to Lamont circa May of this year, just when the blogs were touting him.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

No, i'm not going to go into a tirade, but just a comment or two. The reason i don't like daily kos (not kos himself) is because it parades around as something it is not. It says it is for electing democrats nationwide and creating a democratic majority, but it all it does is too go on tirades about impeaching bush. At the same time, it seems to care much more about defeating lieberman than ford winning in tennessee. In fact on numerous occasions, I have heard my people on there stating that they could care less if Ford won, and want Lamont to win more. How is it that there are no threads on the Maryland debate on MTP on the site right now that I see, but the Lieberman rasmussen thread has 241 comments about Lieberman?

Well obviously Bush should be impeached, but yes, clearly it wouldn't accomplish much without 67 sane Senators to follow through and remove the bastard from office.

None of the $125 I gave this election is going to Lamont. Most of it is the House, if things really go our way there, we can cement a majority until whichever time we end up being the corrupt scumbag party (hopefully never).

[Mike in Maryland]

I like Daily Kos (although I so far don't post on there), but I should note that Kos himself is one of his site's more moderate diarists.  I like his philosophy of "winnerism" in which Democrats should focus on winning, not on ideological purity or quixotic crusades that some of the other participants fixate on (a Bush impeachment is not going to happen even if Democrats win Congress.)

That said, regarding Ned Lamont, I was annoyed by the all Lamont, all the time blog that the site became shortly before the CT primary, which now looks likely to be a pyrrhic victory.

[Saxwsylvania]

I only like reading DailyKos to get an idea of how some of these Democrats think. 
But every post is full of venom.  You think that with the polls going so well for the Dems this year that they'd be happy, but no.

[ian]

I hate DailyKos because of their obvious double-standards applying to all things partisan, I guess.  I hate the way they loathe Lieberman for being too Conservative, but LOVE Jim Webb, despite all of the Conservative things he does on a routine basis.
But the most horrible thing about Daily Kos is the groupthink that happens on that site.  I've discussed this before, but I think the site is just an indoctrination tool for those too incapable to think for themselves--that's not to say that everyone that visits is ignorant; just that the majority of posters there hold no opinions of their own.
Plus, I guess it doesn't really help that as a moderate Democrat, I don't believe in the isolation/progressive approach to politics, where being as partisan as possible leads to the success of the party.  I think a moderate, bipartisan approach is what's best for the Democratic Party, and THAT'S what gains Democratic momentum (McCaskill, Tester, Casey, Webb, and Ford are all seen as moderates, in case you needed proof).  That's why I thank my lucky stars for Howard Dean.  Whatever you say about the man, he's appeased the Daily Kos crowd by using rationality in his direction of the party (50-state strategy), whereas this wouldn't really be accepted by them if it were anyone else leading the Democrats to "victory in 2006", as the present indicates.

[/end tyrade]

[Conan]

I hate DailyKos because of their obvious double-standards applying to all things partisan, I guess.  I hate the way they loathe Lieberman for being too Conservative, but LOVE Jim Webb, despite all of the Conservative things he does on a routine basis.
But the most horrible thing about Daily Kos is the groupthink that happens on that site.  I've discussed this before, but I think the site is just an indoctrination tool for those too incapable to think for themselves--that's not to say that everyone that visits is ignorant; just that the majority of posters there hold no opinions of their own.
Plus, I guess it doesn't really help that as a moderate Democrat, I don't believe in the isolation/progressive approach to politics, where being as partisan as possible leads to the success of the party.  I think a moderate, bipartisan approach is what's best for the Democratic Party, and THAT'S what gains Democratic momentum (McCaskill, Tester, Casey, Webb, and Ford are all seen as moderates, in case you needed proof).  That's why I thank my lucky stars for Howard Dean.  Whatever you say about the man, he's appeased the Daily Kos crowd by using rationality in his direction of the party (50-state strategy), whereas this wouldn't really be accepted by them if it were anyone else leading the Democrats to "victory in 2006", as the present indicates.

[/end tyrade]

Moderates are tolerable in moderate states not conservatives or moderates in liberal states and all the vice versas.

[Boris]

The daily kos has a number of nuts there. I would take that site with a grain of salt.

There are some intelligent, level-headed people there (its founder being one), but in general, I concur with this statement.

[GOP = Terrorists]

At the same time, it seems to care much more about defeating lieberman than ford winning in tennessee. In fact on numerous occasions, I have heard my people on there stating that they could care less if Ford won, and want Lamont to win more.

I feel the same way.  Ford & Lieberman = Pro-Biggest mistake in the history of US foriegn policy...

[GOP = Terrorists]

I hate DailyKos because of their obvious double-standards applying to all things partisan, I guess.  I hate the way they loathe Lieberman for being too Conservative, but LOVE Jim Webb, despite all of the Conservative things he does on a routine basis.

No double standard.  It has nothing to do with Lieberman being to conservative.  It has to do with him supporting the Iraq Debacle.  You'd find that Ron Paul has more friends at Daily Kos than Lieberman does.  And rightly so.

[mgrossbe]

I really think that stating the iraq wars is the worst mistake in us foriegn is on over reach. though i can easily see your point. However the imperlism in the mexican american war and the horrible reaction to our actions in vietnam were much worse. Just my opinion. As far as the daily kos goes i do not like them though i do not know much about the founder. I just personnally dislike polarizing figures whether they are right or left. But we on the left must remeber this country is a tick to the right so if we want to be a party in power we must moderate our policies.

[GOP = Terrorists]

I really think that stating the iraq wars is the worst mistake in us foriegn is on over reach.

I don't.  I don't think anything is even close.  Not within 500% of it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No.  Not even combined.  From a practical not moral view the Mexican American War was a huge success.  Vietnam could be viewed as a loss only in how we were viewed in the world and in men/money.  Iraq will be sooo much more.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Being Pro-Iraq isn't moderate.  It is merely insane.

Some policies would be very popular.  National Healthcare, Funding for education, etc.  Others are in reality part of the old school conservative school:  Fiscal conservativism and and ethical requirements.  Are there areas that left-liberals need to moderate?  Gun Control, gay rights, etc.  I really hate the idea of us having to moderate gay rights but I understand the practical reasons that we can't demand gay marriage nationwide yet. =(

[mgrossbe]

Okay first of i have been against the war in iraq since before 2002 when the country was just thinking about it. However i will never promulagate a immediate withdraw strategy becuase we can not leave that place a mess. No offense if this sounds disinguence but you need to study history a little bit. As far as the mexican american war goes it was an over reach that cost two president there reelection whether it was tyler percieved weekness then stupid action on annexation or polks sense bully of a weak country. As far as vietnam it will always been the stupidest "war" since many historians try not to call it war so we can keep our perfect slate in wars. It was an asinine waste of men and money witch you conseed however it took the country from a beacon of hope and idealism to a state which will use force to push it agenda on anyone. Iraq only confirms the latter it does not promulgate that notion like vietnam.

[poughies]

Look here, if they don't want to like certain democrats that is fine... granted lieberman isn't one now but that is the oint. IF THEY WANT TO BE A SITE THAT ELECTS DEMOCRATS THAN DO IT! Otherwise, if they want to be an ideological site than be that. You can't be purely both.

[GOP = Terrorists]

Okay first of i have been against the war in iraq since before 2002 when the country was just thinking about it. However i will never promulagate a immediate withdraw strategy becuase we can not leave that place a mess.

When you throw an egg at the ground as hard as you can you can not expect someone to put it back together.  It is a mess regardless of we are there are not.  If you think we should stay you need to get off your ass sign up and ship out and do your part.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'll be the one giving the history lesson.  We lost like 10,000 people in the war while we gained massive lands.  I'm not saying that it was the smart thing to do politically or morally but in the longrun it greatly benefited the United States and weakend one of the two countries at our borders.  Practically, in a realist sense the war helped us out.  We've lost almost 1/3 of that in Iraq and all we have done is  ourselves over a million fold.  There is not a single positive possible outcome from the war in Iraq.  It will not benefit the United States in any way but it will hurt us in ways we can't even imagine yet.  Regardless of the political outcome of the Mexican American war it was a million times more beneficial to the United States than the War in Iraq is.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You miss the point.  It is not the idea that the United States will have an immoral foriegn policy that is important.  It is the people who hold that opinion and the resources they control.  Vietnam is nothing to us.  The war did not spark hatred of us that actually lead to future damage to the United States.  I can promise you the increase in terrorism and anti-American feeling sparked by the war in Iraq will do so.   Further we created chaos on top of the most vital resource in the history of mankind.

[mgrossbe]

K this sed topic is why he hates the daily kos i am not fully in agreence with that point but to an extent i do feel the same way. I will nevr supress people for their opinion just tell them why i disagree. As far a lieberman goes get off his case he may have made some mistakes but he is a true democrat i support lamont because that is what Ct dems wanted and that should be respected but lieberman does not deserve this crap. Thanks for the obivous history lesson duh it gave us more land any moron can see that does that mean its a good thing no. Does it mean we should have done it no. i think you actually made my point more than you think in regards to iraq verse vietnam there was no stratgic value to vietnam were there is one in iraq. Oil does matter clearly and if we had not gone in there it would be a better situation no for us i do not disagree. I just believe and many others that vietnam will always be the biggest mistake even if we had won the war what would we have gained realtivly nothing if we accomplish the bush adm objectives we would have a beachead in viotale area that we need a presence in. I personnaly believe all the goals now could have been achieved in afghanistan. Still name me one thing good that came from the vietnam war i cannot think of one. I can as far as iraq goes.

[ucscgaldamez]

Ummm, Democrats bashing Daily Kos. In my opinion, Democrats tend to do this more than Republicans. I am not sure that it is because it is the cool thing to do or whether one would feel somehow superior having an opinion that is different from those "partisan nuts." Anyhow, I don't hear as many Republicans bashing Free Republic as Democrats do to their own partisan allies. When you go to Daily Kos, you know what you get, the same for Free Republic. Both Daily Kos and Free Republic are extremist partisan blogs (forum) in my opinion. I visit Daily Kos for info, just as I visit Free Republic for info, and other sites. I like information even if the sources contradict each other. But anyhow, there is nothing wrong with voicing your disagreement with the site and its inconsistencies. I am also a moderate Democrat but I really like Daily Kos not so much for its members opinions  but rather for its flow of information.