Skip to main content

View Diary: Unpopular Opinions At Daily Kos (161 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Kos Myths (4.00)
    To go way back, I think there have been 4 shifts in this site.  They were driven more by events, and less by some generation gap between new and old Kos posters.  The place has changed a lot since the early days, like any conversation does that expands from a couple of hundred to 10,000.  There is a lot of debate on this site - always has been and always will.  I suspect most posters rather enjoy a good fight - though I will say that more than a few need to develop a thicker skin.

    Anyway, the events that have changed this site have given rise to 3 Myths (Myths can be true) that are not really open to debate on this site. I think probably 90% of the posters on this site agree with all 3 myths - I buy 2 and a half.  

    1.  November 2002 - Did we really see the loss of the Senate coming?  Most of us on this site were surprised, and were very frustrated by the Democratic Party's campaign.  

    This lead to Kos Myth number 1:
    2002 was a disaster because the Democratic Party was not tough enough.

    Who was accountable for this disaster? The prime culprit was the DLC.   I used to see the DLC defended in 2002 and early 2003 - I haven't seen it defended in the last year.

    BTW - for those newbies, pre Nov 2002 one open thread could last a day and half, and would often not exceed 100 comments.

    2.    The Iraqi War debate - April 2003:  This was very much an anti-war site - if there was anyone who was pro-war I don't remember them lasting long. .  In some ways, this was the most interesting period the site ever had, simply because of the very nature of the debate.   We tended to discuss ideas more than we do now, in part because debates over war force you to talk about ideas, in part because some of the guest posters tended to write more about ideas (Here I think of Billmon).

    This lead to Kos Myth number 2:
    The war is wrong, and the Democrats are spineless jerks for not opposing it more forcefully

    3. April 2003 to the Wisconsin Primary, 2004:  Saint Howard

    During this period, the site changed in part to an organizational arm of the Dean campaign.  People wrote, often very movingly, I thought, about the work they had done for Howard.  It was an amazing thing to read.  The site actually tolerated people who supported other candidates (I was more for Edwards than Dean in the end) pretty well.  But you definitely had to be careful about what you wrote here if you were supporting someone else.

    This gave rise to Kos Myth number 3: The corporate media did in Howard.

    One other change - as the primaries approached, this site became increasingly a news site and less an "ideas" site.  I think was simply a function of the election season, but I do think we talked less about political philosophy.

    4.    March 2004 - November 2004: Let's all get in line behind Kerry, no matter how much it hurts.

    I suspect we all know about this one.  There was broad agreement to get behind Kerry - though I don't think people held back in pointing out mistakes he made.  We obsessed about polls, bitched about the other side - and had our hearts broken

    Where is this site going - you know I don't really know.  In the aftermath of this election, I would like to see it talk more about ideas - that's what a party on the outside should do.  The Myths that I have written above in large part serve as a prism through which we see the Kerry's defeat (I know - if it was one...).  One of the things I would like to see us do as a group is question some of the myths above - though I will go to my grave thinking the war was an incredible mistake.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site