The "DINO" Thing Annoys Me

So who isn't a "DINO," Dennis Kucinich?

Rather than evicerating Democrats for failing to attain some level of mostly imagined ideological purity, we should be uniting this party to defeat the most reactionary and evil administration in U.S. history.

Honestly, how can anything else matter?

That being said, Zell Miller is a DINO...

Since he has a spotless pro-life voting record.

I'm not saying I think that, but my point is that people's selective attention to particular issues while ignoring others is part of what is preventing democratic unity.

DINO and RINO reek of party purging. RINO is not surprising - Republicans have always been much more monolithic and unquestioning in their thinking. But for us Democrats to be doing the same thing, that's counter-productive and hurts our chances in the fall.

That said, yes, Zell Miller IS a DINO. ;-)

all with their own interests. For that reason there will never be ideological purity in the Democratic Party.

However, the root of the problem will not go away when Bush does.
The root of the problem is that is impossible to categorize millions of voters in to 2 groups. For example, there is no viable non-capitalist party in America.

For all the political fighting that occurs over it the reason and solutions are actually quite simple and mathematical (not political) in nature. A plurality (winner-takes-all) system is(mathematically) the worst voting system for representing a diverse set of opinions.

We need a voting system that incorporates voter preference so that multiple parties can thrive and receive votes (i.e. no more strategic voting/ lesser-of-two-evils).

Read here for more info:

http://accuratedemocracy.com/
http://www.fairvote.org/
http://electionmethods.org/

If we had a true multi-party system people could get politically involved based on the particular ideology they supported. This way, they merely approximate.

Until the government gets taken over by a criminal cabal, and then it isn't at all about ideology any longer.