To start with, on the "About Democratic Underground LLC" page, it says, the bolding mine:

<snip>

Democratic Underground (DU) was founded on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2001, to protest the illegitimate presidency of George W. Bush and to provide a resource for the exchange and dissemination of liberal and progressive ideas. Since then, DU has become one of the premier left-wing websites on the Internet, publishing original content six days a week, and hosting one of the Web's most active left-wing discussion boards.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/about...

Then, on the rules page it says, again, bolding mine:

<snip>

2. Who We Are: Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office. Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forum...

Now, I've always seen a conflict here. Not all Democrats, or Democratic candidates are left-wing. Very few, in fact. It's supposed to be a left-wing discussion board that supports non-left-wing Democratic candidates. A conflict usually addressed with the pragmatism, lesser-of-two evils, and/or anything to win, deal with contradictions later philosophies.

These days, the conflicts are becoming more pronounced. First of all, as DU has grown, it has also grown towards the center. I see more centrist philosophy espoused on DU than I do left-wing. Especially now that the party has nominated a centrist. Any day now I'm expecting to see DUers advocating all kinds of center-right positions.

I understand that the board has evolved; no longer "left wing," and no longer really "underground." It may be that it's time to update that "left wing" characterization on the "about DU" page.

But what about that rule? That rule that says DUers are expected to support Democratic candidates? You know, the one that locks any discussion other than bashing of 3rd parties or independent candidates? Does the same rule apply for DUers that support republican candidates?

If so, what is going to happen if, as some DUers are already pushing, Obama chooses a republican to run on the ticket with him?

Then the rule doesn't work. I can't support the nominee, the democrat, without supporting a republican. I can't support the democratic ticket without breaking the rules.

Will the rule be suspended for a republican, when it isn't suspended for left-leaning candidates that are not democrats?

Will the rule be rewritten to include support for republicans, rejecting only independents and 3rd party candidates?

Will people be tombstoned for refusing to support the democratic nominee for president because there is a republican on the ticket?

How will DU respond to this conundrum? How SHOULD DU respond to this conundrum?

One suggestion: disallow the promotion of republicans on DU. Shut down the threads promoting a republican on the democratic ticket.

What say you, DU? Are some republicans now our allies, with support allowed at DU, while others are still "the enemy?"

Should we "change," and "come together?" Should "changing" and "coming together" include supporting any candidate, from any party, or do we just change the rules for the republicans Obama likes?

What say you?

More to the point, what will DU admins decide, should a republican end up on the ticket?