Perhaps it is time to learn from the evangelicals

[question everything]

Yes, we are looking at them, wondering how they could support such a sleaze whose life style supposedly is against everything that they believe.

And they are laughing. They got Gorsuch, they are getting many judges who share their view of life and no one is paying attention.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016202047

We, meanwhile, are debating the purity of our candidates. Many here still loath the DLC, which was, still is - gasp - centrist.

Well, the DLC gave us President Clinton who was the first Democrat to be re-elected since FDR! Who gave us years of growth that helped many, who gave us two supreme court justices that are almost at the end of their line.

I saw a thread of two DUers debating the results of the Texas primaries. A "pure" candidate vs. the "preferred."

I don't know the details but I know that the way for us to wrestle the reins is to move to the center. To dump the "purity" test and to appeal to as many voters as you can. To many who see the dangerous path that Trump is taking the country, but are not ready to vote for the "far left."

Yes, I know. Many here will question our identity if we do move to the center but at this point, i think, saving the country is more important than "standing on principles." Or blasting the DINOs

I hope that we can put the breaks on Trump when we take the House, or the Senate, or at least reduce their majority when they will no longer be able to pass laws with their votes alone and just laugh at us.

And maybe, even the Republican so-called leaders will develop some spine to stand up to Trump.

But we have to.

OK, start shooting.

[world wide wally]

1. Perfect is the enemy of good

[Binkie The Clown]

2. You're absolutely right, of course, but the "true believers" will put you down for it.

Ignore them.

[TheBlackAdder]

45. They believe God will be there for them in the afterlife, when God does not protect them in life.

[sprinkleeninow]

3. No shooting, but I would spank you with a wet nooodle.

JK!! ☺

You have a point that's been put forth b4.

It's been well received and not well received.

I feel we should get as many Dems in everywhere while working to keep the ones we got. Lookit Doug Jones, Beto in TX, Conor Lamb in PA. Gives me hope. And others who are turning the tide.

Get Dems in power where we can, then tweak iss ues.

Now's a scary time to take chances.
Just my quarter. *Due to inflation.* ☺

Snuk hub's tablet him not knowing, the emojicons are ugly and tablet is a PITA. Never again! 😵

[ffr]

4. If the candidate has a D by their name, until we have a supermajority, they get my vote.

As simple as that.

[rpannier]

5. Yes, they voted for il douche to get that fifth vote

But don't forget, they spent four decades pulling the republikkan party further and further to the right
They helped push out the Lowell Weicker's and Richard Schweiker's from the republican party in order to get what they wanted: forced births, gawd in the classroom, special protections for religious groups and institutions

on edit:
trump also picked one of them to be his vice president. That helped him immensely among the evangelical-fundamentalists

[blue-wave]

6. It is simply time

to start a pledge for every person who claims to be a Democrat. I'll start now.

I will support and vote for all Democratic candidates in any and all general elections. I will also vote in every election, this means every local, state and national election, in the primary and general elections. PERIOD. Yes, wake up Democrats!!!!!!!! Make the pledge.

[MaryMagdaline]

7. I pledge to do the same

[Hortensis]

34. :) I do support all liberal Democratic candidates, and

almost all others, over any Republican of this era, and in these dangerous times I do vote for the Democrat most likely to win.

We don't all have to "move to the center" by any means, though, and in fact our entire party has moved somewhat left in response to what's happening on the right.

We all do need to support both the return of power to Democrats and the rebuilding of the working center of the electorate that we must have if democracy is to survive.

[question everything]

49. No, we don't need to move to the center, but we should not shun it

And we should not be afraid from a compromise. While Whiny Donny see a compromise as a weakness, and, perhaps, some Democrats see it too, in the long run, compromises show strength.

But right now, I think that removing his power, either directly or by eliminating the strong support in congress should take priority over all our goal and wishes.

[Hortensis]

55. You bet. Since our political center broke, I've developed an

Last edited Fri Mar 9, 2018, 05:58 AM - Edit history (1)

enormous respect for the need for a healthy center of citizens who respect working together to achieve political consensus and to maintain stability for our nation. A huge function of that center is to keep extremism on both sides from breaking out and consuming us.

President Obama warned America that our center has broken. Frighteningly true. But a large, strong working center still exists on the left within the Democratic Party. Our wonderfully diverse coalition of interest groups with common purpose is in itself a working democracy.

For the past couple years, hardly a day goes by without the extremism that's burning on the right and threatening to rage out of control, its flickering echoes from a radical left that is unable to respect the views of others, and the endless partisan meannesses from both sides of an angry electorate that remind me our democracy can't continue this way and survive. Divided we fall.

[BlueTsunami2018]

8. Why do they get to be as far right right and extrene as possible

And we can’t even be center left? We have to be “centrist”. All that does is move the center to the right. We need to just be who we are, pro labor, civil libertarians who want sensible regulations. I’m tired of having to constantly give ground to those motherfuckers and they give us nothing at all, ever.

I’ll vote for any Democrat over any Republican always and obviously Red district Dems have to have flexibility but the party in general should be a left leaning party.

[shanny]

9. This

[demmiblue]

13. +1

[NCTraveler]

20. They aren't even close to as far right and extreme as possible. nt.

[BlueTsunami2018]

23. Really?

They’re reasonable people?

They have flat out traitors, white supremacists, religious whackos and science deniers as their mainstream candidates.

And they keeping moving further and further right. The end game is straight fascism.

[NCTraveler]

25. Please show me where I stated they are reasonable people.

"And they keeping moving further and further right."

Agree and you made my point.

[BlueTsunami2018]

31. And I said as possible....

Meaning, I thought obviously, that.....Oh, there’s no point in arguing semantics, we have bigger fish to fry and we’re on the same side.

[ck4829]

29. +1, Soon enough "Far left" will be "Getting shot at school is bad!" and "Sensibly conservative"...

Will be "Let's put everyone who is not 'normal' in death camps!"

Really though, it seems as though we're already halfway there.

[question everything]

50. Yes, we have our goasl as you list them

and we certainly could have insisted on them were we facing a Bush (either one), a McCain, a Romney perhaps even a Cruz, no, not Cruz.

But Trump is posing such a danger to our country, both foreign and domestic, that shrinking his power, if not eliminating it altogether, should by the main goal. Which means that if we have representatives who support the NRA, who oppose later term abortion, who - look at it now - support the new tariff, but are still Democrats, will give us the votes in congress, then I hope that we can accept them, even while holding our collective nose.

[Martin Eden]

10. "move to the center"

The "center" has moved steadily to the right as the Rethugs keep moving further right. Chasing them in that direction is a losing game which plays right into the hands of the big money interests.

We don't win elections by becoming Republican lite.

We win elections by crafting a strong consistent message in support of effective policies which benefit the vast majority of voters.

We win elections by putting forth candidates who speak truth to power and gain the trust of the people, inspiring them to get out and vote.

The Senate Democrats who joined Republicans to advance the bank lobbyist bill have moved to the center.

To move in that direction is to be co-opted by the forces we are fighting against.

[Demsrule86]

14. And it will always be so if we continue to elect Republicans...you want to move to the left, elect

any sort of Democrat...moderate, liberal even conservative if you have to... get the damn majority...if they win a primary vote for them in a general but field candidates who have a realistic chance of winning a district...Moser in Texas is a prime example. Sure the DCCC was heavy handed about this, but this person funnelled campaign money into her husband's business and said negative things about Texas. And yet, some Democrats are perfect OK with voting for her because she is an our revolution candidate ( Sen Sanders) ...she won't win a general in a million years. There were a number of good candidate including Fletcher with whom she is in a runoff with...I pray Fletcher wins or we lose the seat. And some are celebrating this...as if losing somehow makes you a better party. It doesn't...it makes you a loser, and the GOP keeps the House. A party of the most pure perfect progressives who do not have the majority amounts to a big nothing for us...and they play on the GOP field not matter what they believe...and the country moves right. It has always been so. You want to move left...alway always vote Democratic and field candidates who can win a general.

[NCTraveler]

16. One of the most empty slogans to ever be muttered in politics.

"by putting forth candidates who speak truth to power"

That said, your points are solid. Not absolute but solid.

[Demsrule86]

18. Which glorifies losing as some sort of principle...it isn't a principle to allow people is evil as

Republicans to be elected.

[NCTraveler]

19. Some don't understand the huge difference between.....

Charlie Crist and David Jolly and how primaries work out in certain districts.

No one would accuse me of being a fan of Crist but I absolutely cheered at his victory. Jolly would have won without question had he been running against a Grayson type person or political neophyte.

[Demsrule86]

35. I agree completely.

[Martin Eden]

22. It's only empty if you don't fill it

In the fall of 2002 Democrats failed to speak truth to power in the run up to the war in Iraq. They failed to speak the truth about the lies that led us into a disastrous war that is costing us $trillions and continues to ravage that unfortunate part of the world.

I believe John Kerry would have won in 2004 had he remembered what brought him to national attention in the first place -- leading veterans against the atrocious war in Iraq.

I think Hillary Clinton would very likely have won as well if, instead of voting for the IWR that gave GW Bush authority to invade Iraq, she spoke truth to the powerful interests intent on war and insisted the UN inspectors be allowed to finish their work.

Powerful interests do indeed have significant influence over our government, and they maintain that power by putting up a façade of lies that far too many people accept as conventional wisdom. Only the truth, forcibly and consistently spoken in a path to winning elections, can defeat that power.

It's not an empty slogan if you fill -- and fulfill -- it.

[NCTraveler]

24. It's as empty as could be.

That is why it must be filled. It's owned by every ideology as a great phrase and it truly states nothing. "if you don't fill it". Exactly. Which everyone does in their own way. Completely empty sloganeering.

[Demsrule86]

36. I don't believe what you wrote is accurate...this is not an issue that people

vote on in the first place. As for 2004, the Greens attacked Kerry early in the campaign. And any progressive who doesn't vote for a Democrat period end of story...shut the door should turn in his/her progressive card and go squat with stein. Democrats are the only party that can fight the GOP...so maybe we don't always agree, so what. No GOP is better than any Democrat...and this sort of idea is why we have had three Democratic presidents in 30 years and are fighting to save progressive policy.

[milestogo]

11. Don't we still have primaries?

[Demsrule86]

17. Primaries often hurt us more than they help us...primarying Manchin in WV with a person

who will without a doubt lose the seat is an example and it weakens Manchin. Of course the 16 election is also an example. A primary is a means to field a winning candidate not to purify the party using some 'perfect' criteria and sending unelectable nominees to the general. We need a big tent to take the majority.

[question everything]

51. Regualr primaries could cost Feinstein her seat

Yes, I know, she is getting old and tired. She sat behind Schumer during that government shutdown discussion and she looked very tired. But she has a lot of juice in her and I think that her experience and seniority are valuable. Especailly, to guide us through weakening Trump.

Thankfully, California primaries send to the general elections the top two winners, even if the same party, thus she will survive the primaries and the general elections. Again, with the tough days ahead, we should have someone seasoned as Feinstein instead of someone who thinks that she is not liberal enough, or on the left, too establishment, or whatever the objections are.

[Demsrule86]

12. The GOP has their disagreements...but usually they vote in lockstep looking at the bigger

picture and this is why they have held the presidency all but three times in the last 40 years. Some who call themselves progressive care more about getting the right candidate (one who agrees with them) and sending message votes than winning a general and furthering our progressive agenda. If we don't start voting Democratic in a loyal and determined manner the GOP will beat us even though more agree with us than with the GOP.

[question everything]

52. Not sure where you start your counting

Since 1978? We had Carter, Clinton and Obama for a total of 18 years.

They had Reagan, Bush, Bush and now Trump for a total of 21 years.

Not only that, both Clinton and Obama had only two years with a Democratic congress.

[Demsrule86]

57. We had Reagan, Bush, Bush II for a total of 20 years and now we have

Trump...that is a big deal...and every Democrat was neutered in the first midterm which meant we got little out of the presidency...consider what the other side has managed.

[NCTraveler]

15. I disagree to an extent about how you are framing this.

I do think your argument holds merit and am not outright negating it.

Most of the conversations/arguments I have seen with respect to "pure" vs "preferred" completely define the candidates themselves incorrectly on the ideological spectrum. Many of the candidates being pushed as "pure leftists" are neither pure or left. That is the first point of contention I have when it comes to outlining the debate.

Second, we must continue our push to the left. We have been marching(at a snails pace) in that direction and it is getting noticed. Clinton ran on one of the most progressive platforms of any candidate in history and got millions more to the polls to vote for her. Candidates holding further left positions on guns, social and economic equality, and in all other areas are being heard.

"Yes, we are looking at them, wondering how they could support such a sleaze whose life style supposedly is against everything that they believe. "

We are talking about a group of people who believe Obama was smoking crack and having an affair with a man while eight short years later are justifying affair after affair, sexual harassment, and outright abuses toward American citizens. They can take no part in our path forward or decision making. We must win electorally. <- You are making the case for that. I don't negate it and think it's a solid topic.

[Vinca]

21. I think it's a positive thing that we hash things out so broadly in the primary.

Our problem comes in the general elections. In the past, a large enough number of Democrats have gone off in a snit to cost us a win. It hasn't mattered to a major degree until the last election when people who "voted their conscience" went for Bernie or Jill Stein (Note: I was rabidly Bernie in the primary, too, but voted for the Democratic candidate in the general.) Of course, since we still don't know the extent Russian meddling might have changed the vote, no one can say for sure if Bernie and Jill Stein cost us the White House. Bottom line: do whatever the hell you want in the primaries, but vote Democratic in the general. We are not a parliamentary system so third parties only split the votes of one of the two major parties. In the end there is no proportional representation for a third party.

[Demsrule86]

48. Great post and very true.

[question everything]

54. Well said. Thank you. And... in hindsight I wish that Hillary was not projected to win. Big

This allowed many Sanders supporters to stay home (I do hope that did not vote for Trump though some claim many did).

[yallerdawg]

26. We have to understand our idealism expressed in a primary...

can knock us out of pragmatic victories.

Another lesson from the 2016 presidential election cycle.

[Docreed2003]

32. Excellent point...

[Demsrule86]

37. +1000

[ck4829]

27. What we need to learn is that Evangelicals are the ISIS of the US

They're OK with gay people killing themselves after being tortured with "conversion therapy", they dehumanize transgender individuals and God knows what they have planned for them, they are silent about the maternal mortality crisis in Texas, they gave a religious justification for the Iraq war via the Land Letter, and years earlier they supported "Model Villages" in Guatemala during the Cold War which was a genocide of peasants and indigenous people.

They are terrorists and murderers.

They are monsters.

[mcar]

28. K&R

[alarimer]

30. We are smarter and have more integrity than they do.

It is important that our candidates actually STAND for something and do what they say. Or at least try to. We do have principles, even if we can't always agree what those are.

Electing some slick salesperson who will sell us out time and time again is not really "winning" even if wingnuts think it is. It will destroy this country.

In fact, there are some Democrats I would NEVER vote for EVER. The outrageously corrupt (Traficant comes to mind, though he is long gone) and people who are the complete opposite of whatever the party stands for (currently embodied by Dan Lipinski. Fortunately I don't live there, but I would vote for someone else EVEN if he was the candidate. Fuck him and those alleged Democrats like him). There are some Ds who are as sleazy and worthless as any R.

We cannot sell out our principles for momentary gain, which is what evangelicals have done. We are not hypocrites.

[Demsrule86]

38. Anytime you elect a Democrat and don't elect a Republican, it is winning. And when

our side figures that out...things will get better. Otherwise the GOP will beat us...and we lose all the progressive policy that the Roosevelt generation won for us...as they were smart enough to know the dangers in electing any Republican.

[Demsrule86]

39. And I would add that 'mometary' gain is exactly what we need to get because if we lose more court

seats, we are done. There are times that you vote to save yourself. your party and the country and this is one of those times. As for Traficant...I live in Ohio...during the steel meltdown...Traficant refused to foreclose on folks who had lost their jobs because of the steel meltdown ...he went to jail rather than comply. I would pick a guy like that over almost any politician. I loved the guy.

[Aristus]

33. I agree. Smug, self-righteous political orthodoxy gave us Trump.

To Hell with all those self-described 'progressives' who insist: "Well, you know, both parties..."

[Demsrule86]

40. A giant fuck you to all of them!

Not talking about any on this board...a general comment.

[Aristus]

42. Right there with you...

[Demsrule86]

43. We have to bring back common sense to the Democratic party...the idea that Democrats are

the same as Republicans is pernicious and false...and it will cost us every bit of decent progressive policy if it doesn't stop...vote for the Democrat even if it is Traficant (whom I liked even if he did take bribes he refuse to foreclose on steel company greed victims) or Lipinski or anyone as if you life depended on it because it does.

[Lars39]

41. Ok,

So one of their strategies is to run as Democrats at local levels. They want power and they don’t much care which label they go by in some places. So what you wind up with is a rabid Republican and and a very much diluted “Democrat” who nine times out of ten votes with the rabid Republicans. Somewhat of a Pyrrhic victory because it keeps everything tilted rightward, sometimes for. long time.

[Demsrule86]

44. The Democrats were great this year...and if you want to turn the party back towards liberalism and I

do start at the grass root level. It is the only way...and a "diluted" Democrat still give us the majority without which nothing can happen.

[Lars39]

46. Yes, it gives a majority, there is that.

[Demsrule86]

47. We need a majority...we are sitting ducks without one...playing on GOP turf.

[sharedvalues]

53. They have billionaires. We have voters.

So they buy politicians and media.

We vote.

Dems are never going to be the party of oligarchs and autocrats. That's not in our DNA. We are going to be the party of intelligent people who care about others, who use government to help society while reining in oligarchs. That's our DNA. That's the only thing we can do. We have to win the 2018 midterms. We are a majority in the country.

Win the 2018 midterms and keep pushing. The wind is in our sails. This is a Dem-majority country. We need to work on turnout and that's all.

[McCamy Taylor]

56. You mean how to make money? Money is serious business and people trying to make

it will always pick a winner. That is what is you can learn from the evangelicals.

[Mr. Ected]

58. In a 2-party system, any Democrat is better than a Republican

Vote Democrat regardless of the candidate until we reach a supermajority, then refine our representation over time with candidates that more closely align to our ideals.

A Democrat MAY vote like a Republican, whereas a Republican WILL vote like a Republican.