The Democrats must have a primary, especially if Hillary becomes our nominee

[MrScorpio]

And every single one of those other-than-Hillary candidates must be as leftier/more liberal/super progressive as possible.

Hell, they all should be downright Democratic Socialists.

The point being is that a primary presents the best opportunity to bring a leftward, more populist shift to the Democratic Party. The only people who can accomplish this are the rank and file, labor-based, civil, economic, social progressive wing of the party.

We need to force the eventual nominee to lead a strong force against the corporate money based wing of Democrats, who keep shifting the party rightward.

Sure, this is definitely Hillary's show to run. But she has to be told, in no uncertain terms, that any Democratic candidate for president in 2016 will be representing the cause of fundamental progressive policy and will not end up being Republican lite, as long as we have something to say about that.

Bring on a Democratic Primary!

[chollybocker]

1. Absolutely.

The more candidates for progressive ideas putting themselves into the ring, and through the ringer, the better.

[Recursion]

2. That title is temporally confusing

Primaries and caucuses are how whoever becomes our nominee will become the nominee.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

3. Hahaha! I think you mean force the candidate

To SAY they will do X,y,z to corporate influence.

Once they are nominated they will run to the center and if elected they will govern from the center.

[blkmusclmachine]

4. "Center."

[Pretzel_Warrior]

5. Many DU'ers view of political center

Che Guevera<------Noam Chomsky------Ralph Nader-----CENTER----Bernie Sanders-----Wlizabeth Warren---- CENTER RIGHT----Obama, Clinton, Hillary----rIGHT WINGerZ----Mary Liandreau, Rahm Emanuel.

[Ron Green]

6. Forget this left-right-center nonsense.

We need national leaders who will protect and encourage LOCAL economic activity and community-building. Not capital vs. labor, but worker cooperatives. Not the welfare state, but sustainable jobs and wages. Incentives for entrepreneurship, disincentives for corporations.

Somebody has to think about the future.

[Demeter]

7. There isn't any force, except a massive reality check

that will move Hillary off her course.

A woman who would put up with Bill Clinton will not be swayed by a little dissent.

Unfortunately, I think we will get that massive reality check, and it will be an economic disaster first. If there's anything left, the second blow will be climate.

[lovemydog]

8. I agree MrScorpio

We need at least one strong primary challenger who will call for raising the minimum wage, dropping corporate tax breaks, strengthening health care, lowering the military budget to reduce the deficit - all the things that help the 99%. Besides, Hillary debating against herself would be mighty dull.

[IAmKirak]

9. Everybody etch-a-scketches for the general election.

Only MORmONS announce it.

[wocaonimabi]

10. If a liberal progressive challanger does not come out against Hillary voter turn out will be

lower then normal.

Corporate Candidate (D) vs Corporate Candidate (R) is a LOSING Combination and guaranteed low voter turn out.

People want to vote FOR something not just the lessor of two evils.

The Corporate (R) Candidate will be for tax cuts, no taxes on the rich, pro gun, anti choice, anti gay marriage, anti immigration, claim to want to fix the ACA, pro states rights and a fundy. The Corporate (R) Candidate has a lock on at least 45% of the vote no matter whom they run.

People want a REAL Choice not the faux choices most voters get.

[Scuba]

11. +1,000

[rhett o rick]

12. First we need some progressive potential candidates.

While I agree that we need to do this, I dont fool myself into thinking we can defeat the corporatist candidate. We really only have one viable party and it's been co-opted by Corp-America. Ironically, Citizen's United will undoubtedly help Clinton-Sachs be our next president.

In the mean time we need a strategy. We must get progressives to the polls even if Clinton-Sachs is the Democratic candidate, because we need desperately to elect progressives at all levels.

Would it be against the DU rules to support a write in campaign for president if it were for a Democrat?

I think we are at the point of dumping the "Lesser of Evils" trick perpetrated on us by our Corporate Overlords and deal with what comes. Otherwise we will never break this cycle of conservative presidents. The middle class wont survive another 8 years of Democratic corpocracy.

By the way, I dont believe that even if we have a strong progressive Democrat in the primary, that it will influence Clinton-Sachs near as much as Goldman-Sach's half million dollar checks.