Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)
Sun Mar 23, 2014, 09:45 PM Mar 2014

Why we need multiple candidates in the 2016 Democratic primary

Ok, I realize here that to many, Hillary is not only ordained to be the Party's candidate, but ordained as president. Some have noble reasons, some merely never stopped the 2008 campaign. However, the point of this op is about the Primary itself, as in, why we NEED people to run in the Primary.

Now, let's go ahead and say we know, with a 2 + 2 = 4 level of certainty, the Hillary will win both the primary and election. The problem is, right now, she has NO reason to even humor the left. Go ahead and read the Huffington Post, and you will see people like Mark Penn who support Hillary, but trash anything left at every turn. Yes, these are people who share the GOP delusion that Obama is a leftist. They actually think Hillary needs to tack to the RIGHT.

First off, that is a recipe for disaster. If the GOP runs a Chris Christie, then he can get props for attacking Hillary in a rude, nasty way, which will make Jane and Joe sixpack happy. If all Hillary offers is "I like the right wing too" then she will get mowed down trying to act more like a right wing jerk than the people who are the real thing. As Truman put it, people will pick the real republican over fake ones every time, and sadly, Clinton does not seem to get that. Now, if the GOP gets desperate, and runs someone like Rand Paul, things get UGLY, because while we all know Paul is, at best, a Trojan horse for the Billionaires, he can be different enough in tone. Imagine a debate where Paul discusses peace with Iran, while Hillary keeps making a case that "Assad must go!" We will bleed the vote among people who, ranging from the Medea Benjamins, to the veterans, who are just sick of war already!

So, the purpose of let's say a Robert Reich or Bernie Sanders or Liz Warren would be to pull Clinton to the left, because we know there is a very strong pull to the right already. The left needs to show that yes, we are here, yes you do have to listen to us. The fact this would be done in the Democratic party itself insulate against third party trojan horses that are simply meant to divide the left again.

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why we need multiple candidates in the 2016 Democratic primary (Original Post) DonCoquixote Mar 2014 OP
I think you're confused Adam051188 Mar 2014 #1
We need it just because it's healthy. Loudly Mar 2014 #2
 

Adam051188

(711 posts)
1. I think you're confused
Sun Mar 23, 2014, 10:02 PM
Mar 2014

you're assuming that the things politicians say to get you to vote for them actually matter. Hillary will say whatever she wants, the media will spin it in a positive light. If that is the will of the overlords that is. They could always change their minds. It appears thus far she is their pick. she will get them Iranian oil. Maybe Venezuelan as well, maybe not. i don't know.

didn't obama run on wealth redistribution? what happened there? is anyone talking about it? there's your answer.

 

Loudly

(2,436 posts)
2. We need it just because it's healthy.
Sun Mar 23, 2014, 11:00 PM
Mar 2014

But how long is the list of potential candidates who could be elected in the general?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why we need multiple cand...