General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIm so glad the calls for unity have prevailed
That the attacks on Sarandon and Stein have been knocked down so that DUers can unify around blaming Obama and the Democrats for Trump. It’s very important never to cast aspersions on the salt-of-the-earth Trump voters or principled third-party voters and keep focused on the real problem, Democrats.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)Russian princess Jill Stein and Ralph the spoiler Nader...their true heroes...and always worth listening to...unlike oh any Democrat.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Doesn’t it?
Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)
Control-Z
(15,682 posts)Just, yup. I'm out of words.
Or, should I say, I'm out of "approved words". I don't want to get into trouble.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Control-Z
(15,682 posts)You probably have much thicker skin than I. If I could handle the backlash I'd probably go for it.
But I've been a doormat most of my life. That I won't let people wipe their filthy feet on me any longer is personal growth for me. Lol.
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)Me.
(35,454 posts)involves a one-way street. Stein, Sarandon, Nader......completely destructive forces whose ideology lines up with Bannon's blow everything up. Birds of a feather hate together.
Madam45for2923
(7,178 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Please post links to where that has actually happened.
Critiques of the fall campaign do not equate to support for those people.
betsuni
(25,531 posts)Someone said that Sarandon thought Hillary was more dangerous than Trump, Sarandon said "she is more dangerous." This means Hillary was worse than Trump, Trump would be better. Another poster said no no no, "Sarandon in no way endorsed Donald Trump or opined that 'Donald Trump is better' -- rather, she said she couldn't sleep well at night' if either Trump or Clinton were elected."
That was in the "Enough with the Scolding" thread, and that's not a isolated incident.
Hekate
(90,690 posts)...their version of the Truth, which is Democrats are to blame for all the woes of the Democratic Party and we need to dump all the older Dems with years of experience and wisdom etc etc etc.
But you actually know that, Ken.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And I don't think we need to dump ALL older Dems. Never have.
I'm 56, so technically I'd qualify as an "older Dem".
At times, any acknowledgment that we, as a party, might need to change some things is taken as Naderism.
What is the harm of admitting that at least some of what we're doing isn't working?
Or of pointing out that it might not be the wisest choice to run the next campaign in the way this campaign was run?
There are people who say things about the party that at too harsh-it's NOT valid to say there are no differences between us and the GOP now(in parts of the Nineties, we WERE shading towards that).
sheshe2
(83,771 posts)
Maven
(10,533 posts)Oh, sorry...wrong thread? 
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Just don’t forget Ralph Nader.
Maven
(10,533 posts)That also worked out really well. She's such a revolutionary.
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)revolution...nope we have GOP bull shit from dirty sea to no longer shining sea ( thanks to Ms Green and her merry band of destroyers. I can't see that she is any different than Trump people.
betsuni
(25,531 posts)
FreepFryer
(7,077 posts)Response to BainsBane (Original post)
Post removed
JHan
(10,173 posts)also, this is the funniest thing I've seen posted today..
Lol
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)apparently one is only a progressive Democrat if one's allies work to ensure Democrats not be elected? Is that the criteria? Multimillionares are sacrosanct, but citizens are neoliberal hacks?
JHan
(10,173 posts)You are no longer a progressive democrat Bains, but you knew this when they called you a neoliberalshillcorporatistkillerOfbunnies etc etc etc
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)As far as I recall, I’ve only done door-knocking and phone banking for my own reps, Ellison and Franken. Though I understand that can’t compare to ensuring multimillionaires like Stein, Sarandon, Unger, and Hartman are never questioned.
JHan
(10,173 posts)Time you start defending democrats in these parts.... you're asking for trouble.
Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)She is a Trump enabler.
Madam45for2923
(7,178 posts)Viva la vida UNITED, eh? 
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)You purposefully ignore or even participate in the threads and then pretend they don't exist.
We just had one assailing Obama for Trump's actions. We have a constant barrage of threads and posts demanding that Pelosi, Weinstein, and others be removed from office or leadership. We see attacks on Harris, Booker, Clinton, Clyburn, virtually anyone who commits the sin of being a Democrat, and just coincidentally all of whom are people of color and/or women--which of course is the true ill of the Democratic Party. But if someone ratfucks Democrats, we are told it's "divisive" to criticize them and we must instead unify around them, even though their goals are diametrically opposed to electing Democrats. You go right ahead pretending none of that occurs.
While I understand it's not the fashionable view, I do not believe the Democrats are worse than Trump or the GOP. I do not believe that white supremacy is worse than a DOJ that tries to hold local police departments accountable and invoked Title IX in an effort to reduce the epidemic of rape on college campuses. I do not believe that property in guns matters more than human life. I do not believe that ensuring unfettered profits for the merchants of death qualifies as non-"corporatist." I do not believe upper-income white men are more valuable than the poor, women, and people of color. Failing to recognize the inherently superiority of certain multi-millionaires and the self-entitled bourgeoisie apparently makes me a neoliberal, particularly because I don't recognize the evil of targeting government resources toward the most needy rather than those who earn 2-12 times the national median. I fail to recognize, as the great hero Nina Turner said immediately after the GOP House passed a banking deregulation bill, that the Democrats are worse than the GOP on Wall Street, and what "progressives" really need to do is devote funds to elect more Republicans. I also fail to recognize that another true ally and hero is actions Nomiki Konst, tireless in her efforts to keep the poor, people of color, shift workers, the elderly and disabled from voting and committed to "diversity" in the Dem Party, defined as catering to the poor, oppressed white men who struggle to get by in the upper 0.3% of global incomes, suffering under under the tyranny of a party that dares to represent people of color, women, and the poor rather than focusing exclusively on those who really matter.
Denying what is commonplace is your MO. This is the last time I will respond to your transparently disingenuous claims. It doesn't matter how many times I point them out to you, even with links, you either ignore them or make excuses. It's game to you and an extremely boring one.
I'm trying to imagine what it must be like to continually claim omniscience, despite being proven wrong time and time again. What I do in such circumstances is say I haven't seen it, because I know for a fact I don't read every thread on DU. But then, that shortcoming is yet another of my "neoliberal" failings.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)DU is, by and large, unifying and moving past the primary wars. Sure a few people say fringe things, but they always have.
looking at these threads, I just don't see what you see.
[IMG]
[/IMG]Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)Why should they? He is not a Democratic leader. Countless posts attacking Democrats...we we are going to win without your help I think. You had an affect with the Russians on a very close elections...a perfect trifecta. I doubt it will happen again.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)..HRC's inability to pull away from Trump.
I voted for Hillary Clinton.
I even started a thread saying one should vote for her even if you don't think she'll do your life any personal good because she will help others if elected.
Meh. I need a vodka martini.
Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)for Clinton in the general...since you are here I assume you voted for Clinton...but like 2000, it was a very close election...and I doubt the next one will be that close...so I am not worried about all the screaming from the likes of Greens and other traitors. I am a Democrat. I support the Democratic Party and vote Democratic. I resent the multitude of articles form those who think they need to trash the party and Democratic elected. It only helps Republicans.
lunasun
(21,646 posts)WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Hekate
(90,690 posts)
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I'm glad you allege it doesn't happen. How tight are your eyes closed to avoid seeing what is obvious?
Podkayne K
(145 posts)The Grass Roots’ (appropriately named, at least for this commentary) lyrics keep echoing:
“Where were you when I needed you?
Where were you when I wanted you?”
The words take me back to early November 2016 and the desperate attempt to counter the purposeful destruction of our Presidential campaign by blood sucking fascists including—but not limited to—Fox noose, the Russians, and their faithful Comrade James Comey.
The blame, though, lies only partially with these vampires. The real culprit for this devastating debacle centers mostly on our own traitorous succubae. Fact: there were only two people who could have won the presidency. And if you were eligible to vote and did not vote for Her, you voted for him, period; no wiggle room; no dodges; no excuses! This includes you Jill Slime S*^&+_ts, and you Johnson Jackbooted Jackasses, and those others who just didn’t bother. Those include the ones who said to me, when I sought their vote, “it doesn’t matter,” “it won’t make a difference,” “they’re equally corrupt.” What you have wrought is beyond temporary miasma. It is very possibly the destruction of the country and beginning of the end of civilization itself.
Oh, I know what you’re thinking, ‘I’m being overdramatic.’ But what I’m really being is what many in Germany were not in the 1930’s. And what I’m also being is angry. Angry at those who needlessly put us through this nightmare and those who have and will have the blood of millions on their hands.
Hyperbole?
1. Millions will lose their health care. Whether “trump-uncare” passes or not, there is much rollback the president is doing and will do to assure that millions less are spent on health care so that millions more suffer and die. (All, so that millions will be funneled to the very few whom already have millions.)
2. Terrorism: It has already begun, and I’m not discussing the lunatic fringe from the middle east, but the local loonies, many from your friendly neighborhood tax exempt organizations with lots of swastikas in the living room and plenty of hooded sheets in the basement. These terrorists of the far right and their compadres and all those other “American” fanatics feel they have been given the green light to violently rid the community of those whom they and their leader at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue deem unfit.
3. Women’s health: Planned Parenthood has been under siege from religioterrorists since well before Margaret Sanger opened her clinic over 100 years ago. It’s not just about banning abortion—it never was. It’s simply and precisely a war on women. It’s a war on birth control, mammograms, cancer screening and any service that help women improve their well-being and better their lives. Since trump believes that women are good for only “p*_&^y grabbing” and hair pulling, what did all of you who voted against Hillary believe would happen when we were led by this heinous sociopath?
4. Foreign and Domestic Policy: We don’t need to stinkin’ State Department. Just bombast and bluster because that’s working so well with North Korea. Also: To get you ready:
See the following movies:
Cabaret (especially the Beer Garden scene and the song about to whom the future belongs!)
Dr. Strangelove
Manchurian Candidate (the original)
On the Beach
Testament
They make the statement about what is happening and what will happen far better than most any other commentaries you might see or read.
5. Electoral Politics? Impeachment! Forget about it! The next guy up is as awful or, in so many ways, worse than the present demon. The one sneaky intelligent move trump made was appointing a Veep so bland but dangerous that he, if presiding, would be more unctuous and catastrophic than the current p-Resident Evil.
6. The second specious argument is that it will all turn around in 2018. Anyone believing this or using this argument is lying to him/her self and to the rest of the known universe. The pukes will stop at nothing to either make sure voting is restricted to a few select white folk plus a host of Russian hackers or, more likely, manufacture a pre-planned crisis and/or terrorist attack in which many will die, and the govmint” will be “forced” to suspend not only the election but the constitution and any semblance of representative government in the near and far future.
7. Religious Fanaticism: A great deal of the nut jobs on the right are the type of religious fanatics that wish, want, and welcome the end of the world. They not only pray for it, but do all they can to bring it about.
From what I can gather, they think with the end times, they will be magically transported to some Christian Valhalla while the rest of us will suffer the torture of damnation and hell fire by still being ruled by the likes of a Dick Chaney or a Donald Trump.
So these are the folks who want war with Russia/China/North Korea (the more the merrier), who know Climate Change will destroy us and will do all they can to bring it about, and who want to dance at Earth’s funeral.
And these are, by your vote for anyone other than Hillary, the very people you have allowed into the most powerful position in the entire world.
No doubt you will wail, complain, and claim you led marches and organized “resistance” after November. Excuse me, but what the hell has that accomplished? The Supreme Court has been decimated, the justice department has been “Confederatized, and congress is one big mass of traitorous sycohpants. The time you were needed was last fall, and it was last fall when you failed.
YES YOU FAILED! You failed your family, you failed your fellow citizens, you failed your potential and present offspring (if there will be such), and you failed your country and your only planet. Your arrogance, ignorance, and intolerance got us to this point: to the tears and terror, the blood and brutality, and the destruction and death. And every bit of that is on your hands.
So again I ask:
Where were you when I needed you?
Where were you when I wanted you?
Answer: Sitting around pontificating asininities, making ignorant rationalizations for the upcoming carnage, and selling out your country. And because of that, we the hundred thousands or millions are about to lose our health care, our rights, our country, and possibly our lives. And you: you damn s^*t for brain assholes are exactly like the fascist nut job you elected and just too fucking stupid and/or cavalier to understand you're the same or what your (in)actions have unleashed.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)knocking on doors and making phone calls, and certainly not claiming the two parties were equally as bad.
If by you, you mean me.
Podkayne K
(145 posts)I thought and hoped the article explained whom it skewered. If not, I apologize for wasting your time.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)The content didn't apply to me, but the use of you made me wonder a bit. I couldn't tell it was an article since you didn't use quotes or a link. I agree completely with the sentiment.
Podkayne K
(145 posts)I call it an article, but it's all mine and I didn't know what else to label it.
I always appreciate feedback. Thanks.
PK
Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)just wasn't good enough. I worked my heart out for this election...no blood on my hands. I left my hospital bed and drove to Democratic headquarters...and I didn't see no stinking so called grass roots either...just the same Democrats I see year in and year out...we always get a few...who promise big stuff...but then...we don't see them anymore...unreliable.
Podkayne K
(145 posts)that people only read headings--and this heading, I guess, was a mistake--but not the full article.
During the election I moved to another state for 10 days--as the one I'm in was never in doubt unfortunately for the fascists--and worked through food poisoning and a horrible toothache to get out the vote for Hillary. I never even hinted I didn't think HRC wasn't good enough. In fact, completely the opposite.
So again, I apologize for the article heading. It was, in hindsight, not a good one. But book/cover judgement means you obviously didn't bother to read the rest, where the folks I was/am angry about are those who voted for the jackbooted moron who now poses a threat to the entire planet.
As I stated in the article--since you didn't bother to read it--only two could win. If you didn't vote for her (meaning if you could vote and didn't vote, voted for Slime or someone other than Hillary) then you in actuality voted for him.
And it's those people who are/will kill us and those people who have blood on their hands and don't give a damn. And they don't give a damn because they are exactly the same no conscience, no moral, evil, dark spirited, cruel sub-beings as the one they put into the most powerful position in the world.
Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)Hillary and would have done the same for Bernie...we need to elect progressives. I did read the article...my comment was really not directed at you...it was merely a comment about trying to do the best we could and not being responsible for Trump...sorry if my meaning was not clear...
Madam45for2923
(7,178 posts)We DEMS sooooooooooooooooo lucky!
ananda
(28,860 posts)Yep, I've never seen a party so bent on blaming itself
for Reep fraud and treason.
brer cat
(24,565 posts)Too many people think "unify" means "support who I do or else."
niyad
(113,315 posts)
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)When it gets quiet,
post something to stir it up again.
Sad
Very sad
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)I know. I should stick to trashing Obama, the "quiet," as you call it.
It says a lot that you object to not attacking Democrats.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)I'm putting all the pot stirrers on ignore.
Congrats - you've made the list.
woodsprite
(11,915 posts)I had cleaned out my list after the election, giving the benefit of the doubt. That was a mistake.
mcar
(42,333 posts)
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I too pretend that self-examination, self-criticism and self-analysis is merely stirring a pot-- especially when it doesn't place my sacred cow on a pedestal.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Do tell me when that has occurred? Attacking women and people of color in elected office or leadership positions hardly qualifies as self-examination.
I've gone through some self-examination, which is why I won't ever vote third party again. Thinking only in terms about what I believe does harm to the poor and the marginalized when one votes in a way that allows Republicans to gain power. I've learned that lesson, and I don't see anything productive is to work to ensure that certain multimillionaires, who never vote Democrat and always act in ways that further the GOP, should be subject to no criticism. When people work to ensure the Democrats stay out of office, they promote the GOP, which currently means fascism and white supremacy, even if they refuse to admit it. And that refusal displays an absence of self-reflection.
Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)will ruin their lives and kill some of them.
Demsrule86
(68,576 posts)all women too.
lunasun
(21,646 posts)Or the swipe at Clinton from Nadar posted
JCanete
(5,272 posts)It is totally fair to try to make a case that the leftwing holdouts cost us this election, or that their strategy is a mistake, or that they entirely misinterpret the problem. It is also totally okay to make the case that the democratic party and its leaders have made huge missteps, and have adopted a strategy for decades now that has resulted in us losing 1000 seats over that time. Its okay to criticize policies of Sanders and policies of Clinton, and to challenge their rhetoric and speculate on its effects.
As silly as I think the argument is, it is okay to say Sanders is trying to offer ponies or unicorns, and is letting perfect be the enemy of the good.
As silly as other people think it is, its okay to point out how loud money speaks, no matter what party it is buying a mouthpiece from, so long as that allegation is not in the spirit of actually going the extra mile and assuming the worst of the figures who happen to benefit from that kind of funding. After all, there are strategic aspects that they have no choice but to consider, and they are working within their sense of that framework. Also, there's the fact that some simply benefit from having an ideology that is more appreciated by industries than other ideologies. They aren't shills. They just benefit disproportionally by their less threatening(to said industries) convictions.
This is all in the realm of hashing out philosophical and strategic disagreements. None of it is in the realm of ascribing motivations. None of that is taking the liberty of assuming that our would-be allies are bought and paid for, or conversely, that they are selfish evildoers who either advocated abstaining or voting third party for no reason except that they are petty people who don't give a shit about the suffering of others.
None of that is getting up in arms when somebody remains in the political sphere because that person is still a hero to people, or is still a voice that represents many of us on the left, whether that be Clinton and the ridiculous calls for her to go the fuck away, or Sanders and the equally absurd flip-outs over him being invited on the unity tour, or being tapped to defend the ACA in a debate, or to speak at a women's conference.
All of that is in the service of disunity. That's what we should be striving to avoid on both sides of this SAME SIDE. Granted, there are actually philosophical areas where we part company. So of course we are going to have strong disagreements and there will be a struggle for the heart of the democratic party over core ideals. That's how a party evolves over time. It's inevitable and not a bad thing, so long as it isn't hateful and doesn't devolve into character assassination. I know sometimes that's a blurry line, but I think that we should be striving individually to avoid stepping into that fuzzy area.
As to not casting aspersions about Trump voters, that's important because first, demonizing anybody gets in the way of actually getting into their heads and understanding what is motivating their decisions, which is a tactically unsound thing to do, and we can expect to prescribe the wrong medicine to that condition as a result. Second, you aren't going to be able to penetrate their bubbles if you make sure they know that life outside of them is toxic for them. And their bubbles are huge. This isn't a bullyable minority. These are bubbles generated en-masse by our media and the money behind it, because these dis-informed people are useful. They don't need to change to get acceptance. They have plenty of it in their bubbles. What they need is to be confronted over and over with cognitive dissonance. Calling them deplorables doesn't generate that...it only reinforces their world-view about us.
There's no question, these voters are a problem. But anybody trying to defend the current world-view of Trump voters is probably not coming from the left. Trying to understand why they see the world they see, and the underlying misconceptions that feed their fears and hatred is not agreeing that the reality they see is accurate. It's just accepting that they are trying to be good people in their own heads, based on that skewed reality. If that's the challenge...to change that skewed reality...then we should be using the right tools.
Please try not to confuse the media's bungling(and there is no mainstream personality in the news who is among the far left, you know this) with people on the left when it comes to the message of what we should learn from Trump voters. Their own gleeful mischaracterization of the point...that we ignored the world-view(rather than the struggles) of white rural voters, is a convenient lie(although I suspect its as likely that this is often just a lazy misunderstanding by media personalities who just aren't that deep) that feeds into all of the things that divide us in the bottom 99%. That sewing of division, is of course good for ratings, and keeps the heat off the people who the heat is never allowed to singe.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Is really making a statement about “how loud money speaks.” And I find it fascinating that campaign finance reform and public financing has disappeared in lieu of a litany of excuses.
I’ve don’t think I’ve talked about unicorns and rainbows. What I have talked about is my concern that the poorest and most marginalized Americans are eschewed in favor of rhetoric and proposals directed toward the white, predominantly male, middle to upper-middle class. I’ve also commented about affluent critics of the party (not Sanders) who lambast need-based assistance or equal rights in favor of their own increased wealth. I find the claims of oppression by those who earn more than 99.7% of the world off-putting, and I think it irresponsible for politicians to play into it. I specifically argue against “purity” as a charge and point out that their is eager compromise about the rights and lives of the non-white male majority.
When I see you preach unity in one of the threads denouncing Obama or calling for the removal of Dems who just all happen to be women and people of color, or continual insults that anyone who fails to place one man above issues, equal rights, and their own inconsequential lives, I might believe unity matters to you. Let’s just say I won’t hold my breath. I’ve learned that no issue can’t be thrown aside and no there is nothing that doesn’t depend entirely on personality.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Yes, the 2016 election was a disaster, but how does endlessly lashing out over who made what choice then help us to get people to make a different choice NEXT time?
Nobody should have voted Stein. Sarandon should not have endorsed Stein.
But the voters we need to win over for next time are not going to be won over through callouts and public shaming. And you don't turn nonvoters into voters by shaming them. I share your anger about their choices, but none of them are going to be induced to vote for OUR ticket by the posting of endless threads saying it was stupid to vote Stein.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)to his character. But tell you what...feel free to pm me the next time you see a thread like that. If i see the pm I'll check it out, and if I think these people are being unhelpful, I will absolutely say so.
We've been through it before, and I have no idea how you could consider any of the proposals of Sanders as eschewing to white middle or upper middle class. All of the proposals would have huge benefits for people of color. A minimum wage hike to a living minimum affects immigrants significantly, not to mention other marginalized people who, due to institutionalized poverty and underfunded schools, have less opportunities to get jobs that pay higher than minimum wage. Tuition free college is also something that could greatly benefit families with the tightest budgets. Nothing about that skews white. It takes away one of the major road-blocks that separates white people from people of color...their statistically greater wealth advantage due to long established privilege. And how is medicare for all not beneficial to poor people of every color who cannot even currently afford health-care? How does that one skew white?
I confess, maybe I got lost and you were talking about entirely different proposals by entirely different people, so I'll allow for that possibility.
But yes, these proposals should also appeal to poor white people and middle class white people, because that's the point..it isn't taking from them to make other people's lives better, it is taking from the people who have way way too much and have accumulated it way too unfairly. Its making them put money back into the future of this nation so that future generations can benefit from our infrastructure the way they have.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)What I've argued for since November is that, whoever we nominate, our platform should be more or less Sanders on economics, Hillary, NARAL, Dolores Huerta and BLM on social justice issues, and a lot less military intervention on foreign policy. We could pretty much nominate anybody and win with that program.
Yet every time I called for an approach like that after the election, suggested that kind of a unity program, I was implicitly accused of attacking Hillary, covertly campaigning for Bernie or, most absurdly of all, of calling for the party to abandon social justice and focus on the interests of wealthy white men-when it wasn't doing any of those things or anything remotely similar to them.
Why is it so hard to accept that not every discussion, not ever question, is Bernie v. Hillary?-that, in fact, at this stage, that rivalry is the past, rather than the future?
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)a vote for Trump. It is an entirely valid case to make that it was a poor decision that helped Trump take the White House, without impugning the motives for it.
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)The effect of a vote for Stein was to vote for trump
JCanete
(5,272 posts)A vote for Stein would be 0 Trump, 0 Clinton, 1 Stein.
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)Stein was another tool used by Putin to help elect trump. The russian trolls pushed Stein for a reason
Hekate
(90,690 posts)...the brains, the heart and soul, of those who would vote Third Party in an American presidential election. We do not have a parliamentary system, there are no "coalition governments," third parties wield zero power in Congress -- and there are no do-overs.
The way it works is strictly binary in this country. In the General election if you want your vote to count you vote for either a Republican or a Democrat, because either a Republican or a Democrat will win. It is what it is. Don't tell me someone who does otherwise "means well" if the outcome is disastrous to us all and fatal to many.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)value. They demonstrate that there is a population that is looking for certain issues to be championed. That may screw us in a given election if there are too many third-party votes, but from that knowledge, our party leaders and future leaders have to determine whether or not what these people want is something these politicians should be attempting to deliver.
As to your willingness to impugn motives...the discussion was about calls for unity, and I was chiming in on ways I think we could talk about these issues without assuming the worst in the people we need as allies. That goes for people on both sides of the liberal spectrum. Now, if you want to say "fuck unity", that's fine, and I'm sure you will have plenty of company, from people who you agree with and from people who you vehemently disagree with. And when we devolve into infighting, you can certainly feel free to blame it all on the other side.
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)the GE, or at least to bloody her going into her term? But it wouldn't matter whether the candidate was a solid, serious candidate, or not...Putin would have done this. I think its worth being careful about assuming the worst in the candidate simply because helping that candidate happened to fit Putin's agenda. Personally I found some of Stein's positions troubling. As to her own possible
ties to Putin or Russia, I'm not sure of the extent of them because I wasn't really that interested in her, but my post said nothing about whether or not I agreed with people voting for Stein. She was not necessarily the principled alternative to main-stream politics. But my point about using third parties to quantify a certain value-set that our politicians will either take note of or ignore depending on their own analysis, still stands.
Obviously when people vote third party, they should be thinking really hard about what that choice might cost to themselves and to others, particularly the most vulnerable.
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)The JPR site was full of russian fake stories pushing the idiots who post on the JPR site to vote for Stein. Stein had ties to putin including this
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/guess-who-came-dinner-flynn-putin-n742696
rzemanfl
(29,561 posts)
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Some of the idiots who attack Democrats, particularly Democratic women, are Russian operatives, but that's probably a relatively low number. Most are either the purists throwing a toddler's tantrum, or as appallingly ignorant as Trump's Deplorables.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)than DU.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)But how does focusing on those two win us more votes next time?
How do we cut into Stein's vote(as we have to do) by shaming Stein voters or increase turnout by shaming non-voters?
Obama obviously shouldn't be blamed, and I don't know of anyone saying we should never criticize ANY Trump voters.
Voltaire2
(13,038 posts)and by extension his millions of loyal Democratic Party voters who supported him in the primaries help?
Attack Stein all you want. Cut the crap with the Bernie bashing.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)We need the enthusiastic support of the people who backed Bernie in the '16 primaries. What chance do we have of winning that support if we keep offering those people, nothing but blame and derision? In truth, the vast majority of them did vote for our ticket and are working positively within the party today...what chance do we have if our party's message to them is nothing but "everything is YOUR fault. Shut up, do what you're told and take what you're given"?
Our goal should be to win the additional votes we need. That can only be done through positive appeals.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Bradical79
(4,490 posts)I don't think it's a good use of resources to focus on cutting into her tiny piece of the pie when you have a pool of 40% to 50% who don't vote at all. Would be more fruitful to get some of these people to the polls, imo.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I also think we need to make nonvoters into voters.
There's no way to connect with them without trying no things and new policies.
They won't be won over by us tacking further towards the imaginary "center".
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)