Electability -- Another way of saying "Let the GOP frame the debate -- yet again"

[Armstead]

That, IMO is the basic framework of the "electability" argument against Bernie.

"I agree with Bernie, but the GOP will attack those ideas relentlessly. They'll brand him as a 'far left socialist' and gosh we can never counter that. We can never convince voters that our GOALS, VALUES and POLICIES are in their own best interests as well as being good for the nation as a whole. We can't do that. It's impossible to expose the basic faults at the heart of GOP conservatism."

In otehr words, instead of an actual contest of ideas and goals, we have to play small ball, and disguise what we want to do. We have to make it a campaign about personalities and small issues instead of the Big Picture."

So while the GOP will run a Proud Conservative campaign based on the familiar lies and distortions, we'll have to run a Cowardly Nothing campaign. We'll talk about how bad Republicans are, but not really talk about WHY they are wrong on a fundamental level.

How about a pro-active campaign for a change? Challenge them on the real differences between right and left. Give voters the information, sell it hard and believe that what we believe is actually a good "product."

[fleur-de-lisa]

1. Kick! - eom

[DanTex]

2. Ignoring electability is straight-up foolishness.

No amount of mental gymnastics will change the fact that we need to beat the GOP, otherwise things will be much worse. If you want to argue that Bernie is more electable, fine, I disagree (strongly), but at least that's an argument that recognizes reality.

But these arguments that we should ignore electability for some strange metaphysical reason are just plain foolish. And, speaking of the GOP, this is exactly what they want us to be doing. In the same way that we want them to nominate Cruz instead of Rubio.

[Armstead]

6. We need to beat the GOP. And we can do it without waffling.

And, in my opinion, we will lose without a strong, liberal progressive message.

The GOP will give a strong conservative message filled with lies and distortions, regardless of who their candidate is and our candidate.

We are at a point where the inherent flaws and unfairness of conservatism have become apparent to more and more people. But without strong opposition to that, and an ideological argument against it, they'll go for change for the sake of change -- which at this point in time is the GOP.

[artyteacher]

13. I agree with DanTex...

... understanding electibility is acknowledging reality.

[Armstead]

16. What is the reality?

[frylock]

19. Remember when everyone told us how electable John Kerry would be?

Good times.

[ElliotCarver]

3. Agreed. The electability argument is so self-defeating

Because Bernie has already proven he can turn out first-time voters, he has broad appeal with independents, even with Republicans, and Repub lawmakers openly respect Bernie for who he is, if not for his ideas. "At least with Bernie, you know what you're getting," they all say. America would love to elect a "what you see is what you get" President, after the charade of corporatist pigs we've had for nearly the last half-century.

The more they say he's unelectable, the more people want to elect him. People are done being told what's best for them: we're going to buck the trend in 2016.

Bring on Stage 7 Establishment Meltdown, baby!

[Blue_Adept]

4. Yay! Another instance of calling out liberals for being republicans

Or not able to think for themselves.

[Armstead]

8. Calling out liberals who are afraid tio be liberals

[Blue_Adept]

10. Those poor, scared, little liberals.

Glad to have you around to call us out on this.

[Armstead]

12. Glad to have you fighting "we're not liberals" around to keep us in line

[Armstead]

15. Yesterday on an interview, Clinton surrogate jeanne Shaheen was asked "Are you a liberal?"

Her answer (only slightly paraphrased) "I am an elected representative. My goal is to serve the people in my state, and I am interested in solutions. A particular solution may be considered one or the otehr. But I'm not concerned with labels."

i.e. Liberal is Kryptonite

[Nanjeanne]

5. Hillary Clinton's argument is that gov't is too broken for @BernieSanders' policies to work, so

we should elect the people who broke it.

(Saw that in a tweet and loved it)

[Armstead]

11. That's pretty much it

[kenfrequed]

7. The argument is sad

Have we have reverted back to "only Hillary can win"?

Because that argument is absurd. It has actually already been defeated.

Honestly conventional wisdom seems to be "only the Democrat that asks for the least can win." Voting history suggests otherwise.

[Armstead]

9. "only the Democrat that asks for the least can win." Exactly

[Maedhros]

18. The Party needs to stop being so damned craven.

Let's have some bold action, people! The times certainly call for it.

[Jefferson23]

14. It says a lot when a candidate is considered electable after voting for needless war

and is the recipient of corporate money from people that took down the economy.

Absolutely fucking amazing if you ask me.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

17. It's the gutless democratic strategy that loses seats all the time.

So, let's not have the Democrats change or show that they're up to the game. Let's practice the losing game and see how long we cando it for.

[Dems to Win]

20. Let's do it nt