About Progressive ideals and principles

[CajunBlazer]

There has been much talk on the far left about needing to live up "Progressive ideal and principles" if Bernie fails to secure the nomination.

I believe that we can all agree on is that the worst thing that could happen for progressives and the people we seek to protect in this country is for the Republicans to take over the White House, both Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court.

What is clear to me is that the best way to keep the Republicans from taking over and doing harm to the country is for all of us to vote for the Democratic nominee, regardless of who becomes the Democratic nominee. While sitting home or voting third party might not do any harm, it does absolutely no good. And don't give me that loyal test crap, this isn't a call for for a loyalty test - you can vote for whomever the hell your choose - but it is a call to good ole common sense. There is no better way to defeat the Trump or Cruz than to vote for the Democratic nominee. Period, end of story.

If you have progressive ideals and principles you will do everything in your power to keep Trump or Cruz from becoming President. And if you don't do everything possible to prevent that from happening, I would regard you as a selfish coward who convinces him/herself that you are doing the right thing, but are all the while are allowing harm to come to those who can least defend themselves. People who would do that are selfish and have no progressive ideals and principles at all. I don't see how they can call themselves progressives; they are not even honest with themselves.

[peacebird]

1. Yet another one of these? Good grief, give it a freaking rest.

Seriously.

Or better yet why don't YOU vote for the one candidate in the Dem race who does not have honesty issues, you know, the man of integrity who is just trying to help us save the middle class.

[CajunBlazer]

3. Screw all of that!

If Bernie wins the nomination I will vote for him, meanwhile I will vote for the candidate of my choice for the nomination.

If you don't believe that if Clinton wins the nomination she will not follow a more progressive path than Cruz or Trump, it is you that is being disingenuous.

If you do not do what's necessary to keep the Republicans from taking over the country by voting for the Democratic nominee in the general election, you are no Progressive and you have no ideals and principles.

[peacebird]

5. yawn.

[CajunBlazer]

11. I see you realize that I am right. Thank you very much.

[DesertFlower]

76. well said. nt

[DanTex]

6. Why is the idea of voting for the Dem candidate so offensive to you?

In the midst of a heated primary, I think it's a good thing to remind ourselves from time to time that we are ultimately all on the same side here.

[Bluenorthwest]

24. Had this been posted in GD, where we discuss the General Election it would not be seen as a cheap

and furtive primary tactic. This is the Primary forum, thus the OP's agenda is about the Primary, not the GE. Hence the push back. Passive aggressive is still aggressive, game time is over.

[DanTex]

25. How is calling for joining up to defeat the GOP "furtive"? WTF? That's the whole point!

What is it about Bernie fans that makes the very idea of voting in November to keep the White House so offensive?

You realize that if Bernie wins the primary (which y'all still seem convinced is going to happen), then voting for the Dem candidate means voting for Bernie, right?

[timmymoff]

86. Same side as goldman sachs?

she isn't on the same side as working Americans considering she gave up three dollars on minimum wage before the fight began. She isn't on the same side of labor considering her support of nafta and recent evolution away from supporting TPP. Are you really sure we are on the same side, because I question whether she is on our side daily, then I look at her donor list and wonder. I truly do not think we are all on the same side. I'm not interesting in the hard veer to the right.

[cosmicone]

2. A true progressive is gracious in defeat and supports the winner of elections n/t

[Armstead]

18. So therefore we should all have shut up and supported GWB in the 2000's

[auntpurl]

29. I'm not in this argument, but to be fair...

Bush did not win that election.

[Broward]

4. Are you a selfish coward for voting for Hillary in the primary?

[CajunBlazer]

9. No, no more than you are a selfish coward for supporting Bernie.

But if you are willing to sacrifice all of those who will be thrown under the Republican bus because you won't vote for the Democratic nominee regardless of who that turns out to be, then yes, that title fits. And you are no progressive. A real progressive never sacrifices those who are less capable of defending themselves to their pride and imagined ideals and principals or to get back at those who would not vote for their candidate. Such a person would at best be a selfish coward.

[Broward]

10. Everything you just wrote could be applied to Bernie v. Hillary.

You are clearly willing to sacrifice all of those who will be thrown under Hillary's bus.

[CajunBlazer]

12. There have been a lot of people that have been thrown under a lot of buses lately

Such is the nature of primaries. However, I assume that all of us are strong people and can survive being thrown under a number of buses. If you can't, if you are one of faint of heart, DU is not for you, you don't need to be here.

What I am addressing is what we are going to do after the primaries and caucuses are over and a nominee is chosen. Anyone who doesn't realize that the real impact of the Republicans taking over will not be on the people who are posting on DU, but will be on those who are least able to defend themselves, those who are most in need of our help, has lost all concept of what it means to be a progressive..

[Broward]

13. Again, everything you just wrote is also an argument for Bernie over Hillary.

Yet, correct me if I'm wrong, you support Hillary over Bernie.

[CajunBlazer]

21. You can keep repeating that until dooms day, but....

You will note that I didn't specify which candidate would win the nomination, so you are off on the wrong subject.

However, please note that I don't like Bernie chances of getting the nomination. The early primaries and caucuses have dug a hole for him that I don't think he can climb out of. In fact, I think that before it is all over he will be even further behind in pledged delegates and there is no way that the super delegates will move over into his corner unless he has a commanding lead by the convention. That simply is not going to happen,

But you can hold out hope if you want to. It makes no difference, my argument still stands regardless of which candidate wins the nomination.

[HumanityExperiment]

7. progressive ideals and principles...

interesting OP, in part to the point of presenting a diminished returns candidate if the only ideological progressive candidate fails to gain the nomination and we're left with HRC...

Should we just lay down and accept a candidate that isn't the ideological progressive we need or should we just accept and settle forthe other candidate that isn't Trump or Cruz?

Interesting OP...

ideals and principle, if that's the premise then progressives lose, so is that the answer you're looking for?

Or is this a 'bait and switch' attempt?

[CajunBlazer]

8. First of all you need to quit lying to yourself and everyone else

I'm saying that we should vote for the Democratic nominee regardless who that turns out to be because that is the only viable alternative to the Republicans, probably Cruz or Trump. If you don't, you will not only be letting yourself and your sacred ideal and principles down, you will be throwing people who can't readily defend themselves under the Republican bus. If you aren't for insuring that the Republican don't ruin this country, you're against us; there is no neutral in this fight.

It's pure and simple: If you want to sit on the sidelines and eat popcorn while the rest of us fight to stave off the Republicans, you're not part solution, you are part of the problem and you need to go away as soon as possible and let the rest of us fight your fight.

[HumanityExperiment]

14. sacred ideal and principles...

pure and simple, ideals and principles are always worth fighting for, the more we peg HRC to the left the more difficult it will be for he to tact to the right where she wants to be...

you keep putting on your 'blue jersey' rather than fight for the principle and ideals required

[CajunBlazer]

15. BS

Anyone who would refuse to help stop the the Republicans from taking away people's health care, deporting hard working people, abandon the Supreme Court to conservatives for the next 20 years because they refuse to vote for the Democratic nominee has no progressive principles worth fighting for. If they think they do they are lying to themselves because no true progressive would refuse to lift a finger to keep Cruz or Trump out of the White House.

On the other hand, the words selfish and self centered come readily to mind because such a person apparently does not care what happens to others who will be hardest hit by the Republican's "policies".

[HumanityExperiment]

17. BS indeed...

Obviously this ideological fight for what this Democratic party stands for eludes you this election cycle

If I told you HRC is more Republican that Democratic I'm sure you would try to spin that, but that's the point of my replies, this is an ideological fight not just a D vs. R

Why are you so comfortable with shifting your ideology away from the core values the rest of us are fighting to regain within the Democratic party? Maybe you're the one with more BS to explain away than I...

[CajunBlazer]

27. What makes you think I am shifting my values

I am obviously not as liberal as you are - but then again only a small percentage of the American electorate are as liberal as you appear to be. Understand this, you are the outlier, not me.

Candidate who are on the far left and candidates on the far right have virtually no chance of being elected President of the United States. That's the prime reason why Bernie cannot even win the nomination of the Democratic Party. If the Republicans are stupid enough to nominate Ted Cruz or Donald Trump, they will learn the same lesson. The major parties as a matter of survival have to resist the pull of their extremist elements (who are always the most passionate by the way) which is why candidates of both parties always tack to the middle after primary fights.

In addition, if you look back through history you will notice that when the country has shifted too far to the lift or too far to the right, over a period of years the political pendulum has always swung back in opposite direction. And the further to the left or right the pendulum swings, the quicker it begins to swing back.

You may not like, but here is the bottom line - your political position is quite unlikely predominate in this country and neither will that of the far right. If ever our country loses its mind temporarily and puts the far right or the far left in charge of government, it is almost guaranteed that it will correct that mistake very quickly.

You are where you are politically - and good for you - but just don't expect the rest of the country to pander to you - it just won't happen. This is a center weighted country and that is not going to change any time soon.

[HumanityExperiment]

32. No, you're quite the republcian light indeed...

Knowing HRC and her history on policies and her continued shift on those policies for political expediency is remarkable but it shows her true failings and those are substantial

Was FDR 'far left'? in your perception I suppose so based upon your replies

HRC is a brand, that's really what this boils down to... same as Trump, both are brands and in this highly commercialized world we live in the bigger the brand the more people will follow without asking any questions

Take a very close look at the '60s and the policies and economics during that time frame, was it perfect, not at all, but in terms of what worked for people and the economy it was the better of times in US history

Many of those same aspects that were put into policy and then law are the very same aspects Bernie wants so there is that...

Don't expect me to buy into a brand without doing my due diligence on researching that brand...

Your candidate is weak when it comes to the core policies and ideology of the Democratic party, liberals and progressives

[CajunBlazer]

34. Republican light - LOL! - that speaks volumes about you, not me

Study your history - FDR was trying to pull the country out of a deep depression so he managed to enact measures which he would not even have considered in saner times. Also notice the alphabet soup of agencies set up to see the country through depression quickly disappeared soon after the country was well into recovery.

And consider this - you seem to think that Hillary is a terrible candidate and yet she will be the Democratic nominee and will very likely be the next President of the United states.

So, in light of this, ask yourself this very simple question: Is it you that is out of step with the country, or is the Country that is out of step with you?

[HumanityExperiment]

42. yes republican light...

"Study your history"? Ok....

"you seem to think that Hillary is a terrible candidate" not seem to think, I know she's a terrible candidate

again, HRC is a BRAND, her allegiance is to political expediency, do I have to bring up the '08 primary run she had to prove that point out, let alone all the other political history on her?

"ask yourself this very simple question" I have been asking questions and pointing out the facts, it's your choice to either know and understand them or not, and this is far from 'simple' and that's probably where you fail, the complexity and understanding that and dealing with the facts takes effort and I believe HRC supporters don't want that from the voters, they just want them to buy into the 'brand' without a second thought...

[CajunBlazer]

44. Please practice your convoluted talking point somewhere else, they are getting tiresome

[HumanityExperiment]

47. practice?...

This isn't 'practice' it's debate

History isn't 'talking points' it's history, which last time I checked were based upon facts...

The only one's getting 'tiresome' are HRC supporters, it's odd that if their candidate is considered so 'strong' then they should have no worry or fear about completing this primary process through to conclusion allowing each state to cast their votes...

Have a good day!

[CajunBlazer]

48. Whagt a conincidence, I tired of Sanders supporters:

1) Who think Sanders is the strongest candidate in their memory.

2) Who have labeled their candidate's opponent as a criminal and applied to her every other slur they can think of.

3) Who believe that their extreme political views are somehow the norm and who automatically view anyone with positions not as far to the left as their own as conservative Republicans.

4) Who will take their ball and go home if their candidate doesn't win the nomination because they're selfish and don't care what happens to those who will most need our help if the Republicans are allowed to take over.

NOTE: None of this applies to any number of good Democrats who happen to believe that Bernie simply represents their views better than Hillary. I have communicated with a number of those folks who are also sick and tired of the tactics and posts of the "Bernie or bust" crowd to whom this post is directed.

Good day Sir!

[HumanityExperiment]

50. Try again...

"Who think Sanders is the strongest candidate in their memory." Bernie is the strongest liberal / progressive candidate in recent memory

"Who have labeled their candidate's opponent as a criminal and applied to her every other slur they can think of." I didn't label HRC a 'criminal' you did, so there is that... I pointed to her shifting policy positions through the years for the sake of political expediency, this is easily provable

"Who believe that their extreme political views are somehow the norm and who automatically view anyone with positions not as far to the left as their own as conservative Republicans." You're a republican light so your political views as compared to the liberal / progressive norm would set the current primary issues being debated as 'extreme' so thx for proving that point out yet again

"Who will take their ball and go home if their candidate doesn't win the nomination because they're selfish and don't care what happens to those who will most need our help if the Republicans are allowed to take over." The 'ball' as you describe it are ideology and principles, we are already 'home', we're just reminding the rest of the Democratic party where their 'core' comes from, HRC doesn't embody that so again thx for pointing out that contrast again

I never stated 'Bernie or bust', I CLEARLY state over and over it's principle and ideology, and the person that best embodies those liberal / progressive ideals is Bernie, the more we peg HRC to the left and lock her into making promises to the liberal and progressive ideals the better we and the Democratic party will become of it

[CajunBlazer]

51. Good bye

By the way, I hope you didn't spend to much time composing your post above because I didn't read it. I'm sorry, I should have made it clearer that from my perspective the "debate" was over.

[HumanityExperiment]

16. So...

Which is it, ideals and principals or Democratic nominee?

Therein lies the rub, you claim 'lying' whereas the reality is clear to everyone else in regards to this primary cycle

Suffice it to say, your fighting for party whereas I'm fighting for what that party stands for, that goes beyond just this election cycle

I get that an ideological fight confuses you, it's very apparent with each reply you make here, "you need to go away as soon as possible" proves that point

[raouldukelives]

19. The only thing more effective than voting for Republicans.

Is investing in them. And millions do with each dollar in Wall St. Fundraisers for the GOP and the MIC, one and all.

I applaud all those who consistently stand with bedrock progressive ideals and principles.

For any confused. The best way to start standing with those, is to stop standing against them.

[RiverLover]

20. If only FDR's Democratic Party hadn't been taken over by those w republican principles,

then voting for the Democrat would actually mean voting for Progressive Principles & not the conservative deregulating food stamp cutting fracking off shoring corporate welfare crap we have now.

Clearly, with centrist corporate-bought Hillary's anointment, we can see we're losing this struggle to the Third Way "Democrats"~

Third Way in struggle for the Democratic Party’s soul
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/10/06/struggle-for-soul-democratic-party-pits-wall-street-backed-think-tank-against-elizabeth-warren/pYk3SXRnZDmpi7C7N4ZpXN/story.html

^^^ This, the entire article, should be required reading for everyone who genuinely considers themselves Democratic. $9 billion annually donated by undisclosed corporations. Hillary is their candidate. Think about it.

[CajunBlazer]

22. "If only..." is not a way to start a positive statement

Either you are going to accept that some progressives are not as liberal as you would like them to be or be prepared to accept failure. I have seen several estimates, but the most commonly accepted one is that only about 13% of the voting population considers themselves "very liberal". I assuming that includes you and those that you consider ideologically pure enough by your standards.

It is pretty obvious that if that group stands alone, they will get absolutely nothing done. However, it is also obvious that the rest of the progressives in the Democratic Party and the left leaning independents are also unlikely to elect progressive candidates without at least a large percentage of the very liberal group voting with them.

So what we have is a situation where neither group will be successful in setting the direction of this country without the other. It is also clear that the alternative this election year is the Republicans taking over the White House, both Houses of Congress, and the Supreme Court.

So either we are going to have a "big tent" party are we will all fail when we refuse we accept as allies those whose politics are similar in some ways or but different in others. Each individual among us must chose which of those alternatives is best for us and I hope we will chose wisely.

[RiverLover]

30. I don't know, Cajun. When you push me aside as "very liberal" & "13%", does that mean believing

in regulating industry to protect people is very liberal? Like Banks and fossil fuel cos?

Believing in fighting for the right to form unions so workers aren't abused is too liberal?

Believing prisons for profit is astoundingly immoral, too liberal?

Wanting Made in the USA to not be a thing of the past, liberal?

Wanting Moneyed Interests to not run our govt "representatives" and considering this outright corruption? Too liberal?

Wanting public schools to have the support & the funds to educate children effectively? Not wanting people to profit off of that?

Wanting college to be affordable like it was when I put myself through?

Not wanting corps like GE & Verizon to go YEARS without paying taxes?

Not wanting endless war so that corps can profit & thousands of good innocent people die? Too liberal?

Wanting fracking to be regulated with oversight to ensure safety & to fight for ending the unDemocratic banning of local fracking bans which people voted on?

Not wanting water privatized? This is liberal?

13% far left? Really?

These are Democratic principles. They aren't that far left. And having the most corrupt candidate (the most purchased politician) in my lifetime run & having the entire party elite go to striking pains to ensure her nomination completely stinks to me. Is that too liberal? Wanting the corrupt purchase of our party to not pay off by leaving us with a corrupt republican DINO in office?

To want the Democratic Party to BE Democratic is too liberal? Too far left?

Then maybe the party has left me.

[LondonReign2]

35. I'm right there with you RL

The Third Wayers have taken over the party I once identified with. Now I'm supposed to nod my head as 1980's Republican economic policy because "Republicans are worse".

[CajunBlazer]

37. People may have different opinions on different issues, but one thing is clear....

Bernie is obviously too liberal to even win the nomination of the most liberal major party. Every time only registered Democrats are allowed to vote in primaries or caucuses, Bernie loses badly. Since you obviously support him not only casually, but wholeheartedly, where does that place you? That's easy - well to the left of the vast majority of Americans. It you that is the outlier my friend, not me.

[Bluenorthwest]

23. Why are you talking about the General Election in GD:P during an ongoing primary?

It's sort of disgusting this attitude streaming out of your cohort and your region that the rest of the country's vote does not matter, that the entire West Coast and more than half of the country should not vote, should stop the primary process and pledge things about the election after next, an election taking place 7 months from now, my primary is still weeks away.

Why not do this in General Discussion so that it does not seem like a furtive, covert, passive aggressive primary tactic? Unless that's what it is, if so just leave it here were it belongs.

[CajunBlazer]

26. Show me three states where Bernie is projected to win by large margins

Then keep in mind that he needs to win by large margins in many states

The writing on the wall may not be legible to you yet, but it should be getting clearer.

Besides, you might notice that I was advocating that we all support the Democratic nominee. Given the nature of your post, I find it amusing that you assumed that that the nominee will be Hillary Clinton.

[Bluenorthwest]

31. That's not responsive to what I wrote and asked. Try being responsive. Why are you wanting to talk

about the election after next, in a forum dedicated to the next election? Why not in GD? Because this is a tactic, and that is what makes your writing so obnoxious. Sorry but passive aggressive bullshit like answering direct questions with more questions is a cheap habit used by fearful typists.

[CajunBlazer]

41. There is no proabition about discussing the general election on GD-P

If you think there is I suggest that you go back and read the site's rules.

As we move towards ever closer to the one of the candidates winning the nomination, I see absolutely no reason not to discuss the need for everyone involved to vote for the Democratic nominee whoever that turns out to be.

If you don't like what is being discussed on this thread, instead of moving in and trying to shut down the discussion, why don't you go bother someone else on another thread that you like better.

[Bluenorthwest]

36. And nothing in what I wrote suggested who the nominee would be.

Do not speak for me while refusing to answer questions asked of you.

[CajunBlazer]

43. I'll "speak" however I choose

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. I'll be voting for the most progressive candidate on the ballot.

[CajunBlazer]

38. Whoa, stop the presses!

What a revelation!

I'll be surprised if you can find someone far enough to the left. Good luck with that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

40. Thanks! I'm sure I'll be successful.

Finding somebody to the left of Trump or Hillary should be a snap.

[CajunBlazer]

45. Yea, but finding an extreme socialist will be tough - Good luck

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

46. I'll settle for a progressive.

Which will be easy.

[CajunBlazer]

49. The only progressive running

Has never run anything bigger than a girl scout troop and is totally unqualified and who would be totally over whelmed ff she were to win. Yep, that's perfect choice for you.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

52. I hope we find out after she wins.

[LondonReign2]

65. "Extreme Socialist" in Third Way speak is anyone that

to the left of Bob Dole.

Hey, let's all be condescending, shall we? Do you think you'll be able to find an "Extreme Fascist" to vote for?

[LondonReign2]

33. Thanks, but I think I'll skip the advice from far right Democrats

[CajunBlazer]

39. Our view of others is always affected by where we stand

So moderate Republicans refer me as a fricking liberal and to you as socialist or worse. Go figure.

[LondonReign2]

55. "Moderate Republicans" today are to the right of Newt Gingrich. Our Third Way "Democrats" are

indistinguishable from 1985 Bob Dole economically. What you dismiss as "far left" is the Democratic Party's platform.

[BillZBubb]

53. More of this bullshit? You aren't convincing anyone. Quite the opposite.

You can define progressive ideals however you want, that doesn't make it so. One progressive ideal is to not choose one evil over another.

[CajunBlazer]

54. And obviosly one of your progressive ideals is to selfishly vote for whomever you please....

...every one else be damned.

[LondonReign2]

56. LMAO. "Selfishly vote for whomever you please"?

I mean, fuck Democracy, right? How DARE people vote for a candidate that reflects their values.

[CajunBlazer]

57. Oh, Democracy is still very safe

You can vote for anyone - no one can stop you - and no one will bother to try.

But in this democracy we also have this right call freedom of speech which means that I am free to criticize you or anyone else if who says that they are going to vote in what I believe is a stupid manner. You can't pick and choose which freedoms you want to apply in this country. So let's dispense with your with your little tirade and get back to the real issue.

It is hypercritical to claim that you are voting third party or not voting at all because you are obeying your "progressive principles". Why? It's simple - you are not using your vote to stop Republicans from taking control of the White House, both Houses of Congress, and the Supreme Court when you know that if that were to happen many people who can least afford it will suffer under Republican rule.

It's disingenuous to claim you are acting in accordance with your "progressive principles" when your actions, or lack there of, puts others in harms way. The main difference between progressives and conservatives is that conservatives only seek to take care of themselves while progressives are concentrated on the greater good. You have a right to vote anyway you please, but if you are going vote third party or not vote at all, quite lying to me and yourself by saying you are you are acting in accordance with your progressive principles.

[LondonReign2]

63. More condescension from the very right wing Third Wayers that caused this mess

Apparently you are unaware that no where on a ballot do you mark that you are voting against someone. For many elections cycles now, since the Koch's helped fund the pre-curser to the Third Way, conservatives have been intent on moving the Democratic Party to the right, and with great success, to the point where the Democratic President admits his economic policy is indistinguishable from 1980's Republicans. Mission accomplished for right wingers.

You and your ilk have been running on the "We're Slightly Less Bad Than Republicans" platform ever since then, to our great detriment. Accepting a continued slide to the right, because it is slightly less precipitous under a Third Wayer vs. and an admitted Republican is no longer possible. But congratulations, made the difference nearly indistinguishable to voters and lost the Congress in the process. Well done.

It takes some unbelievably twisted logic to believe that voting against your principles is really how you vote consistent with your principles. Why am I not surprised? It's standard Republican-style pretzel logic.

[CajunBlazer]

69. Oh, get over it

You are like bystander who stands by and watches a crime committed and does nothing to stop it and then claims, "I did no harm; I didn't beat the man up and take his money. I was following my principles not to get involved in other people's business.

Except what you are doing is worse: Above all else, the primary progressive principle is to do whatever is necessary ensure that others less fortunate then ourselves are cared for. That principle over rides all else in the progressive mindset. And you are violating that principle.

You are probably in a condition to survive the Republicans taking over the White House, both Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court just fine, so can afford to ignore everything else and indulge yourself by voting third party. But know this - you are then no better than the guy on the street ignoring a crime and not lifting a finger to help.

[LondonReign2]

77. Again, I'll decline the advice from a right wing Third Wayer

It's pathetic for the one perpetrating the crime to complain that others aren't stopping it.

[CajunBlazer]

78. Yea, typical!

So your saying the only people at fault are all those voters who were too stupid to vote for your candidate. So since you now using my analogy it is all of voters like myself who are equivalent to the guy committing the crime. You do realize how disingenuous that is, right?

Never for a moment does Bernie or his supporters accept any of blame for his defeats. In your mind only Bernie and his people are smart enough to join the revolution and everyone else is not smart enough to understand where their true interests lay.

Do you know what other group shares that kind of supreme arrogance? Those on the far right. They too are convinced that they are always right and see the world only in black and white and never in shades of gray. They too tend to see political losses to be the work of conspiracies. They too are the most are the most enthusiastic on their side of the political divide. They too view anyone less radical than themselves as traitors to the cause - the only difference is that they call Republicans who are not as conservative as themselves liberals and your gang calls any Democrats who are not as liberal as you are conservatives.

I could go on and one with the comparisons, but suffice it to say it is a real phenomenon and political scientists have a name for such similarities between the far left and the far right - the call it the Horseshoe Principal. And if you bother to look that term up, check out the meaning of the term "true believer". I that you might be able to identify with that term as well.

[LondonReign2]

79. Third Wayer wants us to vote for 1980's Republican ideas, elect politician that

calls Kissinger a mentor and is endorsed by PNAC, then whines incessantly that progressives refuse to abandon their principles. LMAO.

[CajunBlazer]

81. I don't give a damn who you vote for

That fact that you try to change the subject after reading my post is ample evidence that you have no answers to my assertions that radical liberals/socialists like yourself are very much like the radical conservatives you hate in both your thinking patterns and actions though you are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. You're perfect example of the "True Believer" and living proof of the "Horseshoe Principle".

For the last time, you have displayed time and time again that you have no progressive principles. The main principal of all true progressives is their lack of selfishness and their willing to put the needs of others above their own when required; every other progressive principle is an extension of this main tenet.

As you already admit, the election of Cruz or Trump would have devastating affects on our country, especially those who can least afford it and can least defend themselves. Yet, instead of taking the one positive action which could help prevent their election, you evidently have decided to selfishly do nothing to try stop Cruz or Trump for winning the White House. By voting third party, voting for Bernie as a write in, not voting, etc. you do no harm, but refuse to take a positive step to prevent disaster.

Like many others of your mindset, your puny excuse for your lack of positive action is, "It's your fault because you didn't vote for my candidate, so its your fault I don't do anything to to help avert disaster for those who are most need of our assistance." Don't you understand how arrogant, selfish and self centered that sounds.

Your zeal is evidently preventing you from thinking logically. You can't violate your progressive ideals and principles because have none to start with.

[LondonReign2]

82. Third Wayers appears very angry some people have principles. Why is that?

Wishes everyone would roll over and vote for warmed over Republican ideas. Why is that?

Likes to bold his whines, to really highlight anger over principles.

Sorry honey, ranting that others don't vote with your pretzel logic is the arrogant, selfish, self-centered approach. Defining progressive ideals as voting for a candidate endorsed by PNAC and with Kissinger as a mentor is Limbaughesque. Nobody could possibly take you seriously.

[CajunBlazer]

83. Again, I don't care who the hell you vote for

People who depend on emotion rather than logic to make important decisions are not susceptible to logical arguments which are the only type I can produce. So "Honey", just make yourself happy with your vote because you are going to what you are going to do anyway so discussing it further would be pointless.

[LondonReign2]

84. I just figured out what the disconnect is

You haven't a clue what a principle is, do you? Much less what progressive means? So you apply your own Turd Way Republican ideas to the words and get spitting mad when thinking people won't go along with your pretzel logic definitions.

It is amusing that anyone can think attempt to contort Kissinger, Blankfein, and PNAC with progressivism much less principles. But that's Turd Way for you Honey.

[CajunBlazer]

85. I am not a pie in the sky idealist honey; I'm realist

I don't see the world in black and whites, I see all shades of gray in between. I am willing to compromise with those that don't view the world as I do, if that will move me closer to achieving my goals. I'm not a dreamer, I'm a doer; I get things done. So I approach my politics in that manner.

That doesn't mean that I don't have principals and idealistic goals, far from it. What it means is even if we had identical principles and goals, you and I go would go about trying to make the world a better place using very different methods. With you it seems to all or nothing; you go for the whole enchilada even if the odds of succeeding are very much against you. I tend chose incremental steps with high probabilities of success, and then I chose the next step, and then another. In some cases when the odds are very much against succeeding, not allowing the other side (conservatives) to win is equivalent to a victory.

In large measure that explains our choice of candidates. The Sanders campaign was an all or nothing affair from the start. If elected Bernie promised to make the US a progressive (socialist) paradise, but his odds of wining the nomination were long, his chances of winning the general election even longer, and the probability of enacting even one or two of his glorious programs if elected President are almost non existent.

However, all of that was okay with you. Bernie's dreams were your dreams of a perfect political system, of a perfect country. His candidacy was perhaps a once in a lifetime opportunity that your couldn't pass up. So you were able to either dismiss the long odds in your mind or you allowed your idealism to over ride reality and you chose to believe that hard work, enthusiasm, and determination would over come all obstacles, regardless of odds.

I chose a different kind candidate. I chose a candidate with the experience to be President day one. I chose a candidate with less grand, more pedestrian, but more realist goals who has a much better chance of being elected President of the United States and actually enacting her goals once elected. Is she a perfect candidate? No. Do I agree with her on all issues? No, just most of them, but I learned long ago the seeking perfection in anything is unrealistic. I learned to not let great become the enemy of good enough.

Now you may chose not to believe this, and that's okay, but our difference are not so much in our principals or our conception of what would be ideal, but in the methods we chose to achieve our goals. If we were playing craps instead of politics your choice would be equivalent to putting all of your money on double sixes (the space with the longest odds and therefore the biggest rewards), believing with all of your heart that you will win, and then rolling the dice. Just don't be surprised if you lose.

So again, it's not the differences in our principles that separate us and our choices. Our differences are centered on what we believe is realistic and doable and how we go about trying to make our country and the world a better place.

[LondonReign2]

87. Your assumptions are, yet again, wrong

No one -- NO ONE -- thinks Sanders is the ideal candidate, nor dreams that he represents the perfect political system. No one. Yet again, you lay out a false assumption and build your strawman on the false premise.

So tell about Hillary's "realistic" goals? Unless you believe that Democrats will somehow take both chambers of Congress, which we all know to be entirely unrealistic given gerrymandering, Clinton will need to get Republicans to vote with her on her proposals. Tell me, what specific proposals has Hillary made that Republicans are going to vote with her on? Because unless Republicans vote with Clinton on something, the whole "she'll get things done" is yet another false premise.

Your craps analogy it yet again another thing you have absolutely wrong. I, for one, am not the least bit "surprised if you lose". My post history is quite clear-- I've said all along Bernie was 99% likely not to get the nomination-- the odds of a relatively unknown not-particularly-charismatic politician taking on the political establishment and winning were astronomical. Bernie's results have actually far exceeded my expectations.

No, the fact is progressives have played along with the 'not as bad as Republicans argument" for the last six Presidential elections. What has it got us? A huge leap to right, to the point where our Democratic President self-describes his economic policies as "mainstream 1980's Republican" and says that "in many ways, Nixon was more liberal" then he is. Hillary represents nothing more than another significant step to the right, far more than Obama did. For god's sake, she counts Kissinger, he of the Central American death squads, as an advisor. She note only voted for the Iraq war, she lobbied for it on behalf of Bush; she is so hawkish that PNAC endorses her.

Bernie is far from an ideal candidate, but he is the only one running that doesn't represent a further move to the right, the only one that promises to use the bully pulpit to try to drag the country back leftwards towards the center.

Third Way Democrats are perfectly fine with continuing to remake the country as center-right, the territory once occupied by Bob Dole. Progressives with a conscious are not.

[EndElectoral]

58. I'll vote my conscience and not be guilted to vote a way because of being called a coward

I don't take well to intimidation, or voting the lesser of two evils. You get my vote by earning it. You get my vote because you reflect basic values I beleive in. You don't get my vote because I wouldn't vote for the other guy.

The dictionary definition of a coward is "a person who shrinks from or avoids danger, pain, or difficulty". I realize a Trump presidency is repugnant, but if I simply vote for Clinton to avoid the pain or difficulty of a Trump presidency, rather than because I believe in her ideals, then I am myself by the dictionary definition, the actual coward.

[CajunBlazer]

59. I get it, you have to vote in accordence to your progessive principles

In my view it is hypercritical to claim that you are voting third party or not voting at all because you are obeying your "progressive principles". Why? It's simple - you are not using your vote to stop Republicans from taking control of the White House, both Houses of Congress, and the Supreme Court when you know that if that were to happen many people who can least afford it will suffer under Republican rule.

It's disingenuous to claim you are acting in accordance with your "progressive principles" when your actions, or lack there of, puts others in harms way. The main difference between progressives and conservatives is that conservatives only seek to take care of themselves while progressives are concentrated on the greater good. You have a right to vote anyway you please, but if you are going vote third party or not vote at all, quite lying to me and yourself by saying you are you are acting in accordance with your progressive principles.

[EndElectoral]

60. First in your op you accuse a person who votes their principles a coward, and now they're a liar?

I get your lesser than two evils argument. It's been posted here ad infinitum.

I've done that and have only seen the Democratic party shift more and more to the right where the party is becoming in many ways more like the Republican Party I knew growing up.

I will vote my conscience and believe that the only way the party will shift back left and towards more progressive principles is if people stand up and say, no more, we're not going to compromise our principles once again for a party that is moving further and further away from us. You can call us cowards, and liars, but I'm not going to just vote for someone I don't remotely believe in because the other guy stinks more.

I believe it was Obama who said vote for "Change you can believe in" I will do exactly that.

[CajunBlazer]

61. You have a selective conscience

Just do what you think is best for you - don't worry about everyone else - a selective conscience can block out their misery.

[EndElectoral]

62. Precisely why I am voting my conscience is because I do worry about everyone else.

You tend to see things through your own view of what people "should" do to assuage 'your fears."

I tend to look at what is more important for the long term viabilty of the Democratic Party. If it is to survive it must move in the direction of FDR and not Kissinger which I don't see happening with the current prospective nominee.

[CajunBlazer]

66. Don't use FDR's name in vain, he would not be proud of you

He fought for the little guy; he would have never allowed the likes of Ted Cruz or Donald Trump to become President if he could help it. And he would have never voted for someone how has no qualifications what's so ever to be Presidents of the United States.

FDR's biggest political fight was his effort to get liberals on the Supreme Court so that the Court would not rule his projects unconstitutional because they were needed to help people who were deviated by the depression. Looking at the long term, he would most assuredly take positive action to make damn sure that the Supreme Court did not fall into the hands of hard line conservatives for the next 20 years.

It is indeed unfortunate that you apparent see everyone who is not as far left as you are as your enemies. That's really sad because most of the voters in the United State are politically to your political right. You my friend are in a small minority. Think not, watch what happens when Bernie Sanders is eliminated from nomination race and he enforces Hillary Clinton. The vast majority of his supporters will move to support Clinton.

Only you and a small number of others will be still contemplating voting third party and then an even smaller number will actually go in that direction. Given the probable Republican nominees, very few will throw their vote away in such a important election.

I predict that no third party will even get the 3% of the vote Jill Stein got last time around. But even if I am wrong and the percentage is higher, you had better hope that will not be the margin which puts the Republicans in charge. If that happens it will be the end of any chance for your REVOLUTION to be successful. Everyone will hate those responsible for putting the Republicans in control, and those voters will not forget. Everyone will remember that it was those who refused to give up Bernie's fight who were responsible. Remember the saying: Third parties are like bees, when they sting, they die. If that happen the entire revolution will die.

[EndElectoral]

71. Didn't FDR say "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."

You began this topic by calling anyone a coward for not voting for Hillary in the general election, and as to FDR I'm glad you have a phone and spoke with him in the afterlife. FDR wouldn't recognize this party today.

I find it surprising that all your arguments are based in "fear." As FDR said, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Something that you are insistent in promulgating as a reason to vote for HRC.

Not once do you speak about what HRC brings to the table, but instead speak out of "fear" of a Republican winning. This is where we differ.

Is it to much to be able to vote for a candidate whose principles one actually admires and believes in, or you so entrenched in voting for any candidate with a "D" beside their name?

If indeed a republican wins, perhaps the Democratic Party will realize they've swung way right to the extreme, and begin to look for candidates who are actual progressives, not "self proclaimed primary progressives."

[CajunBlazer]

74. Okay, used the wrong phraseology, let me correct and take your last argument away

If you are not intensely "concerned" about what harm a Republican take over of all of the branches of our government would bring, then you are an idiot, and I don't believe you are idiot.

And screw your progressive principles. If you don't care enough to at least try to save the country from that fate, you are no progressive.

Your last sentence indicates everything you that I need to know about you: Like many of your kind you have set yourself is judge and jury of what the Democratic Party should be and if the rest of the party doesn't comply with your wishes (and it hasn't), it's screw the party because you know best, regardless of the consequences to the country.

That's really pathetic!

Just go off and do whatever plan on doing. You're not worth wasting anymore more of my time. This conversation has been concluded.

[EndElectoral]

75. We've found common ground. "You're not worth wasting anymore more of my time."

"This conversation has been concluded."

[LondonReign2]

64. Yes, the very misery you are intent on continuing by running to the right

Bitching about the very issues you helped bring about...The cognitive dissonance, is it real, or an act?

[CajunBlazer]

67. See my reply to "EndElectoral" above

[Waiting For Everyman]

68. This is becoming spam.

Trashing.

[CajunBlazer]

70. LOL! That's code for "I've run out of good arguments"

[EndElectoral]

72. Yes, you have.

[CajunBlazer]

73. I literally laughed out loud at that one

[LWolf]

80. No.

Because I have progressive ideals and principles, ideals and principles that exist independent of partisan politics, I will do everything in my power to elect people who represent those ideals and principles. I will not do everything in my power to elect lesser evils, and I will not do anything at all in my power to elect neo-liberals.

I sure don't want to see Trump or Cruz become president of the U.S. People who are worried about that might want to make sure there's a candidate who represents those progressive ideals and principles on the ballot in November. It sure as hell isn't Hillary Clinton.