If you're thinking of voting third party this fall, please reconsider.

[Ken Burch]

(This is the speech I'd give if I was asked to make a case to such voters to support OUR ticket).

There are a lot of reasons to be dissatisfied with our current political culture and the dominant parties within it.

Fighting to change that culture and this country is a perfectly valid thing to do.

And you have the right to make whatever choice you want to make at the ballot box.


BUT...

This nation is in crisis and in jeopardy. The most powerless people in our society and the most ambitious dreams of change we aspire to are in mortal danger-are at risk of being destroyed.

Destroyed by a maniac, by a demagogue and a purveyor of hate.

His name is Donald Trump.

If Donald Trump is elected president, all we hold dear as Americans and all we aspire to change as progressives are under existential threat. The poor, working people, people of color, LGBTQ people, those Americans who are most recently arrived and those who were here before any of our ancestors, will be the subject of an unrelenting campaign of hatred, vilification, and violence in a Trump Administration. It may not be possible to organize even an antifascist resistance in that situation.

We're not asking anyone to give up their fully-justified anger at the status quo and the corruption endemic to it, or their dream of something better, or their right to work for a newer vision of life. We're asking simply, for the next two months, for all people of good will, for all those who want this country to belong to all of us rather than the view to make the tactical decision to join us in stopping
the greatest threat to freedom, democracy, and what Bruce Springsteen called "the country in our hearts", by working for and voting for Hillary Clinton for president in November.

When we have stopped Trump and elected her, we can immediately hold her feet to the fire and push for the program of change this country needs, organizing for it throughout the land and uniting all those who want the nation and the world we need in a massive people's campaign for the future.

We ask this out of respect to all of you, out of support for the values we both support, and out of a sincere belief in the better angels of everyone's nature.

[Charles Bukowski]

1. This seems like a overreaction, no offense

Third party candidates always overpoll; Johnson and Stein are no different. On election day they'll combine for 3% of the vote, tops.

[Ken Burch]

2. I hope you are right.

But what I'm trying to do here, actually, is present a model for appealing to voters currently supporting third-parties that is more effective than the tactic of essentially cyber-screaming "you're an IDIOT if you don't vote for Hillary!".

That approach didn't work in 2000...and it's time to admit that it never can work.

You win people over by showing respect for them as people and for what they stand for as values. Respect wins votes.

[demmiblue]

18. +1

[NanceGreggs]

27. The truth is ...

... given the choice between HRC and Trump, you are an idiot if you don't for Hillary.

I'm not quite sure why that oh-so-obvious point eludes you.

[Hortensis]

62. Don't know how it is, Burch, but every time I read one

of your posts, I feel dis-respected. It's true I did not feel that Sanders was the right stuff for the presidency, but as you now support our nominee and so often and reasonably call for us to come together for the good of America, I would hardly care to explain just why I often end up feeling I've been insulted, and rejected, at some length.

But there it is. This is actually the first post of yours I've read in some months, and it'll probably more than last me through the election and at least the first several months of your apparent determination to make the best of an undesirable president.

"When we have stopped Trump and elected her, we can immediately hold her feet to the fire and push for the program of change this country needs, organizing for it throughout the land and uniting all those who want the nation and the world we need in a massive people's campaign for the future."

We're doing that last right now, Burch, and the first is not needed. HRC has planned a program of change for years, has now articulated it for the nation, and has united a majority of voters to support what hopefully will be achievable changes on a very wide range of issues.

Btw, this may surprise you, but President Obama was able to fulfill 77% of his campaign promises -- to at least some degree. Given a very hostile Congress and the many conservative-stacked courts determined to block him from achieving even 1%, that is a very impressive record. She will build on what he started.

[BobbyDrake]

63. +1!

Ken knows exactly what he's doing with his posts, and that's why I don't buy his crocodile tears for one damned second.

[yardwork]

64. Well said. I feel the same way. Condescended to.

[Hortensis]

65. :) SO misguided. We are a magnificently diverse coalition

representing not only a large majority of those on the left but the conservative factions of many minorities rejected by Republicans.

An outstanding reality of this election is that the Democratic Party of today is widely representative of the people of our nation, in stark contrast to the remnant Republican Party. We are the people's party. If journalists were fulfilling their role in our republic, that would be discussed often, as well as the inevitable flip side that, as always, no faction in this broad coalition can get everything it wants.

Although I'd like a LOT more of the respect and admiration we truly deserve, I'm actually feeling pretty darned good about us and what we want to accomplish for everyone.

[NanceGreggs]

3. I agree with you wholeheartedly, Ken.

The problem being that it is impossible to reason with the stupid, the perpetually pissed-off, and the eternally butt-hurt.

If anyone needs an illustration of what I’m talking about, I suggest a browse through JPR. What gets posted there is an example of people who would sooner see their country and their fellow citizens plunged into the nightmarish consequences of a Trump presidency than vote for the woman who “stole” the election from Bernie.

They believe that a Trump presidency will “teach the Democrats a lesson”, a lesson that will clear the way for their agenda and their candidate-of-choice after the citizenry have suffered sufficiently.

They believe that Trump winning the election will vindicate them, i.e. ”Trump wouldn’t have had a chance against Bernie, and now everyone knows it. We were right all along.”

They believe that “letting it all burn to the ground” will spark The Revolution they envisaged, and lives destroyed in the interim are merely “collateral damage” to be dismissed as unimportant in the great scheme of things.

They believe that HRC winning the election will validate their worst fear: that the voters do not see her as the blood-thirsty, power-hungry, warmonger they have tried so hard to portray her as.

They believe that Bernie Sanders was the only hope of curing all ills, of righting all wrongs, of clearing the government Temple of the money-changers, the power-brokers, the oligarchs, the corporate masters – and were completely convinced that he would do it overnight.

THIS is what we’re up against. THESE are the people advocating voting third party – the enemy within, the so-called True Progressives ™ who would sooner see their fellow citizens hung out to dry than admit that Hillary is the better choice between the two candidates – one of whom WILL inevitably end up in the White House, regardless of how many third party candidates are on the ticket.

I suggest you take your pleas for being reasonable and voting intelligently over to JPR. You’ll be shot down within minutes as a “concern troll” who is trying to sway honest Americans from voting their conscience – the consequences of doing so be damned.

[Ken Burch]

4. I don't want to go to that site. And there's nothing that would win over people

Who actually think a Trump victory would serve the cause they claim to support(btw, it's likely that at least some of that sort of posters are paid provocateurs of the Trump campaign.

What I'm saying is, you can't ever change people's votes by denouncing them, belittling their feelings and otherwise insulting them. No one in history has ever been won over by saying "you're silly if you vote that way".

Why even try?

Do we have the LUXURY of trying?

Is there any evidence at all that that kind if talk would win anyone ELSE over to the Clinton-Kaine ticket.

And if it still angers you that people feel that way about Bernie and not about our current nominee...you might want to consider what it is about the candidate people such as yourself insisted was the person we HAD to nominate if we didn't want to go down in flames, the person the party acted in unnecessarily heavy-handed ways to make sure was nominated, the person many of you insisted was only opposed because some progressives didn't care about bigotry or couldn't handle the election of a woman(claims you knew were untrue) that might be CAUSING them to feel less than enthusiastic about her. She will be a good president, and I support her wholeheartedly, but it would do her campaign and all who support it a lot of good to take stock of why some of the resentment lingers(btw, if you still don't think I'm committed to the ticket, pm me and I'll send you the link to the hate mail I got when I asked -not even banned, just respectfully asked-posters on the Pro-Bernie Facebook page I run to not post in support of Stein. You'd have thought I'd confessed to drop-kicking newborn puppies!). Steps could be taken to address that.


She doesn't have to try and BE Bernie, but she should be listening to the better lessons his campaign taught and continuing to incorporate them into a coalition pitch for victory. She did that at the convention but it still needs to be part of the message.

[NanceGreggs]

6. And again it comes down to ...

... how it is the fault of the HRC supporters that the Bernie-or-Busters feel the way they do.

"And if it still angers you that people feel that way about Bernie and not about our current nominee...you might want to consider what it is about the candidate people such as yourself insisted was the person we HAD to nominate if we didn't want to go down in flames, etc ...

I invite you to link to a post of mine that said any such thing - along with all the other bladdy-blah-blah bullshit.

What you invariably seem to advocate is that the former Bernie supporters who are promoting voting third party, or sitting out the election due to spite, should be coddled and placated in order to win their votes.

According to you, it always comes down to how hard done-by the BS supporters have been, and how allowances should be made for their reluctance to support the candidate who would KEEP TRUMP OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE.

Sorry, no deal. I, for one, am not interested in kow-towing to people who are no better than the right-wingers who they have suddenly decided have a legitimate point of view. I am not interested in placating people who still think HRC should be listening to THEM, instead of following the course that won her the nomination in the first place.

I am sick-to-death of people who identify themselves as True Progressives (TM) who constantly promote the idea that HRC "stole" the election from Bernie, rather than admit that the majority of Democrats weren't buying what Bernie was selling - people who would rather see the country "burned to the ground" than admit that Trump and HRC are NOT the same.

I am not the least bit interested in coddling people whose "resentment lingers" because their preferred candidate didn't get the nomination. I don't give a flyin' fuck about what's causing them to be less enthusiastic about HRC. And I certainly don't care about those who think a Trump win will "teach the country a lesson".

You can make excuses all you want for those people, Ken. The reality is they are no better than the right-wingers they now quote, the anyone-but-Hillary crowd who are all too happy to see Trump elected because they think it proves their point that not giving Bernie the nomination deserves punishment.

Fuck that - and fuck those who think that way. Bernie is NOT the nominee. Get over it and move on - and stop pretending that the fate of the nation is somehow LESS important than the personal butt-hurt of a small group of voters who think their feelings are more important than the reality of the outcome of this election.

It's really very simple, Ken: Either you want to see Trump elected or you don't. There is no middle ground.

If you have to be coddled, you don't care if he's elected. If you have to be placated, you don't care is he's elected. If you are advocating voting third party, you don't care if he's elected. If you want to play the persecuted butt-hurt Bernie-or-Bust supporter, you don't care if he's elected.

"She doesn't have to try and BE Bernie, but she should be listening to the better lessons his campaign taught."

It's time for the Bernie-or-Busters to acknowledge that the majority of the party thought HRC's agenda more in keeping with what THEY want, and should behave accordingly. But they've made it clear that it's their way or no way - so they can sit on their sorry butts and complain all they want. No one is listening.

My feeling is that the Bernie-or-bust crowd never vote anyway - so their absence at the polls will not be missed in any event.

[Ken Burch]

7. Not coddled-and-placated...approached on the level of reason and respect.

We already know that attacking them can't win them over, or win over anyone else currently not supporting us.

We obviously can't win over those who are supporting Trump-they are idiots...what I'm talking about are at least some of those leaning Stein and others who are currently undecided.

It isn't about treating anybody like a special snowflake...it's about doing what we need to do to win.

Shouting "you're stupid if you vote Trump&quot not your words, but essentially the approach a lot of people here are demanding)can never win anyone over. Nor can simply shouting "you HAVE to! you HAVE to!". But saying "yes, you have a point...here is why we're asking you to set that aside for the moment in the name of the greater good" can work. That doesn't mean punishing the party for choosing who it chose..it means being open enough to hear what people who could still work with you have to say.

Why not try it...especially since we lose nothing in doing so?

[Gothmog]

12. We saw this in 2000

The claim that there is no difference between the parties led to George W. Bush and the Iraq war, Citizens United and the gutting of the voting rights act. The idiots on JPR who think that election Trump will treat the Democrats a lesson are forgetting how much damage a POTUS can do. W is proof that this.

I was at the National Convention and the bernie or busters were a small percentage of the Sanders delegates. The vast majority of these delegates came around by the end of the convention.

I am convinced that a vote for Stein or Johnson is a vote for trump

[Ken Burch]

20. This year is different. This year, we have a much better platform

And if we campaign by referencing that platform constantly, we can refute that argument.

What I'm saying is we can win progressive votes on the merits?

What matters is winning...not getting payback for what happened in 2000. That was sixteen years ago, and many of the people you are railing at were small children when that happened.

Thank you for admitting that most Sanders supporters are supporting Hillary.

[Demsrule86]

30. Those who are planning to vote for a third party candidate or

even Trump are not progressive in any way. No progressive would be willing to unleash Trump on this country.

[Ken Burch]

41. By that logic, there's no point in even mentioning them.

Why bother denouncing them if you feel that way?

Denunciation isn't going to swing any votes, from them or from anyone else.

There is no large group of voters who would switch to Hillary if only we went total Joe McCarthy on the Greens.

[Demsrule86]

49. Those who are voting third party hate Hillary mostly.

I have been on reddit, facebook,twitter and JPR...and seen the posts...some no doubt are GOP trolls egging the third party folks on...but it is a personality thing, and you won't reach them. As we saw with the platform...nothing will satisfy them except the candidate they in many cases literally worshipped. They are not Democrats and never were...maybe when they get older and yes smarter, they will realize that they need to become Democrats and fight for what they believe. Maybe they will fold like a cheap tent. and whine on the internet for the rest of their lives...who knows...but most even though it is in their self-interest will not vote for Sec. Clinton. Many never voted before. And while they attended large rallies and shouted their support, many failed to actually vote for their primary candidate for a variety of reasons. You ascribe these noble motives to third party voters. I don't. I believe the act of voting for Stein or Johnson is purely spiteful and an incredibly selfish act.

[Demsrule86]

14. There is no way to reason with some of these folks...and they don't belong here so we can't win

them over on this site...and since Jill Stein supports Trump, those who vote for her support Trump and she also supports his tax policy so she is not even progressive. You can't reason with haters.

[Ken Burch]

24. If you can't reason with them, you can't win them over through abuse, either.

And wasting time berating the hard cases(again, I'm not talking about people who have actually said the goal of "revolution" would be best served by a Trump victory-I haven't been to THAT site, and refuse to publicize it by mentioning its name here, but I think at least some of the people who do that are paid Drumpf schiesse-disturbers) isn't going to gain us votes from any OTHER quarter, so why even bother with lashing out at them?

There are far more effective things we COULD be doing...educating uncommitted voters about both the great things in our platform and the ugly agenda Trump supports, registering the unregistered, canvassing and volunteering at a campaign office(as I'm now doing in Olympia and as millions of people who worked in both major primary campaigns are doing throughout the country). We can win on the merits, by telling the truth about our opponents, and by mobilizing massive turnouts. We can't win by calling people poopieheads.

[Demsrule86]

29. I don't give a damn about them.

And I see no reason to coddle them...also you are always so worried about the undecided whoever voters...some who have said they will vote for Trump...I see no point in that. Screw them. I don't want Greens here period...this is Democratic Underground , they don't belong here.

[Demsrule86]

31. I have actually never called out any supporter of a third party candidate although they deserve it.

I don't know of any post that did that.

[stopbush]

19. Win them over? How about they grow up and support the D nominee

because it's the only viable option?

We should have learned our lesson when we tried to win over Rs early in the Obama years. You cannot win over people who 1. refuse to be won over and/or 2. view being won over to be selling out their principles.

Write 'em off.

[NastyRiffraff]

21. "Why not try it"

Last edited Tue Sep 20, 2016, 07:44 PM - Edit history (3)

because we have tried it, again and again. It does not work and we're sick of wasting time and energy on people whose philosophy is "my way or the highway."

The "Bernie or Busters" either will or will not vote for HRC; most of them will not. It's not me who is saying this it's them. They've made it crystal clear, again and again, that they don't care about the country, only their hurt feelings. And therefore we must...what? Let them cry on our shoulders? Listen to them vent? No thanks. They've had their say, the gods know, here on DU; they drowned everyone else out. Now, most are on the jackass site, and good riddance.

"we lose nothing" Yeah. except our time which is MUCH better spent working on GOTV. Talking to people who are reasonable, not spoiled brats.

[Ken Burch]

23. Actually, we've never tried it.

All our party ever does is to say "a vote for (X) is a vote for (Z)".

Switching from that to saying what you want us to say...something like "you're an idiot if you don't vote for our ticket" has never worked for any party in any election anywhere-nobody has even been won over by being accosted or abused, and nobody else is going to be won over seeing us talk to people like that.

If doing it your way had any chance of achieving anything, wouldn't the Clinton-Kaine have had surrogates doing that since Philly?

BTW, it's essentially what the Gore campaign did in 2000. If it didn't work then, why would doing it more intensely work now?

The approach that can work(and it's not an approach we've seen the party use since the convention, when using it boosted us to a ten-point lead)is something like this:

"You ran a great campaign. You did better than anyone ever expected and you changed our party and our platform for the better, as did our campaign itself. There were things that happened to your campaign and candidate that were not deserved(as was sometimes the case with OUR candidate), and we agree that those things shouldn't have happened. But we all need to move on from that. We all need to rise above the past, we all need to accept each other as having a role to play and a right to be heard, and if you will work with us for the victory of the Clinton-Kaine ticket, we can build our dreams together, reshape life together, save our country from the nightmare of hatred and fascism together. Divided, we can do nothing. United, we can truly be Stronger Together".

That is how we boost turnout, bring the undecided and soft-Stein voters over, and stop Hair Fuhrer and all those who want to enable him in Congress.

Hope works. Respect works. Threats and taunts don't.

[Demsrule86]

32. That will never happen and Stein

has said Trump is a better choice...

[Ken Burch]

39. Ok. Then point out that Stein said that.

Don't make it about insulting voters, because that doesn't work.

[Demsrule86]

58. Here you go:

“Donald Trump, I think, will have a lot of trouble moving things through Congress,” Stein explains. “Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, won’t… Hillary has the potential to do a whole lot more damage, get us into more wars, faster to pass her fracking disastrous climate program, much more easily than Donald Trump could do his.” says Green Party traitor Stein...there is your post supporting Trump.


“I think Donald Trump has said despicable things, but Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, has a really terrible track record.”
“So, you view this as equally bad?” posed host Chuck Todd. “You don’t believe one is worse than the other?”

Stein responded that she doesn’t “think what Donald Trump says is worse than actually what Hillary Clinton in fact has done.”
Oh look, jill Stein the Green traitor did it again...this by the way was picked up by Daily Caller...yeah...Good job Stein. Ms. Rich Green Princess Stein can ride out Trump...she is white and rich...the rest of of us not so much. She is completely selfish and doesn't care one little bit about those Trump would hurt. If it is Greens you think we should be nice to and possibly welcome here...no.

[Ken Burch]

61. I meant use it as part of the argument for voting Clinton-Kaine. n/t.

[JTFrog]

34. The primaries are over.

Get over it. No we aren't going to admit that the lie that Hillary somehow stole the election from your candidate is a sane or legitimate position. Hillary spent decades building a coalition and working within the party, she didn't just decide to use the party for money and publicity. He should have run as an Independent and shit all over his own party.

First we were supposed to kiss Bernie's ass and let the loser dictate the party platform. Now you want us to kiss the asses of the petulant few holdouts who are too bitter to give a fuck about anyone but themselves?

Threats and taunts indeed.

Fuck that noise.

Sorry, but I'm getting really sick of your concern and *cough*advice*cough* threads.

[Ken Burch]

40. This has nothing to do with the primaries. The primaries are the past.

Nor do I want anyone to demean themselves. I want us to win in November. That means continuing to try to win people over.

BTW, there was nothing we wanted in the platform that was ever against the interests of anyone in HRC's coalition. What we wanted in there was going to benefit the vast majority of the party, because we were fighting for everybody. Would it kill you to admit that Bernie's campaign never privileged straight white men over everyone else? The guy isn't running anymore, so you have no reason to continue to defend discredited talking points about him. We're together now, and you need to accept the fact that Bernie didn't hurt the party by running and his supporters were never the enemy. Please let the war be over, JT, and treat Sanders supporters working for the ticket now as people deserving of your trust.

[NanceGreggs]

25. Reason and respect?

There are people who have made it abundantly clear that they are impervious to reason and, by virtue of their "talk nice to me or I won't listen' attitude, have proven they are not worthy of respect.

I'll say it again, Ken: Either you want to keep Trump out of the White House or you don't. There is NO middle ground.

Appealing to people to "put aside their point for the greater good" is pointless when you're dealing with people who have already shown they could give a fuck less about "the greater good".

You've seen the posts here. You've seen former Bernie supporters put their full support behind Hillary. They didn't need to be coddled or cajoled - they got on-board the minute they knew that HRC was the nominee. Regardless of whether they love Hillary, loathe her, or anything in between, they will make sure that Donald Trump never sees the Oval Office outside of a sight-seeing tour, and that a Democrat will be inaugurated next January.

Why don't you tell the Bernie-or-Bust folks "why not try doing everything possible to keep Trump out of the WH?" What do they have to lose in doing so? We all have everything to lose if he wins - but that doesn't seem to matter to them in the least. It's more important to be a butt-hurt baby than to do the right thing.

So fuck 'em.

[zappaman]

26. !!!

[JTFrog]

36. Agree 100%. Fuck that noise. NT

[NastyRiffraff]

45. Amen

and +about a million. Thank you, Nance.

Ye gods I'm sick of these people. And I have nothing but respect for all the Bernie supporters who have rallied behind the Democratic nominee. THEY are grownups who know what's at stake, whatever they feel. THEY know that the good of the country is much more important than their hurt feelings. THEY don't need people to beg them to do what's best for the country and all the people in it. Including vulnerable people who have much, MUCH more at stake than hurt feelings.

The rest of them? Fuck 'em.

[JTFrog]

8. Well said. nt

[SticksnStones]

9. Brava!

The "be nice to us or we won't vote for her" sentiment strikes me as rather childish.

To which I say: Untwist your knickers and listen to Bernie himself as he pleads that now is not the time for a protest vote (or non vote for that matter).

You said it much better though, NanceGreggs.

Brava!

[Demsrule86]

16. Wonderful Post as always. nt

[BobbyDrake]

50. You don't want to go to that site ANY MORE, I think you mean.

You're listed as an MIA member on a thread there. Your old friends on JPR seem concerned about you.

Which I find hilariously ironic.

[Ken Burch]

53. They wanted me to join(I knew some of them here), but I never did.

I may have looked at it once and was repelled. That's the extent of it.

I have nothing to do with them.

And I'm not a concern troll. My intentions are to help this party to win the election while still fighting for what I care about.

Don't ever accuse me of being a "double agent" again. My loyalty to this party is not in question.

[BobbyDrake]

54. So I'm supposed to take you at your word? Despite the content of your posts?

Oh Ken, you missed your calling as a comedian.

[Ken Burch]

55. Yes, you are supposed to take me at your word.

I don't have to prove to you that I'm NOT a cyber-saboteur, that I'm NOT here to screw up our party's chances, that I'm not an agent for some enemy force. No one is ever obligated to prove a negative.

And it's not your place to try to get me thrown off of this site. You are just one poster, like I am. You are not the Official DU Grand Inquisitor.

[BobbyDrake]

56. Sure, you don't HAVE to prove anything. It just leaves the evidence I have that you participated

in the JPR anti-HRC hatefest unchallenged and therefore accurate. Maybe in the future you'll keep better company than the kind of hateful people who founded and run JPR and who were asking about you in their "Missing In Action" thread.

And the purpose isn't to "run you off" or whatever other straw man arguments you build. It's about making sure that other people know exactly who you are before they make the mistake of taking you seriously.

[Ken Burch]

60. I never participated in anything on JPR. I opposed HRC in the primaries, but never hated her.

I am a loyal Democrat and you are being personally abusive.

[Gothmog]

11. Another Great Post by Nance

[Demsrule86]

57. I will say Armstead is doing just that at JPR...making the the case why one should vote for Hillary

Good for him.

[NanceGreggs]

59. And taking a lot of flack for doing so.

Just took a look over there. The latest CT is that Hillary is being green-screened on footage of her speeches, because she's too sick - what with her Parkinson's and all - to appear live.

So they now believe that her staffers pose as the "crowd", and Hill's image is superimposed to make it look like she's actually there.

That site is like flypaper for the delusional.

[ffr]

5. In danger of the Grifter-in-Chief rethug candidate.

With a republican congress to boot! Say goodbye to any funds we have in the Treasury.

[Gothmog]

10. A vote for stein or Johnson is a vote for trump

[Ken Burch]

44. If just repeating that phrase worked, the Stein and Johnson numbers would be dropping

My op incorporates that idea, but without talking down to people.

[Demsrule86]

13. People who are supporting third party candidates are Trump supporters

and should not even be here. We support Democrats.

[CajunBlazer]

15. On this we can agree - K&R

[Demsrule86]

17. I would also like to bring up the "hold her feet" comment..."

I saw Obama savaged on this site and others before the 2010 election by so-called progressives...and what was the result? Congress went to the GOP and all chance of a progressive agenda ended. The states elected GOP types and gerrymandered Congress. I am sick of those who claim to be more left than anyone else...helping the GOP by not supporting Democrats. Imagine what we could have done had we supported our president. Democrats are the only ...let me say that again...only vehicle for progressive change. And all the progressive goodies we have going back over 80 years were provided to us by Democrats.

[Ken Burch]

22. Progressives weren't to blame for that at all.

The Obama movement was taken out of the loop as soon as the votes were cast...told not to come back until the next election.

No one on the left was allowed anywhere near the Oval Office...Rahm made sure of that.

And we were all told "just take what you're given and never ask for more".

That's why we lost in 2010...because Rahm and the party leadership made sure that all the passion and enthusiasm of Election Night, 2008, was crushed. And because the national party did nothing to mobilize voters for a big turnout in 2010.

The lesson is...NEVER demobilize the activist core. Keep them in the loop, listen to them, and keep them busy.

When we win in November this year, the next thing we should do is immediately organize the activists to prepare for GOTV in the midterms, and let them do whatever they need to do to keep voters interested and enthused enough to get to the polls. If once, just once, we can keep midterm turnout from dropping more than 5% from presidential year turnout, we can make epic gains in those midterms, rather than simply accept the inevitability of severe losses.

[NanceGreggs]

28. "No one on the left was allowed anywhere near the Oval Office ...

... And we were all told "just take what you're given and never ask for more".

So tell me, Ken, what do you like to do when you're not claiming to be ignored, marginalized, and persecuted?

[Ken Burch]

37. It isn't about me. Stop always personalizing and trivializing.

What I'm saying was that there was a huge group of activists gathered in the Obama movement during the campaign, and then as soon as the votes were in, they were all told they weren't needed and wouldn't be listened to. Nothing else could come of that other than what did.

You can't expect people, especially young people just getting involved in politics, to stay involved and believe it is worth staying involved when the administration they did as much to elect as anyone else to elect tells them "we don't want to see you anymore until the next election-you're not going to be a part of anything between now and then"...which is exactly what Rahm did.

If nothing else, it was stunning ingratitude.

Those activists were a huge resource. They could have been used to put public pressure on wavering right-wing Demse to actually pass Obama's program without insisting on watering it down. Instead, it was those right-wing dems who were, to use your word "coddled", while the people who supported Obama and his program were (there is no other way to interpret this)told to go to hell.

The Obama movement WAS marginalized and ignored after election day, 2008. They were treated as if they were no longer mattered. This was not what they'd been led to expect...during the campaign, they were told they would be given an active role AFTER the election. Rahm decided he would rather see the party lose Congress than let THAT happen.

Can you seriously defend the decision Rahm made to do that?

Can you possibly claim that any good came of it?

It never serves progressive ends to tell people to stop fighting for change.

[NanceGreggs]

46. Uh, Ken ...

This is complete bullshit.

No one was told they "weren't needed anymore and wouldn't be listened to". No one.

The country is full of activists who work their butts off supporting candidates at every level - from local dog-catcher to mayor, from senate and congressional reps to governor - and beyond.

True activists don't expect to be led - they take it upon themselves to lead. They don't naively think that once they have helped elect any politician to any office, their work is done. They also don't believe that their voice is the only voice to be heard, because they recognize that voters whose priorities might be completely different than theirs have also helped elect their candidate-of-choice.

It wasn't solely "progressives" (a term that is bandied about with little definition these days) who elected Obama. He was also elected by centrists, conservative Dems, left-leaning independents, middle-of-the-roaders, etc. To believe that only "progressives" contributed to Obama's victories in '08 and '12 is beyond naive.

"It never serves progressive ends to tell people to stop fighting for change."

No one ever told "progressives" to stop fighting. And it never serves progressive ends to tell people that Rahm said something they don't like, so it's time for everyone to throw their hands up in disgust while throwing in the towel.

Those who truly want progress never give up. They don't cry "they're being mean to us, so let's all pack up and go home." They are more aware than anyone that the fight is NEVER over, and that there will never be a time when they can all heave a sigh of relief, say "we got everything we wanted", and go home and put their feet up in front of the TV.

Anyone who thought that a comment from Rahm Emanuel was a signal that the battle was over were never committed to the long, hard struggle that IS the war.

[Demsrule86]

48. Nancy your posts rock.

I mean really! Thanks

[Demsrule86]

35. The lesson is support your president.

I promise you ...no president could ever please some of those who did not support him... and what was the result of your protest vote? Did you get anything worthwhile ...no you did not. We have had a wasted six years culminating in not even being able to put a justice on SCOTUS...so time to support the Democratic Party and a Democratic president period. It is the only logical choice because whatever differences we had with Obama...the GOP has been far worse.

[Ken Burch]

38. I don't defend not voting.

What I'm saying is that the party itself has some responsibility to keep people voting. In 2010, the party utterly failed in that responsibility, basically giving up on the midterms in the summer.

How can you expect the voters to care when the party leadership sounds like THEY don't care?

It's not as simple as "support your president'. It also has to be "support and respect your activists". We need BOTH.

[Demsrule86]

42. how do you expect anything to get done

if you bail when you don't get what you want...but consider my question ...was anything good accomplished ....the answer is no.

[Ken Burch]

43. OK, but the responsibility to prevent non-voting goes both ways:

Obviously, you're not always going to get what you want(nobody expects to instantly get everything), but there are more effective ways to help people want to stay in the game than the way we usually handle it as a party...the activists get stopped and disregarded, and they get told "you HAVE to vote for us anyway".

How about finding ways to say "we didn't do what you wanted this time, but if you stay with us, we will NEXT time"? or "After this election, we will listen to your ideas, treat them with respect immediately put you to work using those ideas to registering new to improve our showing next time, because you matter to us and winning matters to us and we can't win without you"?

How about, when legislation gets badly watered-down(like the healthcare bill)or abandoned(like card-check for unions), using that to spur people to fight for making things better, telling them "now, you can get to work and organize public support and effective electoral efforts so we can pass what you wanted this time in the NEXT Congress". Taking that attitude(rather than just screaming "you should have voted&quot would have made a massive difference in 2010-as would NOT conceding defeat in 2010 in the middle of August and NOT running national ads defending the programs Obama passed and featuring people who had benefited from those programs-and would make a massive difference in all future midterms especially. Winning midterms is about firing up the activists to activate the base...that is the ONLY thing that works. We can't win midterms if the party doesn't try to keep people stoked.

Finally, how about NOT treating activists, especially young activists, as if they owe it to us to shut up and know their place? Maybe actually listening to them and treating their ideas with respect, even if we can't always get everything they want done? It's not as though there was anything the Obama activists wanted in 2008(or the Sanders activists wanted and still want in 2016)that would harm anyone else in this party or would have been in any significant way unpopular.

I don't care what you think about me...I'm in for the long-haul...but it looks as if a lot of the people who run this party still care more about being the ones in charge than about things like expanding this party and making it more vibrant and more electable at all levels.
We are always going to lose if we look like a party of jaded middle-aged insiders who keep talking about "you meddling kids" like we're the unmasked villain at the end of every episode of "Scooby Doo".

Idealism and activism are not the enemy. The young are not the enemy. Change isn't the enemy. We need the demanding and the unsatisfied in our party. Having high standards and having people who care about those standards are the only things that make political work worthwhile.

[Demsrule86]

47. I don't give a damn about blaming.

The point is if you want a progressive agenda then don't be a one issue voter...and as soon as you don't get your way...bail...it is that simple. We have gotten nothing accomplished because we did not stick together and fight for it...As for activists who are not Democrats ...they do more damage than good and that is a fact. They accomplish nothing....nada. The young voters are mostly clueless which is sad because they have the most to lose...and we do them no favors letting them wallow in unreal expectations...they need a dose of reality. You will never get everything you want but we can make progress if we work at it together, and if any of them were real issue voters and cared about the environment or any of the issues they are so passionate about (supposedly) ,they would vote for the Democrat...and as for jaded... I am not jaded at all...I am excited about this election. I really like Hillary... the first woman president is about to be elected...I feel great about the election. And I have known no one who called young voters 'meddling kids'. The candidate they like lost...boo hoo. I loved loved Howard Dean, but I still sucked it up and voted for Kerry and worked for Kerry. I have three kids that are of voting age. Two like Bernie and one liked both Hillary and Bernie. All are voting for Hillary Clinton. I would never call my kids 'meddling'. But they have a brain and care about others and their future...and if you are voting third party with a monster like Trump running then you don't have a brain or a heart... it is a completely selfish act.

[NCTraveler]

33. Those who are thinking of voting third party this fall....

are a fucking dolts. Thankfully there are much larger groups for us to go after than these morons looking at Stein and the Johnson. This is one of those years the group on the left threatening third party vote is so small that they have marginalized themselves as insignificant morons. Stein and Johnson voters are currently a very small group LIV's. Their input is not needed and they are so politically uneducated that it isn't worth spending a dime on them.

[tonyt53]

51. Your first complete sentence and last complete sentence really does say it all.

With you 100%.

[still_one]

52. Thanks Ken. If for nothing else the Supreme Court will be determined for the next

twenty years, and the damage that can result from that is terrifying

This election is not like any other, there won't be any do overs