Repeat: Democratic Nominees are not Clay Pigeons

[FM123]

This was posted on DU from another member back during the midterms, but I think it bears repeating so I am posting it again.

Copied from a friend’s page:

Liberal Friends, listen to this right now: Democratic Nominees are not clay pigeons.

I repeat.

DEMOCRATIC NOMINEES ARE NOT CLAY PIGEONS.

But, Emily, whatever do you mean? What is this metaphor?

It goes like this.

One by one, over the next couple of months, Democratic nominees are going to launch their official bids for President. They are going to launch themselves, one by one, into the sky, right into our line of vision.

Our job is not to shoot them.

Our job is NOT, the second we see them cross the sky, to reach out for the gun being handed to us by conservatives (because duh, conservatives and guns) and take aim, and blast them, one by one out of the air, for not being absolutely perfect.

Not likeable enough. BOOM.

Not an inspiring enough speaker. BOOM.

Said that awkward thing that one time. BOOM.

I wouldn't want to have a beer with them. BOOM.

Too old. BOOM. Too female. BOOM. Too white. BOOM.

Not a flawless progressive superhero. BOOM.

Because what happens next? We shoot the candidates down. We degrade them. We belittle them. We smear them. Then we hand the gun to the media. They do the same. They hand the gun to the conservatives. They do the same. Then the bots start reloading. BOOM. BOOM. BOOM.

And then at the end of primary season, we have to pick up the shattered remains of whoever got the most votes and attempt to glue them back together into a candidate who can win the general election.

And we will lose. Because we learned NOTHING from 2016, apparently.

Trump didn't win because every conservative loves him. Most of them hate his guts. But they held their noses and voted for him because he was the only way to push their agenda forward. And holy shit, have they pushed it. Despite his complete ineptitude, his bumbling, his gross incompetence, his blatant corruption, they have shoved through some really damaging policies that are hurting real people every single day, and they will continue to do so for as long as we let them.

So, here we are. You're not jazzed about Liz Warren? Awesome. Beto not your boy? Swell. Sick of Biden memes? Good for you, friend. Keep it to yourself. Why? Because EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT WHO RUNS IS INFINITELY BETTER FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR COUNTRY THAN THE FLAMING RACIST POPULIST TRASH CURRENTLY STEERING THIS COUNTRY DIRECTLY INTO THE SUN.

I'm not sure if you noticed, but we already elected a guy based on a cult of personality rather than on whether he was qualified in any way to do the job, and we're going to be putting out the flames for DECADES.

But what do we do instead, you ask? Watch debates. Compare platforms. Be informed. Choose your favorite BASED ON REAL FACTUAL POLICIES AND EXPERIENCE, NOT ON YOUR DELICATE FEELINGS AND WHETHER YOU FEEL SUFFICIENTLY ENTERTAINED OR INEXPLICABLY HAPPY AT THE VERY SIGHT OF THEIR GLOWING FACE. Then get involved. Register people. Drive to the polls. Hold signs on street corners. Write postcards. Knock on doors. Don't tell us why the other candidates suck, tell us why yours is THE BEST. Fight FOR them. Remember how we used to fight FOR things, rather than against them? I know Trump makes it hard to remember, but I promise, that's a thing we used to know how to do.

Then we all, collectively, wholeheartedly, throw our weight and energy and voice behind whoever gets the nomination. If we do that, we win. Period.

,It's not a question of who can beat Trump, don't you get it? A sentient houseplant with a liberal platform could beat Trump, if we do this right. It's a question of whether WE can beat him, or would we rather tear ourselves apart?

Look around you, folks. The stock market is in free-fall. Our international reputation is in tatters. Our foreign policy is for sale to dictators. Our free press is under daily attack. Our Supreme Court is one conservative white dude away from full-on Gilead, and we can't keep asking an 84-year-old-woman recovering from broken ribs and a third bout of cancer to hang on for six more years because we can't get our heads out of our own asses. I mean, she'll do it, obviously, because RBG is a BOSS, but she shouldn't have to.

I repeat. This is not a test of our candidates. There are lots of good, solid options. It's a test of US. Of OUR ability to unite. Of OUR strength. Of OUR ability to put aside selfish arbitrary purity tests and scales of "likeability" and to just GET IT DONE. We don't need the perfect candidate to rescue us. We need to realize that we can rescue ourselves.

So, how about it, Resistance? They want us to forget that we have the numbers, the motivation, and the power. They want us to implode. Let's explode instead, and leave nothing but a charred ruin of this nightmare administration in our wake.

BOOM.

[Demit]

1. Real factual policies and experience--and character. Character is important too.

Character is very important to me, and it is observable in ways big and small.

[watoos]

2. Bernie and Tulsi have already been blown up.

I may select Tulsi for my pick just to get abused. She is a tough as nails candidate which is my only requirement for beating Trump and I believe she may be our only candidate who served in the military.

[Docreed2003]

7. Buttigieg served

[crazylikafox]

3. YES!!!!!!!!

[Girard442]

4. A hard-fought primary is a gift -- but only if it's on the issues.

If it's just a bunch of Heathers saying, "Ewww, s/he's gross!", we deserve to lose.

[IndyOp]

5. May need to repost weekly ...

[NurseJackie]

6. So we should just listen and remain silent while they candidates make their case? Then choose?

Last edited Sun Apr 7, 2019, 11:48 AM - Edit history (6)

Keep it to yourself.

Oh brother! Hell no!

So we should just listen and remain silent while the candidates make their case? Then choose? No thank you.

Or, we should ONLY praise our favorite candidate and keep quiet about everyone else? Then choose? Again, no thanks.

Personally, I plan on calling out the lies and distortions and the dishonesty and unkept promises whenever I see them. I will not be silent while the Democratic party is demeaned and diminished and compared to the GOP. I'll not be ladylike and genteel and gently "tsk-tsk" when any candidate says that Democrats are "corrupt" or "ideologically bankrupt".

I won't nod and smile when I hear outright lies about a candidate's voting history, or lies about a candidate's popularity, or lies about a candidate's legislative accomplishments. I won't be saying "oh, that's okay, at least you tried" when a candidate cannot or will not produce their tax returns as promised.

Sure! It's all well and good to tout one's favorite candidate and "be positive" ... but if there are LIES and dishonesty and misrepresentations and absurd exaggerations coming from other candidates, those things MUST be addressed too. It's absurd to do otherwise.

To remain politely silent gives the advantage to the biggest liar... or to the candidate with the "personality" factor... or the candidate whose supporters will do/say anything because of a belief that it's his/her turn... or to the candidate that happens to have the most money.

EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT WHO RUNS IS INFINITELY BETTER

True, but, being "better" than Trump doesn't necessarily mean they can win. Especially if it's the GOP who exposes a show-stopper/game-changer about our nominee AFTER the nomination.

It's my person and strongly held belief that we, as responsible and loyal Democrats, have an OBLIGATION to find the strongest candidate. We do that, in part, by eliminating the weakest and most flawed candidates.

A flawed or dishonest candidate is a weak link. The party is only as strong as its weakest link. If I want a STRONG party, then my ignoring weak links for the sake of polite appearances would be a foolish tactic for me to adhere to.

Of course, anyone can certainly PRETEND that every link is strong... and that every candidate farts rose petals... but that doesn't change reality. In the end, the weakness will be revealed, exploited by the GOP, and the entire party suffers.

That's not going to happen with ONLY "rah-rah" for our favorite candidate while remaining silent about some other candidate's lies about his/her record and finances. Anyone can LIE their way to the top if those lies are unchecked and unchallenged.

I repeat. This is not a test of our candidates.

Oh, good lord. Yes it is. Of course it is. That's what the primaries are all about! (Repeating something that's false doesn't make it true.)

There are lots of good, solid options.

Yes that's definitely true. But it's also fair to say that not all choices are equally good. Let's be honest... we have some poor, weak and vulnerable options, too.

It's not a question of who can beat Trump, don't you get it?

Yes it is. It absolutely is. It's not "only" Trump that we'll be fighting, our party's candidate will also be facing the GOP SMEAR AND SLIME machine. I'm looking for a candidate who's strong enough to withstand that. No flaw is too small for the GOP to exploit.

A sentient houseplant with a liberal platform could beat Trump, if we do this right.

No, not really. You're underestimating the power of the GOP and overestimating the intelligence of low-information voters.

I'm not sure if you noticed, but we already elected a guy based on a cult of personality

I believe that if we follow the bad advice in this OP, our party could very well end up falling for the same thing. Personality "cults" are strong, but they can only take a candidate so-far, there are limits... especially noting how effective the GOP is at messaging and smearing. Democrats need strength and character, honesty and integrity, intelligence and vigor... not "personality".

Then we all, collectively, wholeheartedly, throw our weight and energy and voice behind whoever gets the nomination. If we do that, we win. Period.

We who? Our nominee can't win with ONLY the support of Democrats. Sorry, it's true.

All I'm trying to say is... if we have a weak or vulnerable candidate who can be easily disassembled by the GOP smear and attack machine, then it won't matter how "unified" we are as a party, our candidate will end up losing.

Just because a candidate is "better than Trump" is no guarantee of a win. I can't just sit on my hands and smile and pretend that they're ALL equally great and act like they can ALL easily defeat Trump. That's simply not true.

Personally I do not believe it's MY responsibility to remain silent and affable and politely agreeable about the candidates I oppose.

In the end, it's ACTUALLY the responsibility for the supporters of the LOSING candidate (the one/s not chosen by the party) to get THEIR shit together and come together to support the nominee. Oughtn't they be the ones who should be scolded (or encouraged)?

The suggestion that we should just remain silent about the candidates with weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and that we should ONLY cheer for our favorite candidate, and that we should let the chips fall where they may... well... it's just is absurd. In the real world, that's just not going to happen.

On the whole, looking at the entirety of the OP's message, I think that this is something only serves to weaken the party, not strengthen it. The parts about "coming together" in the end are good points. That should be the main message.

[FM123]

9. I hear what you're saying, and the coming together in the end is an important point.

My take on this FB post is that while we share opinions and information about our own Dems, we shouldn't degrade, belittle and smear them.

[NurseJackie]

10. Nor should we allow candidates (or their fans) to falsely claim that they're being "smeared"...

we shouldn't degrade, belittle and smear them.

Nor should we allow candidates (or their fans) to falsely claim that they're being "smeared" or "belittled" or "degraded" in response to---and in an effort to hide from and dodge---the difficult questions, valid criticism, and legitimate challenges. For example: things like "where are the tax returns you promised us?" are not smears.

That's all I'm saying. You and I probably agree more than we disagree... but this FB post that you cut/pasted really misses the mark and if taken literally and seriously as a handbook for what's permitted and how we should all just hold hands and sing kumbaya throughout the entire primary... well, it only weakens us, not strengthens us.

I hear what you're saying, and the coming together in the end is an important point.

It should be the ONLY point.

[aikoaiko]

8. We can disagree and be civil.

The current state of DU is better than I expected given 2016 - much better.

But there are still some people who I used to respect even if I disagreed with them, but bitterness has taken over their lives (at least as they post on DU).

Maybe after the primaries, we'll band together. Maybe.

[Iggo]

11. On hundred percent.