The Division in our party kills people. Here's PROOF. This proof is simple:

[Stuart G]

Last edited Sun Apr 7, 2019, 11:35 AM - Edit history (2)

..Those on our side who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000, voted to kill people. It didn't look that way, but that is the way it turned out. Those Nader votes, elected Bush Jr., and Bush Jr. started a war that killed people. Over 5000 Americans, maybe 200,000 Iraqis.

You want to see the results of war..live and in person?...
...........................Take a look at Senator Tammy Duckworth. ................

.Would Gore have started that war? No one knows.(I believe Gore would not have started a war)

..The divisions in our party elected Donald Trump. If all that voted for "Jill Stein" voted for Hilary Clinton instead, we would have won. The pure thinkers elected Donald Trump. Jill Stein was what prevented Hilary from being elected. Someone in another post just about proved that..(sorry, I couldn't find that one, I tried)..

..You think you are "pure" and won't vote for a moderate, or whoever our party picks, then you are supporting the person who is "Donald Trump" You must vote for our nominee. You might say, I am going to vote for the 3rd party candidate, or you might say, "I am not going to vote this time" then you are supporting Donald Trump. Or the republican replacement.

..You may not see it that way, but your vote for anyone other than our nominee,... is a vote that kills. We must be unified no matter who we nominate. If your candidate does not get the nomination, you must vote for the candidate of the Democratic Party. I will vote for our candidate and send some money no matter who that person is. If you stay home and not vote, or vote for the current "Jill Stein" (the 3rd Party Candidate) then you are voting to kill and elect the republican candidate.

..That is not nice to say. It is mean, ugly, and vicious. You don't like it. But that is the truth.

I want to add just one idea: This is not a game, this is real. "Life and Death" decisions like the "Iraq War" by Bush Jr. We must be united. See Obama quote below.. (post number 8 below)

[yardwork]

1. It is the truth.

[Stuart G]

2. Yes. This is the truth. My post is ugly, mean, very sad, but the truth.

We must be united and elect our candidate. No third party crap,
No voting for Jill Stein or Ralph Nader or whoever is put up there to divide us. (and yes, there will be someone up there to divide us.) That is what has happened and will happen in 2020.

[IndianaDave]

39. I agree absolutely! The Democratic Nominee is OUR nominee. NO EXCEPTIONS.

[FM123]

3. Yes, we vote blue no matter who.

[Stuart G]

4. Yes, I will vote blue no matter who., I will vote blue, no matter who..(again)

Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who.
Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who.
Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who.
Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who.
Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who.
Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who
Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who.
Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who.
Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who.
Yes, I will vote blue, no matter who

[lostnfound]

5. When did Nader and Stein get considered "our party"?

I sure don’t see them that way.

The “divisions” IN our party are generally between well-meaning moderates that don’t want radical change or who think that it’s risky to put forward more leftwing candidates in the general, and left progressives who think that thirty years of rightwing momentum has pushed the country into extreme inequality and that government needs to support the health and well-being of he citizenry directly rather than through corporate agendas or tax cuts.


That divide is pretty soft compared to the chasm we have between our party and what’s left of the other party..

[Stuart G]

6. I found the post...the post that proves is number 5 by Cha in this series at this link

That post quotes a 2016 tweet by Dave Wasserman...take a look.....

Jill Stein is now officially the Ralph Nader of 2016.

Stein votes/Trump margin:
MI: 51,463/10,704
PA: 49,678/46,765
WI: 31,006/22,177


https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142299438

[plimsoll]

7. This will raise everyone's ire

But moderate democrats defect too if they don't like the candidate.

The common wisdom has always been that liberals/progressives in the party had to vote for the more centrist candidate. Al Gore and Hilary Clinton proved that's not true. I abhor the purity test, but this problem is not limited to progressives who decide a protest vote for <Couldn't win Candidate> makes sense.

Both the centrists and the more progressive democrats need to get together and agree to the compromise candidate. The candidate may be more progressive than you are comfortable with? Motivate more people to agree with you. The candidate isn't as progressive as you want. Same thing.

I agree with Obama's comments yesterday, but I think there will be progressives who viewed it as a threat. Try to move things to the left and the center won't follow you. That center isn't the "center of the GOP," they're about as common as Wooly Mammoths at this point, so who should they think will defect?

[Stuart G]

8. Yes, Obama's comments yesterday make sense to me.

One paragraph you wrote is clear (3rd one) and I will quote it completely:

"Both the centrists and the more progressive democrats need to get together and agree to the compromise candidate. The candidate may be more progressive than you are comfortable with? Motivate more people to agree with you. The candidate isn't as progressive as you want. Same thing."

the quote below is one I got from a ...babylonsister post currently up in our forum "Democratic Primaries".
Title of her post "Barack Obama Warns Progressive Purists That Their 'Circular Firing Squad' Will Only Help Trump".......................

at this link:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=57362

Obama also said this:
....Obama continued, “So I think whether you are speaking as a citizen or as a political leader or as an organizer you have to recognize that the way we structure democracy requires you to take into account people who don’t agree with you, and that by definition means you’re not going to get 100 percent of what you want.”

[plimsoll]

11. My second paragraph is in response to a Rahm Emanuel statement

Years ago. I viewed as Hippy punching, an unneeded smack at one half of our coalition. I'm just trying to warn the centrists that we can't expect all the give from the left anymore. They've demonstrated that for at least some, purity is more important than pragmatism. I think the centrist portion of the party doesn't think they need to compromise at all. Our coalition fails when either portion thinks they can go it alone.

There are a lot of reasons why the right looks the way it does today, but some of it is probably due to the racist right getting tired of the lip service. Their response was to elect on of their own.

[Demsrule86]

16. There are more centrists than left left...they can spoil and have...but

can't win alone.

[plimsoll]

22. Agreed

But as you point out they can and have spoiled. I think many of them have reached the conclusion that centrist Democrats have a "like it or leave" attitude. If centrist Democrats can't find a way to work with the progressives we must face continued electoral losses.

As you point out, centrists outnumber the more left leaning side. Looking at it from the left side, it seems like the centrist Democrats enter all negotiations by leaving out all the lefts positions. That is a negotiate from the center to the right stance. I imagine it's pretty hard for a left leaning person to argue that the Democratic party has any progressive wing from that perspective.

I'm not arguing that the left doesn't need to compromise, but I am arguing that the center should look at how they act and decide if their position is "compromise" or "submit."

[Demsrule86]

23. Well,they need to increase their numbers by winning hearts and minds.

But spoiling elections reduces their numbers and hurts everyone. You can't expect folks to adopt policies that we can't win on. That being said, Democrats have moved left.

[plimsoll]

26. Absolutely!

My question to us still stands though, is the center suggesting compromise or submission?

I probably don't count on either side. My inclinations may be more progressive, but you can't change things if you keep losing. So I get the point you, Obama and many other people have made. But if we can't try to acknowledge the progressive side of things, then we can rest assured that we will lose.

[Demsrule86]

32. The progressive side is in the minority because they have not convince enogh people.

You have to win and can't do so with unpopular ideology. I am progressive but I have worked campaigns for years. If we don't run a moderate in 20, we lose.

[plimsoll]

34. So your answer is submit?

And we wonder why people like Noam Chomsky say there are 2 political parties in this country and they're both rightwing. I think we have to do more than just take the attitude that they can't win so do what we tell you. As you pointed out they can't win, but we can't win without them.

I think people whose ideas are always brushed aside see nihilism as a viable choice. We can blame Nader and Stein all we want, but to some extent we have been saying "tough shit." I guess I'll prepare for 4 more years.

[Demsrule86]

35. My solution is win anyway we can while working on hearts and minds. Losing sets back

our efforts way more than electing a moderate. Look how much attention Trump gets and we could work with a moderate Democrat but never a Republican. We are looking at a 6/ 3 Scotus if we don't win. Remember Clinton appointed Ginsberg. Any Democrat is better than a Republican,

[plimsoll]

14. I think we're agreeing

Just focusing on different aspects of the same problem.

You said

If you stay home and not vote, or vote for the current "Jill Stein" (the 3rd Party Candidate) then you are voting to kill and elect the republican candidate.

Beyond that you are voting to re-institutionalize bigotry, income inequality, and extraordinary misogyny.

[TCJ70]

9. Every time this comes up I'm always left to wonder...

...what do the centrists give up?

[plimsoll]

13. Exactly the point I'm trying to make.

I agree with what Obama said, but compromise has to be compromise. Not just "You'll do what we say and like it because the other guys are crazy."

[Demsrule86]

17. It is not a win or lose situation. We need to run on winning issues.

[Demsrule86]

19. What do any of us gain if Trump wins again?

[Demsrule86]

20. Th question really is are there more centrists than progressives.

And how do we win...the answer is and always was a big tent. Clearly there are, more centrists if you look at the Senate and we ignore them at our peril. Can others act as spoilers...sure. but what do they gain?

[JI7]

25. what does that even mean ? they are voting for the more liberal candidate

compared to the repiblican.

they are the true progressives and liberals.

not the shit the votes for Nader and Stein which helps the right wing gay into power.

[jalan48]

27. Corporate donations I would imagine.

[Demsrule86]

33. Exactly.

[Kurt V.]

10. i agree nader should not have run. also nader has saved thousands of lives. so there's that.

[Stuart G]

12. Good Point...., "also nader has saved thousands of lives. so there's that."

I studied Nader at length, I read, "Unsafe At Any Speed" his book.
.. But Nader ran in 2000 and was awful. He hurt Gore. I believe Nader cost Gore the election. Nader tarnished himself forever. If he had kept with the safety information, his name would not be associated with .."awful stinking stuff" Nader would have remained clean. Nader dirtied himself completely and forever.

[Demsrule86]

18. No he didn't.. The car thing was bullshit.

I hate nader and always will.people are still dying thanks to him.

[wasupaloopa]

15. Your statement is not true so everything you say after is not true.

You can't prove any of it because it is all illogical and not real.

You can't say if this happens then that would have happened.

If A then B but B is an assumption, not real so there for A is not real also am assumption..



You proved nothing

[Demsrule86]

21. It is true... Greens started two wars, hurt the environment and caused an economic debacle.

by causing Gore to lose. Their efforts in 2016 to elect Donald Trump will be with us for many years. Fuck the Greens . Many more will die thanks to them.

[wasupaloopa]

38. Maybe study logic

[Demsrule86]

40. Maybe study history.

The Greens have hurt Democrats and the party repeatedly and the country by helping elect GOP losers...they really knocked it out of the park with Trump.

[JI7]

24. so called progressives that voted for Stein, Nader etc tend to like Donald Trump types

these people aren't really progressive in the sense of being more liberal.

they alsoi tend to be mostly straight white men, the group that votes for Republicans in very high numbers. not really a coincidence. in the end they keep their privilege.

[CentralMass]

28. Who here wont vote for the nominee ?

[bernie59]

29. I don't believe you can "count" 3rd party votes for any side (dem or rep)

The people I know who voted 3rd party did not do it because the 3rd party candidate was better than the mainstream candidates - they did it as a rejection of both mainstream candidates. If they did not have the option to vote 3rd party, they would have left the presidential choice blank.

[loyalsister]

30. Please don't hold up someone else's body as part of your argument

Tammy Duckworth is proud of her service and not ashamed of her body.
Living in a body that it not the norm is not the tragedy so many people think. She has adapted just fine, she has a family and has a successful carer in politics.
People are not objects to be exploited to make a political point.

[Kaleva]

31. Those who voted for Nader weren't on our side.

[Lazy Daisy]

36. Are you fucking kidding me?

If you remember correctly, there were many Democrats that voted FOR the Iraq war. Blaming voters for death?

[Stuart G]

37. No one in Florida votes for Nader, those that were thinking that, vote for Gore...and..

Last edited Mon Apr 8, 2019, 12:30 AM - Edit history (13)

Democrats win Florida, also, Gore wins the election. No Iraq War...Yes, blaming voters for death.
Why? Gore would not have started that war in my opinion. Bush Jr. started that for lies, and his feelings.
He lied about that war, weapons of mass destruction, and more.

Bush instructed his administration to lie. I remember those lies. Particularly the Sec of State, Colin Powell,..Well thought of person lied to everyone. You don't like it, ok. But....That is the way history goes. Someone lies about war, there is a war, thousands are killed. It is the truth. How about another example..an awful lie that killed millions upon millions...

Stalin signed a peace pact with Hitler. Stalin believed Hitler would keep his word. They thought alike. No war with Germany Stalin thought. One leader talking to another.

When Germany stated amassing soldiers at the German / Soviet Union border, Stalin didn't believe it was true. So Hitler's soldiers invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, in a massive invasion. There were many in Russia who believed Hitler. Germans believed Hitler. No war with Soviet Union. Hitler had total support of his people..ok, invasion of Soviet Union..Maybe 25 million killed?..Maybe 20, maybe 30?...Stalin did not keep track. Did Hitler?

Guess what..in an early 30s election Hitler won, and became the leader of Germany. The German voters voted him in. You don't like it?...Look it up. It is the truth.

If Gore would have won Florida, things might have changed completely. Voters kill. They vote in the wrong person, then that person kills. Look it up..It is the truth. Don't like it? Ok then you can lie about it too.

Ok..here is an article on the July 31, 1932 German election...just hit the link and it will give you the results...
.......So, all you have to do is hit this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_1932_German_federal_election

from the above article:
"After the election, Chancellor Papen urged Hindenburg to continue to govern by emergency decrees. Nevertheless, on 3 December he was superseded by his Defence Minister Kurt von Schleicher who in talks with the left wing of the Nazi Party led by Gregor Strasser tried to build up a Third Position (Querfront) strategy. These plans failed when in turn Hitler disempowered Strasser and approached Papen for coalition talks. Papen obtained Hindenburg's consent to form the Hitler Cabinet on 30 January 1933."

......So those elections in July were not the final word...Germany had another election in November of 1932:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_1932_German_federal_election

A few months following that election...Hitler was installed leader of Germany..Hit the link above...

.More info on the results of November 1932 election in Germany..from an article on Hitler's Cabinet:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_Cabinet

The Hitler Cabinet de jure formed the government of Nazi Germany between 30 January 1933 and 30 April 1945 upon the appointment of Adolf Hitler as Chancellor of the German Reich by president Paul von Hindenburg. Contrived by the national conservative politician Franz von Papen, who reserved the office of the Vice-Chancellor for himself.[1] Originally, Hitler's first cabinet was called the Reich Cabinet of National Salvation,[2] which was a coalition of the Nazi Party (NSDAP) and the national conservative German National People's Party (DNVP), it became an exclusively Nazi cabinet when the DNVP was intimidated into dissolving itself.

The Enabling Act of 1933, passed two months after Hitler took office, gave the cabinet the power to make laws without legislative consent for four years. In effect, this power was vested in Hitler, and for all intents and purposes it made Hitler a dictator. After the Enabling Act's passage, serious deliberations more or less ended at cabinet meetings. It met only sporadically after 1934, and last met in full on 5 February 1938.[3] Nonetheless, it grew immensely in size on paper, due to the addition of the commanders of the armed services and several ministers without portfolio.
_______________________________________________________________________________

Read it all, or read it none..or some. But elections have consequences. Those that vote for killers are responsible. Sure the voters don't kill, but their votes kill. Bush Jr. killed. Johnson/Kennedy started a war that killed. That war was continued under Nixon. It killed tens of thousands. Johnson hated the war. Felt bad about it. War Kills.
...That is why it is to be avoided at all costs. I often showed a movie about WWII to my high school students. That movie is called .."Night and Fog" 32 minutes. Be warned, it is the worst, saddest, most awful movie I have ever seen. Just 32 minutes... Here is a link. read the first 15 reviews. My review is there. Order of reviews is changed daily or every few days. Today..4/7/19 my review is 2nd. Yes, it is the most powerful movie ever made. Sad beyond belief, and total truth. Read the first 15 reviews..all agree, so powerful and sad, you will never forget it.

You are warned!! my name at IMBD is : stuartpiles The title of the review is...

....The Most Powerful Film Ever Made...
........stuartpiles,...16 November 2004...

Yes it is there, I checked it out..

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048434/