A Question .....

[H2O Man]

Do you hope that the democratic primary contest:

{A} continues after "Super Tuesday" because the process us good for the party?

{B} ends with one candidate way ahead, and the others dropping out, because the process is beginning to damage the chances of party unity in the fall?

{C} other?

[H2O Man]

1. C

I'd like it to continue, though I have concerns that some of the campaigning is causing divisions in the party that could be a problem in the fall.

[cali]

2. I don't know.

I'm not liking how things are going and how much ugliness there is. I used to think the process was good. I don't anymore. Realistically, if anything's going to happen on Super Tuesday it's that Hillary will win the strong majority of delegates. Maybe the best thing for the party in that case, is for JE and BO to simply drop out or absent that simply go through the motions.

I'm pretty fed up with the nastiness of this primary, and I don't excuse my candidate from the blame.

[H2O Man]

5. Two debates ago,

I thought the candidates were attempting to set the tone for the upcoming weeks. I thought it was possible that we were going to have the campaign focus on the important issues. There are still a handful of issues that I think they should discuss openly, in a debate format. At risk of sounding simple-minded, I still think we should hear their views on restoring habeas corpus. I'd like to hear each candidate's thoughts on the Constitution and the attempts to reduce it due to "the war on terror." It bothers me to think our primary process could give any candidate a free pass on this type of issue. But the campaigns and the media seem to be driving the "debate" in a different direction.

[sunonmars]

3. I want it over sooner rather than later

Do we continue an epic battle right up until August or does one of them bite the bullet.

In my opinion, if things are a bit clearer come the morning of 6th Feb, I think we'll see a delegation from the DNC have words with the candidates and force hands.

We'll need a bit of space to settle down and then start rallying around the nominee. Who ever it is.

I think whoever walks off with the best out of ST will be victorious.

[H2O Man]

6. Do you think

that having one democrat to focus on will help the republican machine more than having the self-destructive democratic arguments now taking place in the primary?

[OneGrassRoot]

4. Most definitely "A"

The voters in the remaining states are only now beginning to pay attention. Them believing they truly have a choice - rather than someone being annointed so early on - engages them in the process. In my opinion, that's the way it should be. People need time to know who and what they're voting for. The candidates' bickering, as well as genuine battles about issues, help people decide who they want as the nominee. Sometimes it's a process of elimination.

To me, empowering the citizen is more important than party unity. As John Edwards said last night, "I love my party, but I love this nation more."


On edit: While this process seems especially vicious this year, I prefer weaknesses and criticisms come out now rather than in the GE. We need this weeding-out process to truly feel comfortable with our nominee. They all need to be going through the fire now rather than in the GE.

[H2O Man]

7. As an old

and retired social worker, I think that it is helpful at times to view the democratic party in terms of "family systems." And an extended family can deal with lots of problems, and be a tad dysfunctional, and still pull it together at important times to do what is best for the family.

But when there are personal attacks during the times of stress, which include elements of sexism and racism, you start having serious divides. These are felt at times of family reunions, including but not limited to weddings and funerals. People start by just not wanting to be seated at the same table as a person who has offended them. And pretty soon, some family members simply stop attending these events.

My concern is that certain members of the extended democratic party family are causing deep divides, because they are putting their selfish needs before the good of the family.

[OneGrassRoot]

8. I'm sorry to be in a rush, and hope you'll understand this question.

In your last paragraph, are you speaking of candidates and/or supporters?

I suppose either way, my view is that I don't like to see bad behavior rewarded. I do understand your concern about how this may harm the party. Perhaps I'm looking at this wrong, but I'd rather a disease become acute and come to the surface to be healed rather than lie dormant, causing chronic sickness. Ultimately, I prefer prevention, of course.

And your analogy is a good one. I don't have loyalty to my family because we are related to blood; to many, that "blood connection" forgives and allows for nearly any type of behavior. Not so for me. I'm the same with party loyalty, I suppose, which is probably why I often don't agree with what many here post.

Have a good day! :hi:

[H2O Man]

9. Supporters.

I think some people associated with the campaigns are resorting to undignified behaviors that is damaging to our party.