many of us felt our needs (not preferences) would not be met.
They are not entitled to those votes.
So yes, I will vote for The Democrat, but I will also hold them accountable
100% these things^^
you may find it unhelpful or inconvenient to argue about who wins in a primary, but why they won and others didn’t is entirely relevant, especially going into a new primary.
.
I appreciate your effort here, but don’t defend someone else’s words. If they feel my criticism is unfounded they can respond and defend themselves. White knights are not needed.
And I agree with what you are stating regarding voting in general; but we are not in normal times here. We cannot have any of what is in fact a false equivalency around “Oh, that candidate is just as bad, its the lesser of two evils” no. it isn’t. because one side is absolutely EVIL and the other is definitely NOT EVIL.
i don’t think i was saying that democrats wouldn’t work with the GOP. i was referring to democrats historically being willing to compromise with a party that does not reciprocate. it doesn’t matter how willing and able dems are of compromising and working well with others, if the others in question don’t see those things as mutual goals. dems have bent over backwards to work across the aisle, and when republicans insist they bend over just a little bit more backwards, they usually do.
Keep on haraunguing the 100 million or so who you want to share your ultimatum and vote with it, and ignore the fact that 50 or so people running the ironically named Democrat party remain completely unresponsive to those of us with progressive requirements of anyone who will “represent” us. That same strategy worked really well when you demanded that anti-war types and progressive types should vote for Hillary.
Also, when you ignore the math of the electoral college and hate on third party voters in certainly-red states, you also win lots of points. 
Enjoy Trump’s re-election with this winning methodology, folks. Sure, he’s no longer just speculatively going to do bad things, but damn, if the Democrat party won’t even begin to consider trying to offer something to vote for rather than against, you can expect the same results that Kerry, Romney, and Hillary Clinton obtained in their “not that other guy” campaigns. Especially when several of the front runners are arch-conservative trash… Go ahead and double down on that instead of considering trying to hold your party accountable.
Really? You honestly think someone like, say, Elizabeth Warren is “completely unresponsive to those of us* with progressive requirements?”
…some folks would still rather make the perfect the mortal enemy of the immeasurably better, and let the most vulnerable people in our country bear the cost of ideologically pure spite.
Listen, man, I get it. Someone like Biden is not my first choice and I think would be a mistake for Democrats to nominate. But, if he gets the nomination, and you don’t vote for him, knowing full well what that means for the country’s future, I just don’t get it. Even if the only difference between the Democratic candidate and Trump was judicial nominations (and, of course, that’s far from the only difference), then that’s enough by itself to justify voting early and often if you truly care about progressive policy.
*ahem
She was contentious because of decades of right wing lies to defame her. Anyone who prides themselves on being too smart for Fox News but then believes all the horrors told about Hillary is fooling themselves. Was she perfect? No. Was she a step leftward? No. Was she the most qualified candidate EVER in modern times for the job? Yes. Imagine where we would be right now if Russia and Fox News hadn’t swayed the election.
Warren’s fine… it’s the sentiment that 100 million people who want Warren better suck it up and vote for Harris instead that isn’t going to work. I live in a pure red state… people living in a pure red or pure blue state have only one viable way to vote for a difference, and that isn’t for one of the two, fully-funded, dominant parties. When all of the shouting at the 100 million fails to consider the electoral college, it’s purely senseless. For those in battleground states, sure, let’s talk about the nuance of voting purely for judicial nominations, if the party completely otherwise fails at presenting a quality candidate.
A much better way to get a third party (and more) to be viable across the country would be to help the Republican party lose so badly and so often that it forfeits its lofty position as one of the two main parties.
you silly people think pure red / pure blue is a coincidence? https://boingboing.net/2019/06/27/partisan-gerrymandering-upheld.html you have no choices. many people cannot even vote.
If you are implying that the next election doesn’t matter because we have nothing left to lose I’m gonna have to go with “hard disagree.”
Well then, you go ahead and convince the 100 million people to vote your way, instead of asking the 50 or so people running the Democrat party to get their shit together. It sure looks easier.
I imply nothing. Didn’t say you have nothing left to lose. Posited the country isn’t a country anymore. God’s words he spoke to the prophet Howard came true is what I’m saying.
I voted for her because I am a reasonable person.
The electorate, as a whole, is neither reasonable nor a person. They can decide that this whole country gets to eat shit. They have decided that. And Russian interference is convincing the electorate that shit is tasty and nutritious.
I’m simply pointing out that this can happen, and it has happened. I will vote for The Democrat, but I only have say over whom I vote for, and that’s assuming I don’t magically disappear from the voting rolls.
There’s no movement telling you to “suck it up and vote for Harris” instead of Warren at this point, so let’s just stick to what’s actually in front of us. The primaries are in the first stages–go out and support/vote for any of the candidates you want, that’s the whole point of the primary.
But, if Harris wins, and you purport to care at all about progressive values or policy, you damn well better suck it up and vote for her against Trump.
And frankly, I think the plausible deniability of throwing your vote away because you’re in “safe” red/blue state plays directly into the hands of the party who uses a vocal and voting minority to control most of the levers of power in this country.
If Clinton had won, there would have been a lot I would have disagreed with her about, but the overall direction of her policy would have been taken us in a more progressive direction, and certainly more than we’ve taken since. Hell, the Supreme Court would now have a bullet-proof liberal majority for a generation, instead of being one heartbeat away from a supermajority of ultra conservatives for the next 30 years. This shit matters, yo.
Nobody wants people to believe that more than the GOP.
I think that it should be noted that this bumper sticker probably isn’t for the majority of us here on bbbbs. If you are at all a liberal progressive, it’s pretty much a given that our choice in 2020 is going to be anyone but Trump, even if we have quibbles about the particulars. No, I think this bumper sticker is supposed to be a message for the centrists, for the never Trumpers, and for the conservatives who are tired of the constant shit show and the ongoing war with reality. It’s those people who need to be convinced that Trump’s days need to be numbered.
The only way third parties will be viable in the American system will be if FPTP voting is replaced by ranked choice.
If one of the duopoly parties is replaced, on the other hand, it’s going to be as a result of one of them being totally unequipped to deal with an on-going controversy that will lead to very unpleasant outcomes for all of us (see the Whigs).
Oh great, now I have to rewatch that film again. I love it too much.
decades of right wing lies to defame her
in part, yes. a tactic that was extremely effective and should have given more people pause about her being the best nominee. is it fair? of course not. that’s not the point.
In no small part because, while Trump is obviously the worst, the rest of the GOP are still pretty damn terrible. (As evidenced by their support of Trump, for one thing.)
A Democratic president means the executive branch as a whole is back in sane hands. It means no more executive orders trying to destroy civil rights for various people; no more feckless lickspittles or corrupt bastards in charge of important Federal bureaus, departments and organizations; no more nominating alcoholic rapists to high court positions, etc.
What heritage would have been involved with Clinton? None. The whole “dynasty issue” is a red herring with her.
My main reason for responding wasn’t necessarily to defend. It was about your misuse of “false equivalency.” Yes, it should not be used. But that’s not what he’s doing. If anything, you are creating a strawman false equivalency (wow, that’s a mouthful!) to argue against something he’s not saying.
You guys are in agreement: Trump sucks. No need to yell in all caps. He and I see some negatives of the bumper sticker, you don’t agree. Good. Things don’t get better by everyone agreeing. If I’m not wrong half the time, I’m not exploring boundaries enough. You’d think I’d have a thicker skin. The all caps false equivalency argument triggered me. Sorry about that. I’ll butt out now.
