The Democratic Safe House

[FreeinChrist]

I don't. I kind of get it, given how unified and destructive the Republican party has become. But it's a terrible way to approach things. That sort of attitude is part of how the Republican party got so terrible.

Well, if Harris got nominated but I really wanted Biden, I would still vote for Harris because she is a better choice that Donald. Same with most all of them. If Bernie is chosen, I will vote for him.

The fellow in the program this morning talked about how most of his family, who is African American, were voting for Biden, buy many really liked Harris more. Then he mentioned how early in the 2008 election, African American voters were for Hillary Clinton until they saw Obama start winning primaries, then they saw he would be a viable candidate.

Anyway, I see any of the current Dem candidates as better than Donald .

I can see your point though.

 

[DaisyDay]

Anyway, I see any of the current Dem candidates as better than Donald .

I think Williamson would be almost as awful.

 

[Kentonio]

Well, if Harris got nominated but I really wanted Biden, I would still vote for Harris because she is a better choice that Donald. Same with most all of them. If Bernie is chosen, I will vote for him.

The fellow in the program this morning talked about how most of his family, who is African American, were voting for Biden, buy many really liked Harris more. Then he mentioned how early in the 2008 election, African American voters were for Hillary Clinton until they saw Obama start winning primaries, then they saw he would be a viable candidate.

Anyway, I see any of the current Dem candidates as better than Donald .

I can see your point though.

I’ve never understood that logic. Not voting for someone because they’re not ‘viable’ but then voting for them because other people are. Bizarre.

 

[DaisyDay]

I’ve never understood that logic. Not voting for someone because they’re not ‘viable’ but then voting for them because other people are. Bizarre.

If enough other people are voting for that candidate, then the candidate becomes viable.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I’ve never understood that logic. Not voting for someone because they’re not ‘viable’ but then voting for them because other people are. Bizarre.

Well, I think the Democratic nominee will be viable. I am certainly not voting for Trump. And if too many Dems sit out again in the election, Trump will be reelected. I fear the US will not survive another term as a Democracy.

 

[Kentonio]

If enough other people are voting for that candidate, then the candidate becomes viable.

But that candidate never becomes ‘viable’ in the first place unless people start voting for them. If everyone just voted for their first choice in the primaries, then the winner would be automatically viable. Trying to second guess other people’s votes is nonsensical.

I could understand people worrying about electability in the general, but primary viability is just weird.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

I will not vote for Trump under any circumstance, but I don't believe in "vote blue no matter who". I don't think a corporatist Democrat is actually better than Trump; I think it's as bad and maybe even more insidious. President Obama (whom I voted for twice) turned out to be a good example of that. He droned hundreds of thousands of women, children, and elderly to painful maiming and death yet it remains ignored or, worse, accepted by Democrats as "OK" because it was Obama who did it. Electing a Biden, Harris, or even Warren is just continuing in this pseudo-liberal pattern where a candidate/elected official talks like a liberal and has liberal views on abortion and gay marriage but is a crypto conservative when it comes to the most important things that affect all Americans, such as income inequality and universal health care.

The driving factor behind these corporatist Democrats is their embracing of corporate donations. This leaves them beholden to those donors and they return the favor by enacting legislation that favors the corporations and oligarchs who support them instead of we the people. The only candidates I know to have remained consistent in not taking money from corporate (oligarch) special interests are Bernie and Tulsi.

Therefore, if Bernie or Tulsi get the nomination then I will vote for them. If not, I will likely vote Green Party again.

It's very hard for me to understand how my fellow democrats who claim to be against corporatist interests can so easily support a corporatist candidate. I truly don't comprehend it.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I haven't voted blue no matter who in the past (didn't vote for Obama in 2008), and doubt I will in the future - except this election is truly for the soul of the country, and to maintain democracy. I think most of the folks running will be out soon, and it will boil down to Biden, Bernie, Harris or Warren. Yang is having a bit of a surge but I don't think he will win the nomination, or Buttigieg.

Voting for the green party will allow Trump back in office, and we can kiss any hope of fighting climate change or maintaining democracy away. Trump talked about continuing on after his second 4 years the other day, and there are probably folks who will throw away the constitution and fight for it.

 

[Scholastica]

I could understand people worrying about electability in the general, but primary viability is just weird.

It's because they're worried about electability in the general that people are concerned about primary viability.

Someone might want to vote for Bernie but refrain because if he wins then him being socialist or Jewish might turn off general election voters. Or someone might want to vote for Warren or Harris but be afraid to because that might turn off general election voters who won't for someone who is black, or a woman, or a black woman.

It's fear based logic, and that's a really sad reason to vote strategically, but 2016 has got Democrats very very afraid. If voters in 2008 had used this line of reasoning then the "obviously unelectable" Obama would never have been president.

The way to combat this for everyone to through caution to the wind and just have faith that the candidate they really want to win can win, and convince others of the same. Because in the end, the only way to prove someone is electable is for them to actually win something. Starting with Iowa and New Hampshire.

 

[Kentonio]

It's because they're worried about electability in the general that people are concerned about primary viability.

Someone might want to vote for Bernie but refrain because if he wins then him being socialist or Jewish might turn off general election voters. Or someone might want to vote for Warren or Harris but be afraid to because that might turn off general election voters who won't for someone who is black, or a woman, or a black woman.

It's fear based logic, and that's a really sad reason to vote strategically, but 2016 has got Democrats very very afraid. If voters in 2008 had used this line of reasoning then the "obviously unelectable" Obama would never have been president.

The way to combat this for everyone to through caution to the wind and just have faith that the candidate they really want to win can win, and convince others of the same. Because in the end, the only way to prove someone is electable is for them to actually win something. Starting with Iowa and New Hampshire.

If it was because of general election viability though, it wouldn’t make much sense to suddenly switch in the primaries just because other Dems start voting for them. I agree with your larger point though.

 

[DaisyDay]

#MelaniaLovesTrudeau

 

[Scholastica]

Is there a thread specifically about the Democratic primary campaigns? I feel like that deserves a conversation all of its own but I don't see one anywhere.

 

[Arcangl86]

There have been a couple of started, but they all degenerate into posters railing against socialism and abortion.

 

[Scholastica]

That's a bummer. Doesn't this subforum have moderators to keep things in line?

 

[Arcangl86]

It does and they try, but the political threads tend to deteriorate really quickly, to the point where they can't always be saved.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Is there a thread specifically about the Democratic primary campaigns? I feel like that deserves a conversation all of its own but I don't see one anywhere.

Just a thought - why don't you start one if you feel there should be one? Whenever I think of a thread I'd like to see and can't find one on that topic, I just start one myself.

 

[Scholastica]

That was indeed my intention, but Arcangl explanation for why there isn't one currently has made me rather apprehensive of starting a thread that seems destined to devolve into chaos.

I don't want my first thread in over ten years to be a flamewar right from the go.

 

[Arcangl86]

It might, it might not. You never know. And if it does, as the OP you will have the right to request it gets closed whenever you want.

 

[Scholastica]

Well, why not. Lets get this sucker rolling!

 

[ArmenianJohn]

That was indeed my intention, but Arcangl explanation for why there isn't one currently has made me rather apprehensive of starting a thread that seems destined to devolve into chaos.

I don't want my first thread in over ten years to be a flamewar right from the go.

LOL, totally understandable!