Bookmarked. Very very good post. THANKS!

Progressive or liberal they have my vote.

and so far I don't see any!

Someone with a policy agenda who is ready to lead the sweeping reforms we need.
Someone like FDR who got things done like the New Deal and Social Security.
Someone like LBJ, who got things done like the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act.

I know this will be controversial, but here are some Dem candidates that actually have a real policy PLAN.

- Elizabeth Warren. She did CFPB. She’s got a ton of good plans and a proven track record.
- Bernie Sanders has a real plan, but in the past he doesn’t have a great history of getting things done. I’m torn on him. He’s as good a policy communicator as Warren, which is why the right is scared stiff about him and smears him. But I don’t know about him getting stuff done.

(I’m staying positive here so I won’t run through all possible candidates.)

Others of interest: Cory Booker, Eric Holder. Not sure who else has the ability to pass another equivalent of the Civil Rights Act, or Social Security.

Who else? Who else has a history of leading legislation, from either branch?

Did we need Joe Lieberman supporting Dubya's wars?

That's what we got by putting someone in office whom the party should have rejected utterly.

So there IS a line somewhere that's not worth crossing.

I didn’t mean to suggest we just take anything and I can see how it reads that way. I’m just saying let’s “settle” for great vs holding out for perfect. Joe wasn’t even passable.

But yeah. There’s a line somewhere up there and a lot of great candidates are above it.

And then they work behind the scenes to do better next time.

That’s the key approach we should follow.

Let’s say Beto gets nominated. If we were the GOP we’d go balls to the wall for him, then start talking about how the next candidate should be different.

Now is not the time to harp on progressive "purity."

We need Democrats in every position of power we can put them in.

Not Trump.

that divide us as a community, whether they are 'news' or not.

Stupid GOPer arguments that seem to be aimed at making sure we have GOPer-approved candidates. I want RWNJs to wail and gnash their teeth at our candidates, just as they did at the idea of Nancy Pelosi being Speaker.

and then unhide after the primary... I'm a truth teller and got my one and only ever "post removed" ( been here since early 2001) for stating the obvious, so I'm not participating here much these days...politics is a mean game

I couldn't care less how "pure" our candidate is.

I’m off Facebook since 2016. I really agree with these sentiments, though. Thanks for sharing.

For example, Kirsten Gillibrand, people like her who I feel hurt the Democratic party by jumping the gun on Al Franken must be rejected, why should anyone give her a pass?

People who contributed to her campaign in the past stopped doing it after the Franken fiasco, and they have promised to never support her.

As with any candidate or anyone who wants to run for office, our due diligence is paramount, these people must be studied, their actions (votes) must be analyzed and then be accepted or shot down.

I agree that the analysis must be done in a way that no ammunition is given to the repubs, but lets make sure we all support people who can really win, and who represent real democratic values.

I like Adam Schiff, and with a VP like Kamala Harris, or Elizabeth Warren, that would be a great ticket.