General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI知 a proud member of the Purity Police.
That said, “purity” in a political candidate is not a reasonable expectation. Even the candidates with whom I most closely align have significant policy positions that differ from my own. I get that there’s no such thing as a “perfect” candidate from a policy perspective, and if there was, he/she would still have to demonstrate two more qualities: The perfect ability to get elected and the perfect ability to advance good legislation.
“Perfect”, you see, is an absolute, so grammatically there is no “perfecter” or “perfectest”. It’s “more nearly perfect” and “most nearly perfect.”
And those are the candidates I want representing the Democratic Party – the most nearly perfect ones we can muster. And that’s why I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m part of the Purity Police. I want our party to advance the most nearly perfect policies and candidates that we can.
So when you accuse me of being a “purist” I take that both as a complement and as an admission that you knowingly don’t support the more nearly perfect policies and candidates that the party has to offer in favor of lesser candidates and lesser policies.
And I wonder why that would be.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
dem in texas
(2,674 posts)The most important thing is for the Democrats to get as many seats as they can and to elect a Democrat as president. I am not pure, but driven to win. My biggest concern is the what will happen to the Supreme Court after the election. It is so important that a Democrat be elected President so we won't get any more right wing conservatives on the court.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)So of those who I believe can win, I choose the most nearly perfect in the other regards.
padfun
(1,786 posts)He will get LOTS of young people voting that have given up in previous elections.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Ideologues are uncompromising and dogmatic.
So it's not about being "purity". I no longer use that term. It ends up as juvenile name calling.
R B Garr
(16,954 posts)Bernie was perfect? 60? Maybe 90 days? 
Scuba
(53,475 posts)R B Garr
(16,954 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Since O'Malley is arguably more qualified and as liberal as Bernie. Possibly more if you consider gun legislation.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The rightwing ultrarich already own the Republicans. They don't need our Party, as well. And that's what money does to the process...them with the money get to do the processing.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)The primary process allows me to cast my vote as I please. It's the general election where I must consider pragmatism. I don't think purists would be practical when the general comes around, they would say the same old stuff.
