2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie supporters could blow this election: Why refusing to vote for Hillary Clinton will only make
Bernie supporters could blow this election: Why refusing to vote for Hillary Clinton will only make everything worseby Gary LeGum at Salon
http://www.salon.com/2015/12/02/bernie_supports_could_blow_this_election_why_refusing_to_vote_for_hillary_clinton_will_only_make_things_worse/
"SNIP.................
I recall a debate that year about whether true liberals should vote for Nader because, in his formulation, there was not a dimes worth of difference between the two major-party candidates, Al Gore and George W. Bush. I recall email blasts from at least one acquaintance in a toss-up state trying to interest his friends in states that were safely for Gore in a voting trade of sorts, whereby one of us would cast our vote for Nader; in return, our friend would cast his vote for Gore. The thinking was that this would preserve a Democratic victory in both states while also registering liberal protests at the centrist drift of the party.
I recall spending the night before the election drinking in a P.F. Changs in Los Angeles with a group of friends, one of whom had brought along a reporter from the L.A. Daily News who planned on casting her vote the next day for Nader. There had been some vague concern over polls showing the race for Californias 54 electoral votes might be close, but she assured us all that this was not the case. California was safely in Gores column, so liberals might as well cast that protest vote.
I recall thinking that this was a dumb idea, mostly because I followed the campaign closely enough to believe that the not a dimes worth of difference formulation was utter garbage. But there was a nationwide movement of voters like my acquaintance and that reporter pushing the deal.
I recall spending election night lying on the floor of my room, nursing an enormous hangover, screaming at my TV when the networks started calling Florida for Bush. It seemed that some liberals in Florida had cast those protest votes in the closest of close races because they just couldnt bring themselves to pull the lever for Gore. So we got Florida and the recounts and the Brooks Brothers riot and generally a display of American democracy in action that was more embarrassing than anything in the previous 30 years, which up until then you wouldnt have thought possible.
..................SNIP"
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)Funny how it ended up here.
applegrove
(118,767 posts)HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)I don't want to start a silly argument but this type of stuff is beyond old at this point.
840high
(17,196 posts)applegrove
(118,767 posts)supporters who most often say they will not vote for the nominee. And that serves the GOP. This article is just the facts of the matter. It is not anti-Bernie in any way. It is pro democratic. And is pushing the rules and regulations of this website.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)But it adds fuel to the fire that Bernie supporters are here to deny Hillary Clinton the presidency. I think it's an unnecessary article to post and just prods people into arguing with each other.
applegrove
(118,767 posts)becoming an issue. When should you talk about issues? When it is becoming an issue or after it is one?
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)Voters will vote for whomever they want regardless of this article. It does nothing to compare the candidates and technically isn't even about the primaries, which is what this subforum is supposed to be about. All it does is divide one set of voters from the rest and antagonize people who might otherwise support your candidate in the general. The real issues are the positions of the candidates and what they stand for. That's what this forum is for. This is a provocative OP and nothing more.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)Also, Bernie is fucking awesome, so it's an easy vote.
merrily
(45,251 posts)they'll never vote for the other candidate.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)to have pre-approved scapegoats.
artislife
(9,497 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)Polls show Sanders beating the GOP better than Hillary.
I'd worry about that before I continued the One Thousand and One Versions of the Pledge-y Thing.
vt_native
(484 posts)Gore won Florida and Nader voters did not matter.
Shoulda counted the votes.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)another 2000.
The thing about Nader is that he was pushing the "both sides are the same" line all the way to the end when it was clear it was going to be close. Bernie isn't Nader, and once the primaries are done, he'll be on Hillary's side.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)do want to rebuild America.
Broward
(1,976 posts)Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Also I wanna see some apologies for the whole PUMA thing, and a promise to not repeat that history from her supporters.
msongs
(67,438 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Joe Lieberman was a democrat all the way up until he lost a primary to Lamont, too.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)When that failed he chose power mongering over party loyalty. If the precedent fits.
(BTW, I think Joe was elected by ESS and Diebold. Something smelled rotten in CT.)
INdemo
(6,994 posts)it would then become Sanders vs Clinton. No doubt she would top the crazies and not lose any donors.
The progressives would return to the polls and everyone would be happy and Hillary could take her rightful place just being a grandma. She should really try that its fun..being a grand parent.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)There is too much at stake.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)What a loser, all real Democrats eat at Olive Garden, even I know that!!
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)Karma13612
(4,554 posts)it on HRC and DWS.
But all the blame in the world won't help the US for 8 loooooonnnnnnnngggggg years while the Repugs drive the middle class off a cliff. Every middle class 99%-er is going to lose ground faster than you can say SCOTUS.
I personally believe in fighting for our chosen candidate all primary season. I don't want to hear a single word about loyalty pledging until the convention.
When the democratic nominee is determined, then I will support the democratic nominee fully.
I am guessing a LOT of us are in this basket.
We just don't want to have to keep assuring everyone all day long.
I will not be happy having to vote for HRC in the general, but I will do it.
But make no mistake about it, I am for Bernie until the last Bernie poster is folded and put away in the closet of broken dreams.
And come 2020, I will be glad to primary her a$$.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)I agree with your comment.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)hopefully it's just hot air and frustration speaking in most people.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Paulie
(8,462 posts)FFS
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Then people can make a statement whether they will support or oppose the Democratic nominee.
Me, I will vote for the Democratic nominee in the General election.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Odd, that they also tell us it's a foregone conclusion who is gonna win the things.
One wonders why they're in such a hurry.
Maybe it's the same keen judgment which causes one to drink in a P.F. Chang's instead of an actual bar.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)can wait until we have decided who wins in the primary.
Nothing in life is certain.
woodsprite
(11,923 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)I mean that.
I don't have the patience for it, but it is nice for one of us to not appear like the boogyman to the h supporters.
The fact that I don't believe she will represent the party in the GE helps!
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)didn't vote for Hillary? You do see how stupid this OP is right? Maybe that's why no one has hit rec yet, its destined for the trash bin.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)Their circular "logic" makes me dizzy.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)how do they expect the Millennials to care about them in the GE? (Especially the ones that aren't registered Democrats?)
kath
(10,565 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Trajan
(19,089 posts)Like the others, I have enjoyed your company here at DU ...
But, now, not so much ...
For now, I'll just trash this thread ...
applegrove
(118,767 posts)the history of our party and elections. You don't think we should be and remain vigilant? Not do things that favour the GOP? Wow. As much as it pains me to lose your good favour, I still feel free to talk about politics on a political website.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Thou shalt vote for Hillary...or the Republican; either is fine. However, Bernie votes will not be tolerated...or counted probably.
applegrove
(118,767 posts)as Democrats. Quit purposely misinterpreting a whole article on how not to play into GOP hands.
pengu
(462 posts)Or at least, it's supposed to. What I see is the party demanding people stick together while insulting and dismissing the very, very real complaints people have with status quo garbage.
artislife
(9,497 posts)litlbilly
(2,227 posts)that to me is the epitome of a blown election for the 99%
Hepburn
(21,054 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)If you are frightened that your particular candidate will lose?
They need to be a better candidate. You don't keep losing because you are great.
applegrove
(118,767 posts)not trying to take anybody's primary vote away.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)I am inclined to ask, why do you care?
applegrove
(118,767 posts)ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)demmiblue
(36,875 posts)she is Canadian.
(For the malcontents, I do plan on voting for the Dem candidate in the general)
pengu
(462 posts)demmiblue
(36,875 posts)You are not US, you are CA.
tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)STFU and vote for HRC.
Indepatriot
(1,253 posts)gordyfl
(598 posts)People should stop whining about the 2000 Election.
It was Al Gore's fault why he lost the 2000 election.
1) If Al Gore carried his home state of Tennessee, he wins. He did not carry his home state.
2) If Al Gore carried Bill Clinton's home state of Arkansas, Gore wins. He did not carry Bill Clinton's state.
If Al Gore carried either of those two states (not both) the election is over, and Florida means nothing.
Here's the big question. How did Dems lose to Bush a second time (2004)? You would think 4 years of Bush Dems would win by a landslide. Bush won TWICE. Dems were unable to shift the blame to Nader in 2004. Nader was not a factor.
To lose to Bush TWICE is pretty pitiful.
The problem was neither Gore nor Kerry could garnish the enthusiasm needed for Democrats to win.
jfern
(5,204 posts)Got it. The plan is to whine about "professional leftists" not bowing down before their superior 3rd way masters.
Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)That could be another headline as well.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Welcome to DU.
MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)gordyfl
(598 posts)A new Quinnipiac University poll found that Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders beats every top Republican candidate in hypothetical general election matchups.
The Quinnipiac poll showed Sanders beating Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Ben Carson:
Topping Trump 49 41 percent;
Getting 44 percent to Rubios 43 percent;
Beating Cruz 49 39 percent;
Leading Carson 47 41 percent.
Sanders has the highest net approval rating ( +12) of any candidate Democratic or Republican, and he is also the candidate that voters deemed the most honest (59%-28%).
While Sanders does better on net approval rating and honesty than Hillary Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner also leads against all of the top Republicans.
The Quinnipiac Poll demonstrates how far Sen. Sanders has come in a short period. The attacks on him for being a socialist arent working. Voters are responding to his economic message and his honesty.
Bernie Sanders has risen to become the second electable possibility for Democrats in 2016, and if could upset Hillary Clinton to win the Democratic nomination, the senator from Vermont might be favored to become the next President Of The United States.
Here's the poll...
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2307
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)e.g., the purported "front-runner," will blow the election... It is inappropriate to criticize those who are voting predominantly on Candidate Principle, Past voting and policy record of the Candidate, consistency of position, and on whom they feel can most be Trusted to perform as POTUS most closely to their campaign rhetoric.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)GE.
Given the events of the last week and the responses coming from that side as well as the additional rhetoric...fuck that. They really scare the shit out of me.
mike_c
(36,281 posts)This election is too important to risk, so progressives must knuckle under and support the centrist establishment annointed one. This gets trotted out every time. Every time.
applegrove
(118,767 posts)a meme. A quaint little idea really....
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)You already *have* universal health care.
We watch our relatives and friends die in droves.
applegrove
(118,767 posts)if Hillary is the nominee? If our base does not come out in the general election the Republicans win and repeal even Obama care. Today it was just an ounce they have a new drug to slow down aging. The GOP will build in that this new drug only goes to the rich. The testing starts next year. The USA would get pretty crowded. The GOP requires a dye off. They will do anything to keep any people from living. Medicade and medicare will be destroyed. And who really wants to see the Koch brothers live to 120? The whole point of my OP is that things will get really bad if we Democrats don't stick together in the end. It only benefits the GOP, who are promoting the whole Bernie supporters should not want to vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination race meme.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)When are THEY going to accept that the fault is theirs and not the voters?
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)And the fault of the Democrats who nominated her.
If she fails to energize enough people to vote for her, that'll be because she couldn't attract enough.
Blaming it on Sanders supporters would just be a convenient excuse.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)insufficiently caulked window wells and that nagging persistent toenail fungus......
DAMN YOU, SANDERS SUPPORTERS! DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)People who don't vote for Clinton will still vote, they'll just vote Green. Big deal. The Greens might get 1% of the vote. Bigger deal. The Libertarians will probably break the 5% barrier this time around with the clown car that the Republicans are running.
applegrove
(118,767 posts)joshcryer
(62,276 posts)0.99% went Libertarian. The Libertarians will always get more than the Greens unless the Greens run a credible candidate.
Until that happens I'm not worried in the least.
(And, no, Nader can't make a comeback, the Greens would need someone new, fresh, and with good charismatic and amazing speech abilities. Jill Stein is not that candidate.)
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)I'd be proud to vote for the leading progressive party & the only party not poisoned by corporate $, if Bernie is not on the ballot.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)"Leading" is overstating, to a huge extent, the state of the Green party. It's unfortunate, in 2000 the Green party had a chance to meet the 5% threshold, but Nader decided he'd be better off campaigning in NH and FL rather than growing the party.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Though when I wrote "leading", I was speaking to truly progressive issues, not membership.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)The Libertarians will have a huge showing in 2016 unless the Republicans pull a sane candidate out of the blue.
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)Dopplegangers .
gordyfl
(598 posts)orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)too bad we arent on their team.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)will pull down the democratic lever regardless of who is on the bill, because we remember Nader 2000. Yelling at us as if the mere thought of challenging Hillary is a threat will only reaffirm the fear that come Jan 2016, we will be ignored again.
CBGLuthier
(12,723 posts)because we all know that all the PUMAs, I mean Clinton supporters will gladly vote for the candidate even if it isn't their anointed one. Right?
applegrove
(118,767 posts)many a Bernie supporter say they would not automatically vote for the nominee. That is out there. Being stirred up by the GOP no doubt. That is why someone had to write an article about it.
pengu
(462 posts)The party must learn the lesson from 2000 and 2004. Establishment candidates are not winners.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)"We are not as bad as the GOP" is never going to win the day. NEVER.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)He had support from some of the most surprising corners of the party--Ted Kennedy endorsed him very early on and gave him the legitimacy he needed. TRUE insurgent campaigns need a black swan event to win nominations. If Obama had not upset Hillary in Iowa, do you honestly think he'd be President now? No. He'd have flamed out before South Carolina. Endorsements from party stalwarts and an early victory gave him legitimacy--it showed people "Hey, this guy can win things."
bowens43
(16,064 posts)I won't vote for hillary because she is completely unethical. She is unfit to lead this country. I would not vote for her any sooner then I would vote trump. If she gets the nomination and loses the presidency it isn't because I didnt vote for her, it's because so many voted for her in the primaries.
And it will also be because the DNC has basically forced her on us.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
pengu
(462 posts)It's demanding a vote is owed to the party, rather than the party needing to earn the vote.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
gordyfl
(598 posts)Bernie Sanders: "I'm not asking Wall Street or the billionaires for money."
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... but beyond the walls of this web site, they don't exist in sufficient numbers. They overestimate the value of passive-aggressive blackmail efforts. Bernie's "soft support" poll numbers already indicate the disparity between DU and the real-world.
They'll do as they please, no matter what, and I take them at their word. Why should anyone continue to indulge the vanities or validate their petty grudges?
People who say such things likely do so because they're feeling vulnerable and helpless. It's a way to regain some sense of power and control. Let them have their tantrum. Let them threaten to hold their breath until they turn-blue and pass out.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)That's a really good way to make people who support Sanders but might be on the fence feel welcome.
I guess you want a small tent party.
Hepburn
(21,054 posts)Edit for typo
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... to proudly proclaim that they are so easily influenced by the comments of anonymous strangers on an internet discussion forum.
PS: Just so you know, I don't actually believe you. You're grandstanding. It's pretty obvious where you've stood all along, and I find it laughable that little-ol' me has the power to change your opinion one way or the other. You'll do as you please, and that's perfectly fine. Find your cajoling elsewhere, it won't come from me.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)But I guess you're right. I'm sure it must be very frustrating to be on the losing side, and that manifests itself with anger and revenge.
gordyfl
(598 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I live in CT. The DEM nominee will win my state with or without my vote.
gordyfl
(598 posts)Same here. I'm from NJ. Both Bernie or Hillary would win against the Republican candidate. I think even Chris Christie would lose NJ.
merrily
(45,251 posts)They really helped elect Nixon and Reagan and there were far more of them in Florida in 2000 than there were people who voted Green.
So, how come we never talk about those f*ckers?
pengu
(462 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)pengu
(462 posts)Why don't we talk about democrats that back republicans? Let's consider a couple examples.
First let's talk about Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. This is a Democratic representative who has openly backed Republicans over Democrats in neighboring districts. She backed Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Mario Diaz-Balart, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen over their democratic opponents. After complaints, the best she could do was stay silent. Kind of. Seems like a turncoat democrat, so what do we do? Make her in charge of the Red to Blue program.
Then, as head of that, she does this to candidate Doug Tudor who was making a valiant effort to take a tough district. In his own words:
When I met her in Denver, she immediately told me that she couldn't support me, saying I hadn't raised enough money. I told her that I had raised $100K, that I was a military retiree, that my family is living on my wife's Air Force E6 pay, and that I wasn't able like other "viable" candidates to drop a quarter of a million dollars into my own campaign. I then told her, "Congresswoman, I am one of those working-class guys that our party claims to represent." Her response was "Don't pull that populist stuff with me." I thanked her for her time.
That apparently qualified her to become head of the DNC.
Elsewhere in Florida (it's my state, I know it best), we have a governor's race that was the current republican governor vs. the prior republican governor running as a democrat. The prior republican governor who had ALREADY tanked a senate race after pushing out the Democrat.
Flash forward to today, and consider Patrick Murphy. This is a guy who donated the max to Romney in 2008. After Bush, he decided it was best to donate as much as possible to continue the republican presidency. AFTER BUSH. After that, he flips party and takes a congressional seat from a wacko republican. He goes on to (predictably) vote for things like diluting Dodd-Frank. That apparently is enough to get him the party establishments' backing for the Senate race. He's already been endorsed by many party big wigs such as Biden and Reid.
Those are our CANDIDATES. Democrats that back Republicans are so mainstream we run them as candidates. And you wonder why we don't talk about Dems that vote for Republicans instead of Dems that vote for people like Nader or stay home?
merrily
(45,251 posts)take money out of elections. If the wealth of the country is with the wealthy, then the wealthy deserve to run the country, too. That seems to be the "thinking," for want of a better word.
I wish I knew a way to imprint this kind of info on the minds of Americans. You know, in Texas, churches offer courses to public schools, at the expense of the churches. I keep saying Democrats need some equivalent of the church networks, youth groups, etc.
I am dead serious: At age 4, I watched my father listening to election results as though all our lives depended on the Democrats winning. I imprinted as a Democrat that night.
gordyfl
(598 posts)Come to think of it, I voted for Democrat Joe Lieberman (Gore / Lieberman). Next thing I know, Lieberman is speaking at the Republican Convention.
Lieberman was also instrumental in blocking the Public Option. He fought hard against it. No wonder. He's well funded by the insurance companies.
Lieberman also co-sponsored the Iraq War Resolution - to give George Bush authorization to go to war. Hillary supported Joe Lieberman on the Resolution.
Joe Lieberman also co-sponsored a Bill giving George Bush the power to go to war with Iran - if Bush deemed it necessary. Fortunately, the Democrats stuck together and were able to prevent the Bill from passing. However....Hillary distanced herself from the Democrats and supported Joe Lieberman's Iran Bill.
pengu
(462 posts)He opposed the public option, and counter proposed lowering the medicare age. Progressives were fine with that. So he backtracked and opposed both.
gordyfl
(598 posts)In the end, what did we get? No Public Option and Medicare age stayed at 65. Victory for Joe Lieberman. Defeat for the 99%.
pengu
(462 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Welcome to the board.
pengu
(462 posts)That site redesign is the most god awful thing I've seen.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)gordyfl
(598 posts)I can see many of them voting for Jeb over Hillary, if, God forbid, it came down to that.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)The POTUS doesn't have a right to demand to know how anyone will vote. DUers need to get over themselves.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Be afraid; be very afraid.
"We are not as bad as the GOP" has always been a winning platform, right? We won 2010 with it, and 2014...
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)And by seriously I mean I could care less whether they vote for her, write in their spouse, or whatever. There are so few of these types that what they do doesn't matter at all. This is NOT a Ralph Nader movement.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)by continuing to push an unsupportable candidate. If you want our support, throw Hillary over.
It's never her time because she's unfit for the office of the Presidency.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)I own my vote. PERIOD
BLOW THAT.
gordyfl
(598 posts)Hillary supporters want us to "Take the pledge" as the Republicans did in their debate. Sorry, we're not Republicans. We prefer to think for ourselves.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Her supporters are already finger pointing, but if we end up with a republican its the fault of those seeking to sink Sanders campaign.
brooklynite
(94,716 posts)...some of them will beat their chest about how they'll "never voter for her" throughout the Primary season. When the GE votes are counted, the number who didn't vote for her will be miniscule.
Welcome to the real world outside the blogosphere.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)gordyfl
(598 posts)they did here (video). However...Hillary distanced herself from the Democrats, sided with Joe Lieberman, Bush and the other Republicans.
Fortunately, the Democrats "stuck together" and defeated the Bill.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)If Democrats loose, these people deserve everything the Republicans do.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Earn our fucking votes.
blueman mmxvi
(28 posts)Ripping ourselves to shreds is EXACTLY what the Republicrazies want!
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)nt