A Naive Question Re: Cindy Sheehan

Let me preface my remarks by saying I would never personally criticize Cindy Sheehan because of the enormity of her loss but I find the thought of third party challenges by left of center candidates to Democrats running for the House, Senate, or presidency terribly misguided...All it will accomplish is splitting the left of center vote making a Republican victory more likely...

If folks like Ms. Sheehan want to mount primary challenges I don't see how they can hurt,but how does third party general election challenges by left of center candidates help our cause?

She isn't a Dem, she doesn't give a rat's ass about our cause. She has her one cause and is focused on that one thing. Don't mistake her agreement with us on one issue as her being with us. She has proved that she not only is not with us, but actually despises the party.

I'm not going to join in....

I'm a pragmatist... I just don't see anything good from these challenges...

What exactly is "our cause"? There are many Democrats who only have one cause that they're focused on.

I can understand some of what she feels, there are times when this whole party loyalty trip kind of confuses me. You see my loyalty is to the US Constitution, and to my country, not to a political party or even one individual.

The Republicans have the concept of loyalty to the party pretty much sewn up and we've seen what that kind of loyalty has done to this country!

You could call the GOPU and the Democrats the Jets and the Giants... My goal is to see the most progressive candidate elected and in a race between a Dem, a GOPU, and a third party left of center candidate that goal becomes more allusive...

If you change the principles of electoral math please share with me how...

Or more accurately, the opposition to our opposition is not necessarily our ally.
(I'm tired of politicians who paint their opponent as an enemy to be destroyed rather than an opponent to be defeated.)

I respected Cindy and her efforts for a long time. I am not sure what happened in the weeks and months before she quit, but I think she has been drawn and quartered by multiple groups with multiple agendas. I was hoping she would take this time out to clear her mind and focus on the big picture, but it looks like she is still myopically focusing on bits and pieces.

I would love to see this administration impeached. But, I think it would eat up a lot of the time left for this congress to get things done. Bush supporters are dropping like flies and he won't have a veto-proof minority for very much longer. He can be contained. If we impeach, it will appear to some as retaliation for the Clinton impeachment. It will sour a lot of independent voters we now have on our side.

I think, instead of impeachment, some members of this administration should face the international justice of the Hague. Impeachment will only remove them from office. The Hague imposes stiffer penalties that Bush can't pardon away. I would like to see them in prison for the rest of their lives. Rummy isn't doing anything, how about if we start with him and his Shock and Awe?

--somehow you make the cause of confronting * and trying to end his war and bring him to justice sound like a bad thing.

This isn't the old USSR, where we call each other comrade and pledge party loyalty. "Our cause" is not "my party right or wrong." I see some hacks in DC who are doing nothing for The People and everything for their corporate string-pullers--Ds as well as Rs--and the more citizens who step up to fulfill the concept of "government of, by, and for the people," the better.

From an empirical standpoint I don't see how splitting the left of center vote can result in bringing us closer to that cause... Also, there are a lot of other causes that are dear to me such as individual rights, national health care, and economic justice, et cetera that these quixotic runs jeopardize...

If not for 537 votes siphoned off by Ralph Nader in 2000 we wouldn't be in this mess...

If you have a three way race between a Republican, a Democrat, and a left of center third party candidate the chances for the Republican improve because the left of center third party candidate siphons votes from the Democrat and leaves all the remaining votes for the Republican... It's just math and the laws of math are immutable and not subject to our whims, hopes, desires, or aspirations...

eom

Against a damn republicon. Does that make sense?

I think it is a mistake to assume that there is a universal "cause."

For some, party power is the cause.

For others, issues are the cause, and party loyalty goes as far as the party is loyal to the cause.

For some, loyalty oaths, polarization, and party rule are the guiding principles.

For others, loyalty to the Democratic Party is measured by Party loyalty to the issues. Integrity on issues is the guiding principle.

If you belong to the first group, then any kind of challenge from the left of center does not help your cause.

If you belong to the second group, then challenges from the left create a tension that requires the party to take stances and action on issues to earn votes, or to more firmly establish an identity to the right of center, and cease pretending to represent those whose "cause" consists of issues.

Cindy Sheehan will most likely find out what a lot of 3rd party candidates find out. Their run allows the complete opposite views to win the race because you split the sympathetic vote. On the other hand it’s her right to run and she is free to do so. I have no ill will towards her trying.

If the Democrats move left instead of the usual rightward shift they've been making since Clinton started "triangulating".

eom