General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhen you stand for nothing, you get nothing in return.
I know the Koch brothers exist, and I am all too aware of what they are up to. I know you need to contend with the billionaire neo-oligarchs who think they deserve to run the country because they can write checks with a lot of zeroes to the left of the decimal. Near as I can tell, however, your plan to this point has been to run away from those of us trying to fight these bastards. We're useful right up to the fundraising deadline, but after that, we get the back of your hand.
You support fracking while giving lip-service to climate change? You want Keystone XL approved, despite the fact that it will run the world's dirtiest fuel through our breadbasket and over our main aquifer in a pipeline that is dead-bang guaranteed to leak? You endorse the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement? You're satisfied with the barren lack of accounting meted to the Wall Street brigands who stole our future? You're down with a third war in Iraq?
Wait, you don't support all that? But you won't stand against it, because you're afraid of losing votes or campaign money?
My heroes.
A bunch of braniacs have crunched the numbers and concluded that young people, plus minority voters, plus women, plus old white racist Fox News viewers dying off, means the long-term electoral odds are in the Democrats' favor, and gee wilikers, isn't that nifty news for the party in 30 years...except for the millions of people who will take a deep beating between then and now, and that's only if the party's institutional cowardice and greed doesn't let the oligarchs buy out the whole process from soup to nuts in the meantime.
The police are being weaponized and militarized from coast to coast, making even mild street protest a potentially lethal exercise. The Supreme Court doesn't believe women should have control of their own bodies. There are parts of the country where the tapwater is flammable. The US is spending billions of dollars to bomb the weapons it spent billions of dollars on just a few years ago.
And from the alleged "liberal" party? Silence, acquiescence, and that's only if they're not too busy cashing a check.
Come November, if the Democrats wind up flopping and flailing for an explanation as to why they got routed at the polls, let me offer a succinct reply: You stand for nothing. You are the Washington Generals to the Harlem Globetrotters. Everyone expects you to go down to defeat, because you always lay down, because you are paid to do so.
It doesn't have to be that way, but that's the way it is. When the midterms eat you alive, remember what I said. When you stand for nothing, you get nothing in return.
Write me an email about that.
An Open Letter to My Democratic Spammer
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/26605-an-open-letter-to-my-democratic-spammer
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,580 posts)I'm bookmarking this so I can re-read it after Election Day...
I want to see how close you got.
7wo7rees
(5,128 posts)Just absolutely one of your best.
Thank you.
We applaud you.
I'd rather vote for what I want and not get it than vote for what I don't want and get it.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)be proud of the ACA. They think they can run on being not as bad as the Republicans.
G_j
(40,366 posts)(to the Harlem Globetrotters)
MontyPow
(285 posts)I mean, how else would you get Democrats to vote for Republican Democrats if we actually stood for something?
The primaries are where you make your morality stand. In the general, you suck it up because SUPREME COURT, or TEA BAGGARY.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)
merrily
(45,251 posts)That's the beauty (from their perspective) of LOTE voting.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)It gives them the best of both worlds: a loyal base that doesn't exercise critical thinking skills, and corporate donations to Democratic coffers in exchange for rolling over on key legislation.
merrily
(45,251 posts)people who don't vote Democratic are not exercising critical thinking skills. And I can't say unequivocally that either group (LOTE voting group or no LOTE voting group) is all right or all wrong. Thing is, it's a Hobson's Choice; and I believe both Parties cooperated to see that it became that way and remains that way.
Meanwhile, clothespin sales have never been better--but wait until 2016
The debate between Russell Brand and Lawrence O'Donnell was excellent on both sides, I thought. I posted it in the videos forum a while back.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)On the other hand, LOTE voting is based on the fear of something worse happening, namely that the LESSER of two evils loses to the greater of two evils. And I cannot say that fear is unfounded.
Peacetrain
(22,874 posts)As a Democrat, I know that we are not perfect..and always need to take steps to clean up when we fall down... But I will be hanged if I am going to sit here and let someone tell me I stand for nothing.. I have spent the last 45 years of my life fighting for the betterment of this country through the Democratic party on the local level.. and this is just horse manure to the max
"Come November, if the Democrats wind up flopping and flailing for an explanation as to why they got routed at the polls, let me offer a succinct reply: You stand for nothing. You are the Washington Generals to the Harlem Globetrotters. Everyone expects you to go down to defeat, because you always lay down, because you are paid to do so. "
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)in our very red county. We all stand for something and we do manage to force some progress now and then. Money in politics is the problem and we all have to work to get it out. Meantime, I guess we can just rant. I get the emails too, the delete button works just fine.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)You stand for something ... And so does the Democratic Party (nationally and locally) and don't let anyone tell you differently.
I think a lot of this "don't stand for anything" talk betrays the difference between advocacy and, actual, governance ... the former wants what it wants, when it wants it, the latter gets what it can get, when it can get it.
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)Peacetrain
(22,874 posts)Needed that 
my_best_self
(8 posts)Thank you for voicing my thoughts so perfectly.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Those engaged in advocacy, generally, do not have to concern themselves with governing; and, those engaged in governing, generally, cannot concern themselves with advocacy ... because, in both cases, to do so limits one's effectiveness.
For governance to occur, one must consider (and meet) his/her opposition's interests, which necessarily means one will not get everything one seeks.
calimary
(81,197 posts)Hopefully with more people like Peacetrain and mountain grammy being involved, AND standing for something, the Dems will eventually find their collective backbone. I know, I know, we keep hoping. But while we're hoping, we've still managed to acquire one Elizabeth Warren - who's doing what I know we'd prefer most Dems to do: going on offense, being loud and vocal and high-profile about what she stands for, and IN-YER-FACE to the banksters and alleged regulators and other big time thieves and fraudsters and the moneybagmen. If we had a few dozen more like her in the Senate, we might actually further the momentum.
Unfortunately, though, she's only ONE. And Bernie Sanders is only ONE more. It's a beginning but we have to push it further.
And the most scary word in Will Pitt's rant, above, is "acquiescence." THAT is what we have to push AGAINST - the MOST. Never give up, and CERTAINLY never give in.
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)and we have been for a long time. America's corporate media has done the most damage, and why not? They are the beneficiaries of most of that campaign cash. Not likely to bite the hand that feeds them the most $$$$$.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)When voters elect a candidate, what are they doing? In my experience, they are voting for someone they think is GOING TO ADVOCATE for THEM. They will GOVERN by ADVOCATING for those who ELECTED THEM.
Can you explain when voters accepted the fact that voting was nothing but a weary act of acknowledging that 'Governance is not Advocacy'?
What exactly IS Governance, in your opinion. Because if voters ACTUALLY accepted your analysis of this most important process, why on EARTH would they bother to vote at all? Do you realize how defeatist these talking points are? I've seen this one now multiple times and wonder 'who decided to tell voters not to expect their elected officials to mean a thing they say during their campaigns'. Because that IS what you're saying, isn't it?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 22, 2014, 03:47 PM - Edit history (1)
Since always.
Politics is no different from real life ... suppose it's date night: you want to go to a movie, but suffer with stomach discomfort, so you have no interest in eating, or even, being around food ... And your S/O, had a long day, so all they want to do is eat and fall out. You advocate for the movie (and against eating); your S/O advocates for going to dinner (and against the movie). In this, as with most opposing interests, no one is going to get exactly what they want ... but you and you S/O still have to live together.
When voters vote for politicians to effectuate their interests, that is what the politician should do (advocacy); but at the same time, in order to get anything done, that politician must pay attention to the interests of the opposition, or nothing gets done (governance). (Which means that the voter is unlikely to get everything he/she wants ... unless the voter's interest match those of their opposition.)
Peacetrain
(22,874 posts)It is tough in these red districts.. but we get Democrats elected locally as state reps on the state level.. and that moves us closer and closer.. Braley who is running for our senator to replace Harkin is out there saying that all monies should be subject to social security.. and that has the wrath of the Koch's just dumping so much money in here.. not only them countless monied groups.. it is mind boggling..This is a hard battle.. But I think we are going to win this..
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)Now there's a Democratic Senator who's always stood for something. I think this OP is wrong.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)share of races. The OP was written in critique of our Democratic candidates. No one is suggesting that the Democratic grassroots stand for nothing. But the OP is right. Our elected officials won't stand up for Democratic principles. They won't oppose the XL Pipeline, the TTP, the coddling of WAll Street, the persecution of medical marijuana users, the continuing of the Great Middle East War, the drone killing, indefinite detention, the extreme power of the NSA/CIA Security State. They don't even have the guts to be proud of the ACA. What do our candidates stand on??? They think that if they explain that they are not as bad as the other guys they might have a chance.
I will say it again. Our Democratic candidates won't proudly run on Democratic Principles. Candidates like Sen Warren are exceptions that prove the rule.
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)are suggesting we stand for nothing because you, and only you, get to define "Democratic principles" and the rest of us (and certainly 'they') better stand up for them. I'm sorry for you that only Senator Warren meets your purity test, but she is going around the country campaigning for all Democratic candidates, even the ones that don't meet your standards of "Democratic principles." What does that say about her? Well, I for one would love to shake her hand, thank her and give her a slap on the back.
This is the real world.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)about you and the others telling each other how good you feel because you stand for something. THE OP ISN'T ABOUT YOU.
Democratic candidates are not speaking out. They don't embrace the ACA. Why not? If the ACA is a Democratic victory why aren't more candidates proud to be a part of it? What are they speaking out about? The climate problem? Fracking? The "Free Trade" TPP nightmare? What do they stand for? All I hear from them is fear mongering about what will happen if the Republicans win.
If you don't like how I define Democratic Principles, then tell me where I am wrong.
Supporting fracking, the XL Pipeline, Wall Street corruption, the NSA/CIA spying, drone killing, more war in the Middle East, etc. are not in line with Democratic Principles. Do you not agree?
Sen Warren stands out from the crowd, not because she is for radical change, but because she is one of the few that is actually speaking out. We need more Democratic candidates standing up and being proud of being DEmocrats.
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)"Democratic candidates are not speaking out. They don't embrace the ACA. Why not? If the ACA is a Democratic victory why aren't more candidates proud to be a part of it? What are they speaking out about? The climate problem? Fracking? The "Free Trade" TPP nightmare? What do they stand for? All I hear from them is fear mongering about what will happen if the Republicans win."
Are you kidding? That's all you hear from "them"? Are you not working for ANY Democratic candidates? If you are that's not ALL you hear. I'm hearing plenty of good policies coming from our Democratic candidates (both my Congressman and Senator oppose the XL pipeline and voted against funding the middle east bombing,) but you do have to listen. Senator Warren is listening and she has no problem campaigning for Democratic candidates, who, in your and the OP's opinion, are ONLY fear mongering and NOT adhering to your strict interpretation of "Democratic principles." Hell, when I read your posts and the OP's posts, I wonder why I'm working for Democrats at all, since NONE of them adhere to "Democratic principles" except Warren and Sanders, and they're not running and I don't live in their states. I have to make do with the Dems I have as imperfect as they are.
My Senator is outspoken with his "Democratic principles" and he will probably lose. The Republican has been named the 10th most conservative in the House, but he will win running as a fucking moderate. You bet I'm afraid of Republicans winning. It's the real world.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I suspect this gets down to the root.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)They aren't saying anything about the ACA or fracking or the TPP. Sen Warren is one of the exceptions. That's why she gets lots of air time. She isn't afraid to speak out.
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)We traveled through 9 states this summer. Democrats are fighting hard all over America to raise important issues but are up against big money and big lies from the corporations. We saw it in every campaign in every state we visited and we're sure seeing it in Colorado.
I resent the condescending attitude you, the OP and others on this Democratic board have towards Democratic candidates. Many are putting themselves out there at personal expense, putting lives on hold, all while being subjected to the scorn of the right and the corporate media. Is it too much to ask of our own Democrats to STFU and save your disdain for after the election?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I want Democrats to win. I want them to win by telling the American people what Democratic Values are. To be proud of the ACA and speak up in opposition to fracking, the XL Pipeline and the TPP.
Peacetrain
(22,874 posts)I have not a clue what you are.. your buisness.. but you do not have free hand to be little those of us who are in the fields working for our canidates.. and what we are doing to support those who are ACTUALLY on the lines..
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)for Democratic candidates and think they can do better. When our candidates run away from a Democratic President, something is wrong. Pretending otherwise is naive and counter productive. Sen Warren speaks out but is an exception. I aspire for more of our candidates to do as she does.
"By the way old man" if that was intended as an insult, it failed in it's intention, but is revealing. I think this discussion is over.
Peacetrain
(22,874 posts)And I will do the same.. sigh.. you can talk till your blue in the face.. point out everything point by point.. and they will be back 2 days later with the same old same old..
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)running impossible campaigns, raising real issues, only to be disparaged here, on a Democratic forum, as not being "good enough" and that they deserve to lose.
Peacetrain
(22,874 posts)after something like this:
Come November, if the Democrats wind up flopping and flailing for an explanation as to why they got routed at the polls, let me offer a succinct reply: You stand for nothing. You are the Washington Generals to the Harlem Globetrotters. Everyone expects you to go down to defeat, because you always lay down, because you are paid to do so.
right out of the op.. you push back and you get the but but but.. apparently we are supposed to lay down and take it..and not push back.. we are supposed to bow down to the "you stand for nothing"
Like that is ever going to happen..
Hope you have a good weekend Grammy..not that many days left.. unfortunately.. the Sioux City Journal..the largest paper around this area has endorsed King this morning.. the man has zero legislation to his name, and who is so far off the deep end of craziness.. so you see what we are up against..
But we do NOT give up.. we have elected a bunch of local Democrats on our state level.... in this very very red area.. we do NOT lay down and give up..
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Peacetrain
(22,874 posts) merrily
(45,251 posts)
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Have your efforts paid off? Can you look around and say "this is the country as i want it"?
Rex
(65,616 posts)You expect far too much out of some here.
Peacetrain
(22,874 posts)at least I hope not... and if you cannot look back at the history and see where we were and how far we have come.. there is nothing I can say to you.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)candidates that won't speak out against fracking. Do you support fracking?
randome
(34,845 posts)And just before the election when you can have the most impact. Good thinking. Good job.
Good God. 
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)Wait until there's not an election coming up!
Ideally, if you want to criticize how the election is being run, wait until it is over.
randome
(34,845 posts)Instead of complaining to voters, maybe working with candidates would be more productive. But 'productive' is not the point of this OP, is it?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]
merrily
(45,251 posts)maybe working with candidates would be more productive
Please. As if.
green917
(442 posts)If we had six figure checks to write them so that we actually got more than lip service. Sadly, there's a great deal of truth to this op! Whether we like it or not, the democrats probably deserve to lose this election! We should have the republicans on the ropes nationwide on nearly every substantive issue but we don't because our candidates/elected officials are giving them a pass because they need the same campaign donations albeit, sometimes, from marginally different sources to get elected. The affordable care act is the most glaring of these issues. There are far too many races all over the country where the democrats have simply given a pass to the republicans for being astronomically and consistently wrong about the efficacy of the aca. Democrats are running away from some of president Obama's most shining achievements (aca, increased marriage equality, etc) when the message should be a unified front touting what we gave achieved under a brilliant, yet flawed democratic presidency. Hell, many democrats in these races seem to even be afraid to use the word "obstruction"when speaking of their "friends" on the other side of the aisle.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)But, if Will's OP is pointless, then it all balances out in the end.
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Because who needs to stand for something when you can just slap a D behind your name and avoid all that messy policy stuff?
randome
(34,845 posts)I take it you aren't gay, black or female. I think what you really mean is that they aren't standing for what LondonReign2 wants.
Which is a shame because I'm not in any of those categories, either, but I definitely want more Democrats in power to even the playing field for the rest of us.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]
MontyPow
(285 posts)You mean like when the Democratically controlled House and the Democratically controlled Senate and the Democratic President passed a warmed over healthcare plan?
That kind of level?
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Democrats trying to be Me Too Republicans, which is exactly what our conservodems want, more drift to the right.
TPP? Me too!
Moar gunz? Me too!
Banksters off the hook? Me too!
Bomb the Middle East? Me too!
MontyPow
(285 posts)You Will fans are so funny with your made up world! One day it is, "DU has no impact on RL". The next day it is "DU can change the world!"
Thank you for amusing me!
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I await my DNC-o-gram offering Viagra and Cialis at low, low prices. Or perhaps an offer to help Ms. Wasserman Schultz get the many millions left to her by a recently-deceased relative in Nigeria, in exchange for a serious piece of the action.
Will, I think we need to start taking steps. Our Democratic Party is stuck in a thirty-mile-deep ocean of shit, and the 99% have no representation anymore.
I've been trying to take a mostly-hiatus until the election, but then...
sheshe2
(83,728 posts)Is this 3 or 4 trash Democrats posts from you today? A few weeks from the midterms and you are out in force and you sure are not GOTV2014.
That is pretty damn sad on a Democratic board.
I am a woman and I sure as hell will not let a few emails keep me from voting.
She is voting with her middle finger! She is telling the GOP to go F**k themselves!
Our Vote
Oh yes we will
I stand for women. As a woman Will, I vote for your wife and child as well. Won't you?
Women are not nothing!
N_E_1 for Tennis
(9,713 posts)jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Maybe it doesn't exactly fit, or maybe it does. Still a cool song
You are spot on.
sheshe2
(83,728 posts)"When you stand for nothing, you get nothing in return."
Democrats don't stand for WOMEN this President does not stand for women?
Women say otherwise.
?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1345072152288
For the women! I vote!
Autumn
(45,042 posts)Oh wait.... this isn't about Obama, he's not running again. I will agree, if he was running some people would be more fired up and ready to go.
The DCCC is doing exactly what Will wrote about and it's not working, at least in the way they intended.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)Did you read a single word? Did one letter of the OP filter through your eyes into your brain? Was there any information in it of any interest to you at all? Or do you know better?
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Totally missed the point....but she got her digs in on Will which is what matters...
ballyhoo
(2,060 posts)N_E_1 for Tennis
(9,713 posts)You are not the target.
colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)I'm as tired as I can be having to vote for not so good so as not to wind up with truly terrible.
reimaginethis
(25 posts)I love this post -- and agree completely.
elias49
(4,259 posts)This country has lost its soul.
840high
(17,196 posts)how disappointed I am in the party I once loved. Thank you.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)nothing of Ferguson. Painstakingly designed to not frighten rich white people nor challenge their entitlements.
Sure, sure, DNC wants to get out the vote. They just don't want to look like they care too much about the under $250K/yr crowd, that's all.
It's called the new reality.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
Raine1967
(11,589 posts)I know that you have a job to write. I understand this.
This does't help.
This is depressing.
I don't want to be depressed.
This is almost as bad as the many many emails that you and I have tried to ignore from the DNC.
Voters or candidates?
If you are speaking to candidates, let me assure you, only voters are reading this, and I don't know if this is helpful to the Democratic party.
Raine.
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)candidates or voters? I, for one, took it personally and I take issue with us flopping and flailing. Some of out here are working to get Democrats elected and this isn't helping.
But, like you said, writing is his job.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Here's one, "Wait, you don't support all that? But you won't stand against it, because you're afraid of losing votes or campaign money? " It should be plain he ain't talking to voters.
He is addressing those candidates that are afraid to stand with the president on the ACA. Why would you have a problem with that?
Why are candidates avoiding campaigning on the success of the ACA.
sheshe2
(83,728 posts)and I think you know that. Not sure you care all that much.
You want to be seen and you sure as hell want to be heard. Sadly your message has been lost. People have said here that you were a force to be reckoned with when you took on GWB. Awesome fight. Now, you just trash this President, call him a POS and Dems to you just suck! I find that so very sad Will.
You post images of your wife and daughter a lot here. Please tell me you will vote for them in 2014. I have sweet nieces and yes I am older than you...I support my great nieces too. The Democrates stand for women and we sure as hell are not NOTHING!
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)...
leftstreet
(36,103 posts)Sounds like the OP stands for the people
N_E_1 for Tennis
(9,713 posts)Not just dots on a screen. Explain.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)
tkmorris
(11,138 posts)And I stand beside him.
Autumn
(45,042 posts)Proudly ...
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Most of the capitulating Democratic candidates?
Not so much.
Watch and learn.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)I said we all now know what he stands for. How is that an attack?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Since you like to insinuate let's guess what you really mean. You don't like the OP message and instead of addressing what you think the failings of the message are, you decide to insinuate something about the author. It's not clear to me what you are insinuating but I doubt it's kind to the Will.
Not that it's pertinent to the discussion, I believe I know what Will stands for. I bet he supports a strong Democratic Party whose candidates proudly stand behind the ACA and other issues that support Democratic Values. Candidates that are not afraid to oppose fracking and the XL Pipeline. And I hope you would agree.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)It means what it means.
I have no interest in what you have guessed or decided it means.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Can we spell "ad hominem".
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)Do you ever get tired of telling people how to respond to OPs, which threads they should post on if they're real Democrats, how they're "attacking" people if they reply in a way that goes over your head?
Ever get tired of labeling people as authoritarians, Third Wayers, conservaDems, etc., when they disagree with you?
Ever get tired of lecturing people on how they have no principles if they don't think like you do - you apparently being the final arbiter of who has principles and who does not?
You decided that my post was an attack on the messenger, and then you decided what my response meant, and now you are accusing me of "making insinuations" about the OP's author.
My reply to this OP was pretty straightforward in its meaning. If you don't get it, that's not my problem. But please go on discussing the matter with yourself - which is apparently what you prefer to do in any event.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I do admit that I some times get frustrated at those that use ad hominem attacks in lieu of discussing issues.
This OP is a great example. It appears you disagree with the OP but actually won't commit yourself. If you disagree why don't you present your case instead of making insinuations about the OP author?
I think it interesting when people accuse me of dictating what Democratic Principles are, yet won't discuss where we might disagree.
For example, I don't think supporting Wall Street in lieu of the lower classes falls within the purview of Democratic Principles. That's my take and if you don't agree then please provide your argument. I feel the same about fracking and support of the XL Pipeline.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)... in engaging with you.
Again you have decided what my reply to this OP meant - that it's an ad hominem attack in lieu of discussion.
My response to the OP was plain English. If you want to read all kinds of meanings into it that aren't there, go right ahead - because that's what you usually do anyway.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)are soo much easier.
The OP says "When you stand for nothing, you get nothing in return". What do you stand for?
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)I should have been more precise in my language.
I have no interest in engaging in discussion with you. About anything.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)
marym625
(17,997 posts)We're sunk.
I will vote. I will vote democratic. But I have no unrealistic hope that it will do anything but stave off the inevitable for maybe another couple years. Democrats win and we will remain stagnant in some aspects and perhaps actually improve a little in one or two areas. But on a whole, nothing will change. And for all the reasons you noted. We can't even get all the Democrats to cosponsor bills to remove the time limits on the ERA so it can be ratified. How can any Democrat not sponsor that?
People in this country are fighting for the right not to be killed. Day after day after day, nonstop. And the only two people in office have joined this fight. One of those, a democratic state senator, had the unmitigated gall to say she was "teaching the protesters a lesson in civil disobedience." She was showing a tireless, committed group of people you can "protest without burning things and destroying property." Something that happened in the first week of 75 days and not by protesters. Where are all the Democrats pushing for and speaking out for the civil rights of an oppressed people? People fighting for their very lives?
FSogol
(45,471 posts)
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)I love your signature, man!
Not to worry, the Democrats will take back control of the House this year!!
You'll see.
FSogol
(45,471 posts)are in for an Eric Cantor-esque surprise on election day evening.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)No shit! They aren't going to know what hit them!
That picture of Cantor taken a few moments after he found out that he had lost the primary election was priceless.
FSogol
(45,471 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)they think that means extra large
OMG, it is XL, it will dwarf these! 
Autumn
(45,042 posts) snooper2
(30,151 posts)pick your poison
VICE
It’s estimated that 9 million barrels of crude oil are moving over the rail lines of North America at any given moment. Oil trains charging through Virginia, North Dakota, Alabama, and Canada’s Quebec, New Brunswick, and Alberta provinces have derailed and exploded, resulting in severe environmental damage and, in the case of Quebec, considerable human casualties.
A continental oil boom and lack of pipeline infrastructure have forced unprecedented amounts of oil onto US and Canadian railroads. With 43 times more oil being hauled along US rail lines in 2013 than in 2005, communities across North America are bracing for another catastrophe.
VICE News traveled to the Pacific Northwest to investigate the rapid expansion of oil-by-rail transport and speak with residents on the frontline of the battle over bomb trains.
Autumn
(45,042 posts) Tatiana
(14,167 posts)Where are the Howard Deans? Why is he not in a cabinet post or leadership?
It seems like Democrats who actually want to make a difference and effect substantive change have to go against their own party to do so.
We definitely need a real populist wing to challenge the ineffective leadership of the party.
840high
(17,196 posts)daughter. She thanks you. Women's Issues are not the only thing she is looking at.
leftstreet
(36,103 posts)Corruption Inc
(1,568 posts)I think you targeted the right audience.
Tommymac
(7,263 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)
Corruption Inc
(1,568 posts)and for-profit medical insurance.
They love to look at kitty cat pictures too.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)I am resorting to 
as I find this sort of post appalling right before an election. Not GOTV, but ranting that Dems are paid to do nothing. Good job Will.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Perhaps even grow some spines and give us something to vote FOR, rather than a tepid "isn't-as-bad-as".
But I'm pretty sure we'll all still hold our noses and vote for Democrats.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)a progressive candidate? Or even before that, during endorsements so that progressives can win the primaries?
We have two sets of elections, one where you choose the Democratic candidate (or candidate for another party), and one where you choose between a Democrat and a Republican (not always, but most of the time nationally). The time to try to get a different Democratic candidate is during the primary, and the time to choose between Democrats and Republicans is during the general.
I don’t understand ignoring primaries and then getting pissed off at their results right before the general. Or if you are pissed off at their results, encourage people to vote for different Democrats in the primary next time? Or support progressives where they are running and could use help, like in California or DC?
Tommymac
(7,263 posts)These scare emails are not meant to be about GOTV. They are meant to scare ordinary people into giving them their hard earned $$$$ to a group that could really care less about the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party. They are not directed at getting out new voters to the polls, not directed at getting people excited about what their candidates stand for - - they are directed at those who have shown they gave $ in the past to keep the corporatist Democrats (who are spineless sycophants who stand for nothing but what their corporate masters tell them) in power.
If Democratic Candidates act like populist Winners (not whiners) Democrats win.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)Democrats to support during the primaries. I did a search on DU for threads with "primary" this year. I only went back 5 pages, but the only thread that broke 40 replies that I found was about Cantor's defeat. Most were below 10. If we're pissed off about Democratic candidates, the best thing to do is to choose other candidates when we have the option to, neh?
As for the spam - yeah, a lot of it is fairly terrible, but some of it is good as well (Warren asking you to support specific progressive candidates that will help strengthen social security, DFA asking you to support a proud liberal against their blue dog opponent, etc.). Again, we have the choice to support good and progressive candidates and send everything else to the trash.
merrily
(45,251 posts)
bullsnarfle
(254 posts)have pretty much no options, period. We got a choice for governor between a damn criminal and an opportunistic former 'republican "lite"' for chrissake.
Somebody just shoot me before Nov 4 please.
merrily
(45,251 posts)tkmorris
(11,138 posts)When it comes to national messaging and all of the fundraising spam that is the primary source. I sure as hell don't recall anyone asking me what I thought about DWS, do you?
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)partisan race was chosen by the public.
merrily
(45,251 posts)I don't recall Pitt ignoring the primaries.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)us are, and if you're not there are plenty of ways to support the many progressives running in other areas.
Mr. Pitt seems to be ignoring primaries in this post, as if the Democratic candidates we get aren't the ones chosen by us. They are. If we don't like them, the answer is to choose better candidates (and hell, in some races around the country they're going to be voting between corporatist and liberal Democrats in November).
But it wasn't just directed at him, as I said elsewhere: "I did a search on DU for threads with "primary" this year. I only went back 5 pages, but the only thread that broke 40 replies that I found was about Cantor's defeat. Most were below 10."
There seems to be more interest in fundraising spam than in choosing better Democrats around here. We choose these candidates. If we want better ones, we have to choose better ones.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Realistically, in reality, we had little to no choice.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)majority of people choose to ignore (primary turnout is depressingly low – I think it was ~6% in Virginia this year; I think we were around 24%). It’s also the case where even the few people who do show up largely choose to remain uninformed for the most part (judging from personal experience). But collectively, the choice is entirely up to us, and whoever gets the most votes becomes the candidate.
When we act like we don’t have a choice, we are ignoring the primaries, and ignoring that the candidates we get are the ones we choose (with many people choosing “I don’t care enough either way to vote or inform myself”).
merrily
(45,251 posts)Chathamization
(1,638 posts)this? Or are you claiming that people have no control over which bubble they fill out in the voting booth (or whether they even show up)?
merrily
(45,251 posts)No, primary voters don't have much of a realistic choice. If you truly think they do, I can't help you.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)voters have no power over what they themselves do in the voting booth?
merrily
(45,251 posts) uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Here I like to encourage DUers to also contact their reps and candidates, to get actively involved, to not just sit around and whine and to go vote. It could be Will's other post was the anti-voting one, I am just replying to you here, not rereading his 2 recent posts.
Hey everyone, contact your candidates, contact your representatives, consider running for even local office, get off DU and GET INVOLVED.
N_E_1 for Tennis
(9,713 posts)Think very critically..
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Come November, if the Democrats wind up flopping and flailing for an explanation as to why they got routed at the polls, let me offer a succinct reply: You stand for nothing. You are the Washington Generals to the Harlem Globetrotters. Everyone expects you to go down to defeat, because you always lay down, because you are paid to do so.
Though I admit it, I mean if I could get away with grossly violating the terms of service here time and time again...
Nah, who am I kidding? I could never stoop to that level just for a little attention.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)
maxrandb
(15,317 posts)When you don't vote...you get fucking Mitch McConnel as Senate Majority Leader and Lindsay Graham as Senate Armed Forces Committee Chairman.
I'm sure Romney or McCain would have nominated Elena Kagan or Sonya Sotomayer to the Supreme Court. I'm sure Romney or McCain would have pushed through the largest investment in Green Energy our country has ever seen. I'm sure Romney or McCain would have ended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and not started any more wars! I'm sure Romney or McCain would have insured 10 Million people and began bringing downt the cost of health care.
You know, I say that the Republican voters are ignorant...and then I see ignorant shit like this from a so-called progressive. It's the same shit Nader used to say about how there is "no difference" between the parties. It's bullshit, and it's designed to keep down turnout. "Why fucking vote at all", these ass-hatted lefties say, and then we end up with truly fucking insane people in power.
My God!!!!! If the only fucking difference between the parties is that the Democrats keep their crazy aunts locked up in the attic, vice giving them committee chairmanships, or LIFETIME SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENT....that's reason enough to vote Democratic.
I dont' know who the "eff" Will Pitt is, but if he doesn't know what the Democratic Party stands for...either HE HASN'T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION, or he's just trying to stir up shit and ensure a Repub victory.
Want to change the Democratic Party for the better? Get out...vote Democrat...and hold their feet to the fire.
There are only two reasons why the Repubs have been successful. Either the country really is drifting right, or DEMOCRATS HAVE STAYED HOME ON ELECTION DAY BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN TOLD THERE'S "NO DIFFERENCE".
and I don't believe this country is drifting right.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)LOL. Any attempt for "hold their feet to the fire" is met by the Swarm, screeching that criticism is racism, poorly veiled libertarianism, or outright Republican support.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)If they know you will slavishly vote for them no matter what they do, you have absolutely no leverage.
N_E_1 for Tennis
(9,713 posts)Second of that, read the post with no emotion this time, just with some critical thought.
You may change your mind or not. But you may have to admit... Ya kinda wasted a little time posting what you did.
Not that it's not correct but has nothing to do with the OP
Skittles
(153,142 posts)REPUKES ARE WORSE is *NOT* a great campaign slogan - we want to vote *FOR* something
maxrandb
(15,317 posts)Last edited Thu Oct 23, 2014, 09:27 AM - Edit history (1)
The way to stop the "so called" rightward drift in this country is NOT by throwing up your hands and saying stuff like "since I didn't get single payer, or a minimum wage increase, I'll just stay home and turn the 'effing' 'gubmint' over to the likes of Ted Cruz and Louis Gohmert".
"Dems" like the poster remind of the Germans who sat on their hands while a nutcase was elevated to power in the 1930's.
What do you think the "effing" message was to our elected officials when we elected President Obama in an Electoral Landslide in 2008, and then 2 years later turned the reigns of power over to certifiably insane wingnuts? I'm thinking the message was "fuck you, we didn't get 100% of everything we wanted, so have some Teabaggers to play with".
If you wanted all the stuff discussed in the OP, then the same force that elected Presidnet Obama should have come out and increased the number of Democratic Representatives and Senators.
Imagine how different things would be today had we done that. Imagine that instead of bitching and moaning and being lazy, we had worked to increase our influence vice giving in to pettiness and bitterness.
I'm retired Navy, and I compare the direction of the country to turning a World War II Battleship. It takes time, and it takes sticking to course, and it takes tremendous effort.
People seem to think that FDR's New Deal, or the Civil Rights Movement were done at a snap of the fingers, but in reality, each took decades and decades of hard slogging to achieve them.
As I get older, I'm increasingly concerned with leaving my kids and grand kids a better country. We surely are not going to get there by sticking to some puritan litmus test for Democrats, and we certainly aren't going to achieve 1 fucking thing that we want to achieve with Paul Ryan in charge of the Budget Committee, or Lindsay Graham in charge of the Armed Service Committee.
I guess I should thank the OP, because this thread motivates me even more to get out and vote the Democratic Ticket!
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)And your thinking is completely wrong. Liberals did NOT say, fuck you, we aren't voting. You know who did? The moderates and independents. I'm fucking sick and tired of so-called moderate Dems continuing to spin this lie.
Did liberals really stay home and cause the 2010 rout?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/06/1003805/-Did-liberals-really-stay-home-and-cause-the-2010-rout
“So I went back to the exit polls and the picture I see shows nothing like that. If you are a proponent of this claim, I challenge you for empirical proof that some set of activist liberals "took their ball and went home" or whatever metaphor you prefer to make Obama's leftward critics appear childish and immature. Inside, the evidence I found that shows this just ain't so.”
http://blogforarizona.net/do-progressives-even-sit-out-elections-the-numbers-say-no/
“As you can see, Democrats did slightly better with liberals in 2010 than in 2006. Had there really been a collective we’re-sitting-out-the-election-to-spite-Obama pout going on, then there should have been a sharp drop in the liberal participation percentage. Yet notice the 9% in moderate voter participation and the concomitant 10% increase in conservative turnout. Republicans were pumped for that election but their turnout tends to be higher in midterms anyway. Millions of moderate voters either flipped to conservative or stayed home in 2010.”
“As you can see, all the Democratic groups dropped, but the liberal Democrats dropped least of all”
maxrandb
(15,317 posts)Could it be that they heard those on the "left" bitching about how "there's just no difference between the parties"?
If you're a moderate, or an independent, I think the last thing you would want to hear is how "Dems and Repukes are just the same"!
The Dems like the OP are nothing but purveyors of the "false equivolency" they rail about every day...and I'm sick of it.
No matter how you slice it, depressing turnout is stupid and wrong. A vote lost for Alison Grimes because she happens to believe you can't throw every miner in KY out of work without a longterm, comprehensive plan to change the economic reality on the ground is a vote for McTurtle.
Who would you rather have in the Senate? An Alison Grimes who stands up for her workers and knows that ending our dependence on coal is going to take a long hard slog, or Mitch McConnel?
It's not even fucking close who I would choose, despite the fact that I don't agree with 100% of what Grimes beleives, I'd vote for her a million times over McConnel.
People have forgotten how to be pragmatic....
- Elect a Dem and you may get single payer
- Elect a Repuke and ensure the Insurance Companies and HMO's are free to reign terror on the country all over again
It really is as simple as that.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)First, try the gambit about how it is all the lefties fault for not voting.
When that lie is refuted with facts, simply claim it is STILL the lefties fault because, despite THEMSELVES still voting for Democrats, they persuaded those poor, can't-think-for-themselves independents and moderates to switch and vote Republicans. Yeah, that's it. Why, it's perfectly logical to try to persuade someone to vote against the candidate you voted for.
Or maybe, just maybe, the independents and moderates BELIEVED the Democrats when they ran to the left in 2008 and were sorely disappointed when the actions failed to match rhetoric.
Rex
(65,616 posts) Skittles
(153,142 posts)JAYSUS
merrily
(45,251 posts)It's unfortunate that something or other has prevented you from realizing it. However, whether you realize it or not, it has been going right, esp. since formation of the DLC around 1985, followed by think tanks like Progressive Policy Institute, Third Way, Center for American Progress, No Labels, etc.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...absolutely spot on...
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)ballyhoo
(2,060 posts)Put these threads in an understanding colander and you can quickly sift out who gets it and who don't.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)"...the oligarchs buy out the whole process from soup to nuts..." Does anyone think they have already done this to the Democratic party? They are muscling the old left out of the way. Rightwingers who see which way the wind blows are jumping the center line enough to take over the whole neighborhood. Gentrification. Us workers, women, minorities will get less and less representation as they pull the rug out from under us! In my area, we now have elections where two Democrats move out of the primaries. One always seems to be a rightwing shill. Imagine that!! And then they switch parties if they win as one Democrat did throwing our legislative majority to the Republicans.
We do have some major problems in our party. One of them is how easy some conservatives think it is to make us their tools. 
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)only to find it's ba-a-a-ack.
"vote for me! because, like WOW! I stand for, you know, US! And we can do, sort of better...but we need your $$!"
N_E_1 for Tennis
(9,713 posts)For the life of me I really don't understand how some here think that they are the target.
Don't you get it? Do you guys need an explanation?
Will, you may need to lower the level of your writing from junior college to sixth grade level.
I apologize if I have scattered some feelings, get over it. Reread the post, get your minds off yourselves and think, just think.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)
malthaussen
(17,184 posts)The people who were going to vote for them are gonna vote for them no matter what. How many "I'm gonna hold my nose" posts do we see here at DU every day? Even you, my dear Mr Pitt, will Yank the Big Red Lever, because you know it has to be done.
So all the gazillions they're begging for is to try to con the "undecided" to crawl out of their pits and vote, too. I wonder what the price-per-head for each vote will be. Sometimes, I think they have the right idea in Belize -- just flat out pay the voters in cash. Moi, I could use the fifty bucks.
(Of course, Mitch McConnell is already operating on that basis)
-- Mal
merrily
(45,251 posts)They don't ask you and me for donations or volunteering because they lack money. They ask us so we buy in to the process, get invested in the outcome, etc.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Comments are my own
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)off to the next outrage, with nary a word.
spanone
(135,816 posts)
BeyondGeography
(39,367 posts)Reprinted w/o permission from Frank Schaeffer.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Because you can't fix this shit. Tear it down. Burn the crap. Keep the good parts.
That's THE PLAN.
[center]Now, for your entertainment, I give you Foamy.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)One reason is that they are afraid they will offend those that donate to their campaigns. Also, they don't have the gumption to take on the Corp-Media.
The reason Sen Warren is making such a big splash isn't because she has radical new ideas, it's because she stands up for DEmocratic Principles while the Democratic candidates around her hide under their desks, afraid to stand up for the ACA, even for SS and Medicare.
Why don't Democratic candidates speak out against fracking? Do they agree with the Republican acceptance?
I am painting with a broad brush as the OP did. There are some Democratic office holders that do stand up for Democratic Principles but not many.
The emails asking for support for Democratic candidates don't say, "Support the candidates that voted for the ACA." Nope, what you will see is, "If you don't send us money, the bad Republicans will eat your children. BOO."
The Wizard
(12,541 posts)"Nothing comes of nothing."
Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything.
Perhaps Jesse Ventura was right when he suggested that American politics is like professional wrestling in business suits. The referee (media) always looks the other way when the villain reveals he has a foreign object hidden in his shorts. And interest in professional wrestling always spikes in Republican administrations. The drama queens always wringing their hands and their knickers are in a bunch while they struggle with the vapors.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)But, beating a dead horse isn't going to make the jockey feel any better for the next race!!!
The Democratic Party is dead!
No, it's not, it's just pining for the fjords!
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Or for Cordelia, the honest one, either. Kind of the whole point. 
marble falls
(57,063 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I got a letter today
from my spammin' democrat
She killed my doooooog
and my pet rat
o woe is me
I got another letter today
It's hard work
Unsubscribin' and stuff
It's such hard work
I've had enough.
I stand for something
But I don't know what
JanMichael
(24,881 posts)People are greedy and nasty these days and maybe all days before. It's the economic system not the political that stinks here. The fact that we took so long to make a half assed try at "socialized" medicine is a joke.
I don't blame Reagan I blame America and it's save wealth constitution.
Yes I suck.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)and needed to be said.
This is the Democratic Party on corporate money, too.
When the DLC connections to the Koch Bros. became well known, they just rebranded the infiltration
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4165556
When you hear "Third Way", think INVESTMENT BANKERS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024127432
GOP Donors and K Street Fuel Third Way’s Advice for the Democratic Party
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101680116
The Rightwing Koch Brothers fund the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414
Same companies behind the GOP are behind the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1481121
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)candidates who are putting themselves out in the public arena, getting bashed repeatedly by the the right wing noise and lies on the corporate media. They are fighting hard, many at great personal expense. We have districts in Co. where no Democrat stands a chance, yet there's Vic Meyers, there's Irv Halter, running as Democrats, raising real issues in places where their Republican opponents don't even bother to campaign. 35,000 people in Vic Meyer's district got the medicaid expansion, yet his opponent is running on repealing the ACA. Vic makes this case to no avail. Guess he's just not standing for anything and deserves to lose, right?
Is it too much to ask that on a Democratic board, they be given a break and the benefit of the doubt until after the election.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Very good post.
mountain grammy
(26,614 posts)to go against the great Will Pitt. But this kind of post so close to an election is like a huge wet blanket on all of us who have been working so hard to get Democrats elected.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)infiltrated the dccc - why else would they mail threatening appeals for money that captialize on fear? doesn't sound like a democrat employee to me.
