Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

minivan2

(214 posts)
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:08 PM Mar 2015

I'm not supporting any democratic nominees right now

Because no one has said that they're running yet. Why is everyone on here saying that they're not voting for Hilary even though she hasn't said she's running yet. Give it a rest.

50 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I'm not supporting any democratic nominees right now (Original Post) minivan2 Mar 2015 OP
The ones who say they are voting for her LiberalElite Mar 2015 #1
As with TPP, it's far better to remain silent until it's way too late for dissent to matter. merrily Mar 2015 #4
Amen +1 n/t jaysunb Mar 2015 #6
better to discuss it now G_j Mar 2015 #2
Exactly! CaliforniaPeggy Mar 2015 #3
Sorry. Our party has decided primaries suck. merrily Mar 2015 #7
Sigh...rewrite the rules... KoKo Mar 2015 #9
Someone objected to merrily Mar 2015 #10
Do be careful, I got a hide for a legitimate story that happened to be a Fox news link. NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #48
Wait, what? Major Hogwash Mar 2015 #49
Thank you for the warning. Much appreciated. merrily Mar 2015 #50
I find the idea of NO primary, unhelpful. bravenak Mar 2015 #11
Me, too. But, it seems it will be either no primary or a dog and pony show primary. merrily Mar 2015 #13
And we will lose. bravenak Mar 2015 #14
That is one of my fears. merrily Mar 2015 #15
I really think we are at a point where they think we have no choice. bravenak Mar 2015 #17
How many times have you and I read on DU that we have no choice? merrily Mar 2015 #18
I know it doesn't matter who I vote for. bravenak Mar 2015 #22
My vote does not even count in local races, though I am glad the Mayor beat the other charter school merrily Mar 2015 #23
I feel the same way. bravenak Mar 2015 #25
Speaking of the revolution, I doubt very much that it was the poor colonist farmer merrily Mar 2015 #37
I was more thinking we'd end up pulling a french revolution type of thing. bravenak Mar 2015 #38
The French Revolution was inspired by ours, except that they merrily Mar 2015 #39
Nice, revealing, Links...thanks....Rewrite the Rules for the Party... KoKo Mar 2015 #12
Push back how? At whom? Why? No one actually believes we want zero voice. merrily Mar 2015 #16
It's coming ...it isn't just USA ....it's voices across the world against EU/World Bank/US Policy KoKo Mar 2015 #19
I hope so, Koko. I hope so. merrily Mar 2015 #21
Well if primaries are not helpful or not needed there is no choice Autumn Mar 2015 #30
They are helpful to, and needed by, Dem voters. merrily Mar 2015 #34
Thanks for compiling the links Dems to Win Mar 2015 #45
Seems that way to me also. merrily Mar 2015 #46
We need a primary. Raine1967 Mar 2015 #24
Yes, and a real primary, not just a feint from a stable mate or stalking horse. merrily Mar 2015 #47
there are none. spanone Mar 2015 #5
The Democratic Party wants none but Hillary. That's been clear to me since at least 2012. merrily Mar 2015 #8
not so clear to me. i'm waiting till something actually happens. spanone Mar 2015 #28
What then, do you make of all the talk from prominent Dems about no challenges to Hillary? merrily Mar 2015 #29
Some are working and supporting Hillary ams some are supporting candidates the GOP hope runs. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #20
LOL! Yet another false attempt to equate the left with the right. merrily Mar 2015 #31
Yes I do wonder why some Democrats are helping the GOP degrade Hillary. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #33
I doubt that, but I'm wondering why Democratic voters don't deserve a real primary. merrily Mar 2015 #35
I have been advocating for a primary. I don't understand why there isn't candidates and their Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #36
It's not about you. Maybe this will help you understand. merrily Mar 2015 #40
Who are you talking about when you say Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #41
" Don't address me and then say it isn't about me." merrily Mar 2015 #42
Oh, yea, now you know. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #43
Um, no. I know and always knew, "you guys" is not a reference to you and only you. merrily Mar 2015 #44
can demographics trump the democrats and the GOP? guillaumeb Mar 2015 #26
As a Hillary supporter, I'm happy to have anyone say they'll vote against her... brooklynite Mar 2015 #27
That talking point was silly from the jump and is totally played out at this point. merrily Mar 2015 #32

merrily

(45,251 posts)
7. Sorry. Our party has decided primaries suck.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:35 PM
Mar 2015

merrily

(45,251 posts)
10. Someone objected to
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:09 PM
Mar 2015

my linking to newsmax, which I did not really notice I had done. It was a direct quote from Brown and I'd already seen video of Brown making that statement, so I didn't really need to question the veracity of the source. However, I added a link from WAPO quoting Brown to the same effect.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
48. Do be careful, I got a hide for a legitimate story that happened to be a Fox news link.
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 02:28 PM
Mar 2015

Asshole stalking alerters and random juries.

Play safe!

merrily

(45,251 posts)
50. Thank you for the warning. Much appreciated.
Tue Mar 24, 2015, 10:35 PM
Mar 2015

As I said, in this instance, I just didn't notice the source because I had simply googled a quote from Brown I had already seen him say on video. I wanted a link to the video itself to come up. Failing that, however, I just took the first hit. (AFAIK, I have never linked to any rightist source before and I get annoyed if I follow a link here and it gets me to Free Republic or some such.)

At some point, though, at least some of us are going to have to admit that, in this uber partisan world, we may see stories about inconvenient truths about Republicans only in left-leaning sources and, conversely, stories about inconvenient truths about Democrats only in right-leaning sources. I don't want to get my news from Fox or Newsmax or World Nut Daily, but I don't want to be like wingnuts (including Scalia) who will look only at media that leans their way. Otherwise, I will become the blue version of a Fox viewer. I have buried my head in the sand before, but never intentionally.

As far as what a right-leaning source is, in this New Democrat world, I have seen rightist crap coming from the NYT and the LAT, so......

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
11. I find the idea of NO primary, unhelpful.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:09 PM
Mar 2015

This is bullshit. Reminds me of a fantasy/dystopian novel.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
13. Me, too. But, it seems it will be either no primary or a dog and pony show primary.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:17 PM
Mar 2015

P.S. And the talking point about how we should find our own candidates is bs.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
15. That is one of my fears.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:20 PM
Mar 2015

The other is that my chosen political party thinks I should have no meaningful choice at all in who governs me and mine.

Fuck that.

Twice.

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
17. I really think we are at a point where they think we have no choice.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:26 PM
Mar 2015

Black people HAVE to vote for the DEM, so do liberals and the scary 'far left'. It's like, Rahmwellian. I saw that word earlier and it summs up how I see the party. I think we need to show them who the boss really is. Us.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
18. How many times have you and I read on DU that we have no choice?
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:34 PM
Mar 2015

And, I am not sure that we have realistic choices.

My vote, for one, is meaningless. I live in Boston, where the Democrat will win, no matter what. We had something like 22 candidates in the last Mayoral primary. I think one was Republican, and he was a preacher with zero political experience, savvy or backing. So, the only primary was basically a Democratic primary. Did I want the Republican preacher to win? Hell, no (no pun intended). I am not even sure he wanted to win.

But it wouldn't have mattered if I did want him to win the primary. The only choice in the general was between two pro-charter school Democrats, so I voted for the one who had a strong union background. The same is true if you live in a red town. Your vote also does not matter. For the Presidency, it comes down to somewhere between 8 and 100 purple counties. That's who Romney and Obama each actually spent a billion bucks on in 2012, indie voters in somewhere between 8 and 100 counties.

(I've seen articles saying as few as 8 counties and 10 counties, but nothing higher than 100.)

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
22. I know it doesn't matter who I vote for.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:42 PM
Mar 2015

My state has 1 electoral college vote and it will go to the Republican. Usually does. The only things that count for much it my vote in local races, and for my state senate and reps. We always get the same guy for Congress no matter who he abuses. Don Young since before I was ever born.

My main focus are the ballot initiatives. That's where I see a bit of progress. We got our minimum wage tied to inflation after raises for the next couple of years. We got weed legalized to slowly ebd the drug war. National dems are drug warriors and seem to be only about the money. No reason for me to get all excited for more drug wars or Clintonian welfare reform. My vote for president is basically for the Supreme court. And I know I'll probably end up fucked there too.

When I see people going into rages by the idea that some Dems won't vote for Hillary it trips me out. Why should we want to vote for her? Why not Sherrod Brown or Al Franken? Money. That just make me less interested in anything Clinton.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
23. My vote does not even count in local races, though I am glad the Mayor beat the other charter school
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:56 PM
Mar 2015

Democrat.

As far as the Supreme Court, Kagan and Sotomayor would not have been my choices and I've lived the last few years dreading the possibility that Cass Sunstein could be next. Besides, if that is the only reason to vote in a Presidential, that is pretty thin.

Inasmuch as the left did do fairly well in ballot initiatives, I expect there to be fewer and fewer ballot initiatives. Sorry, but the push in this country since 1917 has been to quash the left, lest they overthrow this nation's version of the tsars. IMO, that was the reason for the New Deal and the Great Society. Very little remains of those besides Social Security, Medicare, Head Start and SNAP and they're after all of those as well.

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
25. I feel the same way.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 09:13 PM
Mar 2015

The left is supposed to make consession after consession until there is nothing left. They think that will be the end of the issue, but the things the left stand for is the only thing standing in the way of a revolution. Things were better for the colonists in America before the Revolutionary war than they are for us here, representation wise and probably financially too. In the age of for profit prisons I think the breaking point could be anything. One terrible event could ignite a tinderbox of built up frustration.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
37. Speaking of the revolution, I doubt very much that it was the poor colonist farmer
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 11:10 PM
Mar 2015

who was worried enough about a tax on imports to risk dying and having their kids die in a revolutionary battle. Not that I am sorry that someone fought for independence, but it was the John Hancocks doing a "let's you and him fight so I can be richer."

I don't know about another revolution in the US, though. If and when they think one is likely, out will come another New Deal or Great Society program.

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
38. I was more thinking we'd end up pulling a french revolution type of thing.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 11:13 PM
Mar 2015

But, you're right, the second they saw that coming, the coffers would magically open. It's sad that it takes fear of violent death to get a fair shake for average Americans.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
39. The French Revolution was inspired by ours, except that they
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 11:28 PM
Mar 2015

added égalité and and fraternité to liberté, whereas our cry was "no taxation without representation." (by which we really meant no paying taxes to the king, because we didn't fight that revolution just to get a rep into Parliament, now, did we)? However, the aftermath of the French revolution was not to put the citizens, like Madame de Farge, in charge, either. Communist revolution traded one set of greedy tyrants for another, too, it seems.

Somehow, the 1% always end up ruling or the rulers always end up with 99% of the wealth.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
12. Nice, revealing, Links...thanks....Rewrite the Rules for the Party...
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:10 PM
Mar 2015

Figures. Well worth the reads.......or, even just a scan as to what it's about.

BUT...that's why we need to push back for alternatives.....just in case...Fail Safe?

merrily

(45,251 posts)
16. Push back how? At whom? Why? No one actually believes we want zero voice.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:22 PM
Mar 2015

As usual, they know exactly what we want and, as usual, they don't care.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
19. It's coming ...it isn't just USA ....it's voices across the world against EU/World Bank/US Policy
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:35 PM
Mar 2015

Domination. Protests everywhere. And, I know, people tell us "People Protests" don't work because "OWS" went down and other stuff making it look like protests are dead and something from the '60's that people don't want, anymore.

And Wall Street voices say: "Look at Greece...they protested and are still under the EURO THUMB" and they lost...and caved.

But, that's the SPIN. These protests add up and add up....and then BOOM...the change that no one sees coming does come.

Not soon, though...but years away...but, this time its world wide. The Banksters and Oligarchs went too far.....and making change isn't easy, ever ....but, against MSM/MIC/Corporate Domination with a throttle hold on the Global Population and Millions of Young with Limited Future this is bigger than even the 60's because so many groups have been pushed down.

Well....I have to be hopeful....even if the "Change" isn't soon enough that we would hope. Maybe this one will be lasting as it builds on what was accomplished in the 60's which was great ....but, fragile. This TIME....it might be a rebuilding that will last for longer because it's even more diversified in participation than the 60's Revolution was because our times are so dire globally.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
21. I hope so, Koko. I hope so.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:39 PM
Mar 2015

But, I don't think the US will be a big center of protest. They usually manage to give us enough to keep us from revolting. And the logistics of getting a nationwide protest going in the US are very different from getting one going in some population center of Spain, France or Greece. Besides, unions there are usually the way the protests get started and spread and they've made sure our unions here are weaker.

Autumn

(44,743 posts)
30. Well if primaries are not helpful or not needed there is no choice
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:27 PM
Mar 2015

and really no reason to vote. Reading those links have really pissed me off. Fuck em

merrily

(45,251 posts)
34. They are helpful to, and needed by, Dem voters.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:36 PM
Mar 2015

What was unhelpful and unneeded was Hillary's continuing the 2008 well beyond the point where she had any mathematical chance of winning. At that point, McCain was the clear and uncontested choice of the Republican party and running against Obama, while Obama had to spend time, money and energy continuing to run against Hillary.

At that time, all we heard from the Party was how helpful that primary was to Obama and the Dem Party--energized voters, etc. I didn't buy that, but it sure covered Hillary's self serving acts in 2008.

Now that voters really need and want a primary, though, primaries are deemed undesirable.

 

Dems to Win

(2,161 posts)
45. Thanks for compiling the links
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 02:37 AM
Mar 2015

I'm convinced the Dem leadership told Hillary in 2008 they would support her unanimously in 2016 if she would stand down at the convention. They, including Obama, have done everything in their power to build her up, increase her popularity, for this 2016 run.

There are other good potential candidates, but they know they won't get support of Dem leaders and big fundraisers, so they are not stepping forward to run.

Harry Reid encouraged Obama to run in 2007. He's not done that with anyone this time around, and he won't.

I have mixed feelings about this. I DO appreciate Hillary and her supporters for their help in
electing and re-electing President Obama. She was a team player, big time, once she ended her campaign in 2008. So, it makes sense that we do owe them, and now it's time to pay up.

But my gut tells me Hillary is going to lose. We couldn't find a nominee with more baggage if we tried. It's pretty crazy to put up a nominee who can't win a competitive primary on her own, whether in New York (party leaders convinced Nita Lowey to stand aside for Hillary) or nationally.

The only good solution is for Hillary to choose not to run. But that's not happening.

I'm really afraid that the price we will end up paying for the unified convention in 2008 and thus 8 years of Obama as president will be the election of Scott Walker. Sorry to be a gloom and doomer.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
46. Seems that way to me also.
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:05 AM
Mar 2015

However, I think the deal was not only to stand down, but for her and Bill to give full throated support to Obama, which they did. And, I think the downside of running goes way beyond just not getting support. If you want any kind of career as a Democratic politician, you don't cross the entire party.

Harry Reid encouraged Obama to run in 2007


Not only Reid. Daschle spoke of encouraging Obama as well. According to Daschle, Obama thought he might need more time in the Senate before running and Daschle told him it was just as likely that he (Obama) might find himself running against his own Senate record, which Daschle thought had done in his (Daschle's candidacy.

Back around 2008, a lot was made of the speech Reid made to other Democrats saying Obama was articulate and only used an accent when he wanted to. What I wanted to know was when did Reid make that speech to Democrats and why. I mean, if the primary decides who the nominee is, why did Reid have to convince other Democrats that Obama would make a good nominee?

She was a team player, big time, once she ended her campaign in 2008.


Sorry, I disagree that cutting a deal to further your own Presidential ambitions makes you a team player, even small time, let alone big time If she had actually been a team player, she would not have run out the primary wll past the point where she had any chance of winning, forcing Obama to run against her long after McCain had started running against Obama. And Carville would not have flaunted his PUMA sneakers at the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

So, it makes sense that we do owe them,


We owe them? I don't know about you, but I never made a deal with her and she never helped me. I don't owe her or her husband squat. And, if I did, his lobbying Democratic Senators for repeal of Glass Steagall and her Iraq War speech to the Senate (and the nation) more than cancel out any alleged debt.

Given the economy at that time and McCain's bizarre behavior and his choice of running mate, I don't know that Obama could not have beaten her even if she and Bill remained silent--which is THE MOST they would have dared to do, if that, if Hillary wanted to run in 2016, which she obviously did. So, I don't even know how much Obama actually owes them. If he made an express deal--which I believe he did--he can stick to it. But I don't owe Obama or Hillary a thing they haven't already gotten. If anything, at this point, they owe me.

BTW though, note that Schumer states that he instituted the "avoid primaries" policy for US Senate elections in 2005, well before any deal Hillary made. I very much doubt he did that while the entire rest of the Dem Party bigwigs thought primaries were the way to go. So this issue goes way beyond this election.


merrily

(45,251 posts)
47. Yes, and a real primary, not just a feint from a stable mate or stalking horse.
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:13 AM
Mar 2015

I think they were trying to get away with none at all, until they heard from the base that this was not going to fly.

Webb, challenging Hillary from her damned right would not be what I consider a vigorous primary, or even an authentic one.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
29. What then, do you make of all the talk from prominent Dems about no challenges to Hillary?
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:27 PM
Mar 2015

And, if you wait until "something happens," what do you do after it's too late?

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
33. Yes I do wonder why some Democrats are helping the GOP degrade Hillary.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:33 PM
Mar 2015

Doesn't make for winners in the DNC.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
35. I doubt that, but I'm wondering why Democratic voters don't deserve a real primary.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:37 PM
Mar 2015

Don't you guys think Hillary can win a primary? If not, why does she deserve to be the Democratic nominee anointee?

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
36. I have been advocating for a primary. I don't understand why there isn't candidates and their
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 11:03 PM
Mar 2015

Records and possible experience posted. No, I am not scared about having a primary, I doubt Hillary is concerned either. I just see over and over about Hillary will be the "one" but I don't see an alternative candidate posted by those who wants a primary.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
41. Who are you talking about when you say
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:18 AM
Mar 2015

Don't you guys think Hillary can win a primary? If not, why does she deserve to be the Democratic nominee anointee?

Since you responded to my post and you address "you guys", you made it about me.

Don't address me and then say it isn't about me.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
42. " Don't address me and then say it isn't about me."
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:21 AM
Mar 2015

"you guys" means you and only you? Sorry, I did not know that.

No comment on the apparent desire of the Democratic Party to avoid a primary, though? Or do you consider my saying "it"s not about you the most important thing about my reply 40?

merrily

(45,251 posts)
44. Um, no. I know and always knew, "you guys" is not a reference to you and only you.
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:42 AM
Mar 2015

I was hoping you'd get that, too. Guess not.

And you're still ignoring the far more important part of the post.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
26. can demographics trump the democrats and the GOP?
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 09:37 PM
Mar 2015

bravenak talked about ballot initiatives. Many very progressive initiatives passed in 2014, even in deeply red states. To me that is a sign that people do recognize that there are serious problems and that tax cuts for the rich are not the solutions. It also helps that younger and non-white voters appear to be less conservative generally than the Tea Party types that currently dominate the GOP.

Plus marriage equality is more and more seen as inevitable. Wal-Mart, Target and other corporations are raising their wages, not to livable levels, but raising them. Surveys show that people are aware of income inequality even if many are unsure of what should be done to address it.

So-called right to work legislation has passed in more states, but often passed by tiny margins. A heavy turnout in 2016 could overcome GOP gerrymandering and remake the electoral map.

On the down side, many of the conserva-Dem candidates are uninspiring at best. Plus womens' health issues, including abortion rights, are still under attack.

I nominate Kshama Sawant!

brooklynite

(93,835 posts)
27. As a Hillary supporter, I'm happy to have anyone say they'll vote against her...
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 09:51 PM
Mar 2015

I just don't understand why most of them are so unwilling to do some actual work to find an alternative.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
32. That talking point was silly from the jump and is totally played out at this point.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:30 PM
Mar 2015

Please don't pretend you need someone to explain practical reality to you.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I'm not supporting any de...