General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: In 18 years since Naders run, what has been accomplished by attacking the Dem party from the left? [View all]quakerboy
(13,915 posts)In actuality, I would say that the attacks, in totality, are pretty much equal. Here on DU, the attacks on the left, at least to my perception, far outnumber those from the left. But in the wider world, I think there is rough parity.
Here's the problem..
Those organizations have every right and reason to come at the Democratic party. Many Democrats believe things much in line with what these organizations believe, and these organizations believe(I am assuming) that the Democratic party is not adequately representing their values. However, they are relatively small, and are not in a position to go out and win elections. So their only path to effectiveness is to pull in enough new people to become influential. Moderating their tone while trying to attract supporters is about the opposite of motivational. So its in their benefit to be strident, and since they are ignored now, they have little to lose.
Flipping that, the Democratic party, while having every right to come at those groups.. has little reason to do so. Frankly, they need those people to come back in the fold, because thats where a lot of the passion lies. The Democratic party has a fair bit of power even in its current predicament. Its within what is actually a small margin of victory. What it needs is more votes to win. They need enough votes to overcome gerrymandering, Russian influence, voter suppression, and the electoral college. Where will they get those votes? I would assert that alienating those who look like natural allies to any outsider is probably not going to be the best course towards getting them to vote for you. Putting together a coalition of voters that can overcome all the obstacles the right will throw at us would seem to start by.. increasing the coalition. Not driving wedges between its factions.
Unless the goal has nothing to do with winning elections or influencing the direction of the nation towards stated Democratic party goals. In which case, continue on the campaign of alienation.
I will give an example. When we were in the recent primary season, I was a Bernie supporter. When I recommended we keep things civil and consider that whichever candidate won, they would need us to come together to support them.. I was told by multiple Hillary supporters to shove it, that come the GE, my vote was not wanted. My vote was NOT WANTED. I voted for her anyway, because, frankly, she was the most qualified person remaining in the race at that time. But I cant help but think that telling voters you dont want them to vote for your candidate is a poor way to go about motivating folks and winning elections.