To explain and justify attacking Hillary (or other centrists)

[NobleCynic]

Hillary supporters are confounded by the vitriol of the attacks levied against her. They believe that these attacks may sabotage her in the general election. They may be right.

But first let me say that most, dare I say nearly all, of us will vote for her in the general should she win in the primaries. Should she win the primary, I don't think anyone here would still prefer a Republican. We don't want to sabotage the 2008 election. We are still on the same side, even if we oppose your candidate of choice.

But our attacking her serves a very real purpose. By demonstrating our discontent, we inspire other candidates to take a less moderate and more ideological stance. Some of us believe in the virtue of campaigning at the extremes even if we do not believe we should be governed by the extremes. No one is inspired by a moderate. You win converts in politics by preaching strong ideology, that is why the Republicans were able to grow so quickly from Reagan forward. They gave no ideological ground. Even if you don't believe in a black and white stance, preaching flat grey is a suboptimal approach at best.

Sure, you may win a single election by moving center, but by doing so you push the center away from you which hurts your cause next election. People do not pay close attention to politics, they judge the center to be in between the two parties. Therefore when one party moves center, the entire country moves away from that party because they assume that the center is still in between the two parties. Only by running from the center can you pull the country with you.

That is why many of us attack Hillary. Any who aim for the center do so at the cost of the entire party. She aims for the middle on every issue you can name, to the detriment of us all.

If you're disgusted by it, fine. But realize there are good reasons for attacking her. We're trying to force her, and any other candidate running, a little farther left than dead center. Winning with a complete moderate is no more than a push at a blackjack table. We want to win something in 2008, not just prevent another Bush.

To end, I leave you with a short paraphrase I attribute to Abbie Hoffman:
I'm really not as extreme as I seem. The reason I do what I do is to make what I truly believe seem reasonable by comparison.

[ShortnFiery]

1. This country has moved so far to the right, non-FOX watching constituents

are considered LEFTISTS. :(

[NobleCynic]

3. That is a frightening thought

But Fox ratings have been falling for a while, so maybe there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Thank You!

Well said.

[SaveElmer]

4. Then do not act like you have been shot...

When those of us that consider ourselves centrists...attack back...

(not referring to you specifically necessarily...just in general)

[NobleCynic]

6. No, no. I'll take no offense

I love a good verbal scuffle. Sometimes to the detriment of the general conversation (I enjoy playing devil's advocate just a wee bit.)

But this is more than just a general attack on Hillary. It is a statement in support of moving leftward in general. And maybe a little bit of an attack... But I earnestly believe that you have to start by demanding the world and then backing up until you've compromised to get to where you wanted to be all along.

[SaveElmer]

9. Many of us in the center...

Do not view our positions as a compromise of preferred position. The moderate position is our preferred one, and hence we will often argue against a move either further left or right.

[NobleCynic]

10. I can respect that

Even as I fight against it. I hope you see an unwillingness to pull punches as a form of respect rather than an insult. Hillary is a powerful candidate.

[question everything]

5. Not all of us support the extreme left position

that you preach. At least, I hope that not all of us, even on DU.

But the benefit of attacking her is for her to prepare of what the RW will do if she is the candidate.

Funny, though. Except for having the luxury of not being in Congress and not having to vote on IWR - how is Obama such a leftist ideologue?

He is against gay marriage - like Edwards - but only Edwards get savaged.

He starts his announcement by talking from his "Christian conviction" - or something. If Clinton included such a phrase in her announcement, she, too, would be savaged on these pages.

I think that if we select a PC candidate, he will lose.

I think that it will be sad if Democrats will not vote for the party candidate is Clinton - or someone else - is the candidate.

Most of us, Democrats, do not see our party is extension of the 60s, of leftist ideology, of the hippies, of the ones who were against the establishment without offering anything to replace it with.

Look around you. Most of the world has rejected Communism. It is just against human nature.

[NobleCynic]

7. And neither do I

But if you start from a moderate position you have no bargaining power. The Republicans have come in time and time again threatening to destroy Social Security, and then back off in exchange for business tax cuts. They know the majority of Americans support Social Security. Destroying it was never their aim.

[endarkenment]

8. And there you have it: commie hippy bastards, all of us.

Did you need more tar? A bigger brush?

[ShortnFiery]

11. Yeah, and just perhaps us liberals can also "attack back" the centrists?

It don't work with Democrats, i.e., attacks, intimidations, coercion, guilt trips etc.

Our illustrious Centrists will have to learn the hard way but all the campaign donations in the world will not bring back the American Jobs lost, Health Care not afforded NOR gin up support for perpetual waring on behalf of AI PAC and The Military Industrial Complex.

If this is how the centrists wish to treat their base, rest assured, THE AMERICAN WAGE SLAVE will win the war on behalf of true populists.

Strap yourselves in because all your centrist (third way :wtf:) or DLC money and political bullying can NOT buy you votes from people who are losing their pensions, homes and/or slipping into poverty. In other words, people don't listen so well to DECREES and OR ELSE'S when they don't have that much to lose. ;)

[applegrove]

12. Those are wise words.

[PassingFair]

13. To put it another way:

“I'd rather vote for something I want and not get it than vote for something I don't want, and get it.”


---Eugene V. Debs

[Forkboy]

14. Good ole Eugene

:thumbsup:

[PassingFair]

17. He was a person who sacrificed MUCH

...for his country.

I am indebted to him.

[Forkboy]

18. We all are

For those not familiar with him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs

[AtomicKitten]

15. Funny thing is many of those po'd about the disparity

in the way she is treated here at DU aren't even HRC supporters. She's about 8th on my list. As a long time liberal Democrat, I am appalled at the vitriol levied against one of the candidates who has declared their candidacy. It's inappropriate and uncalled for and, in fact, does nothing to assist in the democratic process of choosing a candidate. It is, in fact, tantamount to propaganda in its level of bad intent.

[Trajan]

16. I'll take Hillary ....

I'll take ANY of the current crop of Democratic candidates ....

This kind of dogmatic creedalism seems personal and trite, compared to the absolute necessity to overturn the current party in the WH .... It is WAY more important for SOME party to win against the GOP in 2008 than it is to make sure everyone feels good about themselves .....

That party, barring any MAJOR shift in public political thinking, will be the Democratic Party .... and whomever carries their banner, be it Hillary, Obama, Clark, whomever, will be the greatest possible threat to continued GOP rule in the WH ....

I dont love most of the Democrats who have declared, but I will DAMNED SURE to vote for them come 2008 ... No matter how anyone here feels about it ...

[NobleCynic]

20. If you think I'm advocating withholding a vote in the general

you're quite mistaken. Anything but. In the general election we must show absolute unity.

But I would like to see a primary fight that forces any serious contender significantly farther left than where some candidates stand currently. If some candidates get a little bloodied by this, so be it.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

19. I agree.

I personally like her, think she's brilliant, but she's too conservative.

They moved the middle of the road FAR FAR FAR to the right.

Nowadays, Richard Nixon would be a liberal Democrat. I remember Watergate. He established the EPA, the NEA and other such new governmental bureaus.

We have been dragged so far to the right by the corporate interests that many of us see little difference in the two major parties. Both parties are bought off by corporate interests and are not looking out for the working person, the poor, etc.

We need some more people like the Reverend Norman Thomas and Eugene V. Debs. We need active, viable, visible third and fourth parties, but unless the Fairness Doctrine is reestablished it won't happen.

You have to ask for far more than you expect to get, to let the other side feel like they are getting concessions from you, and to end up getting anything worth fighting for for yourself.
Read books on basic negotiations, and that's what they say.