dems needs to stop with the purity tests

[moonshinegnomie]

i was talking to a friend of mine today. we were talking about newsom and she had nothing good to say about him at all,calling him a transphobe,a corporate stooge,a republican lite,all the usual bullshit.

i asked why she considers him a transphobe and she said it was becasue hes not in favor of transwomen competeing in womens sports. she didnt like me pointing out that doesnt make him anti trans,there can be a serious debate about whether they should be allowed to compete. I know both sides and while i favor letting them compete I can at least understand the other side.

so i asked her who would you favor that has a realistic chance of beating the GOP. becasue that is heh only thing that matters. purity tests are what led to the orange maniac winning. a lot of dems were pissed at how she won the nomination and refused to vote for her. and we see the result.

is newsome the candidate with teh best chance in 2028? I dont know. priztker? aoc? I dont know who would have the best chance but its newsome then im 100% onboard team newsom. if its pritzker then go pritzker. I dont care who it is as long as they beat the GOP.

No candidate is perfect. but all that matters in winning.

[Ping Tung]

1. "I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." Thomas Jefferson

[W_HAMILTON]

4. "We must all hang together or assuredly we shall all hang separately."

Attributed to Benjamin Franklin.

[soldierant]

39. Said the man who,

in order to get the Declaration of Independence signed by 13 colonies, struck out what he had written about slavery.

Am I saying I wouldn't have done it? Absolutely not. It was an impossible situation and he did what he had to do. I just mean it doesn't appear to agree with the quote.

[ReRe]

52. Well, if we are going all the way back to the very beginning,

I'd go with George Washington. He argued against having parties at all!

[Nimble_Idea]

147. ssshhh, mah principles are peaking. praying for the gaza voters in dearborn

[Jim__]

2. There is no perfect candidate. People waiting for one are going to have a long wait.

[RandomNumbers]

87. Yes, and in my old age they come across to me as privileged a*holes.

I could talk anyone's ears off about all the shortcomings I see in the Democratic Party. Some which have impacted ME. Directly.

But no fucking way would I support Republican candidates over Democrats. There is one thing to support some less than optimal policies. Or just be less vocal than I would prefer in support of better policies. But compared to the EVIL of today's republican party - and the ACTUAL, PHYSICAL HARM being visited on so many people by that bunch - give me a fucking break. Trans competing in sports? Next to people being rounded up, brutalized, deported or jailed without any kind of real justice? Next to people losing food stamps, kids losing access to education, elderly and disabled losing access to transit options ... what the ever loving fuck. Get out of your bubbles, people. Especially for anyone who isn't trans. (I have a little sympathy for people who are directly impacted. In the case of trans people in sports, that's got to be a pretty small number. But even on that ... like Gaza ... the Republicans are going to make it BETTER?? Yikes, anyone thinking that needs to get a clue)

[W_HAMILTON]

3. Those applying the purity tests of which you speak almost assuredly are NOT Democrats....

... and would probably be offended at you even daring to call them such.

[mcar]

12. 🤔

[JI7]

18. Right, most make a career out of right wing being in office

It's why you see certain people become hateful against democrats. It's easier to sell anti right wing things when they are in office.

Once Democrats get in office many people that voted for Democrats are less likely to tune in to anti right wing things.

It's the opposite with right wing selling anti liberal things. They always do well.

[niyad]

45. ???

[Wonder Why]

34. Tell that to all those who didn't like Democratic candidates who disagreed even slightly with them on the

Israel/Hamas war.

[W_HAMILTON]

72. Most of them hated Democrats to begin with and Gaza was just the most recent thing to bash them over.

[womanofthehills]

101. The young are marching in the streets all over the world over genocide

It’s a biggie. The young are on their phones all day long -and when I was a child I cried because Bambi died in a movie - our children are seeing burnt, blind, headless babies and thousands of kids with no arms and legs on their phones everyday.

Since when is genocide not a big deal?

[comradebillyboy]

131. The pro-Pals have been conspicuous by their silence

ever since Donnie Boy was re-elected. Oh, except I do recall them booing AOC for not being sufficiently anti-Israel.

[womanofthehills]

136. Wrong - thousands protested in NYC last week

Happening Now: NYC takes to the streets by the thousands demanding an end to the starvation in Gaza

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=YZgyyp4w_z7vW3neKxa6cQ

Chris Smalls:

“I was the only Black passenger of the Handala. It is no coincidence that I was one of the last to be released from prison.”

Chris Smalls recounted his mission on the Freedom Flotilla and his imprisonment by Israel at the Stop Starving Gaza rally in Bryant Park NY

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=YZgyyp4w_z7vW3neKxa6cQ

[WhiskeyGrinder]

5. People living their lives aren't a purity test.

It's not just sports. Newsom said recently that age 25 is too young to transition, which is absolutely ridiculous.

It's way to early to try to get people to unite behind a candidate.

[Phoenix61]

19. He never said that. The comments about the age 25

were in the context of juvenile justice. If I’m wrong please share your source.

“In 2022, Newsom signed SB 107, which claims to protect children and families from out-of-state laws that prohibit or restrict transgender procedures on minors. It also bars California courts from enforcing subpoenas from states that have enacted such laws, while allowing them to take temporary emergency jurisdiction if a minor cannot access such procedures elsewhere.

Last year, Newsom signed AB 1955 (SAFETY Act, 2024), which prohibits school districts from requiring staff to tell parents if their child identifies as transgender or has requested a different name or pronouns.”
https://washingtonstand.com/news/newsom-implies-8yearolds-too-young-to-transition-admits-issue-a-major-problem-for-dems
Both of the above are pro-trans.

[Sparkly]

21. Thank you. nt

[WhiskeyGrinder]

28. On the Shawn Ryan podcast last month, Ryan was setting up the point that people under 18 should not get transition care

because "you can't serve the country until you're 18, you can't buy a gun, you can't buy alcohol until you're 21..." and then went on to say "to make that big of a decision as a kid -- "

At which point Newsom nodded and said "Totally get it."

Ryan said, "You could also be destroying a lot of lives as well. I mean they’re brain isn’t even fully developed."

Newsom said, "You got -- well yeah, till 26, plus, well yeah so it’s even further with the brain.”

It is a myth that the frontal cortext isn't "fully developed" until 25. It is transphobic to think that trans people making decisions about themselves is going to destroy a lot of lives and they shouldn't do so until they're 25.

[Phoenix61]

32. "Totally get it" doesn't mean he agrees.

I’ve told plenty of people the same thing about statements they made I completely disagree with. As far as brain development, seems NIH disagrees with you.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3621648/

Of more importance is what legislation has he passed. Biden was personally against abortion but still supported a woman’s right to choose.

[ShazzieB]

86. Thanks for this link.

On the issue of brain maturation, that article lays it right out:

It is well established that the brain undergoes a “rewiring” process that is not complete until approximately 25 years of age. This discovery has enhanced our basic understanding regarding adolescent brain maturation and it has provided support for behaviors experienced in late adolescence and early adulthood.

[travelingthrulife]

135. This. He is educable and to jump on him for those answers is ridiculous.

The lgbtq community leadership should sit down with him and hammer this out. They should invite some medical experts to weigh in about the physical ramifications of transitioning as a youth.

The trans community made some mistakes like referring to themselves as 'they/them' and then insisting other people use these chosen pronouns. He/him and she/her seem perfectly fine and appropriate use to let someone know you are transitioned or transitioning.

However, if you are seeking to be included in society as an individual person, referring to yourselves in the plural does not seem like a pathway to acceptance. Do we need to refer to multiple personality schizophrenics as 'they/them' as well.

[BannonsLiver]

71. Thanks.

I knew that framing was inaccurate.

[AlexSFCA]

48. it's irrelevant

It’s for medical community to figure out. He is not trying to ban anything.

[BannonsLiver]

6. 💯 agree

[customerserviceguy]

7. May I please point out

that your last sentence, "No candidate is perfect. but all that matters in winning." is exactly what the MAGAts think about Trump.

[moonshinegnomie]

9. and he won......

[johnnyfins]

30. EXACTLY!!!

[B.See]

81. precisely.. it's called PRAGMATISM, as in

bringing guns to a GUNFIGHT.

(can't believe I'm having to make the same point a decade later,).

[customerserviceguy]

98. Yes, that is true

but the next time somebody asks, "Why do they follow Trump so blindly, no matter how evil the things he does?" I guess we both know the answer to that question.

[writerJT]

64. Yep. Why our side doesn't get that

is just baffling. But that’s the purity wing.

[EllieBC]

74. Yeah and they won.

Because they were interested in winning. Not a circular firing squad that they hoped would become a circle jerk echo chamber. They just wanted to win. We clearly don’t know how to do that.

[womanofthehills]

109. We have to do better on social media

Young men were influenced by social media - not so much rallies.

[Susan Calvin]

83. If you don't win

You've got no opportunity to accomplish anything else. Winning fair is definitely preferable, and it's what should happen. But when the other side has thrown out the rules, what are you going to do?

[BannonsLiver]

96. Ah yes, the absolute horror of winning elections!

[thought crime]

115. Yeah, not quite Hitler, but close enough.

[gulliver]

8. Being against purity tests should be a litmus test for leadership in the party

We need to focus on core issues. It's a shame, but when someone wants to claim they pass a purity test (or administer one to others), you're usually looking at a nitwit.

[Sparkly]

22. Or someone self-aggrandizing who's out to sabotage a Democratic candidate

by making him or her self appear superior.

Seen it for 50 years now!!

[samsingh]

10. That's the reason we lose elections

We need to fight and defend each other

[womanofthehills]

107. Candidates need to market themselves like Mamdani

More young people were influenced by podcasts than rallies.

Watching Mamdani market himself is a great lesson in how to mobilize people and win. If he ran an add agency, it would be best in the world - he is that good at marketing. In my younger days , I worked at a NYC ad agency so I’m not an innocent when it comes to marketing. The fact that he is speaking about Gaza is also refreshing as a candidate.

I’m lucky to live in a blue state with GREAT reps who voted against sending bombs to a genocide. Love my reps Martin Heinrich & Ben Ray Lujan for their moral clarity.

“Scavenger hunt day is also canvassing day (because that’s every day).”

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=YZgyyp4w_z7vW3neKxa6cQ

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=YZgyyp4w_z7vW3neKxa6cQ

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=YZgyyp4w_z7vW3neKxa6cQ

[samsingh]

123. this is good strategy

[mcar]

126. None of this is new

Candidates the world over speak in churches and participate in local events. Take the Iowa State Fair, for example.

I'm not dissing Mamdani as a candidate; I'm saying that his campaigning is not unique.

[womanofthehills]

137. You have to admit having a scavenger hunt was pretty unique

At the end you got a photo with Mamdani & a chai

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=YZgyyp4w_z7vW3neKxa6cQ

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=YZgyyp4w_z7vW3neKxa6cQ

Link to tweet

?s=46&t=YZgyyp4w_z7vW3neKxa6cQ

[mcar]

138. Yeah, that was cute

Still don't see that it's outside the lines of a typical campaign.

[comradebillyboy]

133. Mamdani appears to be a good deal more politically skilled

and pragmatic than your run of the mill "Democratic Socialist".

[womanofthehills]

145. He's really knows how to appeal to the young

Many reports people really had fun and if you finished you got a photo with Mamdani and some chai.

[CloudWatcher]

11. No pedestals

I get sorely tired of people deciding who they are going to support by their personality and winning smile and not their actions.

We have to vote to get people elected to do their job. I couldn't care less if they have the personality of a door stop (yeah, I'm thinking of you Al Gore).

[Sparkly]

26. I tend to like people

with 'personalities of door stops,' I think. (I was a Dukakis supporter! I was mystified that Reagan won over Mondale.) I adored Al Gore. I'd never worked harder for a campaign than I did for General Clark's. I was all in for Hillary Clinton by 2008.

I make the mistake of looking at the wrong things, I guess.

[ReRe]

55. Al Gore v. George Bush?

Hey, I'd take Al Gore for a door stop any ole time. I voted for him! Of course it helped that he was the Democratic candidate.

[BlueKota]

153. Can't remember the comedian, for sure

though, I think it may have been Chris Rock, who pointed out the stupidity of the poll who would you rather have a beer with Dubya or Gore.

He said that's like if your pilot dropped dead on an airplane who would you want to fly the plane, in his/her place. The person you want to have a beer with or the smartest damn mother fucker on the plane? He said his choice would always be the smartest damn mother fucker on the plane. Mine too.

[ReRe]

154. Oh, it had to be Chris Rock.

[BannonsLiver]

68. No reason to bring Al Gore into this.

And his personality was fine.

[womanofthehills]

110. People with great personalities are more electable

The two who always stick out are Bill Clinton and Obama. Being a great and interesting speaker is always a plus.

[ananda]

13. For the last 40 years at least, Dems have been held to standards...

and republicans have been held to no standards at all.

Big money has been behind this, especially since it bought
the media and a lot of down and dirty Republicans who
were willing to use dirty tricks, lies and attacks.. while
Democrats remained, on the whole, nice and docile.

Maybe it should be: when they go low, we go lower and
hit em where it hurts...

kinda like Gavin Newsom is doing.

[FakeNoose]

25. Yep - ever since Reagan, they've had no standards at all

One might even argue that Nixon was when they lowered their standards ... but Richard Nixon had the luxury of riding in on Eisenhower's coattails.

[ananda]

56. That's true. He was the first to play the race card.

However, in 68, Dems kinda lost that one on their own in a way.

Humphrey peaked one week too late.

I did go to his last rally in the Astrodome, which was so great,
a lot of enthusiasm and a big crowd...

One more week and he'd have won.

[FakeNoose]

62. 1968 was so messed up because of Bobby Kennedy

I wasn't old enough to vote then, but I was so gung-ho for RFK.

[RobinA]

143. 1968

was messed up because Humphrey didn't pass the purity test.

[Skittles]

31. yup

Dems are treated like women / POC, while repukes are treated like white men......it's a HUGE difference. And you are correct - playing fair DOES NOT WORK with lying, cheating fascist assholes. Nope.

[Walleye]

104. Yep, we want to protect the rights of women and POC and that's why they hate us

[Walleye]

105. Yep, we protect the rights of women and POC and that's why they hate us

Because they hate women and POC it’s pretty much that simple

[moonshinegnomie]

41. i agree

my motto
dont get mad
dont get even

get ahead...


if the gop wants to play dirty then we need to play even dirtier...

[BaronChocula]

14. Needing to be "enthusiastic" over the Dem in a general election

Last edited Sun Aug 24, 2025, 02:51 AM - Edit history (1)

is completely childish.

What people need to be enthusiastic over is their list of main priorities. We vote for agenda as much as we do people. Not every agenda item may check off, but it beats letting the candidate who's against everything you stand for win.

[Sparkly]

35. Yes, and

what will it take for most people to be fired up enough about an issue, a priority, a policy, to stop falling for lies and show up to vote?

I thought I'd seen it, but it's like the proverbial frogs in cold water slowly heated to boiling. They watch Fox Nooz and happily explain things away, hearing what they want to hear and accepting the most convenient explanations to avoid changing their beliefs.

I have long thought another war with a broad military draft might motivate people from outrage, but that's why Republicans won't do it, not equitably, with skin in the game for most Americans. They'd only recruit in a way that profits themselves and fools their voters into another "patriotic stupor" like the one sparked in 2001, blaming Democrats and creating an excuse for worse authoritarian rule.

(I've been sensing it coming.)

I only wonder whether it's too late.

[womanofthehills]

146. Many kids online have said if there was ever a draft they would not show up

I think American kids would rebel. You can’t be on your phone all day in the military.

[NoMoreRepugs]

15. 2025 and we are talking about how do Dems go about figuring out how

to win versus finding an impossible to find “perfect candidate.”

[ironman_25]

16. They go low we need to go lower

Democrats need come out swinging like the Republicans and especially like Trump who name calls and acts like a playground bully. It needs to be focused on that the evangelical right love Trump who is totally immoral and a vulgar obnoxious human being. The politics that our parents had with gentlemen making the best and most same decisions are gone. We have to expose the atrocities of Ukraine and point out Trump keeps pushing a decision weeks down the road. A real American president would send a surplus of weapons to keep democracy alive in Ukraine. Trump can't pry his lips off of Putin's ass long enough to do the right thing.

[Jack Valentino]

63. Since the 'playground bully' has purportedly won two presidential elections,

I APPLAUD Newsom's mockery of him and responding in kind!

Trump has clearly been cowed and then triggered by it all, with ineffective responses.


As presidential elections seem to have been turned into some kind of 'reality show',
rather than an intellectual battle over real issues,
Newsom and his team seem to have caught onto that, and are being very effective!

[IzzaNuDay]

65. that's right!

When GOP goes low, kick ‘em hard and often!

[womanofthehills]

108. Mamdani is not going low to win

It’s about inspiring people to be their better selves, inspiring people to canvas for you and having a message people respond too. Being young is a plus because the young are great at marketing themselves on social media.

[CousinIT]

17. Agree. There is no such thing as the perfect candidate. You vote for the one closest

to your belief system and who you want to represent you and lead. NONE of them is going to be perfect. Not even Bernie, AOC, or Obama.

Dems need to grow the heck up about this.

The old saying: "You're not getting married. You're taking the bus", applies.

I've had to hold my nose and vote for imperfect Democrats all my life, but I GODDAMNED VOTED FOR THE DEMOCRAT.

EVERY.

TIME.

That's IT.

[JI7]

20. The problem is people treating politics like a personal religion

.

[betsuni]

54. Believing that all politicians are corrupt except their pure moral authentic anti-establishment outsider heroes

who aren't really politicians. But of course they ARE politicians, aren't perfect. Supporters get very very very upset when presented with verbatim quote after quote vividly displaying this reality.

[JI7]

77. At the same time they view those that vote Republican as victims

victims of democrats who weren't pure enough that they had to vote Republican.

[betsuni]

79. They'll make cryptic little comments implying everybody stayed home in a dark closet rocking back and forth

on Election Day rather than vote for Kamala Harris for reasons so obvious and disgusting they need not be said or typed out loud.

Her biggest sin: not running against Biden and the Democratic Party; mentioning Trump too much in the last week. Because the true enemy is the Democratic Party! Clinton and Obama ruined America and did economic anxiety to everyone and made everyone say "status quo" in every sentence and be angry.

Change, change, change, everybody says they want change and that ends up as radical extremist Republican chaos. Which is of course Democrats' fault for not stopping. Everybody's happy hating Democrats!

[JustAnotherGen]

60. And looking for a soul mate

[JI7]

78. That's why I always ask about who they voted for in other offices

especially local level.

usually they will be clueless and ignore it as it would show their interest in politics is mostly about following what is trending and not about policies .

[Heidi]

88. Which is a highly dubious claim in even the best marriages.

Call Me Wesley and I have been happily married for 25+ years and have raised four beautiful, cheeky cats together over the years. But we don’t buy the whole woo-woo soulmate thing. We had lives (and loves) of our own before we met and we still have our own lives, interests, and sometimes differences. We keep it together mainly because of shared ethics/values, mutual respect, shared interests, *wanting* to be together, and willingness to do the work. I swear, if I could find a Dem candidate who loved our country as much as we love our cats… (No, I won’t subject you to cat pics, but you *know* they’re infinitely amazing. )

[niyad]

94. Oh come on! You KNOW we want cat pics!!!

[Heidi]

99. Hahahaha!

We’ll see if I can find a way since my Photobucket account is closed. Not to be a tease, but they are Maine Coons: Nanna and her polydactyl kitten half-brother Gemmy. Both are, as we say where I grew up, “a mess.”

[niyad]

100. Now we absolutely HAVE to see them!

[Heidi]

119. Here you go!

Last edited Mon Aug 25, 2025, 01:37 AM - Edit history (1)

Our 2024 holiday card + baby Genmy’s big feet

[niyad]

121. squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!! They are soooo adorable! Thank you!!!

[Heidi]

124. Thank you!

They‘re in cahoots to run us ragged but that‘s just fine.

[niyad]

125. Just one of many reasons we love them.

[Heidi]

139. !

[Just Jerome]

23. First of all,

may we avoid the whole, “Would you have a beer with this candidate? Would you invite this candidate to your home for dinner?”
I’m not saying I’ve seen that nonsense here, but it turns up at election time. Not seeking a drinking buddy nor a dinner companion.

And, fun and marginally useful though it might be to size up presidential candidates, there is A LOT to be done before 2028.

Let’s keep our heads in the game.

[JustAnotherGen]

127. I remember that from the

Bush years and the 2008 election.

For the record - I would never sit down and have a cocktail with Obama.

I'd feel like an idiot having a conversation with that man. He's super super Intelligent and I don't have high enough self-esteem.

[LeftInTX]

140. Me meeting Obama!

[RVN VET71]

24. Only "purity test":

Check A or B:

A: I hate fascism and will do whatever I can to defeat it.
B: I loves me some Fascism because it's really great and stuff.














Pssst: The correct answer is A. And "whatever I can" includes voting against it.

[WarGamer]

27. My only comment...

I like Newsom... a lot.

He did a great job during COVID.

But he's gotta run though the 2028 gauntlet with anyone else who wants to run.

NO preemptive favorites or chosen ones.

Newsom will face significant challenges fighting the "California Problem" and that means an anti-California bias in the Rust Belt

"Don't make the US, California"" will be a non stop meme...

I will support whoever wins the Primary,

[moonshinegnomie]

42. hes not my top choice either

but ill vote for a dirt sock before id vote for a rethug....

[BannonsLiver]

70. Fair enough

But the geography thing is overrated in my view and too much is made of it. Pritzker will have to deal with the “Chicago thing” or “rich guy thing”, or whatever the GOP and their media acolytes cook up.

They will cook up something on Wes Moore and Shapiro, too. If Gallego gets in he will also have his detractors.

Let’s Just roll the ball out on the court and see what happens. You mention the desire to avoid preemptive favorites. Fine. But there’s no reason to preemptively nullify candidates, either. That’s what all the CA hullabaloo feels like to me.

[WarGamer]

91. I'd like to see a full primary slate and let "iron sharpen iron"

[JustAnotherGen]

128. I don't support

Presidential Candidates in Primaries until South Carolina Votes.

We vote in June here.

I don't understand why people get so 'wed' to a candidate then scream 'rigged'! establishment! when that candidate doesn't win.

[angrychair]

29. Let's be honest

There is no way to have a totally open conversation about the merits of this for obvious reasons.
I will note that outside of a brief mention of AOC, the only people mentioned as serious candidates was two old rich white men.

I would ask people to remember that VP Harris got more votes than any other Democrat or Republican in history except for Biden in 2020 and that orange bag of shit in 2024.

I will, as I have for over 30 years, always vote a Democrat for every office because they are always better than the alternative.

That is really all that needs to be said.

[moonshinegnomie]

43. id love aoc but i dont think she can win

the fascists have done a pretty good job of demonizing her to the point a lot of independents wont touch her.
i dont care if the nominee is male female,white black,or whatever. as long as the can win.

[JustAnotherGen]

129. I'm 52

I will never see a woman in the White House in this lifetime.

We just had a woman Candidate who had served as VP. This country is way to regressive to allow us to lead. And a LOT of that blame lies with self-hating suburban white women.

[R0ckyRac00n]

49. "VP Harris got more votes..."

Its not unfair to point out that that is somewhat a function of the population of the country being at it's largest ever.*

In percentages of vote:

2020 Joe Biden............51.3%
2012 Barack Obama.....51.1%
2008 Barack Obama.....52.9%
1996 Bill Clinton..........49.2% (3-way race - a second-time Perot still took 8.4%)
2024 Kamala Harris.....48.3%

I was happy to vote for Harris and I know she would have been a stellar president, but saying she got more votes in history except for Biden (while literally being true) is a little misleading - in regard to how well she actually performed (in a tough situation)

*The population of the US grew by over 21 million between Obama's 1st term and the 2024 election.

Like you, I will always vote for a Democrat for the reasons you state.

[PunkinPi]

120. To be truly fair, Kamala Harris got exactly the same number of votes as Biden in 2020...

b/c they ran as a ticket.

[sop]

33. Republicans get angry about something, they go out and vote.

Democrats get angry about something, they stay away from the polls.

[ReRe]

57. Not this Democrat. ;-)

And then I go out and eat!

[3catwoman3]

36. Keeping a Republican from being able to make Supreme Court appointments...

...should have been reason enough to be enthusiastic about Hillary or Kamala, no matter what you might have thought about them otherwise.

Sadly, it was not, and a pox on all those who stayed home.

[Jilly_in_VA]

37. Purity tests

Are what the DNC is doing right now to try to silence the young Democrats who have different ideas. No different from 1968, IMNSHO. And if you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you always got. If they continue with this crap, it will be a BIG LOSS in not only the congress, but the next presidential election (assuming there is one).

[marti]

38. just be a democrat

great we have a broad coalition but we need to be democrats first

[relayerbob]

40. 100% this

[Emile]

44. Please, way too early for this!

[Srkdqltr]

46. If you want a very perfect candidate. You should run. Give us all the benefit of a really perfect person

[Scrivener7]

47. We need to educate ourselves to understand that choosing a Democratic candidate is like choosing which bus to take.

Buses suck a little. None of them picks you up at your home and takes you exactly to your destination. So you choose the one that comes closest to your desired route. You may entirely miss a stop you wanted to make along the way. You may not get all the way to where you want to go and have to walk part of the way. But you choose the bus that gets you closest.

It works this way because no one of us is the most important. We all have to give and take on the route we take so the largest number of us get closest to where we want to go.

[The Wizard]

50. Purity in politics is for the weak minded.

Politics is the art of compromise.

[DinahMoeHum]

51. (sigh!) Nothing But The Best For The Oppressed

strikes again.

[ReRe]

58. Sorry? You lost me.

I'm an old-timer dummy, so catch me up please. Thanks in advance.

[DinahMoeHum]

59. Letting the perfect. . .

. . .be the enemy of the good

[ReRe]

61. Ah. I've never been fond of that term, myself.

It's always seemed like a snooty Corporate Dem shut-down. Doesn't it seem to be a bit condescending?
Thanks for the explanation. For all the world, it sounds like something straight out of Lee Attwater's mouth.

[radical noodle]

84. It's a fact of life

Nothing is perfect. So if you give up everything to wait for it, you're gonna be waiting a real long time.

[ReRe]

97. I must admit

that I have been told I have high expectations.
You see the phrase as a fact of life and wear it on your sleeve.
I see the phrase as discouraging and disheartening and can't think of an instance in which I would use it.
It takes all kinds, radical noodle, and you and I are two of them.

[radical noodle]

118. Well, let me know if you ever find a perfect person

I'd sure be happy to admit I was wrong.

[writerJT]

66. Indeed.

Of all the reasons to lose elections…🤦‍♂️

[Irish_Dem]

53. The only goal is defeating evil, and saving our democracy.

We can work out the niceties later.

[writerJT]

67. Lose the election and no principles

or ideals will matter. You’re exactly right.

[BannonsLiver]

69. I think it would be helpful if people got a little more wise to that.

My personal wants/ beliefs shouldn’t be the only consideration. Other issues matter as well. Our culture’s greatest affliction is main character syndrome, IMO.

[BlueTsunami2018]

73. We play right into their hands with the culture war bullshit.

We’re in a class war and we have been for decades. That should be the message and the ONLY message.

The problem is, at the end of the day “our” guys still believe in the same failed, unfair system that favors the owners over the workers. You can’t regulate it away when those regulations can very easily be reversed as we’ve seen.

We need a fundamental overhaul of this entire system.

[flamingdem]

76. Dems need to discuss all of this

Liberals need to see the way others see them.

Some of their cliches about us are true!

And if you're surrounded with the like minded it's harder to notice..

[flamingdem]

75. Newsom is stepping up and acting presidential

We're lucky if this momentum continues he'll win!!!

[womanofthehills]

111. I think middle America & Independent voters will be a problem for him

Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin could be a problem.

[B.See]

80. I made similar observation weeks ago.

Seems every time a Democrat gains any level of popularity or following, out comes the critics trying to nitpick him or her apart.

And I know some of it is right winged inspired claptrap, and some of it legitimate concerns.

But some of it is also picayunish in nature if not (imo) suspect, and (bottom line) serves to undermine us ALL

[murielm99]

82. Much of the nitpicking happens

right here on DU. Point it out and you get alert swarmed.

(p.s.: look at the post count of some of the alerters).

[B.See]

114. Sorry to say, but

unless charged with the duty to do so, I don't keep track of that kind of stuff (like post counts or who's alerting, don't even know how to do the latter). I may disagree with someone in a discussion and a month later might like something they say. Usually don't even remember who.

I just think those, left of MAGA, need focus less on the mythical "perfect" candidate, who checks all the boxes for EVERYONE, and focus more on the saving of DEMOCRACY from those hell bent (and sent FROM hell) to destroy it.

[CommonHumanity]

85. 100% correct

The FACT is we have to live and resist in the REAL WORLD we have, not some idealized version of the perfect candidate/politician!!

As the evidence shows: Sacrifice the good for the perfect and you get the WORST.

IN THE REAL WORLD: Supporting a politician or cause IS NOT the opportunity to showcase all your personal political preferences. Many are confused about this. The REAL option is to choose the best candidate from the options available at that point in time! that doesn't negate building a 3rd party, pressuring a candidate to move closer to your beliefs or advocating for change. It MEANS choosing the best/most strategic options at that point in time. Purity tests are the antithesis of strategic.

[Mysterian]

89. We need to nominate candidates who will win

Not someone whose turn it is.

[Srkdqltr]

90. That is absolutely true.

[thought crime]

117. This is one of the biggest lessons to be learned.

People have different ideas about who will win, but it's a huge sign of trouble when someone is entitled, or obtains momentum from the backing of leadership, super-delegates and endorsements rather than actual presentation of ideas and skill. That is especially important now, because Independents outnumber either party, and they don't respect any party establishment.

[iemanja]

92. What I don't like is when they buy into the GOP narrative

and in this case it’s trans women in sports, which affects only a handful of people. I’d be interested in hearing what the trans community thinks are the most important issues that they would like Dems to advance. Is it really sports?

[Heidi]

93. True allies LISTEN. (nt)

[Geechie]

95. Tell that to the League of Women Voters

I know they're not "partisan," but we're dealing with FASCISTS, folx.

[love_katz]

102. I agree.

Purity tests and eligible voters refusing to vote or voting third-party is how Agolf $hitler and his company of scum bags got into office.

Repukes vote in lock step, no matter what happens.
Unfortunately, we need to do the same. We have bigger numbers of supporters and we need to mobilize them like never before.
Tearing our candidates down serves the needs of the broligarchs and the fundy fascist wannabe dictators to divide us so they can conquer by completing their ongoing coup.

We have the numbers needed to defeat them, if we work together instead of under cutting each other.

[lostincalifornia]

103. yup. and if they don't our Democracy will be over.

[Alwayshopefull]

106. Alwayshopefull

On Bill marsh show from August 22. He pointed out that Trump won this time because he took one or 2% of all of the Democrats single issue items for himself. An example would be how the youth vote was larger than last time, and it was because of his TikTok use.qq

[Cirsium]

112. No

It is more true that the failure to take strong stands causes Democratic party electoral losses. "Purity test" is just an insulting way to attack those who are demanding that Democrats take stronger principled stands. When the so-called "purists" object to that pejorative characterization, we then hear the "circular firing squad" nonsense.

Newsom should not have given credibility and exposure to right wing maniacs, and should not have gone "both sides" on transphobia, as you just did.

"I know both sides" and "I understand the other side."

[Behind the Aegis]

113. Agreed. But the NOses!

There are those who will cut their nose off despite their face and feel justified (burn it all to the ground) and the ones who can't see past their own noses (I got mine, fuck everyone else!).

I have been voting for Democrats since I could vote. Wanna know how I, a GAY man, did it? Because the ALTERNATIVE was far worse! I did it because I believe women should have autonomy over THEIR bodies. Because I believe POC should be treated EQUALLY to me as a white person. Because I believe the "trickledown theory" is a load of HORSESHIT! For all THOSE reasons and many more I will always vote for the Democrat, no matter how "imperfect" s/he is. I voted for candidates who thought "separate but equal" was a viable option to "gay" marriage. I voted for candidates who were openly homophobic. I have voted for candidates who were indifferent to GLBT issues. Why? For the reasons above and because, in reality, a Democrat is more likely to "evolve" on a situation, than a fucking Republican!

The ONLY time I will not/did not vote for a democrat was when they were so right-wing, the republican candidate looked almost sane! That's only happened TWICE in almost 40 years!

[Nixie]

116. Yes, the purity tests have resulted in a presidential cabinet full

of billionaires, so all the purity messaging and war on billionaires was a giant fail. Smart politicians hopefully learned from this and will not double down on the losing messaging we’ve had to endure over the last 10 years.

[JustAnotherGen]

130. I know there is or was

An Oligarchy tour - but if that was a truly winning message?

We wouldn't have had two terms of Krasnov.

There is a 'culture' element to Maga that we need to tap into.

Part of my joy with Gavin Newsom? He's like the ID of Black Women. Like we've stayed behind closed doors waiting for the dominant culture to get outraged . . . and it's not happening.

He's giving us an element of laughter and joy that we haven't seen since Nov 4th last year. November 5th it died.

The id is the primitive and instinctive part of personality that seeks immediate gratification.

[Nixie]

141. Great post, and totally agree about Newsom and the culture element

to MAGA. I would be embarrassed to participate in a 10-year oligarchy tour if my messaging helped contribute to two Krasnov terms. Calling out the obvious messaging Fails needs to be done, considering the supposedly suffering working class voted against their economic best interests in favor of strong man pettiness over just about everybody. Don’t blame on oligarchs what they were handed on a silver platter.

Great points about Newsom and your perspective on the ID of black women. I can see how his dominance and flamboyance is resonating on very deep levels for those who are ready to laugh about this clown show administration. 👍🏼

[betsuni]

142. I don't understand the oligarchy tour message.

Saw the 2017 DNC's unity tour mentioned somewhere, that at the first rally DNC chair Perez was booed. The reason why was co-hosting the tour.

[Nixie]

144. Self-promotion, it looks like. Some of the headlines are so bad, I've noticed they are not even

posted here. “It’s not just Musk and Republicans, it’s the Democratic Party…………”. It’s no wonder that type of losing messaging is helping Trump. Sure as hell isn’t helping us.

[betsuni]

149. Far as I can tell the only mention of Democrats is the "both sides controlled by oligarchs" one.

Only encouragement to vote is for Independents, that I heard.

Republicans receive far more money from movement conservatives, industrialists, billionaires because they like Republican policy. Wealthy liberals give to Democrats because they like their policies. This is twisted into oligarchs controlling and corrupting both parties, that the Democratic Party has moved to the Right with same economic policies as Republicans (trick people into voting for them with identity politics), Democrats ignore working/middle class and don't have the foggiest idea what inequality is because all they care about is money, dysfunction in politics is caused by money and all that needs to be done is get money out of politics but Democrats won't do it, etc. The whole ideology is wrong.

"The very rich invest most heavily in the Republican Party: its politicians, its party organizations, its allied groups, and its causes. Of the richest Americans on Forbes's famous wealth list, according to a recent study, roughly two-thirds contributed mainly or exclusively to Republican or conservative causes, and their spending outweighed the spending of those in the top 100 who gave to Democrats or liberal causes by a ratio of three to one.

"The conservative tilt is even more pronounced when one considers the more organized segments of the plutocracy, including influential networks of donors and powerful business groups. And it's even more pronounced when one considers the many nonpublic ways the superrich and corporations can support politicians and lobby for their causes -- not just so called dark money ... but also hidden flows to interest groups and advocacy spending laundered through nonprofits."

From "Let Them Eat Tweets"

[Torchlight]

122. I'll vote for candidate who most closely aligns to my vision and values

Everything else is noise. And sealions.

[Omnipresent]

132. Transgender men competing in women's sports was reverberating everywhere before the Nov election.

It is one issue that I don’t believe Biden or Harris ever disputed.
When a false claim is not disputed, and it not only gets the attention of republicans, but democrats and independents, it grows into a “wedge issue’.
So if we want to win, we can’t hand them have a club to beat us with.

[travelingthrulife]

134. Yes. There are still idiot Palestinian protestors protesting Democrats,

because they are too chicken shit to protest the party that wants Palestinians disappeared, the GOP.

Newsome is a good man and has done great things for us in CA, all while juggling the 4th largest economy in the world.

[uponit7771]

148. 100% this

[hunter]

150. A candidate who passed my own purity tests could never be elected.

I wouldn't vote for them.

Democrats are the next best thing. I do vote for them and don't spend any time agonizing about it.

I don't vote for Republicans or Third Party Candidates.

I'm a radical environmentalist and some kind of Socialist but my politics are always practical.

[Deep State Witch]

151. Just Because We're Cheering Newsome's Media Team

Using Yam Tits' ramblings against him, it doesn't mean that we're going to vote for him. Let's just get past the midterms before we start saying who is pure enough to run for President.

Frankly, I'd vote for almost anybody as long as they promised to clean up Yam Tits' mess and uphold the Constitution.

[BlueKota]

152. I may not always be entirely happy with a Democratic candidate, but

the only times I would not vote for the Democratic candidate in a general election, would be, if they proposed or voted for Maga policies, far more often than they do Democratic Liberal ones(like 75 percent of the time), or were a convicted felon. Even then I still wouldn't vote Republican. I'd probably vote for an independent or write in. Thankfully so far I haven't had to do that.

For example, if Schumer has a challenger, in his next primary, who was willing to go after the Magats no holes barred, I'd totally vote for that person over Schumer, who disagrees with Republicans, but seems unwilling to fight against them tooth and nail. If Schumer beat the challenger, I wouldn't be happy about his win, but would still vote for him in the general election.

I believe in being loyal, but not blindly so, like Magats.