Do people really expect the candidates to treat each other with kid gloves?

[redgreenandblue]

Last edited Fri May 3, 2019, 08:10 AM - Edit history (1)

If so I got some news: This primary hasn't even started yet, and it is going to get heated.

While all of the top contenders (Biden, Harris, Sanders, Buttigeig, Booker, Warren etc.) may be united in their goal to take down Trump, and might even be fully aligned on certain policy positions, each of them has their own ambitions. If it comes down to Biden vs. Harris, for instance, I fully expect them to clash hard, as they should.

I believe all of this is healthy. We need the strongest candidate, not the one that people went soft on as to not "damage" them.

[True Blue American]

1. I see no reason for that.

The person who will get my attention is the one who talks about what they will do for the middle class if we elect them.

I am sick to death of the nasty back biting, name calling, inaction and rages we have been hearing.

[Thekaspervote]

2. Agree! I don't think the negative, hard as the sanders camp has tried has helped him

If anything it seems to be hurting him.

[Demsrule86]

8. Now you may have a point. It sets him apart...emphasizing that he has only

recently joined the party.

[luvtheGWN]

28. Sanders is yesterday's man.

His message in 2016 was new, radical and refreshing, and gave people something to actually consider, instead of the same old, same old.

Now, Bernie's message has itself turned into the same old, same old. In fact, every time I see him interviewed on TV, I can actually "mouth" his replies.

We North Americans are a different society. We want something shiny and new every day. We don't especially cherish the old. And our attention span suffers for it.

[TheFarseer]

34. Wait

Is his message too radical or same old same old? DU can be so confusing

[luvtheGWN]

35. In 2016 it was radical.

Two years later, it's the same old, same old.

Clear enough for you?

It's not that I disagree with his policies, it's just that one does get tired hearing the exact same words over and over and over again. It's the equivalent of (dare I say this?) the old man sitting on his front porch yelling at every passerby "STAY OFF MY LAWN". Eventually we all start to tune him out.

[LakeArenal]

36. Many realized they like the policies not the candidate

Much better carriers of that message now

[Demsrule86]

13. Me too.

[Left-over]

22. I am in total agreement and will vote for the Democrat cantidate.

There is no need for negative campaigning by anyone.

[DownriverDem]

24. Candidates go negative

when they are losing. I support true members of the Democratic Party.

[Chin music]

32. +1

[rampartc]

3. facts about republicans

1. their opposition research is exponentially better than ours
2. they have the means to repeat anything loudly and endlessly and
3. they do not care if it is true or not.

one thing we must learn about our candidates is how much of this they can take, and how much they can dish back.

if your candidate has a secret, it will come out. do you want it out now with time and opportunity to mitigate, or do you want it to drop as an "october surprise?"

[Demsrule86]

9. Attacks on a candidate from the right and the left simultaneously hurt our chances and no

candidate should do it. Someone signed a pledge. And I dont see others doing this...and also attacking the party as esablishment.

[Chin music]

33. +11

[Otto Lidenbrock]

10. that's because republicans unite behind their candidate once the results are in

republicans talk a lot about family values and how constitutionally conservative they are but once the nominee is picked they'll back him for the sole fact at least they'll get conservative judges and tax breaks for the 1%

we as democrats should be uniting behind whoever the candidate is because at the least we will get liberal judges. that's progress. presidents come and go but the judiciary will rule for decades to come.

trump has made 104 judicial appointments. that alone is a reason to not give him another four years.

[Demsrule86]

12. This is not secret shit Sanders is dishing. It is old crap...twisted. been out for a while,

I do not excuse Sanders.

[NYMinute]

43. +1000000

All the dishing in 2016 and now is done by Sanders.

It hurt badly in 2016 because the memes started then were used by Trump against Hillary.

[DownriverDem]

25. Attacks from the left

will not help us defeat trump. Candidates that go negative are losing. True Dems will not go on the attack against true Dems.

[irisblue]

4. Idealism is a trait Democrats share. We want to be the 'more perfect' right now

[Demsrule86]

11. This has nothing to do about being perfect. This sort of thing is why I hoped

Sanders would not run. It doesn't seem to be working so I sincerely hope he is out soon before more damage to our candidates and our party can occurs. Nothing Is more important than beating Trump.

[irisblue]

14. Dems, you maybe over reading my comment. Humans will never be perfect

And I agree with you, the threat ApricotHellbeast represents to our beloved country is existential.

[Demsrule86]

18. I understand just pissed at the situation...we need to win and this Sanders spiel

Isn't helping, the attacks on the party as establishment will drive voters away from joining the party and voting for any of our candidates.

[True Blue American]

16. No!

We just want to be the positive, forward looking party who has plans to move us into the future, the world we live in today. Perfection can never be acheived. It is not possible.

I may be old but have no desire to return to a past that was not perfect! I prefer the young, brilliant ides!

[Kurt V.]

5. have they ever?

[Demsrule86]

6. It is not candidates it is one candidate. It will hurt him in the primary.

And yes I expect other candidates not to dig up 30 Years or more shit. It is disgraceful and of course establisment Democrats are back. Already I see the twitter if so and so isnt the nominee than i wont support him/ her.I think Joe will be the candidate and this sort of thing could help reelect Trump no matter who is the candidate. I hope enough Democrats realize . That this what happened in the 16 general and will not be fooled agin

[Rainbow Droid]

7. Do NOT let the media drive the narrative. That's the biggest lesson from 2016.

Powerful media companies and cable TV created this monster. They largely own this fucking awful situation we're in now, and, spoiler alert, they don't want anyone to bring the situation under control unless they continue to set the narrative. They see themselves as the only kingmakers in the game, and firmly believe that since they created Trump, LITERALLY A JOKE PRESIDENT THAT ISN'T EVEN PLAUSIBLE, they can replace him any time they want, with whoever they want.

DON'T LET THEM FRAME THE NARRATIVE DURING THE CAMPAIGN.

DO. NOT. ALLOW. IT.

[True Blue American]

17. Thank you!

[Cosmocat]

23. CHANGE THE CHANNEL!

This is why I am drawn to him so strongly ...

[Demit]

15. I expect competitors in a competition to compete, lol.

Anything else is unrealistic. Criticism is informative. How they do it, and how they react when it's done to them, can be very informative.

[kcr]

19. After 2016, and with Trump? Yes, they do.

In an ideal academic dream world, it would be healthy but the reality is it won't give us the strongest candidate. It will give the GOP, with the media in their corner, their talking points and depress turnout. And with this large field, the strong candidate will be the one that shows they can attack trump. The ones bashing each other will simply tack each other out.

[jberryhill]

20. kid gloves

kid leather is a thin, soft leather made from goat skin or lamb skin.

The expression is "kid gloves", referring to soft, thin leather gloves, not "kid's gloves".

What would that even mean? Wear tiny little gloves?

[SidDithers]

26. Mittens. Attached by a string...nt

Sid

[The Genealogist]

29. Kid's gloves would be for Donald Dainty Digits to wear.

I doubt he can wear adult sized ones.

[McCamy Taylor]

21. Yes. A divided Democratic Party benefits Trump and Putin.

[melman]

27. No they don't

That whole thing is something they only apply to one particular candidate. Everyone knows that.

[pdsimdars]

30. I just wish the media would stop putting their thumbs on the scale.

Every word you hear about Biden is what a great guy he is, and any way they can throw shade on Bernie they exploit. It is disgusting.
And then they wonder why the people are misinformed. Duh!

[Deb]

31. I expect kind gloves

let's keep the limelight on congressional proceedings

[nolabear]

37. I'm not worried about candidates so much as outside forces.

I suspect there’s a real effort to creat division and rage among us Democrats by bringing up and recontextualizing things to gin up outrage and keep us from party unity. We’re terribly manipulable in our efforts to be good and there are organized efforts to get us to consume one another.

[LakeArenal]

38. I wish there was a limit to how many times and places you can post the exact same negative post.

Over and over.

Also a limit on hyperbole.

[WiffenPoof]

39. I think you meant to say...

"kit" gloves.

[robbedvoter]

40. No. it's attacks on the Democrats in general (from allegedly one of ours)

that piss me off.

[aikoaiko]

41. Some people fear that the slightest criticism will cause their candidate to lose.

And I get it. I don't like it when the candidates I like are criticized fairly or unfairly.

But I say bring it on.

[JHan]

42. well there's criticism and there's ratfucking

We're in an information war - where memes and disinformation shape narratives almost by the hour. I don't want to see a scorched earth primary. I want sensible discussion about policy so Ratfucking dressed up as criticism on our side will not impress me.

This article sums up my approach:

But if we’re serious about evaluating candidates, weaknesses have to be assessed along with strengths. The fact that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between Booker’s record as a senator and Elizabeth Warren’s also matters. Putting the arbitrary dealbreakers side-to-side is often instructive, showing the electoral equivalent of the “ACA is worthless neoliberal crap and repealing it would be a catastrophe” contradiction. If Harris’s squishiness on criminal justice issues is worthy of mention but Booker’s excellent record on them as a senator is not, for example, then we’re not really evaluating candidates based on criminal justice — we’re just finding pretexts to clear the field for your preferred candidate.

Criticism of potential candidates is not merely fine but necessary, and people will have different priorities. But useful comparisons of candidates examine their records and strengths and weaknesses as a whole, both in terms of policy and politics.

.....

Cherry-picking the records of candidates you have decided ex ante you don’t like and ignoring problems with candidates you do is not going to be very illuminating.

http://dsadevil.blogspot.com/2017/08/arbitrary-candidate-disqualifcations.html

http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/08/useful-candidate-evaluations-holistic-not-ad-hoc-searches-arbitrary-dealbreakers