Democratic Primaries
Related: About this forumCan DUers at least agree that any Dems who don't vote or vote 3rd party are fools?
Even if they say they oppose Trump. Even if they say they'd have voted for the Democratic nominee IF ONLY the primaries had given them the nominee they wanted.
Can we at least agree that you'd have to be an idiot, if you're a Democrat and oppose Trump, NOT to vote for the nominee?
I'm so tired of being told that "progressives won't vote" or "young people won't vote" unless they get exactly the candidate they want, and to hell with other Democrats' choice if it doesn't agree with theirs.
To be blunt, anyone stupid enough to not vote at all in a crucial election, or to vote third party as some kind of sanctimonious protest, probably doesn't have good enough judgment to pick the best candidate anyway.
We ALL have to vote blue, no matter who.
We have to defeat Trump, keep the House and take back the Senate.
We can squabble over the policy differences later.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
wyldwolf
(43,865 posts)We've seen 'progressives' go third party / threaten not to vote a number of times. Sometime we still win (1948), sometimes we don't (1968, 2000)
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
mountain grammy
(26,571 posts)And one of my best friends, a lifelong republican, also agrees.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
highplainsdem
(48,730 posts)doesn't agree with Democrats on very many issues.
I've been encouraged by seeing NeverTrumpers on Twitter telling other Republicans unhappy with Trump to vote blue, no matter who.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
mountain grammy
(26,571 posts)When she told me she had concerns about some Democratic candidates I asked is trump worse? Yes of course he is. She will vote for the Democratic candidate for the third time in a row, she just wishes it would be Obama again. I cant disagree with that.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
CMYK
(106 posts)I've voted in every election since I was 18, and whoever the nominee is will have my vote.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
DanTex
(20,709 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Progress_Dem
(96 posts)with this concerning all the candidates except Bloomberg. If he is the nominee, then I can fully understand why some Democrats would have a hard time voting for him. And they wouldn't be fools because of that struggle.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Zolorp
(1,115 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Progress_Dem
(96 posts)I don't think you are a fool though!
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)If not, it seems irrelevant. At best.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Ill vote for the dem. I say if Bloomberg isnt a Democrat neither is Bernie
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Zolorp
(1,115 posts)If Sanders is a Dem now, then Sanders was a Communist in 1980.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
highplainsdem
(48,730 posts)Hesitating to vote for the Democratic nominee would mean that they find Trump as acceptable, or almost as acceptable. And that they might be wiilling to help inflict Trump on the country and the planet for at least one more term because they'd have preferred another Democratic candidate.
That's both foolish and selfish.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Response to highplainsdem (Reply #9)
Progress_Dem This message was self-deleted by its author.
highplainsdem
(48,730 posts)find Bloomberg as unacceptable as the sociopathic criminal Russian asset in the White House, they can't be thinking very clearly.
Trump's an existential threat to the country, and the planet.
Bloomberg isn't.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Progress_Dem
(96 posts)I understand where you are coming from. But I also understand where those who have serious concerns about Bloomberg are coming from too. And I share a lot of those concerns.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
highplainsdem
(48,730 posts)If your friends think there's no difference, and they decide not to vote or vote 3rd party, that's their choice. But choices have consequences, and they'd be enabling Trump to win re-election. They'll really have no right to complain about Trump in the future if they can't be bothered to vote against him.
I've never seen a perfect politician, a perfect candidate. They don't exist.
And any member of a party also has to consider that there are lots of other members of that party.
I don't want Sanders to be our nominee, but if he is, I'll have absolutely no trouble putting together arguments for why he's better than Trump. Because he is. As Bloomberg is. Neither one would be my preference. But I'm not the only vote in the party.
And while my vote might help as part of a blue wave, it's valueless -- and I may as well not have the right to vote -- if I don't vote, or vote for a third party candidate with no chance of winning in a crucial election.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)who founded a major liberal news organization, and whose positions have been largely progressive for his entire career would be as "unacceptable as they find Trump"?
I can see people having trouble with many of his positions, but as unacceptable as Trump? Donald Trump?!?!?
That is absolutely absurd.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
cab67
(2,963 posts)Neither one is electable, for reasons beyond people sanctimoniously staying home and letting the rest of us deal with the outcome. (I can go into the details another time, as I'm in between work projects ahead of the caucuses. Guess which state I live in....)
All that aside, I have no patience for "you have to earn my vote" or "they're both just as bad" (meaning the Republican and Democratic candidates). We live with a two-party system. I don't like it either, but unless both parties are broken up at the same time (something that won't happen short of a constitutional convention), protest votes do nothing to break the system up. Quite the opposite is true - they make the other party stronger. I don't have much use for Bloomberg or Sanders, but I will absolutely vote for either one if either is nominated, and I'll work my ass off to get everyone else to do the same.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
overleft
(353 posts)whomever it is, it will give more leeway to tRump. As the saying goes "We must hang together or we shall hang separately". The right wing thugs mean business when they threaten liberals. Support whichever candidate that the primary voters choose.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
They would be fools.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Response to Progress_Dem (Reply #5)
rebe303 This message was self-deleted by its author.
mountain grammy
(26,571 posts)Would be unacceptable compared to trump. Just no! Every vote against trump must be for the Democrat running against trump. This isnt a game show.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
TheRealNorth
(9,435 posts)Bloomberg is still better than Trump.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
musicblind
(4,484 posts)He has all the qualifications I need for a Democrat vs Trump... a torso.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Zolorp
(1,115 posts)And it is this point in the primaries where the cries of "my candidate or nobody" always ring out.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
FoxNewsSucks
(10,375 posts)I'd bet the same goes for a lot of people. It's so encouraging to constantly see these posts who bash people with a different opinion. Of course I know who I will have to vote for, but seeing these posts all the time doesn't help your argument at all.
The reason I used to vote 3rd party was because the choice was between two mediocre establishment candidates. Since then, I have voted Democratic, mainly because the republicons suck so much.
I, and many others, are sick of my vote being taken for granted. Sick of having a stale establishment corporate-friendly democratic candidate as the only choice other than a deranged fascist. So tired of being told I just have to settle.
When someone tells you "progressives" or "young people" won't vote, instead of deriding them or calling them fools, stop and think for a minute. Those people, likely the ones who polls say have a non-democratic 2nd choice, are WANTING to vote FOR something. Not just against a deranged, corrupt fascist. Their first choice is someone they want to vote FOR. Someone they think will not just be the opposite of a deranged drooling fascist, but will actually move the country forward. A lot of them wouldn't have voted for the Democratic candidate, thus the non-democratic 2nd choice. What that means is someone who may not have been a Democrat is now willing to vote Democratic and maybe join the party. It also means the DCCC and corporate donors are willing to turn away voters. Willing to stifle the growth and future of the party. Willing to miss out on adding new members to the Democratic party.
So please, think about who the fools really are before you continue to alienate a lot of good people . I'd like to see the Democratic party grow, and return to the liberal policies that would benefit us all.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Progress_Dem
(96 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
squirecam
(2,706 posts)The democratic nominee WILL make massive changes to the system. A public option, for example, would really change the way health care is done. You have private companies now having to compete with the government.
The *only* people who believe that the dem nominee wont bring massive change are those who think Sanders is where the middle of the party should lie. Which is stunningly absurd.
These people *wont* spend the time joining the party, and working for change inside it, because the DNC is too centrist. But they demand that the DNC make changes to benefit them....its crazy.
Change does require work. If you wont work within the party to change it, then you get the nominee the Democratic Party wants.
As far as enthusiasm, if people arent motivated to get rid of Trump, thats on them. You dont need to be excited this year. You need to be angry enough to get rid of him.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
MyOwnPeace
(16,888 posts)What a great line - and that is exactly what needs to be preached!
"You dont need to be excited this year. You need to be angry enough to get rid of him."
WOW! We need posters, billboards, and bumper stickers for that because it is SO true.
We SHOULD be able to work through all of the "other" stuff - actually, we NEED to be able to. We saw what happened the last time we opted not to.
This time, we MUST work together to make sure that he is gone - finished - chased - thrown out - tossed - booted - kick out - whatever you choose to say to make sure that we save this great democracy and its people. It could be our last chance.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)This is about voting against what Bernie Sanders himself called the most dangerous president in history. While I think he's partly responsible for putting that president in the Oval Office, the point is that some of us don't have the luxury of waiting it out. What Trump is doing to the court system is dangerous to many marginalized people and the worst thing about Bernie is the delusion that fixing the class struggle will fix things for marginalized people. Never mind that communist China wasn't friendly to gays and corporate billionaire Oprah was given the side eye while trying to buy a purse in Switzerland that the clerk didn't think a woman of color could afford. Class, race, homophobia, and the rest are all separate issues that are going to need solutions for each. Those of us in these marginalized groups may not survive another four years of Trump. If voters have the luxury of waiting it out, or if they are in these marginalized groups and are willing to hit rock bottom with another four years Trump in the hopes that some class-struggle savior will come along, fine for them. But I knew the moment that Trump, in 2016, promised to nominate only from a list of 21 Scalia-like justices provided by the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation that, not only would he be the Republican nominee, he would get the Evangelicals no matter how vulgar and immoral he actually is. So many friends who voted Trump (most of whom now regret) didn't seem to realize that Scalia voted in 2004 to keep sodomy laws in place that would put my kind in jail. This is certainly not something that any of the current crop of candidates on our side would do, so I frankly resent anyone with a hateful vengeance at this point that would vote either Trump or sit home over some idea of "corporate-friendly" whatever. I despise Bernie Sanders. I find him revolting. And there are days I think another heart attack might save me the aggravation of having to choose between him and Trump. That's how much I dislike him. But I will still vote for him if he's the nominee so not only do I think anyone who sits home or votes third party is a fool. I think they are the worst kind of scum.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Response to highplainsdem (Original post)
RandiFan1290 This message was self-deleted by its author.
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)and I do think the 2016 purge of the Jaded, Pining Miserables was necessary too. Bernie himself referred to Trump as the most dangerous president in history. How does one sit home or vote third party when the saintly savior himself makes a statement like that?
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
booley
(3,855 posts)I can agree that voting third party is unlikely to get the person you want into office.
And not voting only helps Republicans.
However (you knew there would be a However)
..... No one is entitled to anyone's vote.
Democrats as a party don't ask enough WHY some don't' vote and others vote third party. Instead, we scream at them and I will let you in on a little secret.
That NEVER works.
No one has ever been vote shamed into voting Democrat. Saying Trump s bad isn't enough. Democrats have to convince people they are worth voting FOR. This was a lesson we learned in 2008 and then for some reason forgot.
Again No one is entitled to anyone's vote. If voters won't vote for someone, that is on the candidate, not the voter.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Stay home or vote third party, you enable Trumps destruction of the constitution.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
booley
(3,855 posts)Yes you can make that case for Trump.
We did make that case against trump in 2016
We made that same case for Bush in 2000 and 2004.
And it did not work. I have yet to see one time when it did much less the millions of changed minds required to swing an election.
So what I am saying is maybe if we want to win we should do something different from the times we lost. We are thinking about this all the wrong way.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
squirecam
(2,706 posts)Due to the butterfly ballot fiasco. But also he lost Due to the GREEN party voting for Nader.
Gore would have been the best environmentally friendly President.....well ever really. Instead, that tp vote gave us Bush.
So no, what we need to try is no tp spoilers.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
booley
(3,855 posts)Never mind that you assume you would have had those votes to begin with
Never mind that it was so close that a few hundred people could change the election.
And never mind that almost a hundred thousand voters were cut off from the voter rolls when they should not have been and maybe we should have been a little more focused on that.
If someone won't vote for a candidate, that is on the candidate. Screaming Do what I want has not made people do what you in al the history of people not doing what you want.
Your argument implies the voter doesn't' own their vote. One of the two major parties do. And that attitude is part of the problem.
Again, a candidate has ot earn those votes, not just show up because you want to.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)
and that, with Trump, it's no longer about the onus being on the candidate or about whether you owe anyone their vote. By sitting home or voting third party you would be hurting your fellow Americans who are marginalized deliberately and strategically, willing to hurt whoever Trump's courts will throw in jail for being gay, whose marriages will be overturned, people of color whose voting ryouights will be curtained and law enforcement who will be exonerated for killing people of color. Yes, I think the blood of those people is on the Bernie or Bust people from 2016 and it will be again.
And if marginalized people mean nothing to you or if you are in a marginalized category and you're willing to drag the rest of us down the nihilistic hole of potential disaster in homes of getting a less "corporate-friendly" choice, how about the fact that this president is probably the most likely in all of modern history to use our nuclear weapons like a kid pulling toys out of a toy box. Bernie is so pro-environment. How hard will it be for the environment to bounce back from Trump's nuclear toy box?
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Jakes Progress
(11,121 posts)This isn't 1992. It isn't 2000. It isn't even 2016.
This is different. Those who don't see that are in a position to help eliminate democracy in America.
All of this "America has been through this" and "America always survives" shit is just stupid.
I am not a big fan of Bernie. He is my least favorite candidate.
I don't care. If he is the nominee, he gets my money, my time, and my vote. Anyone who sees this a chance to hedge a bet against future frustration is short-sighted and, frankly, just silly.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
booley
(3,855 posts)But like Mark Twain said, History never repeats but it often rhymes.
You can say what you want to do. But if you want to win you have to get others to do it too.
Screaming at them about how they are destroying America isn't' going to cut it.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Jakes Progress
(11,121 posts)This isn't a word game. This is serious.
No one is screaming at anyone (except for one candidate and his followers). Just trying to get people to get over themselves. Notice who my chosen candidate is. That's who I would like to see in the Oval Office. But, I don't even begin to think that this country will elect someone that competent; we didn't in 2016. So, whoever gets then nom, I will vote for.
If someone thinks their very unique vote is that precious, then throwing it away is just silly.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
you understand that one of the main reasons we are where we are today is that the GOP votes red until they're dead? They don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We all want a candidate that will appeal to us personally, one that we believe will do what's best for the country.
We should also be able to recognized the danger that the country is in at this present moment, and do what we can to make things better. Maybe not perfect, but better.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
booley
(3,855 posts)sorry but you all are asking the wrong questions here. Everything in that post tells me you didnt'grok my point. So let me see if I can explain it another way...
Would you agree that republicans vote in the numbers they do because they are motivated?
We can agree on that, right?
Now a lot of that motivation is fear. And that won't work for us. Fear make speopel more conservative and thus more Republican
What would motivate people to vote for Democrats?
So some harsh truth.
A lot of those voters you want to vote for Democrats aren't doing purity tests. They dont' see it as "perfection is the enemy of the good" because they don't' think Democrats actually mean it. They think Democrats just say the right things to get elected.
Let me say that again. The voters you want to get think Democrats don't mean it.
Wanting insulin without having to go broke isn't about perfection. It's about people's lives
Needing a job that will pay the bills isn't about perfection. Its about people's lives
Heading off the worst environmental catastrophe in human history isn't about perfection. It's about people's lives.
And every time a candidate proposes small changes or says we can't' do anything about it, all that says is that candidate doesn't' really care.It says they cant' fight the Republicans because they have negotiated away any position they already had.
So again I ask, how are YOU going to convince THEm that it isn't just platitudes?
Sorry but some of you need to get off DU and actually TALK to people. By which I mean Listen to people.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,102 posts)Even if I have to hold my nose per our eventual nominee I'm voting against Trump.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)But then, compromising doesn't give one the same satisfaction as finding a lonely hill to be right on.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
booley
(3,855 posts)I mean if someone wants to cut off your head, ho do you compromise on that? Is compromise a good idea.?
I mean the GOP wants to destroy Socal Security and Medicare. What is the compromise that doesn't' weaken those programs halfway to destruction?
Yes, we would be better off trying to win people over. Or the many who already agree with us but don't realize it because Democrats in power have compromised too much.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)Your comments about non-voters is uninformed.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
certainot
(9,090 posts)and considering the amt of trolling and voter suppression increasingly used by republicans and foreign interests that conclusion should be a no-brainer
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)Condescending language but the sentiment) . Its ill informed and i'd suggest if ppl were actually interestedt in why some ppl don't vote they should go to poorest parts of this country and ask them. hint: its not bc they're dumb.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)I suspect there's a fair chance that I'll be using some of the responses as an example.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Tom Rinaldo
(22,911 posts)I would go to the mat for Mike Bloomberg against a mob of raging radicals if it came to that. Any candidate I know of who has a prayer of winning the Democratic nomination will require our total support if she or he heads the Democratic line come November
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Drum
(8,911 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Eyes were getting glazed over - then this!
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)Everyone here really has to agree with that. Some might not vote or vote 3rd party, or even for Trump, but they won't admit to it here. Some here also can't vote at all. We have some Canadian DUers and some from other countries.
Really, though, it is not DUers who matter. We're a small group. Only a handful of Jill Stein voters in 2016 in those three states that turned the election over to Trump were DUers. There were a few, though. Mostly, they're not here now, at least under the names they used then.
Bottom line is that some people don't do what they say they will do. Some people are pretenders and do not share our overall beliefs, I have no doubt.
I will vote for every Democratic candidate and our Democratic Party nominee for President. I'm certain of that, because I have never done otherwise.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Rider3
(919 posts)Totally agree with you.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It is unrealistic to assume they will completely accept a different candidate on the same platform.
The same is true of people on the other side. Lots of Ron Paul supporters never voted for Mitt Romney, after their primary blew up. Those people were probably not Republicans, and therefore not beholden to the eventual Republican nominee.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)A vote for Jill Stein or a third party was a vote for trump and Putin
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)Did you vote for Jill Stein?
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)'cost Hillary the election' presumes they would have voted for Hillary under any circumstance, which is not known, and cannot be known.
You cannot assume a vote belongs to a particular candidate.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)A vote for stein was a vote for trump and Pitin
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)If Stein was not in the race, those voters could have actually, literally, not indirectly, cast a vote for Trump.
Or they might have stayed home. Or written in 'mickey mouse' and get their ballot thrown on the provisional trash heap that wasn't even counted.
You don't get to assume those votes were ever going to be for Hillary. The only person we can know whom they were for, were the person they were actually cast for.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)Math works in the real world. trump won in the electoral college due to sanders voters voting for trump or third parties. A vote of Stein was a vote for trump and Putin.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)None of that material shows that, for instance, any of those Stein voters WOULD EVER have voted for Hillary under any circumstance.
You don't get to assume they were ever likely or even potential Hillary voters.
Trump won in those contested states, because he received more votes, and that is as far as you can go with this.
Grumping about voters you could never have considered as part of your base, isn't going to help any of us. We didn't get them last time. We need them next time. We need every last vote we can get.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)Why are you defending idiots who voted for stein? Did vou vote for stein?
Again a vote for stein was a vote for trump and Putin
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I am not defending them, I am criticizing your (and others) mis-use of the math and ongoing election meme that is WRONG, and will not attract more voters to our side.
I've also answered the Stein question. No, I voted for Hillary. (And I'm in WA, so I could have been in a coma that November and it wouldn't have mattered)
A vote for Stein DID NOT INCREASE Trump's total votes. It is an unrealized vote for our candidate ONLY if you assume that person could/should/would vote blue no matter who. That is not the reality of EVERY LAST POTENTIAL VOTER.
We need to woo these people, not browbeat them, if we want more votes next time. Stein's not in it this time, is she? Great. Let's go after those votes and show why our candidate NOW is better, and we NEED THEIR SUPPORT in the battleground states. (In which I do not live)
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)I am amused by your defense of slimy Stein voters. A vote for Stein was indeed a vote for Russia and trump so far as Russia was concerned. I live in the real world and I saw Russia work like crazy to hurt Clinton by encouraging sanders voters to (I) vote for trump, (ii) stay home or (iii) vote for Stein. Russia was supporting Stein for a reason because Russia knew that a vote for Stein was a vote for trump in the real world. Again Russia lives in the real world and understands the rather simple concept that encouraging voters to vote for Stein or to not vote was in effect a vote for Russian and trump
Link to tweet
I note that sufficient votes went to stein to swing the election in favor of trump. In other words, Putin and Russia won because a vote for Stein was a vote for trump and Putin in the real world. That is why Russia spent so much effort promoting sanders and stein
Link to tweet
trump won by cheating and help from Russia
Link to tweet
Internal IRA documents referred to support for the Trump campaign and opposition to candidate Clinton, according to the report. While much of this section of the report is redacted, it cites directions to IRA operators not to harm Sanders.
Main idea: Use any opportunity to criticize Hillary [Clinton] and the rest (except Sanders and Trump we support them), quotes the report.....
While Sanders had said in a previous radio interview that one of his campaign workers figured out what was going on and alerted Clinton campaign officials, his 2016 campaign manager Jeff Weaver told The Post in a recent interview for the story that Sanders misspoke a little bit and conflated a few of the facts. .?.?. He did not know, I did not know, none of us knew that Russia was behind the efforts.
See Also https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-power-briefing/2018/02/16/mueller-indicts-13-russians-for-allegedly-meddling-in-2016-election-fbi-says-protocols-were-not-followed-when-they-received-tip-on-parkland-shooter-va-cos-resigns-249433
-- They engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump.
The math is really not that hard. Russia succeeded in getting sanders voters to vote for trump and/or Stein in sufficient number to win. In the real world this is how math works.
Link to tweet
Math is fun and the math here is clear in the real world
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)If a voter was convinced by GOP, or Russian assets (or GOP assets that are also Russian) to not vote for Hillary that reduces her vote total by 1.
It does not INCREASE Trump's vote total at all, if they vote for stein, stay home, or write-in mickey mouse.
Therefore, stop saying a vote for stein is a vote for Trump. A vote for trump is a vote for trump. Period. That's math.
I feel sorry for people hoodwinked by such tactics. I am angry that such tactics were deployed.
I want to bring those people back, because WE NEED EVERY LAST FUCKING VOTE WE CAN SCARE UP.
Ask yourself how to entice such a voter back into the fold. How are we going to do that? Yell at them? Tell them they're morons? Tell them they're disloyal or traitors? You and I are on the same page that they shouldn't have done it, that those unrealized votes have given us a little over three years of waking nightmare, with almost a year to go. I know that some of the damage that has been done is irreparable, and it's continuing day after day. But My eyes are on the NEXT four years, and how we wake up from this fucking nightmare.
I have observed, that browbeating people who have made a bad choice, doesn't usually rectify the problem, does it? I can't prove it mathematically, because it's a behavior issue. But the 'vote for mickey mouse is a vote for trump' meme? That's basic math. It's wrong. It's not helping to repeat it.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)I am comfortable with my math skills and your analysis is simply wrong
Russian and Putin knows that a vote for Stein was a vote for trump in the real world and the math set forth above showed that Russia's tactics worked in the real world
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
lapucelle
(18,039 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)In the real world the GOP can win an election by suppressing the vote or getting voters to waste their vote on a third party candidate
Link to tweet
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)The rest effectively didn't vote like ~90 million eligible voters in 2016.
And like those voters, the 90 million eligible voters that didn't vote, they don't count under Trump's tally.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
lapucelle
(18,039 posts)...the eligible voters who didn't vote, not "that [sic] didn't vote". The relative pronoun should match the antecedent.
My post spoke to the bewildering plea, "You're mixing math and behavior. Please stop."
If you're interested in the 2016 data from the CCES, you can read it here.
https://dataverse.harvard.edu/file.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/GDF6Z0/RK0ONG&version=4.0
If you're interested in cogent, thoughtful, expert analysis of the data, you can preview and purchase (or ask for an examination copy to be sent to you at the university where you teach) at this link.
https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/making-sense-of-the-2016-elections/book256733
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)This is a political commentary site, not Grammarly. When I'm writing, I proof. Here, I'm snatching what free time I can get ahold of to talk about politics.
If 'math and behavior' is unclear, perhaps substitute 'intent' or 'assumptions'. IN this case the assumption that the votes in play were ever, under any circumstances (including if Stein had been left off the ballot completely) going to be for our candidate. (Edit: I didn't finish that sentence the first time for some reason)
Votes are like stocks in the market. It's not money, until it's money. It could be worth any fantastic amount, but it's not actually money until there is a transaction that has closed, converting it to money. Same with votes. You don't get to assume it's a vote for your candidate, until it's actually cast. When they are cast for a spoiler like Stein, it's morally equivalent to just staying home and watching TV. It was never our actual candidate's vote to count on.
Otherwise, the voters that were called out for abandoning Sanders and going for Trump, would effectively count as TWO votes against Hillary. One negative for Hillary, and one positive for Trump. But that's an illusion and not actually the case. It was only ever one vote per person, and we couldn't count on it or assume it was for our candidate, regardless of whether they intended to give it to Bernie in the beginning.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
lapucelle
(18,039 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)I have volunteered a ton of time on voter protection. I have been running war rooms and voter protection operations for a long time. I was one of the 11000 lawyers who went out of state in 2004 for the Kerry Edwards voter protection program (we had 3000 out of state lawyers just in Florida). I can assure that the GOP and evidently Russia knows that the easiest way to win an election is to either suppress the vote or waste the vote. This quote is from the man who founded ALEC
Link to tweet
In the real world you win elections ethically by getting people to vote for your candidate or you can use the GOP/Russian method of winning elections by suppressing the vote or getting someone to waste their vote. 2000 is a great example. I will never forgive nader Rove funded Nader in 2000 and 2004 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html
Furthermore, Karl Rove and the Republican Party knew this, and so they nurtured and crucially assisted Naders campaigns, both in 2000 and in 2004. On 27 October 2000, the APs Laura Meckler headlined GOP Group To Air Pro-Nader TV Ads. She opened: Hoping to boost Ralph Nader in states where he is threatening to hurt Al Gore, a Republican group is launching TV ads featuring Nader attacking the vice president [Mr. Gore]. ... Al Gore is suffering from election year delusion if he thinks his record on the environment is anything to be proud of, Nader says [in the commercial]. An announcer interjects: Whats Al Gores real record? Nader says: Eight years of principles betrayed and promises broken. Mecklers report continued: A spokeswoman for the Green Party nominee said that his campaign had no control over what other organizations do with Naders speeches. Bushs people - the group sponsoring this particular ad happened to be the Republican Leadership Council - knew exactly what they were doing, even though the liberal suckers who voted so carelessly for Ralph Nader obviously did not. Anyone who drives a car the way those liberal fools voted, faces charges of criminal negligence, at the very least. But this time, the entire nation crashed as a result; not merely a single car.....
On July 9th, the San Francisco Chronicle headlined GOP Doners Funding Nader: Bush Supporters Give Independents Bid a Financial Lift, and reported that the Nader campaign has received a recent windfall of contributions from deep-pocketed Republicans with a history of big contributions to the party, according to an analysis of federal records. Perhaps these contributors were Ambassador Egans other friends. Mr. Egans wife was now listed among the Nader contributors. Another listed was Nijad Fares, a Houston businessman, who donated $200,000 to the Bush inaugural committee and who donated $2,000 each to the Nader effort and the Bush campaign this year. Furthermore, Ari Berman reported 7 October 2004 at the Nation, under Swift Boat Veterans for Nader, that some major right-wing funders of a Republican smear campaign against Senator John Kerrys Vietnam service contributed also $13,500 to the Nader campaign, and that the Republican Party of Michigan gathered ninety percent of Naders signatures in their state (90%!) to place Nader on the ballot so Bush could win that swing states 17 electoral votes. Clearly, the word had gone out to Bushs big contributors: Help Ralphie boy! In fact, on 15 September 2005, John DiStaso of the Manchester Union-Leader, reported that, A year ago, as the Presidential general election campaign raged in battleground state New Hampshire, consumer advocate Ralph Nader found his way onto the ballot, with the help of veteran Republican strategist David Carney and the Carney-owned Norway Hill Associates consulting firm.
It was obvious, based upon the 2000 election results, that a dollar contributed to Nader in the 2004 contest would probably be a more effective way to achieve a Bush win against Kerry in the U.S. Presidential election than were perhaps even ten dollars contributed to Bush. This was a way of peeling crucial votes off from Bushs real opponent - votes that otherwise would have gone to the Democrat. Thats why the smartest Republican money in the 2004 Presidential election was actually going to Nader, even more so than to Bush himself: these indirect Bush contributions provided by far the biggest bang for the right-wing buck.
Again, I live in the real world and I work on actual campaigns. Here a vote for Stein was a vote for trump/Putin just as a vote for Nader in 2000 was a vote for Bush
If you want to actually win a race, you need to live in the real world and understand how the rules operate.
Again, a vote for Stein was a vote for trump/Russia in the real world. Russia and trump will try this same stunt again
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)In the Real World(TM) in 1996, were the 8 million votes for Ross Perot actually 8 million votes for Bill Clinton?
Splitting the vote is a real tactic, yes. I agree it's likely to happen again. Many interested parties, beyond the RNC and their Russian puppetmasters will have motive and opportunity, and make overt efforts to split the vote. I don't disagree there.
Where I disagree is saying 'it's a vote for X' when you pick Y candidate. It is simply an unrealized vote for your candidate. It doesn't matter that the Sanders voters above were closer to our platform than the GOP (except the ones that ACTUALLY voted for Trump apparently). Unenthusiastic voters stay home, for the most part. That makes them unrealized votes for your candidate, NOT votes for the opposition. (again, excepting the ones that actually did vote for Trump)
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)Again, I live in the real world and I have been volunteering my time for a very long time on voter protection. The fact that I have been working in this area for such long time helped earn me a slot as a delegation to the National Convention. Living in the real world means living by and understanding the metrics used in the real world.
Rove won the 2000 race with Nader. aby diverting sufficient votes for Bush to win. Rove funded Nader for a reason and his efforts worked. Rove does not care if you disagree about the metrics being used. Putin and trump won 2016 with Stein. This is who the real world works. By the metrics used by the GOP, a vote for Nader was a vote for Bush and a vote for Stein was a vote for trump/Putin. You may not agree with this math but these are the metrics being used by the GOP and Russia in the real world.
I have been dealing with GOP voter suppression for a long time. The GOP had a voter id law in effect In 2014 a federal district judge found that the Texas voter id law discriminated against minorities but the opinion was stayed on appeal. Here is a chart that shows the effect of the Texas voter id law on Democratic turnout
Greg Abbott got more votes in 2014 compared to Rick Perry while Wendy Davis got far fewer votes even though she spent more.
In 2016 the 5th Circuit affirmed this ruling and the Texas voter id law was largely gutted so that any registered voter can vote if they lack one of the approved ids and sign a Reasonable Impediment Declaration and provide one of the alternative ids which includes utility bills or bank statements. For college students, out of state drivers license are an approved id. In 2018, Texas voter prarticiation increased a great deal.
Right now Marc Elias has 20 lawsuits pending on GOP voter suppression efforts. (Marc was Clinton's legal election law attorney).
Link to tweet
I have steered some additional plaintiffs to a lawsuit filed by the Texas Civil Rights Project on wrongful rejection of absentee ballots
Link to tweet
One of my fellow delegates to the National Convention is one of the named plaintiffs in this case
I have to live in the real world to be effective on voter protection efforts. That means that I look at and understand the metrics being sued by the GOP. Rove was successful with Nader and Putin/trump was successful with Stein/sanders. The real world can be a harsh place but one has to live the rules in such world.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)"Rove won the 2000 race with Nader. aby diverting sufficient votes for Bush to win. Rove funded Nader for a reason and his efforts worked. Rove does not care if you disagree about the metrics being used."
The metrics show the diversions lowering the total vote count for the (in this case) D candidate. Absolutely, that's a valid strategy, and they chose correctly in funding it. But in this example, it only reduces the total for our candidate. It doesn't add votes to the republican candidate. It just makes things easier for them. A bad thing certainly, and on its own, COMPLETELY worth paying for, in their eyes. But it still isn't a vote for, in the current case, Trump. (Except the percentage that in fact, directly voted for Trump.)
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
NYMinute
(3,256 posts)This is called the law of distributed power.
Let's say there are 100 voters in a system. Let's say 90 of them will vote and 10 are out of town, disabled or in a hospital so they will not vote.
Let's say of the 90, 30 are Democrats , 30 are republicans and 30 are independents.
In a given election, let's say the independents are breaking 60:40 towards the Democrat. Then the Democrat will have 48 votes and the republican will have 42 votes. Democrat wins.
Let's add a third party candidate to this mix. Now, 7 Democrats, because of their unhappiness in the primary, vote for the third party candidate and 10 independents do the same. Then the Democrat will have 23+(30-10)*6 or 35 votes. The republican will have 30+(30-10)*4 or 38 votes and the independent (third party) will have 17 votes. The republican wins by 3.
Now imagine if the 7 Democrats don't vote third party, the Democrat will have 30+(30-10)*6 or 42 votes, the republican the same 38 votes and the independent (third party) will have 10 votes. The Democrat wins.
This distributed power becomes more acute the more evenly the independent vote splits. If the independents break 80-20 it has less effect but if they split close to 50-50, ANY defection from the Democrats is catastrophic.
Hope I made it easier to grasp!
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)"Now imagine if the 7 Democrats don't vote third party"
Sure. They write in 'Mickey Mouse' or don't fill out their ballot. We still lose. Because the problem isn't that they had too many options on the ballot.
You identified the actual problem:
"Democrats, because of their unhappiness in the primary,"
That's the thing that desperately needs to be fixed. Not grumping about people who didn't deliver votes to the candidate they claim to be loosely affiliated with the party thereof. Browbeat them all you want, it's not going to induce them to come back, and vote for the final candidate.
Your math is sound. But I note you're not making the case, as others have above, that the 3rd party votes are actually votes for the Republican in this scenario. Because they aren't voting for the Republican, even though their essentially non-participation sinks the Democratic candidate.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
lapucelle
(18,039 posts)He "mixes math [sic] and behavior" all the time.
https://cces.gov.harvard.edu/
Link to tweet
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
whopis01
(3,467 posts)It is a popular thing to say. And the point that voting for a third party instead of voting for the Democrat will be beneficial to the Republicans is correct.
But it is simply mathematically incorrect to say a vote for a third party is a vote for Trump. A vote for Trump hurts the Democratic candidate twice as much as a vote for a third party.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)I live in the real world and numbers matter. You are totally wrong https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/308353-trump-won-by-smaller-margin-than-stein-votes-in-all-three
In Michigan, Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes, while Stein got 51,463 votes, according to current totals on the states official website.
And in Wisconsin, Trumps margin over Clinton was 22,177, while Stein garnered 31,006 votes.
In Pennsylvania, meanwhile, Steins total of 49,485 votes was just slightly smaller than Trumps victory margin of 67,416 votes, according to the states latest numbers.
According to this study 25% of sanders supporters either voted for trump, a third party candidate or did not vote which number was more than enough to give trump his electoral college victory
Link to tweet
There were sufficient sanders voters who voted from trump to ensure trump's victory
Link to tweet
Again, a vote for Stein was a vote for trump and trump is POTUS due to stein and other voters
Link to tweet
A vote for stein was a vote for trump and Putin
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
whopis01
(3,467 posts)Let's be clear. I am not encouraging anyone to not vote. Nor am I encouraging them to vote for a third party.
I understand that a third party will hurt the candidate who is closest to that party. They will split the votes. that is obvious.
My problem is with the mathematical incorrectness of saying a vote for the third party is the same as a vote for the opponent. It simply is not true. The point that is being made can be made with factual statements, there is no need to use falsehoods.
Here is as simple of an example as I can provide to explain it.
Say you have 5 people voting. 1 is a solid Republicans. 2 are solid Democrats.
If the remaining two do not vote, or vote for a third party, the result is 2 to 1 in favor of the Democratic candidate.
If the remaining two vote for the Republican, the result is 3 to 2 in favor of the Republican candidate.
Mathematically different. A vote for the opponent hurts more than a vote for a third party.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)In this election, as in most, there will be only two candidates with an actual chance of winning, those being the Democratic and Republican nominees.
Every eligible person will "vote", regardless of whether they cast an actual ballot. If they do not cast a ballot for one of the two viable candidates, they will have helped elect the other. Casting a ballot for a candidate that cannot win has the exact same effect as not voting.
That's how it works. Either you tip the scale one way, or by inaction, you allow it to tip the other way.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It's bullshit. It's a trick of perspective.
Unrealized votes for your preferred candidate, are not votes for the opposition candidate, unless, and ONLY if they are ACTUALLY CAST FOR the opposition candidate.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)Your position would only hold if there were an infinite number of possible votes for each candidate. They're aren't.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Imagine a scenario where 10 people have voted for Candidate A and 10 people have voted for Candidate B.
If you vote for Candidate A, the tally is now 1110. If you vote for Candidate B, the tally is now 1011.
If you vote for neither, whether you're abstaining or voting for Candidate C, the tally remains 1010.
1010 is not the same as 1110 or 1011.
A vote for 3rd party, or an abstention from voting, is NOT a vote for the candidate you least like.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Jakes Progress
(11,121 posts)and so perfect that their vote is that precious, that they can't be called on to help bring the country into a better world? Is that person's feelings about how special they are worth locking up children, taking away women's rights, dissolving the democracy, and leaving a crap-spewing crazy person at the head of our nuclear arsenal?
Give me a break. Vote for anyone that will remove this shitstain from the White House. Those people need to get over themselves.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I think we're in deeper shit than we realize right now.
Scolding people into doing the right thing never seems to work. Using bad logic for a good cause isn't productive either.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Jakes Progress
(11,121 posts)Here's a little reality beyond number games.
If those who stayed home during the 2016 election because their favorite didn't get the nomination had voted for Clinton, we would not have children locked up, women's rights being taken away, and several hundred under 40 lifetime right wingnut judges.
Same goes for those who voted third party because they thought Hillary was "just terrible".
Suck it up. Vote for the Democratic candidate.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Oh right. It NEVER works.
It's not a logic game, it's simple math. We need a huge turnout, we need to win. You're not going to get there by browbeating people over it with bad math.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Jakes Progress
(11,121 posts)What part of this do you not get. I'm sorry if you feel that your right to sulk is greater than the need of he country, but it just isn't. If you don't like being browbeaten, see how you like living under an autocrat.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)If you don't like people pointing out that 1+0 is not 1+1, then stop asserting it. It's not how voting works. It's not how basic arithmetic works.
I understand there's an emotional component to VOTING, and specifically, to our upcoming and recent elections, but MATH GIVES ZERO FUCKS ABOUT EMOTIONS.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Jakes Progress
(11,121 posts)that had those who did as you suggest voted for Hillary, we wouldn't have trump.
That is math. This is not emotion. This is dealing with reality instead of playing math games because that makes someone feel so removed and cool. It is not cool. It obscures the reality of what happened in 2016 and will happen in 2020.
Some of us do give a fuck about what happens in the election. It seems some don't.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Do we add them to Trump's totals as well by virtue of them choosing to stay home?
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)1. A v B
2. ~A
3. B (disjunctive syllogism)
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Maybe the voter wants to keep the green party on the next ballot as a major party in X state. In my state, that's 5% of the total. An openly stated goal of the Libertarian party. They go into it, not hoping to win, but hoping to make the next ballot as a defined Major Party.
Republicans used the same 'you're voting for Hillary' logic on Libertarians that cast votes for Gary Johnson, even though Wa wasn't even close to a battleground state.
It's because the logic is bad. The voter can just stay home. That's not a vote for either Hillary or Trump, nor prospectively, Biden or Trump, depending.
Without knowing who the voter was 'most likely' leaning toward, you can't tell which candidate was helped, short of just assuming 'whoever is behind'.
You will not convert a 3rd party, or conscientious objector voter to get off their ass and vote for your candidate, by telling them that their non-vote or 3rd party vote is a vote for Trump. It's not going to work. It's unsound, and telling people what to do is the best way to get them to do the opposite.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)And I will refrain from stating what i think of anyone who would choose not to stop Trump just to get a minority party with no chance of winning on the ballot the next time around.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Not for the Voter's purposes.
If the voter is, (using my previous example of trying to keep the L party on the ballot as a Major Party) fulfilling their intent for their vote they are casting, then that's the end of it. Republicans don't get to assume that was a vote for Hillary in '16. It's simply not.
The voter wanted their vote to represent X and they cast it, and that's it. Any other re-cast of relevancy by you or I, is meaningless. It's not our vote to define the relevance.
Your vote is your vote, and yours alone. Your purposes are yours alone.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)But I don't know if calling them fools is a good way to talk them back in off the ledge.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)You cannot possibly pretend to know the mind of every single voter and their intent, and fallback plans.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Quixote1818
(28,904 posts)but states like California, NY, Alabama etc. Where they felt safe doing a protest vote and not impacting the end result.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Once upon a time, I took a picture of my completed ballot, because I expected challenges like this one, but in all honesty, you're the first person to ever pull this bullshit on me.
I voted for Hillary.
Now, please mathematically prove that a vote for Jill Stein is a vote for Trump.
(I'll save you the effort. You can't.)
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)will tip. If you do not vote to tip it one way, you have allowed it to tip the other way.
There is a finite set of voters that did not want Trump, and since casting a ballot is a deliberate act, do so in a way that removed a vote that would tip it away from Trump, tipped it to him.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)the Republican candidate have one more vote.
Listen to what you are saying. Under what circumstances would a vote for a third party be a vote for Hillary in 2016? (An argument non-republican conservatives made as well)
Feels awkward to say right? It's not math, it's a personal matter of perspective.
It's because to assume that the vote for a 3rd party candidate, or a non-vote, is equivalent to a FULL vote for your preferred candidate opposition, assumes ownership of the voter's vote. You talk in terms as if the vote is owed to your preferred candidate, or the voter is being somehow disloyal. I don't know about you, but I never signed a loyalty oath. (But yes, I did vote for Hillary even after my preferred candidate was defeated in the primary, hence my signature which is Hillary's campaign slogan, at the completion of the primary. It has been so, since the conclusion of the '16 primary.)
You don't own it. It was never yours to assume for your preferred candidate. You have to earn it. Otherwise, they stay home, throw it away, or worst case, ACTUALLY vote for the opposition candidate. THEN you ACTUALLY have voted for the opposition candidate. Then the vote totals that matter in a first-past-the-post election actually move.
No party, no candidate is OWED anything from a prospective voter. If you want to drive voters away, by all means, tell them they MUST vote for your candidate.
Edit: Oh god, 3 years of Trump has given me brain damage or something. Onward came about ~6 months after the election to pool support for Democratic candidates. I'm not going to bother fixing it, I had made other comments after the primary to show support, that can probably be found, if you want to look.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I hear libertarians talk about this all the time, just meeting ballot requirements to be listed.
Defections occurred at the Electoral level too. Washington State, solidly blue, 3 EV's went to not-Hillary. (2 to Colin Powell, and 1 to Faith Spotted Eagle.)
United States presidential election in Washington, 2016[4]
Party
Candidate
Running mate
Votes
Percentage
Electoral votes
Democratic
Hillary Clinton
Tim Kaine
1,742,718
54.30%
8
Republican
Donald Trump
Mike Pence
1,221,747
38.07%
0
Libertarian
Gary Johnson
William Weld
160,879
5.01%
0
Write-ins
102,416
3.23%
0
Green
Jill Stein
Ajamu Baraka
58,417
1.82%
0
Constitution
Darrell Castle
Scott Bradley
17,623
0.55%
0
Socialist Workers
Alyson Kennedy
Osborne Hart
4,307
0.13%
0
Socialism and Liberation
Gloria La Riva
Eugene Puryear
3,523
0.11%
0
Republican
Colin Powell
0
0.00%
3
Independent
Faith Spotted Eagle
Winona LaDuke
0
0.00%
1
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I figure it mostly cancels out, and isn't worth yelling about. Worst case, purity tests may drive away some of our voters.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
marble falls
(56,358 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
PaulRevere08
(449 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Quixote1818
(28,904 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Pepsidog
(6,252 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
subana
(586 posts)not voting, to me, is no different than voting for the asshole in charge now because it makes it a little more likely that he will get another 4 yrs!
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
MyOwnPeace
(16,888 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)But calling them fools won't make them more likely to vote or for our person.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
highplainsdem
(48,730 posts)principled certainly won't help.
And that will make it easier to sit out the next election, if they don't get exactly the candidate they want.
At the very least, they should have to explain WHY their not voting for the nominee isn't foolish. If they have to take a closer look at their reasoning, they might realize how weak it is.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)to the other peoples' perspectives.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
MyOwnPeace
(16,888 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
cstanleytech
(26,080 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
meow2u3
(24,745 posts)And that is if you're ineligible because you're too young, not a citizen, or have been convicted of a felony (in some states).
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
cannabis_flower
(3,764 posts)If you hadn't voted early and you are incapacitated - got sick (bad enough that you couldn't get up) or had a serious accidental, went into labor....
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
barbtries
(28,702 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
calimary
(80,699 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Cornell Engineer
(80 posts)that I'm pretty sure I'd vote for Charlie Manson if he were still alive and was the Dem nominee this year.
I'm also fairly certain that we could randomly pick an administration comprised of some of Charlie's former prison mates and end up with a cabinet less corrupt and more moral than the one we got now.
So if there's a God in Heaven there will be a Democrat in the White House this time next year and hopefully Biden/Bernie/Bloomberg/whoever will appoint a real Attorney General who will start putting all these anti-American assholes where they belong...in Charlie's former living quarters.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
MyOwnPeace
(16,888 posts)Guess I'm not keeping up with things like I used to. Manson died?
I guess that leaves us with the usual Bugs Bunny, Mickey Mouse, Jill Stein write-ins now?
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Cornell Engineer
(80 posts)One dead Manson is still better than one live Trump.
But if you don't wanna write-in a dead guy you could always vote for Manson's buddy Tex Watson who's still alive and eligible for parole next year.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Silver1
(721 posts)Yes in this election and every election!
Maybe the non voters should be sent to live in a dysfunctional third world country for a while so they see what it means to really live in a place where votes don't matter.
Yes, voting isn't just about what you want to happen, but also about what you don't want to happen.
I feel like this is another example of the sense of "entitlement" so many people seem to have these days. If things don't go their way, they dismiss whatever is going on around them. Usually with cynicism. Personally, I can't stand cynics.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
jayschool2013
(2,309 posts)but I'll vote for the nominee with a "D" next to their name in November, even if it's Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont).
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
highplainsdem
(48,730 posts)she should.
It should still be a four-way race coming out of Iowa.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Turin_C3PO
(13,650 posts)Calling them fools is being too kind, IMO. Anyone who doesnt vote Dem, I dont care who the nominee is, is responsible for another Trump term.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
whathehell
(28,969 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Magoo48
(4,659 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Still In Wisconsin
(4,450 posts)This is her FIRST election. I hope there aren't too many more like her, but I fear there are. Bernie Sanders seems to attract followers who are fiercely loyal to him (and that's fine) but don't care about anything or anyone else (that's NOT fine).
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Keep talking. That vote isn't lost until the polls close, if Bernie isn't the nominee.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
ramen
(783 posts)I know I can and must.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
geardaddy
(24,924 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
tiredtoo
(2,949 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
grumpyduck
(6,198 posts)if he were the Dem nominee.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Ingersollman
(204 posts)Vote Blue No Matter Who.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
keithbvadu2
(36,369 posts)Ideological purity is a lot of it. I would even vote for Sanders if it was him against Trump.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Doremus
(7,261 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
dewsgirl
(14,961 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
PatrickforO
(14,516 posts)- either a Democrat in name only, or
- utterly lazy and ignorant, or
- unable to vote due to suppression.
With the exception of #3, someone who is a Democrat and doesn't vote straight blue in November is awfully blind to what's going on and what is at stake.
I don't like the word 'fool,' though, but that's just me.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
bluestarone
(16,722 posts)BLUE all the way!
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
cab67
(2,963 posts)They're selfish and arrogant. They're saying that their feelings are more important than the future of the country. They're saying that we're not all in this together, and that it's our fault they're acting in a way that could harm the whole world.
I have no patience for "you have to earn my vote" in the general election. One of two people will be elected. We can work toward the world we want while keeping grounded in the world that exists.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
QualTest
(84 posts)Everyone keeps wanting Bernie and his supporters to PLEDGE that they will support "Unity", and vote for whomever is
the D nominee. However, I don't see anyone asking the other candidates this same question. Actually, I see people like
HRC actually hedging, and saying they may not support Sanders if he were the nominee.
Can we please STOP this "unity" purity test? I does not seem like it's very fair and balanced!
When I hear Hillary, Perez, and all the DNC minions get on the MSM and in one voice say,
"YES, we will get behind Bernie, Warren, or anyone...." At the convention, no games, no BS!
Then we can go here.
As I've said before, I'm NOT a Bernie/Warren supporter at this point, but I'm really just looking that
everyone on the ballot gets an even shake. SO far it looks to me that this "unity" street is running 1 way.
My .02
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
MyOwnPeace
(16,888 posts)You may have been watching/following for some time, and you may be bringing a new and refreshing perspective, but I'd say I'm tending to question your position in the issue. Why do you question anyone asking about "sincerity" to the party?
I'm not locked into any candidate at this point, but I do understand the need for solidarity and dedication to the party and what it stand for and offers to all. That being said, I don't see any problem with questioning that commitment of solidarity and support from someone asking for it as the party nominee. Why should I spend my "support money" on someone who might jump ship and not be a loyal candidate/nominee?
I don't know.
Do you?
As for me, I'm gonna' vote blue, no matter who!
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
My problem is that is seems that the question only seems to go toward the
"Left/Progressive" candidates & their supporters.
Why is this not universal? Not just here on DU, but in MSM, and everywhere?
I don't have an issue with the question, and I'm happy to support anyone not Trump, but...
It seems that many who are "Centrist/Establishment do have a problem.
We want party fealty from the left side of the party,
but we won't sign up for the reciprocal.
We like unity only if it's the "right" D, seems to be what I'm seeing.
As I said, I'm all about fairness, and that doesn't seem quite right to me.
My perception. Seems like a lot of insider stuff, and less concern about Drumpf!
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
elleng
(130,152 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
highplainsdem
(48,730 posts)foolish belief that not voting or voting third party is somehow more principled or smarter than voting for the nominee, in a crucial election.
If we let people think it's perfectly okay not to vote, or to vote third party, that makes it much more likely they'll do so next time.
So it's important to try to get them to defend their decision. It's important to lay out the arguments against it, rather than sympathizing and saying you're sorry they didn't get the nominee they wanted and the majority of the party chose someone else.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I've argued, in context, somewhat against what came out of your OP, but this post of yours is better. I agree the behavior is foolish, but yeah, calling names and getting in peoples faces is NOT gonna fix it.
Anyway, thank you for your follow-up post.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
MGKrebs
(8,138 posts)are idiots?
I hope not. Even if it's true we don't need to actually say it out loud like that. Not helpful.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Warpy
(110,910 posts)Young, naive and wrong, maybe, but not fools.
I save that for people who are old enough to know better.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
highplainsdem
(48,730 posts)making a mistake they're likely to regret later.
Don't let them think not voting is a smart decision, a principled decision, some kind of worthy protest, when that will just help Trump.
If they're young, they're already seeing lots of messages in social media about not voting if you don't get the one candidate you prefer. Some of those messages will probably be posted by Russian bots.
Offer some solid reasoning to counter that.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
nini
(16,670 posts)I might have to hold my nose but I'll do it.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
SKKY
(11,772 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Nitram
(22,671 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
in2herbs
(2,942 posts)important to me and because 8 or 9 million more people voted against Trump than voted for him I don't see the Ds future being as dark as some would like us to believe if voters exercise their choice. Ds have to fight to beat trump but we must not forget that trump has never been popular with those who vote.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
herding cats
(19,549 posts)Not to mention the myriad of other reasons we must win in November.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Dem4Life1102
(3,974 posts)There are too many that won't vote or will vote third policy if their preferred candidate doesn't win. It's a "play by my rules or I'll take my ball and go home" mentality. I don't know how to combat that. There are still people that to this day will proudly declare that they refused to vote for Clinton in 16 because she was the lesser of 2 evils.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
musicblind
(4,484 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
BlueWI
(1,736 posts)We need to stop scapegoating and win the damn election.
Period.
And respecting differences and winning voters over is a better strategy than slandering voters with a broad brush.
In fact, a better question would be: what policy positions among Democrats would broaden our appeal if they were emphasized in advertising and communication?
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
highplainsdem
(48,730 posts)this OP.
We have what is essentially a two-party system. The only way to achieve any real power is to work within one party of that system.
And that, because of the size of the party, inevitably means a lot of people will simply not be thrilled with the nominee, or the party platform.
Vote blue, no matter who, anyway.
And then work on the policy differences.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
BlueWI
(1,736 posts)which we routinely fail on doing successfully in national elections. And you didn't mention advertising or communication in your response. Generally, Democratic positions poll better than Republican positions do, but we lose our fair share of elections in part because we don't emphasize advertising and communication strategies enough. There are definitely policy positions that have broad agreement among Democrats. Why isn't more of our individual and collective work, as a party, focused on communication strategy?
It's obvious that the vast majority of Democrats vote blue, and liberals are the most reliable voting block (as opposed to moderates and conservatives, or the white majority, for that matter, who make Republicans win way more frequently than "Bernie Bros." . This OP doesn't call out the primary scapegoats that exit polling identifies. So what's the point?
We need to do the hard work of building up the Democratic brand based on common values, or we lose in 2020. There are always outlying third parties, Ross Perot, John Anderson, Gary Johnson, they draw from both parties. A much bigger problem is the the to craft a national message that resonates as widely as possible.
"I'm with her" wasn't that message. Neither was "a better deal." There's work to do on that, and time is short.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)This is the way.
Browbeating fence-sitters and undecideds, and people maybe interested in third parties, is NOT going to bring them to your preferred candidate. Never has, never will.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
BlueWI
(1,736 posts)Most independent or third party voters have a preferred major party too. Votes for our side will happen with a good message.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
The Revolution
(763 posts)I think there is a sort of an attitude of "that will show them" among some that are more to the left. Meaning, that will vote 3rd party if their preferred candidate doesn't get the nomination, thereby encouraging the party to nominate someone further left.
The funny thing is, what this really does is probably push the party further right, as the voters on the left are not supporting it, and it seeks out voters that will be more reliable.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)And your last paragraph, pointing that out to those voters, is at least a better strategy than telling them the upthread 'your vote for stein is a vote for trump' nonsense.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Hekate
(90,192 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden