General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Ms. Sarandon, self-righteous liberals, Hillary Haters, all the rest, SEE what's happening TODAY? [View all]LiberalLovinLug
(14,565 posts)an invitation and was involuntarily seated at the same table, at a news media's international invitational conference, with other party leaders and dignitaries of countries from around the world, where there were no interpreters, with no verbal exchange between them, kind of de-legitimizes anything else you say. Convenient conspiracy theories from one side are just as ridiculous as made up conspiracy theories from the other. And sadly devalues any further arguments.
I can separate a leader and party's competing progressive platform from the practical and prudent need to vote Democratic over Green. Sarandon was pig-headed and wrong to vote Green, even if out of frustration with her perceived belief that the Democrats choice was not willing to move fast enough on progressive policy.
But the implication that a democracy should be defined as only having two parties running, simply based on what's always been, is the antithesis of what democracy means IMO. If one believes, say, in freedom of speech, another standard of a democracy, for everyone no matter their viewpoint, then the same principle should hold for those wanting to run for office IMO
As someone else said on here, you get more using honey rather than vinegar. The answer is not to curtail democracy, and demonize progressive leaders from other parties that are exercising their democratic right to run, but to woo the more radical progressive voters back into the Democratic tent with more progressive ideas, that makes the other progressive party moot.