General Discussion

primavera

(5,191 posts)

166. Is short term winning the only thing that matters?

Mon Dec 19, 2011, 11:22 AM

Dec 2011

What about long term losing? I often wonder about this. I mean, I understand that Kucinich could not get the 270 electoral votes needed to win today, that's a given. But if we ran someone like Kucinich, who represented Democratic values, losing would at least afford the opportunity to make the country aware that there was, in fact, an alternative point of view, a better way. They might not be ready to hear it today, but tomorrow or the next day, maybe they would be ready to listen. If we preemptively assume that the public is only ready to hear one viewpoint and endorse that viewpoint with our middle of the road candidate, maybe we'll win an election today that way, but the price we pay is that we've sacrificed the truth that there IS a better way, which will never be discussed because it's considered politically unfashionable and not a winning platform. You make that same tactical decision over and over and over again - as we have been since Clinton - and, thirty years later, you find yourself in a country so far to the right that even the right's patron saints like Ronnie Raygun and Barry Goldwater would be horrified to see where we've wound up. Is there no point at which it's strategically - if not tactically - advisable to stand up for what's right, even if it means losing today, so you have at least some chance of achieving what's right tomorrow? Or is it just hopeless and we need to reconcile ourselves to making ever greater and greater compromises in a national debate led by the rightwing that isn't afraid to speak their minds?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

167 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Who more "progressive" do you want nominated, then explain just how he/she gets 270 electoral votes. [View all] RBInMaine Dec 2011 OP

Kind of a pointless question, Obama is already our nominee. tridim Dec 2011 #1

If he is, then why the continued attacks here by so-called 'progressives'? MH1 Dec 2011 #69

Because they can. JTFrog Dec 2011 #162

It's pointless because no one who will satisfy the left side of DU exists. JohnnyRingo Dec 2011 #86

Maybe, but it's the Left side that pulls the party in that direction. tblue Dec 2011 #105

I'd bet they don't pull it Left. Extortion is recognized by oppo, which uses the weakening effect of patrice Dec 2011 #115

That's a very good point JohnnyRingo Dec 2011 #135

Yeah, they exist AmericaIsGreat Dec 2011 #150

Good luck with this CakeGrrl Dec 2011 #2

Those who think that are hyperbolic non-realists who'd waste votes on Nader. Nuff said. RBInMaine Dec 2011 #57

Right, and we all know how valid conventional wisdom is: e.g. Invasion & Occupation of Iraq; Deregul patrice Dec 2011 #116

Hi, RB- You are mixing your opinion with fact. Shame on you. MrTriumph Dec 2011 #3

OK, please explain exactly how Dennis Kucinich could win. (I think you need to find the planet.) RBInMaine Dec 2011 #56

50? Name them. RBInMaine Dec 2011 #58

I'm shocked that you think DK or Sanders would be electable JohnnyRingo Dec 2011 #87

Can you please name me a Democrat that Fox would not call an extreme leftist? Bjorn Against Dec 2011 #97

fact is it matters what fox says. even more so it matters what RW radio says to 50 mil a week certainot Dec 2011 #134

While I don't disagree with that it does not answer my question at all. Bjorn Against Dec 2011 #137

it's not a matter of winning their support. we let them decide where the center is and how the certainot Dec 2011 #142

Just explain how ONE of your fifty could win the election, realistically. pnwmom Dec 2011 #100

I'd settle for anyone in your list and I don't care if we don't win. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #4

You don't care it we don't win? drm604 Dec 2011 #9

Yes I am willing to take a few hits if we can turn that into progress. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #12

Well then drm604 Dec 2011 #16

I'm sure most people are so disgusted with both parties that they don't bother to vote. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #17

Even if you think that it's okay to sacrifice people who don't vote drm604 Dec 2011 #20

why? We just get more of the same either way. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #41

You may believe that there would be no meaningful changes, but you're wrong. drm604 Dec 2011 #42

Quoting a Republican disagreeing with the President? A Simple Game Dec 2011 #63

I'm sorry but your response confuses me. drm604 Dec 2011 #71

What makes you think there will ever be "huge changes," as you define the term? BzaDem Dec 2011 #84

Question Hippo_Tron Dec 2011 #85

I don't know whether that would have happened under a Gore or Kerry Administration MNBrewer Dec 2011 #159

Then they have no need to bitch a single syllable. And they can go back to the sandbox and play. RBInMaine Dec 2011 #60

" bitch a single syllable" nt. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #73

that's what the media is selling, and they thank you for buying Whisp Dec 2011 #112

"I am willing to take a few hits if we can turn that into progress." MilesColtrane Dec 2011 #34

You're awfully trusting of the GOP, to think that CakeGrrl Dec 2011 #49

Does "few hits" include people suffering & dying from lack of appropriate health care, patrice Dec 2011 #117

yes exactly. I am sick and tired of getting more of the same and being told I should be happy Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #45

You're answering me a second time? drm604 Dec 2011 #50

I don't think there is time to get something better for myself, A Simple Game Dec 2011 #65

So? All of us have lists of things that we do, despite being "sick and tired" of them. BzaDem Dec 2011 #81

Unreal. You do understand this a Democratic forum don't you? tridim Dec 2011 #11

yes I do - did you have a point, or are you just making thinly veiled threats? Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #14

I alerted with a TOS check. LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #21

oh good for you! Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #39

The Goldwater splinterization was precisely what enabled Democrats to pass the great society. BzaDem Dec 2011 #75

And it won't even necessarily do that! It REALLY could drive them in the opposite direction from patrice Dec 2011 #118

what he's saying is true after Obama's next 4 years: who will secure the D win then? It is an open StarsInHerHair Dec 2011 #143

Not a threat, a statement of fact. tridim Dec 2011 #22

Actually it's not just for Democrats. Iggo Dec 2011 #26

It's for people who support voting for Democrats. tridim Dec 2011 #28

Support is a funny word, especially around here. Iggo Dec 2011 #30

at least be honest. You made a threat. And now you are making another one. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #52

yeah these supporters have gone way over the edge now alerting on threads that do not deserve it StarsInHerHair Dec 2011 #144

People that don't think Obama is the best candidate are anti Democrat? A Simple Game Dec 2011 #68

"... don't we?" Oh come on, almost no one posts under his/her real name around here, who knows patrice Dec 2011 #123

except that it isn't any more, sadly. dionysus Dec 2011 #51

"Otherwise it is just more of the same" LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #19

Pay attention to the argument. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #46

+1 rtassi Dec 2011 #108

Your best guess: How long a term? Culminating in what kind of party agenda? patrice Dec 2011 #119

I don't know how long. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #167

So have you and yours. You have established and full throatedly supported a death spiral TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #72

well put TheKentuckian StarsInHerHair Dec 2011 #146

Wonderful post dreamnightwind Dec 2011 #157

I nominate Warren Stupidity to primary Obama! Itchinjim Dec 2011 #44

I'm sorry but the Stupidity Ticket is already filled to overflowing. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #47

bet every problem will be solved in 1 hour Whisp Dec 2011 #113

"Lose elections to make progress."???????????????????? Nuff said. RBInMaine Dec 2011 #54

see goldwater '64. nt. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #59

I've seen this idea raised before - Summer Hathaway Dec 2011 #74

You mean "thoroughly hated" like Reagan? JohnnyRingo Dec 2011 #89

We already tried your method when we lost to George Bush twice. pnwmom Dec 2011 #101

They have no answer for you. They'd rather froth at the mouth than deal with reality. MjolnirTime Dec 2011 #5

thanks for the broad brush smear. I answered the OP above. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #6

It's not a broad brush. It applies to a very small, very vocal group of Obama deriders. MjolnirTime Dec 2011 #7

where small equals around half of the active participants of DU. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #10

between 100-200 is not even close to half of DUs active participants MjolnirTime Dec 2011 #13

I see. You are sure of those numbers? Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #15

With the new functionality to see who is making recs, it is clear. MjolnirTime Dec 2011 #23

Likewise. Edweird Dec 2011 #32

Make it 201 Charlemagne Dec 2011 #147

Hell there are 95 avowed SOCIALISTS on DU socialist_n_TN Dec 2011 #25

Sure, there are plenty of non-socialist liberals. But most of them support Obama for re-election. BzaDem Dec 2011 #78

There's a difference between voting for Obama socialist_n_TN Dec 2011 #138

You've read DU wrong. People here accept he will be the nominee, they just wish he was more liberal bettyellen Dec 2011 #8

You can "wish" for it to rain ham sandwiches too. Someone "more liberal" CAN NOT WIN THE ELECTION. RBInMaine Dec 2011 #55

your opinions amuse me. But your angry tone make me hope you're not out there stumpimg. bettyellen Dec 2011 #61

I think the saddest thing is that we DID elect a someone more liberal. Then he showed his true aka-chmeee Dec 2011 #80

Dup Self Delete. snagglepuss Dec 2011 #82

DING DING DING We have a winner. snagglepuss Dec 2011 #83

I cannot imagine how anyone could have taken candidate Obama for anything like a Liberal. patrice Dec 2011 #120

Yeah, it is the craziest thing. emulatorloo Dec 2011 #128

We could always make the claim that he is actually MORE Liberal than how he presented himself, with patrice Dec 2011 #131

Do you think not knowing about the Derivative Crash of '08 might have had an effect upon patrice Dec 2011 #121

So the solution to the crash & economic crisis Charlemagne Dec 2011 #153

Tell me what he was supposed to do about what he DIDN'T KNOW about that crash. patrice Dec 2011 #154

+1 Charlemagne Dec 2011 #148

I agree. Progressives were duped. Obama talked a lot about "change" LibDemAlways Dec 2011 #160

partly because you and other obama supporters refuse to move left. tomp Dec 2011 #155

Wow! I've seen posts that went waaaay beyond "wishing". JohnnyRingo Dec 2011 #92

I actually think that Bernie could win socialist_n_TN Dec 2011 #18

I agree with this, BUT: Ship of Fools Dec 2011 #40

Pick any name libtodeath Dec 2011 #24

So do that and Utah, Idaho, Alabama, Texas, and Mississippi are going to turn bright blue? Ya right. RBInMaine Dec 2011 #62

So which one of those states did Obama win in the last election? Bjorn Against Dec 2011 #98

Actually those tactics would work, being bold, speaking in one voice, WHEN CRABS ROAR Dec 2011 #106

Would it matter if they have no support in congress? abelenkpe Dec 2011 #27

I'm thinking Gov. Brian Schweitzer or Elizabeth Warren in 2016. It's way too late Zorra Dec 2011 #29

100% agree mvd Dec 2011 #33

Remember now that Schweitzer is gun advocate. No where near a purist "progressive." But I agree RBInMaine Dec 2011 #64

well that was the other part of your argument that was insulting and silly. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #67

I have to say anyone who can get elected statewide in Ohio dsc Dec 2011 #31

Brown Charlemagne Dec 2011 #145

Depends who they're up against Ter Dec 2011 #35

The focus on personalities instead of principles and issues is the problem, not the solution saras Dec 2011 #36

+1 rtassi Dec 2011 #109

You know, most of us aren't proud of the system. We know what it is and that's why we disagree patrice Dec 2011 #132

Oh boy ... Ship of Fools Dec 2011 #37

OBVIOUSLY this is not plausible in 2012. There is no choice but to support Obama's reelction Douglas Carpenter Dec 2011 #38

I'm sick of voting for the best reformer of capitalism, to be honest. nt Modern_Matthew Dec 2011 #43

Even Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich are reformers of capitalism Douglas Carpenter Dec 2011 #48

We've had a long string of 'capitalism reformers'. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #53

So? Lots of people do things they are sick of. Just because you are sick of something does not mean BzaDem Dec 2011 #79

Now there is a winning poliltical theme! 'Abandon all hope of change' Bluenorthwest Dec 2011 #88

But it doesn't apply to most people. It merely applies to people whose definition of "change" BzaDem Dec 2011 #96

Ah yes, capitalistic "realism" rears it's ugly head socialist_n_TN Dec 2011 #133

It doesn't need to be 1980 for it to be true that capitalism isn't going anywhere. BzaDem Dec 2011 #161

Silly to you maybe. And to the owners themselves? Sure..... socialist_n_TN Dec 2011 #165

Even if those people were President, they'd still be President of the same country treestar Dec 2011 #66

Few who criticize policy would want to elect a 'red communist' and that sort of tripe is what Bluenorthwest Dec 2011 #90

A more progressive candidate will be nominated. But, he/she probably won't win. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #70

Anyone more progressive. Tired of playing ball on the Republican home field. mmonk Dec 2011 #76

Two words: Citizens United nadinbrzezinski Dec 2011 #77

No time this time unless history makes a tide unpredicted Bluenorthwest Dec 2011 #91

Canidate castnet55 Dec 2011 #93

K&R -- Good point. No one we might ideally choose would win. nt gateley Dec 2011 #94

I will tell you how we win, by not giving up and letting you tell us that we can't win. Bjorn Against Dec 2011 #95

+1000 NorthCarolina Dec 2011 #103

the same way Obama did Enrique Dec 2011 #99

Assuming Bernie ran as a Democrat, I think he would win. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #102

agreed ... rtassi Dec 2011 #110

If Sanders, Kucinich, Brown or Grayson were in the running, I'd be like "Obama who?". NorthCarolina Dec 2011 #104

Democratic approval for President Obama is consistently around 80% on Gallup. CakeGrrl Dec 2011 #125

And I should care what Gallup says because???? NorthCarolina Dec 2011 #127

Have you been polled? JDPriestly Dec 2011 #129

I'll do you one better: I'll show you how a liberal/progressive can get 365 electoral votes... DRoseDARs Dec 2011 #107

A union supporter who will de-militarize our foreign and domestic policies ... T S Justly Dec 2011 #111

Gen David Patreaus is waiting in the wings.... lib2DaBone Dec 2011 #114

Kind of a sad and pointless post... jimlup Dec 2011 #122

I agree ... but let's move on ... there will be no primary .. JoePhilly Dec 2011 #124

Well said. -nt CakeGrrl Dec 2011 #126

Excellent plan. Good post n/t emulatorloo Dec 2011 #130

1. Kucinich! Sanders! Kucinich! Sanders! 2. Er................ (nt) Nye Bevan Dec 2011 #136

Wow. What a massive misdirection. ChadwickHenryWard Dec 2011 #139

You just don't get it do you? Not worth explaining! n-t Logical Dec 2011 #140

So we give up.. bluestateboomer Dec 2011 #141

If the midterms are any indication, making a smug point is a victory in itself to these guys Sen. Walter Sobchak Dec 2011 #149

People shouldn't vote based on whether or not they think that person can get 270 electoral votes Cali_Democrat Dec 2011 #151

Who says Sanders and Grayson are not progressive enough? AmericaIsGreat Dec 2011 #152

If what you say is true, voting is not important now anyway. caseymoz Dec 2011 #156

Who ever it is why can't they get tp 270 EVs the same way Obama would? ... GOTV Dec 2011 #158

Bernie Sanders gael Dec 2011 #163

I believe that Somebody who would fight FOR these Progressive Policies & Issues: bvar22 Dec 2011 #164

Is short term winning the only thing that matters? primavera Dec 2011 #166