Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Could there EVER be good reason to choose a DLC/THIRD WAY/BLUE DOG presidential nominee again? [View all]Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)263. If the Tea Party IS destroying the GOP brand, we don't HAVE to choose HRC.
The ONLY argument for her would be if the country was moving massively to the Right...and it isn't.
And, btw, I AM working on the 2014 Congressional races...but the Blue Dogs and the DLC types your candidate is backed by don't WANT our party to take Congress back. They LIKED what things were like after 1994. The fact that Bill Clinton refused to try to get even a Democratic House back in 1996(something that should have been automatic like it was in 1948 and 1954)proves that.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
340 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Could there EVER be good reason to choose a DLC/THIRD WAY/BLUE DOG presidential nominee again? [View all]
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
OP
Perhaps so. But they lack confidence in the strength of the progressive position.
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#22
That arrogant assumption that only a select few of you are true progressives is nonsense.
Beacool
Jan 2014
#77
There is no confusion between who are the progressives and who are the conservative DEmocrats.
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#242
OK, as individuals you CAN be progressive. But why back the anti-progressive candidate?
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#244
She voted for Bush's wars and supported them even after it was proven to her he had lied. If she did
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#61
that's why many progressives who are left of Clinton no longer really self identify as
liberal_at_heart
Jan 2014
#267
President Clinton was correct to have a change of heart re: Glass-Steagall.
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2014
#189
You're forgetting that Clinton PUSHED those Dems to pass Gramm-Leach-Bliley.
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#250
Self-loathing in terms of your core values-didn't mean self-loathing as human beings.
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#266
In my view Clinton's NAFTA+GATT+Welfare Reform are not tiny nor insignificant and
Ninga
Jan 2014
#275
OK...we could get a "photo negative" version of the "What have the Romans ever done for us?" scene
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#324
What did he do that you liked? Throwing health care overboard in order to pursue his economic
Egalitarian Thug
Jan 2014
#51
The economy boomed because a revolutionary technology exploded into the the
Egalitarian Thug
Jan 2014
#56
If you believe that the economy boomed because of a short lived .com bubble
AgingAmerican
Jan 2014
#98
Did I say that? No. The economy and the stock market had only the most
Egalitarian Thug
Jan 2014
#101
Sorry I would vote for Zombie Hitler over a bluedog, namely because he would eat opponents.
Katashi_itto
Jan 2014
#18
I will vote 3rd party then. I will not vote for "death by a thousand paper cuts"
Katashi_itto
Jan 2014
#15
I am jumping off the "lesser evil" merry-go-round. I won't go around on it another time.
GoneFishin
Jan 2014
#42
You have expressed very well the biggest issue the Democratic Party faces.
Egalitarian Thug
Jan 2014
#106
Funny how the 3rd way never moves to the left but pushes the left to move right.
L0oniX
Jan 2014
#166
As it has apparently escaped your notice, we've been down the rabbit hole and through the looking
Egalitarian Thug
Jan 2014
#107
Yeah I know, it's so insufferable to worry about war crimes and the destruction of the working class
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#200
I am living with the consequences of people buying Nader's crap in 2000 and voting for a third party
Gothmog
Jan 2014
#34
BS, you are living with the theft of an election that had zero to do with the legalities of politics
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#69
Can't do that, there's too many criminals wearing blue so we have to "look forward". n/t
Egalitarian Thug
Jan 2014
#108
All Gore won the election, the Feloniouos Five on the SC stole it. End of story.
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#295
Yes, we all used to feel that way not so long ago, but you belong to a shrinking minority now that
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#80
Yes, we should do a Bush v Gore 2.0 in 2016. That'll teach those Democrats!
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2014
#142
'Die hards'? Well, your idea of die hards and mine are obviously different. The die hards who keep
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#177
Yes, Sabrina, we obviously have different takes on what a "die-hard" is, and
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2014
#181
We lost in 2010 because of the die hards who insisted that we had no choice but to continue to
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#194
You seem to believe the "passionate Left" is in a minority and must settle for junior-partner status
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#279
Problem there was that your candidate was unknown, not that he was progressive.
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#287
Yes, let's do that and let's find someone who will make sure we have PROGRESSIVES on the SC rather
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#76
Well we've been working that way for decades now and it hasn't worked for millions of people, not
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#173
Many people don't notice the GOP has gone terminal, I wouldn't trust them with the Button
uponit7771
Jan 2014
#110
Will she be campaigning to the left of Senator Obama or President Obama?
winter is coming
Jan 2014
#91
Well, I guess our party is banking on people like you. Voting yet again for the lesser
Katashi_itto
Jan 2014
#114
And I have no problems with your strategy. However believing thats the only strategy available is
Katashi_itto
Jan 2014
#193
Oh I agree with everything except the last part. I used to vote that way. Saw where it got us
Katashi_itto
Jan 2014
#196
Thanks, but if you ever want to get heard, let me know I would be happy to craft a PSA that declares
Katashi_itto
Jan 2014
#199
Don't you get it? People have moved way beyond the 'lesser evil' manipulation. We have 'moved
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#64
You may be right but I think the argument is that we must have someone more progressive
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#39
It's funny how the Tea Party dolts believe President Obama is a socialist/commie
Common Sense Party
Jan 2014
#148
Some here are not willing to fight for their freedoms and liberties. They support the status quo
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#41
Good grief. You really want a list? YOu ask the question as if you cant think of
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#214
I wasn't aware of any Democrat who has moved to nullify habeus corpus
Common Sense Party
Jan 2014
#228
Non-awareness is no excuse. My statement was that some here arent willing to fight for
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#234
I said that there are some that are unwilling to fight for their freedoms and liberties. They are
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#240
I see, this is about Obama. The hell with the freedoms and liberties, but how can we defend Obama.
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#243
A couple of things. Your "that's good enough for me" is what is killing the middle class.
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#58
You seem to spend a lot of time here. By your logic, how do you have time to 'work to get
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#94
I never doubted that people walk away from their computers, that was YOUR accusation against
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#296
EVERY nominee becomes DLC/THIRD WAY/BLUE DOG the moment they say something "unprogressive"
wyldwolf
Jan 2014
#45
Certainly when they get chummy with Goldman-Sachs and the Carlyle Group. nm
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#75
and most definitely when a pic surfaces of them within the same 20 mile radius as a Bush
wyldwolf
Jan 2014
#105
And most definitely when they pardon the Bush Gang and let Gov Siegelman rot in prison. nm
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#215
You're talking about Democrats, right? 'Once elected they have to govern' which means
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#179
I'm a Democrat so in my world winning means YOU get to set the agenda and compromise doesn't
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#197
when a president wins, she sets the agenda. But there's this inconvenient thing called Congress
wyldwolf
Jan 2014
#223
now that the civics lesson is over, tell me how that happens in the current political climate?
wyldwolf
Jan 2014
#232
The 'current political climate' is no different and in some ways even BETTER than it has always been
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#298
Seem you are trying to rationalize why Bill Clinton signed NAFTA and killed Glass-Steigall or
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#219
Never even crossed my mind, but as long as you're reaching into your faux psychic grab bag...
wyldwolf
Jan 2014
#224
wrong, one poster started (discussing and being civil) and you never even tried.
bobduca
Jan 2014
#288
I have no use for anyone who puts words in my mouth or who states his guesses as fact
wyldwolf
Jan 2014
#293
Even FDR gets "trashed" on the DU if someone thinks it will make Obama look one scintilla better
Fumesucker
Jan 2014
#277
Contractarian Clinton policy bolstered the Work not Welfare crowd. I think it gave repukes
Ed Suspicious
Jan 2014
#55
If they get more votes than a progressive liberal in the primary is the only good reason I can think
Agnosticsherbet
Jan 2014
#57
I guess that the masturbatory posts of the Left will continue for the next two years.
Beacool
Jan 2014
#79
You are not part of this 'left' you speak of with so much disdain? 'masturbatory'? I have heard
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#81
I can't think of a better time to let the Party know what the voters want. Are you suggesting that
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#88
Well if you don't like the left stating facts in response to the pushing of a candidate on them
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#96
It is horrible, Bea. We've had -40, That is the same in Farenheit and the in Celsius and
Whisp
Jan 2014
#185
A good reason? I suppose the fact that the Third Wayers are much more likely to get a lot more
Douglas Carpenter
Jan 2014
#104
there is a center-right but not completely insane party that at least has some glue to reality and
Douglas Carpenter
Jan 2014
#117
I would say that a battle between the Clintonites and the So-Called Progressives is bad news
alcibiades_mystery
Jan 2014
#126
Hell, I might even take the 20 some odd So-Called Progressives I have on ignore off the list
alcibiades_mystery
Jan 2014
#204
What do you mean "So-Called Progressive"? There are a lot more progressives than there centrists
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#249
Well if you were a more moderate centrist Democrat than I suppose they might represent
el_bryanto
Jan 2014
#132
Well then isn't it time to stop whining and get busy finding Democratic candidates to vote for
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#182
She's no more popular than any other Dem candidate that's being talked about.
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#246
Could there EVER be a good reason to stop talking about the least useful position in the government?
randome
Jan 2014
#211
You know perfectly well there's no good reason for Warren to WANT HRC nominated.
Ken Burch
Jan 2014
#265
You mean as opposed to Sarah Palin, or Mitt Romney, or Chris Christie, or Paul Ryan, or
Squinch
Jan 2014
#255
They are predators. They are corporatists who put on Democrat costumes
woo me with science
Jan 2014
#305