Only 11% of Democrats polled want a more liberal presidential nominee than Hillary Clinton

[bigtree]

221. I'll consider that

Last edited Wed Jun 18, 2014, 10:10 PM - Edit history (1)

. . . you make a compelling case, and it would be foolish to disagree with what you've said here. I'll just say that I'm not really certain where all of what you've said is going to manifest itself. Politics is certainly about challenging government to change, but it's also a place where we try and reconcile our myriad of differences from disparate regions around the nation.

Nothing happens, as you've expressed, unless the people demand it from their legislators, in and out of office. Yet, in our legislature there is an impetus to compromise; it's the nature of our democracy. Our legislature provides room to both argue and compromise. There's very little room for legislators to just dictate one pov or the other.

There's a need to form coalitions with folks who may not share every plank of someone's agenda to advance legislation, and there's not always a guarantee that there will be a new legislature in time for you, or us, to force through perfect voting bloc in Congress. The electorate is too diverse.

I don't see a shortcut to generating the needed support among the electorate for whatever ideal or initiative we want to advance first - then comes the voting and the electing, and the pressuring of these pols. The voting is everything, and it's up to the candidate to convince the voters as much as it takes voters to make their demands of the candidates.

Not everything is going to yield to demanding; some politics will need consensus. That means forming coalitions; much like we organize under our Democratic banner. It's a process, more than it's a brawl, and nothing is ever guaranteed in our political system.