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
 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
28. I strongly disagree re 2000
Mon Apr 13, 2015, 02:13 PM
Apr 2015

An acrimonious primary can hurt the eventual winner, but the Bradley vs. Gore duel was quite civil. If anything, Gore would've been better off if there'd been more fireworks on his road to the nomination, to get him more publicity despite the ongoing fierce battle on the Republican side. Even as it was, it helped get him some exposure, some recent debate experience, some warmup for his staff and volunteers, etc.

Media matters pointed out in months when the primary was run for Gore, that was the time when the corporation media smeared Gore with silly lies.


Is it your argument that, if Bradley hadn't run, silly lies that were thrown at Gore would never have surfaced? I'd think it more likely that they would have come out anyway, but in the fall, when they would have been more damaging.

I don't understand your conclusion. This part seems to suggest that Chafee, O'Malley, Sanders, and Webb should just abandon any idea of campaigning and wear their Ready for Hillary lapel pins 24/7 until Election Day:

A primary would only leave the corporations in charge of the election:
let support our candidates Hillary has been a loyal democrat for almost
thirty years: We all know her, we need to spend out time helping her and
win the Senate and House back.


But then you write:

Let's leave the primary up to democrats to decide....


I agree with that part. Let Hillary run, but let her face an opponent from the more progressive win of the party, and let Democrats in primaries and caucuses around the country decide who'll be the nominee.

As for Citizens United and the Kochs, I don't foresee lots of corporate money flooding into television ads attacking Hillary as too conservative. To the contrary -- in the general election, we'll certainly see any Democrat attacked as being too liberal. If Hillary is the nominee, she'll be better positioned if she can point out that she was the more conservative candidate in the primaries. "You call me a socialist? Ha! I ran in the primaries against a real Socialist and I beat him! I'm in the sensible middle."

Recommendations

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

There MUST be at least one challenger. This allows progressive ideas to be seen by the public. TheBlackAdder Apr 2015 #1
Why would she not have challengers? MineralMan Apr 2015 #2
Exactly! There are going to be challengers, and I hope for a rigorous debate among them. BlueCaliDem Apr 2015 #4
K n R. Yes she needs a challenge. mylye2222 Apr 2015 #3
It's not up to us whether she has challengers or not. MoonRiver Apr 2015 #5
There will be a primary challenge. hrmjustin Apr 2015 #6
Hillary the is only non-coward: It didn't help Gore to have a primary Challenge lewebley3 Apr 2015 #7
Umm, Gore won. The SCOTUS Cyrano Apr 2015 #10
Gore dispatched of Bill Bradley rather easily.../NT DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #23
All recent non-incumbent victors have emerged from contested nomination fights. Jim Lane Apr 2015 #26
Jim Lane, All the Primary did to Gore was hurt him!! lewebley3 Apr 2015 #27
I strongly disagree re 2000 Jim Lane Apr 2015 #28
Don't Agree: If the Dem's know they want Hillary now, why waste money!! lewebley3 Apr 2015 #29
That's a big "if", my friend. Jim Lane Apr 2015 #30
She will have primary challengers BainsBane Apr 2015 #8
So you see a primary challenge for Hillary as just a little PR exercise? Nothing that would djean111 Apr 2015 #9
Do you really think anybody cares if you are "won over?" MoonRiver Apr 2015 #11
Oh, I am shattered. Why on earth would I care what you think? I am answering a point in the OP. djean111 Apr 2015 #14
And of course she will present her positions, MoonRiver Apr 2015 #19
She needs to prove how she will support randr Apr 2015 #22
You NAILED IT. mylye2222 Apr 2015 #13
No, I do not see it as a PR exercise Cyrano Apr 2015 #15
Not doing the pledgey thing. Sorry. djean111 Apr 2015 #16
Not really. Perhaps someone else will Cyrano Apr 2015 #20
She will still win the nomination.... Novara Apr 2015 #12
And she'll have one...or two...or three brooklynite Apr 2015 #17
Of course she does. William769 Apr 2015 #18
We can only win with a primary challenge! randr Apr 2015 #21
Of course she does. That's what I expect. HRC enthusiasm doesn't replace the process, which some freshwest Apr 2015 #24
freshwest, part of your post is Cyrano Apr 2015 #25
Dream on realFedUp Apr 2015 #31
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hillary can only benefit ...»Reply #28