One of the most principled and honest senators is "unelectable", why?

[Fairgo]

188. Thanks for the clarification

You are correct of course, in the narrow context of this discussion and in the intent of your message. We must vote for the party unless, in the rare case "where a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative..." I just wanted to make sure that even as I pledge to vote according to DU TOS in the general election, that I can still advocate for a platform that embraces the values of democracy. I have faith that our leaders respond to powerful messages -from the collective as well as the purse - and that any nominee can be influenced to do the good work of the people...but not if the forum is silenced by a gavel ending free speech full stop...even within this DU context. I like to think you meant the spirit of the TOS; that we need to be supportive of the candidate (and each other) in our expression of diversity, rather than silently acquiescent in any regression to the policy mean. I will support the candidate as the servant of the message, but I will never stop talking about what that message should be. Although DU controls decorum and content, it is always a balance with free speech, not its end. That was my minor point, flippantly put. I meant no disrespect by the way.