General Discussion

DonCoquixote

(13,958 posts)

135. reply

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:20 PM

Jun 2012

"Why would anyone respond to those that are already captured? They don't have to do a damn thing because there are no consequences and nothing to be gained or lost if they don't. "

Because they still need our votes to win. However, on the other hand, if the GOP knows that our circular firing squad will keep firing, then they have no reason to fear us, because they know we will do their work for them. We would "capture" ourselves. Why do you think Rush Limbaugh encouraged people to give money to Ralph nader? Why do you think Hamsher and Huffington get paid by the GOP? The right would love NOTHING BETTER than for us to splinter into several groups: it is why they got CANADA, because even though the left had 60 percent of the vote, they fought amongst themselves, and got clobbered.

Unless you can actually win office, you are already captured.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

135 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This election is a binary event. Calling for Obama's defeat *IS* advocating for Romney's victory. [View all] scheming daemons Jun 2012 OP

+1,000. K & R. freshwest Jun 2012 #1

What is the +1000 for? rhett o rick Jun 2012 #16

Apparently it would be to a Harvard professor advocating the defeat of a Democrat. CakeGrrl Jun 2012 #39

In binary, that's only 8, tclambert Jun 2012 #110

He is a tenured Harvard professor bluestateguy Jun 2012 #2

That's always true, ever four years DavidDvorkin Jun 2012 #3

what a system! nt tomp Jun 2012 #112

I wish we had a parliamentary system DavidDvorkin Jun 2012 #127

Ah... The Simple Life... WillyT Jun 2012 #4

Yeah, ProSense Jun 2012 #7

Well... I WILL Be Staying At Home... WillyT Jun 2012 #8

Same as you ProSense Jun 2012 #10

I flirted briefly with voting 3rd-Party in November. But then I watched one coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #104

It's like fifty shades of gray, or something. nt OnyxCollie Jun 2012 #12

Beautiful photography! kentuck Jun 2012 #18

You Are Quite Welcome !!! - Here's More: WillyT Jun 2012 #19

Bookmarked. kentuck Jun 2012 #25

Consider, too, that we see less than 10% of the electromagnetic spectrum. TahitiNut Jun 2012 #24

You consistently amaze me with your ability to be obtuse. MjolnirTime Jun 2012 #37

You've Been Consistently Amazed Since October ??? WillyT Jun 2012 #42

Hit the nail right on the head, didn't I? MjolnirTime Jun 2012 #61

Actually, WillyT, this has nothing to do with politics, but somehow to call those photos JDPriestly Jun 2012 #45

Most Excellent Observation !!! WillyT Jun 2012 #54

Informed liberals are going to see rudycantfail Jun 2012 #90

Completely, absolutely, 100% wrong. Zoeisright Jun 2012 #101

The Democratic leadership is not concerned rudycantfail Jun 2012 #114

he's likely to pick centrist judges, imo. nt tomp Jun 2012 #116

What a ridiculous statement. How Nader-esque. Tarheel_Dem Jun 2012 #117

please be careful not to confuse your opinion with fact. just sayin'. nt tomp Jun 2012 #115

Sometimes it is simple treestar Jun 2012 #108

Yeah. but ProSense Jun 2012 #5

That sounds like a logical and rational argument... kentuck Jun 2012 #6

The professor should keep his opinions to himself until Pres. Obama is re-elected. BlueCaliDem Jun 2012 #13

I resent those, like Unger, with their protected jobs cally Jun 2012 #9

Precisely. The people who make these observations are likely doing well. joshcryer Jun 2012 #21

Absofreakinloutly Inkfreak Jun 2012 #68

+1 JNelson6563 Jun 2012 #77

Cally, I wish I could frame this, or at the very least, recommend it. Tarheel_Dem Jun 2012 #121

He's not the first Harvard professor to throw a bomb during the waning years. aikoaiko Jun 2012 #11

That is true. So it makes me wonder, what was his point? Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #14

So what is your objective here? To clarify to the "smart" liberals that they have no rhett o rick Jun 2012 #15

November you vote for the Democrat jeff47 Jun 2012 #26

Who are you arguing with? nm rhett o rick Jun 2012 #32

You. You claim the OP is designed to piss off liberals jeff47 Jun 2012 #33

And I guess you think that liberals dont get that. nm rhett o rick Jun 2012 #48

If they did, they'd show up on primary day. Yet they don't show up. (nt) jeff47 Jun 2012 #49

This is an amusing post. The other day, I read a post from a DUer who claims to be an ardent Bluenorthwest Jun 2012 #79

Your anecdote clearly trumps statistics. :sarcasm: (nt) jeff47 Jun 2012 #83

Actually, primary day is too late. We need a lot of progressives to show up at Democratic Clubs JDPriestly Jun 2012 #46

One step at a time jeff47 Jun 2012 #50

You really need to learn that you don't represent all liberals. TheWraith Jun 2012 #28

!! Number23 Jun 2012 #59

Another gem I wish I could rec! Tarheel_Dem Jun 2012 #122

it'd only piss you off if it was accurate and hit a nerve... too fucking bad dionysus Jun 2012 #36

Sorry. Oversimplification. FBaggins Jun 2012 #17

Don't agree ProSense Jun 2012 #20

Prosense speaks the basic truth, as does the OP. It's just a fact. Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #27

But Unger and those who feel like he does are people we have to deal with. JDPriestly Jun 2012 #47

We cannot change Unger's mind. His heart & thoughts are about Brazil; Romney has Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #128

I wonder about this quakerboy Jun 2012 #132

You move the party in the primaries jeff47 Jun 2012 #22

and, some imbeciles think throwing the govt to the repukes will result in a great depression which dionysus Jun 2012 #40

That's the historical materialist roadmap and it's not been historically accurate. joshcryer Jun 2012 #23

Yes, the country is much more left wing now as a result of 2.8 million liberals voting for Nader TrollBuster9090 Jun 2012 #44

You and Thom Hartmann say this. It all majes sense to me. chknltl Jun 2012 #126

Thank you! TrollBuster9090 Jun 2012 #133

Or, he sees an advantage for his home country, Brazil, if Romney is elected. pnwmom Jun 2012 #29

STFU and vote a straight Democratic ballot! xtraxritical Jun 2012 #30

We should change our election system so we don't need to have this conversation anymore. limpyhobbler Jun 2012 #31

You will never get such a system from the Democrats or Republicans jeff47 Jun 2012 #34

Yep. You're pretty much stuck with it. laundry_queen Jun 2012 #81

thats a fine idea but no one will allow that to happen. dionysus Jun 2012 #41

Unfortunately, changing our election system requires actually WINNING elections and assuming power. TrollBuster9090 Jun 2012 #51

I agree with what you say. nt laundry_queen Jun 2012 #82

It should be obvious, but apparently not for some even now. CakeGrrl Jun 2012 #35

Heads like Holes MjolnirTime Jun 2012 #38

True. Good argument. Any other suggestions in case this does not convince people? JDPriestly Jun 2012 #43

Copying what I replied to you in another thread jeff47 Jun 2012 #52

Great post. Thanks. That's what I am trying to do. And I plan to keep trying. JDPriestly Jun 2012 #63

Carl Sagan called "If/Then" an invalid attempt at argument. Fire Walk With Me Jun 2012 #53

Save for one thing DonCoquixote Jun 2012 #55

All "leaders" must be held accountable by the people they supposedly represent Fire Walk With Me Jun 2012 #58

Pressure vs not voting DonCoquixote Jun 2012 #62

Obviously we need a new model which will obsolete the old. Fire Walk With Me Jun 2012 #66

There is no way to pressure a politician other than votes and money. TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #73

what I mean DonCoquixote Jun 2012 #113

I don't buy your premise because it really makes no sense. TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #134

reply DonCoquixote Jun 2012 #135

I remember when the sentiment, "you're either with or against us" disgusted Marr Jun 2012 #56

Presidential elections are one of the rare cases where it applies. scheming daemons Jun 2012 #69

Wow-- that's a pretty enormous exception. Marr Jun 2012 #84

Naaahhh, that's only when a Republican says it. Beacool Jun 2012 #87

If only the collective would explain their rules in advance so that we could all march in lock-step AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #95

I'm a rebel at heart. Beacool Jun 2012 #102

DU rec...nt SidDithers Jun 2012 #57

2 to 4 Supreme Court justice nominations is enough for me.... Rowdyboy Jun 2012 #60

there are two kinds of people that understand binary Evasporque Jun 2012 #64

There are 10 kinds of people in the world,... GarroHorus Jun 2012 #65

If you absolutely must put time and energy into this corrupt, bought-and-sold system Fire Walk With Me Jun 2012 #67

So using that logic, calling for a victory for the people of this country means, MadHound Jun 2012 #70

Are you calling for the defeat of both Romney and Obama?...nt SidDithers Jun 2012 #71

It certainly would be a victory for the people, don't you agree? MadHound Jun 2012 #72

Great, we're all waiting for a plan from you on how your ideal candidate can win in November. stevenleser Jun 2012 #78

This election is a binary event. OnyxCollie Jun 2012 #86

So some self important Harvard Professor isn't happy with Obama WI_DEM Jun 2012 #74

Only on Huffington Post, apparently. MineralMan Jun 2012 #76

Precisely. nt MineralMan Jun 2012 #75

True. It's game theory played out on a political level. shcrane71 Jun 2012 #80

We know how to get out of this jeff47 Jun 2012 #85

So "Libruls" are the problem?!?!? Riiiiight. nt shcrane71 Jun 2012 #91

No, Liberals not showing up to vote is. jeff47 Jun 2012 #92

It was the "moderates" who failed to turn out for the last mid-term elections. /nt Marr Jun 2012 #93

Moderate turnout was down compared to 2008. Liberal turnout was down more. (nt) jeff47 Jun 2012 #106

That's not what I'd read-- do you happen to have Marr Jun 2012 #107

Not in a convenient link. jeff47 Jun 2012 #111

I'm sorry, but it sounds like you sifted the information to Marr Jun 2012 #119

They didn't fail to do so in the WI Recall. Stop blaming Liberals. shcrane71 Jun 2012 #98

So the WI Recall was a primary election? jeff47 Jun 2012 #105

You're out-of-touch. Ignore the record turnout in WI, but others won't. shcrane71 Jun 2012 #130

Again, they show up when it's exciting. jeff47 Jun 2012 #131

"Stop" not knowing the difference between a "primary" and a "recall" election. Tarheel_Dem Jun 2012 #124

I work in UC Berkeley lunatica Jun 2012 #88

It is not a binary event. NCTraveler Jun 2012 #89

Exactly Teamster Jeff Jun 2012 #94

"Reorientation" of the Democratic Party makes some big assumptions CakeGrrl Jun 2012 #96

Which might well motivate a stronger progressive movement. One never knows... n/t jtuck004 Jun 2012 #97

An Obama loss will lead to a "reorientation" all right: a reorientation to the right, NYC Liberal Jun 2012 #129

The obvious flaw in your header: truedelphi Jun 2012 #99

True. And remember the "free trade" agreements. Three more added. Another is on its way. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #103

Good post. bigwillq Jun 2012 #123

AND, as any long term Party Activist KNOWS, bvar22 Jun 2012 #100

Is this addressed to Unger? DireStrike Jun 2012 #109

I agree. But, will add, criticizing a policy position of Obama is not calling for his defeat nor morningfog Jun 2012 #118

This thread is awesome... SidDithers Jun 2012 #120

Which begs the question, why would they wanna post here? If they agree with Unger, how is...... Tarheel_Dem Jun 2012 #125