Is it really "refighting the primaries" just to post the NAMES of last year's Dem candidates?

[NurseJackie]

109. "GD belongs to all of is...it's just as much my place to post here as it is yours." Glad to hear it!

========================
"GD belongs to all of is ... it's just as much my place to post here as it is yours. "
========================
Every time you post something here, I think it would be a good idea for you to mentally prepare yourself for a reply or two that you're not going to like. If you can just do that... I believe you'll be much happier. I hope so anyway.

========================
"It comes off as though you believe anyone who doesn't share your view of how limited the possibilities for political change are isn't simply a person you disagree with, but a spoiled delusional child unworthy of any human respect. "
========================
Here's the thing... if you don't like the things I say or how I say them, I can deal with that. As an adult, I understand that you don't hate ME as a person! And even IF you did come right out and say that you DO hate me (as a person) I wouldn't care. I wouldn't dwell on that fact, and I wouldn't be upset about it at all.

My life goes on perfectly fine whether you like me or not, or whether you hate me or not. My sense of worth or well-being is not dependent on whether a stranger online "hates" me or "likes" me. I'm an adult with a real life outside of this very entertaining website. As interesting as it is, it's just a website. It's not real-life, it's not my ENTIRE reason for existing. (Does that make sense? Do you get what I'm saying?)

I think it's fair to say that some highly sensitive people here are prone to over-reactions. Those people take things far too personally. In contracts, I've noticed that people are generally happier when they are able to to separate their sense of *worthiness* from their *ideas*. When others ridicule someone's *ideas* that come across as being "silly" or "unrealistic" or "out of touch" or "naive" etc, they're not rejecting the *actual person* who wrote them... they're simply just rejecting the idea. (See the difference? Think about it.)

========================
"All I'm doing is talking about blending our ideas for the future and going forward as a true coalition for change."
========================
No, you're talking about giving instant "parity" (across-the-board) to ideas that have already been REJECTED. If someone else runs on those previously rejected ideas... and if they're embraced by the party... then GREAT! Let the voters decide.

In the real world, the party is not going to automatically adopted the failed and rejected by default, simply because you wish it were true. (Sorry, that's not how it works.)

========================
"Why do you participate in a discussion board if-as appears to be the case-you're against the very idea of discussion?"
========================
OMG! LOL!

========================
"We can't win any future elections by reducing everything to "cheating, Comey, The Russians".
========================
WTF? I have no idea what you're talking about, or who this may have been intended for. When have I EVER said anything like that to you? It certainly wasn't an argument you've been having with me. You must be confused and think that I'm someone else perhaps?

But let me just add: We can't win any future elections by denying and IGNORING "cheating, Comey, The Russians".

========================
"We need to be FOR, as well as against. "
========================
Yawn. Absolute nonsense. Get real, because we already are.

========================
"The only reason for the Democratic Party to even exist is to be the party of change."
========================
LOL! The "only reason" huh? Seriously?? Get real and GMAFB!