Stop Re litigating 2016 liberals /OP ED.

[Brian37]

US politics is plagued with weak semantics.

No wonder their media finds it so easy to manipulate muddled minds.

igh:

Tell me about. I have to live here. Over in the thread about differences between right and left, some of the guys described the left using memes based in right of center talking points against the left as if those talking points described the left. When I laughed at that, one of them doubled down on their confusion by calling me a centrist. I keep running into these very, very confused people who confuse my obviously very, very far left political views with (inexplicably) conservative Republican views. Our 'left' has become inundated with people who are provisionally socially liberal, but fervently support Reagan style economic policies that they deny are Reaganomics.

HOLY FUCKING CRAP.

Economically there is no economic left in politics. If you want to argue that our "left" is slightly right of center right now. I AGREE.  

But not because of our politicians, but 40 years of VOTER APATHY in midterms and 40 years of GOP gerrymandering.

Stop thinking short term. One fucking election is not going to change things over night. Reagan's failed trickle down is not what I support.  I do however support a long term strategy. 

Lets say Bernie wins and becomes President. He still cannot act like a dictator and change things over night. He'd still be dealing with 3 co equal branches. So you cannot make it about him, the person. It still has to be long term involvement by the voter in every election every year.

Our democratic politicians HAVE been pulled economically to the right over the past 40 years. But again, a politician is only as strong as the support we give them. Dems have to vote locally state and national every year. We have to control the narrative. We have to give no matter whom we elect the daily support. I agree economically there is no economic left. 

But that has more to do with 40 years of lack of voter participation in local and off years. WE CAN WIN and beat the GOP, but it cannot be a one day  in November issue. It has to be the same long term planning the GOP has crushed dems with.

[Shell B]

Oh, good. Getting blamed for Trump again even though I didn't vote for him. I just LOVE this argument.

Warren will never win. Not enough people like her. We need someone fresh and new, not someone people already hate.

[Brian37]

Oh, good. Getting blamed for Trump again even though I didn't vote for him. I just LOVE this argument.

Warren will never win. Not enough people like her. We need someone fresh and new, not someone people already hate.

I am not blaming any one person.

I am blaming dems, MY OWN PARTY, for lack of focus  long term. Not any one individual, just the climate of division in our party. 

If Bernie wins the nomination, I will support him. If Biden wins the nomination I will support him. If Harris wins the nomination I will support her. If Warren wins the nomination I will support her. If Beto wins the nomination I will support him.

Not sure Warren can beat Trump myself. Just like I am not sure Bernie can win this time either. 

I tend to agree, we need fresh new blood. But once we nominate ANYONE, we cant be self defeating regardless. 

The good thing this time around is that 45 has been shooting himself in the foot on a daily/weekly basis. He is not going to get the same number of swing voters this time around. So lets not assume who can or cannot beat him. 

I want a winner too. I think winning has more to do with the general and supporting the nominee and not being divided in the general.

And even if we do win, it is still a matter of every off year locally/state and midterm after that too.

[Shell B]

So, if Bernie doesn't win the primary, and I still vote for him, will you blame me? Bernie didn't get the nom, and I didn't vote for Clinton.

[brewer]

Oh, good. Getting blamed for Trump again even though I didn't vote for him. I just LOVE this argument.

Warren will never win. Not enough people like her. We need someone fresh and new, not someone people already hate.

There's a politician that's not hated?

[Yonadav]

Bwian, you don't think long term. You only vote against people. You don't care about Democratic policies, or who will execute them best. You only vote against the Wepublicans, and now you are only voting against Bernie (for psychotic reasons). Your own cat is probably trying to figure out a way to register to vote, just so that it can vote for Trump to screw with you.

[Brian37]

So, if Bernie doesn't win the primary, and I still vote for him, will you blame me? Bernie didn't get the nom, and I didn't vote for Clinton.

No. In the primaries I support whomever you want to vote for.

In the general however, if you sit out, or protest vote or hold grudges because your person didn't get the nomination, that is when it becomes a problem for me.

The sad thing about 2016 is most of the Bernie and Hillary supporters DID vote for Hillary. But there was just enough grudge holders that didn't help.

My point is there is too much at stake for grudges or purity tests.

Vote for whomever you wish in the primaries. But even if your person wins the nomination, one election does not change the climate in terms of years or decades.  It still amounts to a long term strategy.

Again if Bernie wins, or Warren wins, or Harris wins, or Booker wins, or Beto wins, or Bidin wins, it is still one office, it is still one year, and that winner will still have to deal with any GOP with their own oversight checks.

Again, the key is not one election, or one politician, but long term strategy. 

I don't blame you personally. I do blame dems  AS A CLIMATE not having focus and not thinking long term. 

If you can't get 100% of what you want, your ideal perfect candidate, what do you do then?

In 2016 I would have voted for Bernie if he had won the nomination. Just like I voted for Hillary because she won the nomination. Just like I voted for Obama twice. 

But again, Bernie, Hillary, Obama, it is still one office. And for the economic pendulum to swing where we want it to go, it also matters whom we put locally, at the state level, and in congress every mid term too.

---

As a liberal, right now, at this point in history, there is only one "grudge" to be had right now. Every time the fucker says something bigoted, every time he kisses the ass of dictators, every time he attacks our allies, every time he ignores or attacks his own intel, every time he attacks the free press, ask yourself if you want another 4 years of that? Ask yourself if other GOP candidates see that as a winning strategy how much more damage can be done even after he leaves office.

We are not living in an age of politics as normal, so we need to pick our battles.

[Shell B]

Oh, good. Getting blamed for Trump again even though I didn't vote for him. I just LOVE this argument.

Warren will never win. Not enough people like her. We need someone fresh and new, not someone people already hate.

There's a politician that's not hated?

There are plenty that aren't widely hated. We have a better chance if we don't go with one that Republicans have skewered for years.

[Shell B]

In the general however, if you sit out, or protest vote or hold grudges because your person didn't get the nomination, that is when it becomes a problem for me.

I didn't hold a grudge and I still didn't vote for Hillary. Hillary wasn't my candidate. Lucky for me, I don't care who has a problem with it.

I don't blame you personally. I do blame dems  AS A CLIMATE not having focus and not thinking long term. 

Yes, the party is a fucking shit show, which is why I didn't vote for one.

If you can't get 100% of what you want, your ideal perfect candidate, what do you do then?

I vote for the person I want every single time. If they don't win, I move on with my life. I don't vote based on what will tip the scales.

[Brian37]

In the general however, if you sit out, or protest vote or hold grudges because your person didn't get the nomination, that is when it becomes a problem for me.

I didn't hold a grudge and I still didn't vote for Hillary. Hillary wasn't my candidate. Lucky for me, I don't care who has a problem with it.

I don't blame you personally. I do blame dems  AS A CLIMATE not having focus and not thinking long term. 

Yes, the party is a fucking shit show, which is why I didn't vote for one.

If you can't get 100% of what you want, your ideal perfect candidate, what do you do then?

I vote for the person I want every single time. If they don't win, I move on with my life. I don't vote based on what will tip the scales.

Perfectly legal yes.

But if not voting in the general means someone like Trump, why would that be better?

I do get it. You should vote your conscious. But sometimes the alternative is far worse than sitting out.

The scales are not tipped by one politician. The pendulum changes by long term strategy. 

Republican or democrat, the winner of the office of the President, isn't a dictator, and still has to deal with a house and senate. 

It cant always be about one person, the individual. Change isn't about voting for a single individual. Politics is just like a team sport. You can have the  best QB behind the line (President), but if they have no offensive line(enough in the house and senate) the defense(opposition party) is going to have the QB staring at the sky every play.

Long term strategy matters. 

If Obama had a majority of the House and Senate, for the full 8 years, things would have been even better. He did well for what he had to work with, but things could have been better if he had the support of the majority of Governorships and state houses. 

As Obama put it, "Dont boo, vote".  But he was talking not just about him, but every level.