Skip to main content

View Diary: Here's to the Republicans (89 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Actually, several of us were lined up way before (4+ / 0-)

    Barack Obama signed this legislation.  I see it as the Democrats constant reasoning that something is better than nothing.

    I do not have a problem with compromise if it is done in good faith but that is not what we have here.  True good faith would have been a negotiation between the progressive stance of single payer and the conservative stance of free market.  The result would have been something more like the public option.  Instead, single payer was immediately taken off the table (or rather never even allowed to be mentioned in the first place) and public option was quickly removed as well.  What we ended up with was championing a republican proposal as a progressive model and branded as socialists for proposing a communist health care system that was actually a free market solution.

    The same thing is happening in elections.  Republicans run their rightwing lunatics and the Democrats know that half the people won't vote for these crazy people so they run a conservadem hoping to pick up the remaining rational conservatives left somewhat near the middle.  It works and they win but what are they left with? Terry McAuliffe and all the other conservadems.

    "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

    by Buckeye Nut Schell on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 07:42:28 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  All fair enough. (7+ / 0-)

      The challenge: can you pick where we left off and keep right on going, not pronouncing these outcomes as "failures" but as stepping-stones?

      That's fairly new territory for progressives right there.

      It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

      by karmsy on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 07:50:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Okay, I accept the challenge. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        karmsy, paulex, YucatanMan

        I whole heartedly admit that the ACA is better than nothing.  I like several of the provisions and indeed it is a stepping stone towards the right direction.

        However, why did we start the negotiation in the middle?  Why wouldn't we at least fight for the ability to negotiate drug prices?  Why wouldn't we at least force the Republicans to negotiate down to this point so we could share the responsibility?  This was their proposal in 1994.  How can anyone call it a democratic victory that we succeeding in implementing their proposal?  Just because they have moved so far to the right that they now disown it as communism does not suddenly make it a progressive policy.

        My challenge is for you to see that winning elections by having conservatives run as a Democrat is not the same thing as winning.  I want someone who will fight for a truly progressive tomorrow and just because someone who has a (D) in front of their name gets the most votes, it does not mean that WE won the election.

        "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

        by Buckeye Nut Schell on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:20:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thing is... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          karmsy

          ...though I see your point, if the only thing you have to say is that voting for conservative Democrats is not winning, then you just lost a ton of votes. Most people aren't actually interested in politics, but they do like to feel like they picked a winner or are at least part of the winning side.

          Time is of no account with great thoughts, which are as fresh to-day as when they first passed through their authors' minds ages ago. - Samuel Smiles

          by moviemeister76 on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:45:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That is why we are where we are... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            karmsy, YucatanMan

            We are so concerned about winning, we have forgotten what we are fighting for.

            Would you rather lose with a truly progressive candidate or win with a blue dog?

            I don't see the point in winning an election with someone who is not going to fight for what I believe in.  I would rather fight for what I believe in and lose.  At least I if I did win, I would be winning something.

            "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

            by Buckeye Nut Schell on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 09:27:35 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Are you kidding me? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              karmsy, mconvente

              I would much rather win with a Blue Dog if that's my only damn choice. I know this for a FACT. I live in NC, a state which used to be made up of primarily Blue Dog Democrats. Now we are controlled by the Republicans. The damage has been catastrophic, and we are less than a year in!

              The real fight you are talking about is at the primary level. That is where you duke it out for a true progressive candidate. But if the progressive candidate loses, then you fight like hell to make sure the Republican doesn't win because, these days, the results of those still willing to even be called a Republican winning an election are literally dangerous.

              Time is of no account with great thoughts, which are as fresh to-day as when they first passed through their authors' minds ages ago. - Samuel Smiles

              by moviemeister76 on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 09:35:01 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Okay, why are Republicans winning? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                karmsy, YucatanMan

                Could it be that most of the democrats don't even see a difference anymore so they are not getting out the vote?

                Do you think that when a they see a blue dem democrat throwing them under the bus, voting against their values and thumbing their noses at the people who elected them makes them want to get out the vote?  Do they energize their base?   Maybe if we got rid of the logic that we need conservadems in red areas, maybe we would find out the the democrats in those would actually come out to vote for someone that would actually support them back.

                I have held my nose and voted too many times for blue dogs in the past and I hate it.  I am sick of voting against people.  I want to vote for someone.  I sympathize with the political situation you currently find yourself.  It is like the victim of spousal abuse wishing they had their old spouse back that didn't beat them as badly as the new spouse.  It's better not to be beaten at all and that is what is worth fighting for.

                "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

                by Buckeye Nut Schell on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 09:50:21 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  They won because of money and laziness (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mconvente, jan4insight

                  And because of Democrats like you who stayed at home because they actually believed there was no difference between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Thing is, now we fucking know that there sure as hell is a big difference between the two. So for you to take what has happened in North Carolina and to wish it on your own state is astounding. After having visible evidence of what happens if you just stay at home, STILL you say people should just not vote if their only option is a Blue Dog.

                  Time is of no account with great thoughts, which are as fresh to-day as when they first passed through their authors' minds ages ago. - Samuel Smiles

                  by moviemeister76 on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 10:15:01 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I see your point, but (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Buckeye Nut Schell

                    I'm not really sure this is a fair paraphrase of Buckeye's intent:

                    After having visible evidence of what happens if you just stay at home, STILL you say people should just not vote if their only option is a Blue Dog.
                    In arguing for ideals, I don't see him/her arguing against realism.

                    It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

                    by karmsy on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 10:40:07 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Thank you Karmsy... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      karmsy

                      That is exactly my point.  I would pick the spouse who beats me less every time but I am not going to enthusiastically promote the lesser of evils.  That is reality.

                      Instead of the logic that we HAVE to run a blue dog in a red area in order to be competitive, how about we run a progressive and fight for him or her?  How about the party support who they want instead of who they think can win.  moviemiester made the point that this is an argument for the primaries and I agree but I am sick of the Democratic party counting on my vote because they know I am going to vote against the evil Republican.  Earn my vote by supporting my beliefs.  Don't tell me I have to vote for someone just because they have a (D) next to their name.  

                      Look at how it worked out when we supposedly had a super majority in the Senate when President Obama was elected.  Blue Dogs like Leiberman held the Senate hostage and caused gridlock long enough for the Republicans to take back the house.  We keep hearing how we had a super majority but did we really?  We had a group of conservadems masquerading as Democrats that now make it seem as if we did not do anything when we had the opportunity.

                      If we pick someone who is going to vote against our values, then we have already lost.  I am not saying to support the Republican and I am not saying not to vote.  I am saying I am sick of doing it and I am not surprised that a lot of people stay at home because they feel like, "Why bother".

                      I live in an ultra conservative part of Kentucky and it is the prevailing logic here that the only person who can win is a conservative Democrat.  The party and many of the Democrats only vote for who they think can win.  I get to choose between what would have been considered a Republican ten years ago and a tea party enthusiast.  I don't like not having anyone to vote for and I am not going to be happy just because nutjob Sr. lost and nutjob jr. gets to be in charge for the next few years.

                      "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

                      by Buckeye Nut Schell on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 11:46:34 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Sure, I agree with everything. (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Buckeye Nut Schell

                        What I was responding to, and what I see other comments in this thread as responding to, is the promotion of an attitude of "it has to be perfect to count." In politics, disillusionment with weak Dems and progressives is completely understandable, but it's also dangerous. Your remarks might be seen as justifying "purity" to the cost of realism, though I don't believe you really are.

                        I live in one of these "hip" urban areas with most residents way younger than I am. A while ago, after an election, I saw a handbill on a light-post that raised my hackles. It said something to the effect of, "No politician cares about your interests as much as their own career." I suspect the flier was being used to justify "staying home on election day" because "the whole electoral process was hopelessly corrupt," sort of a hipper-than-thou protest. It is so wrong and so destructive. This is the kind of thing I want to shake a young person by the shoulders over.  

                        It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

                        by karmsy on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 12:21:25 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Absolutely... (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          karmsy

                          I encourage my daughters to get out the vote at their respective universities.  I realize my point is walking a thin line on issue and I agree, not voting is not the answer.

                          This thread started because the comment was made about people lining up to condemn ACA the moment it was signed because it was not perfect.  I was in line before it was signed because it could have been a lot better and it is not the Republican's fault that it wasn't.  It was our fault, we shot for the middle right from the get go.  We tend to do that a lot these days and one area in which we have become extraordinarily proficient at doing so is in elections.  

                          If we continue to shoot for the middle just to increase our chance of winning then we are going to have a lot of people fighting half-assed for kinda-sorta what they want against a lot of conservative fighting for exactly what they want.  The Republicans are going to show up more enthusiastically and the liberals are going to kinda show up, maybe, because nobody is going to be fighting for what we really want.

                          Thank you Karmsy for this conversation.  I appreciate your wise words and your kind delivery of them.

                          "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

                          by Buckeye Nut Schell on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 12:59:01 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site