There seem to be quite a lot of very dangerous misconceptions about how politics is governed, and what mechanisms are most effective at holding elected leaders accountable. For instance, let's say there's a Democratic politician, Sen. Whatshisname from the great state of New Calegon. Whatshisname is a total, absolute shit burger of a Senator who doesn't care a whit for the American people, and proves it on a regular basis, and finally he crosses some final line and we no longer wish to support him. The only way - and I do mean only - to remove him from office without paying an even higher price than we were already paying is to primary him and then get the replacement elected.
But here's something critical that we all must understand and acknowledge if we are to be effective citizens: If the primary attempt fails and Whatshisname remains on the ticket, the matter is over - there is no strategically acceptable option not to help him win the general election, because elections go beyond the individual officeholders. They contribute to the overall power of Parties just by being registered in them, regardless of whether their actual politics are a sham, and also contribute to the numbers that determine who wields control of legislatures on both the state and federal level. In other words, there is no legitimate option to punish the entire nation by allowing a Republican to take a seat just in order to punish one Senator who does not live up to Democratic standards.
This is how the system is organized, and it is the immutable strategic reality of operating within that system: The time for punishing leaders is in the primaries, but if a primary challenge fails, the dispute is mooted and the two choices are between working to uphold the status quo or being foolish enough to think that Republicans being in control of that seat would not be infinitely worse. We have all witnessed more than enough elections to know exactly what I'm talking about. It's not the "lesser of two evils" when you're talking about a corrupt centrist Democrat and a Republican - it's a choice between someone who is useless or parasitic lending their weight to the Democratic bench and fundraising base, vs. someone who is simply, utterly your enemy acquiring that seat and turning all of it totally against us.
In case I'm not making this clear: Focus on the primaries. They are the time to rampage through the field, culling the miscreants and monsters from our ranks, and leaving those who overcome such challenges hopefully at least somewhat chastened for having been inadequate. Once the primaries are over, the issues played out in the primaries no longer matter: The issue is the long, hard trench warfare battle with the Enemy to guarantee ourselves the greatest amount of territory on all levels of government, regardless of whether the patriotism of one of the soldiers fighting the battle is rather dubious. The decision was made to trust Washisname with the nomination, so now you have to carry that decision through and donate, volunteer, and find ways to advocate for him even if you loathe him, because the alternative is to surrender a Democratic seat, however disgraced and neglected by Whatshisname's occupancy, to the wehrmacht. That has never, ever, never benefited the march of progress.
We gained nothing from George W. Bush being in the White House rather than "corporatist" Al Gore. It was not the Democratic Party that was punished by Nader's "stand of principle" in 2000, but the whole entire country, for eight long years. So there you have it: We choose our candidates in the primaries, and once those candidates are chosen, we support them full-bore like soldiers, even if they make us wretch, because the good ones among them still need the numerical power provided by the shitty ones in order to have Chairmanship and other statuses where affecting policy is critical. So it's very simple:
Between election citizens, we are watchers, participators, and commentators on what government does and what we wish it to do. In primaries, we are determined partisans who fight ideological civil to remake the face of the Party. But when the primaries end and the general election begins, we are simply soldiers for ensuring that Democrats win election. Boycotting an election because you don't like the options only punishes yourself - you had a chance to set different options, you failed, and now it's your responsibility to be a soldier and deal with the situation intelligently.
So here is my accountability pledge:
1. I will vote in primaries against any Democratic leader who votes to cut economic rights like Social Security and Medicare, and a litany of other issues as well. But then, I've always had this as my standard.
But...
2. I will always vote in the general election for the Democratic Candidate and act to support them, regardless of who they are or what they do, unless there is some compelling and unique set of circumstances that suggest doing otherwise.
Got it? Primaries = accountability. General Elections = war. Failure to win a victory in a primary does not absolve any of us of the responsibility to fight as soldiers in the General Election war. I'm not being hyperbolic when I call it "war." Wars are not fought with friends and mutual admiration societies - they are fought with armies that despise each other, that barely speak each others' languages, that often consider each other borderline enemies in themselves. And such is a Democratic General Election. Idealists and scumbags working toward a common cause. And just to alleviate any misconceptions, yes the scumbags do reciprocate when they believe an idealist can win - they are perfectly willing to help get a moral paragon elected if they're convinced the person can handle the campaign. Our Party is a huge, highly complex alliance on every level. This brief glimpse into one aspect of it is just the surface, but is enough for our purposes.
Conclusion: Do not, under any circumstances, withhold donation or volunteer work for a Democrat in a General Election fight. That Democrat is no longer even important. What's important is the Party as a whole. You should have hashed out your differences with that person individually in the primaries, and failing that, it's just too late - fight the war beside their side even if you despise them, and then primary them next time. Don't let a Republican win for the self-gratifying experience of whatching this one, irrelevant douchebag be stymied - the horrors that Republican would perpetrate from that office would be quite a high price to pay for the momentary satisfaction of embarrassing a Democrat you don't like. Keep the end game in mind, all the time, and we will achieve both more and better Democrats.