"Morning Joe" reacts to this third party news
Recent reports indicate that Democrats likely will face a significant third party challenge in the next general election, with such third party members committed to enabling an agenda that would, among other things:
- slash taxes on the wealthy and corporations, and increase taxes on the poorer
- cement Republican control over the Supreme Court for decades
- repeal the Affordable Care Act and return to a growing population of uninsureds
- dramatically increase income inequality
- deregulate not only Wall Street, but eliminate most of the federal regulatory framework
- reverse any climate change initiatives and plunge the earth closer to chaos
- crush any remaining vestige of union and labor power
- roll back recent advances in gay equality rights
- diminish women’s reproductive and economic rights
- maintain a shadow economy of exploited immigrant labor
- restrict voting access to millions
- set back Progressive priorities for decades
This third party consists principally of Democratic voters who loudly promise not to support the eventual Democratic nominee if he or she was not their preferred candidate in the primary.
In a rare instance of coordinated communications, both the Sanders and Clinton campaigns jointly implored these third party voters not to do anything this damaging to the Progressive movement.
Standing together at a single podium, Mr. Sanders and Ms. Clinton said loudly and in perfect unison: “Please don’t do something this freaking stupid and counterproductive!”
When contacted for a response, leaders of this confused third party refused to stop commenting endlessly.
*************
You don’t like the snark? — well too bad, and maybe humor can smooth the edges off one of the most jaw-droppingly stupidest courses of action that I have seen repeatedly advocated on this site.
Every day I read a nutty post like “Why 2016 is Bernie or Bust” or some other proud declaration of war — a defiant promise to sit out the general election if a preferred Democratic primary candidate doesn't become the nominee.
I’ll agree with all good faith fights in the primary — but it is flat-out juvenile, destructive, and irresponsible if you carry that grudge into the general election. No woman wants to suffer through onerous or unsafe abortion procedures simply because Paul Tsongas supporters were disappointed with his 1992 primary loss. No gay person wants to see the gay rights movement set back out of others' pique because Bill Bradley didn't do better in the 2000 primaries. No sane Democrat cares more about the intramural differences between Ms. Clinton and Mr. Sanders than securing control of the Supreme Court and its generations long impact.
Yes, fight in the primaries for your favored choice, but make no mistake that you are immoral if you talk about “sitting out” the general election. To put if plainly: Yes, any Democrat crucially needs to win the next election. I don't want to believe that I have to further spell out all the huge — perhaps irreversible — damage that would be done to Mr. Sanders’ or Ms. Clintons’ heartfelt agenda if you or anyone else cooperated to elect a Republican in the next election by sitting on your ass, or using crayon write-in ballots, or whatever other juvenile bull-shit that I often see repeated on this site.
News flash: if Hillary loses the primary, she will endorse Bernie, and vice versa. Why? Because neither Ms. Clinton nor Mr. Sanders is a complete idiot.
Here is a suggested rallying cry (if need be): “Go Bernie! Or, Go Hillary! But I am not going to f*ck over the whole country if my preferred primary candidate can’t even win a primary nomination.”
.png?1455293978 "no image description available")
Comments are closed on this story.