General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Democratic Party can compromise on principles to win but it cannot be a cult
I, and many Democrats have always stated that party purism does not work. Brooklyn and rural Alabama requires different democrats.
However, what we cannot have is a fucking cult. So we cannot hear for months on end to end centrist democrats like Joe Manchin (who by the way votes with democrats 80% of the time ),but on the other hand champion Heath Mello, because one of them is supported by sanders and the other is not.
That is not sustainable, that is the building of a cult. A cult where someone is acceptable if sanders endorses but not if he doesn't.
For months we got lectured that democrats were too centrist, only to be told now that centrism is needed in some districts, and nothing changed barring the endorsement of sanders.
This argument lacks any kind of internal consistency and coherence and is not building a party, but seems to be building a cult where the say so of one man makes things go from unacceptable to completely necessary.
Kahuna7
(2,531 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)lpbk2713
(42,775 posts)The mindset of "either you're with us you're against us" has cost Dems numerous
elections. We need to learn how to compromise and how to find the middle ground.
Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)
ymetca This message was self-deleted by its author.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)sheshe2
(84,072 posts)Thank you Pri~
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)so I find your post about "throwing DEMS under the bus" in a thread using a cult analogy ironic/amusing.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Where that idea would come from- they are a very diverse coalition. There's nothing cult like about defending a majority of your chosen political party. Singling out one person is quite different.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)BainsBane
(53,137 posts)while arguing right-wing positions like abandoning women's rights.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)loyalsister
(13,390 posts)but I really think it is worthwhile to point out that the difference in influence of these politicians is relevant to the conversation. Ignoring that factor in order to forward what is essentially a purity argument is intellectualy dishonest.
This isn't about the Bernie vs. Democrats pettiness. It's about getting voters to vote for Democrats. I understand this because those of us who are politically active here have to accept that there are anti-choice Democrats in the state legislature. But, when it comes to health care, housing, and basic equity issues they are reliable.
If it were the governor or US senators, it would obviously be a deal breaker. But, getting over a severe flaw when there are so many other important factors to consider is painful but necessary to keep Democrats in some districts.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Cuomo and de Blasio have a lot more influence in my life than most senators do
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)Manchin affects the lives of people outside of WV because he votes on federal policies. Thus, it is reasonable that some people outside of WV are critical.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Those who want to primary Manchin are truly dumb.
But those who want to primary Manchin but totally think mello is great, are hypocrites
radical noodle
(8,019 posts)A great critique on what's going on. Jim Jones also had a cult with an economic message.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)radical noodle
(8,019 posts)for them as well.
JHan
(10,173 posts)Lucky Luciano
(11,267 posts)Endorsing Mello was beneath him.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)It's been funny.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Where have we heard that before....
JI7
(89,289 posts)Hekate
(91,047 posts)m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)associated with Bernie , who complain about purism and then become purists themselves whenever it happens to be somebody Bernie supports!
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)...at all levels of government, the Party needs to move left. I asked where the bulk of the candidates who won were positioned vs. the Democratic candidates, to their left or to their right. The expected answer was to the Democrats' right.
So, I followed with the question "well, if Democrats are losing to candidates that are to their right, how can moving even further to the left win more seats?"
Sadly, I didn't get an answer.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)TNNurse
(6,933 posts)I am sure there is someone with whom I agree 100%. However, I am almost 68 and have not yet met that person, not even the guy I married 38 years ago.
mcar
(42,475 posts)any Dem who voted to approve Drumpf's cabinet, but we have to welcome and endorse anti-choicers.