Events in Philly are making a pretty damn strong case for closed primaries.

[DanTex]

The people booing aren't Democrats. They aren't progressives. They aren't Bernie supporters. They are Greens or other far-leftists who latched on the the Bernie movement. And they're going to abandon the party and go back to their perpetual whining as soon as the convention is over. Even Bernie was surprised when they booed him, he's starting to figure out what a lot of us already knew: that Green Party types are not allies of progressives, they are allies of the GOP.

I like the Democratic Party. I like Obama. I think he's been great, and accomplished a lot of good things. I don't want it burned to the ground, and neither do the vast majority of other Dems. I'm happy about expanding the party, but I don't want to expand it to people like this. I'll take the Mike Bloomberg type moderates over the Jill Stein crazies any day of the week.

I think, in the end, Hillary will still win, despite the best efforts of the far left to put Trump into office. But we should definitely not be changing any primary rules to make it even easier for Greens to try to sabotage us.

[treestar]

1. Letting Bernie run as a Democrat was

possibly not a good idea, but then there was so little other opposition. At least the convention is their last gasp. Not much they can do afterward.

[DanTex]

5. Yup. It's looking that way. Hopefully his speech tonight can get things under control.

But I don't know, those booing people don't seem to be of sound mind.

[politicaljunkie41910]

44. He had no control over them during he speech to them this morning, and he'll have not control

over them later this evening.

[Hortensis]

196. Feel pretty sure you're right. Oh, well.

The Democratic Party does not do litmus tests for who gets to belong to the party. Of course its membership includes a full range of radical/left-wing extremist elements in addition to liberals and some conservatives. We're the inclusive party.

Again, oh well.

But, YES: ABSOLUTELY, CLOSED PRIMARIES!

[Hortensis]

13. There were actually another 12 candidates

besides Bernie and Hillary. Nine were cut out of all debates entirely by the DNC, meaning we also never got to see all our possible choices.

Of course, the Democratic Party will always have a full range of the left, although the right is in question. Happily for the planet, the more extreme types are minorities on both sides, but our job will always definitely to make sure they are never able to unite to set the nation on fire under our banner.

[politicaljunkie41910]

46. You've said this before and repeating it doesn't make it so.

Who were these other 12 candidates 'blocked' by the DNC, that we never got to see. If Bernie was allowed to run, than why weren't these mythical 12 Democratic candidates allowed. Besides, it was the networks who decided which candidates got into the debates, and even Martin O'Malley was in the early debates when he was polling at 1 percent. Go sell this bull crap somewhere else. We are not buying it.

[treestar]

58. Yes probably some rule about having to have

some minimum of support - there are thousands of people who would run. These "choices" are not even on the ballot if they don't get enough signatures.

[pkdu]

59. This guy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermin_Supreme

Apparently , should have been debate time

/sarc off

[Hortensis]

86. Lol. Yes, Mr. Supreme was one of the nine.

I'd have trouble remembering the more...mainstream types, but I remember him. Didn't know he went on to run as a libertarian. Got a vote too!

[George Eliot]

154. If invisible, can you really count them? GOP got theirs out in front of voters. DNC?

[Hortensis]

171. Apparently not. Nobody seems to have known

about all these candidates stonewalled in such a completely undemocratic manner, even as they continually expressed their outrage over the DNC giving subtle assistance to the lead candidate where it could.

It is the voters' responsibility to understand why they're being told what they are BEFORE they get all outraged, to not be lead around by their ignorance. Bernie had a legitimate grievance. It's the hypocrisy of only getting excited about him that's out of line. Again, it's a principle if it is applied to all. If not, it's just political opportunism. Understand that and accept or reject with our eyes wide open.

And of course the GOP had lots of others they blocked too. Remember, the 17 or so all had national reputations. They GOP blocked serious but less-known candidates while accommodating people who are well known to have been using elections as advertising for their private brands. Like Carson, Gingrich, Trump, Huckabee. And those all are hawking actual product. Then there are all those who were just "running" to pump up their visibility and resume for other jobs, like Fiorina. Just imagine if the rotted RNC had rejected those in favor of the best of those whose names we never heard?

[George Eliot]

193. Horsepucky.It's media's (remember the fourth estate Constitutionally?) job to get the word out.

[Hortensis]

195. Horsepucky yourself. The media are private enterprise.

We can't shove our own moral responsibilities off on them. I'm not saying everyone should want all those candidates given fair and equal treatment from the party. I'm saying it's grossly hypocritical to cherry pick one and then complain that ONLY that candidate is given unfair treatment, with truly ridiculous displays of virtuous outrage.

The fact is that both Bernie and Hillary were benefited tremendously by the party drawing an arbitrary line for the sole purpose of getting rid of all these other candidates before they could draw off support.

Does a party have a duty to be "democratic" or not?

[George Eliot]

199. So you don't believe in Constitution?

Shall we amend it?

[Hortensis]

202. What can I say to that that'd be worth

your time and mine? Have a nice day.

[Hortensis]

66. Maybe Bernie didn't want them clogging up his stage.

An unprincipled and opportunistic behavior certainly, but professional politicians know perfectly well that it is not the job of parties and candidates to be "fair."

Those other, screwed-over candidates all met the state requirements by paying sometimes many thousands of dollars and sometimes gathering many thousands of signatures but never had a chance, and neither did the people who hoped to be able to vote for them.

As for "why" Bernie, he was a nationally known professional politician who met the minimum poll cut to get into the very first debate. The parties contracted with the networks to allow those choices for a number of reasons, but in part so they wouldn't be blamed for them. Did you imagine CNN and Fox being involved was in the Constitution?

The "poll" bar was meant specifically to cut out most of the candidates BEFORE they had a chance to introduce themselves to the nation through the national debate mechanism. Like salesmen who only take 3 carpet samples into the house to keep people from having too many choices.

Not fair or principled, and certainly not democratic, but beneficial to those who candidates who do benefit, like Bernie.

[AngryAmish]

133. What about Deez Nuts?

Deez Nuts got slapped around.

[treestar]

57. There's likely some rule about having enough support

to be involved. They don't have to support everyone who runs. Anyone can start up a crank campaign.

[Hortensis]

79. Treestar, see my post above. The "right" of the DNC

(not to mention TV networks!!!) to decide who'll get support and who'll be weeded out as a crank -- regardless of the rights of the candidates and of all those Democrats who signed their petitions and donated money to meet their filing fees -- and regardless of the rights of all voters to have a choice about who's on their ballots -- is exactly what all the anger is about.

Bernie would never have made the cut if, say, he was a state senator and ex-mayor of a large city instead of a long-time career politician -- a U.S. Senator!, with small but real national name recognition.

If a principle doesn't apply to all, it's not a principle, it's just cynical opportunism hypocritically masquerading as something far better.

[mythology]

185. If you're arguing that everybody running should be at debates

There were 28 people who received votes in the 2012 general election for president. That doesn't count write in candidates. There is no viable way to have 28 candidates debate each other.

There is nothing wrong with having a requirement around demonstrated support, especially given how lesser known candidates can use Iowa and New Hampshire to build that support through retail politics.

[Hortensis]

186. An introduction of candidates wouldn't have

to be in debate format. Perhaps we specifically use that format right out of the gate as an excuse to discriminate against candidates who might challenge the status quo. Bernie's kind of an oddball, you know.

25 years in the U.S. Congress, most as a U.S. senator, voting 96% of the time with the Democratic caucus--which is what allows him to be reelected to his elite position for a quarter century. Doesn't get more establishment than that. Then he breaks out and starts attacking everything he's been part of for a quarter century.

What makes him an oddball is not pretending to be an outsider (gosh no!), it's that he really is in spite of everything. He accepted the pay and position, voted with the group, but always despised everyone but himself. And when he broke free in order to attack the institution, he was completely sincere.

How often does that happen? That a genuine challenger to the status quo can be part of it long enough to develop a national reputation sufficient to make the first presidential cut?

But what none of us know is what fantastic iconoclastic changemakers the DNC and RNC may have used their power to get rid of before we ever had a chance to see them.

Didn't Bernie mention the DNC corruption that vanquished 9 prospective competitors at least once? People who really do care that the process be democratic should care about this.

[R B Garr]

20. +1, yes, totally agreed.

[pnwmom]

76. Martin O'Malley might have done better if Bernie hadn't been in the race. His supporters were Dems.

[adigal]

205. I voted for Bernie, and I'm a Dem as are my kids and all of their friends

All of whom voted for Bernie.

Since you don't want us in the Dem party anymore, why am I still getting a dozen emails a day asking for donations???

[Bucky]

77. l'gasp!

excluding people with new & different ideas is not the way to grow a party.

That green lady standing up in New York Harbor isn't just about immigrants; it's about an idea of inclusion and self improvement.

[treestar]

108. That's kind of dumb

New and different ideas have to take hold to a point. And no party can exist without "excluding" some people who just don't mesh with it. New and different ideas can be seen as too conservative also.

[billhicks76]

114. Bernie As VP Would've Avoided All Of This Drama

It would've guaranteed a Democratic victory. Obviously those who hold the purse strings said it won't be allowed and don't care if a Trump victory is risked. That is called reality.

[bettyellen]

136. Reality is he was never supportive enough of Hillary to be considered.

[billhicks76]

139. That's BS Historically

Are you new to presidential politics? Remember Reagan was labeled a crazy fringe candidate by Bush but everyone knew if Bush was VP it would seal the deal. Reagan was also afraid of Bush according to Nancy and with good reason which we don't need to go into here. Politics has always been full of infighting. Where did all these fragile newcomers come from? Yes I understand Obama didn't pick Hillary as VP and I don't know why. Her comments about RFK were unsettling in June 2008 but she was the obvious choice but I'm sure he had his reasons. Hillary has hers buts it's common to choose someone who will help you get elected. JFK chose LBJ who hates him and felt as senate majority leader he deserved the presidency. Some have surfaced in recent years saying it was JFKs biggest mistake because LBJ was plotting against him. We all know Bernie isn't a plotter or power hungry and is not a killer so why not make everyone happy and secure the easy win? Tim is a nice guy but he doesn't shore up the base.

[bettyellen]

141. The fragile newcomers? They're booing people at the stadium.

Sanders could not have been supportive during the campaign after all the dog whistling. Also, so weak on social issues and foreign policy he would have added little. Lots of better picks- and Hillary got a great one.

[billhicks76]

142. Yes Fragile

Yes its drama and unfortunate infighting. If you don't think everyone cares about helping our country the you watch too much tv. If people are out of line or rude or helplessly passionate in a way you don't like it's ok if it rubs you wrong. But letting it get to you so much makes you fragile and politics has always been like this.

[bettyellen]

147. Sanders was obviously shocked by the boos from his own "supporters" too-

I guess you'd wrote him off as "too fragile" too?
Been around a long time and seen plenty of ugly- just not this much actual rat fucking- like going on tv promoting trump from the convention floor. Some delegates are assholes. Doesn't make me fragile to acknowledge that. Why would you even go there.....

[George Eliot]

155. Politics isn't for the fragile. I'd suggest people get over fragility.

I wonder what the Founding Fathers would think of our fragile politics. Are we going to have a fragile President going mano a mano with Putin? As long as there are politics, people will disagree and that's a good thing. Have you ever watched the Brits in session? Time to get over fragility.

[bettyellen]

157. The fragility you speak of is only in your imagination.

And why you are trumpeting the Brits way over our own tendency toward more civility is beyond me.
They got nothing to be proud of lately. Mano a Mano? Lol, no. Strategy and intellect wins over mindless bullies like Trump.

[George Eliot]

159. So now the Brits are mindless. Sometimes emotion overwhelms intellect.

Hopefully after the election, you'll calm down and see things more clearly. Everybody has a right to their opinion without being a bully, mindless or even uncivil. Seems to me the Brits have quite a lot of fun with their debates. Curious, have you ever watched one?

[bettyellen]

160. I'm totally calm- it's the BObs who have lost their shit....

But thanks for your phony concern.

[George Eliot]

162. No, emotions generate words like shit and BOBS...not intellect. Too much hate on DU.

You're going to tell me I don't have to be here. I only occasionally now hoping the hate has subsided. I don't think it's going to.

[bettyellen]

164. No- my I mouth generates the word shit and also fuck quite often. Even when I am content!

The bobs are merely pathetic. They are so transparent - going after Bernie and Warren, no one will fall for this crap. Sorry if my profanity effected you so profoundly! I'm sure you'll get over it.

[apnu]

221. Bernie's dithering after he was mathematically eliminated in PDs sunk him.

He dithered and led is people on like he still had a chance. Not only did that sow the seeds for the raucous convention we are seeing now, but it also torpedoed any VP chances there might have been. Why Bernie dithered is a different topic, but he did dither and give false hope. That's on him now until after the election on November 8th.

[tonyt53]

2. Those open primaries and the caucuses were exhibit 1 for closed primaries in all states.

[politicaljunkie41910]

48. The GOPs primaries were Closed and no one said a thing about it.

[surrealAmerican]

61. This is inaccurate.

The Republicans have much the the same mix of open/closed primaries and caucuses as the Democrats.

I happen to live in an open primaries state. It's open regardless of what primary one chooses to vote in.

[fleabiscuit]

74. One of the reasons Dump didn't get a majority of those who cast votes. nt

[onehandle]

3. Closed primaries. No caucuses.

Get your own damn party.

[radical noodle]

53. I agree totally

[northoftheborder]

83. agree with this totally^^^

[Codeine]

143. A-fuckin'-men. nt

[LongtimeAZDem]

179. ^^^^^ (nt)

[Dawson Leery]

4. Close the primaries and have a rule that

says any one wanting to run in the primary must be a member of the party for at least 5 years.

[onehandle]

6. And have been elected to office as a Democrat at least once.

There are a number of states where you can be registered as a Democrat, but also be registered as a Green or Libertarian, etc.

[LiberalFighter]

81. At least that way we wouldn't have anyone like Trump with that requirement. :)

[jmowreader]

123. How about REelected at least once?

And it's got to be a fairly high office - governor or Member of Congress. School boards and state houses of representatives do not count.

[Justice]

18. Or have to change party designation 6 months prior to primary election.

that should do the trick.

[R B Garr]

23. I like this idea, too. "must be a member of the party for at least

5 years." That makes a lot of sense. And close the primaries, yes. Who needs all this negativity for no reason.

[LongtimeAZDem]

180. I would have said 2 years, but otherwise I agree (nt)

[DURHAM D]

7. Closed caucuses are even more important.

Open caucuses are a wet dream for bullies. Women with children and older women had to leave our caucus because of the abuse.

I know of at least 3 of those bullies who are now in the room.

[DanTex]

9. Caucuses have to go, period.

Like you said, a wet dream for bullies, a small band of crazies can come out ahead because turnout is so low. It's not a coincidence that most of Bernie's wins came from caucuses. It's the kind of people we're seeing protesting the convention, small in number but very loud.

[Justice]

19. Agreed

[Lord Magus]

10. That's why we need to abolish caucuses.

Something that should've been done decades ago.

[LisaM]

47. Yep. Almost every woman I know in Washington who supported Hillary

opted out of our caucuses this year (I sent an affidavit, have no idea if it was counted). We had a primary later that didn't count, and Hillary won that handily, but it's the bullies from the caucuses who got to move on to be national delegates.

[sarae]

111. That's what I hate about caucuses – people are intimidated into supporting a candidate.

When there's a radical difference between the results from the beauty pageant vs. the caucus, there's something wrong with the process.

[George Eliot]

156. She won by six percent which means had three percent voted B, it would have been tie.

Six percent seems like a lot to some people but it isn't really. I didn't vote primary because I'd already caucused. I didn't care about primary. So I don't think your example is perfect.

[Codeine]

144. No caucuses, period. nt

[cloudbase]

8. Be careful what you wish for.

If Sanders had gone third party all the way, Ms. Clinton wouldn't stand a chance in the GE.

[DanTex]

11. Sanders wouldn't have gone third party. He's no Ralph Nader.

[billhicks76]

49. You Base That On What Exactly?

[fleabiscuit]

88. What Bernie said. nt

[billhicks76]

92. Well If He Had Then This Poster Would Have Even More To Complain About

Our party could've lost to Bernie and/or Trump. People here need to be outraged Trump is ahead now in the polls. Why do they keep whining about Bernie or the Green Party. Victory is solely determined by turnout in a closely divided nation. Trump got record turnout of the base this year. We did not. It's that simple. We need to motivate turnout to win.

[liberalnarb]

98. The fact that he didn't run third party maybe?

The fact that he endorsed the nominee?

[R B Garr]

26. Wrong, he might have been vetted more and then reality would have set in.

You have to wonder why he hadn't tried your suggestion the last 11 Presidential elections he didn't engage in.

[1StrongBlackMan]

37. I think you are correct ...

had Bernie run third party, there would have been no reason for the HRC campaign to pull punches ... and I believe they pulled a lot of punches because they didn't want to damage a member of the left.

[LiberalFighter]

84. Absolutely! Hillary's campaign avoided that as much as possible.

[NanceGreggs]

29. If Sanders had gone Third Party from the beginning ...

... HE wouldn't have had a chance in the GE.

Bernie complained throughout the campaign that "nobody knows me", and that the media was ignoring him. How much media attention do you think he would have gotten without running as a Dem?

By his own admission, he ran as a Dem because he NEEDED the media attention he couldn't have gotten without that association to a major party.

[bekkilyn]

31. Not to mention the Democrat party moving even more Republican-lite (nt)

At least with Bernie's influence, the party made the platform more progressive. Don't let a few rude delegates destroy what is of benefit to all of us.

[politicaljunkie41910]

62. That's your opinion and you know what they say about opinions and a$$holes. Everyone's got one.

It doesn't mean a thing. Sanders wasn't even that certain. If he were that certain of himself and his revolution, he'd have run as an Independent. At least then he would have been authentic.

Instead he ran as a Democrat and utilized the systems and resources of the DNC to launch his "revolution", which was built off the backs and hard work of members of the Party.

[oswaldactedalone]

12. Dump caucuses altogether

They suck.
Should be primaries in every state. I like NC's way of doing it in that Dems have to vote in their primary, Thugs vote in theirs, and independents have to request either a Dem or Thug ballot. Many things are wrong in this state but voting isn't one of them.

[NurseJackie]

14. Absolutely!

[procon]

15. I really don't like this Sanders supporter who is speaking right now.

Diane Russell from Maine, she keeps smirking and saying they won. Did she just make an oblique reference to the "enemy"... like who, democrats or Hillary? She says they are getting open primaries.

[SharonClark]

126. I heard her on NPR say the same things.

[Thinkingabout]

16. We have rules in the DNC, expect to abide by those rules, we know we can change rules

But they still need to be our rules. I love the super delegates, we need a safety device to prevent the hostile takeovers by those who do not hold our values.

[B Calm]

17. Bullshit!

[RBInMaine]

21. They are beyond the "Far Left." They are the MEGA INSANE LOONEY TOONS LEFT.

[liberalnarb]

99. Really?

Affordable college, a living wage, expanding social security, protecting a woman's right to choose, and universal healthcare are "mega insane"?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

22. Green Party members are allies of the GOP?

Did you expect to be taken seriously?

[George Eliot]

25. If that's not whining, what is?

[George Eliot]

24. Voter oppression? Democratic value? That many Greens, party'd be doing better. And Martin O'Malley?

You make a lot of assumptions. Why not just expect your party to support all democrats equally. Can you say that O'Malley wasn't burned as well with all the energy in party supporting Clinton? Is he not a democrat?

So Greens are not allies but GOP supporters? That sounds like whining to me. You want a united party? Then it is time stop the accusations and the whining. Also, the people Bernie brought into the party wouldn't be here without him. That makes Greens a moot point. And it make independents a moot point. Somehow you just don't get it.

[DanTex]

27. Greens are obviously GOP supporters. They have accomplished absolutely nothing

for progressive causes, their only political accomplishment is helping Bush get elected in 2000. Now they are trying to get Trump elected in 2016.

I don't want to be united with these people. I don't want them in my party carrying Trump's water by booing Democratic leaders who have done so much for this nation and who I respect highly. There different kinds of independents. The Mike Bloomberg kind of independent I welcome with open arms. The Jill Stein anti-vax crazies I want nothing to do with.

[billhicks76]

55. Bloomberg Is A Republican

How can you keep a straight face and call environmentalists republicans and banker affiliated owners of business news networks as independents. Something is wrong with you. Keep your eye on the ball. Don't get sucked into the past. Nadar? That's 16 years ago. A lot could've been done to stop the Bush family that did not. IranContra prosecutions would've helped.

[DanTex]

68. No, he's not. He's an independent, same as Bernie was until he ran for president.

And unlike the (mostly white) jackasses shouting down Elijah Cummings while he was talking about Black Lives Matter, Bloomberg is going to endorse Hillary for president.

Bloomberg is also an environmentalist, and has done much more for the environment then the entire Green Party has during the whole course of its existence. Which isn't hard, because the Green Party has done absolutely nothing for anyone (except for George W Bush), ever.

[billhicks76]

70. That's LaLa Land

Maybe you should go work for Bloomberg then. He supports companies that destroy the environment. It doesn't matter what he calls himself. He's as Republican as they get. Try and stay focused and get Hillary elected. You're doing more harm than good complaining about the past.

[George Eliot]

161. Right, Bill, Labels mean very little in politics. I yearned this year for attention to issues but...

it was all about labels. Isn't that sad?

[George Eliot]

153. So you are for super delegates,TPP & fracking? Greens-they aren't in your party. They're greens.

Again, you are advocating for voter suppression. Truthfully, I don't understand voters like you. The party moving to the right left me, I didn't leave them. Democrats further left than 1956 Republican platform which I'm sure you know. So...I really don't get you. DNC = Koch Brothers and Wall Street. Are you really a Democrat or a Republican who came over as your party moved right? I think it's a fair question.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=25838

[DanTex]

158. Superdelegates, no. Speaking of which, don't you find it ironic that the Bernie or Busters

booing at the convention, when interviewed, talk about how superdelegates should overturn the voters and install Bernie as the nominee in a blatantly undemocratic manner? No, unlike Bernie or Busters, I don't think we should have superdelegates, I think whoever gets the most votes should be nominee.

I've been a Democrat my entire life, my first election as an adult was 2000, so I saw first hand how the Greens intentionally sabotaged Al Gore because Nader in his twisted mind thought it would be better for Bush to win. They're trying to do the same thing this year, except now they want to stick us with an even more dangerous person than W.

TPP and fracking, I can see both sides. TPP I'm more or less neutral, I can see the benefits, increasing American economic influence, opening markets, imposing stronger environmental and working regulations on countries we trade with, and being a counterweight to China, which has very little regard for human rights. On the other hand, there are some provisions in there that I'm not totally happy with.

Fracking, certainly needs to be regulated strongly because of risks. However, at this point, until we transition to a fully renewable economy, if we're not getting electricity from natural gas, we're getting it from coal, which is dirtier.

[cannabis_flower]

28. I wouldn't say

they are GOP allies, at least not on purpose. I know people like them. They are just so inflexible that they would cut off their noses to spite their face. They are people for which the good is the enemy of the perfect. You really can't be that way and expect to make changes.

[B Calm]

30. Most of the Bernie delegates raising a ruckus are from closed primary states.

But, you probably already knew that.

[DanTex]

32. There would be more of them if those primaries were open.

[B Calm]

33. Glad you admitted that.

[DanTex]

34. It's not a big secret. Bernie did better in caucuses and open primaries.

[Sheepshank]

91. How do you know this?

[B Calm]

104. The states listed below utilize closed primaries/caucuses for presidential nominating contests.

Alaska
Arizona
California (Republicans only)
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Hawaii
Idaho (Republicans only)
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Oklahoma (Republicans only)
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Dakota (Republicans only)
Utah (Republicans only)
Washington
Wyoming

[Omaha Steve]

35. Delegates are elected at state conventions

Second time in 15 minutes I have had to say closed primary wouldn't change delegate elections.

[DanTex]

39. Closed primaries would make it more difficult for non-Democrats to win delegates

in Democratic primaries in the first place.

[phleshdef]

36. Comments in your post are making a pretty damn strong case that you don't understand...

...how delegates are selected.

[B Calm]

60. Don't delegates have to be registered democrats for at least 2 years?

[Martin Eden]

137. How is your question relevant to my post?

[retrowire]

38. "that Green Party types are not allies of progressives, they are allies of the GOP."

Horse shit and you know it.

This is some"if you are not for us you are against us" absolutist bullshit.

The world is not red or blue, or black or white. Grey exists.

God damn.

[DanTex]

41. It's absolutely true.

Name one accomplishment that the Green Party has ever made for progressive causes. There aren't any.

Their only political accomplishment is helping Bush win in 2000. And this year they are trying to help Trump win. They are GOP allies, plain and simple.

[retrowire]

51. facepalm. you're going on my ignore list once and for all after this

Just because greens have not accomplished progressive values does not mean they aren't trying to champion progressive values.

And, just because they have acted as spoilers before DOES NOT mean that they MEANT TO BE SPOILERS.

That kind of logic of thinking that "Oh they're trying to ruin us and they're on the Republicans side!" Is ignorant and conspiratorial.

Good lord man. Divisive as fuck.

[DanTex]

63. So you can't name a single accomplishment.

I see no evidence whatsoever that they are "trying to champion progressive values." If that were really what they were trying, they are the least effective group of people in the world. A decades long record of total failure.

Are you really trying to argue that they don't mean to be spoilers? That would mean that they are stunningly stupid. It's not very hard to figure out. Especially since they've already acted like spoilers in the past. Maybe the first time, they didn't realize it, but by now, everyone knows how it works. Jill Stein can't be dumb enough to think that she can win, or accomplish anything other than help elect Trump.

[billhicks76]

69. Perot Was A Spoiler

He had double digits. Nadar wasn't even close. Gary Johnson will take more republican votes than Jill Stein so it all evens out. You're focusing on the wrong thing. Like everything in life we are easily misled into blaming others for our problems. When we work hard and focus on ourselves things turn out better. Stop going negative. Don't get so rattled as life isn't a cake walk. The convention will be over before you know it

[DanTex]

72. Yes, he was. Although he took votes from both sides, but he did help Clinton.

The total number of votes Nader took from Dems would have given Gore a SCOTUS-proof victory, there is no question of this.

It doesn't matter that Johnson will take more votes than Stein, Stein is taking votes that would otherwise go more Dem than GOP.

Of course I'm bothered by them. A bunch of angry white people shouting down Elijah Cummings while he is talking about Black Lives Matter. Sounds like a Trump rally, right? Explain to me how that is a good or even acceptable thing.

[billhicks76]

87. You're Breaking The Rules

Get over yourself. We have all gotten over ourselves and are focusing on the future. Start worrying about yourself and not others. The independents are a wash. No one cares about Nadar right now. There are always many factors that influence turnout and results. You shouldn't be lecturing people about Black Lives Matter. By the way it's a movement and doesn't come down to one or two guys having an argument. This thread is a waste of time.

[DanTex]

90. What rule am I breaking? Jill Stein is not a Democrat, she is a GOP ally, and there's

no DU rule against criticizing GOP allies. And you might not care about Nader anymore, but it's a very clear example of the far left allying itself with the GOP, the same thing that Jill Stein is doing this year.

And I'm not lecturing anyone about Black Lives Matter. I'm just pointing out that the mostly white far lefties disrupting the convention shouted over Elijah Cummings when he was talking about BLM. And you want me to consider these people allies?

[billhicks76]

94. You Will Defend Anything Regardless Of Facts

You going backwards. You're trying to refight the primary. I get it that others are doing same thing by protesting at the convention but DU isn't the convention.

[DanTex]

95. Fact: Jill Stein is not a Democrat.

Fact: the Green Party has never accomplished anything for the environment or working people or anything else except for George W Bush's election.

This has nothing to do with the primary, it has to do with the crazed far-lefties that are screaming at Elijah Cummings while he is trying to talk about BLM.

[billhicks76]

106. Yawn

You're just a broken record who covers their ears and mutters. We all heard what you said the first time.

[DanTex]

107. When you wake up, maybe you can give me a list of the Green Party's accomplishments.

[billhicks76]

112. You're Not Worth The Time

You're distracting venom is counterproductive to Hillary beating Trump which is what I'm focused on.

[DanTex]

113. Or maybe you can't list the accomplishments because there are none.

[billhicks76]

116. Good Luck With Everything

If your mission was to focus energy on discrediting the Green Party instead of promoting Hillary then you still have a lot of work ahead of you. Try not to suck too much air out of the room and take the spotlight off Hillary because that's the work some of us want to get to.

[George Eliot]

163. Sorry to interrupt but...what are accomplishments of dems? I'm not talking FDR.

I'm just curious what you think is an accomplishment?

[DanTex]

165. Let's see. Obamacare, preventing the economy from descending into depression,

strongest wall street reforms since WW2, saving the auto industry, climate regulation through executive actions, a nuclear arms deal with Iran, normalizing relations with Cuba...

[George Eliot]

194. Band aids. What we get from the usual politicians.

Obamacare . . . still in infancy and lots of people not covered. Auto industry? Lee Iaccoca did same. Any good dem would have done same. Climate? Get real. Clean coal? OMG! You're easily impressed. Arms deal - Obama is a less warlike President and I'm grateful for that. Kerry the best S of State we've had IMO. Cuba was a no-brainer and it's time it was done. Banksters? Read Thirteen Bankers A total rollover by Obama and screwed middle class totally on Bush's TARP. Very reluctant President when it came to taking on the Republicans.

Major accomplishments? Social Security, medicare, civil rights . . . now those are achievements. Items such as these were Bernie's vision.

[DanTex]

197. Again tell me one thing the Green Party has accomplished.

All they do is whine. Accomplish nothing. Do nothing productive. Y'all like to whine about how the historic achievements of the Obama aren't socialist enough, but at the same time the Greens/far-lefties have never, ever done anything to help a single person in America.

You want to throw 20 million people off health insurance, go ahead, vote for Jill Stein.

[George Eliot]

198. Red herring. Defend your claim.

Another REAL accomplishment: Kennedy's moon challenge


You're the one who touted accomplishments, not me. What does green party have to do with anything?

[DanTex]

201. Nope. The Greens are totally useless, that's my claim. And I'm right.

The Democratic party under Obama has a huge number of historical accomplishments. I listed them. The Green Party have none, except for helping to hand the 2000 election to Bush.

The fact that you choose to ignore all of Obama's accomplishments because it would disrupt your anti-progressive worldview isn't my problem. I deal in facts. You don't.

The Dems are a force for progress, and the Greens are tools of the right wing.

[Hortensis]

203. Uh-uh: Green functions for spite voting.

Last edited Thu Jul 28, 2016, 05:48 AM - Edit history (1)

Seems to be an important function. It's sad when a list of Obama's exciting, inspiring accomplishments, and Clinton's promise of so more to come, make no dent in negative emotions that overwhelm all else.

It seems not everyone is emotionally suited to the very imperfect gives and takes of democracy. My guess is 2016 will become just the latest in a series of self-inflicted but bitter disappointments unless they can remember why they should care which party is elected.

[DanTex]

208. The Green Party functions for Trump voting.

I agree with you, Greens are not emotionally suited for democracy. They don't like give and take, or compromise of any kind, they have a strong authoritarian streak, which is part of why Trump appeals to them.

Sure, part of it is spite. They act like spoiled teenagers, oozing with privilege and entitlement. But that doesn't excuse them from carrying Trump's water.

[Hortensis]

204. It's unfortunate that you feel that way.

As for the major accomplishments you list? None seemed all that major initially. Those were enacted in face of opposition that did everything it could to keep them from working well, and there were a lot of problems, many but not all of which have been fixed.

Btw, this struggle is always with us. SS and MC could be so much better if the forces of repeal weren't constantly trying to sabotage them enough to weaken public support. Same thing even more for the civil rights laws, of course.

Sure you don't want to vote for the side that didn't just enact these laws but has fought to keep them from being damaged and ultimately destroyed every year since enactment without fail?

[longship]

40. 19 states have no party registration, by law!

How in the Sam Hell is anybody going to have a closed primary in those states? That's right, they aren't.

So people can just stop ringing that cockamamie closed primary bell. And I would really like to hear the cause and effect of closed primaries and bad acting individuals at the convention. How does that work?

Support open primaries everywhere. Let everybody vote in the primaries. There is no harm in that.

[DanTex]

43. OK, those states can have open primaries. Closed primaries where possible.

Also no more caucuses, makes it too easy for a small band of crazies to get a majority because the turnout is so low.

[longship]

45. That is up to the state party, too. (Re: caucuses)

I fully support primaries, but only if they are open. Let everybody select our candidates. And again, you are not going to be able to close the primaries in the 19 states without party registration.

The solution is to level the playing field and open the primaries everywhere.

[billhicks76]

65. Maybe Try Uniting People Instead If Calling Them Crazies

You pretty much lost most everyone when you said the Greens and the Republicans are allies. Get a grip. Radical environmentalists that put saving the earth from greedy businessmen above politics hardly equates to whatever outlandish modality you're trying to portray. Time for you to go back to the drawing board, stop alienating frustrated leftists and work hard to elect Hillary.

[DanTex]

71. I don't want to be united with people who shout down Elijah Cummings

while he is talking about Black Lives Matter. They are GOP allies, and I don't want to have anything to do with GOP allies. These people are not radical environmentalists, radical environmentalists when interviewed don't say that they won't vote for Hillary but might vote for Trump. Trump doesn't believe in global warming and these people are trying to get him elected.

[billhicks76]

110. No One Is Voting For Trump At Convention

You need to seriously chill out. And you lecturing us on BLM is a joke. You do know not all Black people agree on everything right? You do know they are allowed to criticize each other right? Have you ever been beaten up by a cop or witnessed it first hand like I and countless others have? You're too dismayed by conflict and controversy. You need to focus on ejecting Clinton. You better want to be united with those you aren't identical to or you have no clue what politics is about. You're acting like the people you're against.

[Bill USA]

42. as long as we have Repugnants who R happy to fuck with our democracy, we MUST have closed primaries.

[B Calm]

50. Then political parties need to pay for the primary elections.

[Bill USA]

188. I don't mind if we pay for the Green party primary or the Bernie Independents primary unless it's

a really small group like less than a few percent of the voters.

I don't really see the sense in people who are not part of a party saying they are so they can tag along. Nobody's stopping anybody from having their own party.

[obamanut2012]

52. k & R -- Great post

[Tatiana]

54. Some local party allowed those people to be delegates.

I am against closed primaries. We are supposed to be a big tent. Even if we have crazies show up to our house, let's take the opportunity to try to educate them and persuade them off the cliff.

This election is too important not to do so.

[BlueStateLib]

56. norman solomon is a green and he is leading bernie's california delegation

[Cha]

64. Oh Yeah! Lots of tweets saying that, too.

[MellowDem]

67. I think it's a good case for a parliamentary system...

The two party system is already grossly undemocratic, and directly responsible for the rise of people like Trump, so many people don't feel like they have any choice at all.

Closed primaries will make the situation worse, making it an even smaller, more niche population electing nominees than it already is.

The Democratic Party is seen as not very progressive by a lot of people, and for a lot of reasons, and they have nowhere else to go.

[bucolic_frolic]

73. Do the Greens know that if they elect Trump

there won't be anything green still standing?

[Bucky]

75. You think they won't show up anyway?

Democracy means people are going to boo us some times. If you want less boos, work for stronger policies.

[DanTex]

78. Protestors sure, but we definitely don't need crazies like this at our convention.

These people don't care about policies or democracy. They just like disrupting.

[Bucky]

85. A valuable point.

But you gotta love the scrum of a vigorous democracy. It's what freedom sounds like.

[Andy823]

80. Exactly.

I was listening to MSNBC on the radio this morning, and they were interviewing on of the protesters. She was asked why she was there, she said the system was rigged, and then they asked her if she would vote for Hillary, she said no way. She then stated how terrible Hillary was, and then said she would vote for the green party. She then said that "all of us who are NOT Democrats" will NOT vote for Hillary. She then said Trump would be better because he would only make it for 4 years, and Hillary would be running again in 4 years. I thought to myself how stupid can people be to think that 4 years of Trump wouldn't be "that bad"!

[fleabiscuit]

82. The DNC doesn't really have all that much say what happens in the states.

The individual states run their own primaries.

[BzaDem]

93. The DNC decides whether to allocate more than 0 delegates to states with open primaries.

It is entirely up to them. States can have whatever beauty contests they want, but they have no power to make them count for anything.

[fleabiscuit]

169. I noticed the DNC didn't pass on California. eom

[BzaDem]

170. I'm not saying the DNC has chosen to do this.

I was responding to the idea that they don't have the power. They do, and states typically respond to rule changes by bringing the elections into conformance with party rules (with a few exceptions, like Michigan/Florida in 2008, which caused all their delegates to be stripped).

[Exilednight]

212. Florida and Michigan only had half their delegates strippes away, not all of them.

The DNC met and reinstated half their delegates. The reasoning is quite simple, if they strippes those states of their delegates, it would have equates to electoral suicide.

How do you win a state when you tell them their vote doesn't count in selecting the nominee? It's res meat for Republicans and will never ever happen.

[riversedge]

89. Oh definately should have closed primaries.

[PoliticalMalcontent]

96. "Green Party types are not allies of progressives, they are allies of the GOP."

That's a real, "You're either with us or you're against us" mentality.

If you look at green party doctrine you'd realize they're faaaaaaarrr more progressive than anything democrats can currently elect based on how the system is currently set up. Advocating for closed elections would just make for more moderate democrats. Additionally, demonizing people is NOT a way to make allies. I don't know how to make that clear, but it should be common sense.

I consider myself a democrat through my voting habits (seriously, I can't remember the last time I didn't vote dem), but ideologically I'd probably fit more in with the greens. To see them get thrown under the bus so frequently around here makes me question my life choices.

Don't be so small minded. Think big. Think about the things we could do better for this world instead of always using the 'better of two evils' approach. I know most everyone here doesn't feel they're picking between the lesser of two evils, but that's how most people are most election cycles. We can do better than that. Maybe not this cycle, but hopefully in future cycles we can work to fix a broken system.

If things are working how you want them to, obviously you wouldn't believe it's a broken system. Most people believe the system is corrupted and dirty though; perhaps beyond repair. I think that's why you've got people willing to vote Trump, despite the clear dangers he represents. I, personally, don't think he'd fix the system so much as abuse the system and break it more in his favor.

Anyway, yeah. Stop demonizing progressives because they see the world slightly differently than you, okay? That'd be the best way to be a swell individual.

[DanTex]

100. It's actually an "if you're against us then you're against us" mentality.

Green party doctrine is totally meaningless. Name one progressive accomplishment that the Green Party has actually done. You can't because there aren't any. Nothing. They are totally impotent as a force for policy change.

They say all sorts of things, but the only actual effect they have is taking votes away from Dems and making Republicans more likely to get elected. And they know that, but they keep doing it anyway. Look at them now, shouting down great and accomplished progressives like Elijah Cummings, Nancy Pelosi, etc.

I'm not being small minded. I'm being factual. The Green Party, in decades of existence, has never even come close to accomplishing a single thing. People in the Green Party don't want to change things, they want to complain about things.

[PoliticalMalcontent]

118. If you didn't have Dems and Repubs working hand-in-hand to keep a two-party system going

I believe the results would be much different.

As is, Dems and Repubs, despite working from opposite sides of the aisle, work together to keep other political parties from succeeding. It's self-preservation to keep third parties from gaining any sort of traction. That doesn't mean that those two parties have a monopoly on ideas.

Even if someone from the Green Party did manage to get someone elected they'd probably have to face flak from both sides of the aisle in congress, whereas nowadays it's usually just Republicans demonizing dems and vice versa. Those in the two-party system benefit from keeping it that way.

To say there's no good ideas in other political parties is ridiculous and I think fits the definition of small-minded pretty well. Look at how much flak Sanders got for being 'independent' on these forums despite caucusing with dems for YEARS. It's absolutely mind-boggling the shit-slinging that was done all in the name of fear mongering. "He'll never be electable. He's a socialist!" (which isn't even technically correct, but hey, facts these days are hard to come by.)

Anyway.... People man. They need to use their brains more instead of just falling in line with group-think.

[DanTex]

120. The two party system is a result of the winner-take-all system we have.

Changing that requires changing the constitution. When that happens, and we get a parliamentary type proportional representation system, then we can talk about third parties. Until then, no third party will be able to be anything but a spoiler, except possibly in local elections. It is possible that a third party can actually replace one of the major two parties, but the last time that happened we had a civil war. And the Green Party is not going to be replacing the Dems in the next 50 years, there just aren't enough people that far left.

Third parties might have good ideas but that makes no difference. They are politically impotent, they don't accomplish anything. People who join them don't want to improve the world, they want to complain about the world.

And complaining about the world is great, there's a lot to complain about. But then taking actions like Nader did and 2000 and Stein is doing in 2016, which can have no possible effect but to move the actual policies of the nation to the right is, at best, hugely irresponsible, and at worst intentionally destructive to everything they claim to believe.

[dembotoz]

97. i ran my counties caucus..i find this post insulting and quite frankly bullshit

[FloriTexan]

101. You are in denial.

This is what when you mess with people's votes. Rightfully so.

[DanTex]

102. Nobody messed with anybody's votes. Conspiracy theories belong in Creative Speculation.

[FloriTexan]

119. That you believe that

Is part of the problem.

[synergie]

200. That you think belief in outlandish nonsense not supported by fact, evidence or reality

is enough to make sweeping statements with no merit is actually 100% of the problem.

[Codeine]

145. Take the CT bullshit elsewhere. nt

[TheKentuckian]

103. "The Big Tent" only expands rightward apparently.

[mike_c]

105. ^^^^^^^^

Yep.

[DanTex]

117. If anyone is to blame for that, it is the far left.

They don't want to join the tent, they just want to tear it down. Here they are at the convention, making asses of themselves, talking about voting for Trump, booing whenever the Democratic nominee is mentioned, shouting down Elijah Cummings when he is trying to talk about BLM. And this is after Bernie got almost everything he wanted in the platform. With friends like these...

It's like they are committed to never ever accomplishing anything. If they did, they wouldn't have anything to whine about. No thanks. I'll take the Mike Bloombergs over the Jill Steins any day. His politics are to the right of mine, but at least he understands the important of beating Trump, whereas Jill Stein is doing her best to get Trump elected.

[TheKentuckian]

189. There is no "far left" of note in this country and history didn't start with any issue you presented

Your definition of "far left" seems to be anything past global center if not inclusive of that too.

What grinds your gears seems to be New Deal types and Socialist lites.

Fuck Bloomberg with a rusty dumpster, just another Republican conservative who got left behind by the radical regressive neoBirchers.

[DanTex]

190. There is Jill Stein, and Nader before her.

What grinds my gears are the Steins and Naders who would rather see Republicans that Dems elected because the Dems aren't pure enough for them. It's not a coincidence that they are both wealthy and white and don't suffer from the consequences of the right-wingers that they happily and intentionally help elect.

I think the New Deal is great, which is why I vote for Dems that protect it. The Stein-Nader people are the ones trying to dismantle the New Deal.

And Bloomberg has nothing to do with neo-Birchers. He is a centrist independent. Give me Stein vs Bloomberg, I'll go with the one that understands that Hillary is 1000x better than Trump every day of the week. How about you?

[TheKentuckian]

218. I said he was run out of the Republicans because he isn't a neoBircher

And no question I support Stein's positions over Bloomberg's and it isn't even within shouting distance.

Being better than Trump is easy, billions manage that everyday. George W. Bush can handle that assignment without breaking a sweat. Only the likes of Ted Cruz and David Duke aren't up to that task.
Hell, I don't think I know a single individual personally less up to the task than Trump. He makes Mitt Romney look like Harry Truman.

[DanTex]

220. It doesn't matter what Stein's positions are.

It matters what she does, not what she says. And right now she is trying to get Trump elected. And Bloomberg is trying to prevent Trump from being elected. That makes Bloomberg one of the good guys and Stein one of the bad guys.

Stein has never done anything and will never do anything to make an inch of progress on all the things she talks about.

[Martin Eden]

132. +1 x100 n/t

[Lordquinton]

109. Open and transparent

Or change the name from the Democratic party, cause closed is not Democratic.

[Maru Kitteh]

115. Got that right! To hell with these Trump/Putin acolytes.

Close the primaries.

[glennward]

121. And even more superdelegates!

[SCantiGOP]

122. Nailed it, DanTex

[Trust Buster]

124. There's a minority of selfish anarchists in the crowd. For the first time I can see Trump as having

a serious path to the White House. This will give the selfish anarchist 4 years of playing the downtrodden victims.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

125. The green Party IS NOT ALLIES OF THE GOP.

[DanTex]

128. Of course they are.

Name a single thing that they have accomplished during their entire existence besides helping throw the 2000 election to Bush. Nothing.

[KPN]

134. DanTex, that'S ridiculous ... and you know it I'm sure.

The Greens I know were all Democrats until Bill C busted their faith in the Party.

[DanTex]

140. Let's be honest for a second.

The Green Party has accomplished absolutely nothing during their entire existence. And they have no prospects of accomplishing anything for the next 50 years.

What they do is siphon off voters that would otherwise be D, by saying patently false things like "both parties are the same." This helps the GOP, and the GOP knows it, and the Greens also know it. Everyone knows it.

So: here's a party that accomplishes nothing, has no hope of accomplishing anything, but electorally helps the GOP.

How else do you describe that other than an ally of the GOP?

[KPN]

146. I guess I would describe it as a Party that has rejected

the other two main parties. Not as an ally of the GOP. That'S an entirely different thing. The Libertarian Party is an ally of the GOP, but definitely not the Greens. Because Greens don't meet with your approval doesn't make them automatically allies of the GOP. I would say they are more an ally of the D Party ideologically, but the D Party has trouble embracing them, in part because of the Third Way element.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

166. Lets be honest

You have no idea what the future might look like in fifty years.

[DanTex]

167. Except for the fact that the Green Party will never have won a major election, no.

[uponit7771]

130. Well, believe you or my lying eyes and ears hunh? tia

[liberal N proud]

127. The entire primary has provided a strong case.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

129. This may be odd for me to say, but Senator Sanders absolutely had a right to run

And I simply can't support anyone saying that he didn't.

I do agree that closed primaries should be how all party leaders are chosen though. If you hate a party to such a degree that you can't bring yourself to even call yourself a member of it for a few months, you have absolutely no business whatsoever in choosing that party's leadership. Period.

I don't tell Republicans who they should pick for their leader. I certainly don't support neo-NAZIs picking their leader. So why should we allow neo-Communists to have any voice in picking ours?

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[KPN]

148. My, you are conservative!

I also learned you like to use divisive terminology: neo-communists, reality based community. Not useful.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

168. Accurate terminology

And there is nothing uniting about neo-communists, no matter what new word they use to describe themselves "Green", "Peace&Freedom", etc.

You also might google "Reality Based Community" before you criticize it, friend.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[KPN]

173. Swing and a miss!

You just don't get it. Example: your reality is different than mine. Your observations are no more credible than mine. You should know that being a member of the reality based community.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

174. You accurately described yourself

Know how I know you didn't google?

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[KPN]

177. Lol.

There you go again, totally ignoring the facts. I don't need to google reality based community. It's not a new term. While you pride yourself on living in reality, you ignore the basic reality that (and again, you should already know this) reality is always changing. Make fun, ridicule Berners if you want -- that won't preserve your reality. Berners will for the most part support Hillary November 8th -- they are not stupid, they are simply applying the leverage they have, but you fail to understand that and would rather ridicule and in the process alienate them. This isn't about the Presidency -- it's far more than that. Get with reality man!

[ConservativeDemocrat]

191. You're not laughing

Most people who type "LOL" don't.

And you might actually be surprised at where that phrase came from. You might even understand, once you do, why attacking me over it leaves you so open to ridicule. I'll give you a small clue though: it's mocking Karl Rove.

But anyone who thinks they can ignite a peaceful revolution, persuading people to support them, by acting like that handful of jackasses are doing down on the floor of the DNC, deserves to have their head examined.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Martin Eden]

131. Because shutting people out of the democratic (small d) process is such a good thing.

Because driving voters on the Left away from the Democratic Party is a good thing.

Because you're the one with a flamethrower in your hand, unwittingly burning it to the ground.

[DanTex]

135. If these booing jackasses are the "left", we're better off without them.

There are plenty of ways to expand the party that doesn't involve trying to reason with a bunch of whining spoiled teenagers who will tear the whole tent down if they don't get 100% of what they want.

[KPN]

149. OK. Looking forward to seeing those "plenty of ways".

[DanTex]

150. Mike Bloomberg will be endorsing Hillary in prime time. That's one way.

[KPN]

172. Haha. Oh, that'll be huge!

[DanTex]

181. It is pretty huge. A widely respected centrist, lots of business credentials, appeal to swing votes

[bigwillq]

138. I fully support open primaries.

I want to vote in any race that affects my life. I want to vote in both R and primary because one of them will be president. I want to have a say in that process.

[FarPoint]

151. Absolutely....

Sometimes...ya just got to establish healthy boundaries... Tough Love...

[immoderate]

152. It's a way to limit democracy!

--imm

[Attorney in Texas]

175. You can have a small pure tent or a big diverse tent. Both tents have some appeal but bigger tents

might serve us better every fourth November.

[Gothmog]

176. Agreed

[Orsino]

178. This is what a big fucking tent looks like.

As pleasant as a coronation ceremony would have been, the world has changed, and new interested voters are not only on the scene but are at our convention.

Are our leaders not up to it? Best we find out now, while there are still a few months for them to learn how. Last I heard, there's a general electiom waiting.

[DanTex]

182. Bernie or Busters don't want a big tent, they want to tear the tent down.

I'll welcome supportive people into the tent even if their views differ from mine. I'm happy that Mike Bloomberg is going to be endorsing Hillary and speaking at the convention. I welcome him, and other swing voters into the tent.

But only on the condition that he actually supports our nominee. If Bloomberg was going to show up and boo Hillary, then I'd say hell no stay out of our tent. Same goes for the BoBs.

[Orsino]

183. I insist that our nominee try to win these voters.

And I think she's doing it, with a lot of help.

Not everyone booing was a BoBer, and not every BoBer will still be a BoBer next week or next month. Our tent is growing and will continue to do so.

[DanTex]

184. I insist our nominee try to beat Trump. I'm in favor of whatever strategy is most effective.

If that means going after BoBs, then so be it. If it means giving up on BoBs and going for centrists, that's fine too.

[adigal]

207. So what will make us different than the Repubs is we keep going right?

The Greens believe what we believe, only more strongly. I actually laughed and showed your OP to my 22 year old daughter, who said that with nonsense like "the Greens are allied with the GOP," you will never get the votes of the young.

Very divisive - and untrue.

[DemonGoddess]

187. The Greens don't belong at our convention

hell, they don't belong on this board. They're not part of the Democratic Party.

[NurseJackie]

209. Thank you! You're absolutely correct.

[Blue_Tires]

192. I'm pretty sure the "open/closed" discussion will die a quick death now

the only reason why it was ever discussed is because the Sanders camp think they could have snatched a couple more states if there were open primaries...

[hobbit709]

206. What you going to do when the big tent shrinks down to a campout shelter?

When you've driven out the numbers you need to win an election? When the people you say aren't wanted or needed leave?

[DanTex]

210. Replace the Green nutjobs with centrists. I'll take Bloomberg over Jill Stein any day.

He gave a great speech supporting Hillary over Trump, whereas Jill Stein was giving interviews supporting Trump over Hillary.

After that, why on earth would we try to forge a coalition with Greens rather than centrists? The Greens are welcome to join the tent, but if all they want to do is tear the tent down, then we'll forge a coalition with different allies.

[hobbit709]

211. keep telling yourself that in your lonely little tent.

"The only thing in the middle of the road is yellow stripes and dead armadillos"

[DanTex]

213. There are far more centrists than there are Greens.

If Bloomberg decided to run third party he would have gotten 10 times as many votes as Jill Stein.

You don't actually want a big tent. You don't want Bloomberg in your tent. You don't even want moderate Dems in your tent. You want a telephone booth full of Marxists.

Bill Clinton expanded the tent in 1992, that's what the "New Democrat" movement was about. And it worked, he took back the White House after three consecutive losses. Since 1992, we have won the popular vote in every presidential election except 2004.

What the far left wants to do is kick all the people that Clinton brought into the tent back out again. They want to shrink the tent until it becomes a sleeping bag.

[hobbit709]

214. Maybe you should read Thomas Frank's book

Marxists? I have about as much use for Marxists as I have for the corporatists.

[DanTex]

215. Has Thomas Frank won elections? No.

You know who has: Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

[hobbit709]

216. A lot of people have won elections. If winning is your only criterion.

How many elections did Mr. Oops win?

[DanTex]

217. Winning elections is important. One of the many things the Greens seem

incapable of grasping.

One of the big reasons to expand the party, to have the "big tent", is to be able to win elections. We're a more powerful political force if we unite people with diverse views by being willing to compromise.

This is anathema to the far left. The far left wants strict ideological adherence: everyone has to be for single payer, against TPP, against Glass Steagall, etc. Even when they get only 90% of it, they still boo.

That's not a "big tent" philosophy. Big tent means also accepting people like Bloomberg, who is against single payer and pro-TPP, in order to form a winning coalition around broadly shared values.

[BainsBane]

219. Maybe Trump trolls?