This is a forum for Democrats, but what kind of Democrats?

[sadoldgirl]

There are those adhering to FDR and LBJ (except for Vietnam) Democrats as well as the "New Democrats", progressives and liberals, etc.

What is there that seems to divide us greatly? It seems to me the 2016 presidential elections. That is understandable. What is very difficult for me to swallow is the rejection of a primary with many possible candidates. That should be a democratic value.

For those among us, who can see HRC as the only candidate, I ask you why you cannot approve of others to join her as possible candidates. Are you afraid that more candidates may cause trouble for her? If you are so sure of her invincibility any debate should serve her well.

Arguments that anyone else does not have the required experience are somewhat strange. How much experience did Carter, Clinton, or Obama have?

Arguments that others are not democratic enough, lead me to ask what are your values for the party? Money? Well, let us see first a spirited debate during the primaries. The money will follow the winner; it always has.

So why can we not all agree to welcome more candidates for a great primary and welcome any and every one to join in without immediate disparagement? I would really enjoy that, and I don't think I would be the only one to do so.

[JI7]

1. is anyone saying only Hillary should be allowed to run in a Primary ?

[sadoldgirl]

2. No, but dispagaring everyone else seems to become the norm for some.

[DrDan]

8. HRC sure seemed to take a lot of heat today

[sadoldgirl]

10. Don't get me wrong,

She is more than welcome to join in. I just want to see others accepted and respected as well.

[840high]

19. So do I.

[ZombieHorde]

26. She has been taking a lot heat here,

and heat will continue her way. I was thinking about making a thread about her IWR vote, but I didn't want to dog pile by making another HRC=bad thread. I'll probably wait for the primaries begin.

[DrDan]

27. yep - that was a big vote that needs some explanation

I left the party within minutes of that vote after being a D all my life - it was a deal-breaker with me

[merrily]

3. It was not the plan to have any Dem challenge Hillary in a primary.

That has been evident to me for almost exactly two years now.

Before Obama was even re-elected, every Dem pundit, strategist, politician, host on MSNBC, etc. suddenly started saying , if Hillary runs in 2016, no Democrat will even bother to oppose her. She'll clear the field." All using the same words or very similar.

It was another way of saying "Hillary is the inevitable nominee, as in 2008, only worse: At least in 2008, we had a field of about six to start with and a hot contest between the two frontrunners. And Dems then said how much it had helped the Party. So, this time, no primary is supposed to help the Party?

It was as though we were supposed to get brainwashed, along with any rogue Dem who was not prepared to follow the script. Never in my life has anything remotely this happened--saying four years out from a primary that it was a done deal? Everyone? On every talking head show? Before the incumbent even got re-elected? I find it very suspect and, in any event, and totally unacceptable.

[Warpy]

4. Well, it's long been said that organizing Democrats

is like herding cats. Even Mythbusters failed on that account. Cats are just too damned independent and so are Democratic voters who make up their own minds based on the information they have at hand rather than on the orders of party bosses or other authorities.

While it seems to be a tactical disadvantage when we're faced with an authoritarian setup like the modern GOP, it can also be one of our strengths. Remember, the GOP authorities can never admit they were wrong about anything, it would confuse their various voting blocs severely, so they are locked into doing things that have never worked.

We're at one of those points, now. Most of their policies have been tried for years and the country is a mess because of them. That is why the political pendulum is just barely starting to shift leftward after 40 years of being pinned to the right.

However, don't expect us to agree on much of anything except the general principles that women deserve reproductive health care and equal pay, that all citizens should have equal standing before the law, and that wealth needs to shift back downward to the people who produce it through their labor.

ETA: If her partisans are saying Hillary should not be opposed, they're in for a very ugly surprise (or a whole bunch of them) over the next two years. Brace yourselves.

How we get to all those places will be produced by contentious arguments producing working models of possible solutions. That's how Democrats are.

[justiceischeap]

28. Herding cats is easier

[TexasProgresive]

5. "I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat."

Will Rogers says it for me. There are all kinds of Democrats that what makes us great-unlike the other party which only has asshats.

[sadoldgirl]

6. I have a friend in Austin,

who says her city is a single blueberry among the rest of tomatoes. Even in my state it is not so bad. The best for Wendy!!!!

[TexasProgresive]

9. Austin is probably the bluest in the state

but most cities are bluish but the suburbs and rural tends to be RRRREEEEDDDD. All the counties surrounding Austin are RED.

But your friend's analogy is a bit weak if she is using store bought tomatoes which are pink at best. Maybe she grows her own or gets them from a farmer's market.

[RobertEarl]

7. Hilliary deserves it

Her husband was the president and she was first lady, so there it is.

She gracefully lost to Obama in the primaries. Well, sorta.

And she's establishment so she will get all the establishment backing. Bernie is more underground and the rest are all in between, so if you want establishment to stay established and continue establishing what heretofore establishment has established, then we have no choice but to vote for the person who best represents the establishment.

I hope that we have established that and there is no more concern?

Hilliary E. Clinton-Sachs for the best government money can buy!!

[Dirty Socialist]

11. I was going to vote for Hillary in the 2008 primary

My views are close to hers. However, Obama ran a better campaign, so I voted for Obama. I am still up in the air now.

[BuelahWitch]

12. But it's her TURN, dammit!

[babylonsister]

13. All kinds of Democrats, and anyone else who cares

to support us. It's a big tent for a reason, and I think different POVs only make all of us think. It's a good thing!

[upaloopa]

14. We here do not determine who runs for Predident.

I think at times some DUers see themselves as being more influential than they really are. We are not the Democratic machine. Between Hillary and others we have NFL wife beatings and angry White guy privilege and feminist history to contend with.

[Johnyawl]

15. Annointing a candidate and trying to discourage or block others is nothing new...

...I remember the primaries in 1968.

[pnwmom]

18. Trying to discourage people from voting for Hillary even in the general election is wrong.

But I have no problem with her having competition in the primaries.

[sheshe2]

16. I will say it again and again and again.

Unless we vote in 2014 then 2016 won't mean a thing if we win the Presidency.

GOTV 2014!

[mimi85]

20. Exactly! Well said as always, sheshe2!

We should have a thread in the lounge or somewhere about what our "handles" mean. Some are super obvious, but many more aren't.

[pnwmom]

17. I like Hillary, but in the primary: the more, the merrier.

After that we damn well better get together, no matter who the nominee is.

[Nye Bevan]

21. +1. I am a Hillary supporter but warmly welcome Sanders, Warren, etc. into the primaries.

The debates will be more interesting, for one thing. And choice is always good IMO. And anyone who claims that Hillary is inevitable is a fool. A week is a long time in politics; 2 years is an eternity.

[tritsofme]

22. You have built quite a strawman here.

There is literally no one who opposes a primary process with multiple candidates.

Why in the world shouldn't Clinton supporters advocate against potential opponents in that primary process? Pretty ridiculous.

[sadoldgirl]

23. Simply because nobody has declared yet,

and you and I should be open and listen to the relevant arguments before deciding on one candidate, unless you want to exclude any reasonable kind of discussion of the very important issues regarding all of the country.

You may favor her, okay; still we ought to listen as well as look at previous records to allow for respect for other candidates and not use immediately a "diss" sign. These signs have been on this forum for a long, long time.

Why do you want to exclude other candidates??

[aikoaiko]

24. In have seen no one reject the idea of multiple candidates in a primary

Where have you seen it?

[donco]

25. I’ll vote for whichever Dem that wins…Butt

I would prefer someone like Senator Warren or an independent Senator by the name of Sanders.