We can't both brag about being morally and ethically superior to Republicans but then complain when

[StarfishSaver]

we actually hold ourselves to a higher standard than the Republicans do.

[malaise]

1. That simple

No need to play the victim

[el_bryanto]

2. That's the problem with having a diverse grouping of people

Some are going to feel that we should use the same seemingly effective techniques of our enemies, while others feel like we should take moral high ground by not using the same tactics. I prefer the high ground, but I don't know if it's actually more effective. For one thing, it's pretty easy to see that our political enemies will describe us as monsters whatever we do.

Bryant
http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[mcar]

3. +1!

[Garrett78]

4. I agree, but we have to do something to alter the dominant narrative.

Because when anything like Hill's scandal happens, the narrative that gets pushed is "it goes to show that both parties have scandals." Democrats have to push back hard and relentlessly against the false equivalency bullshit and establish a talking point along the lines of, "Unlike Republicans, Democrats actually have standards."

It requires persistent repetition to gain control of a narrative. That's the one thing Republicans do really, really well.

[StarfishSaver]

5. True

But it doesn't help the narrative when our first reaction is "Republicans do it all the time so why are WE being held accountable?!"

[Garrett78]

7. Right. Then the narrative is about hypocrisy or, as I said, false equivalency.

Instead, the dominant narrative should be about how the Democratic Party is honorable and the GOP is ethically bankrupt.

This is an area in which the Democratic Party has room for improvement.

[Demsrule86]

6. We don't need to hold ourselves to a higher standard first of all...it only helps GOP types...

Had we done so in Virginia...the GOP would have control of the state. You can't be so so so pure when the other side is not...take it on a case by case basis.

[gratuitous]

8. So, which Democratic president are you referring to?

We've certainly seen the clips of Trump beaming at the podium when his supporters break into their chant. There are numerous instances. Do you have one instance of a Democratic president doing anything remotely similar?

Does the difference between the president leading a chant and a spontaneous chant at a sporting event really need to be spelled out? If so, please tell me ahead of time how many syllables is too many so nobody's brain is over-taxed.

[StarfishSaver]

9. I didn't say anything about a Democratic president. And I wasn't talking about chants

[stonecutter357]

10. Donald Trump is a racist pig !

[leftstreet]

11. Maybe run on policies, not moral superiority n/t

[maxsolomon]

12. I'm not sure what this OP is about.

But if it's about booing President Sociopath the 1st time he's stepped in front of a crowd that's not composed of hand-picked deplorable fools, then I disagree.

Jeering unpopular leaders has a history that goes back millenia.

[StarfishSaver]

18. That's not what it's about

There's nothing moral or immoral or ethical or unethical about private citizens spontaneously booing a politician.

[maxsolomon]

26. Oh, then it's about Katie Hill

Gotcha

[Paladin]

13. We can't afford to be candy-ass Democrats, anymore.

This goody-two-shoes act by Democrats---while republicans are pillaging this country and enjoying it---is so over with.

[Grasswire2]

15. yes, it's a perversion of Sun Tzu thought.

And people like Karl Rove have used it to bludgeon the left into submission.

[MineralMan]

17. "Candy-ass?" WTF?

That's really an ancient insult that dates back to my days in the early 1960s. There's nothing "candy-ass" about being ethical and holding strong values.

It's not "candy-ass" to be working on impeaching a President, either.

If I remember correctly, "candy-ass" was a way of saying about someone that he wasn't a "real man," somehow. It was something the high school football player might say to a guy who played in the band. It's a marginal homophobic insult, really.

Here's one of the definitions of it from Urban Dictionary:

Candy Ass
a male who is meek and timid, shows female personality traits. basically a male who wouldn't survive outside the security of his mother's arms reach. Also look at pansy, sissy, fruit, wimp

Who do you consider to be a "candy-ass" Democrat, I wonder?

[StarfishSaver]

19. Kind of makes my point, doesn't it?

If we either behave according to the standards set by Republicans or we're "candy-asses," we need to stop trying to claim any moral or ethical superiority over them.

Ethics are easy to uphold when it doesn't matter. And if, when it matters, we claim we don't need to uphold them because Republicans don't, we can forget claiming any ethical or moral superiority.

[MineralMan]

24. However, if we do follow ethical rules, there is no issue

at all. If following good ethics is "candy-ass," then that should be taken as a compliment, it seems to me.

[Grasswire2]

14. Maybe Dems don't need a lecture on how to behave.

We people will do what we do when facing a tyrant. This is America.

[Grasswire2]

16. He's lucky the fans didn't come with eggs or tomatoes. nt

[StarfishSaver]

21. My OP wasn't about fans booing Trump

[mountain grammy]

22. +1

[mountain grammy]

20. Sure we can.

All day every day!

[StarfishSaver]

23. Well, of course, you can

But don't expect anyone to take you seriously the next time you criticize a Republican for being an unethical, immoral hypocrite.

[mountain grammy]

25. You worry about you 🙄

I’ll be fine. 😊