tens of thousands of people who said they were Democrats, but really weren't, will leave the

[still_one]

Democratic party after the primaries

[riversedge]

1. good riddence

[gcomeau]

13. Yeah, who needs voters during an election?

Yay Hillary! She can win elections without voters she's so awesome.

[FrodosPet]

70. Thank you. Elections are not popularity contests.

It's not about the NUMBER of votes you get, it is about the QUALITY of votes you get.

True, you might not be elected, but you still have integrity.

[reformist2]

74. You guys have convinced me, if Hillary is the nominee, she's going to get shellacked by Trump.

You can dis large groups of voters all you want, just don't expect to win any elections.

[daleanime]

2. I've been a Democrat since '78......

we'll have to wait and see how much longer I survive this political climate. If we finish the primary and the only thing the democratic 'leadership' is willing to fight is me, then it just wouldn't make much sense to stay would it? But you'll only hear what you want to, so make sure to have a lovely day.

[Demsrule86]

41. since the alternative is a GOP type who wants to kill Medicare and Social Security...

It sure makes sense for you to vote for any Democrat ...and help keep the evil ones out of power...and I mean Republicans when I say evil.

[daleanime]

45. So republicans are not the only ones....

who try to scare their voters?

[Vinca]

3. Maybe the party has left them.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

5. Ding ding ding!

We have a winner

[peacebird]

51. Exactly, starting with the DLC & Bill Clinton.

[Vinca]

57. Funny, I was just thinking about when Bill ran for president.

He had the best platform ever, but turned out to be just your typical bait and switch candidate. The reason he had a long list of accomplishments was that he signed all the GOP bills. I'm afraid we might see history repeat itself.

[840high]

67. .^that

[TheCowsCameHome]

4. Thanks, Nostradamus.

That was very insightful.

[brush]

6. Sanders join the party 8 months ago.

Excuse me but that's not much time to have built relationships and gained enough influence to overthrow the whole thing.

Maybe he should have joined a long time ago instead of it seeming like he only joined to use the Democratic infrastructure to run for president.

And to those who only joined to vote for Sanders, well you weren't dems before so if you leave . . .

[Jarqui]

27. He joined the Dem party so that if he ran as an independent, he wouldn't split

the Democratic vote and in doing so, elect a Republican.

That's why he joined. I really don't think that's very evil.

He's really been an independent his whole political life. Arguably, he still is. But he would not allow that to significantly improve the Republicans chances of winning the White House.

if Trump and Clinton were the two nominees, Bernie may well have won that contest as a independent.

[artislife]

42. Remember 1984 and the rewriting of history?

You are not helping them do that when you bring in facts.

[hedda_foil]

31. Oh ffs! He has has ALWAYS been a member of the Democratic caucus in the Senate and House.

Not only that , but he is so trusted and respected by our Congressional leaders that they gave him the senior post on the all-important budget committee. In the last Congress, when Dems still held the majority, he was appointed by Democratic Senate leaders to the position of Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. After the Dems lost the Senate in 2014, he became the committee's Ranking Member.

Are you saying that Harry Reid, Dick Durbin and Charles Schumer didn't know his politics? Or are you implying that they didn't care about the party's budget priorities? Or could it just be that they trusted his loyalty and his negotiating skill to get the best budget deals possible?

[brush]

36. Why not just join years ago? All this DNC stuff may have been avoided.

[2pooped2pop]

77. No it wouldnt . Clinton is the establishment choice

And they intend for her to win by any means.

[Downwinder]

7. They might already have left.

Couldn't find enough to fill the Precinct chairs.
haven't seen a local Democrat candidate in four years.

[nc4bo]

8. Keep up those happy thoughts. It's already happening. How are those turnouts going?

Either they'll go indy or become like the unemployed who are no longer counted in official unemployment numbers. IOW, they just won't show up to vote.

[Svafa]

9. Too bad the Democratic party will need them when it comes time to vote in the GE.

[NurseJackie]

10. Preach!

[Gwhittey]

11. That is because if HRC

I rest my case.

[George II]

38. You should put that in context, AND give us the date of that (looks like early 2000s)

[gcomeau]

12. Tens of thousands of voters that *would* have been Democrats.

If the party had given them a reason to stay.


Yeah, but who needs voters right? This is an election! Voters don't matter.

[Gwhittey]

15. Yea

See my post #11

[George II]

50. Well, we already know that Sanders wouldn't have been one of them. He already has his re-election..

...committee set up, and it still says "Independent".

Before someone comes out and says that's the way Vermont is, his fellow Senator, a Democrat, still shows up on record as being a Democrat.

Here are the details:

http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/candcmte_info.shtml

S4VT00033 SANDERS, BERNARD 2016 BURLINGTON VT INDEPENDENT S - SENATE
P60007168 SANDERS, BERNARD 2016 BURLINGTON VT DEMOCRATIC PARTY P - PRESIDENTIAL

http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/candcmte_info.shtml

S4VT00017 LEAHY, PATRICK J 2016 MONTPELIER VT DEMOCRATIC PARTY S - SENATE

[gcomeau]

56. It's stunning to me that you appear to not get the significance.

There are 2 possible outcomes of this primary.

1. The Democratic Party demonstrates it is capable of supporting true progressive positions when given the opportunity to do so successfully, and we have Democratic presidential nominee Sanders.

2. The Democratic Party decides it prefers the corporatist status quo... the very status quo that has kept the most progressive most principled Senator in the United States out of the party until now. And he will return to his Independent status along with all the progressive voting population that were willing to follow him in and give the party a chance.


And you appear to be sneering at the reality of option 2 as if you want it to happen... because who needs progressive voters in the Democratic Party right?

[George II]

58. I get the significance of what we're seeing in the primaries so far this year, and soon to come....

....and I like what we're seeing so far.

Unfortunately some don't "get the significance" of our democracy, where the will of the people is of utmost importance.

[gcomeau]

61. So you DO like...

...the idea of driving away progressive voters and repellng them from the Democratic Party?

You're in the "good riddance" camp along with so many other I've seen posting here, cheering for shrinking the party instead of growing it?

Or is it just that you prefer it grow in the other direction?

[treestar]

59. Who said voters don't matter?

There are other voters out there. They are more numerous than the crowd that wants Bernie or Bust.

The number of Democratic voters who want Hillary is greater than the number who want Bernie and they are going to stay Dem and vote that way in the GE. Why don't those voters matter?

[gcomeau]

64. Anyone saying good riddance to them said it.

Scan the forums. Not hard to find them if you look.

.The number of Democratic voters who want Hillary is greater than the number who want Bernie and they are going to stay Dem and vote that way in the GE. Why don't those voters matter?

Nobody is saying good riddance to any of them. Because all those voters would also vote for nominee Sanders. Because they have no reason not to.

The same argument does not apply in reverse. That's the simple reality of the situation. Sanders brings in additional voters Clinton does not. And not just any additional voters, progressive voters. Voters that shift the party the way we are all supposed to want it to go.

And the Clinton camp appears dead set on stringing up barbed wire and no trespassing signs to keep them out.

[treestar]

66. Clinton can bring in more additional voters than Sanders can

the number of Bernie voters (some of them will vote Hillary in GE too) is not greater than the number of other non-Democratic voters. those other voters will at least consider Hillary whereas Sanders or Bust people will not. Those others seem more persuadable.

[gcomeau]

68. Oh... based on what data is that claim made?

And who are these other voters? The people who aren't currently in the party because it's been too far left for them before now? Who?

[CorkySt.Clair]

87. Answer: Only Bernie voters matter

Everyone else is a Turd Way, low info voter.

Purity of essence!

Purity of essence!

[YCHDT]

14. Yeap, especially the ones who don't care that Clinton would have more votes than Sanders

[mcar]

16. To them, I say: Bye Now!

[gcomeau]

19. You get that the point of campaigns...

...is to attract voters TO your party, right? Or are you Clinton supporters really so far gone that you think the entire point of this exercise is to glorify Hillary?

[yodermon]

17. Holy shit, you'd actually prefer to lose, provided you can punch some fucking hippies afterward?

yeah, go with that.

[wildeyed]

20. Hippie puncher, for the win!

Sorry, I find that term highly amusing.... This is the only place I have ever seen it used.


And no, we are punching the faux-Dem libertarians, actually. At least that is who I like punching the most

[gcomeau]

21. Yes... because the people supporting the Democratic Socialist

...are obviously the REAL fake liberals in all of this.


How fucking clueless can you be? I mean just how deep in the sand are you able to jam your head?

[yodermon]

22. Really?

e.g.

Why are big-shot liberal economists hippie-punching Bernie Sanders?
http://theweek.com/articles/606698/why-are-bigshot-liberal-economists-hippiepunching-bernie-sanders



And look, i think it's fair game to lambaste anyone on this board, or anyone *individually* that you know, who claims they won't vote for Hillary out of spite.

BUT if it turns out to be a real movement of any significant numbers, which could actually throw the election to Trump, then we need a more inclusive approach besides threats and guilt-tripping.

Bernie is attracting some independents... how can Hillary keep them?

[wildeyed]

23. "Bernie is attracting some independents... how can Hillary keep them?"

That is a really good question, actually. It is very, very likely that she will be the nominee. Not a done deal, but very probable. So how do we keep the indys and college students engaged through what will be an intense period of disappointment?

This is where the idea of coalitions comes into play. The Sanders coalition needs to figure out how to stay engaged and continue to push Clinton on their issues. And Sanders himself will be key. He is a better activist than he is a politician, so I trust that he will be able to exploit the moment to get his issues front and center with the more traditional party. But he will totally fail at that if his people do not show up to vote. So pretty sure he will be focused on the GOTV side of the game too. And that will help.

[artislife]

44. No...the key to a coalition is the majority reaching to the others

So it is hillary herself along with her surrogates and supporters.

Good luck with that.

[Svafa]

28. To be perfectly honest, I find the implication that Sanders supporters

such as myself are secret libertarians highly offensive. (Yes, to me, "libertarian" is a pejorative word.) Anyone who knows me personally would laugh their ass off at the idea of me being a libertarian. It's quite the opposite actually: the Democratic party has made a sharp turn toward the right, and I am not going down with it.

[wildeyed]

37. Nah, see you were the one who made assumptions about who the OP

was talking about. I just said that I thought that many who were threatening to leave were more libertarian than anything. That is who *I* assumed the OP was talking about. We could ask

[Warren DeMontague]

33. Cool story, bro.

[yardwork]

24. Punching, hitting Hillary with a 2x4, such violent imagery.

[CoffeeCat]

52. Hippie punching (and don't forget mocking of fellow Democrats!). It's all part of

Hillary's "digital outreach strategy."

Spreading her special brand of sunshine and rainbows all across the Internet!

Do her digital supporters realize that they've turned so many people off from the Clinton camp, that they wouldn't vote for her if they were paid to do so?

They are horrible messengers and mouthpieces for her. Unless of course, their goal it to foment hatred. If that's the case, then they're right on target.

[Jefferson23]

18. lol

Good luck.

[jeff47]

25. You'll finally have your safe and pure minority

from which you can continue to fail to win general elections.

[ibegurpard]

26. you'll be fine

You've already made it clear you need neither their support nor their votes.

[zappaman]

29. Yup.

[fredamae]

30. Great attitude for Retention-it's not like the Dem

party isn't bleeding members who Are long time Dems....I'd think the leadership might want to retain newbies...unless they really aren't trying to rebuild the party after 900+ lost seats.

[amborin]

32. thousands who have always been Dems, who donated to Obama, etc...will NOT vote for Hillary if she's

the nominee

[hobbit709]

34. I guess I was mistaken in all these elections starting in 1972.

[highprincipleswork]

35. I'm curious still_one, and others who don't care. What do you folks actually believe in?

What do you actually care about?

[George II]

40. Notice you didn't get an answer in almost a day? Obviously most if not everyone here "cares", so...

....who exactly are to asking?

[highprincipleswork]

65. I'm asking those who think anyone who "leaves", or who advocates for Bernie, is a non-Democrat...

to state what they really care about. Since they don't seem to care that large parts of the Democratic Party have been disenfranchised by this process, by the DNC activities, by the debate schedule (since remedied slightly through Bernie's success, persistence, and negotiating skills}. by activities like leaving Bernie's name off of the sample ballot in Cook Country, by debates being populated not with local interested Democrats but with hand-picked DNC plants. They don't apparently care about that or think it's right that people might be pissed off enough by a corrupt and rigged primary system to sit this election out or vote another way. And then to call these people non-Democrats or to just foolishly assume they are.

Where are the "Democratic" credentials of those making such claims? What do they actually believe in?

Because the beliefs that seem to be evidence by so many on this site, including supporting more needless wars, less regulation of banks, possible invasions of social services like Social Security, changing of the laws re Freedom of Choice, seem highly suspect in a site promoting Democratic candidates and values.

I am someone who steadfastly believes in the New Deal, and the economic theories that supported it. The fact that current Democrats seem so beholden to the kind of theories that supported Ronald Reagan through the Chicago School of Economics and through the DLC and the Third Way is a big, big problem for me. Does that mean I am not a "Democrat" or they are not, or we can't get along, or the Democratic Party has outlived its usefulness or is in line for a massive realignment or some kind of big split? I think we've got massive fences to mend and philosophical hurdles to jump, and I hope we can do it.

For me, the only direction, however, is the more Progressive one. We've been flogging this Republican lite for far too long, and it simply is not working.

[auntpurl]

72. I care about beating the Republicans in the GE.

I quite like Hillary, and she aligns with my political beliefs well, so that is just a plus. But I would happily vote for a ham sandwich over Trump, Cruz, or any of the idiots in the clown car.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

73. Ends as opposed to means? Probably much the same as you.

(With the obvious disclaimer that I can't speak for still_one):

Most Sanders supporters desperately want to believe that the disagreement is primarily about ends - if they can tell themselves that Clinton supporters don't care about things like reducing poverty and inequality, protecting abortion rights, mitigating climate change, decreasing the number of wars in the world, and so on, then that makes their opponents the Bad guys and them the Good guys.

But the truth is that virtually everyone supporting Clinton *does* care about those ends, they just disagree about the means to work towards them. You'll notice that I said "reducing", "mitigating", "decreasing" rather than "stopping" or "eliminating" - like most people who prefer Clinton to Sanders, I think that evolution is much more likely to do good than attempting a revolution that is almost certain to fail.

If you base your beliefs about Clinton's politics and views on what you read on DU, you'll probably fairly quickly come to believe that Clinton doesn't support those ends. To be frank, I think this says more about DU being a faith-based rather than an evidence based community than it does about Clinton. But even if the mud-slinging DU majority were right about her and I were wrong, it should be obvious that most of her supporters *believe* that she does, even if they're wrong, and support her for that reason.

[Fumesucker]

86. To be frank I think those who support Clinton are more "faith-based" than Sanders supporters

It takes faith to think Clinton believes anything that comes out of her mouth since she has so often contradicted herself.

Hillary takes a back seat to no one in her progressive credentials yet pleads guilty to being kind of moderate and center.

Hard working white people know a dog whistle when they hear it, I'm not kidding maddie.

[VulgarPoet]

39. Deuces. I needed to restock my ignore list anyway...

[mmonk]

43. That is your delusion.

[Autumn]

46. Damn, tens of thousands? Glad to see I beat the rush. I switched back to Unaffiliated the day

after I caucused for Bernie and he won here in CO. Now I've always been a Democrat, never missed an election and voted straight Dem every single time and will continue to vote for the Dems, just as Bernie has always caucused with them to get their agenda passed.

Are we sure I've never been a Democrat? Damn.

[Lizzie Poppet]

47. Not me, I'll tell you that!

Never said I was a Democrat...

[bvf]

48. I'm surprised you didn't say

"Democrat party," because, speaking as a lifelong Democrat, I think that's exactly how your sentiment reads.

[Coincidence]

49. Fine with me, as long as you're acknowledging that this is no longer the progressive party. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. I cannoto wait for the day the Dems have the same problems keepign the lights on

in my state, By the way, the the real world effect, Good.

Rs had the same exact attitude.

All I can do is smile.

[Waiting For Everyman]

54. I'll remember that when HRC is begging us to vote for her.

I've been a registered Dem forever, but I have to say I can't see a big deal of difference accomplished by sending in a piece of paper, or not. So what? A voter is a voter.

My beef is with other (supposedly) registered Dems. Our establishment candidates, potential and elected, are not democratic -- not big "D" or little "d".

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. "who said they were Democrats". Weren't they registered as Democrats?

How does that work with "weren't really"?

[Avalux]

60. You WISH they really weren't Democrats.

Everyone I know who is angry at the DNC and considering leaving have been registered Dems their entire lives; their family members are proud Democrats.

I don't know where you guys come up with this stuff.

[whatchamacallit]

62. I guess many of them were pretending for decades

and wasting their votes on democrats in an elaborate ruse. The world changes, people change. Deal.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

63. I guess every other vote for Democratic candidates was just a facade.

[840high]

69. Yes - my vote starting

with JFK was just to fool everyone.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

80. This only be my 3rd national election. Pity I had to blow my cover so soon.

[Betty Karlson]

71. I didn't know all Clinton supporters were that bitter?

But indeed: Third Way has overstayed its welcome in the party. I'd welcome some variety in the party leadership. If that means that a couple of corporation-cuddlers have to slam the door on their way out, so be it.

[Attorney in Texas]

79. When you show up in an ascot and top hat for a coronation, you get testy when democracy breaks out.

[Betty Karlson]

83. It broke out in Michigan alright.

Where will the goalposts move this time...?

[Attorney in Texas]

75. You're one hell of a party builder! Hope your small tent will keep you dry through the Cruz-Kasich

presidency.

[jillan]

76. Keep it up. Keep telling lifelong democrats that we are not really democrats.

[Thinkingabout]

78. I have been a Democrat for a lot of years, I will remain a Democrat, I have voted for

Democrats since I was old enough to vote and will vote for Democrats in the future, the Republican party does not share my same beliefs.

[aikoaiko]

81. You'll miss 'em on November 8th.

[840high]

82. Yes. Count on it.

[lovemydog]

84. I'm hoping hundreds of thousands will reform it for the better

and join it.

[delrem]

85. Your statement makes no sense.

It's obviously a "call out", but it makes no sense.

Look, still_one, you are as much a faker as any of these "tens of thousands" that you speak of, because you haven't got shit.

Your OP is pure noise.