Reply #81: Same arguments from 2000. Crosspost from Cali's opposite thread.

[UTUSN]

This called for supposed "purity," if not the same individuals, of their persuasion-- the same who said the same thing in 2000, who said there is "no difference," who voted for NADIR, who withhold their votes unless the nominee is "pure," who help Rethugs at every turn---AND, I will say, who soon turn to cusswords in their "arguments."

I give the o.p. an electron point for taking it to the level of "purity = PURGE". I guess I'll be lined up against a wall, and in that case, after quitting smoking fifteen yrs ago, I'll take a cig, or actually just one will make me dizzy, so give me notice so I can fire up a pack or so in advance.

The o.p. is missing something in claiming that the strength of the Rethugs is in their purity. Not so. Their strength is that their TOTALITY VOTES every time. That kernel just matches the numbers of committed Dems who actually vote, such that their "wins" are just barely there. If every single eligible Dem voter actually voted there would not be a single Rethug in office anywhere.

He claims the overwhelming voice of "the people" is on his side. The reality is that the overwhelming majority of Democratic constituencies DON'T VOTE. The eligible ones. It would be more to the point if the o.p. would focus on mobilizing da peeps. How about paying attention to the Rethug thrust at splitting the California electoral votes, for starters.