Anyone you see making our TWO PARTY choice out as NEGATIVE, i.e. more or less stating that while one

[Eliot Rosewater]

party is better than the other they are BOTH a problem, that person is helping the GOP win elections.

[Me.]

1. Correct

TOS...support Democrats

+1

[dalton99a]

4. Especially in our current crisis

We are facing an existential threat that gets worse by the day

[left-of-center2012]

2. Not necessarily

If you are saying third party candidates (or independents) help the GOP,
Republicans believe Libertarians take votes away from Republican candidates.

[Cary]

3. That's nothing more than an excuse

Vote Democratic!

[left-of-center2012]

5. huh?

An excuse for what?

[Cary]

8. Perhaps I misread you

Sorry.

[bettyellen]

9. Libertarians also appeal to those who maybe liberal on some issues.

And totally stupid or uncaring on others. Like it or not, third party candidates like Nader have had a lasting impact on our nation- and not a good one.

[pnwmom]

49. The Republicans are wrong. Many young people are drawn to Libertarians because

of their positions on pot and LGBT issues, and don't pay attention to their radical-right economic views.

[Demsrule86]

98. without a doubt the progressive third parties help the GOP...and their criticism of the party costs

votes...we want the libertarians to take as many votes as possible from the evil right.

[left-of-center2012]

99. "the progressive third parties help the GOP"

Uh -- no.

(without a doubt)

[Demsrule86]

100. Yeah...so called progressives like the Greens...remember the Russian princess Jill

Stein...now I don't believe they are progressive but they talk the talk...

[Demsrule86]

101. And consider Nader who gave us United, two wars, and economic debacle with katrina thrown in for

measure.

[left-of-center2012]

106. Nader's not a progressive

And the Greens, who knows what they are.
Eco whackos?

[Demsrule86]

115. He was a Green...and you are right...they are wacko...why do they call themselves Green? I see no

indication they give a rats you know what about the environment.

[ismnotwasm]

6. Agree. Theres always a type of psychobabble about the two party system and

If it’s from intelligent, well informed people it’s wholly disingenuous given the history of American politics. More often, we see it from the under-informed or the mis-informed.

It’s not hard to google “history of two party system, United States of America” though, so ignorance is not an excuse

[pandr32]

7. Absolutely!

[Cosmocat]

10. I ... HAVE ... ZERO ... TIME ... FOR ... THAT ... SHIT

I mean, even if democrats were feckless twits (and there is a real case for that), on their worse day they are 1,000,000 times better than the GOP.

But, the honest truth is the overwhelming majority of the time, the people who say that are Rs with this flicker of soul to them, who have this distant sense that the Republican party is truly horrible, but they have been so effectively brain washed, they can't get past the programming of the evil liberal boogyman.

This why, while I don't personally characterize myself as such, I now out and out tell people I am a liberal, because running from that labels enabled us to get where we are now.

[Hortensis]

84. Doesn't sound like you're a feckless twit, CosmoCat.

I know I'm not. And none of the people I vote for have ever been, or that would have made me a feckless shit. I've always voted for candidates I had good reason to believe were competent and honorable, and since the internet age every one with a public record to consult really always is.

We did make a big mistake. We thought the information age would make people better voters. We failed to see how new access to information would be turned into very dangerous weapons to corrupt whole groups of voters and destroy whole parties. One good lie is several times far more powerful on the psyche than one good truth, just how much on average has now been measured.

I tell people I'm a liberal, too. I also tell them, btw, that I'm newly proud to be a Democrat, more than ever before, in this era when the GOP has been taken over but we still stand uncorrupted in our commitment to protecting our democracy.

[Cosmocat]

88. The reference was more to the party itself

not the rank and file ...

There are a lot of good dems in congress, but as a political entity, I have no problem calling the party feckless.

[Hortensis]

89. Seriously, I'm absolutely sure there are far,

far, far, far more feckless twits among the rank and file than among those who make politics and public service their careers. Not even close to a guess. It's a certainty.

Maybe when you're lying in bed some night, pretend you're running for the state legislature, you've worked yourself to exhaustion for over a year and a half, done your unfeckless best to get your message out, and then read articles that say most people don't recognize your name and none of those who do can name even one of your issues.

[sheshe2]

11. Vote Democratic!

Vote

[Tom Rinaldo]

12. Who is saying that they are both a problem? n/t

[BoneyardDem]

16. I continually keep hearing about the "lesser of two evils" choices

that same drum beat is starting to pick up momentum again.

[Tom Rinaldo]

17. If you don't get to vote for a person whom you are pleased to have represent you

that is the classic definition of a "lesser evil" choice. But that is simply common usage in our political vocabulary, I don't assume in such a case that the person I end up voting for is literally evil and usually I go out campaigning for that individual to win. Many liberal voters in Pennsylvania tomorrow have such a choice. Lamb won't even support Pelosi for Democratic Majority leader. None the less, for me, that vote is a no brainer. If I lived in that district I would crawl over broken glass to vote for Lamb and I will still celebrate if he wins though he does not closely represent my politics.

[BoneyardDem]

18. That Drum beat is hurtful to the project at hand....Getting Trump out of the WH

instilling futility, disheartening chatter, pressing a reason to stay home rather than vote, and encouraging ambivalence is only helpful to Trump.

That drum beat has never been used to actually try and put a 3rd party into the WH.

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. We are talking on a Democratic Board

I, like I assume you are too, am out there working for Democrats. I routinely carry formal nominating petitions for Democratic candidates who I am not always enthusiastic about. I belong to our local Democratic Committee. But I am concerned that all out outcries to the contrary are not making Democratic loyalists out of unaffiliated voters. The trends are clear and should be worrisome to all Democrats. A plurality of voters now choose to be Independent;, that becomes a majority when you get to the youngest voters. If we stop talking about them like they are the problem maybe we can become more effective at outreaching to them.

[Eliot Rosewater]

26. All that god damn NOSE holding bullshit worked to reduce the number of people voting.

Right up to election day.

Which has NOTHING to do with the primaries.

[mcar]

29. When one regularly hears

No difference between Rs and Ds
Democrats are bad, wrong, corrupt
Democrats didn't do enough or this or that

One could be forgiven for one's ambivalence about voting. Especially if one is not politically aware or savvy.

[Eliot Rosewater]

32. Exactly. Or if you are told as a young voter that you can insist on perfection in your candidate

that you can expect a candidate who can WIN who is with you on ALL issues

That one is just as dangerous.

[mcar]

34. Yes, it is

Along with the "I'm voting my conscience" voters.

[sheshe2]

46. Oh.

Let's toss in...

"I live in a blue state, a safe state. I can vote as I please, my vote doesn't matter."

[mcar]

50. Oh yeah!

Almost forgot that one. I lived in MA, as you do now, she. How many times has that true blue state elected R governors?

Every vote, every election counts.

[sheshe2]

61. Yep...

Blue MA elects way to many GOP Governors. And, lest we forget Scott F**king Brown to Teddies seat!!

Yeah...blue is so safe.

[Iahotdog]

78. Thats shit republicans spew to make

people apathectic about voting, they've been playing that game for years!

[Orsino]

90. I am.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/democratic-support-senate-eyes-rollback-banking-law-53544831

The two parties are not equivalent, but a lot of the same money is buying both.

If you say that that's a party with campaign finance laws rather than with the parties, I might sort of agree.

[poboy2]

13. I would vehemently disagree with you ordinarily.

"Our two party system' is this way because it was turned into it. Our founders wished for NO political parties.
It is nothing sacred or holy. All beside the point save the appeal of 'our'.

Now to the agreement. We simply cannot afford the LUXURY of voting 3rd party at this time.
That is the couching you should take. We cannot afford the risk of having the criminally insane run our gov't.

LIFE AND DEATH...extinction level event.

All hands on deck. Vote for decency and survival.
3rd party can wait until this crisis has past.

[Eliot Rosewater]

14. Obviously at this time more than others. But I also think people need to

stop with the nose holding attitude bullshit, it is why we have trump.

If you go into any election with the presumption that the democrat is only better because they are not a GOP, then you really dont know what you are talking about but more importantly the people you influence with that attitude, they are the ones I worry about.

Are they gonna then say fuck it, not worth it, and not vote? Sadly many will do just that.

ESPECIALLY the millennial, who has been sold on an idea that isnt really workable in the short run, many of them have anyway.

[Fresh_Start]

15. our constitution does not have provisions for a coalition government

if no one gets the majority of votes for president.
the top three vote getters are then voted on by the house of representatives and thus the people's vote is further undermined

[GulfCoast66]

79. We will never, ever, ever have a 3 party system that last more than one cycle

Because of the winner take all nature of our system, 3rd parties divide one side assuring the other side the victory.

Any 3rd party candidate on the left will insure a victory for the right.

Want to live in a nation with viable 3rd parties, move to a nation with a parliamentary system.

Cause it ain’t happening here.

[poboy2]

81. I don't expect everyone to understand the point of my post.

Obviously you did not, but it was not meant for someone like you anyway.

[GulfCoast66]

82. Someone like me?

Someone who thought one sentence in your post was inaccurate?

Because I agree with most of your points and certainly your overall theme.

The danger we face leaves no room for internal battles. My only point is that if we try to settle those healthy internal battles in the general rather than the primary we help elect republicans.

Have a nice day.

[Orsino]

91. Agreed. I'll cling to the party that promotes progressive change...

...or that at least leaves the opportunity available.

[Demsrule86]

102. I agree with you...but I have looked into third parties in Europe...they often lead to minority

rule - often conservative rule. Start at a grass roots level when this emergency is over and make the Democratic Party a home for all...we will always need a big tent in a center left country. For example, I see no way to hold the Senate without a big tent.

[peggysue2]

114. Exactly!!

This is the argument I've been making as well. We cannot afford, do not have the luxury to screw around with the November election. Meaning all the 3rd party arguments, both parties are the same, yada, yada nonsense is null and void.

This is a must win, not simply for Democrats but for the whole frigging country!

Decency and survival is also on the money. Our House is on fire, right now. Our Institutions are under attack, right now. The danger is real. The arsonists are determined.

We can argue about the color of the drapes once the fire is extinguished. Not before.

[poboy2]

119. It is the winning argument.

It is strategic in that it has universal appeal and applies to all political stripes. It is the most effective argument to sway to our side.
The brow beating is a losing strategy. LOSER, any strategic thinker can see this.

We offer SOLID advice on messaging, imo. It is too bad this simple truth is not taken and run with.
Our message is irrefutable, realizable, and effective imo.

[leftstreet]

20. They're just not patriots!

[KPN]

21. Better yet, I'm not going to play.

Waste of time.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. Are you saying you're glad the US electoral system encourages just two parties?

Because it's quite possible to point out that a system that allows third parties to grow without the result being "a party on the other side is helped by that" would be preferable, to enable a society to develop.

[Eliot Rosewater]

25. Of course not.

[muriel_volestrangler]

37. OK, "making our two party choice out as negative" sounds like that

You may think "of course not", but that's not how your OP comes across.

[Eliot Rosewater]

38. If you cant view what I am saying in the context of what we are facing then I cant

help you.

Also, there is NO third party now, none.

To have a viable 3rd party it will take a very long time and even then it will be touch and go.

[GeorgeGist]

24. Broadbrush much?

[mcar]

27. 3rd parties need to build from the bottom

If they want to be a truly competitive instead of just spoilers, they should have candidates running for school board, county commission, state legislatures, etc.

Running for national office esp now, does nothing to advance their cause and everything to hurt this country.

[Eliot Rosewater]

28. But where is the fun and excitement in that? I am a 24 year old person who didnt

think my vote mattered until recently.

Recently someone of national prominence got my attention and the main thing I learned is BOTH political parties are corrupt and I am likely to not vote or only vote for someone if they are ENDORSED by a certain someone or group.


Something like that.



I am hoping the number of millennials out there who think like this is going down, but not sure if that is the case.

[mcar]

30. I have faith in our young voters

Especially now!

[Salviati]

39. Agreed.

If they aren't working to build the party at the grassroots level then a third party presidential ticket is just so much ego stroking. For those running on the platform as well as those voting for it.

[mcar]

45. Yes

[Vinca]

31. I would prefer a parliamentary system myself.

[Eliot Rosewater]

33. I would prefer to own my own island and live in a mansion...

[Vinca]

36. Me, too! Just waiting for that giant lottery win. LOL.

[George II]

43. Mega Millions tomorrow night, Power Ball Wednesday. Both in the hundreds of millions.

[vi5]

35. I know a TON of people...

who would never in a million years have voted for Hillary no matter what. But they also hated Trump, so they voted Gary Johnson. I'm not going to complain about that in any election.

[melman]

40. Who is doing that?

Why won't you tell us who's doing that?

[still_one]

48. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

https://www.democraticunderground.com/12511425503

[NurseJackie]

54. Very interesting.

[Eliot Rosewater]

57. Yikes...look at THAT

[George II]

58. And it had more than 330 recs here on DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! There have been so many more, too.

[Cha]

68. Haha.. things have changed a bit

on that front at DU.

[George II]

70. In some ways, yes. But sadly in some ways no.

[Cha]

73. I heard

that

[ehrnst]

85. Alrighty then.

And it appears that the anti-Democrat "Pivot America.com" website, which published that bit of hard-hitting clickbait journalism is now gone.


Registrar: NameSilo, LLC
IANA ID: 1479
Abuse Contact Email:[e-mail]
Abuse Contact Phone: [phone]
Status
Domain Status:clientTransferProhibited https://www.icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Important Dates
Updated Date: 2018-02-26
Created Date: 2016-01-24
Registrar Expiration Date: 2018-01-24

I guess it served its purpose and the comrades pushing out content have moves on to other venues.

https://www.facebook.com/pivotamerica/

[Gothmog]

96. I think that poster is now over on JPR

[mcar]

51. Visit Twitter

Sanders supporters there are still playing their greatest hits.

[Cary]

59. No one owes you an answer

Of course, you already know as I know why you ask. Why be obtuse?

[JustAnotherGen]

93. Maybe he thinks its another hate thread

So he HAS to be obtuse.

Not that he's offering any examples or proof that hate threads exist at DU. That simply doesn't happen. Sorry - but I can't see who is doing that (hate threads that are OPS). No source. Alternatively neither you nor can we being anything but 'wowed' when we have no idea one earth what the question is even about. At least it's just a post not a hysterical hate post by someone who won't himself 'name names'. One might say that he won't go ahead and tell us why.


This is pre-emptive -






I just did all of the 'greatest hits'

Your welcome Cary!

[Cary]

94. You're over thinking IMHO

Elliot made a statement with which I agree. I almost always agree with Elliot.

It's very simple: let's elect Democrats.

That requires discipline. I have no desire to quash dissent but when people do as Elliot describes, they sow discord and discontent and undermine our discipline and our efforts to elect Democrats. I don't want discord and discontent. I want to elect Democrats. I don't want the likes of #fakepresident. I don't want the likes of GWB.

Some posters will whine about their dissent being quashed but if they can sow discord and discontent then why can't Elliot and I criticize them for it? That has to go both ways, doesn't It?

As for singling people out, that accomplishes what?

VOTE DEMOCRATIC! I am passionate about that. It's that simple.

[Gothmog]

95. Have you ever visited the JPR site?

If you want to see putin/Russia loving posters who want to steer voters into wasting their votes by voting for Stein or not voting, go visit that site.

[George II]

41. What I've seen is a little more direct, one isn't as bad as the other. We seen it all the time.

[Eliot Rosewater]

42. Elsewhere I just witnessed some undercover FSB agents talking about how Rachel Maddow

is really no different than Oprah Winfrey.

Very clever, actually.

[George II]

44. The term I've seen used more than once is "Democrats suck less". On this site!

[Cha]

47. Those types are so

ill informed

[NurseJackie]

55. People like that allow others do their "thinking" for them... and they question nothing.

[Cha]

56. Prescisely, Jackie!

Lazy thinking.

[paleotn]

53. Yep.

People who can't judge the difference between feet and light years. If a candidate varies mere nanometers from their view of perfection...."they suck...they all suck!....just like Rethugs!" I can't seem to wrap my brain around such thinking.

[mcar]

52. Shaun King on Twitter today

(Or yesterday) was imploring people to "give Bernie a chance," "go to a rally." People responded with old tweets of his saying HRC was as bad as Trump. He was sad.

[George II]

64. I could post some quotes of Sanders himself, but.........

[FarCenter]

60. The two parties both have members and policies that are agreeable and disagreeable.

Neither is monolithic. Both are coalitions of multiple sub-groups.

[ehrnst]

83. I think that there are some who want the Dems to adopt a manifesto

and a leader who is never to be questioned, or disagreed with in any way on any topic, or else be considered "corrupt" and "corporatist" and attacked with a mob mentality.

That might work for Republicans, but it will NEVER work for Dems, whose strength is coalitions and diversity of race, opinion and background.

Fortunately those who want a manifesto party are a minority of progressives.

See also: Ralph Nader's movement.

[aikoaiko]

62. OFFS.

[jes06c]

63. Ever notice

Usually when people SAY "both sides are bad," what they really MEAN is "both sides are bad, so vote Republican"

[herding cats]

75. Yep, Ive see that very same thing.

Either that or to vote for a third party spoiler candidate. Which tends to end up the same way.

Welcome to DU!

[gopiscrap]

120. welcome to DU

[JCanete]

65. A two party choice is a negative. I'd argue instead that your scary ass platitudes are part of the

problem.

We should have a better system. That said, this is the system we do have. We have to work with what is essentially a two party system...and when we try to run progressives in democratic primaries, you can continue to shit on that effort too.

[George II]

69. "We should have a better system", but we don't. Until that time, which is better:

Democrats or republicans? Or sitting out, or voting for a fringe candidate?

[JCanete]

71. I recognized that this is what we have in my post. I still hate ops like this. It should be

reasonable to question the way things are.

[George II]

74. In my very last class in college (now more than 45 years ago) we were addressed....

....by our student adviser. The thing that sticks in my mind after all these years is what he said, "in your career you won't agree with what your colleagues will say, but if you do you had better have a suggestion about how you would do it differently."

What he was saying is that if one wants to be critical, one should have an idea of how to do it better.

Not just question the way things are, but specifically the way one thinks things should be.

Unfortunately I don't see that in these discussions.

[JCanete]

77. We discuss all the time about how things should be...what kind of fight we should be fighting...

There's simply no question that changing the party system is even a further bridge to cross than say, giving DC voters representation, which is why the debate appropriately settles on whether or not people should try to affect change from third parties or from within one of the major two, though if at any point the latter is chosen, then of course the bar is changed to how incumbents or party favorites shouldn't be challenged because doing so is also helping the GOP.

[Tom Rinaldo]

86. I think Democrats shouild allow Independents to vote in our primaries for one thing

I can see putting a time frame requirement on that, so that people can't just change their registration to Independent a week prior to a primary just to vote in it only to immediately shift back to being Republican for example. But I believe long time Independents should be able to participate in our primaries - given the nature of our current political system that essentially freezes out those who don't align with a major party from full participation in our system. I recognize there are pros and cons to that proposal, but I think the pros outweigh the cons. I want Independents to identify more with the Democratic Party than with the Republican Party, I want them to become more familiar with the Democratic Party than with the Republican Party, as they will be if they start paying more attention to our primary debates than to Republican ones for example. I want them to believe that they get a fair hearing from Democrats rather than from Republicans, so that they default more often to supporting us in General Elections than they do Republicans. I think in particular that will help Democrats stay better connected to younger voters who more instinctively register as Independents than they do with either major party.

[Orsino]

92. Most people will split the difference.

In the Citizens United era when both parties are failing for various reasons to make our lives better or to reduce inequality, a lot of people will be more inclined to give a third-party candidate a chance; meanwhile, a lot of us are in the position of not daring to dilute Democratic resistance.

I say we need better Dems, and better Republicans to help force our Dems to be still better.

[jalan48]

66. I overheard two people in a coffee shop saying this. Is there a hotline I can call and report them?

[JCanete]

72. hahaha!

[stevenleser]

80. Yup 212-479-7990

[Devil Child]

67. The two party choice is a negative

How many GOP elections did I just secure with this stating of the obvious?

You maybe happy with the two party system but I'm not. Though this is my opinion, I will continue to support the Democratic candidates as I always have. The with-us-or-against-us tone is about as appealing as the Bernie-or-bust crowd to me. Which is not at all.

[orangecrush]

76. Putin tactics

exactly what it is.

You are 100% correct.

Don't fall for it.

[Eliot Rosewater]

87. And the bullshit talking points like "this with us or against us stuff"

straight outta you know where.

And the beat goes on and on, you would think my comment, now especially, would not be slightly controversial. But it is if your agenda is different.

[Demsrule86]

97. Correct...the halfway support I saw in 16 undoubtedly turned voter off to the Dem Party.

If you can't say good things about Democrats...then stay the fuck off of twitter.

[Wwcd]

104. + a million.

[HopeAgain]

103. Broken record?

Much?

[Eliot Rosewater]

105. Gonna break my rule

Why does unconditional support of the D party bother you?

There are only two parties, did you know that?

[HopeAgain]

113. No I don't know that

because it is incorrect. Why not focus on getting Democrats out to vote and leave progressives who don't want to vote the way you want them vote alone?

[rock]

107. I'm going to vote Democratic

However I retain the right to say, "That person running as a Democrat, is NOT in fact a Democrat!" Say, as an example, Trump had run as a Democrat.

[Eliot Rosewater]

108. OK but dont say it in front of people who might then NOT vote, deal?

Are you able to influence people?

I am.

We all are.

Constant BASHING of someone works to get people to not vote, for instance.

[rock]

109. No problem

Voting is a very personal matter. And does NOT have to be justified to anyone.

[ehrnst]

110. You "wouldn't have voted for DOTUS if he was a Democrat?"

That's like saying that you wouldn't buy television if it was a washing machine.

As if somehow there wasn't a way to figure that out beforehand?

As if no one could tell the difference if someone told them that a washing machine was a television?

You might want to choose a different metaphor....

[rock]

111. Trump could have run as a Democrat

Since all it would take is a DNC that would accept him on on the ticket. And I am not so enamored with the DNC that I think they wouldn't under any circumstances do that. It's not a metaphor, just a supposition.

[ehrnst]

112. FYI - the Dem voters decide who is on the Dem ticket, not the DNC.

So long as they meet the requirements for running for POTUS.

In case you were confused on that issue.

[rock]

116. Why do I have to explain the simplest things to you?

Then if the Dem voters decided to run trump for POTUS that's who would be on the ticket.

[ehrnst]

117. I was correcting you on how the Dem presidential candidate is picked. You're welcome.

And indeed, if Dem voters decided to run a DT on the ticket, as you seem to think is a possibility, that would be a case where Superdelegates could save the country...

[rock]

118. "... Super delegates could save the country..."

Like they did when trump got the republican nomination.