In November, we're going to need ALL Democrats.

[jazzimov]

The Republican Party is splitting. There are hard core Tea Partiers who are threatening to apply purity tests to only run candidates who are "Conservative" enough - regardless of the will of the majority of voters in their district. This has often been called the "death knell" for the Republican Party.

And yet, there are many here who want the same for Democrats.

In Conservative areas, only Conservative Dems can be elected. In these areas, we need ConservaDems, or as some call them them DINOS. In some areas, we need the DLC candidates, because they are the ones who can get elected.

Once in office, Dems are free to set the agenda and we can debate the DINOS and DLCers much easier than the obstructionist Republicans who merely want to get back in power.

I am a Liberal. I am a Progressive. But I recognize that not everyone agrees with me. I am willing to debate my views and compromise with reasonable people.

BUT I know that it matters whether I argue with a Democrat or a Republican. A ConservaDem, a DINO, or a DLCer will actually debate. A Republican will only obstruct. So, we need to elect Democrats so that we at least can set the agenda.

[elleng]

1. Thanks, jazzimov.

This is a CRITICAL issue, especially for the elections coming up, and DUers should discuss and do our best to get Dems a majority in the House and a more solid one in the Senate. Without this, it will matter little who runs for President in 2016.

[jazzimov]

3. Agreed! GOTV 2014

[VanillaRhapsody]

2. It's within our grasp...

if only...

[elleng]

4. Yes, Rhapsody,

if only.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Because that worked so well in 2009...

Yes?

I happen to agree with you, but the White House never had much control over fringe-Right Dems, and now has zero control. Little will get done no matter who wins the elections.

[freshwest]

6. FWIWK&R

[rhett o rick]

7. Sorry but when compromise means that children go hungry, families live in their cars, and seniors go

without food, count me out. Conservative Democrats and the status quo are killing the lower classes.

[JaneyVee]

17. Are you really saying you're not voting in 2014?

[rhett o rick]

41. No of course not. I have always voted since I've been eligible.

But I dont vote for corporate lackeys. I think the "best of evils" is a tool our corporate overlords use to make us think we are free. Russians get to vote but are they free? They only have one choice and are strongly encouraged by the government to vote. Some people equate voting with freedom. But if were we free in 2000 and 2004? I didnt vote for Georgie Porgie. One of my Senators is a DLC Democrat (was an actual card carrying member). She supported the Iraq war. During one of her elections there was an anti-war candidate trying to oppose her. She bought him off. Where was my choice for the primary? And in the general I got to choose between thing 1 and thing 2, both cheering the killing of innocent Iraqi children. So some would try to rationalize that if I voted for thing 1 I would only get beaten once a day while if thing 2 were elected, I'd get beaten twice a day. No some here would be all giddy about only getting beaten once a day.

In 2016 I see Wall Street propping up H. Clinton-Sachs and also some clown from the Republican Party. And people will feel all giddy when Clinton-Sachs wins. And Wall Street will rejoice. And the middle class will perish.

[randome]

21. Not voting could easily mean...

...children go hungry, families live in their cars, and seniors go without food. We all make do with what we have. If that means voting for someone you don't entirely agree for, it's better than the alternative.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[Andy823]

24. EXactly!

It's a no brainer that if republicans win we will see all those things, plus more. At least with democrats we have a much better chance of getting things fixed. Maybe not "everything" a voter wants will get done, but as you stated, it's better than the alternative by a long way!

[Dawson Leery]

8. k/r

[Pretzel_Warrior]

9. Yeahhhhh! Make it so. I want to see the look on Rove's face

When Dems hold the Senate and retake the house.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. If the Democrats want to get the votes of the left they need to appeal to the left voters.

With something other than the "not as bad" that centrist/conservative candidates offer.

[Scuba]

13. Thank you. "Not the Republican" just isn't going to inspire anyone to vote ....

... If we want to win, there are plenty of votes to go after, considering that half the electorate doesn't bother because we don't offer them squat.

[MineralMan]

22. It should. Really it should

GOTV 2014 and Beyond!

[WorseBeforeBetter]

11. Kay Hagan (ConservaDem-NC) is trailing one R challenger by 7%, and a Teabagger by 4%.

A majority of North Carolinians HATE Obamacare, and they will vote for whomever has the R next to their name.

Stay tuned...

[Dawson Leery]

16. Those are (R)asmussen polls with a MOE of 5%.

Other polls show her statistically tied with every Rethug challenger.
It is going to be a competitive race. I am not guaranteeing she wins a second term, just pointing out that (R)as has a reputation.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

18. She's gone from a double-digit lead to statistically tied.

And Americans for Prosperity is ponying up $1.4 million to help oust her.

I don't take polls as gospel, but am finding some of the numbers interesting. Need to check PPP to see what they're coming up with...

[Dawson Leery]

19. PPP has her tied down or ahead by 1%.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

40. It really blows that Obamacare may cost us a Democratic senator...

and we don't even get Medicaid expansion like "blue" states.

Hagan is no prize, but I'll vote for her.

[sheshe2]

12. Damn well kicking and rec'ing this!

Spot on and so very well said.

Thank You, jazzimov !

[Bluenorthwest]

14. And yet in 2010 it was the 'conservadems' who lost, whose constituents failed to turn out

and in the end handed the House to the Republicans. Where I live, no such candidate would get a nomination, and I think other areas might want to think first about the political abilities of their potentials and find some skill and some talent rather than seeking out the most mushy, nearly Republican Democrat they can find and pushing them out there under the dubious theory that 'only those who lost last time can win'. People vote for candidates, for people, not for imaginary points on some political graph.

[LWolf]

15. Then let's hope

the party abandons the divisive neoliberal tendencies of those at the top and embraces the 99%.

THAT'S how to get votes. Earn them.

[MO_Moderate]

20. Dems are going to run and Dems are going to vote for them

hopefully liberals and progressives will join us.

[djean111]

28. Thank you for making it perfectly clear that "Dems" do not include liberals and progressives!

I have been feeling that way for a while now.

[Aerows]

31. Even though we always show up

and will pull the lever for Dems. It's just an attempt to drag the party further to the right because they have bought into the Republican narrative that the US is a center right country. Not to mention many stand to profit handsomely if a corporate Dem gets elected.

Those icky progressives and liberals cause corporations to have to do things like pay attention to environmental issues, social justice, and :shudder: might be against the unending warmongering industries.

How dare anyone go against the right of corporations to reap as much profit as possible, destroy unions and improve things for the majority of Americans? A CEO might take a pay cut!

[MO_Moderate]

34. Not the Democrats fault

We are not the ones separating ourselves from others who do not share every one of our beliefs.

[djean111]

42. "others who do not share every one of our beliefs."

So - you are cool with killer drones and the NSA and putting SS on the table?
This "purity" thing being NEWLY (really) flung around is, I believe, aimed in the wrong direction.
Seems, these days, that the Third Way peeps who have taken over the Democratic Party are calling anyone who does not agree with all of THEIR policies cute little names like firebaggers and hippies and whatever. I am now wondering from exactly which direction the so-called attempt to discourage those who used to be mainstream Democrats - before the party was dragged to the right - from voting is really coming from.

[Aerows]

29. They *ALWAYS* do

pretending that progressives and liberals are less likely to vote, and less likely to vote for Democrats is silly. Who, that is politically progressive, stays home and declines to vote when a nutjob Republican is the alternative? None that I know.

You can blame a lot of people for staying home, but liberals and progressives won't be among that number. I think you need to GOTV to the fence sitters and those that think both parties are the same - not the liberals and progressives that are going to vote regardless.

This narrative that it is the fault of liberals and progressives when a Republican gets elected is an attempt to steer the Democratic party to the right, and pump up corporate politicians that are Dems. It's a farce of the worst kind.

[Sissyk]

23. The republican party is splitting.

That's certainly the case in my state and we need to take advantage of that to get Democrats elected in federal and state 2014 elections.

We can hold their feet to the fire once we get rid of the republicans. I'm for criticizing our elected politicians, and would love the opportunity to do so once they are in office.

Here is my state party website:

http://www.tndp.org/

Look at the face of the dem party in Tennessee. Diverse. Republican party? not so much. We need to build on that and give the republicans a run for their money this year. But, we need to work hard, and harder, to get a foot in the door in this red state.

We all need each others help, especially in red states, to turn them blue. That's the beginning.

[Andy823]

25. I agree

Getting the voters out is the key. Those who are trying to push the "purity" test on democrats that the tea party is pushing on the republicans need to sit back and look at just how unpopular the tea party has become, and what it has done to their party, the republicans. Most americans want to see things get done, not one party doing their best to get "their way" and the hell with the rest of the country. I know that the word "compromise" is not in the republican vocabulary, and it seems like for many here who want the "my way or the highway, it's not in their either.

I would rather see progress in taking care of the problems that we have faced since George W. almost destroyed this country, than the constant refusal to listen to others and compromise. Letting republicans take back the country would be a disaster, one we may not survive this time. We need to prevent that from happening at all costs.

Those who think both parties are the same, so who cares, will find out the hard way just how wrong they are if we go back to the polices of George W. or even worse policies that the tea baggers want to see put into place.

Everyone must make their own choice, but we all have to live with the results of not getting the voters out an letting republican win.

[djean111]

33. Are you REALLY equating what the Koch-backed Tea party wants with what liberals and

Progressives want? really? You feel that what liberals and progressives want will be injurious to the country?

That is very fucking interesting, indeed.

[Andy823]

38. Maybe you should read what I said

I said that the majority of the people in this country want things to get done, they don't want one party who has to have the "my way or the highway" agenda.

I never said anything about liberals or progressives being injurious to the county. You seem to have a problem reading what is written. My post was that either party is wrong when they try and ignore compromise. It's much better for the country to get something done instead of arguing all day long that "my way is better so I won't compromise"!

What is interesting is that so many here can't seem to understand that in order to get something done, in life or in politics, you sometimes have to compromise. The "purity" test that some here want to put on every democrat that runs, is no better than the purity test the tea baggers want to put on everyone who don't see things the exact way as they do.

Letting republicans win because there is nobody on out side that fits in the "purity" mold is just plain crazy, and something that those who follow that thinking will regret when once again republicans are in charge. Think about it.

[Aerows]

26. I don't like "hold your nose and vote"

anymore than anyone else does, and the time to express that opinion is in the primaries. After that, you have to vote for who is the lesser of two evils. Depressing? Sure. That's why you need to vote in the primaries.

[Rex]

35. Kinda early to be whipping the troops into shape imo.

Some of us will go the the polls and vote straight ticket D like we always do.

[TeamPooka]

27. GOTV 2014!

[Gothmog]

30. GOTV 2014-Go Wendy Davis

Wendy has a chance to turn Texas blue. Greg Abbott is a weak campaigner and Wendy may be able to keep is close.

[gopiscrap]

32. absolutely

[FSogol]

36. K & R. n/t

[11 Bravo]

37. Agreed, but based on what I've read right here, I'm not sure we can count on ALL ...

Dems (or alleged Dems) actually showing up.

It appears that the Purity Brigade would prefer to sit this one out and re-visit 2010, rather than support a less-than-perfect candidate.

[Andy823]

39. Sad isn't it

I bet if we get the same results as back in 2010 with more republicans wining elections, these same people will be the loudest complainers! Of course the "alleged dems" will probably be happy as hell.

For the life of me I just don't understand how so many can say they want things to change, and yet "demand" the purity test for every candidate or they just won't vote, or they will vote for a third party candidate that has no chance to win, but will most likely help the republican candidate.

I don't agree with a lot of things that the president, or my two elected Senators, both democrats, do but I know one thing for sure, they are a millions times better than any republican. Getting republicans back in control of this country is something I never want to see again, and the only way I can see to prevent that is to vote for the democrat running even if I don't agree with everything they have done, or will do.