If anyone votes for a progressive third party candidate

[MineralMan]

where a district usually elects a Republican and that progressive third party candidate wins, please let us all know. If that happens, then we'll know that just voting for a Democrat to beat a Republican is a bad idea. Until then, I'll be following this rule:

GOTV 2014 and Beyond!

[RedstDem]

1. it's best to vote your conscious

look at the positions held by the people running, and vote for whomever matches them the closest..

take the little letter after their name away.

[MineralMan]

2. Is it? Are you sure?

My conscience won't let me vote for anyone if that vote will help a Republican to win the election. I'm always conscious of that.

Since I've seen third party candidates cause the Republican to win a few times in my life, I would never vote for one if it might lead to a Republican getting elected. Why on Earth would I do that?

[RedstDem]

11. I doubt there will be a credible three way race for the job anyway, but

there are advantages to voting your conscious.

if there is a three way race, and your vote for whomever matches you the closest leads to bush or cristy getting the job, don't worry.
frontal assaults from the RW are easier to defend than the sneak attack by the republidem.

[MineralMan]

14. Well, I do hope you're conscious when you vote your conscience.

Truly.

[RedstDem]

17. nowadays, thats not a bad idea..

i no spelling good at that. some time.

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. Reminds me of Jiminy Cricket...

[Common Sense Party]

6. I often vote when I'm barely conscious.

I think it helps.

[Aerows]

25. Okay

That was funny

[pnwmom]

7. It's best to have a realistic conscience that understands

that it's better to vote for a candidate who agrees with half of your positions than to throw your vote away on someone who has no chance of winning, and then watch a tea bagger slide into office.

[DinahMoeHum]

52. +1000s

[BlueCaliDem]

55. Bingo.

As I've stated in my post down this thread, it's better to have one bird in the hand than two in the bush.

Primaries are where we decide to change-out one Democrat for a more progressive one. But if that fails, we'll just have to vote for the Democrat who won so that we close off the chance that a Tea/Republican will win it. Because as we've seen, they've proven to be ten times worse than any ConservaDem.

[BainsBane]

29. Only if you don't care if a Rep or Dem is elected

If you're just as happy with a Ted Cruz presidency as a Democratic one, then by all means, vote your conscious. Just don't complain about the results.

[MineralMan]

35. +100

[libdem4life]

73. and to stack the SCOTUS for decades against the people...No. Citizen's United would be

child's play.

[Vashta Nerada]

42. Voting while conscious is usually a good idea.

I wonder if many people are unconscious when they vote.

[riqster]

62. Every woman, person of color, or member of the LGBT community who votes Repub.

Such people are so shit-stupid, they cannot be said to be conscious.

[1StrongBlackMan]

45. Yes, because ...

it is far better to vote one's conscience and elect a republican who will support your conscience 0% of the time; than vote for an electable candidate that will caucus with Democrats (important when it comes to judicial nominations - think SCOTUS - and committee chairs) and will vote to support your conscience 70+% of the time.

Moral victories are loses.

[sabrina 1]

4. I think you need to send this message to those who need it. There are 61 elected Democrats in NJ

who ENDORSED the Republican, Christie and led Democrats who are a majority of the voting public there, to vote for the Republican.

And btw, no one in this country is required to 'confess' to anyone, how they vote. Just so people know, they are under NO obligation to report to anyone, unless they choose to, like the NJ Democrats who announced to the world that they were NOT endorsing the Dem Candidate, how they chose to cast their vote.

[MineralMan]

10. I never supported Christie. Never would.

I didn't support Crist in Florida, either. They're Republicans.

[sabrina 1]

13. My comment wasn't about YOU. It was to advise you to talk to Democrats, elected no less

who voted for and endorsed the Republican. I have no idea why you thought your 'message' was needed here on DU.

[Rex]

22. It is like he didn't even read your post.

MARSHA MARSHA MARSHA!

[BainsBane]

31. Maybe because we've had thread after thread with people insisting they've left the Democratic Party?

Just a wild guess.

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. Not just that they have left the Democratic Party ...

(or the party left them) ... but seem to want to take as many as possible with them.

[JoePhilly]

26. Apparently, some one thinks the NJ Dems who supported Christie are your responsibility.

But I doubt they will lift a finger (other than to maybe type something here on DU) to do anything about those Dems themselves.

[MineralMan]

27. Well, if those NJ Dems are reading DU, they might see my post.

I am speaking to Democrats here on DU, after all. Who knows? Maybe some of them are here.

I don't live in New Jersey, so I can't vote there. I think that Democrats who supported Christie made a huge mistake, and I hope it's one that isn't repeated.

[JoePhilly]

30. Hopefully, Christie's collapse will keep them in line for a while.

NJ runs on favors, bribes, and grudges. If a progressives can make their way up and into key positions, following Christie's mess, all the better.

[MineralMan]

33. Endorsing Christie was moronic.

It was always moronic. I hope some of those Democrats get primaried. But, I still don't vote in NJ.

[JoePhilly]

40. Its unlikely that they will get primaried.

When I say NJ runs on favors, bribes, and grudges ... I mean the entire state, not just the elected officials.

Generally speaking, mayors get judged on "what did they get us". How they get it is less of an issue.

Right now, you can expect some of those mayors to be telling Christie, "Hey, get me X, and I'll have trouble remembering the pressure you put on me to endorse you."

[MineralMan]

43. I don't know NJ politics at all.

Except for the Presidency, I focus on legislative races in my own state and districts. I don't have time, energy, or money to do anything else. So far, so good. There are progressives in every district where I am. Amy Klobuchar is kind of an exception, but she always votes with the Democratic caucus and has a lock on that Senate seat as long as she wants it, pretty much.

[JoePhilly]

66. I keep up because I still have family up in the area. nt

[NCTraveler]

18. +1 nt.

[jeff47]

65. You fix that in the primary. In the general, it's pull the lever for D or you help the R win.

(Except in CA - open primaries and top-two generals)

[sabrina 1]

67. No, that may be what YOU do. I do not support Republicans no matter what letter they have after

names.

It is the reason why we are now where we are, and most of us won't be making that mistake again.

So here's how 'you', meaning the Dem Party, rids the party of Republicans with a D after their names. They provide DEMOCRATS, they BACK DEMOCRATS not Third Way right wingers, and/or Republicans, such as the NJ Dems who are no different, as we know now for sure, than Republicans.

IF the party doesn't do that, provide and then BACK Progressive Democrats who have a record of voting for Democratic, not Republican, policies, then they will be Villified for handing the election over to Republicans, as they did in NJ

Voters are BLAMELESS when this happens, and all the talking points in the world won't change what people will feel, do, say if the Dem Leadership doesn't FIX this the ONLY way it can be fixed.

[jeff47]

71. No, the reason we are where we are is people not bothering to participate

They spend their time and efforts on message boards instead of voting in the primaries and getting involved in the party.

So they write long ranting posts about how horrible "the party" is instead of doing anything to fix it.

The messiah of the Democratic party will not appear on his or her own. You have to make it happen. And lengthy illogical rants on message boards will not make it happen.

Voters are BLAMELESS when this happens

Voters are the party. They have 100% of the blame.

Don't like where the party's going? YOU have to work to change it. In the real world.

[Le Taz Hot]

5. I'll follow my own rules, thanks.

But then again, I'm not a win-at-all-costs-including-selling-out-my-principles kinda gal. Now, having said that, I've a situation where I've no choice but to help get a Blue Dog elected in CA-21 solely because it's not just a Republican currently holding the seat, it's a TeaKlanner and all TeaKlanners must go. Now, if/when she gets in, I'll be the one spearheading her opposition in 2016's Democratic Primaries.

[MineralMan]

8. I'm not asking you to do anything else.

I'm just asking that you let us know when a third party candidate you vote for wins the election. You vote your way, and I'll vote mine.

[Le Taz Hot]

9. MM, honestly, do I look stupid?

I've been on DU a long time, often don't vote Democrat (NEVER Republican) and I'm still here. How do you think that happened?

[MineralMan]

12. I don't know how you look.

How would I? I can say that your avatar doesn't look too bright, though.

[sabrina 1]

15. Well, since we're asking for 'confessions' on how people voted, you were not around here airc

throughout the Bush years when all of us were slamming Bush supporters, certainly not giving them advice on how to defeat Dems, who did you vote for back then, IF you don't mind someone asking?

[MineralMan]

19. I don't mind your asking. I voted for the Democrat both times.

Gore and Kerry. I have never voted for any Republican for any office.

[Jim Lane]

74. On very rare occasions, the Republican is the better candidate.

There was a thread a while back about "Have you ever voted for a Republican." Some responses were in your "never" camp, but some of us had, with varying degrees of difficulty, crossed that line. For example, I voted for a halfway decent Republican against a corrupt Democrat who won the election but subsequently went to prison.

I would somewhat revise your maxim in the OP. In many American elections, there will be precisely two candidates who have any realistic chance of winning. In such an election, progressives should (1) do what they can to see to it that a progressive is one of those two, but (2) when confronted with the final choice, pick the better candidate from between the two who might win.

In some other elections, however, there is only one candidate who has any realistic chance of winning. In those circumstances, the practical argument for voting for a conservative Democrat is much weaker. If a shoo-in RWNJ Republican incumbent is being challenged by a conservative Democrat and by a progressive third-party candidate, the most practical choice might well be to vote for the third-party candidate -- not because he or she will be elected (because by hypothesis nothing you do will affect who's elected) but because it might usefully affect the choices available in future elections. Of course, a high tally for the Green Party or whatever might also encourage progressives to follow the disastrous course of third-party politics, so even in that hypothetical it's not clear-cut to vote for the candidate whose principles are closest to your own.

[MineralMan]

75. I have never experienced such a situation. Never.

Perhaps you have, but it's not part of my experience.

[Le Taz Hot]

20. Well, I'll tell you.

I look JUST like Cindy Crawford. Except older. And shorter. And fatter. But other than that? We could be twins.

[MineralMan]

21. OK. That's a good look, and not a stupid one, either.

[jwirr]

16. I want to know that also. If you want to change our Democratic party the way to do it is get

involved from the precinct level on up. I hate to say this but the teaparty is an example. They worked for years taking over rethug seats on the local level and then county and then governorships and now congress and they hope to win the WH.

We do not have that much time to rescue our own party for the centrists but we need to start. I am fortunate because I live in a heavily union area that has been doing this for years.

I also like the idea here on DU a couple of days ago to earmark races we as DUers will actively support our candidate.

[MineralMan]

23. Exactly. Every nominated candidate is selected

through a process. Getting involved in that process lets you help to select the candidates. That's what I do, too.

[Rex]

24. ...

[Demo_Chris]

28. We elected Obama with a majority in the House and super in the Senate...

They still offered us nothing but excuses. Fuck excuses, fuck empty promises, fuck trust. I demand proof and action.

[fadedrose]

44. We got a big stimulous package

that helped save the auto business, some tax breaks, and the underpinning of what will someday be a great health care law. Have faith in it, I know it's hard, but it'll smooth itself out.

We got the equal pay act, the gay rights bills, and some damn good speeches.

So much we didn't get. Damn those gerrymandered voting districts, and the influence of the DLC who didn't even offer excuses or empty promises, just insisted that they knew best. Junk.

[1StrongBlackMan]

56. But ... But ...

We didn't get single-payer ... and NSAAAAAAA {and fill in any other agenda item that didn't happen that serves to negate what did}!

[fadedrose]

69. Single Payer wasn't on the table

Maybe some day Strong Man, keep the faith.

Not in my time but it will come....

Right now I am more worried about the unemployed who aren't getting checks, and the weather is wretched - bills and warm clothing, boots, gas for the car if they are still lucky enough to own one, etc., nothing can be bought.

And food stamps are cut.

And the TP agreement (I think TP stands for Toilet paper) and the XPipeline. More to worry about than the single payer. It was nice to thPnk about it though.

[1StrongBlackMan]

70. I agree with most ...

of what you wrote ... TP and XL (that hasn't materialized) don't come close to negating the things that this Administration (and his team) have accomplished.

[fadedrose]

72. He's got the wrong teams advising him now

At the beginning he had a lot of his best advisors and FRIENDS, now they're all other peoples flunkies, opportunists.

Wish Michelle would gently tap the side of his forehead to see if he remembers who he was...

Lets' hope that TP and XL don't materialize...

[grahamhgreen]

32. Bernie Sanders might be an example... his Senate seat had been R since 1930....

[MineralMan]

34. Bernie Sanders is unique, as is his state.

But, you make a point.

[Go Vols]

41. +1

Senator Bernie Sanders, for the second time in as many weeks, is indicating serious contemplation for a presidential run in 2016 if none of the potential Democratic candidates show the proper urgency when it comes to addressing a key set of issues that he thinks now face the country and the world.

https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/27-4

[BlueCaliDem]

36. I'll be following the same rule, MM.

I'll vote for another Democrat during the primaries, but in order not to become an enabler of more lazy Republicans in our government, I'll hold my nose and vote for the Democrat who's nominated even if I can't stand her. Like Feinstein. Voted for her primary challenger but when he got less votes than Orly Taitz, I cast my vote for Feinstein.

It's always smart to have one bird in the hand that two in the bush.

[MineralMan]

38. Thank you!

[fadedrose]

37. What is a progressive 3rd party candidate?

I thought the progressives and 3rd party supporters were polar opposites...

[MineralMan]

39. Some Green Party candidates have been progressives.

There are other third parties, as well, who run progressives for office. At least there are in Minnesota and California, the two states where I have been a voter.

Third parties are not always conservative, by any means.

[fadedrose]

46. Sorry, I was thnking "Third Way"

And you betcha there is a difference. The "other" third parties don't have the money behind them and their platform is more honest if not in all cases desirable. Greens are an exception. They are for the most part what everyone approves of but doesn't vote for...

Thanks for your explanation. I misread the terms in your op...

[1StrongBlackMan]

59. Come on, MM ...

you can say it ... Okay I will ... Ralph Nader!

(But I can understand you not raising the name because what is likely to follow, detracts from the message.}

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

47. I'll be delighted to let you know.

[MineralMan]

49. Thanks. Really.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

53. I'm hoping that the Democrats run candidates that are progressive enough to vote for.

Really.

[Aerows]

50. To quote my own post

(and I won't include a blue link, since that would be silly), progressives ALWAYS vote. They might hate a Dems guts, but they will pull the lever for them rather than vote for a Republican. This is all the work of the Democratic party playing into the narrative that the US is a center right nation.

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!

Think about that when you go to vote in the primaries, and for heaven's sake, vote in the primaries.

[MineralMan]

51. I not only vote in the primaries, I participate

personally in the process that selects and endorses them. In 2012, that process got an incumbent Democratic state senator who was not a good supporter of labor unseated and replaced with a Hmong naturalized citizen who is very progressive.

At the state senate District convention, I caucused for the man who eventually won and we denied the incumbent an endorsement by the DFL Party, Minnesota's Democratic Party. Losing that endorsement caused the incumbent to withdraw from the race.

You can read about it at this entry from our DFL precinct's website. I'm the precinct chair:

http://saintpaulw6p13.blogspot.com/2012/03/senate-district-67-convention-results.html

So, yes, I think about that all the time, and act to nominate and elect progressives. You can do the same.

[Aerows]

54. It's a good thing to remind people of.

You can't vote for somebody that isn't nominated and isn't running!

[1StrongBlackMan]

60. No, I think MM stated it correctly ...

he was not questioning whether progressives vote; but rather whether progressives vote effectively.

We do have a real world example of progressives voting 3rd-Party rather than Democratic (See: Nader, 2000).

[Aerows]

63. Obviously

you are correct. It's not like our President is a Democrat and the Senate is Republican. If only those awful folks had shown up at the polls.

[reddread]

57. herding, shearing or shagging?

all 3?

[The River]

58. Thank You For Supporting

the status quo.

[Bluenorthwest]

61. Bernie Sanders sits in a seat that had a Republican ass in it for decades.

Here in Oregon any candidate can be a cross nominee so for example in 2012 Peter DeFazio, Democrat, was also the nominee of the Oregon Progressive Party and the Oregon Working Families Party. So the progressive 3d Party candidate is also the Democrat. Jeff Merkley, who is one of our Senators, was also cross nominated.
Makes the row you are trying to plow far less fertile. And that's how we like it.

[Nye Bevan]

64. But if a Ralph Nader is a little more progressive than an Al Gore, why not vote for him?

I mean, what could possibly go wrong with this kind of strategy?

[TheMathieu]

68. A vote against a Republican that is not for a candidate that can win.

Is a vote for a Republican.

So, anyone voting their "conscience" contradicts themselves.