(REDUX) Should Democrats who (actively) cooperate with Drumpf be treated as collaborators?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	15 (83%)
	No
	3 (17%)
	2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[HopeAgain]

1. Pure obstructionism doesn't serve the American people

If there are things that the two parties, including the worse president in history, can do together to help Americans, or relieve poverty or suffering, I think it would need to be done. Do I think that opportunity will arise? Not so much...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. If he withdraws Gorsuch and nominates a judge in the mode of Sandra Day O'Connor or Anthony Kennedy

If he withdraws Gorsuch and nominates a judge in the mode of Sandra Day O'Connor or Anthony Kennedy I would counsel my fellow Democrats to passively cooperate with him.

[TrekLuver]

20. I agree. There will be and is plenty to oppose him on...no need to manufacture any.

[Lucinda]

21. +1

[old guy]

23. It certainly helped the repubs to gain control of the entire government.

[HopeAgain]

24. It also helped elect an "outsider" to the Presidency

And how is that working for us?

[old guy]

28. They control the House, Senate, and the White House.

They do not need the Dem cooperation for anything. Giving it to them gets nothing for us except making us share the blame when it goes bad. No thanks.

[NCTraveler]

2. If they cooperate with Trump, aren't they by definition "collaborators"?

I'm not aware of any who are on any grand scale.

I expect Dems like Manchin to work with him on certain things.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. I would make a distinction between active and passive cooperation.

To paraphrase former Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart I know active cooperation when I see it.

[leftstreet]

4. Yes. And force them to wear Ivanka clothing in public

We will know them by their reduced-price tags

[Wounded Bear]

6. Don't like the rhetoric...

It's not like we'll be shaving heads and marching them through the streets naked. Might sound like a good idea, but we won't do that.

Now, if you want to threaten and support primary challenges, go for it!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. No, we just talk shit about them./nt

[Wounded Bear]

9. I'll assume you're being sarcastic...

Talk shit all you/we like. But follow it up with real activism and politicking. A LOT of the protests have occurred in red states. We need to harness that energy to flip some districts. I have a feeling that 2-3 red districts in my home state are softening on Trump/Repubs. The DNC and the DCCC need to find those vulnerable districts and work them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. I actually think we will be fine in 018.

i know we have a lot more Senate seats to defend in 018 but I believe we hold our own or expand our numbers in the Senate and we expand our numbers in the House, governorships, and state legislatures.

[Wounded Bear]

16. I agree. For all of the caterwauling this past election...

we actually narrowed the gap in both houses.

I remember some people saying the Repubs have "the greatest majority in history" or some such bunk. More grandiose claims of imagined greatness/power.

Back to the OP, I have no problem with primarying weak Dem candidates anywhere. I'm not a huge fan of purity tests, but I suspect the country is actually hungry for a turn to the left similar to what happened in 1932. We've been drifting right for far too long.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. "There are ten states that Drumpf won in 018 that we have to defend in 018."

I hear that like a mantra. But one needs to look at the states and the size of Drumpf's wins.

Stabenow (MI), Nelson (FL), Casey (PA), Baldwin (WI) and Brown (OH) need to be considered favorites.


If Drumpf is hovering around 40% popularity the GOP is in real trouble, all the gerrymandering in the world notwithstanding.

[Wounded Bear]

22. In the final analysis...

their "mandate" is based on razor thin margins in traditionally blue states.

We DO need a lot of work done in red districts nation wide. Hopefully the new DNC and DCCC leadership will address this.

[PufPuf23]

8. Pretty cool Dude. More dividing threats.

Trump should not be supported but the last thing the Democratic party needs is more purity tests.

Folks like you have already made many life long Democrats seem unwelcome in our own party and look where that has got us?

Semantics of passive or active so what?

Stop the threats.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Thank you for the compliment.

"...Pretty cool Dude..."

Punctuation !!! You actually complimented me.

[Zoonart]

11. I say YES

IMHO we. should primary everyone. Every single one... to send the message that no one gets to act brave on one or two issues and then put their feet up. We know they do this. They coordinate who will stand up for what to spread the threat for incumbents but also to spread the camera time and fund raising opportunities around.
They need to know that no one is safe. They have to be all in all the time or they are out. I don't care who they are. I don't care if they are the current heroic darling with Presidential aspirations. Why are we even thinking about 2020? 2020 will take care of itself... we need to get there first and that is not a certainty.
ALL IN ALL THE TIME . NO ONE IS SAFE... least of all us.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. I make a distinction between active and passive cooperation.

Some vulnerable senators need to be nuanced in their opposition.

[Arkansas Granny]

12. If I had a Democratic Senator, I would expect him/ her to

support legislation that was good for our country and our people, regardless who brought it before the Senate.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. With all due respect what has Drumpf or the GOP proposed heretofore which is good for the country?

Ersatz Muslim ban?

Wall?

Repeal of the ACA?

Privatization of Social Security and Medicare?

I think the last good thing a Republican did is when George Bush added a prescription benefit to Medicare.

[Arkansas Granny]

17. Please note, I said "if".

I won't hold my breath waiting, but it might happen.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. I appreciate your optimism , I think.

I believe the GOP wants to turn us into plant food.

[Azathoth]

25. Yes. The only exception is when it is unambiguously in the interest of our constituents

But that won't happen because the GOP is an eliminationist party. They're no longer interested in governing or even pushing an ideological agenda, they're interested solely in vandalizing Democratic achievements and erasing us permanently from the body politic. Democrats still don't seem to grasp that this is Weimar politics circa the late 1920's.

[Motown_Johnny]

26. We need to gain seats in both houses in 2018

Some (D)s will need to do things we don't like in order to try to hold their seats next time around.

So long as they are not casting deciding votes in favor of Trump policies, I think we need to be pragmatic about it.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

27. If they collaborate with Trump they're no better than Republicans, so what

is the point of them even being Democrats? If they're more worried about keeping their seats than voting with their party, they might as well just change their party registration to R because they are no good to Democrats.