Perhaps you'll enjoy this blog post from Blue Oregon as much as I did.

[pablo_marmol]

Points made by Jeff Golden have been made here at DU -- but I like the way he lays out his case:

http://www.blueoregon.com/

GO BERNIE!

[senz]

1. The blog post references Thom Hartmann's support for both candidates,

but Thom has said that he favors Bernie, adding that if Hillary is the nominee, he will support her over any Republican. I think that's a reasonable stance. Anyone who has listened to his program for very long knows how fond he is of Bernie. They go back a long way.

[merrily]

2. Golden seems to be referencing the infamous "add on."

aka Bernie BUTter--as in, "I support Bernie Sanders.........but I will vote in the general for whoever is the Democratic nominee."



For a time--many months before Hillary even announced for this primary, a (mercifully) few DUers were making bizarre (to me) demands for what I termed loyalty oaths--a pledge to vote for Hillary in the general, no matter who we supported in the primary. (Of course, that was before it was not okay to support anyone but Hillary in the primary.)

From what Golden says, I am wondering if the idea for that originated somewhere other than DU.

In any event, DUers who supported other candidates started to seem compelled to add that they would, of course, vote for Hillary in the general if she were the nominee. Some seemed to me to be quite sincere about their support for candidates other than Hillary, while others definitely did not, but that is another issue. Anyway, Golden is not saying that Hartmann supports both. Golden is saying that Hartmann supports Bernie, but uses the self-defeating add on:

What I have to say keeps coming up for me as I listen to Thom Hartmann’s daily talk show. I like Thom a lot, but he’s giving me heartburn when he tacks on to his strong support of Bernie a proviso that he’ll definitely be supporting Hillary if she’s the nominee (upcoming Supreme Court nominations, dontcha know). It brings back a line from Goodfellows or some such film: “I got two words for you—shut the #@% up.”* Not forever, but for the next twelve months or so.

I myself saw absolutely nothing productive to be gained from either demanding or giving the loyalty, unless one hoped Hillary would win the primary. I don't, so I never did give the oath. That has resulted is some claiming that I've affirmatively said that I will not vote for her in the general if she is the nominee. However, I only refused to say one way or the other--and I still refuse to say.

Kinda sad for me that the Democratic Party has devolved into fear-based campaigning for itself, namely, if you won't give full-throated support to the Democratic nominee, say hello to President (insert Republican's name here) and lose the Supreme Court for the rest of your life." I call it political terrorism. FDR had no need to engage in that--and he certainly understood Supreme Court nominations!

P.S. I am not familiar with quote Golden says may have come from Goodfellas, but I love it and intend to steal it, early and often.

[pablo_marmol]

3. "Golden seems to be referencing the infamous add on."

Exactly --- and I agree with his reasoning on why it is undermining.

Kinda sad for me that the Democratic Party has devolved into fear-based campaigning for itself, namely, if you won't give full-throated support to the Democratic nominee, say hello to President (insert Republican's name here) and lose the Supreme Court for the rest of your life." I call it political terrorism. FDR had no need to engage in that--and he certainly understood Supreme Court nominations!

Couldn't agree more. Political terrorism indeed.

[merrily]

4. Yep. That should not be your bottom line reason to vote for someone.

My sister once developed a school girl crush (literally) on some Republican politician. Being much too young to vote, she asked my mother to vote for him.

My mother replied, "Republican? No, we don't vote Republican. Social Security. Union."

Not a word about Pretentious Hat Tony.

[pablo_marmol]

5. Ha!

P.S. I am not familiar with quote Golden says may have come from Goodfellas, but I love it and intend to steal it, early and often.

Then maybe you'll "steal" this one as well....

Person speaking to irritating person: "Have you met Chatha?"

Irritating person: "Huh? Who is Chatha?"

CHATHA FUCKUP!!! (two words)

[merrily]

8. LOL!

[senz]

6. Agree on that loyalty oath business

When I decided to jump in and start interacting here, one my early second thoughts was their warning that commenters could be banned for threatening to vote for a non-Democrat. It gave the place an oppressive, overbearing cast. Some of those folks come across rather bossy/ authoritarian (again, one wonders how closely they may resemble their candidate). So I hope it isn't official du policy.

However, with Hartmann -- I wondered at first if he, like so many, was afraid of getting on Hillary's bad side, but after a couple of weeks concluded that since he's a talk show host with a wide following and well aware that his words have greater consequences, he doesn't want to lead people into attitudes/ behaviors that could give the GE to one of the nut-job Republicans. He doesn't want to be responsible for that, and I don't blame him.

A year or so ago, he was more openly critical of her.

[merrily]

7. One can be banned from this board for threatening to vote for a non-Democrat.

Voting for Democrats is part of the terms of service of this board.

Vote for Democrats.

Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side

.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice


That was part of the cuteness of the demands for a loyalty oath.

Once, Poster A demanded a loyalty oath of Poster B. Poster B said he would not vote for Hillary, no matter what. Poster C chimed in with, "Do me a favor. Remind of that after the primary ends." I had to laugh.