Can We Please Stop the Infighting?

[MineralMan]

Every time we go on a rampage about some minor incident involving one of the Democratic primary candidates for the presidential nomination, we feed an ugly machine that wants all Democrats to lose. The Republicans seize on such minor things and so do the media. There's no question about some people preferring different candidates. That's what primary elections are about. But we should be very careful not to let our preferences magnify so-called "incidents" involving our primary candidates.

Right now, the target is Joe Biden, who is accused of some personal contact with a woman who is also a politician and a serious fan of a different candidate. Sill, even she says the contact was not seen by her as a sexual assault of any kind. It was a "violation of her personal space." OK. People shouldn't violate other people's personal space. I get that. But such a thing is not any sort of disqualification for the office of the President.

No doubt, someone could be found to state that every last Democratic primary candidate has done something objectionable. Men and women alike. And, no doubt someone will. The question we should ask, each and every time, is: Even if this is true, is it truly a disqualifying thing for a presidential candidate? Most often, the answer will be that it is not. Democrats are not immune from behaving in questionable ways sometimes. Even some of our favorite Democratic Presidents have done such things, and much, much worse.

When we, as Democrats, contribute to blowing up minor faults into major issues, we feed the Republicans. Why would we do that?

We ended up with Donald Trump as President due to internal bickering among Democrats in 2016. Are we going to do the same thing in 2020? Did we learn nothing?

C'mon folks. Let's not do this again!

[marylandblue]

1. The infighting is unavoidable. Too many passionate people convinced they are right.

I am looking for the candidate that best responds to the dirt thrown at them and can keep the media focused on policies.

[MineralMan]

7. I believe there are people who enjoy stirring up reactions to such things

for their own purposes. Some are just fans of a different candidate, but others do that for different reasons. There are many people who are looking for any way they can make it more difficult for a Democrat to win. Some of those pretend to be on our side, when they actually are opponents of any Democrat winning.

We saw that clearly in 2016. It worked. Trump is in the White House. We need to think about this better.

[marylandblue]

8. No doubt, but what do we do about it?

[MineralMan]

12. Just what I'm trying to do in this thread.

That's what we do about it. We need Democrats to stand up and say, "Hey! This is bullshit. Why are we doing this?"

You can count on me to do that on a regular basis for the next many months. I've been doing it for a long time.

A claim that a candidate "violated someone's personal space," is not a disqualifying thing. To claim it is is bullshit. I call it like I see it.

We've already seen other candidates receive similar criticism. "Is Pete Buttigieg's sexual orientation something that could keep him from winning?" I've seen that written here, in more careful wording. "What about some of Kamala Harris's cases as Attorney General of California - was she liberal enough?"

It's an insidious theme that will come up for every candidate. We're going to see every potentially winning candidate hit on some grounds or another. Count on it. Count on me to post an OP about it, too.

[emulatorloo]

13. Stick w facts not rumor. Policy, voting records

[Andy823]

22. EXactly!

More and more trouble makers will be showing up to do their best to start arguments, and to use the old divide and conquer tactics. As you stated they will pretend to be on either side of a discussion, and two or more will join forces to stir the pot even more. The sad thing is that the "negative" threads get the most attention, and push all the positive threads off the front page.

[watoos]

10. The M$M is complicit with the right.

It takes a special person to change the right wing narratives; Speaker Pelosi can because the press must cover her, and AOC can. I watched her biography last night on msnbc. I see one reason that she gets her fire, she interned under Ted Kennedy.

I turned on msnbc again today while riding my bike, I usually only watch Nicolle and Rachel. Stephanie Rule was on and the #1 topic was the emergency at the border. It was 1/2 hour before the Mueller report was discussed.

I keep hoping that I am proved wrong that msnbc and cnn are little different than Fox, but I have had no luck so far.

I keep waiting for msnbc and cnn to start pushing for impeachment.

[marylandblue]

14. You are right that Pelosi and AOC are able to change the narrative.

I thing Buttigieg is able to do it too, which is why I am backing him.

[Tipperary]

2. Recommended.

Flores is on MSNBC now, and she sounds like she is desperately trying to justify herself. She needs to just be quiet.

We definitely should not be giving fuel to the right wing.

[SummerSnow]

3. she's full of it.she'll be on the view next

[Corgigal]

4. Yeah,

I muted the TV and put on Stephanie Miller. No idea why her experience is newsworthy.

[mitch96]

34. "We definitely should not be giving fuel to the right wing."

Exactly. You KNOW these repuke political operatives are taking notes and doing their homework. By infighting we are making their job easier.. They are gonna use it against us in the next election...
m

[watoos]

5. I'm with you MM,

The only way we lose in 2020 is if we fight among ourselves.

I was involved in my local union for 26 years while I was working. I am not ashamed to admit that I voted for Joe Biden in the primary instead of Barack Obama because Joe was a strong union man.

We need a tough as nails candidate to beat Trump, my list is narrowed down to 3 people and if Joe gets in my list grows to 4. Kamala, Tulsi, Liz are on my list now as tough as nails people.

[samnsara]

6. i hope the ladies on the view help her see the light...

[blue cat]

9. Yes, I agree

Im ready to stop after getting kicked in the gut hearing the Barr brief. All of our candidates are better than theirs.

[mobeau69]

11. I agree, MineralMan, but does it really matter?

I used to visit a lot of stock trading boards before I retired. I played around with just a few thousand dollars. I was always amazed at how a dozen or so bashers as well as pumpers on these little boards wasted their time in the belief that they could actually influence stock prices that traded millions and millions of shares everyday.

[emulatorloo]

15. Interesting analogy. Very thought provoking, thanks for posting

[MineralMan]

16. Donald Trump is in the White House.

I rest my case. Presidential elections in this country are almost always very close elections that turn on small numbers of voters in a few states. In PA, MI and WI, fewer than 90,000 votes, total, made all the difference. It doesn't take much to keep some voters away from the polls. Attacking our own candidates is not a winning strategy, even this early in the primary season. It's just not.

The stock market is a different thing, altogether. Truly it is. It's not a thing that can actually be influenced by a small group of minor traders.

[marylandblue]

31. But can DU affect even 90,000 votes?

I'm not even sure we can affect each other's votes all that much.

[MineralMan]

32. It's not just DU, of course.

DU is merely a reflection of political trends in this country. It skews left a bit, but any opinions and other statements written on DU can be found outside of DU as well. It's not a matter of DU being important in elections. It's the general trend of things, which is clearly reflected here.

[marylandblue]

25. I think you are right, which is why media reaction and polling are more important.

If the media does not obsess over it and the candidate's polling is unaffected, the attack was unsuccessful. If it takes a candidate down during the primary, that candidate could never survive in the general against Trump.

[c-rational]

17. Agreed, but some people will just not play fair. We typically see this with reThuglicans,, but

it is not above some Dems. The incident in question is one which should IMO have never been brought up today if it was not brought up in 2016. What are the motivations - to educate the electorate about personal space, raise to bar for acceptable behavior.

[left-of-center2012]

18. It's fodder for the GOP

Some of the attacks are just dumb
I saw an attack here on DU against 'Mayor Pete" that simply read:

"He has a funny name !
No one will vote for someone with a funny name !"

(He won re-election with 80% of the vote)

[marylandblue]

26. I thought Barack Hussein Obama was too funny of a name.

Admittedly, "Buttigieg" is worse, but if people like the candidate, they seem to overlook flaws. If they don't like the candidate every flaw is magnified.

[left-of-center2012]

28. One attacker said ...

"Buttigieg" translates into 'grower of chickens' !!!!

[marylandblue]

33. That's an attack?

I would consider it a plus that his ancestors were successful family farmers.

[Celerity]

35. being President is in the Buttigieg genes it seems

Dr Anton Buttigieg
PRESIDENT OF MALTA (1976 – 1981)

https://www.gov.mt/en/Government/Government%20of%20Malta/Presidents%20of%20Malta/Pages/Dr-Anton-Buttigieg.aspx



He embarked on a political career and was first elected to the House of Representatives in the Labour Party interest in 1955. He was re-elected in all subsequent elections and held his seat in Parliament up to the time of his resignation in October 1976. From 1959 to 1961 he was President of the Malta Labour Party and from 1962 to 1976 its Deputy Leader. When the present administration took office in 1971, he served his country as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Justice and Parliamentary Affairs.

He was a delegate to the Malta Constitutional Conferences held in London in 1958 and in 1964. He was also a representative to the Consultative Assembly in the Council of Europe (1967 - 1971), where he was elected Vice-President (1967 - 1968).

In October 1976 he resigned from the House of Representatives and on 27th December, 1976 he was elected as the second President of the Republic of Malta.

[USALiberal]

19. Research "Discussion Board" nt

[MineralMan]

21. No need. I'm discussing something already.

[guillaumeb]

20. Define the term "minor incident".

Speaking of Joe Biden, and the allegation of personal, uninvited conduct, do we reflexively reject the allegation?

Or are we looking for what does not exist, the perfect candidate?

[MineralMan]

23. I'll leave definitions up to you, Monsieur B.

Go look it up somewhere. Both words are easy enough for the average English speaker to understand clearly.

[guillaumeb]

44. Perhaps the female victims do not take the same view as you do.

Distance can make one more "philosophical" about such behavior.

[marylandblue]

27. As far as I am concerned, all incidents are minor.

A Democrat can shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and my only concern would be if they have a good excuse and how it affect their polling numbers.

[guillaumeb]

45. Agreed. eom

[defacto7]

24. We need to stop the tabloid BS by not participating

[bigtree]

29. it's an open forum

...there are ALWAYS going to be a handful of folks posting who can't get enough scandal to fill their plates.

I'd counsel perspective, instead. See those candidate support totals at the top of the page? These tiffs here are as real and relevant in the actual world as those percentages.

Perspective.

[rzemanfl]

30. My question is, "Do trolls have the right earn a living?"

If so, then we have to learn to recognize and ignore their work product.

[yaesu]

36. MSM will decide who runs against tRump by their targeted crisis reporting

Like they did to Howard Dean (scream), biden's hugs, ect.... Targeted scandals will herd the sheep to the tRump slaughter house.

[billpolonsky]

37. There is a difference...

...between being critical and criticizing.

[Otto Lidenbrock]

38. We ended up with Ronald Reagan as President due to internal bickering among Democrats in 1980

We clearly learned nothing

[MineralMan]

39. And again in 2000, when Greens in Florida threw the presidency to

GWB. I have read that the Nader campaign received money from Republicans.

[BlueWI]

42. Along with Democrats who voted for Bush.

They were greater in number and get next to no accountability.

[BlueFlorida]

40. The infighting on issues is fine and healthy

Smearing other candidates should stop. So far, only one candidate and his attack staffers seem to be doing it and I hope that candidate is punished by voters at the polls.

[hughee99]

41. Everyone is willing to stop the infighting once everyone else

Accepts that their candidate is the best.

Many people seem to believe that THEY are fighting for the best candidate and everyone that opposes them is just dividing the party.

[BlueWI]

43. More discussion of issues and strategy would be welcome.

Too much ink on the horse race, scandals, and why we don't like another candidate's supporters.

Compared to...

What are the candidates proposing, what's their strategy for the election map, and what are we learning from our own involvement in campaigns?

[McCamy Taylor]

46. Dude, does the phrase "bull moose in heat" ring any bells? Hunter S. Thompson

describing Democratic candidates in pursuit of the presidential nomination. As it has been so shall it be. It would not be a democratic primary without the mud slinging.