Oh. My. Sweet. Lord.
We’re already seeing it. The threats that if Democrats aren’t “pure” enough, then they’re not getting the votes.
Unlike the right wing, whose concept of RINO serves to keep them in lockstop, the specifics of what counts as “proper” liberal ideology vary from person to person.
And if there was one time I’d agree that liberals are looney, it’s this argument that only the “best” liberal should be a candidate.
Don’t get me wrong. My personal “wish list” for a candidate is FAR to the left of any candidate that I’ve seen on the national stage. Give me reparations for slavery. Give me instant-runoff voting. Give me redistricting that represents people fairly. Give me universal healthcare and single-payer systems. Give me universal basic income, and investments in both trade schools and university that serves all of our people. Give me all of that – and probably a lot more that I haven’t thought of right now.
But I was also an adult in 2000. I was an adult in 2016.
And both times, I heard this dumb-as-rocks argument. This idea that if someone wasn’t “pure” enough, that they didn’t deserve our votes.
I agree, we should have progressive candidates. We need inspirational candidates.
But I’m also not naive enough to think that all people to the left of Trump have the same ideas of what constitutes a truly “progressive” or “liberal” candidate.
Everyone’s “purity” test is going to be just a bit different.
And we are going to have to compromise. Just like when we realized (after memeing the hell out of him) that Terry Crews, for all his awesomeness, has some unsavory views about porn and transpeople. And that’s awful… but he’s still a lot better than Chuck Norris’ reactionary self.
And that’s the point.
Fight it out bitterly in the primaries. Push the Democrats to the left, even if they don’t want to. Campaign and run as the protest party of your choice. Get the Green Party US above its 156 officeholders nationwide.
Please note that count of 156 officeholders currently counts such things as a member of a Residents Advisory Board in Baltimore – positions that are absolutely important, but seem to get no real interest from those who insist that Democrats are totally awful and who make noise every four years.
But after the disaster that was Dubya – and the ongoing descent into horror that is Trump – one cannot make the argument that Gore and Clinton were “just as bad” or “exactly the same”.
So once the primaries are over, you might be faced with a choice between the lesser of two evils.
And the lesser of two evils means they’re CLOSER TO GOOD.
Which means a “protest vote” is clearly a vote for more evil.
Choose wisely.
“You better have a candidate in 2020 that meets my idea of liberal ideology, or else we’re not voting.”Oh. My. Sweet. Lord.
We’re already seeing it. The threats that if Democrats aren’t “pure” enough, then they’re not getting the votes.
Unlike the right wing, whose concept of RINO serves to keep them in lockstop, the specifics of what counts as “proper” liberal ideology vary from person to person.
And if there was one time I’d agree that liberals are looney, it’s this argument that only the “best” liberal should be a candidate.
Don’t get me wrong. My personal “wish list” for a candidate is FAR to the left of any candidate that I’ve seen on the national stage. Give me reparations for slavery. Give me instant-runoff voting. Give me redistricting that represents people fairly. Give me universal healthcare and single-payer systems. Give me universal basic income, and investments in both trade schools and university that serves all of our people. Give me all of that – and probably a lot more that I haven’t thought of right now.
But I was also an adult in 2000. I was an adult in 2016.
And both times, I heard this dumb-as-rocks argument. This idea that if someone wasn’t “pure” enough, that they didn’t deserve our votes.
I agree, we should have progressive candidates. We need inspirational candidates.
But I’m also not naive enough to think that all people to the left of Trump have the same ideas of what constitutes a truly “progressive” or “liberal” candidate.
Everyone’s “purity” test is going to be just a bit different.
And we are going to have to compromise. Just like when we realized (after memeing the hell out of him) that Terry Crews, for all his awesomeness, has some unsavory views about porn and transpeople. And that’s awful… but he’s still a lot better than Chuck Norris’ reactionary self.
And that’s the point.
Fight it out bitterly in the primaries. Push the Democrats to the left, even if they don’t want to. Campaign and run as the protest party of your choice. Get the Green Party US above its 156 officeholders nationwide.
Please note that count of 156 officeholders currently counts such things as a member of a Residents Advisory Board in Baltimore – positions that are absolutely important, but seem to get no real interest from those who insist that Democrats are totally awful and who make noise every four years.
But after the disaster that was Dubya – and the ongoing descent into horror that is Trump – one cannot make the argument that Gore and Clinton were “just as bad” or “exactly the same”.
So once the primaries are over, you might be faced with a choice between the lesser of two evils.
And the lesser of two evils means they’re CLOSER TO GOOD.
Which means a “protest vote” is clearly a vote for more evil.
Choose wisely.