Democrats behaving stupidly again… (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

So Democrats are pouring money into crazy, extreme Republican candidates in the primaries, hoping they will be unelectable in the fall: 

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/27/1106859552/primary-illinois-colorado-republican-candidate-democrats-ads

I cannot emphasize how much I despise this sort of politics. Whenever a crazy type, from the right or left, wins a major party nomination, it is harmful to the nation. And of course there is the old adage “be careful what you wish for.” This is so stupid and wrong. 

Sigh. Democrats have always been, and continue to be, their own worst enemies. 

 

[The Commish]

If they're going to use these tactics, they are missing the elephant in the room.  A social war between DeSantis and Trump is the layup of layups, yet another swing and a miss.

 

[timschochet]

Even in the article I linked, Claire McCaskill (whom I normally like) expresses concern only about whether the strategy will work. There is no concern about the possibility that by promoting extremism you are weakening our system of governance. It’s disgusting. 

 

[George Costanza]

I will be the first to say, the Dems have never been great at strategy. It's really frustrating to watch them always snatch defeat from the jaws of victory...

 

[Max Power]

Its almost like they never learn.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

"60% of the time, it works every time."

 

[BladeRunner]

Wait until the GOP starts doing it to extreme Democrats.  

 

[Marauder]

Even in the article I linked, Claire McCaskill (whom I normally like) expresses concern only about whether the strategy will work. There is no concern about the possibility that by promoting extremism you are weakening our system of governance. It’s disgusting. 

Well, McCaskill can't really criticize the tactic since she used it herself in 2012 when her campaign ran adds supporting Todd Akin who she saw as a weaker challenger.

 

[AAABatteries]

Isn't this how we ended up with Trump?

 

[Quint]

Isn't this how we ended up with Trump?

exactly. 

"So to take Bush down, Clinton’s team drew up a plan to pump Trump up. Shortly after her kickoff, top aides organized a strategy call, whose agenda included a memo to the Democratic National Committee: “This memo is intended to outline the strategy and goals a potential Hillary Clinton presidential campaign would have regarding the 2016 Republican presidential field,” it read.

“The variety of candidates is a positive here, and many of the lesser known can serve as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right. In this scenario, we don’t want to marginalize the more extreme candidates, but make them more ‘Pied Piper’ candidates who actually represent the mainstream of the Republican Party,” read the memo.

“Pied Piper candidates include, but aren’t limited to:
• Ted Cruz
• Donald Trump
• Ben Carson
We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to [take] them seriously."

LINK

 

[FairWarning]

Isn't this how we ended up with Trump?

Exactly.  I knew a lot of people in Mich voted for him over Kasich in the primary so Hillary could win.

 

[The Commish]

Isn't this how we ended up with Trump?

Of course....but these goobs don't seem to want to learn from their mistakes.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Isn't this how we ended up with Trump?

I think we probably would have ended up with Trump anyway, but yeah the Hillary campaign intentionally boosted Trump because they figured he'd be easier to beat.  Worked out really well for the country.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

This kind of stuff isn't very noble.  That said, this strikes me as the type of "dirty trick" that's sketchy but within normal parameters in ordinary times.  It's downright dangerous when Republicans are nominating full-on illiberal extremists.  Nobody should be boosting any candidates that they would seriously mind losing to.  

 

[AAABatteries]

RCV and more candidates would help solve this to a degree.

@roadkill1292

 

[Mile High]

I've seen those Ron Hanks ads in Colorado. They make him out to be a completely out of touch for Colorado. If that makes Republicans vote for him, go for it.

 

[knowledge dropper]

 

Democrats tampering with our sacred democratic process ….shocking!!!!!

 

[Stoneworker]

And here I thought it was all just a "messaging" problem...

 

[supermike80]

exactly. 

"So to take Bush down, Clinton’s team drew up a plan to pump Trump up. Shortly after her kickoff, top aides organized a strategy call, whose agenda included a memo to the Democratic National Committee: “This memo is intended to outline the strategy and goals a potential Hillary Clinton presidential campaign would have regarding the 2016 Republican presidential field,” it read.

“The variety of candidates is a positive here, and many of the lesser known can serve as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right. In this scenario, we don’t want to marginalize the more extreme candidates, but make them more ‘Pied Piper’ candidates who actually represent the mainstream of the Republican Party,” read the memo.

“Pied Piper candidates include, but aren’t limited to:
• Ted Cruz
• Donald Trump
• Ben Carson
We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to [take] them seriously."

LINK

Wow

 

[Max Power]

 

Democrats tampering with or sacred democratic process ….shocking!!!!!

More like financing the foundation for insurrection. 

 

[roadkill1292]

RCV and more candidates would help solve this to a degree.

@roadkill1292

Don't let the unimaginative minimizers handwave it away. First past the post has to die for democracy to move forward.

 

[Dr_Zaius]

I think stuff like this highlights how much norms and societal stigma matter.  You will never be able to make this sort of thing illegal, although most everyone would agree that it is scummy, so the only way to stop it is for the practice to be viewed as shameful enough that nobody wants to participate.  To, that end, people like the Republican strategist in the article gushing about how brilliant it is are part of the problem.  I'm reminded of the (maybe apocryphal) story of LBJ wanting to falsely accuse his opponent of having sex with farm animals because he wanted to hear him have to deny it.  If we laugh these sorts of sociopathic political strategies as legitimate, we sow the seeds for more disfunction.

I would add that I suspect that the people pushing these types of strategies will not be dissuaded by examples of it blowing up and leading to a nut getting elected, as if it works more often than it doesn't that is good enough for them, institutional damage be damned.  

 

[BassNBrew]

So Democrats are pouring money into crazy, extreme Republican candidates in the primaries, hoping they will be unelectable in the fall: 

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/27/1106859552/primary-illinois-colorado-republican-candidate-democrats-ads

I cannot emphasize how much I despise this sort of politics. Whenever a crazy type, from the right or left, wins a major party nomination, it is harmful to the nation. And of course there is the old adage “be careful what you wish for.” This is so stupid and wrong. 

Sigh. Democrats have always been, and continue to be, their own worst enemies. 

Thanks for posting this @timschochet  I was about to start a thread about this https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-democrats-big-winners-illinois-gop-gubernatorial-primary

Impossible to give money to the DNC when they are using it to promote candidates with agendas and ideas worse than Trump.  

 

[timschochet]

Thanks for posting this @timschochet  I was about to start a thread about this https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-democrats-big-winners-illinois-gop-gubernatorial-primary

Impossible to give money to the DNC when they are using it to promote candidates with agendas and ideas worse than Trump.  

Interesting to relate that Democrats mainly failed last night to get the extreme candidates in. Which is a just result. 
 

On a side note, I have no idea why anyone would ever give money to the DNC or RNC. If you must give money to a political candidate, then choose the candidate that agrees with you. Personally I have never given money to a political candidate (I prefer supporting political causes, not candidates) with one exception: in 2016 I sent money to Ted Cruz’s campaign, a guy I despise, because he was the last man standing between Donald Trump and the Republican nomination for President. 

 

[Boston]

Interesting to relate that Democrats mainly failed last night to get the extreme candidates in. Which is a just result. 
 

On a side note, I have no idea why anyone would ever give money to the DNC or RNC. If you must give money to a political candidate, then choose the candidate that agrees with you. Personally I have never given money to a political candidate (I prefer supporting political causes, not candidates) with one exception: in 2016 I sent money to Ted Cruz’s campaign, a guy I despise, because he was the last man standing between Donald Trump and the Republican nomination for President. 

I would also add that I gotta believe it makes the candidate not getting the $/and or the votes from the party-switchers stronger as it probably gives them a real rallying point...the lack of commonsense from both parties is amazing.

 

[Gilroy34]

Again?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I think stuff like this highlights how much norms and societal stigma matter.  You will never be able to make this sort of thing illegal, although most everyone would agree that it is scummy, so the only way to stop it is for the practice to be viewed as shameful enough that nobody wants to participate.  To, that end, people like the Republican strategist in the article gushing about how brilliant it is are part of the problem.  I'm reminded of the (maybe apocryphal) story of LBJ wanting to falsely accuse his opponent of having sex with farm animals because he wanted to hear him have to deny it.  If we laugh these sorts of sociopathic political strategies as legitimate, we sow the seeds for more disfunction.

I would add that I suspect that the people pushing these types of strategies will not be dissuaded by examples of it blowing up and leading to a nut getting elected, as if it works more often than it doesn't that is good enough for them, institutional damage be damned.  

Yes, and I feel like this observation could go in half a dozen different threads right now.  

I've reached the point where I have basically had it with the non-stop norm violations and angle shooting.  This kind of thing, screwing around with judicial nominations, screwing around with election certification, EOs that the president knows are unconstitutional but he announces it anyway, etc. etc.  The only reason why I voted for Biden was because I figured he was the most likely person to help set this stuff aside.    

We tend to talk a lot about the "red tribe" vs. the "blue tribe," but I think we need to talk more about the sportsmanlike tribe (peaceful, committed to liberal democracy, honorable) vs. the scumbag tribe (winks at violence, indifferent toward liberal democracy, dishonorable).  These two tribes cut across red/blue lines.  I'm happy to live alongside sportsmen of all political persuasions, and I'm ready to cut the scumbags loose.  

 

[timschochet]

Yes, and I feel like this observation could go in half a dozen different threads right now.  

I've reached the point where I have basically had it with the non-stop norm violations and angle shooting.  This kind of thing, screwing around with judicial nominations, screwing around with election certification, EOs that the president knows are unconstitutional but he announces it anyway, etc. etc.  The only reason why I voted for Biden was because I figured he was the most likely person to help set this stuff aside.    

We tend to talk a lot about the "red tribe" vs. the "blue tribe," but I think we need to talk more about the sportsmanlike tribe (peaceful, committed to liberal democracy, honorable) vs. the scumbag tribe (winks at violence, indifferent toward liberal democracy, dishonorable).  These two tribes cut across red/blue lines.  I'm happy to live alongside sportsmen of all political persuasions, and I'm ready to cut the scumbags loose.  

I couldn’t agree more with this sentiment. Unfortunately for me you seem to regard me as one of the scumbags. I hope I can change that opinion. 

 

[Boston]

Yes, and I feel like this observation could go in half a dozen different threads right now.  

I've reached the point where I have basically had it with the non-stop norm violations and angle shooting.  This kind of thing, screwing around with judicial nominations, screwing around with election certification, EOs that the president knows are unconstitutional but he announces it anyway, etc. etc.  The only reason why I voted for Biden was because I figured he was the most likely person to help set this stuff aside.    

We tend to talk a lot about the "red tribe" vs. the "blue tribe," but I think we need to talk more about the sportsmanlike tribe (peaceful, committed to liberal democracy, honorable) vs. the scumbag tribe (winks at violence, indifferent toward liberal democracy, dishonorable).  These two tribes cut across red/blue lines.  I'm happy to live alongside sportsmen of all political persuasions, and I'm ready to cut the scumbags loose.  

Agree 100%...I despise when people make the lazy "whataboutism" claim because IMO the main purpose of using it is to make sure there are two sets of rules, and those rules will always favor my team...until there is consistency/no hypocrisy from both sides we will continue traveling down the sewer.

 

[Gatorman]

So Democrats are pouring money into crazy, extreme Republican candidates in the primaries, hoping they will be unelectable in the fall: 

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/27/1106859552/primary-illinois-colorado-republican-candidate-democrats-ads

I cannot emphasize how much I despise this sort of politics. Whenever a crazy type, from the right or left, wins a major party nomination, it is harmful to the nation. And of course there is the old adage “be careful what you wish for.” This is so stupid and wrong. 

Sigh. Democrats have always been, and continue to be, their own worst enemies. 

 republicans down in florida the last election cycle ran third party candidates with similar last names to the Dems running to mess up the vote. the mastermind for this got arrested for it,but the rep who won refuses to resign.  And the dems are the problem?

 

[timschochet]

 republicans down in florida the last election cycle ran third party candidates with similar last names to the Dems running to mess up the vote. the mastermind for this got arrested for it,but the rep who won refuses to resign.  And the dems are the problem?

Yes they are. 
I’m not a Republican. I used to be. But the Republican Party as it currently stands disgusts me. So I don’t worry about their lack of ethics. 
 

I am a Democrat. For a long list of reasons, I want to see them succeed. So they’re the ones I care about. And when they act in a stupid fashion I’m going to call them out for it. 

 

[Gatorman]

Yes they are. 
I’m not a Republican. I used to be. But the Republican Party as it currently stands disgusts me. So I don’t worry about their lack of ethics. 
 

I am a Democrat. For a long list of reasons, I want to see them succeed. So they’re the ones I care about. And when they act in a stupid fashion I’m going to call them out for it. 

makes sense, but I will say the left having ethics when the right does not is very much like bringing a knife to a gunfight, especially since the right is going to portray them negatively no matter what they do.

"Evil will always win because good is dumb" - Dark Helmet

 

[Dr_Zaius]

makes sense, but I will say the left having ethics when the right does not is very much like bringing a knife to a gunfight, especially since the right is going to portray them negatively no matter what they do.

"Evil will always win because good is dumb" - Dark Helmet

The problem is that if you reverse "left" and "right" in your statement, you can go to right-wing discussion board right now and they will be making the same exact statement in earnest.  The partisans on each side are largely convinced that if not for the dirty tricks of the other side, they would be winning elections and making the world better.  Maybe one of the "sides" is objectively correct, but they certainly can't both be, and yet they are firmly convinced that they are.

 

[dkp993]

I'm happy to live alongside sportsmen of all political persuasions, and I'm ready to cut the scumbags loose.  

Preach! Preach!  What time is your next sermon, I want to get there early for front row access.  

 

[Gatorman]

The problem is that if you reverse "left" and "right" in your statement, you can go to right-wing discussion board right now and they will be making the same exact statement in earnest.  The partisans on each side are largely convinced that if not for the dirty tricks of the other side, they would be winning elections and making the world better.  Maybe one of the "sides" is objectively correct, but they certainly can't both be, and yet they are firmly convinced that they are.

I agree with that and the sentiment, but even if we play above board (which we actually do 99% of the time) the right will simply make stuff up. The whole Pedo/groomer nonsense, The Clintons as killers, etc. We tried Truth vs fiction and it lost us an election and 3 supreme court nominees. Trump is one of the most corrupt people I've ever encountered, but Hillary's emails??  

Again, I agree with the sentiment, but the fact is we have reached a tipping point. With the republic at stake (and if not for him being a total incompetent dummy, Trump may have pulled off January 6) moral victories are really still just losses.

 

[BladeRunner]

I agree with that and the sentiment, but even if we play above board (which we actually do 99% of the time) the right will simply make stuff up. The whole Pedo/groomer nonsense, The Clintons as killers, etc. We tried Truth vs fiction and it lost us an election and 3 supreme court nominees. Trump is one of the most corrupt people I've ever encountered, but Hillary's emails??  

Again, I agree with the sentiment, but the fact is we have reached a tipping point. With the republic at stake (and if not for him being a total incompetent dummy, Trump may have pulled off January 6) moral victories are really still just losses.

I think I found the problem, guys. 

Between you and @tommyGunZ the left is as pure and clean as wind-driven snow and always has been.  That thinking is EXACTLY the problem.  It's like you pretend 2016-2020 never existed with the "above board play" we got from the Democrats.  They were damn near as despicable as Trump in their efforts to get him.

 

[Gatorman]

I think I found the problem, guys. 

Between you and @tommyGunZ the left is as pure and clean as wind-driven snow and always has been.  That thinking is EXACTLY the problem.  It's like you pretend 2016-2020 never existed with the "above board play" we got from the Democrats.  They were damn near as despicable as Trump in their efforts to get him.

Blade: thank you for proving my point.  

Shining a light on a crooked person isn't being "out to get him".  I have no problem with "Trump: the personality" I do have a problem with Trump: the businessman who stiffs his contractors, declared bankruptcy 3 times, etc.  My buddy who is as republican as they come wouldn't vote for a con man.  This had nothing to do with him running for office and everything to do with just watching him on television or in the news before he ever considered politics. If Trump came in for an eye exam in my office I'd make him pay up front.  I especially had an issue with Trump: the president bc everything he touched in turned to crap (except for moving the embassy in Israel).  

Shining a light on voter suppression, gerrymandering, etc isn't being "out to get anyone" either and the "despicable" items you accuse the left of have a lot less basis in fact than you think they do. Again, proving my point.  The left could act as wholesome as apple pie and the right will figure out a way to bash the apples in the pie...

 

[parasaurolophus]

I've seen those Ron Hanks ads in Colorado. They make him out to be a completely out of touch for Colorado. If that makes Republicans vote for him, go for it.

Got a text on my work phone telling me how bad ron Hanks was.

I replied telling them I was voting for him since he would be great at foreign policy after filming Forrest Gump and meeting with all of those world leaders. 

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Even in the article I linked, Claire McCaskill (whom I normally like) expresses concern only about whether the strategy will work. There is no concern about the possibility that by promoting extremism you are weakening our system of governance. It’s disgusting. 

I agree with your larger point, but Claire McCaskill used this exact strategy to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat in 2012, so it's not surprising she's in favor of it

 

[Rich Conway]

Yes, and I feel like this observation could go in half a dozen different threads right now.  

I've reached the point where I have basically had it with the non-stop norm violations and angle shooting.  This kind of thing, screwing around with judicial nominations, screwing around with election certification, EOs that the president knows are unconstitutional but he announces it anyway, etc. etc.  The only reason why I voted for Biden was because I figured he was the most likely person to help set this stuff aside.    

We tend to talk a lot about the "red tribe" vs. the "blue tribe," but I think we need to talk more about the sportsmanlike tribe (peaceful, committed to liberal democracy, honorable) vs. the scumbag tribe (winks at violence, indifferent toward liberal democracy, dishonorable).  These two tribes cut across red/blue lines.  I'm happy to live alongside sportsmen of all political persuasions, and I'm ready to cut the scumbags loose.  

This isn't going to be anything you don't already know, but if angle shooting works (and it does), then one side can't realistically choose not to engage in it while the other side does.  If they did, they would lose more elections, thus giving the other team more opportunity to create additional angles to shoot.  Until voters punish this behavior (and they don't and won't), it's going to keep happening and get worse.

 

[Manster]

Blade: thank you for proving my point.  

Shining a light on a crooked person isn't being "out to get him".  I have no problem with "Trump: the personality" I do have a problem with Trump: the businessman who stiffs his contractors, declared bankruptcy 3 times, etc.  My buddy who is as republican as they come wouldn't vote for a con man.  This had nothing to do with him running for office and everything to do with just watching him on television or in the news before he ever considered politics. If Trump came in for an eye exam in my office I'd make him pay up front.  I especially had an issue with Trump: the president bc everything he touched in turned to crap (except for moving the embassy in Israel).  

Shining a light on voter suppression, gerrymandering, etc isn't being "out to get anyone" either and the "despicable" items you accuse the left of have a lot less basis in fact than you think they do. Again, proving my point.  The left could act as wholesome as apple pie and the right will figure out a way to bash the apples in the pie...

But the left is not as pure as the driven snow......and the bashing works both ways.....another reason we got trump.....the left becomes more and more out of touch with every day America by the day.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

This isn't going to be anything you don't already know, but if angle shooting works (and it does), then one side can't realistically choose not to engage in it while the other side does.  If they did, they would lose more elections, thus giving the other team more opportunity to create additional angles to shoot.  Until voters punish this behavior (and they don't and won't), it's going to keep happening and get worse.

Yes, and I feel like this observation could go in half a dozen different threads right now.  

I've reached the point where I have basically had it with the non-stop norm violations and angle shooting.  This kind of thing, screwing around with judicial nominations, screwing around with election certification, EOs that the president knows are unconstitutional but he announces it anyway, etc. etc.  The only reason why I voted for Biden was because I figured he was the most likely person to help set this stuff aside.    

We tend to talk a lot about the "red tribe" vs. the "blue tribe," but I think we need to talk more about the sportsmanlike tribe (peaceful, committed to liberal democracy, honorable) vs. the scumbag tribe (winks at violence, indifferent toward liberal democracy, dishonorable).  These two tribes cut across red/blue lines.  I'm happy to live alongside sportsmen of all political persuasions, and I'm ready to cut the scumbags loose.  

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

makes sense, but I will say the left having ethics when the right does not is very much like bringing a knife to a gunfight, especially since the right is going to portray them negatively no matter what they do.

"Evil will always win because good is dumb" - Dark Helmet

"Get your own house in order." - William Shakespeare

I do think sane people should spend more time criticizing the loons on their own side rather than the other side. Criticizing the other side is mostly pointless because they won't listen. The loons on their own side won't listen either, so ... uh, actually, maybe people should just worry about themselves.

 

[Gatorman]

But the left is not as pure as the driven snow......and the bashing works both ways.....another reason we got trump.....the left becomes more and more out of touch with every day America by the day.

Again, propaganda vs. truth.  You are correct in the assumption the left is not pure as the driven snow, especially historically, but in the recent past they have certainly been more fair and equitable than the right in terms of things I mentioned above.  Voter suppression, redistricting, propaganda (Fox news, OAN, etc), and accepting help from other countries in our elections (whether active or passively allowing this).

Now, I agree with the sentiment of the above post about helping the worst candidate get the nom can backfire bc we are so divided he could win and then we are worse off, but if one side is always changing the rules to suit them, why do we need to be the white hat party?

AS for out of touch: I doubt you have spent more than a minute listening to Katie Porter, AOC, Liz Warren and the other "pro-worker" liberals bc the narrative vs the substance to what they are trying to achieve is pretty much stark.  Even Bernie's messaging is more in line with every day america than what the right is trucking out.

 

[Gatorman]

"Get your own house in order." - William Shakespeare

I do think sane people should spend more time criticizing the loons on their own side rather than the other side. Criticizing the other side is mostly pointless because they won't listen. The loons on their own side won't listen either, so ... uh, actually, maybe people should just worry about themselves.

MT - name the community and the same thing occurs no matter what side you are on.  Condo board, Optometric trade group (I was on),  City council, boardroom etc etc etc.  For many it is about the acquisition and maintenance of power, less so about actual service. Those who are actually "called to serve" so to speak usually end up being jaded and disillusioned about the whole process.

I am a democrat and a liberal but I still call out those on my side, especially when it comes to Israel and Jewish policy.  I'd prefer if things were set up elections wise to let the moderates decide.  Alas, that is not what we have in America at the moment.

 

[Stoneworker]

Again, propaganda vs. truth.  You are correct in the assumption the left is not pure as the driven snow, especially historically, but in the recent past they have certainly been more fair and equitable than the right in terms of things I mentioned above.  Voter suppression, redistricting, propaganda (Fox news, OAN, etc), and accepting help from other countries in our elections (whether active or passively allowing this).

Now, I agree with the sentiment of the above post about helping the worst candidate get the nom can backfire bc we are so divided he could win and then we are worse off, but if one side is always changing the rules to suit them, why do we need to be the white hat party?

Lmao. If these recent posts aren't the very definition of "sanctimonious liberal" I don't know what is.

 

[Manster]

Again, propaganda vs. truth.  You are correct in the assumption the left is not pure as the driven snow, especially historically, but in the recent past they have certainly been more fair and equitable than the right in terms of things I mentioned above.  Voter suppression, redistricting, propaganda (Fox news, OAN, etc), and accepting help from other countries in our elections (whether active or passively allowing this).

Now, I agree with the sentiment of the above post about helping the worst candidate get the nom can backfire bc we are so divided he could win and then we are worse off, but if one side is always changing the rules to suit them, why do we need to be the white hat party?

AS for out of touch: I doubt you have spent more than a minute listening to Katie Porter, AOC, Liz Warren and the other "pro-worker" liberals bc the narrative vs the substance to what they are trying to achieve is pretty much stark.  Even Bernie's messaging is more in line with every day america than what the right is trucking out.

Ive listened.  I agree with some of their stances actually.....in a perfect world the rich would take care of the poor.....its an imperfect world.....also they lose me with the social justice crap.

 

[msudaisy26]

You know what really helps you win elections? Being a good candidate with good ideas. It would be really cool if either side would do that. 

 

[dickey moe]

Again, propaganda vs. truth.  You are correct in the assumption the left is not pure as the driven snow, especially historically, but in the recent past they have certainly been more fair and equitable than the right in terms of things I mentioned above.  Voter suppression, redistricting, propaganda (Fox news, OAN, etc), and accepting help from other countries in our elections (whether active or passively allowing this).

Now, I agree with the sentiment of the above post about helping the worst candidate get the nom can backfire bc we are so divided he could win and then we are worse off, but if one side is always changing the rules to suit them, why do we need to be the white hat party?

AS for out of touch: I doubt you have spent more than a minute listening to Katie Porter, AOC, Liz Warren and the other "pro-worker" liberals bc the narrative vs the substance to what they are trying to achieve is pretty much stark.  Even Bernie's messaging is more in line with every day america than what the right is trucking out.

Then why do you think the working class has soundly rejected them? 

 

[AAABatteries]

You know what really helps you win elections? Being a good candidate with good ideas. It would be really cool if either side would do that. 

Agree and I may be on an island with this one but how about being a good person.  Not perfect, just not a huge ##### like most of the people that run for office nowadays.