@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
When people tell me they are confused as to what my intentions are, they ought to have that post bookmarked, to refer to for my answer.
I don't think anyone's confused anymore edgar.
You're content to let things like Sandy Hook, Parkland, Vegas continue to happen for as long as it takes until a truly, wholly, progressive party that agrees with all of it's members entirely (except Lash who is fine with more guns...gosh, we have disagreement already).
You're content to let people suffer without healthcare they can afford utnil your wholly progressive party can take charge and overrule any minority party opposition (why even vote in the Senate/House?).
You're content to let the world burn (so-to-speak), I think, because you know that you're not going to be here long enough to suffer the consequences.
That's cowardly, sir.
OMG, now I'm about too defend edgar!
Because you are willing to compromise certain of your principles in order to achieve ends you believe are worth the sacrifice doesn't mean that someone who is not (edgar) is either actively or passively abetting the world's conflagration (figuratively or otherwise)
To start with, you have absolutely no guarantee that the
moderate to conservative Democrats you are willing to cast your vote for will come through for you (and America) on any given issue. While it's true that there is a better chance that the "progressive agenda" will be realized if there are more Democrats than Republicans in Congress, by now you should be aware that you (nor edgar for that matter) can rely on even the most ideologically pure progressives in Congress to vote in a manner that conforms with either your notion or the more widely agreed upon notion of the "progressive agenda." Time and time again I have been frustrated and angered by Republicans who have failed to cast votes for legislation that was in line with the “conservative agenda.” I appreciate the need for compromise and am not willing to throw out the good in a futile pursuit of the perfect, but time and time again the Republicans who have disappointed me have not done so because in their judgment a compromise in the here and now would further advancement of conservative goals in the future, but because a yay or nay vote on one particular bill would purchase a supporting vote on a bill they needed to pass for the advancement of their career.
I believe that the pursuit of enlightened self-interest will eventually and in general lead, imperfectly, to the best interests of all, but this is not some natural law upon which we can always rely and the dynamics can be thrown off the rail by individuals who limit themselves to the pursuit of venal self-interest that takes no care in what it’s achievement means to the interests of the whole. The system works when our legislators act as representatives of our interests, seeking to please a significant number of citizens. When they work solely or even mainly to promote their own interests, even at the expense of their constituents’ interests, the result is corruption, and systems break down when corrupted.
Voting for someone with whom you have no ideals in common simply because they are running as a member of one party or the other is too great a sacrifice if the candidate in question doesn’t, ultimately, advance your desired agenda in some way, and while, again, that person is probably a better bet than the candidate from the other party, unless voters make known their dissatisfaction with the candidates their party is putting up, there will be no change in the choices offered to them, and they will continue to have to hold their noses when they vote.
It’s not unreasonable to argue that this is too idealistic a view to have if any of the agenda is to be advanced, but it is unfair to argue because someone holds this view and is playing the long game while you are focused on the present that they are in some way responsible for legislation passed by the opposition party that won the seat because not enough party members had a pragmatist’s view of voting. If people are currently suffering with their healthcare or there aren’t in place the gun regulations you favor, you can’t draw a straight line between those circumstances and edgar’s refusal to vote for just any Democrat.
Regardless of what you or edgar may think of the Tea Party, the movement was created by conservatives who like edgar weren’t content with the candidates their ostensible party kept offering them. Contrary to what you probably believe the movement wasn’t formed to explore ways to oppress minorities and fill the coffers of mega-corporations. People who had such things on their agenda made efforts to influence and seize control of the movement, but this is always the way of effective grassroots efforts. I was there at the beginning and while I suppose it’s possible that the members of my community who joined me were secret operatives for the Koch brothers, I doubt it very much. We were tired of Establishment Republicans who paid lip service to conservative ideals while running for office but found all sorts of reasons for abandoning them once they were ensconced in their DC offices. Our goal was to identify conservative candidates who regardless of whether they had the backing of the local GOP, we felt were worth our support…and then we gave them all the support we could muster. Again, regardless of what you think of the movement, it worked “Tea Party Candidates” won in primary battles against the Establishment shills and then they won against Democrats. As a result, it moved the party to the right.
Sitting on your ass and grousing about your party and refusing to vote for its candidates is an empty gesture if that’s all you do, but it still doesn’t make you personally responsible for the policies of the person who wins the election. I’ve no idea what edgar is doing to change the Democrat party or to help fortify or create a new party that better represents his ideals, but he is under no compulsion to vote for candidates whom he dislikes or distrusts simply because they have a “D” next to their names. Whining about the edgars of the world is sour grapes behavior. Your guy or gal didn’t win and now you want to lash out at all the reasons other than the ones that matter. Rather than trying to shame people like edgar into voting a straight Democrat ticket, you should be following his lead and doing what you can to influence the party’s selection of candidates…particularly if you essentially agree with edgar’s ideals.
If you’re a left-winger, and a left-wing agenda can’t get a Democrat elected, there’s something dishonest, dishonorable, and, frankly, stupid about casting your support for an essentially conservative candidate masquerading as a Democrat; in the hopes that they are actually a stealth-lefty who, once elected by the conservative rubes in your district, will tow a left-leaning party line. Achieving goals are important but so is how you achieve them.
