General Discussion

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)

51. There's not enough "oozers" to explain that effect

Sat Aug 2, 2014, 02:56 AM

Aug 2014

The problem is the party itself constantly lurching rightward. Not due to the nefarious influence if a small gribble of ship-jumpters, but because it is easy and profitable. it takes effort to take a stand. Taking stands can have expense. Why rock the boat whe nyou can float along and get showered with lobby money for "doing the right thing?"

And of course there's the problem that Democratic voters seem to have no concept of how to say "no." I've been watching this tide of stupid rise around us fr the last few years, this hyper-partisan "DEMOCRATS DO NO WRONG!" belief system that mirrors that of the Republicans... and it's dangerous. when you put party above principles, well, shit, why are you bothering with a party at all at that point?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

53 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

David Sirota: Clinton Isn’t Warren, No Matter What Her Allies Say [View all] marmar Aug 2014 OP

Kick, Rec n/t Smarmie Doofus Aug 2014 #1

To be honest, I thought Hillary abstained from voting on Bankruptcy Deform. closeupready Aug 2014 #2

She voted for the 2001 bill which didn't pass and missed the vote on the 2005 bill. PoliticAverse Aug 2014 #5

k&R KoKo Aug 2014 #3

k&r for the truth, however depressing it may be. n/t Laelth Aug 2014 #4

Why would Hillary be Warren or why would Warren be Clinton? How do you determing who would be Thinkingabout Aug 2014 #6

The present Warren or the one who probably voted for Reagan twice? BeyondGeography Aug 2014 #7

"probably voted for Reagan twice"? "PROBABLY"! hedgehog Aug 2014 #9

Per-zactly! Plucketeer Aug 2014 #11

She can say she didn't vote for him BeyondGeography Aug 2014 #17

I am sick and tired of Republicans oozing over to join the Democrats Fred Friendlier Aug 2014 #33

There's not enough "oozers" to explain that effect Scootaloo Aug 2014 #51

Hillary was a Goldwater girl PADemD Aug 2014 #24

Who supported Eugene McCarthy as a junior in college, and then campaigned for McGovern in '72 BeyondGeography Aug 2014 #25

Hey, good point. Richard Shelby was a Democrat when *he* was 46 years old.... beerandjesus Aug 2014 #28

there are pubs in my family who vote dem. broad brush much? roguevalley Aug 2014 #42

And Reagan used to be a big time Democrat too! cascadiance Aug 2014 #30

The main point is how easy BeyondGeography Aug 2014 #37

not likely imho roguevalley Aug 2014 #43

I guess just as easily as wingnuts "deflate" Thom Hartmann for campaigning for Goldwater... cascadiance Aug 2014 #48

How dare you not toe the DU line when it comes to the infallible Warren... Cali_Democrat Aug 2014 #35

So the person who "probably" voted for Goldwater... ljm2002 Aug 2014 #38

She was not even eligible to vote for Goldwater is how it works BeyondGeography Aug 2014 #39

Well since she campaigned for Goldwater... ljm2002 Aug 2014 #40

She campaigned for Goldwater but was not old enough to vote. Thinkingabout Aug 2014 #46

I concede. n/t ljm2002 Aug 2014 #49

Or, or the future Warren that probably will become a Scientology. rhett o rick Aug 2014 #45

Good...Warren also has her flaws... joeybee12 Aug 2014 #8

No, they do admit she has flaws. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Aug 2014 #27

If anyone is looking for any dem to mildly criticize and say, maybe, just maybe joeybee12 Aug 2014 #29

Actually, they can look at Rep Ellison of Minnesota. nt Erich Bloodaxe BSN Aug 2014 #32

He's the only one, and I should clarify any Dem with national joeybee12 Aug 2014 #34

I would vote for Warren over Hillary but I have some suspicions about what role Warren is... L0oniX Aug 2014 #10

Don't forget, we're talking about the Democratic Party here - hedgehog Aug 2014 #13

Yep ...thinking the Dem party is above manipulation is indeed ludicrous. L0oniX Aug 2014 #15

If we are going to discuss manipulation, let's get serious and look hedgehog Aug 2014 #23

could it be,that Rogers meant a small d? sadoldgirl Aug 2014 #18

if Warren lets Hillary make that claim, then it's essentially true Enrique Aug 2014 #12

It is going to be hard to find a candidate who is mot supported by corporations. Thinkingabout Aug 2014 #47

Sirota is taking a break from Obama bashing this week? conservaphobe Aug 2014 #14

some people don't like conservatism, regardless of who's practicing it Doctor_J Aug 2014 #20

Lol. Melodramatic much? nt conservaphobe Aug 2014 #21

says the poster of reply#14 Doctor_J Aug 2014 #22

That is a good read. JaydenD Aug 2014 #16

The Hillary Is Inevitable club make a few vanity posts every time Warren Doctor_J Aug 2014 #19

Its like Obama split into two people LiberalLovinLug Aug 2014 #26

HRC played a leading part in drafting the TPP antigop Aug 2014 #31

To be fair Clinton was in the Senate for eight years whereas Warren has only been in totodeinhere Aug 2014 #36

Sirota - still a hack wyldwolf Aug 2014 #41

that is_why he will never get my vote. clinton better step up. I'm already tired of her and her tin roguevalley Aug 2014 #44

" . . . filled in for George W. Bush . . ." Major Hogwash Aug 2014 #50

Well, it's a step, and a tool Babel_17 Aug 2014 #52

Hillary is clearly campaigning for the support of the wealthy and no DLCer yurbud Aug 2014 #53