Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Question about weak candidates. [View all]JCanete
(5,272 posts)3. No, or at least not opposed to their opponents. But I already had a long discussion with you about
media influence and its corporate bias, and you dismissed or glossed over my assertion that the problem with our Party and its abysmal chances of ever actually being at the helm of an actually functioning government, is that it does not as a unit expose and disavow this cancer in our politics that is not only abdicating its responsibility to nurture an informed public, but intentionally and systematically misinforms or distracts it with total garbage. It is killing our so-called democracy.
Why can't we as a party find common ground on this pretty fucking obvious fact?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
124 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I suggest that all of the candidates be entered into the Olympic weightlifting competition.
TexasTowelie
Dec 2016
#2
No, or at least not opposed to their opponents. But I already had a long discussion with you about
JCanete
Dec 2016
#3
No, what? I'm sorry, I thought I was including Hillary as not being a weak candidate, again,
JCanete
Dec 2016
#79
Point is I'm not trying to refight the primaries with you, nor am I trying to turn this into a
JCanete
Dec 2016
#110
THIS!!!!! I don't understand why so many focus on blaming democrats when
AgadorSparticus
Dec 2016
#123
there are many undecideds/independents who tend to alternate party choices.
SleeplessinSoCal
Dec 2016
#5
Go back and re-read my post, since you obviously didn't get it the first time.
BlueProgressive
Dec 2016
#20
Oh, you're saying you believe the right-wing smears you say you've seen posted on this site?
BlueProgressive
Dec 2016
#30
This myth that Sanders was pure is outright stupid. Kurt Eichenwald SAW the oppo on Sanders and the
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2016
#52
Sanders is an extremely good retail politician, which is why he has the highest approval rating in
karynnj
Dec 2016
#61
No, they weren't. And they lost anyway. Hillary, on the other hand, handily beat her opponent
EffieBlack
Dec 2016
#25
So What other blasts from the past are we going to use to see who would beat Trump?
JHan
Dec 2016
#53
Three million votes, and those are only the ones tht got got counted and not "lost" somehow
Hekate
Dec 2016
#72
Did those candidates have a pages long list of reasons the public may not trust them?
TCJ70
Dec 2016
#18
They also didn't have a 25-year witchhunt, tens of millions of dollars and an entire media industry
EffieBlack
Dec 2016
#24
which is precisely why the GOP dedicated so much of its resources to trying to
BainsBane
Dec 2016
#32
No one - even here in Vermont - ever thought Bernie would do anywhere near as well as he did
karynnj
Dec 2016
#67
You can have a smaller group of very enthusiastic people vs a larger group that vote, but are not as
karynnj
Dec 2016
#96
Bernie lost the primary due to one reason and one reason only. He did not execute a sound strategy.
Exilednight
Dec 2016
#113
They were all excellent candidates, but they weren't all good campaigners, IMO.
mtnsnake
Dec 2016
#62
The other candidates lost the electoral college too, and all except one the popular vote.
BainsBane
Dec 2016
#98
Not weak, but relatively untalented politicians who had been insiders for too long
geek tragedy
Dec 2016
#83
I don't actually think this is fair, to Clinton or these other candidates. Because...
JCanete
Dec 2016
#87
come on...Bush was a good candidate? Better than gore or Kerry? It takes help to make
JCanete
Dec 2016
#91
how? If the media makes up the rules about what makes you an effective candidate, then yes
JCanete
Dec 2016
#93
well, thanks for this discussion....no shit. The question remains, do Republicans actually
JCanete
Dec 2016
#95
I think by the time a candidate wins the nomination, that candidate has real strengths.
Yo_Mama
Dec 2016
#85
In the current bizarro world, Hillary is weaker than the guy she destroyed in the primary. nt
LexVegas
Dec 2016
#104
I'd say the campaigns of the first three had significant weaknesses as well.
Ken Burch
Dec 2016
#115
In ways. They lost. Being a weak candidate does not mean they'd be a bad president.
dionysus
Dec 2016
#116