In defense of Susan Sarandon, and by extension Jill Stein et. al. ?

[guillaumeb]

Last edited Thu Feb 16, 2017, 05:25 PM - Edit history (1)

Numerous posts have talked about so-called limousine liberals like Sarandon and Stein and their positions regarding Donald Trump being President. One can also read numerous posts at JPR asserting much the same thing.

But if we look at the position that Trump is somehow, on some level, preferable to Clinton, how can we approach that in a positive way? How can a positive be made out of an apparent huge negative?

First, I believe any argument must concede that the Trump Presidency, no matter how long it endures, will be a negative for the bottom 90% of Americans. GOP spin and framing aside, Trump is a tool of the 1% just as the GOP is a tool, and that tool will not be used to build, but to destroy.

But if there is any positive that has occurred so far, it is that many Americans are organizing, and protesting, and calling their respective Congress members to register their opposition to the GOP agenda. So this activity is a positive, but only if it represents a new normal for Americans. Far too many Americans only pay attention to politics after Labor Day in Presidential election years.

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

In 2012, again Democrats were motivated to vote, but 2014 saw a repeat of the 2010 complacency as the GOP took the Senate.

So if Trump's election can motivate Democratic voters to wake up and get active, Trump might just have done the Democrats a favor for 2018 and the crucial 2020 Presidential election that will also affect the 2020 Census redistricting. Democrats must realize that, arguments about demographics aside, people actually have to vote and pressure their Congress members all of the time.

And this does not apply to the hyper-aware and well informed DU community. The obsession with politics here is evident. But DU members must preach the gospel of political awareness and involvement to our friends and family and neighbors.

[msanthrope]

1. OFFS....this election proved we had the numbers without the Farthest Left. We need EC strategy.

Tell me exactly how appealing to Blue State limousine liberals solves that?

like the green party has any fucking ground game in a red County that we might need?

[guillaumeb]

5. My point is about complacency.

And the fact that Democratic voters simply do not vote in sufficient numbers in every single election. Especially non-Presidential elections.

And those points are proven by history, especially from 2010 to the present.

[msanthrope]

26. Tell me the telling signs of complacency you see since Trump's election. nt

[guillaumeb]

29. Fourth paragraph of my post:

But if there is any positive that has occurred so far, it is that many Americans are organizing, and protesting, and calling their respective Congress members to register their opposition to the GOP agenda. So this activity is a positive, but only if it represents a new normal for Americans. Far too many Americans only pay attention to politics after Labor Day in Presidential election years

The exact opposite of what you claimed that I said.

Now explain the huge fall off of voting by many Democrats in 2010 and 2014.

[msanthrope]

88. That's nonsensical. We lost because of the red counties. Tell me exactly how appeasing the Far

Left changes that.

[starshine00]

91. after this election no one should ever try to appease them

it is like a tantrum throwing child, it is best to be polite and ignore but don't give in to the rotten behavior or you reinforce it. Somehow it got reinforced this time and the results are an utter and complete global disaster already.

[msanthrope]

95. Exactly. nt

[guillaumeb]

97. We lost for a number of reasons.

Comey, Kobach, Putin, Assange, David and Charles Koch, Citizens United...............

and voter complacency. Voter complacency explains 2010 and 2014.

And 2010 and 2014 explains 6 years of obstruction and a lost SCOTUS seat.

SO what that has to do with this far left I do not see.

[msanthrope]

101. Thank you proving my point. If the far Left had nothing to do with losing..then why consider them?

[guillaumeb]

103. My point is about complacency.

It is framed somewhat provocatively, but the point of low turnout leading to bad results remains.

And when talking about the far left, what and who are we talking about?

[Caliman73]

125. What you call complacency may also be considered disillusionment

Less people turned out to vote during the midterm elections because President Obama had both houses of Congress and they were still stymied by a minority party. People may have stayed home because, "We're fine, we got this" but more because of an sentiment of why bother to participate if the Democratic representation is so weak that the party in control of both houses can't push through its agenda.

People are scared today because the Republicans have seemed able to push through a good deal of their policies without both the legislative and executive branch. Now they have both and are poised to have a conservative court. We are fighting for our lives. That is not a good thing. That is not a silver lining. That is an attempt to justify recalcitrance and put a shinola on shit.

Change is either made by people working within a party structure, like the Tea Party did within the Republican party, or it is made externally. The problem with the external route is that you need a significant crisis to motivate people and that usually entails a great deal of pain. I know of many immigrants, both documented and not, that are in fear and in hiding at this point because they are afraid of deportation. For people like Sarandon to be out there smugly and safely stating that with crisis comes opportunity, is beyond insensitive.

[starshine00]

86. this is a beautiful thing to read, your headline.

It is time. When I was younger I could understand the Green Party politics but I would never have voted for them. And the legacy of the Nader candidacy is what is happening to the Yazidi women who are being raped serially by their ISIS captors. The legacy of that tragic splitting of the vote is playing out NOW. And it needs to be stated over and over and over again. I understand the politics of the farthest left for sure but as if Nader was not enough, this current debacle shows that they never need to be listened to again, seriously, taken into consideration, sure, but these virulent identity politics and the me, me, me factions that voted third party and gave us Bush and Trump have lost me. I share a lot in common with them politically, but I am not stupid enough to put the world in the hands of a Bush or a Trump, and the party needs to appeal to those folks that understand that actions have consequences and that usually it is the most innocent and vulnerable who pay them.

[msanthrope]

98. I'm kinda fucking done with Chamberlain appeasement. nt

[Beaverhausen]

2. Tell that to the immigrants being arrested

For starters...

[Charles Bukowski]

4. Bernie Busters won't listen. They're too busy calling for the world to burn.

From a safe distance, of course.

[guillaumeb]

7. Dismissive? Prone to generalize? eom

[Charles Bukowski]

10. Anecdotal for sure, but I have yet to run into an apologetic

Bernie Buster. They're still railing against the DNC and Clinton while families are literally being torn apart by Trump and his administration.

Accuse me of making generalizations if you wish, but this is the reality as I see it. Third party voters are not going to help us.

[guillaumeb]

13. As I already mentioned to another responder,

my point is about Democratic electoral complacency. Witness the pathetic turnout in 2010 and 2014.

Complaining about Sanders does not explain the curious laziness that appears to affect many Democratic voters in non-Presidential elections.

[Charles Bukowski]

25. I can't envision a scenario in which Democrats rush to the voting

booths in a complacent mood. We will enter this midterm with a zeal that blows away even 2006. Will it be enough to take back the House? That remains to be seen.

[guillaumeb]

27. Complacency refers to the non-voting tendency of some Democrats.

See the 2010 and 2014 elections for proof.

[Charles Bukowski]

30. I don't see turnout being an issue this time.

Sometimes the GOP screws things up so spectacularly (even by their standards) we have no choice but to show up. 2006 was one such occasion. 2018 will be another.

[guillaumeb]

32. For the sake of the country, we both hope you are correct.

But, as I mentioned in my post, political interest must be a regular thing for Democratic voters, not just an every 4 year thing.

[MrPurple]

106. Unfortunately there's more voter suppression & gerrymandering in place than in 2006

The D's will have to fight through that, but 2018 will be an uphill climb. It will be much harder to flip things or make a dent than it was in 2006.

[starshine00]

87. what is a bernie buster?

never heard that

[guillaumeb]

100. The mythical Bernie voter who will only vote for Bernie.

Even though surveys showed that the vast majority of Sanders supporters actually voted for Clinton, this myth persists.

[starshine00]

107. I met some of them on twitter

they are proud of themselves and seem to be quite happy with their decisions to vote third party or not at all. So some of them at least are real.

[guillaumeb]

109. No doubt.

I have engaged with some at JPR also. Some are unapologetic and, I would argue, clueless as to the real harm that Trump is doing and will continue to do.

[starshine00]

112. i don't understand this approach to politics

it seems like aberrant psychology to me.

[guillaumeb]

115. Do you mean the "burn down the house and then rebuild" approach?

That only works if one has numerous houses as options.

[starshine00]

119. in my heart, I do not believe they thought it would go this far.

I think, upon contemplation, many of them were as bewildered and defensive as Sarandon seemed. I don't think they thought Clinton would lose, at all. They maybe thought that they had 'room' to be stupid and irresponsible because Clinton was a shoo in.

[guillaumeb]

122. I also felt that Clinton would easily win.

We all underestimated how much the GOP would lie cheat and steal to win.

But I still voted for Clinton because I felt she was the best candidate. And she crushed Trump in Illinois.

[Charles Bukowski]

116. There's nothing mythical about the Bernie Buster.

Yes, the vast majority of Bernie supporters switched to Clinton for the GE, but a small vocal minority did not, and in an election that came down to 80,000 votes across three states, it proved disastrous.

[guillaumeb]

117. Many things contributed.

Including voter suppression, courtesy of Kris Kobach, and including everyone who voted third party.

[guillaumeb]

8. I agree. But what of Democratic complacency? eom

[Justice]

3. Sarandon and Stein are indefensible. Don't want to see any thread defending them on DU ever again.

[guillaumeb]

6. Did you read ALL of what I wrote?

If so, explain what points you disagree with aside from the title.

[starshine00]

89. I just heard Maddow noting that Stein is at the table w/Flynn & Putin in that photo

interesting.

[Chevy]

113. Exactly! Is this Democratic Underground

or Alt-Left Underground?

[joshcryer]

9. "Limo Liberals" as msanthrope pointed out, are not going to do squat in red areas.

They will have zero impact in those areas. They wouldn't even donate to the most feasible Democrats to get elected in those areas (John Bel Edwards types, pro gun, anti abortion), much less endorse them.

[guillaumeb]

11. The title aside,

my post and my point concerns Democratic complacency.

2010 and 2014 being my prime exhibits here.

[LanternWaste]

44. Post hoc ergo prompter hoc

Post hoc ergo prompter hoc. Low turnout can in fact, be explained by conclusions other than complacency, a complacency illustrated by two examples, but not supported with objective evidence. Complacency may indeed, be on, of many factors.

Ignoring all other relevant factors is irrational, biased and lacks critical analysis.

[guillaumeb]

102. 2010 and 2014 were both low turnout elections.

And historically, low turnout elections favor the GOP.

As to the post hoc point, I would argue that Citizens United v. FEC buit upon Buckley v. Valeo.

[starshine00]

93. I don't think economic class is the issue

it is the far left and many of the most young and idealistic are at poverty level or below. What grates me about Sarandon is she used her influence on this idealistic demographic to a very bad end.

[Cattledog]

12. She's just a rich, white, privileged actress.

Watching from her Ivory tower while people suffer the consequences.

[guillaumeb]

14. Which does not speak to my points.

It is easy to categorize, but difficult to self-examine.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

17. yes, why don't you examine why your sympathies seem to lie with these over privileged fools

and not with the real lives getting destroyed.

[guillaumeb]

19. I suggest that you read the post, not just the title.

With due respect.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

20. i did. nt

[guillaumeb]

22. If you did, I can see no reason for your dismissive responses.

Or do you disagree with my analysis of Democratic complacency?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

31. i disagree with your entire narrative that minimizes harms and excuses those who allowed this to

happen.

your sympathy is misplaced and coddles those who don't deserve it.

[guillaumeb]

35. Please point out where I said or implied that.

Because I cannot find it. I find a post that talks of being politically involved every day, not just during Presidential elections.

[JTFrog]

43. By saying they did Democrats a favor you are minimizing all the harm he is doing.

For fuck's sake.

Get a clue dude.

[guillaumeb]

114. I am merely looking for the positive in a negative situation.

And pointing out the real problem with low voter turnout in non-presidential elections.

[LanternWaste]

46. I find it bemusing you believe anyone who disagrees with your premise

I find it bemusing you believe anyone who disagrees with your premise does so only because "they have not read the post... only the title." How incredibly self-validating of you.

[guillaumeb]

55. Based on the numerous responses that accuse me of supporting the idea of 3rd party voting,

I must stand by my conclusion.

And this also is in the post, but few talk about it:

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

If you can find in this, or the entire post, a defense of 3rd party protest voting, feel free to respond.

[JTFrog]

57. Well your subject line specifically says "in defense of".

If you can find in this, or the entire post, a defense of 3rd party protest voting, feel free to respond.

What the everloving fuck are you trying to sell here?

[guillaumeb]

61. I felt that the post made it clear. I am addressing complacency. And non-voting.

As here:

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

[JTFrog]

63. I get enough of this round about bullshit from Trump.

Good luck with this thread.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

15. multimillionaires and hucksters don't need your support

if you have left over sympathy, have it for the REAL lives that are getting destroyed by this administration.

[still_one]

16. Noam Chomsky said it best why the OP's premise is wrong

"Progressives who refused to vote for Hillary Clinton made a ‘bad mistake’

Chomsky attacked the arguments made by philosopher Slavoj Zizek, who argued that Trump’s election would at least shake up the system and provide a real rallying point for the left.

“[Zizek makes a] terrible point,” Chomsky told Hasan. “It was the same point that people like him said about Hitler in the early ’30s… he’ll shake up the system in bad ways.”

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/11/noam-chomsky-progressives-who-refused-to-vote-for-hillary-clinton-made-a-bad-mistake/

As for Sarandon and Stein, they can go to hell

[TeamPooka]

18. This. done.

[guillaumeb]

21. I am not disputing Chomsky's analysis.

And I am not agreeing with Sarandon and Stein.

As a reading of my entire post would show.

[still_one]

47. I didn't say you agreed with their positions, but I was addressing the point that a trump

presidency might be a positive motivational factor for getting involved.

That was rationalization Ralph Nader used in 2000, and a similar rational used by those who voted for Stein.

Problem is the damage that very possibly will be done in 2 years, would take decades, if not generations to undo.

[guillaumeb]

50. The damage was done when Kobach and Putin and Comey weighed in.

But if there is any positive, people are getting active and organized. But will it be sustained action and organization?

[StubbornThings]

62. It was a terrible argument before the election.

Now, with Trump as President, it's at least worthy of discussion.

[LanternWaste]

49. Maybe clarity of writing rather than reading comprehension is at fault.

Maybe clarity of writing rather than reading comprehension is at fault. Or, you could continue the implication of pretending everyone who disagrees with your premise is stupid or too lazy to read.

Ten bucks tells me you'll continue to rationalize the latter...

[guillaumeb]

51. Other than the title, which makes sense if the post is read in its entirety,

please point out the lack of clarity in my talking about the tendency of Democrats to not vote.

As in:

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

[StubbornThings]

66. Your OP makes perfect sense.

Not sure why it's so wrong to discuss this topic here.

[stopbush]

23. Here's why you're wrong about Jill Stein, and about people who suppported

and voted third party this year.

The Jill Stein vote took enough votes away from Hillary for Trump to win close contests in swing states. If that's what Stein expected to happen, then she knowingly helped Trump get elected.

If, on the other hand, she felt that people voting for her would not amount to enough to tip the election to Trump, one must ask why she felt that way. The most-obvious conclusion to draw is that she believed Hillary was running an effective enough campaign that many of the hard left voters would vote for Hillary instead of Stein. Therefore, there was no reason to withdraw from the election and to urge your voters to vote Clinton instead of Stein, because you (Stein) didn't actually believe your own rhetoric that far-left voters would not vote for Hillary.

Either way you look at it, Stein's actions helped get Trump elected.

[guillaumeb]

24. No argument with your points, as my post actually shows.

The title aside, my point goes to complacency as being the real problem with Democratic voters.

Complacency explains the 2010 and 2014 losses of the House and the Senate. And the loss of Merrick Garland.

[Blue Idaho]

36. You keep banging on about your post content

Being very different than it's title. So what is the title? Click Bate?

[starshine00]

94. look who else came to dinner

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/22/1603031/-Jill-Stein-s-Connection-to-Putin

[zipplewrath]

120. "Took away"

Your assessment presumes that those folks that voted for Stein, would have voted for Hillary otherwise. The precious few folks I know that actually chose to vote for Stein, never would have voted for HRC. Predominately they would have done something like a write in, or ultimately just not voted at all. One of them might have actually voted Trump.

Predominately it's a bit of hubris to say votes were "taken away" from someone. No one "owns" a vote. One earns it.

Now Susan on the other hand is a different story. If one believes they influence others, then how they choose to use that, "moves" votes around.

[stopbush]

128. I know too many Ds out here in CA who voted third party

as a protest vote against Hillary. Their reasoning? "CA will go for Hillary anyway. It's not like I live in a swing state."

Fine. Except that these same voters living in "safe states" spent all summer and all fall on social media trashing Hillary. I guess it never occured to them that maybe they might poison the waters for Hillary with their friends living in swing states, where their third-party votes made a huge difference.

You can't tell me it wouldn't have been a different story if Sanders, Stein and others had thrown their support behind Hillary in March or April, when it was clear their support would have made a difference, and when it was clear the nomination was hers. But, no, they kept up the Hillary bashing well into the season when people start paying attention, and that cost her votes.

[zipplewrath]

137. Well, now you're changing your story

Previously, it was that people actually voted for Stein and "took away" votes.

Now you wanna discuss that they voted third party in states she won, and as such somehow made folks in swing states vote for Trump.

Hillary lost because about 100k people in about 5 states are stupid. Trying to stretch that to the third party types avoids the basic truth. Third party types always exist and there were fewer this time than in some other races.

[bettyellen]

28. It's an out to dodge responsibility for the damage they did. Not buying it.

It's basically saying "our way or let it al burn down".
There's no thought that this country is. It as nearly as liberal or anti capitalist as they are. They need to grow the fuck up, honestly.

[Gothmog]

34. The BOB idiots are happy that trump was elected

I really dislike BOB idiots

[guillaumeb]

39. Off my topic and off my point.

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

[bettyellen]

54. Not at all- this is just advocating (again) that "burning it down" is a good thing...

Forgetting that much of the Dem base will be more hurt than anyone. Forgetting Trumps core supporters are too stupid to ever blame him.

There is no evidence we're coming out of this with more worries about Wall Street / oligarchy and corporate donations to candidates. People are worried about war and losing their civil rights, for fucks sake.


Burning it down is indefensible. We knew it when she talked about it last year. It's truer than ever today.

[guillaumeb]

59. No it is not advocating the "burn it down" philosophy.

Nowhere in my post do I advocate for that. What I do say, in the middle, is:

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

I see an indictment of complacency.

[bettyellen]

72. No one doubts there's been too much complacency- but she advocated "the burn" as a solution....

And those things are too intertwined to deny or deflect away from. Sorry but she's made herself irrelevant by cheerleading for this shit. You can try and parse it but this is what she wanted. So yeah- fuck her.

[bettyellen]

45. They screamed "burn it down" and are shocked people have a problem with it?

These are cafeteria progressives. They picked one item of the menu and said fuck you to everyone else. Fuck all of them.

[starshine00]

118. my theory based on the kids I argued with on social media

is that the ones that voted nader and stein were Xers and milliennials who were in grade school for the length of the positive administrations of Obama and Clinton (not saying either pres was perfect but certainly better than republican admins) and held some utopian vision that because of some fabled physical law of trajectory things would only continue to get better. The actual law is one of Newton's laws of motion that an object at rest or in motion remains in that state unless acted upon BY AN OUTSIDE FORCE. They truly did not understand the diabolical nature of the right wing and probably many are a bit astonished right now to see the truth playing out before our eyes, with the muslim ban etc. They will be well acquainted with evil before 4 years are out whether under Trump or Pence. The Dakota access pipeline seemed to be a pet issue of theirs and it must have been stunning how quickly Trump reversed that.

then there is the argument that I used to have trouble with but which time has born out to be utterly and completely false due to the fallout from the Iraq war, which is that voting for a 'neoliberal' like Clinton is immoral and they are making a more moral choice to not vote or vote third party. The horrible legacy of ISIS in Iraq and elsewhere and the genocide of the Yazidi people should forever invalidate the argument that there is ever any morality in standing by and letting someone like Bush or Trump get control of the White House...the effects of their disastrous policies last decades and the ultimate horror visited on the Yazidi should prove that there is absolutely nothing moral about abdicating from our duty to keep demonic people from getting control of our military.

[guillaumeb]

37. My point, in the middle of the post:

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

[starshine00]

96. yes bettyellen yes

this is how I feel and honestly I was apalled at the number of people I was encountering on twitter AFTER the election who were positively giddy to see the fires starting.

just giddy with excitement that their temper tantrum worked and they were going to have their destruction as a reward for not falling in line behind Clinton in order to save the world from what Trump would bring. I don't know WHAT to call this psychological disorder, my mother used to always say, 'cutting off your nose to spite your face'...it is sick and I nearly lost my mind arguing with these idiots, ALL of them very young (well interestingly and this may sound a tad prejudicial but the ones that aren't just very young make great use of cannabis like Sarandon so maybe it is that, I use an entheogenic but only periodically, not daily from morning to night like some enthusiasts so who knows. The more I dig on Stein the more I find her in Putin's pocket so this is getting more and more creepy http://americablog.com/2016/09/russian-greens-blast-jill-steins-silence-putins-human-rights-abuses.html

[Gothmog]

33. Sarandon also supported Nader who gave us Bush

Sarandon can rot in heck. She is an idiot who is too stupid to deal with. Nader gave us Bush and not Stein gave us Trump. Her idiotic theory that a gop president will help the liberal cause has no basis in reality.

Again, Sarandon can go F*** herself

[guillaumeb]

40. Not my point at all, even if the title suggests it:

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

[LanternWaste]

38. I disagree with the premise of her opinion

I disagree with the premise of her opinion, but if I hated people just because I disagreed with them, I'd be a world of one.

I'll let the irrational and the emotional give into reactionism and bias. I think she's a great actor and I'd be an idiot if I was unable to separate the art from the artist.

[guillaumeb]

41. Understood.

I too disagree with her point as she expressed it. But my point was:

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

[alarimer]

42. You are right, of course. There is a silver lining in all the activism.

If it can be maintained and if it leads to increased turnout for Democrats.

Sometimes it does take a disaster for people to get off their asses and do something. Whether that translates into actual votes down the line is another thing. Hopefully it will and hopefully the activism will lead to more and better candidates.

[guillaumeb]

48. Thank you.

I titled it the way I did because I though it would make people read it. I believe that many misread it, assuming from the title that I was defending 3rd party voting. I was not.

My point was solely about Democratic voter complacency.

[JudyM]

74. Well said, and my feelings about this, as well.

[delisen]

52. Sarandon: I want you to sacrifice yourself and your children for my agenda. Sort of like Trump

This is the root of dictatorship. "I dictate, you suffer, and you must applaud me while you cry."

She is insulated from the worse effects of a Trump presidency-she doesn't get deported, she doesn't have a child in the military, maybe if Trump starts a nuclear war she might suffer but in general her vast wealth protects her.

She wants to convince others to risk themselves and their children for her ego.

Sarandon does not belief in her own cause enough to donate her fortune. If she should ever do that I will have some respect for her.

She is basically an authoritarian. The dictators always preach, never listen. Even when proven wrong, they come back to preach again.

She and trump are Shoulders-they tell us what we should think, what we should say, what we should do.

[JTFrog]

53. "if we look at the position that Trump is somehow, on some level, preferable to Clinton"

The whole post is a bunch of bullshit.

[guillaumeb]

67. I was speaking to the Sarandon position, or how I perceive her position to be,

not agreeing with it.

My point addressed Democratic complacency. Specifically:

And if there was any negative to the Obama Presidency, it was that obviously some Democrats saw the election of Barack Obama as somehow solving things. As if the election of one person could be the savior, the solution. And some Democrats obviously felt that electing President Obama was enough because these deluded Democrats did not bother to vote in the crucial 2010 elections.

And the result of this Democratic non-vote, this complacency by Democrats, was that the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. And the result of the new GOP House Majority was that President Obama faced massive House obstruction from 2010
through 2016.

I hope that clarifies.

[JHan]

56. I agree with you on one thing..

I've never seen people pressure their congressmen/women like this. It's stunning, but why did it take the election of Trump to create this awareness? Citizens have to do a lot better...

Still, this price everyone will pay - including Trump voters - is not worth it..

Look back to 2010 to now: The Voting Rights Act was gutted, Citizens United is in play, there was widespread gerrymandering that guaranteed sustained GOP victories for almost a decade - all AFTER the fuss of the Occupy Movement which was also about "revolution". If what I described is the result of "revolution" then maybe there's a fundamental lack of understanding of what reform really requires and this is where the Sarandons and Steins of this world fail and why they never attain power.

Organizing and protesting have an effect but won't get us to the seat of power i.e. state legislatures, house and senate, the supreme court, and the presidency.

The Trump Presidency has set the progressive agenda backwards - to retain whatever will be lost will take time, effort and cost money. It won't bring the "revolution" quicker, whatever Susan means by that no one will ever know, she's been saying it forever. So this was a stumble in the path to progress that was not necessary.

The only good to be gained from this is to never repeat the same mistake again, sort of like what many said .. in 2000.

[guillaumeb]

68. We are in agreement on all points.

As to the why of Democratic complacency, I cannot answer that.
Edited to add:

So if Trump's election can motivate Democratic voters to wake up and get active, Trump might just have done the Democrats a favor for 2018 and the crucial 2020 Presidential election that will also affect the 2020 Census redistricting. Democrats must realize that, arguments about demographics aside, people actually have to vote and pressure their Congress members all of the time.

[bravenak]

58. Are you serious with this, G?

No. Trump did us no favors by rolling back our rights. See, G, white folks who have nothing to fear from INS, the KKK, the Police, racists, homophobes, islamaphobes, etc, can say this shit with a straight face because they are not likely to suffer from these things and have never ever suffered from them.
This sense of detachment I see from the far left is the real problem. The fact that you guy make these shallow arguments is hurtful to us on a deep level. Think about how others will suffer and are suffering under a Trump admin before you start formualating arguments that seem to be focused on the idea that this is somehow good for us.
My kid came home worried that one of her friend's was going to be deported because she is from somalia and is muslim and wears traditional garb. How is this helpful? My grandfather was deported back to europe back in the late fifties/early sixties. He was never heard from again; we only knew he died because my momma did her own damn investigation. This will happen to many more children; my grandma had 10 kids to care for and a deported husband and no papers. They starved until the kids were old enough to work. Yay! Progress. Revolution!
None of this will hurt you or the Susans of the world but y'all will say with a straigh face that you care deeply about us dark folks. How you care about us if you are so detached from our reality? Take yourself to a mosque or a synagogue and then to a black church and a hispanic center for immigrants and then come back and tell us how Trump 'motivating' democrats is helpful to them. You guys need an empathy transplant.
I told susan last night on twitter that she only cared about her revolution; she will watch the rest of us burn from her mansion in the name of 'progress' and 'revolution'.

[JHan]

69. ++++ I don't get it either... I didn't need any "revolution"..

I wanted more efficiency, I wanted better policy, the* possibility that every bit of progress made thus far will be rolled back at what price? It almost sounds like a first world problem.

[bravenak]

71. Yes. Definately a WPP.

I'm worried about Trump sending troops to kill my people in Chicago and Bmore. They worry about 'motivating' democrats who turn out in the millions more than Republicans.

[ismnotwasm]

75. Plus forever

Some of us apparently have learned nothing

[bravenak]

76. I think they never will

[JudyM]

79. And if the people aren't more awake to rise up against him we will lose everything.

[bravenak]

82. You won't lose anything from this compared to us who have never managed to gain

what privileges you have. The time to come together was about three hundred years ago. White folks are late to the party but want to decide the entertainment.

[JudyM]

104. Completely agree about the privileges, it's disgusting. I also think whatever wakes people up

to injustice and gets them to act on it is good.

[JTFrog]

70. ***THIS***

nt

[guillaumeb]

77. I am serious about my point. That complacency by Democratic voters leads

to not voting consistently. And not voting leads to Reagan and Bush and Trump. And bad consequences for the bottom 90%.

And this:

So if Trump's election can motivate Democratic voters to wake up and get active, Trump might just have done the Democrats a favor for 2018 and the crucial 2020 Presidential election that will also affect the 2020 Census redistricting. Democrats must realize that, arguments about demographics aside, people actually have to vote and pressure their Congress members all of the time.

As to me having something in common with a millionaire, I am from a family of 8. My father was from a family of 17. There were no millionaires in our town. Just a lot of poor farmers and shop keepers and factory workers and such. Poverty was not a label that we applied to ourselves, but we lived it.

[bravenak]

81. Did any of your family ever get deported? Mine did.

Were they black in racist ass america? Or mixed with black like me and mine? Then you do not get it. Yours is the all american tale of white folks making good. Our is the tale of deportations, redlining, no papers to get food stamps, too black to find work... Think about that. Even poor, your family have many privileges mine never did. My daddy left the south because even with civil rights he was not able to go out at night because his black ass was in a sundown town. Stop comparing white poverty to the minority experience of white supremacy. You are wrong to do so.

[guillaumeb]

83. This matter does not really relate to my post about voter complacency.

I do not argue your points, I actually agree with them. But the post was specifically about non-voting by Democratic voters.
And as I finished,

So if Trump's election can motivate Democratic voters to wake up and get active, Trump might just have done the Democrats a favor for 2018 and the crucial 2020 Presidential election that will also affect the 2020 Census redistricting. Democrats must realize that, arguments about demographics aside, people actually have to vote and pressure their Congress members all of the time.

[bravenak]

85. Your post was silly

Straight up privileged and unempathetic to those who will suffer while you dance in the streets in ecstasy over democrats finally being 'woke'.

WE WILL SUFFER UNDER TRUMP LIKE YOU WILL NOT. STOP SAYING THIS IS A GOOD THING IN ANY WAY. It is not.
I find it hurtful to all of us who are suffering in fear and it hurts me personally to see my allies be so detached from my reality. I have a hispanic name with a nice arab muslim middle name. I'm worried about my name coming up on a list somewhere.

[mcar]

129. All our children

Who could be sent off to war, what they will do to the air, land and water, to women's rights, to POC, immigrants. The list goes on.

There is no silver lining here.

[bravenak]

130. Agreed

He wants a war. He will start a draft, imo. I hate him

[mcar]

131. I hate them all

All the Rs in Congress who won't lift a finger to stop him.

[bravenak]

132. Me too

[anneboleyn]

60. It is "et al." - not "et. al." Latin: et alia means "and others" in English. "Et" is not abbreviated

so it does not need to be punctuated as such. Sorry, but I had to post this as I studied Latin for years, and I had to teach college students some basic Latin -- especially how to use common Latin phrases correctly (such as quid pro quo or ad hominem)

[guillaumeb]

78. I sit corrected. Literally. I am sitting.

But I will leave the error as proof that I am not perfect.

[tenderfoot]

64. Unrec

[DanTex]

65. I agree that Dems need to be engaged beyond the presidency.

But I don't see how that makes for any kind of defense of Sarandon, Stein, etc.

[guillaumeb]

80. Not literally a defense, more of a search for the good in a very bad situation.

Perhaps I should have indicated it was meant as such.

[ismnotwasm]

73. "The position that Trump is somehow, on some level, preferable to Clinton

How can we approach that in a positive way"???

Hillary Clinton was subjected to a systematic AND scattershot amount of complete bullshit that come from the left and the right. Any person who thinks Hillary Clinton is not preferable by algorithmic degrees is not only poorly informed, but probably unreachable.

I don't understand why you are trying to say. Stein and Sarandon directly contributed to Trumps victory. There is no defense.
Now, the Democratic Party learning from its mistakes? Sure. But we need to be clear on what those mistakes actually were, and were not.

So vagueness does not help. Specific actions made to obtain specific outcomes does. I see you tried that in your last paragraph, but I almost stopped reaching at your second sentence.

JPR is full of unstable, conspiracy mined people, and if I thought DU was in any way comparable I would leave.

[guillaumeb]

84. That position was Sarandon's.

And I disagree with it. My post concerned Democratic complacency. Specifically in 2010 and 2014.

And I ended:

So if Trump's election can motivate Democratic voters to wake up and get active, Trump might just have done the Democrats a favor for 2018 and the crucial 2020 Presidential election that will also affect the 2020 Census redistricting. Democrats must realize that, arguments about demographics aside, people actually have to vote and pressure their Congress members all of the time.

I am arguing for more citizen involvement.

[Blue_Tires]

90. sorry, I'm not a big believer in burning down the nation to save it

and all that mindset does is perpetuate the cycle anyway.

[guillaumeb]

99. No argument.

What I am in favor of is consistent citizen involvement. And that includes being politically active and aware all of the time.

[applegrove]

92. I prefer the term 'cocktail socialists'.

[guillaumeb]

105. Both terms fit.

And these upper income people will not generally be harmed no matter which Party is in power. Wealth insulates quite a bit.

[applegrove]

108. Yes. They do not lose their Healthcare when they have a preexisting condition

when the ACA is replaced. They are not three months away from bankruptcy if they lose a job. I was really disappointed with her during the campaign.

[Warpy]

110. My defense of them is that they have a right to be as loony left as they want.

After all, they're a far tinier minority than the crackpot far right.

[guillaumeb]

111. True. I defend their right to have an opinion,

even as I disagree with their proposed plan of action.

[BainsBane]

121. Wishing suffering on the poor and oppressed

for the entertainment of the wealthy and privileged is evil. How many people must suffer and die for the self involved to feel good about the misery of others?

We are dealing with people with a stunning level of ignorance combined with a narcissism and sociopathy that enables them to wish ill on others for their own enjoyment. That are every bit as repugnant as the KKK and NeoNazis they align themselves with.

We stood at a key historical juncture and they refused to stand up to fascism. Now they defend their enablement of that fascism by claiming their efforts to spread misery and poverty "awaken" people. Only they are the ones who are asleep, stunningly ignorant and evil to the core. They demonstrate precisely how someone like Hitler could come to power. They enable and promote fascism and authoritarianism. That makes them fascists. They can rot in hell.

[guillaumeb]

123. I do not know if enjoyment is the correct word.

But narcissism definitely applies. As well as shortsightedness and lack of empathy.

[BainsBane]

124. Whatever it is

They promote suffering, racism, and further inequality for their own benefit. That is evil.

[hunter]

126. I'm not going to defend them in any way. Not even Bernie Sanders.

My politics are left of all of them and my views as an environmentalist are extreme. I think Ralph Nader is a right center stooge.

Nevertheless my voting is practical. I'm proud to say I voted for Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Obama is one of the great Presidents of U.S. history. I say that even as I consider his politics slightly right of what I see as the center. But Obama represented this nation well. This nation is strongly right of center. Maybe forty percent of U.S. Americans are authoritarians who'd have coped without complaint had the Nazis won World War II, just like in Philip K. Dick's "Man in the High Castle." Ashes are falling today because they are burning the corpses of useless people at the hospital. No problem. They were dragging us down.

Hillary Clinton shares Obama's competence as a leader. She would have been a very competent U.S. President, worthy of my respect.

As for Trump, there's no way in hell I'm going to go hunting for ponies and unicorns in all that shit.

I'm thinking back to some of my misspent youth... I was an enthusiastic supporter of Jimmy Carter. I was also some kind of joyful skinny-dipping anti-nuclear-activist granola-eating hippie. That was when I began to notice those who wore all the trappings of the left, but just under the surface they were Ronald Reagan Republicans. The men did all the "real" work, the women stayed at home taking care of the kids and preparing vegetarian meals served precisely one hour after dad got home. They had black friends, Very Ozzie and Harriet, only the fashions were different, trading a white-shirt-and-tie for tiedye.

There is no defense for those sorts of tie dye leftism or innumerate environmentalism. On the axis of witless and authoritarian politics, that leftism curve really is a horseshoe where the leftist extremists draw closer to the right wingnut extremists.

I've zero patience for those who can't do the math but pretend they have done the math.

I don't regard Susan Sarandon or Jill Stein as allies.

[guillaumeb]

127. I also vote practically. A good way to describe it.

Along with realistically.

The main point of my post was to address the complacency of some voters who can only bother to vote in Presidential election years. A complacency that resulted in the 2010 and 2014 GOP wins.

[hunter]

133. I'm not that generous of heart.

The "complacency" of these voters who stay home is a direct consequence of their untested core beliefs.

It's the I'm not a racist, sexist, homomophobe, etc... BUT... crowd.

Evidently Obama appealed to them in a way Hillary Clinton did not and now we are all suffering that.

It's not something defensible.

[guillaumeb]

134. Or they feel that voting in Presidential elections is sufficient?

I do not understand the logic of it, but it is one of the components to consider.

[hunter]

135. Sufficient for what?

Anyone who was badmouthing Hillary Clinton, everyone who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary Clinton for some damned reason, well it's simple, they fucked up.

Now we must suffer Trump.

That's not to say the Republicans and Russians didn't play every dirty trick they could. We still ought to have beat them.

[guillaumeb]

136. True. But I was talking about the unfortunate tendency of some

Democrats to not vote in non-Presidential elections. Like 2010 and 2014. Voting has to be something that one does for every election.