Democrats used to stand for principles

[MADem]

90. Have you not been reading what I write?

I do not endorse/approve/like/enjoy the fact that we live in a CITIZEN'S UNITED world, but that IS the world in which we live. You want it overturned? It won't happen if Jeb Bush becomes the next president. His Supreme Court picks will make DNRs a crime and abortion illegal, if he gets his way.

If you want a candidate to prevail, the way to do it is not to crab about other candidates, but get off those collective butts and start beating the CU people at their own game. That takes WORK. Not talk, WORK. Fundraising. Organization. Development of a ground game and a fifty state strategy. Identification of deep pocketed donors, and wooing of same. Not sitting in front of a keyboard crying like Rodney Dangerfield about how the national party doesn't give you any respect. You don't "get" respect--you have to earn it, and you earn it with productivity, not gripes.

I don't see much if any pushing of alternative candidates here, aside from the odd posting of a link when the desired nominee does something, like introduce a bill accompanied by a lot of Yay!! and WOOO! and "That's what we need!" but not a word about how to get from wishing-and-hoping to a candidate behind the podium. Saying "Harrumph!!! Money in politics is BAAAD!!!!" like people don't KNOW that already isn't helpful, either. I mean, DUUHHH. But we're not going to fix it by wagging fingers, and if we "opt out" of the system, we -- the Democratic Party, I mean -- LOSE.

I also see a lot of energy directed AGAINST one undeclared candidate to the point of absurdity. All this does is harden the resolve of supporters, it's not a mind-changing game at all, particularly given all the rudeness and derision and snide shit that some claim is "satire" when it's just poorly crafted snark. More to the point, though, I don't see any meet-ups, fundraisers, anything on those lines for these desired candidates--just a load of complaining. Complaining doesn't win elections--organization and outreach does.

And if you think money doesn't mean anything, you're wrong. Smart candidates gauge their strength through fundraising with dollar limits--small contributions from many are worth far more than a big contribution from one person, because those small donations represent VOTES. If you get ten ten dollar donations from ten citizens in Town X, you know that you'll get at LEAST ten votes in that town. That little shit Nader played that game, Howard Dean did it to very good effect, Obama WON with it, and the RFH crew is doing it now. It's a way of testing the commitment outside the usual -- and increasingly unreliable -- polling paradigm.