by Green Party and other third party voters.

So what are you doing?

I joyfully voted for both of them. But this seems like a really distasteful purity test that says if someone wasn't as joyful as I was but voted for them and is a loyal enough Democrat to be here, that's not enough and you want to "unmask" them for some reason.

Seems like the worst kind of purity test, designed to alienate our own people. Seems like shit stirring.

In this forum the answer should be No and no one should be threatened by the question.

Nor do I care if anyone who did was joyful or not. No need for anyone to take this personally.

what your poll is asking.

If I'm wrong about that, then what IS your poll asking?

Also, noticing and disliking shit stirring does not equal "taking it personally."

if people agree with an accusation made against two of the Democratic Party’s presidential nominees. I expect most don’t.

which everyone is free to ignore.

This thread serves zero purpose to unite Democrats.

The results were clear

She was the chair of the DNC during the primary.

to rehash the 16 primaries?

BTW Debbie Wasserman Schultz was the DNC chair during the primaries. After she stepped down Brazille stepped in for the convention and election.

Seems like shit stirring aimed at people who all voted for them both.

this shouldn’t be controversial. A no vote should be obvious.

Why?

Again, seems like shit stirring.

This shouldn’t be divisive in a forum dedicated to supporting democrats.

This is a purity test.

It says that those whose voting decision may not have been as uncomplicated as yours or mine need to somehow be exposed as bad Democrats.

It's shit stirring.

I’m not the one trying to pick a fight.

Do you feel you have "exposed" something? Do you doubt that person's loyalty to the party?

Should we banish them and tell them their vote for our candidates is not the right kind of vote and is therefore not good enough for us?

Stop shit stirring.

They have a right to their opinion. Even if the rest of us disagree.

Just as you, or anyone else, is required to vote in the poll.

But you agree the accusation that Clinton and Harris were the “lesser of two evils” is ridiculous.

you can't answer my questions without being ridiculous.

Have a nice day.

And again, I’m not required to answer your question. Just as you are not required to answer any I might ask.

or:were Biden and Gore the lesser of two evils.

I think it helps illustrate why this poll is problematic.


It reminds me of push polling which is a form of propaganda so often used on the far right.

about all three plus Bill Clinton in the past. However, since the Supreme Court decision yesterday have heard it mainly said against Clinton and Harris, who both lost to Trump.

Might as well poll - "Do you think we're awesome?" (to which I would answer no, because sometimes you just want to go with chaos)

Loyalty enforcement is so tedious. But it's weirder when people take it upon themselves. Volunteering to keep others in line when no one asked is a personality trait that is . . . not admirable.

That would make a great poll that no one here should be threatened by.

But in the wider world, discontent is very much a thing that exists.

So, to tack on to the other poster, what is the purpose? You'll never wrangle people who vote for Democrats at large - it's too diverse a group with too varied motivations. What if someone actually said, "They weren't great candidates, but I still voted for them." Then what? We browbeat them into believing that they were? Past candidates who are unlikely to run again? We must declare post-election loyalty and admiration for non-candidates? What, exactly, are you taking the temperature on? Sufficient enthusiasm? And what if it's found wanting?

Sometimes you can get a vote without admiration. Demand for both is an investment in an individual's personality and persona that is unbecoming in a democratic society. I find some of the . . . overly effusive affection for the powerful a little distasteful, to be honest. They're servants - not celebrities. I don't have to like them or believe they were the best we can do. But I will vote for who I think is better of the viable options. Just like I'm currently doing in California.

The only other motivation I can fathom for this bit of shit stirring is to measure for purity here, in this space. This isn't the first instance of, "One person decides they will monitor, measure, and report what makes and who is a Good Democrat," which is a penchant that is frankly very weird.

Why that's anyone's self-appointed job is totally beyond me. I don't think "Making sure Democrats in an expressly Democratic space are the Democratiest Democrats who ever Democratted," is screamingly productive. But we may be having very different Thursday mornings. I'm currently procrastinating on midterm studying.

You are free to assign any motivation to my intentions that you like. But in the end that is all you.

Have a good day.

How should it be worded?

Who was the better candidate?

Is this the same thing yet not painting it with a negative?

that by nominating Clinton and then Harris the Democratic Party was asking them to vote for the “lesser of two evils”. The answer should be obvious.

If I vote that I didn't vote for Hillary and Kamala because they were the lesser of 2 evils does that mean that I can't ever criticize them?

Democrats are human beings, they aren't perfect. I criticized something that Chuck Schumer did but I would still vote for him if I lived in New York.

What do you think about my suggestion that Democrats should nominate a non-politician for president in 2028? Take politics right out of the equation, no debates over moderates v progressives, just nominate someone who is a fighter. I suggested Miles Taylor and Malcolm Nance.
Is this blasphemy? Should I be alerted on suggesting this?

And you are free to support or criticize anyone who wish. No one is saying that you are not.

so that makes your poll moot. Surges for Krasnov on election day only in the battleground states are not just coincidences.

I say that Kamala and Democrats did nothing wrong in the last election, your poll insinuates they did something wrong.

No my poll doesn't insinuate anything. Just a simple yes or no question about an accusation that has been made against them. 9

It's a simple yes or no question. Shouldn't be controversial in a forum for supporting democrats.

have been saying democrats are to blame for yesterday’s Supreme Court decision because they nominated candidates who were the “lesser of two evils”. In 16, Susan Sarandon and Eddie Glaude made this claim. I wanted some reassurance and came here for it. I don’t understand why some found it so controversial.

which is why I came here to get reassurance from allies.

I was under the wrong assumption that this is another claim that progressives are the problem in our party. Sorry if I misread your intentions.

I never thought progressives are the problem. I think we need more like AOC.

Used to justify their Trump vote. These were mostly pure libertarians. Obviously Trump has been a libertarians nightmare. So, yeah, Hillary and Harris were obviously the lesser of the two evils. Indeed, it was obvious on election day yet many anti-government types bleeding the assignment not once, not twice, but three times now.

How about we attack republicans instead of democrats. Just a suggestion.

I never considered either Harris or Clinton or any democratic nominee the "lesser of two evils" nor have I ever heard any democrat make that accusation. But that is the standard response of green party and other third party voters.

... Harris never stood a chance after the mishandled transfer of power. Biden suggested during the primaries that he would probably be a one term President. There had to have been a better way to have ease Harris in than what happened.

Their student loan policies alone would have made a world of difference to me and literally tens of millions of others.

And even if you are a moron and think that you were being forced to choose between """the lesser of two evils""" if you voted for them, you have to be a REALLY stupid fucking moron to think that letting the greater evil (Trump and his MAGA Republicans) win would somehow be the better option.

to see all the no votes.