General Discussion

Maybe I have the wrong idea of what is meant by purity tests.

Though, leave it to RW apologist Welker to lob such a question (like Holt's 'soul-searching BS asked of Biden) at Booker. And one which Booker might have answered better.

What I think a purity test means is one insisting that a candidate checks every single box. There is no such thing as the perfect candidate for everyone.

In the primaries, you vote for the closest match, but then you stick with whoever prevails, whether or not she or he supported your particular niche enough to your satisfaction.

Because your protest vote, or no vote, is a vote for the other side. And I'd think by now we'd have learned that.

So if that's what it means, I'd have to agree with the first part of his statement.

But certainly NOT with that 'transcend traditional party lines and the left-versus-right divide' comment.

Because the divide is far too great, too fundamental in nature. Because there's too much at stake.

You don't transcend, reach out, compromise with principles, policies, and ideology you know are repugnantly, abhorrently unacceptable.

And you don't compromise with a cult that you know is hell bent on your... 'obliteration' (to coin a term).