Home | About | Donate

For Democrats, So-Called ‘Purity Tests’ Can Be a Good Thing

#1

For Democrats, So-Called ‘Purity Tests’ Can Be a Good Thing

Alan MacLeod

The Democratic primaries are heating up. One notable feature of the race is the strong presence of progressive candidates — which has many in the establishment wing of the party worried.

Former president Barack Obama, whose moderate vice president Joe Biden is now in the race, recently decried the alleged “purity tests” he saw on the left. Obama worried that an “obsessive” ideological fanaticism was setting the party up for failure.

#2

Obama is the perfect spokesman for the “purity tests are bad” posse.

His standard negotiating position was pre-capitulation, then moving even further toward his opponents’ position, and then adopting Repub policy wholesale. See Romneycare for your illustration.

So instead of having purity tests, Obama prefers having no firm positions whatsoever – unless he’s making a backroom deal with his corporate bosses. Then his position is “Yessir.”

4 Likes
#3

They won’t respect you until you really hurt them.

1 Like
#4

MacLeod sez:
“Obama worried that an ‘obsessive’ ideological fanaticism was setting the party up for failure.”

Ah, good. A lecture on “party failure” from the guy who engineered the Democratic™ shellackings of 2010, 2014 and 2016.

3 Likes
#5

I want to start a new trend of confronting all the Democratic Presidential contenders who seem to be in the race to stop Bernie Sanders, Here is an example of the message I sent to Seth Moulton.

Blockquote
I want to know who prompted Seth Moulton to get into the race for President. He knows he isn’t going to win. What does he expect to accomplish by being just one more Democratic office holder vying for the nomination? Certainly he has better things to do with his time. I am very suspicious of what is the payoff for him. The reward must be pretty big if he is willing to throw away his credibility just to do this.
Blockquote

We must start taking active measures to let these politicians know that there is a political price to pay for playing this game. We cannot wait to take revenge. We must stop this train wreck from occurring.

4 Likes
#6

What proof does Krugman offer to show that DamnocRats who don’t support a single-payer system
are NOT ‘industry shills’?

IMHO, anyone who DID attend the AIPAC conference should be required to register as an agent of a foreign government, and be voted out of office A.S.A.P.

3 Likes
#7

Purity schmurity; the word is standards.

1 Like
#8

or principles

2 Likes
#9

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
Mahatma Gandhi

#10

True for Sanders and others like Gabbard. But not true for Warren.

When are we going to start being honest about Warren? She has made it clear if she gets the nomination she’ll take all the money corporations want to give her. Some principle stand- NOT.

If a purity test is a good thing- then apply it to lying, hypocrite Warren.

Again, true for Sanders and others like Gabbard. But not for Warren. She’s for several things, a weasel, Kerryesque “I’m for it but for others things too.”

Again, she fails the purity test.

I’ve said this before, Warren is white, female Obama. I mean, my God, she thinks we need to green the Pentagon so it can be more effective in the American Imperial Project.

Warren: FAIL

1 Like
#11

The Purity test was, has been, and is being administered by the Party Elite. Bernie would have won, but he wasn’t working for the 1% so… they lied, cheated, obfuscated and stole to take it away and give us Trump

#12

Tulsi must be gaining traction. Did you see this?:

1 Like
#13

No, I hadn’t read that.

As someone who likes Redacted Tonight and Susan Sarandon and Stephen Cohen, that article boosts my reasoning to support her.

But to the “Maddow is our Megaphone Mouthpiece” insider, corporate, liberal interventionist establishment Democratic Party bubble, she always has been anathema since she spoke against war and against the DNC.

I wonder if “Goofy Grapes” is John F. O’Donnell? He hasn’t been on the show for a long time but is still in the credits. I’ve been wondering what’s going on with him.

1 Like
#14

Come what may, Tulsi should stick around long enough to get a feel for the lay of the land after Uncle Joe says something stupid, and Gillibrandless, Klobucharred, Beto-and-switch, Bookluster, and half a dozen others flame out.

She gave what I considered to be a contrived answer to Judy Woodruff on the NewsHour Friday when asked about why she isn’t supporting Bernie. Otherwise, she gave a good interview.

And is Maddow relevant beyond an aging cable TV audience drawn to Biden?

#15

I didn’t hear the Newshour interview on Friday. But I’ve heard her answer before and her answers before weren’t contrived sounding to me. She simply said that she’s running because of her concern about these regime change wars she’s against and she chose to run before Bernie did. She didn’t say anything negative about Bernie, even though the interviewer kept fishing to get her too. She talked about why she is running, not why she’s running against Bernie.