Truly, the only way to escape this is to stop playing the "who you think can win" game, and just vote for who "want" to win. But most people won't do that, because they are too afraid of ending up with the alternative.
And with very good reason, because in 1984 and 1988, Democrats nominated the guys who were so single-mindedly devoted to advancing our principles that they didn't give a damn whether they were electable or not. The result of us voting for our principles, at the expense of worrying about our candidates' electability, was a second term of Reagan and the first (and only) term of Bush Sr. To be honest, since I'm in no rush to see the White House go back to the Republicans, I HOPE you guys will vote for who you WANT to win, without worrying about whether they CAN win, so that we can score a second term of Obama (and possibly even a first term of his Democratic successor).
Here's a funny joke ...
Q: What do you call someone who declares a "moral victory"? A: The loser.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 30/11/10 19:50 (UTC)And with very good reason, because in 1984 and 1988, Democrats nominated the guys who were so single-mindedly devoted to advancing our principles that they didn't give a damn whether they were electable or not. The result of us voting for our principles, at the expense of worrying about our candidates' electability, was a second term of Reagan and the first (and only) term of Bush Sr. To be honest, since I'm in no rush to see the White House go back to the Republicans, I HOPE you guys will vote for who you WANT to win, without worrying about whether they CAN win, so that we can score a second term of Obama (and possibly even a first term of his Democratic successor).
Here's a funny joke ...
Q: What do you call someone who declares a "moral victory"?
A: The loser.