Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Democratic party needs to embrace open competition for leadership of the party. [View all]Just give it to Hogg
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
76 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The Democratic party needs to embrace open competition for leadership of the party. [View all]
Yavin4
Jan 16
OP
It's not always good. Hard to find the positives in Ted Kennedy's 1980 challenge to President Carter.
tritsofme
Jan 16
#1
Right you are, and for those who are too young to remember, Carter's defeat led to the most Right Wing lurch with
msfiddlestix
Jan 17
#57
I agree 100%. Just because he has gray hair and some years under his belt doesn't mean he's a dinosaur.
BComplex
Jan 17
#14
Competition opens the soft underbelly to dilution of the brand and ideology
bucolic_frolic
Jan 16
#3
LOL! I blame the ones who wanted to "punish" the party by not voting rather than voting for the BEST candidate.
Oopsie Daisy
Jan 16
#8
I'm telling like it is. In addition to the "saboteurs" who chose self-harm to prove their piety...
Oopsie Daisy
Jan 17
#15
It's incorrect to call it annointing. In the real world, WINNING and gaining the MAJORITY are of the utmost importance.
Oopsie Daisy
Jan 17
#24
You keep talking as if the party hasn't been doing exactly what you're saying for years now.
Yavin4
Jan 17
#41
So, more competition in primaries is akin to "Shitting on Democrats and bad-mouthing our party"
Yavin4
Jan 17
#47
Any politician worth his or her salt should be able to easily defeat a primary challenger.
Yavin4
Jan 17
#60
As I've said being "worth one's salt" does not mean endless supplies of cash.
Oopsie Daisy
Jan 17
#62
You don't stand for anything by allowing the principles of the party to be destroyed.
bucolic_frolic
Jan 17
#18
The strategy of "let's suppress younger leaders and then get mad when young people don't vote for us"
Yavin4
Jan 17
#42
Nobody is doing that. That's nobody's "strategy" and saying it is only HURTS DEMOCRATS.
Oopsie Daisy
Jan 17
#55
What principles would be destroyed by opening the leadership competition to younger Dems?
TheRickles
Jan 17
#51
Good lord. Why spend time depleting the campaign funds of incumbents so that they can be out spent by Republicans?
Oopsie Daisy
Jan 16
#6
Educating them DOES work. Why would anyone be opposed to educating the voting populace?
Oopsie Daisy
Jan 17
#56
I feel like I need to get out my BINGO CARD when threads and posts like this one come around.
Oopsie Daisy
Jan 17
#35
It may be worth considering the immediate future of the other party in the short term.
taxi
Jan 17
#16
Relying on the Republican Party to screw up and consequently winning by default seems to have been the Democratic
Midwestern Democrat
Jan 19
#74
The failure of your rationale here is believing that it was Schumer/Pelosi that prevented anyone else from running...
W_HAMILTON
Jan 17
#43
The fact that Obama became the nominee in 2008 shows that the process is at least somewhat open
karynnj
Jan 17
#32
The best way to get "people willing to do whatever it takes to fucking WIN" is through competitive primaries.
Yavin4
Jan 17
#38
We need a leader who will take the leadership away from the left-wing media.
everyonematters
Jan 17
#64