Bumping into this again.
This, of course, is bullshit. The page that posted it also linked to a Mother Jones article written by Erika Eichelberger, who failed in her reporting as well. In context, with my emphasis in italics in the excerpt.
Let's establish once again that votes are earned, not "siphoned off". To believe this logical fallacy, you would have to believe another one, that voting populations are zero sum. So that's pretty much the end of that argument. But in the comments at the Facebook page, you will see several folks invoking the very stubborn urban legend that Ralph Nader cost Al Gore the 2000 election.
It makes me sad when I see Democrats so afraid of Republicans and losing elections that they go home and kick the cat, so to speak.
So I offered some thoughts on that page, and they promptly deleted them and blocked me. Then they came over to my blog's Facebook page -- where I had the same comments up -- and posted this.
As some of you may know, I was a delegate to the Texas Democratic Party convention, and I did vote in both their primary and their runoff, so by every legal definition of the word, I am a Democrat. The problem for Democrats -- as you have probably already figured out -- is not just that I don't swallow the party line, it's that I also offer a lot of criticism to Democrats about how they conduct themselves, handle their campaigns, what they stand for, and so on. This genuinely irritates some people.
As a reminder, I consider myself an independent progressive. It's accurate to describe me as an activist in both parties. I am more committed to progressive philosophy than I am partisan politics. So their blocking me on their page has more to do with their hostility to having their thinking challenged than it does their little rules, or anything else for that matter. I will acknowledge that the label I have applied to myself creates a lot of cognitive dissonance in partisans, and furthermore that I make no attempt to ameliorate their discomfort.
But for the sake of what happened in this particular disagreement, let's review what "the Democrats" wrote: two logical fallacies, one unprovable premise,one now two several ad hominems, including one calling me an 'ignorant teabagger'. Hilarious.
That's just no way to get independents and progressives to vote for you, Dems. And I'm pretty sure that you don't have any votes to lose in 2014, in Texas or almost anywhere else in the country. And let's also be clear about the verb being used here: you're losing them. They are not being taken away from you.
Update: Socratic Gadfly wades in with some additional inconvenient truths.
This, of course, is bullshit. The page that posted it also linked to a Mother Jones article written by Erika Eichelberger, who failed in her reporting as well. In context, with my emphasis in italics in the excerpt.
If Keister's plan had succeeded, it could have helped Reed—the Northeast regional chairman of the NRCC—by putting on the ballot a progressive candidate who would likely draw votes away from his expected Democratic opponent, county legislator Martha Robertson. But Keister messed up: Because he filed the Robbins petition late and got the other Green Party member's address wrong, neither Green will appear on the ballot for the June primary or the November general election, according to New York election officials.
Let's establish once again that votes are earned, not "siphoned off". To believe this logical fallacy, you would have to believe another one, that voting populations are zero sum. So that's pretty much the end of that argument. But in the comments at the Facebook page, you will see several folks invoking the very stubborn urban legend that Ralph Nader cost Al Gore the 2000 election.
It makes me sad when I see Democrats so afraid of Republicans and losing elections that they go home and kick the cat, so to speak.
So I offered some thoughts on that page, and they promptly deleted them and blocked me. Then they came over to my blog's Facebook page -- where I had the same comments up -- and posted this.
Baby Boomers and Senior Citizens Against Republicans & The Tea Party Brains and Eggs - We removed you from our page, as it clearly states at the top of our page that we are a "DEMOCRAT ONLY" page, and that we ban trolls. You claim to be progressive? Good luck with that one. Your arguments are comparable to Republican trolls. The only one you are fooling is yourself.
As some of you may know, I was a delegate to the Texas Democratic Party convention, and I did vote in both their primary and their runoff, so by every legal definition of the word, I am a Democrat. The problem for Democrats -- as you have probably already figured out -- is not just that I don't swallow the party line, it's that I also offer a lot of criticism to Democrats about how they conduct themselves, handle their campaigns, what they stand for, and so on. This genuinely irritates some people.
As a reminder, I consider myself an independent progressive. It's accurate to describe me as an activist in both parties. I am more committed to progressive philosophy than I am partisan politics. So their blocking me on their page has more to do with their hostility to having their thinking challenged than it does their little rules, or anything else for that matter. I will acknowledge that the label I have applied to myself creates a lot of cognitive dissonance in partisans, and furthermore that I make no attempt to ameliorate their discomfort.
But for the sake of what happened in this particular disagreement, let's review what "the Democrats" wrote: two logical fallacies, one unprovable premise,
That's just no way to get independents and progressives to vote for you, Dems. And I'm pretty sure that you don't have any votes to lose in 2014, in Texas or almost anywhere else in the country. And let's also be clear about the verb being used here: you're losing them. They are not being taken away from you.
Update: Socratic Gadfly wades in with some additional inconvenient truths.
9 comments:
Woohoo!
I've said it before (maybe too many times): The Dems and the Greens have won the same number of elections for statewide office between 1996 and today. ZERO.
That goes for years in which the Greens were on the ballot and years in which they weren't.
Most importantly, however, I simply don't support most of the Dems' decisions once they assume higher office. The corporate party have corporate results.
As you well know, as far to the left as I consider myself to be -- hell, I'll proudly answer to 'socialist' -- I'm still to the right of you.
And the actual socialists that I know laugh at me when I say that I'm a socialist, so there's that.
It's just not much relief to my Democratic friends, despite the money I've given to and the blocks I've walked for Wendy Davis this cycle.
Eh, fuck 'em. I'm going to a Green fundraiser this weekend for Kendrick and Salinas, so they'll just have to be mad about that as well.
As for the one actual complaint? Why shouldn't Greens accept occasional Republican help? Both "main" parties make it hard enough to get on the ballot anyway.
If Dems don't like it, they can help more Libertarians get on the ballot.
==
And, given that Kendrick is viable and sensical, I might just need to send him a few dinero myself.
Also, I think I ran across some of Katy's blogging years ago, over the Trig Palin stuff.
I halfway down the road backed off the idea that Mama Bear Palin was faking a pregnancy. That said, I do seriously wonder if somebody besides Papa Bear Todd is the daddy, and that's why she had to give birth only in Wasilla.
You guys really need to click over to my blog's Facebook page. Now they're calling me an "ignorant teabagger". Is that funny or what?
As you'll see, I commented on your original post there, and your new blog post link.
Speaking of, how much extra traffic does that drive your way, having a FB site?
Oh, not much. Five or ten unique hits a day is all. It just passed fifty on the two posts together there, though.
That's a little goose.
As you can see, I couldn't help but jump in: http://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2014/10/smackdown-green-vs-democrat-brouhaha.html
Post a Comment