On Party Switching (Clark or whoever)

[Northwind]

Much is being made the last few days about Clark's one-time votes for Republican candidates, his speaking at their fundraisers, and so on. Many people are blowing it very far out of proportion, acting as if a vote for a Republican at any time in one's life makes one irredeemable. This is, as they say, bullshit.

Clark is not my favored candidate, and in fact I do not think he would make a good President, but who he voted for in 1984 is something I care nothing about. The fund raising I admit to being a little more leery of, but it really is not that important. To all those who act as if it makes him a GOP operative or an irredeemable scumbag, let me just say this:

Jim Jeffords

As I recall, when Jeffords dumped the GOP and aligned bureaucratically with the Dems, he was hailed as a great hero. No one acted like he was a GOP plant or an attempt to disenfranchise the little guy.

Therefore, stop the freakin' hypocrisy. If it was ok, indeed, it was considered a brave and wonderful thing, for Jeffords to do it, why is it not ok for Clark? A man can change, a man can realize he's made mistakes and try to amend them. Let it go.

Disclaimer: If it can be shown (which would be difficult) that Clark was in fact a true, registered Republican who only switched parties because he knew the GOP would not nominate anyone but Bush, rather than switching out of a real change of heart, then he is an opportunistic dungball and should be shown the door marked 'out".

[Robbien]

1. There is already a thread on Clark voting Republican

This is a duplicate.

[Northwind]

2. There are many threads about it, and this is not a duplicate

This is an opinion piece coupled with an admonishment meant to put all the debate in some perspective.

It was started anew outside of other threads in order that the comments not be lost amidst the endless flame-fest of the aforementioned threads.

[Tinoire]

3. 2 things

1. Jim Jeffords is not running for the Democratic Presidential nomination.

2. Jim Jeffords has an established track record, both as a Republican and as a Democrat, that we can scrutinize and judge.


Jim Jeffords did not register as a Democrat 25 days ago with a truckload of shady associations right within a few short weeks of having pandered to the Republicans to get on the their ticket.

Jim Jeffors has been more action than words and you know which one speaks louder.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=423043

[lcordero]

4. Jim Jeffords is still an independent

I also would like to add that Jim Jeffords took a PRINCIPLED stand where he could lose a lot. I'll be glad to accept him anyday.

I will not vote for somebody that I perceive as changing depending on which way the wind is blowing on a given day.

No thank you.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

5. *This is just an opinion.*

It didn't take a brain surgeon to realize that Reagan was a bad thing for this country. Voting for him twice, especially after the PCH drivel in the 1984 debate, can be considered dereliction of duty as a voter.

Those two votes say volumes about how one processes information. I'll throw the first vote away. The second defies all logic.

[Northwind]

6. Good points here

What bothers me is not those who have a well-reasoned gripe about Clark that is partially about his recent switch. As I said in my disclaimer, if he really did just switch in order to run, that is a problem, but I just find it hypocritical to revile one person for switching while praising another. Very few people warbling about this issue are making any sort of good argument, they are simply screaming for his head because he voted Republican a long time ago.

[UTUSN]

7. Well, Have Never Switched and Never Will

and, as for accepting those who do, somebody like BROCK who make a VERY believable switch, well alrighty then. Somebody else, well, I'll TAKE 'em as long as we see how far we go along together. But there IS a question: If somebody is a die hard party regular, working their tails off for life, why should somebody WALTZ in and expect equal status, ehhhhhh? We all want to help and with whoever can help, but PARTIES are for SOME reason, no?

[The Magistrate]

8. A Small Point, Sir

The other party has rather made hay out of persons switching parties: a large portion of their Dixie delegations are former Democrats. These people and their supporters are not given the third degree but welcomed with open arms. Treat defectors well; you are more likely then to get more of them....

[UTUSN]

9. Good Point, But----------Dues, Dues, Dues Also Count n/t

[WilliamPitt]

10. As ever

The Magistrate speaks sense.