The 2006 Connecticut Senate race proves that there will always be splinterists no matter what.

[LoZoccolo]

They threaten on forums like this one, saying that because they are not getting what they want, they will splinter.

But do they ever say what specific terms would get them not to splinter? I haven't seen it. I hear generalizations like "if they would adopt Nader's/Kucinich's platform" (which neither of them actually have to deliver on) "then I would vote for the Democrats".

My theory is that there is always a certain group of people who like to think themselves more righteous and intelligent than 97% of us, and will act not according to getting more of what they want, but according to what will make them feel that superiority.

My proof? A Green Party candidate, Ralph Ferrucci, ran for Senate against Lamont in 2006.

And my point? People who will never come through with the goods anyways will get ignored. But maybe that's the point; to enjoy the feeling of the superior genius outsider who no one understands. They have a reason to want to lose.

NOTE: If you are going to allege that I supported Lieberman in this race, please respect the other members of Democratic Underground and come prepared with some proof. No one has been able to establish it as yet.

[LoZoccolo]

1. I knew I was right.

:kick:

[arendt]

2. Hey, gnat gatcher. You missed the beam in your eye named Joe Lieberman...

This "splinterist" epithet you just made up to bash people -
why didn't it apply to "Independent" sore-loser ex-Democratic
candidate Joe Lieberman?

Why are you dredging up some asterix-percentaged nobody and
ignoringt Traitor Joe? Oh, maybe because the DLC still loves Joe.

This is a pathetic attempt, really. Give it up.

arendt

[LoZoccolo]

3. Because I'm addressing a specific argument that doesn't apply to centrist splinterists.

Did you even read the fine print at the bottom? Go do a search of my posts from that election which mention "Lieberman" if you want to find out what I thought of him.

[LoZoccolo]

4. Oh hey wait, you can't do an advanced search, because you didn't donate to DU.

OK then.

[ulysses]

5. what does someone's donation status have to do with anything?

[LoZoccolo]

6. It means they cannot do an advanced search.

Unless someone donated for them.

[ulysses]

8. yes, but why bring it up?

Not like I don't know, but I wonder if you'll come out and say it.

[Odin2005]

7. I call them the ideological purists. They would rather let the country go to hell then...

compromise even just a little bit. They do not understand that compromise is necessary for democracy to function, otherwise the body politic would break up into a bunch of tiny millitant factions trying to impose their ideals on the world by force, the end result being one of the factions defeating all the other factions and imposing a totalitarian state. All of these ideological purists are totalitarians at heart.

[skipos]

9. And Greens ran against Wellstone too. Hence the name...

G-etting
R-epublicans
E-lected
E-very
N-ovember