Jump to content
ExPDXer

We Are Indivisible

Recommended Posts

Seems reasonable, if everyone agrees.

 

https://pledge.indivisible.org/

 

These candidates have signed the pledge below (yay!):

 

Booker, Buttigieg,Castro, Harris, Insley, Klobuchar, Sanders, & Warren

 

The following candidates have NOT signed the pledge below:

 

Biden, Delaney, Gabbard, Gillibrand, Hickenlooper, Moulton, O’Rourke, Swallwell,  & Yang

 

 

We must defeat Donald Trump, I pledge to:

Make the primary constructive. I’ll respect the other candidates and make the primary election about inspiring voters with my vision for the future.

Rally behind the winner. I’ll support the ultimate Democratic nominee, whoever it is — period. No Monday morning quarterbacking. No third-party threats. Immediately after there’s a nominee, I’ll endorse.

 

Do the work to beat Trump. I will do everything in my power to make the Democratic Nominee the next President of the United States. As soon as there is a nominee, I will put myself at the disposal of the campaign

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ExPDXer said:

 

These candidates have signed the pledge below (yay!):

 

Booker, Buttigieg,Castro, Harris, Insley, Klobuchar, Sanders, & Warren

 

The following candidates have NOT signed the pledge below:

 

Biden, Delaney, Gabbard, Gillibrand, Hickenlooper, Moulton, O’Rourke, Swallwell,  & Yang

 

 

Can we say the latter group hasn't signed it yet? Maybe they will sign, in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, laripu said:

 

Can we say the latter group hasn't signed it yet? Maybe they will sign, in time.

Yes we can. This is where it stands as of now. As candidates sign the pledge, or violate their pledge,  I will update this thread.

 

 

And diamonds... maybe diamonds actually hate girls....😀  Will stone get excavated, or indicted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last two seem like obvious requirements.  But, that first one, "make the primary constructive", seems awfully subjective.  Does that mean no criticism of the other candidates?  I can see how some of the candidates (front-runners with long track records) would appreciate this protection more than others (challengers).  If there's a valid reason not to select someone as the candidate, shouldn't the other candidates bring that up?   Shouldn't we hear their response?  Or, do we pretend the issue doesn't exist and wait for the Republicans to bring it up?

 

I'm thinking this pledge allows for some reasonable challenges, but opinions on what's 'reasonable' will vary widely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ExPDXer said:

And diamonds... maybe diamonds actually hate girls....😀  Will stone get excavated, or indicted?

 

:D  He was arrested last January following a raid and an indictment form the Mueller investigation.  Stone presents an interesting paradox:  how can a Stone crawl out from under a rock? I'd forgotten about him until you brought it up. His trial starts November 5th, this year. Plenty of time for Trump to renege on any offers of pardon.

 

7 minutes ago, Renegade said:

The last two seem like obvious requirements.  But, that first one, "make the primary constructive", seems awfully subjective.  Does that mean no criticism of the other candidates?  I can see how some of the candidates (front-runners with long track records) would appreciate this protection more than others (challengers).

 

You make a good point. But there's different kinds of criticism. It can be:

 

1. "My colleague is well intentioned, but I think policies are both too expensive and not as efficient and targeted as they could be. Let me explain mine...."

 

or

 

2. "If you elect her president she will bankrupt the country! None of her impossible idealistic fantasies will ever become reality! She lives in a dream world of her own making, not anywhere near Main Street.."

 

I prefer #1, but #2 is more entertaining to people that don't care much about details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, laripu said:

You make a good point. But there's different kinds of criticism. It can be:

 

1. "My colleague is well intentioned, but I think policies are both too expensive and not as efficient and targeted as they could be. Let me explain mine...."

or

2. "If you elect her president she will bankrupt the country! None of her impossible idealistic fantasies will ever become reality! She lives in a dream world of her own making, not anywhere near Main Street.."

 

I prefer #1, but #2 is more entertaining to people that don't care much about details. 

I view it as a guardrail, or deterrent against truly destructive negative campaigning.They say all is fair in politics, but there is a limit, at least as far as personal attacks against other candidates, or their supporters. Policy differences should be debated vigorously,  then let the primary voters decide based on the issues. I can dream, can't I?

 

 

2 hours ago, laripu said:

 

:D  He was arrested last January following a raid and an indictment form the Mueller investigation.  Stone presents an interesting paradox:  how can a Stone crawl out from under a rock? I'd forgotten about him until you brought it up. His trial starts November 5th, this year. Plenty of time for Trump to renege on any offers of pardon.

Nov 5th? He's not allowed to talc about the case until then.

Crawl? He's more like a rolling Stone. Despite his faults, I think everybody must get Stone.

 

I have not hit rock bottom yet. I dug up some more puns that are not too dirty…

 

Why did the tectonic plates break up? It wasn’t her fault, but there was just too much friction between them, and he took her for granite.

What do you do with dead geologists? You barium.

Why was the sedimentary rock extra cheap? Because it was on shale.

What do rocks eat? Pom-a-granites.

Did you hear about the geologist who went to jail? He was charged with basalt and battery.

What did the geologist say when his doctor said he needed a colon exam? No Frackin' way!

Why are geologists great dates? They are very sedimental.

Why was the sedimentary rock so cheap? It was always on shale.

What did Darth Vader tell the geologist? May the quartz be with you!

.Why are geologists great dates? They can make your bedrock.

Did you hear about the geologist who got divorced?

He was taking his wife for granite, so she left him.

Why is the world so diverse? Because it contains alkynes of people.

 I really hate rock puns. My sediments exactly.

 What did the gold say to the pyrite? You’re a fool and a fake!

What do you call a benzene ring where the iron atoms replacing all of the carbon atoms? A ferrous wheel.

What did the diamond say to its friend copper? Nothing, silly, minerals don’t talc!

What is black, purple, blue, yellow and white? Sugilite, sardonyx and opal all fighting over a gumball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ExPDXer said:

I have not hit rock bottom yet.

 

Great work, I enjoyed them all. :)

 

Here's an old one of mine:  "A person with an iron will cannot have a heart of gold... because that would be mixing a metalphor."

(The l is bolded to unprotect the dimocent.)

 

An then there's the flowchart below from this site.

 

Democrats-flowchart-e1553199797428.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated....Seems to be catching on quickly.

 

These candidates have signed the pledge below (yay!):

 

Booker, Buttigieg,Castro, Gillibrand, Harris,Hickenlooper, Insley, Klobuchar, Ryan, Sanders, & Warren

 

The following candidates have NOT (yet) signed the pledge below:

 

Biden, Delaney, Gabbard, Moulton, O’Rourke, Swallwell,  & Yang

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ExPDXer said:

Updated....Seems to be catching on quickly.

 

These candidates have signed the pledge below (yay!):

 

Booker, Buttigieg,Castro, Gillibrand, Harris,Hickenlooper, Insley, Klobuchar, Ryan, Sanders, & Warren

 

The following candidates have NOT (yet) signed the pledge below:

 

Biden, Delaney, Gabbard, Moulton, O’Rourke, Swallwell,  & Yang

 

I bet they all will sign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, laripu said:

You make a good point. But there's different kinds of criticism. It can be:

 

What about Biden's record with women?  Biden & Sanders' age?  Harris' criminal justice record?  Booker's ties to the pharmaceutical industry?  I'm sure every candidate has something in their history (or else they can be criticized as inexperienced, untested, and unproven).

 

These types of criticism are not positive.  They don't inspire anyone.  But, maybe we need to talk about the dirty issues before we get to the general election?  Maybe they're relevant in deciding who we want to get the nomination?   

 

Those who get hit with even the mildest criticism will point to the pledge and say: "You promised..."  And then they'll launch their own attacks.  I just don't think that first pledge point is realistic, desirable, or precise enough to be meaningful.  

 

But, it doesn't hurt anything.  Maybe they'll be a bit more positive and uplifting in their messages.  That would be a good thing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Renegade said:

 

What about Biden's record with women?  Biden & Sanders' age?  Harris' criminal justice record?  Booker's ties to the pharmaceutical industry?  I'm sure every candidate has something in their history (or else they can be criticized as inexperienced, untested, and unproven).

 

These types of criticism are not positive.  They don't inspire anyone.  But, maybe we need to talk about the dirty issues before we get to the general election?  Maybe they're relevant in deciding who we want to get the nomination?   

 

Those who get hit with even the mildest criticism will point to the pledge and say: "You promised..."  And then they'll launch their own attacks.  I just don't think that first pledge point is realistic, desirable, or precise enough to be meaningful.  

 

But, it doesn't hurt anything.  Maybe they'll be a bit more positive and uplifting in their messages.  That would be a good thing.  

 

I agree with you about the subjective nature of Item #1 "Make the primary constructive". If i could rewrite 'rules' for a constructive primary, it would be addressing The DNC's failure as an honest broker. I would have the Tom Perez and top DNC members sign a pledge not to engage in any 'thumb on the scale' activities, and maintain radio silence throughout the primaries.

 

All in all, this is a subjective pledge, signed by politicians on the honor system, with no official referee, or penalties. I have no illusions.

 

Some things are not subjective, though. Iowa, and Nevada caucuses were fraught with problems..

 

Here is Sen. Boxer making the Nevada caucus constructive, and encouraging voter participation in our democracy!

.Screen-Shot-2016-05-23-at-1.19.52-PM.png

 

However...there are 2 things I really like about this Indivisible Pledge

Immediately after there’s a nominee, I’ll endorse.

Nothing ambiguous, or subjective about that! If all candidates agree, this takes the issue off the table for 2020. The nominee will immediately get many endorsements of (varying conviction) after the convention. Back when there was only 2-3 candidates, it was considered a 'norm' to endorse. With 19-20 candidates, it needed to be formalized.

 

As soon as there is a nominee, I will put myself at the disposal of the campaign

I would be more specific like, "I will use all leftover campaign funds for (post-primary) media buys encouraging my supporters to vote during the General Election."

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U all know that it's a long long way until the primary's start. We've all heard the rhetoric that sounds nice. I do think folks are really interested in policy measures this time around.

We got to demand discussion on all the important issues. The plan to address climate change, and a frank discussion about the economics behind any policy measures. Same thing regarding healthcare, SS, job creation, education, and yes, taxation. 

How would a financial transaction tax work, who would pay, and approximately how much revenue would be raised. Etc...

 

It's early, there's plenty of time to study up. Remember, most of these candidates are US Senators so they ought to know quite a lot about all of these issues. That should all equate to very meaningful discussions during every debate and almost no name calling - you know, like the Republican primary debates produced.

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...