Isn’t getting all these candidates primaried just a form of purity tests? It’s a good form, but still seems to be one. After all why are you trying to primary them if not because they’re not pure so to speak?
How is more Choice a purity test? No one should run unopposed. More choice is better. Especially in the primaries. It keeps people fighting for their seats And respecting Those they represent. Incumbents running without a challenge Quickly lose any concern or respect for Their constituents, and fall into the same old patterns of how can this benefit me.
We had plenty of purity test in the last presidential election. And that really didn’t work out for us. It certainly didn’t help either that the Democrats ultimately didn’t hold primaries and handled the whole situation so badly. But I think it’s pretty safe to say. That we wouldn’t have and Gestapo charging into the fields and businesses. Seizing non-citizens and citizens alike. Making them disappear. As well as the emboldened attacks on our lgbtq allies.
And literally if all we focus on is Purity tests. Not actually running people in the primaries to challenge these people who would fail the Purity test. How are things going to get better?
You seem to be using the phrase primaried radically different than I’ve ever seen it used before. The verb to primary someone typically means to Target them specifically for removal by supporting a candidate who more closely matches your ideals. If that doesn’t sound like a purity test I don’t know what does. We’re not talking about choice. You specifically said that you wanted to primary them. You want to Target them for removal, presumably for their blatant corruption and voting with fascists. I agree with 100%. However what is that if not a purity test? Frankly it’s a purity test I think should always be applied I expect all of my candidates to not be fascists. There’s nothing wrong with certain Purity tests.
Yes its a more general general usage. But it still stands. Power that is secure is power to corrupt. What better way is there to get your concerns and philosophy out there. If you gain traction in the primary. Even if you lose, the winner of the primary will often adopt popular positions.
It’s got nothing to do with purity. It’s just about challenging power and promoting participation. Purity test implies pushing a specific agenda. But that isn’t what I was advocating for.
Isn’t getting all these candidates primaried just a form of purity tests? It’s a good form, but still seems to be one. After all why are you trying to primary them if not because they’re not pure so to speak?
How is more Choice a purity test? No one should run unopposed. More choice is better. Especially in the primaries. It keeps people fighting for their seats And respecting Those they represent. Incumbents running without a challenge Quickly lose any concern or respect for Their constituents, and fall into the same old patterns of how can this benefit me.
We had plenty of purity test in the last presidential election. And that really didn’t work out for us. It certainly didn’t help either that the Democrats ultimately didn’t hold primaries and handled the whole situation so badly. But I think it’s pretty safe to say. That we wouldn’t have and Gestapo charging into the fields and businesses. Seizing non-citizens and citizens alike. Making them disappear. As well as the emboldened attacks on our lgbtq allies.
And literally if all we focus on is Purity tests. Not actually running people in the primaries to challenge these people who would fail the Purity test. How are things going to get better?
While I definitely agree, you also need to have someone that wants to run for office in order to oppose a person.
Get into politics if you see an open position. Make the change you want to see.
Absolutely
You seem to be using the phrase primaried radically different than I’ve ever seen it used before. The verb to primary someone typically means to Target them specifically for removal by supporting a candidate who more closely matches your ideals. If that doesn’t sound like a purity test I don’t know what does. We’re not talking about choice. You specifically said that you wanted to primary them. You want to Target them for removal, presumably for their blatant corruption and voting with fascists. I agree with 100%. However what is that if not a purity test? Frankly it’s a purity test I think should always be applied I expect all of my candidates to not be fascists. There’s nothing wrong with certain Purity tests.
Yes its a more general general usage. But it still stands. Power that is secure is power to corrupt. What better way is there to get your concerns and philosophy out there. If you gain traction in the primary. Even if you lose, the winner of the primary will often adopt popular positions.
It’s got nothing to do with purity. It’s just about challenging power and promoting participation. Purity test implies pushing a specific agenda. But that isn’t what I was advocating for.
deleted by creator