Liberal Hatred for Susan Sarandon is a Symptom of People Who Refuse to Acknowledge Their Own Failure

[rainbows_]

Oscar-winning actor and progressive activist Susan Sarandon sparked a good deal of controversy during the primary stage of the presidential election when she expressed doubt to MSNBC’s Chris Hayes about whether she could bring herself to vote for Hillary Clinton in a “lesser-of-two-evils” situation. It was a common question at that time among

Comments

[adelheide]

I seem to recall that Sarandon said that HRC would be as bad, or worse, than Trump. Which is patently ridiculous. She certainly didn't cost HRC the election personally, but her and the people that voted with her definitely messed with the electoral college that gave Trump the win. For that, I can blame them.

As much as liberals and progressives (I count myself among them) may dream, we need centrist politicians to get anything done. Behold how a radical right Congress has ground governing to a halt. We need compromise. We need give and take. When we get one side that takes their Colonial LARPing too far, we end up with stagnation and dysfunction.

Do I wish the news had covered the DAPL protests more? You bet I do. There's a lot of things I wish the press covered more. I think the only good thing to come out of the clusterfuck that was Nov. 8 is that a lot of people (including the news) woke up. A lot of people checked in. A lot of people started to act. Nothing like a crisis to get the people's ass in gear.

[rainbows_]

If you want centrist politicians in the white house, I think that probably makes you more of a liberal than progressive.

However I disagree about needing centrist politicians! I posted 'Why Republicans are impressive' which talks about this, here are some select quotes:

The lesson is this: in modern American politics, having an ideologically coherent and disciplined party is an advantage, not a liability. This flies in the face of conventional wisdom: during the 2016 primary, many Democrats, especially those who supported Clinton, worried about the “purism” of the party’s younger and more progressive wing: would it force the party to confront a choice between nominating ideologically progressive candidates who would be unelectable and facing mass defections to its left? After all, it was widely understood that candidates needed to “pivot to the center” to win general elections. Clinton’s claim to be a “progressive who gets things done” was founded on this assumption: the notion was that Sanders’ policies, even if you found them

[rainbows_]

CONTINUED

[amw]

I loved that article that you posted, and I wish it had created more conversation because I think it's a very important conversation for the American left to have. That said, there is one point in there that is not entirely true, and that is this idea that America is lurching wildly to the right. It's more complex than that

[adelheide]

As the saying goes, Democrats fall in love. Republicans fall in line. Party unity is more important to them than anything--family, country, God. While that does present a united front, it also leads to inflexibility and an inability to respond to changes in society

[imnotasquirrel]

her and the people that voted with her definitely messed with the electoral college

There are plenty of legit reasons to criticize Sarandon (as you said, her belief that HRC and Trump are equally bad), but she didn't fuck up the electoral college one bit; afaik, she voted in New York, which was always going to go blue.