As you noted, Brad, ballots are about to go out, It is time to winnow the field and reduce the candidate list to those who actually have a chance. Many of those you and your guests cited as being desired to have been on the stage are not polling well with the voters and only pull marginal support away from stronger candidates which might be needed.

There is no reason for these candidates to remain silent just because they aren't on stage. Tulsi Gabbard (more on her below) is the example that the others could follow, in the sense that she's going around to the various talk shows and putting her opinions into the mix. I agree that Yang has interesting views, as does Williamson. Not too worried about the others doing so since I don't see them having much to say.

I do, however, want to see Klobuchar gone. She has nothing to say, no support, and takes up space which she hasn't earned.

Getting back to Tulsi Gabbard, the more she speaks, the less I see any value in her running for President. I support her desire to end regime-changing wars and better support for US military personnel. But I hear a lot of right-wing talking points in her comments. I cannot support her for any office anymore.

I have had enough Democrats posing as progressives while campaigning only to reveal their actual reactionary selves once office is won. This applies to every Democrat since LBJ who won election - Carter, Clinton, Obama. To steal a line from The Who, I won't be fooled again.

I wish there was really more difference between Democrats and Republicans to Vote Blue No Matter Who. NDAA and USMCA are only the most recent examples of how Democrats aren't much of an opposition party. Until the Democrats provide someone I can vote FOR, they aren't going to get my vote. They have done nothing but betray me for 50 years, and I have had enough. I will vote for what I want whether or not enough people agree to deliver a win.

Matt Froelich said @1:

It is time to winnow the field and reduce the candidate list to those who actually have a chance. Many of those you and your guests cited as being desired to have been on the stage are not polling well with the voters and only pull marginal support away from stronger candidates which might be needed.

Our elections should be decided by voters, not polling (or money), IMO.

I wish there was really more difference between Democrats and Republicans to Vote Blue No Matter Who. NDAA and USMCA are only the most recent examples of how Democrats aren't much of an opposition party.

The NDAA (now with additional Paid Parental leave for millions of Americans) and USMCA (now with additional protections for unions) are both anywhere from perfect. In both cases, however, they are far better than their predecessor legislation, thanks to Democrats.

It's still shocking to me that folks like yourself don't seem to appreciate that. (And, of course, that is coming from someone who is not much happier with Dems than you are.)

Until the Democrats provide someone I can vote FOR, they aren't going to get my vote. They have done nothing but betray me for 50 years, and I have had enough. I will vote for what I want whether or not enough people agree to deliver a win.

While I will fight every day for your right to vote for whoever you like (whether I agree with that vote or not), I hope you are in a jurisdiction where you can afford to help Trump win, and Republicans take further control of Congress. Otherwise, I'd have to argue that the vote you describe is as short-sighted, selfish and self-defeating as any of the most ardent and hateful MAGA voters.

Merry Christmas!