Our Revolution just endorsed an UNAFFILIATED candidate running against a Democrat...

[George II]

...in the General Election for a seat in the North Carolina House of Representatives.

Unaffiliated candidate Penelope DiMaio is running against Democrat Charles Deaton and the republican incumbent for the District 13 Seat.

Link to tweet

[dalton99a]

1. Sure enough

[Hortensis]

20. Lol. What part of "revolution" don't we understand?

This IS a revolution against people like me and the mainstream voters of that precinct, after all. All's fair in revolution, which by definition requires destruction in order to rebuild.

Without defeated Democrats or perhaps over our trampled bodies, of course. I don't think they've quite thought that one through yet.

[unc70]

138. The Dem in NC has withdrawn!!! No issue

All the screaming and yelling down thread is misguided regarding NC. The OR candidate is the only one running against the Repub.

[Hortensis]

144. Well, the state house is a good place for a newbie

to start making a difference. Also to start building a record for future voters to scrutinize.

And that's huge. Speaking about those entering politics with OR etc. help in general, I don't think a lot of you quite realize that a lot of left fringies migrate to the right over time (most often moving farther left until they finally get there). Being so given to anti- Democratic Party ideas as to refuse to run as a Democrat is certainly a clue to watch out for. Young zealots especially often start left and end right.

Of course, some are just what they say they are now, and I like that this woman is older and presumably knows who she is. (Although I didn't admire some of the people who apparently support her on twitter at all, another thing to watch out for.) Also btw, some will turn out to be fairly mainstream people who are positioning themselves to appeal to OR types because the market for the regular brand is already glutted.

Without past voting records to scrutinize, you can't know.

At this point the one thing I want to see isn't label but rather implacable commitment to joining Democrats to stop the rise of fascism on the right. Not someone too clueless to realize what's happening or who secretly considers it a possible solution to the evils of the Democratic Party.

Speaking of, you really should wonder what is happening inside those OR groups whose actions revealed that they wanted the Democratic candidate to lose to the Republican. Was that mere spite at their own candidate losing, was it the "when Democratic Party collapses we'll be waiting to take over" delusion, or is someone there manipulating them all to the right without the others realizing?

[radical noodle]

2. Oh gawd. Don't get me started.

[redstatebluegirl]

3. Not surprised by this, but I am keeping my eyes on November.

We can't control who the other side endorses, and if they are not endorsing Democrats they are the other side here. I am voting for Democrats, nothing else in November and in any primary. I will not support a pseudo Democrat either.

[George II]

4. Great perspective - yes, I now consider Our Revolution "the other side" just as I consider....

....Justice Democrats and Brand New Congress, who have endorsed Independents and even republicans, running against Democrats as "the other side".

Sadly as Democrats I guess we'll just have to go it alone against all comers.

[Blue_true]

27. Exactly. Fuck them, keep our eyes on the road. nt

[JCanete]

5. And they said they would support candidates who ran on the values they stood for. It fits with their

charter. That said, they have to know what three way races do and that does make me uncomfortable. I advocate these sorts of challenges through the primary system. If people want to dis-affiliate on the other end of that primary I don't really care(although the democratic party leadership does....eh), because it would be much smarter for us as a party to encourage these left leaning and far left candidates of all stripes to run in the primary rather than against us in the GE.

[GaryCnf]

6. I agree

Maybe instead of more left-bashing, though, someone would have thought to link to Charles Deaton's website so people could do something POSITIVE for the party as opposed to trying to divide it.

[msongs]

7. OR is not a democratic party group. nt

[GaryCnf]

8. Very interesting

So I am sure you have Charles Deaton's website/twitter/ANYTHING because you care about electing Democrats, not just bashing OR, right?

I'll just wait here for it.

[xmas74]

12. Wrong thread

[brush]

23. Have they declared themselves a seperate party yet? I mean why wait...

they run AGAINST Democrats.

[brush]

117. That's right, don't believe your lying eyes.

They're now running candidates in the general election against Democrats.

That means they are not a Democratic Party affiliate.

Wake up.

They're about to split the vote and the repug might now win. I wonder if they are on the repug payroll now?

[Adrahil]

16. For fuck's sake dude!!!!

They are endorsing a candidate in the general election whio is not the Democrat running. There is NOTHING more divisive to the party than that.

And frankly, there is nothing "left" about their position IMO, since it will help ensure the victory of the GOP candidate. So don't play the pity card on their behalf. Being a leftist doesn't mean you pour you brains out and ignore electoral consequences.

So FUCK OR.

[unc70]

22. Can find no info on Dem running

Just did a bit of searching on the Dem running. Essentially nothing showing up. He apparently file and was unopposed in the primary. No campaign structure I could find easily. I'm out of state and need to do more checking.

Could be just a token campaign or even worse. I need to talk to friends on the ground in that area. The Repub has won repeatedly at over 70%. Suspect something strange is going on locally.

[mcar]

39. +1000!

[GaryCnf]

44. Dude?

FIRC

But that aside, OR does not claim to support Democrats. They support candidates who reflect their policy positions.

The folks out there attacking OR do CLAIM to support Democrats, yet not one of them know the first fucking thing about Charles Deaton, the Democrat in the race. That's because they don't give a FRA about Deaton. He's just a prop in their 25+ year effort to drive the left out of power in the party by constantly blaming them for the complete and utter failure of political centrism.

[disillusioned73]

90. Why no platforms listed in the op??

if the Dem has a better platform I'll join in on the criticism.. policy over platitudes..

[George II]

98. As someone else here so intelligently pointed out, having a Democrat and an Independent...

...running against a republican is going to split the "Democratic" vote and almost ensure that the republican wins. When that happens, you can throw "policy" out the window.

[unc70]

139. Deaton has withdrawn and no Dem is running

No issue in NC.

[Blue_true]

28. They got the shit kicked out of them in primaries so far.

They are taking it to the next level, screw up the general for democrats and the country. Idiots.

[JCanete]

29. That isn't accurate at all. What are you basing "got the shit kicked out of them" on.

[Blue_true]

42. Did you read the analysis that ABC news and Ballotpedia did.

Their win rate isn't 60% (that includes cross endorsement where the DNC endorsed also), the DNC win rate, where they endorsed and OR did not, is 89%. Joe Biden and Liz Warren are 100% on endorsements, Bernie is about 50%. Joe and Liz endorsed more people also, Joe twice as many as Bernie, Liz about 50% more.

[JCanete]

74. so what. I would still count those wins in the DNC file. You are making a false dichotomy that

Our Revolution is directly opposed to the DNC and any candidate the DNC supports. That's silly.

[George II]

56. So far this year, including several candidates that "ran" unopposed, their success rate...

...is in the mid 40s. And most of their high profile candidates have lost.

I won't wade through the offices of candidates for whom they endorsed, but a number of their "successes" are very low level local candidates.

In other cases they jumped on winning candidates who were way ahead just days before their primaries.

[OilemFirchen]

59. 32%

According to fivethirtyeight.com.

[George II]

60. Thanks. fivethirtyeight may have "vetted" their successes and weeded out the superfluous ones.

I just read quickly through that article, it's very interesting and a lot of work went into it (have to go to the various links in the text) Some pretty amazing, and I'm sure objective, numbers!

What I found interesting is that the two most successful endorsers are the Democratic Party itself and Emily's List.

Thanks again for the source.

[JCanete]

75. 40 percent isn't a bad percentage though. For a startup political action group that supports

candidates at a huge disadvantage? Saying that they are getting crushed is just foolish or cynical spinning.

Did the candidates they jumped on espouse the values they espouse? Maybe they weren't on their radar and then they were. I don't know how effective Our Revolution has been, but I know just how ridiculous it is to expect them to put up a batting average that is higher than the entire democratic party in the 2016 GE. If they are impacting these races in the favor of their candidates even slightly, their existence is justified.

[George II]

79. This is their third year of endorsing candidates - how much longer will they be considered...

...a "startup political action group"? But they had a much higher success rate when they truly WERE a "startup group".

It's not like they're out campaigning for candidates or supporting them financially. They do none of the former and very little of the latter (more in a negative manner toward their endorsees' opponents), but they sure do take credit when some of their endorsees win. I just looked at their home page, they're referring to Sanders' win on Tuesday as "historic"!

Seems like their primary function is to raise money and use it to pay salaries.

[JCanete]

88. well oddly enough you and so many others sure do want to give them the blame when the candidates

they endorse lose. You don't see any irony in that? Its only fair that they take the credit when their candidates win.

As to age, 3 years is still very young. But I don't expect Our Revolution to ever be as big as other players on the field though, and you and I both know why. It could happen, but money is a huge component of success. Their primary strength is that they have a set of ideological positions that is what makes their endorsements mean something. they have a brand that can generate support as a counter-culture of politics. Maybe that could go mainstream, but like Occupy Wall Street, etc. where money is tireless, people aren't and have to think about their bills and the many things tugging at their time. These sorts of groups are almost always doomed. It means something that Our Revolution is still standing after 3 years.

Their primary weakness (hopefully DU is just a bubble) is that people here seem to not even look at the candidates side-by-side, they just react to whether or not OR is supporting a candidate, and reflexively decide that they'll take the other candidate. Embarrassing, but whatever.

[OilemFirchen]

91. Their "ideological positions" are:

1) Did the candidate support Bernie Sanders in 2016?


For reference, see KS-3.

[JCanete]

93. reference to what? Your statement is cute and snarky, but is it factual? did you

actually do the research?

[OilemFirchen]

94. It's not "cute and snarky", it's a simple fact.

Did OR endorse any candidates who did not support Sanders in 2016?

Uncute and non-snarky answer: No.

What research are you referring to?

[JCanete]

96. that detail. Do you know that to be true? Every candidate they endorsed endorsed Sanders in 2016?

I just haven't heard that before until now. Is there information out there that shows this, or is it just your feeling?

[OilemFirchen]

97. It's not exactly a secret.

Find me an OR candidate that didn't at least implicitly support Sanders, or - better yet - explicitly supported Clinton and I'll retract my claim.

[JCanete]

99. I doubt very much that that is a litmus test. If somebody came out of the woodwork tomorrow

who hadn't been active in politics previously, I don't think they're going to be asking "Who did you support in 2016."Do you think if somebody did a mea culpa and decided to abandon the notion of money out of politics, to have come to Jesus with big Pharma would be endorsed by OR simply because of a previous affiliation with Sanders? Does that really make sense to you? I'm not going to bother with doing your leg-work for you on this though. You made the claim, as absurd and dismissive as it is. You know you can still disagree with them without trying to reduce them to being all about a cult of personality right? You can even still distrust them. But until you show me an instance where somebody who does not align with their purported values has gotten an endorsement because that person previously endorsed Sanders, maybe you shouldn't be making these sorts of claims simply because they suit you.

[R B Garr]

102. "abandon the notion of money out of politics" Thanks for confirming these are just

"notions". I'm glad that other candidates realize that until Democrats are a majority, notions don't really mean diddly-squat because there is no plurality to enact anything. In the meantime, the Republicans are going to the Russian coffers to grease their wheels while so-called "progressives" are trying to hamstring Democrats with "notions."

[JCanete]

103. hehe...okay Garr. Nailed me on the word notion, and my whole house of cards has crumbled....

this hasn't gotten childish at all.

[R B Garr]

106. As childish as Trump in the White House while Democrats are nationally being attacked

over things that only mean anything if you actually WIN.

[OilemFirchen]

108. You are correct.

Do you think if somebody did a mea culpa and decided to abandon the notion of money out of politics, to have come to Jesus with big Pharma would be endorsed by OR simply because of a previous affiliation with Sanders?

That doesn't make sense to me. Why would they have a "previous affiliation with Sanders" if they only recently aligned with his positions? Note, BTW, that I asked "Did the candidate support Bernie Sanders in 2016?" Your question is absurd.

Here, from their About page, concerning Membership:

Our Revolution is built upon the success of Bernie Sanders’ historic presidential campaign, and will continue to thrive with the support of an unprecedented level of grassroots organizers.

Again, that's not a secret. It's the genesis of the organization

FWIW, I can give you an example of a candidate who does align with their "purported values" but was snubbed in favor of a Sanders supporter: Sharice Davids. But I digress...

[JCanete]

110. they don't have the same values. Sharice Davids doesn't have the same position on campaign

finance. That is the BIG one a the center of Our Revolution. Again, you are trying to make Our Revolution about the man and not the ideals he fights for, and nothing you quoted proves your point. They cite Sanders unprecedented campaign as the impetus but that is not the same thing you are trying to make it to be, and I hope you know this.

[OilemFirchen]

116. Really?

What is Davids' position on campaign finance?

[JCanete]

118. Does she eschew big donors from supporting her campaign?

[OilemFirchen]

120. Did she receive money from "big donors"?

Sharice Davids. Top industry: Retired. Top sector: Other

Brent Welder. Top industry: Lawyers/Law Firms. Top sector: Lawyers & Lobbyists

[George II]

128. Bazinga!

[R B Garr]

100. You haven't heard that Sanders' revolution group named "Our Revolution"

promotes candidates who endorsed Sanders' platform?? Really? You haven't heard that before? Because I thought I've seen multiple posts from you insisting that Sanders' platform is what everyone needs to run on, including Democrats in areas not as progressive as the Bronx or Vermont. You don't remember that?

[JCanete]

101. The platform is the ideology. Not a history of having endorsed sanders in 2016. Nor would that

carry much weight if the person's platform was not in alignment with that Sanders platform today, wouldn't you say? The whole attempt to make it about the support of the man versus the support of the policies is the bullshit smear I'm addressing here. You kind of had to undercut that attack to make your point, so thank you for that.

[R B Garr]

105. There is no "bullshit smear" to repeat what Our Revolution is about.

It is who they are and what they are. You constantly contradict yourself. I didn't "undercut that attack" because your entire distraction is completely disregarding why Our Revolution was formed, who formed it, what their stated goals are...LOL. Your distractions get quite byzantine. Look at how your comment makes no sense -- they are Sanders' "platform" and the whole role of Our Revolution is to force every single "platform" wish anywhere in America, so unless Sanders' quits promoting his "platform", then of course Our Revolution is about him.

*I'm only putting these words in quotes because the Democratic platform is very progressive and insinuating Sanders' is the only progressive to follow is not accurate.

[JCanete]

107. So if Sanders platform changed tomorrow would Our Revolution change with his change of heart?

It does not follow that because Our Revolution was born out of Sanders campaign and the issues he addressed, that the main concern of the group is loyalty to Sanders, not to the ideology. You don't see a difference in framing that is disingenuous to say that its about the person? If you fail to see the difference, I submit that you're trying to hard to blur your vision.

There is an obvious example of what this poster insinuated about Our Revolution in trump supporters. Trump can say one thing one day and entirely contradict himself in the same breath and nobody who supports him gives a shit. That is a cult of personality. That has nothing to do with any ideology beyond bigotry and an appreciation for his viciousness directed at people who his voters have, or are perfectly willing to have, disdain for.

[R B Garr]

109. LOL, you are the one erasing Sanders' from Our Revolution, obviously because

their endorsements have not worked out except for the ones that the "establishment" endorsed that OR just happened to get right. This thread is about another dubious endorsement, so of course now you have to say that Sanders is not Our Revolution. Has Sanders' contradicted Our Revolution?? Does he go on record as being opposed to anything his own group is saying or doing?? How does it work that his group does not have anything to do with him unless there is a win, which there haven't been that many.

You are actually describing your own tactics when you bring up the "cult of personality" by trying to divorce Sanders from his own group. You contradict yourself a lot.

[JCanete]

111. ugh...no Garr. Whatever all that shit is, I'm too tired to do this with you. I'm not divorcing

Sanders from the group he helped to form. I'm saying that Sanders isn't the king there. Sanders is popular and held up because of what he stands for. Attempting to reduce Our Revolution's interests down to whether or not a candidate is some Sanders sycophant(granted that's me reading between the lines) rather than an actual candidate with ideals that align with the stated goals of Our Revolution, is not genuine.

I don't follow where I contradicted myself, sorry. Maybe I need some coffee.

[R B Garr]

132. You are definitely contradicting yourself. You are trying to backpedal his involvement

in the Our Revolution. Our Revolution is his group, so of course he is the "king there." (your words) All of the candidates state that they backed Sanders -- do you have a link to any of the candidates that do not tout him and his group Our Revolution?

[OilemFirchen]

113. I'll say it, since you led with it...

Yes, OR would change their "platform" if Sanders changed his.

Yes, there is a cult of personality behind OR.

They endorsed Dennis Kucinich, for fuck's sake.

[JCanete]

115. And Sanders apparently didn't. sooo.....um....what? If Sanders is the ringleader here how did that

happen? If Sanders IS the rudder you claim him to be I'd expect a different result.

[OilemFirchen]

119. Thanks for the help.

Sanders may not have endorsed Kuchinich, but Kucinich most certainly was a Sanders supporter.

What did I say about Our Revolution again?

[George II]

125. You're mighty presumptuous there. Maybe a reason many aren't happy with Our Revolution...

...is because of some of their tactics?

As for your criticism that people "give them blame when the candidates they endorse lose", I haven't seen very much of that. BUT, I've seen some pointing out their poor judgement in their choice of candidates, and there seems to be a common thread (pointed out by someone else in this discussion) running through most of their endorsements.

[JCanete]

127. you haven't seen very much evidence of that? Really? Posts about Our Revolution crashing and

burning...posts about establishment candidates cleaning their clock? I'm impressed that you could miss them. I'm sure I won't see posts of yours in those threads.

[George II]

129. As you folks like to say, "you're moving the goalposts".

I responded to your premise of "well oddly enough you and so many others sure do want to give them the blame when the candidates they endorse lose."

I don't think I ever said that (except maybe a time or two humorously) and haven't seen much of that from others, either. What I HAVE said is that they choose the wrong candidate. This is politics, sir, one can't get anything accomplished unless one gets elected. Backing losing candidates isn't the way to promote one's agenda.

So tell me, this week Ilham Omar won her primary. Last week Rashida Tlaib won her primary. Our Revolution endorsed them - just what did they do to put them over the top? They certainly didn't help them financially - when it comes to doling out their money they're very frugal and don't contribute to candidates' campaigns, most of it goes to "administrative costs".

I'll make it easier, they also endorsed Sanders and on Tuesday night he won his (actually OUR!) primary. How many votes did Our Revolution generate there?

Getting back to what I originally responded to (and you deviated from), most of the candidates they endorse lose, and they have very little effect on those races. Isn't that a show of poor judgement?

Finally, your comment about "establishment candidates cleaning their clock" - they got their clocks cleaned NOT because Our Revolution endorsed them but because they were poor candidates to begin with and, this is a novel concept - they did not appeal to their constituency!

[JCanete]

130. I can't vouch for all of them, but no, some were certainly not poor candidates.

If you're going to speak honestly about this at least address the financing disparities when you get into how they were "also" bad candidates. You KNOW that exposure matters. You know that funding matters. You have to know that "they did not appeal to their constituency" is a half-truth then. It doesn't mean that on an even playing field they would win, but you can't take your single criterion of evidence as proof of what you claim it to be.

If by your definition, it makes a bad candidate to campaign in a way that ultimately puts you at a disadvantage because of funding and you lose, I simply disagree with your definition. The fact is that left-wing candidates can pull their centrist candidates to the left on issues, so even losing, if their showing isn't non-existent, they can have a real impact on the exposure of those issues they care about. Sanders articulated this himself. The point is to advocate for the people who reflect Our Revolutions values, not to tout a score-card. Why would I trust an organization more if that's what it cared about?

As to your point about Our Revolution's record, well I just have to say that if you're going to break apart their endorsements you need to do the same for the win percentages of everybody else who has made endorsements. If incumbants don't count, okay lets take them out. If people far ahead in a race don't count if you got there late, okay lets take them out of the count.

Your point is taken and not disagreed with that Our Revoutions actual effect is hard to measure. I assume that it has a net positive but I don't expect it to be staggering. And you're right that other than their public presence and minor visibility they may bring to a candidate, they aren't putting money into these campaigns, which is probably a good thing.

[Demsrule86]

82. We would have won the Ohio race maybe outright if the Green candidate had not been on the ticket.

These sort of groups and OR have now shown their true colors. I consider them despicable and are not progressive in any way. Nina Turner employed an anti-immigration person who appeared on Fox multiple times. And I have heard from some she was not really fired...don't know if that is true though. They help Trump and the Republicans. I won't vote for any primary candidate candidate championed by OR and the Greens can fuck off.

[brush]

114. Makes one wonder if they're not on the repug payroll as this will split votes...

and help the repug candidate, ala Jill Stein.

[TheBlackAdder]

9. Waiting for the inevitable fusion between Our Revolution and Jill Stein's Green Party. It's coming.

[Gothmog]

11. The same group of people support both so-called institutions

[comradebillyboy]

36. The Russians?

[Gothmog]

49. In part

[George II]

15. Our Revolution, Justice Democrats, Brand New Congress, and the Sanders Institute...

.... are already "fused" somewhat, at least financially. They have been trading money back and forth for a while. In the last year:

Justice Democrats have transferred 31% of their receipts to Brand New Congress
Brand New Congress' largest recipient of money, 53% of their receipts, has been themselvess
Of the $460,000 received by the Sanders Institute, $170,000 (37%) came from Our Revolution

I don't know if the Green Party has gotten involved in all this, but as you say it may only be inevitable.

All these numbers are available on opensecrets or FEC.gov

[Demsrule86]

81. I knew Our Revolution would do this ...if they can't win they will spoil like the Greens.

In the ohio house race still not settled, there is a green candidate that took enough votes that the Democrat would have probably won outright .

[Gothmog]

10. Who is surprised by this?

[sheshe2]

17. We knew this was coming.

I am not at all surprised by this.

[R B Garr]

66. Not surprised at all. It was obvious they were using

the attacks on Democrats as a launching pad.

It was obvious they needed to generate all that agita to have a bad guy. Trump needed to attack Hillary, too. Where is Tad Devine?

[Stinky The Clown]

13. How soon before some rookie "democrat" shows up to endorse her?

Maybe with some "fringe" campaigner?

[Kaleva]

14. The Repub incubent, Pat McElraft, has been winning elections by double digits since 2006

I don't think she's at any risk of losing even if OR didn't endorse an unaffiliated candidate.

And I very highly doubt many, if any, of us DUers are going to send donations to the Dem candidate Charles Deaton.

[George II]

18. But I'm sure some DUers are sending contributions to Our Revolution, and they're turning around....

...and supporting non-Democratic candidates who are running against Democrats in GENERAL ELECTIONS.

Should we as Democrats be happy about this?

[Kaleva]

21. But lack of actual support here for the Dem candidate, Charles Deaton, tells the story.

Nobody here is going to care if the Repub incumbent wins re-election to a state house seat and very , very few, if any, are going to send contributions or do volunteer work for Democrat challenger Charles Deaton.

We may profess to be angered by this but our actions say we don't give a damn.

[unc70]

24. Many of us care a lot about NC state house

The situation in NC is dire with a veto-proof majority in both houses of the General Assembly. That said, NC HD-13 is not a likely place for a pick up, but certainly not with a "stealth" candidate like Deaton. A quick search turns up little information about him.

[Kaleva]

133. Who is this "many"?

Can you link to a few posts here at DU talking about Charles Deaton?

[Donkees]

134. Charlie's name is withdrawn. btw, Charles Dawson Deaton ('Charlie') is a woman)

NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT
013
PATRICIA MCELRAFT Patricia (Pat) McElraft REP
CHARLES DEATON Charlie Deaton - Withdrawn DEM
PENELOPE DIMAIO Pene diMaio

http://www.carteretcountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5029/UOCAVA-Election-Notice

[unc70]

140. Thank you.

I had discovered that too but had not had time to post.

BTW I grew up a mile from this district and Carteret County has always been heavily Republican.

[George II]

26. You don't have a problem with (or don't give a damn about) an organization supporting....

....a non-Democratic candidate who is running against a Democratic candidate?

Where is your "red line" on issues like this?

[still_one]

30. Anyone supporting the person who is NOT a Democrat against the republican is a TOS violation

[George II]

32. I think you mean the Democrat? Yes, that's not good.

[still_one]

33. Thanks George, I reworded it so there was no ambiguity. "non-Democratic party candidate"

[Blue_true]

31. The poster is pretty consistently for Our Revolution.

Always "explaining" them. Go read historical posts here on DU. The post are just a clever way of saying "why support the democrat in this race?". There is complete failure to acknowledge that democrats across the country have WON in very red districts.

[Kaleva]

135. Can you provide any evidence that anybody here at DU cares about Charles Deaton?

I did Google searches on him and have come up with about zilch. This thread is about two unkowns who have next to zero chance of defeating the incumbent. Nobody here is supporting the unaffiliated candidate Penelope DiMaio nor is anyone here actually supporting the Dem candidate Charles Deaton either.

I find it very interesting that several people spend so much time attacking an organization they are arguing is ineffectual. If it's ineffectual, why waste any time on it? And I find it very interesting that several people who attack AOC and OR used to also savagely attack Hillary. The archived threads don't lie. Makes one wonder what's really going on here.

[R B Garr]

142. Who used to "savagely attack Hillary" and now AOC

and OR?? Talk about wondering what’s going on here...

If you’ve observed OR and their ex Republican funded affiliates Justice Democrats, you’ll see how they attack Democrats, so there’s your answer about why people question them. This isn’t difficult to understand.

*Cenk Uyger founded Justice Democrats— he is an ex Republican

[grantcart]

19. Putin strongly endorses these endorsements

[SkyDancer]

35. Stop it. 2 of these are DEMOCRATS

And one flipped her district from red to blue last year., A district which hasn't voted Dem in AGES. A district Trump won by huge margins.

To say Putin endorses that is absolutely disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[Jake Stern]

76. More than a few DUers see Putin's hand in EVERYTHING

Republican wins the race for Booger County Dog Catcher? Putin.

Stock market dips 100 points? Putin again.

Chik-fil-a store in Kenosha has good sales on Wednesday? Putin willed it so.

It's so pervasive that is seems like anybody that is to the left of Bill Clinton is almost instinctively viewed, on here, as being a potential Putin stooge until proven otherwise.

p.s. Welcome to DU.

[Voltaire2]

78. It's much easier than trying to figure out why we

have been losing elections across the country for decades.

[Jake Stern]

112. Indeed

Putin and racism is all that some folks got to explain it.

I once gave an example of a coworker who had spent 2 years trying to get her then Dem rep to help her father get his VA benefits only to be told "there's nothing we can do" well the new GOP rep got it fixed within a month and has come through a few times after. She has voted for them since out of gratitude.

[SkyDancer]

84. Apparently & it's sad

Benghazi truther birth certificate level stuff.

Logical and rational thinking be damned.

Seriously, literally saying "Democrats were helped by Putin" and nobody even saying a word? Ya, that bothers me.

[KPN]

80. Thank you.

[SkyDancer]

85. You're welcome

[Demsrule86]

83. Democrats don't run as independents and help Republicans by splitting the vote. Primaries are

different. However, in the age of Trump, the money should be spent on races we can use to win the house and Senate and not on primarying sitting Democrats.

[SkyDancer]

86. Here is my question

Obviously we all know what candidates for Our Revolution stand for, correct? Do you have a link to the website for the Democrat running? I tried looking yesterday but I am finding absolutely nothing about the guy. I mean a big fat zero. Even Ballotpedia is empty with no info on the guy. I want to see where he stands on issues and see if there are defining differences between him & the Our Revolution candidate.

I am finding nothing. If you find anything do me a favor please and holler in a reply. I banged my head for 90 minutes yesterday.

[disillusioned73]

92. Not even a picture... strange

[Demsrule86]

95. No I won't, and we support Democrat on this site...OR is slime and I don't care what shit their

Last edited Thu Aug 16, 2018, 01:03 PM - Edit history (1)

candidates spew during a primary, I won't vote for them...they endanger a majority for us this year and thus have extremely poor judgement. I suppose they can't win but will settle for electing Republicans by splitting the vote ...despise OR. Nina Turner hates Democrats...well the feeling is mutual. I am surprised that you appear to support an independent OR (third party) candidate over a Democratic candidate.

[SkyDancer]

121. I disagree with you about OR

being slime. They have helped Democrats get elected all across the country. In the end, that is what matters the most.m correct?

I am not a fan of what they are doing here but I also know that this is very much an outlier case, my question to them is "wtf?!" In fact, maybe I could get an answer if I tweet to them asking them why. We'll see. Should I, I will reply here. Should be interesting to see what they say should they reply.

I'm not sure why you'd think I support a third party candidate as I didn't elude to such a thing and only asked you a simple question. I do not.

[disillusioned73]

123. Howie Klien seems to be in the know...

when it comes to situations like these.. just an fyi

[unc70]

141. Deaton, the Dem, has withdrawn

No need for outrage regarding NC endorsement.

[SkyDancer]

34. Oh! Christine Pellegrino is on that list!

I REALLY like her! She is awesome and very nice. I've had some great conversations with her on Twitter.

She was the first to absolutely kill it in a Trump district that hadn't voted for a Democrats in a LONG time! She flipped the district in May 2017. It was a HUGE win!

[OilemFirchen]

41. She's the incumbent, establishment candidate...

and she's running unopposed in her primary.

As I've said before: Worst. Revolution. Ever.

[George II]

46. And she's a Democrat.

[Gothmog]

50. The Our Revolution group do not care about the Democratic Party

[George II]

52. True, but for some reason it was pointed out that they also endorsed her, which has nothing...

...to do with the point of the OP.

[SkyDancer]

71. I disagree

I think electing Democrats who are for a living wage and single payer health care is a GREAT revolution!

[OilemFirchen]

72. You would have LOVED it at the turn of the 20th Century.

This "revolution" is nothing compared to Teddy Roosevelt's.

[SkyDancer]

87. The founder of the progressive movement?

[2naSalit]

37. Obviously I have missed something here...

Just who the hell is OR? What is their platform?

[George II]

48. Our Revolution is an organization founded by Senator and Jane Sanders....

....to "advance the progressive agenda that we believe in"

What we're seeing more and more is that they are willing to support candidates who are running against Democrats. Not only in primaries, which is no big deal, but in general elections, splitting the Democratic vote and helping the republican candidates.

[2naSalit]

61. great!

Thanks. Like we need that after the last go 'round. Well, they won't be getting my vote, not this election, nor the next.

[Cha]

40. Of course they did.

[OilemFirchen]

43. This, combined with the "pushback" posts, is simply pathetic.

[George II]

47. Who the heck is Stan Lipinski?

[GulfCoast66]

63. I cannot think of a single DU Member who supported him in the primary.

Can you?

And I guarantee we all support him in the general. Don’t you?

The worlds shittiest Democratic Congress Member is better than any republican.

[RandySF]

68. And the Republican is an avowed Nazi and Holocaust denier.

[RandySF]

67. Against the Nazi? HELL, yes!

[LexVegas]

51. How deep are certain foreign interests in that organization? nt

[George II]

54. It's hard to tell. At first they were reluctant (i.e., refused) to reveal their contributors....

...but they're not required to. After pushback, they now list their individual contributors' names, but that's all. No location, no occupation, and no amounts.

Opensecrets has only sketchy data about their receipts, contributors, and expenditures.

[RandySF]

53. Fuck

This seT is a tossup

[McCamy Taylor]

55. You mean Russia's Revolution is financing left wing third party splitters.

It was inevitable. It is their only chance. Put pretend candidates on the ballot and then hack the vote to move Democratic votes to the third party splitters in races that are close. We are going to see this over and over---and unless the FBI/NSA/CIA does something to protect the vote, it could work.

[George II]

57. Not really. As a matter of fact I don't think Our Revolution has contributed a cent.....

....to any candidates. Apparently their biggest expenditure was $170,000 (a "loan" which hasn't been repaid) to the Sanders Institute, which coincidentally was founded by the same founders of Our Revolution.

[GulfCoast66]

64. But hey, the institute has some salaries to pay!

[sheshe2]

73. Uuuuge ones from what I have read.

[RandySF]

58. Nina Turner's revenge

[Squinch]

62. Jesus. There is no end to the stupidity of these people.

[RandySF]

65. They know exactly what they are doing

[R B Garr]

69. They knew to use the Democrats for media and

exposure or they never would have gained any traction enough to matter. Such deception with not an ounce of accountability. Although it was obvious to most of us. All they needed were a few gullible types.

[R B Garr]

70. It's obvious they need to cling to Democrats as a crutch.

They can’t make it on their own. This is not surprising. How phony!

[roscoeroscoe]

77. Presented without comment

I couldn't do that! This is wrong

[Lee-Lee]

89. For those of you who don't think this is a big deal- here is he deal from NC

Right now we have a Democrat Governor but the GOP has a veto proof majority in the state legislature.

So basically our Democrat Governor is almost powerless. The Legislature does whatever they want and overrides every veto he makes. Now they have put Constitutional Amendments on the next ballot to strip him of even more power.

I don’t have hopes we can win a majority back in the legislature this election. But I have high hopes we can at least break that veto-proof majority and force the GOP leadership in the legislature to have to negotiate and deal with the Governor to get any legislation signed. It won’t be perfect, but it will stop the insanity that a legislature with nonchecks and balances against it is waging in this state.

So EVERY RACE and EVERY SEAT matters. Is that probably a safe R seat? Probably. But you never know, next week something could happen damaging the incumbents chances. But endorsing an independent and siphoning votes away from the Democratic candidate makes that much harder.

Every seat matters in this election. This isn’t the time to play spoiler and split votes in these contests in NC.

Fuck them.

[unc70]

143. Deaton, the Dem, has withdrawn

OR is not being a spoiler in this NC race. There is no longer a Dem in the race.

No need for the outrage.

[Lee-Lee]

145. If they had made the endorsement after the withdrawal that would be different

But they didn’t.

[muriel_volestrangler]

146. When did Deaton withdraw?

Was it before or after the Carteret County Democrats put DiMaio on their Candidate Roster? Or she spoke at their Big Blue Wave Rally?

Did "Our Revolution" endorse DiMaio before that tweet?

[LanternWaste]

104. Their Revolution is now officially throwing anything at the wall and hoping something sticks.

I dig Sanders, and I think its in his best interest to absolve himself of this PO Box organization.

[OilemFirchen]

122. To reiterate my contention about Our Revolution's "policy" requirements:

From the minuscule amount of information available about Penelope DiMaio, the candidate they've chosen to endorse:

She’s a bit shocked, even now, to be in the running for public office, admitting she only recently found herself enveloped in the world of politics.

During a tenure a few years ago as a truck driver, she tuned into the radio to catch Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign and, she says, something just clicked.

“Finally, here was a, in my opinion, a politician whom I shared values with,” she said. “At this point now I’m starting to listen to politics for the first time in my life, you know?

✔ Supported Bernie Sanders in 2016.

[muriel_volestrangler]

124. Bizarrely, the local Democrats seem to support her too

At least, they give her space on their "candidate roster", but not Deaton: http://www.carteretdemocrats.org/election-2018/

What do we know about Deaton? He was unopposed in the Democratic primary. The online lists say nothing about him:

https://votesmart.org/candidate/179968/charles-deaton#.W3XYOvlKjIU
https://ballotpedia.org/Charles_Deaton

[Me.]

126. Kiss Of Death

maybe DiMaio should ask them to reconsider

[Hekate]

131. Why. Just why. Oh well, we know where they stand, and it's "on principle" & not "get rid of Trump"

This year, as last year, adults understand that getting rid of Red Don and His Comrades supercedes absolutely everything else, or next year we can kiss the republic goodbye. It is obvious that OR, like its founder, is not about getting Democrats elected or re-elected, and they are not a Democratic group.

Good to clear that up.

[muriel_volestrangler]

136. As already pointed out, the local Democrats support her too

and post #134 shows why - Deaton has withdrawn. Dimaio is the only candidate running against the Republican.

[Kaleva]

137. Since the Dem candidate has now apparently withdrawn, are you supporting Penelope DiMaio?

http://www.carteretcountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5029/UOCAVA-Election-Notice