for those about to post an anti-Dem rant

[Enrique]

a suggestion.

Instead of posting that rant, which has already been posted a million times before, why not post something that will help one of the challengers listed in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1519118

Let's get familiar with these names. Let's rally around them.

And if you take me up on this, realize that the fact that the DCCC will be supporting the incumbents is already well known and has also been pointed out many times before.

[MonkeyFunk]

1. why not put the

energy and resources into defeating a Republican?

[Vincardog]

2. DINOs are REpigLICKINS

[MonkeyFunk]

4. oh geez

REpigLIKINS


Well, it's hard to argue with a well-thought argument like that. :eyes:

But the fact is, the very best we're gonna get in a lot of those districts is a conservative Dem. They vote with us on most issues - on some they disappoint. The republicans do NOT vote with us on choice, gay rights, minimum wage, the environment, etc.

Conservative dems usually do.

[Maddy McCall]

8. That has got to be the most retarded post I've ever read.

Could you put any more effort into posting a parody of yourself?

:shrug:

[Vincardog]

16. You can support DINOs I will work against LIEberman and his ilk at every turn

[Maddy McCall]

17. And you will Chimpeach the Chimpenfuhrer on Fitzgiving Caturday!!

:woohoo:

[MiserableFailure]

26. Lmfao

That's pretty much where those posts were going.

Little boy wanted a cookie and was frothing at the mouth. I think it's time for his NAP.

[MiserableFailure]

27. ARRRF ARF ARF ARF ARF ARF

Oh yeah big

[Enrique]

19. Vincardig, have you heard of any of the primary challengers listed there?

if you have, have you done anything to help them?

Sincere questions, both. It's quite possible that you have, and I'd love to hear it. But to be honest, my feeling is that you haven't.

[Vincardog]

37. I have been working my ass off in TX against the corrupt State party for years.

I have donated to worked on the steering committee for and worked for Progressive Democratic candidates.
I have also donated to progressive Democratic candidates out of state.

I went and stood with
Cindy when the SS threatened to arrest her for standing up for her rights.

I went to DC for the marches for Peace and Justice to end the illegal occupation.

What have you done?

[onenote]

38. did you support Lampson?

[Mythsaje]

3. Good idea...

Let's replace them with DINOs. Now THERE'S a plan.

[MonkeyFunk]

5. But conservative Dems

do NOT vote with the republicans on every issue - just a few. On most issues, they side with us.

It's stupid to spend so much energy defeating Dems when you can put that energy into defeating a Republican. If we had a much larger majority, the blue dogs wouldn't matter nearly so much.

[Mythsaje]

11. Just a few of the most important issues...

Like protecting the middle class, defending the Constitution, and putting a halt to treasonous BushCo crap.

The one thing we can't afford is to elect MORE conservative Dems.

You DO realize that there are a lot of otherwise liberal folks who don't vote because of shit like this, right?

[MonkeyFunk]

12. I don't get the sense

that large numbers of people don't vote because Dems aren't liberal enough.

The fact is, on many issues of importance, conservative dems vote with the party. Republicans almost never do. Given limited resources, it's wiser to focus on defeating a Republican.

[Mythsaje]

22. I'd say there's a good chance

that Nader actually got people out to vote in 2000 that probably never had before. It was a mistake to vote for HIM (unfortunate, really, since he'd done some great things for all of us in the past and it's made his name a curse-word for many progressives since).

A lot of folks DON'T see a difference between the Democrats and Republicans--both sides feeding off one another and continuing the destruction of a LOT of lives in the process. There IS a difference, obviously, but to some it's not large enough.

[MiserableFailure]

28. You're so wrong and I think you know it

Is it a little bit of disingenousness perhaps? Just a tiny bit?

Hint: Of the 100 million or so Americans who don't vote, their political philosophy is not conservatism or liberalism, it is APATHY. They would not vote 60/40 Democratic "if the right person" was nominated or some crap like that.

[Mythsaje]

29. Oh, bullshit.

Too many political junkies make that same fucking mistake. Yes, there are a lot of apathetic people...but there are also one hell of a lot of disenchanted people. People who think ALL politicans are corrupt and that the system is a flat-out lie. Anarchists, Libertarians, and, yes, even Progressives.

Nader got 10% of the vote in 2000. You think ALL of them were from sources that ordinarily voted Democratic? I seriously doubt it. Those numbers don't add up.

I talk to people all the time who don't vote or haven't voted. You'd be surprised how many of them are aware of the issues--at least the issues that affect THEM. But you know what a lot of them say? "Why bother? They're going to do whatever they want anyway. They don't represent US. Bunch of rich lawyers, looking out for THEIR own interests."

Assuming it's all about apathy is casual arrogance and it truly pisses me off. I used to BE one of those people. I turned 18 in 1984 and I didn't vote until the 2000 election...primarily because I KNEW Bush would be a disaster. Not that my vote meant a goddamn thing in the grand scheme of things.

I have followed the political winds damn near my whole life. I remember the Carter/Reagan campaign and I remember how the Iran hostages tipped the balance. I remember how it was whispered that Bush Sr. met with with some ambassador of Iran in Paris to convince them to HOLD the hostages just until after the election, and how, only a few years later, they were selling ARMS to Iran. I followed the Iran/Contra news and wanted to vomit. They let them get away with SO MUCH shit.

The Dems were running things back then and they couldn't nail those fuckers. They didn't even really TRY from what I could tell. Then Clinton closed the door on it all after he beat Bush.

And now here we are, dealing with the same bunch of trash we failed to throw out the last time around. And you wonder why some people think they're ALL a bunch of lying crooks?

It wasn't apathy. It was utter disbelief in the system. Since then I've thought I may be able to affect the system, just a little, by exercising my talents and reaching out to convince people who thought like me that maybe, just maybe, they could make a difference after all.

And I've managed to get more than a few people to vote who wouldn't have before. If only to vote AGAINST these assholes and their agenda.

That's why I'll continue to vote Democratic. I don't think there's a better option. But I damn well reserve the right to scream my bloody head off when they piss all over us for the sake of THEIR convenience.

[NoPasaran]

34. Nader got 10% of the vote on what planet?

Here on Earth he could only manage 2.7%

[MiserableFailure]

39. Lmao.

He got 10% of the vote on Weed planet.

Seriously, what is that guy smoking to claim that Nader got 10% of the vote? How disingenuous.

[radfringe]

32. not apathy - disgust

my partner has sworn over the years not to bother voting - not because she doesn't care, but because she sees it as not making a difference and with the stuff emerging about rigging votes, she's also not entirely sure that even if she does vote that it will count

dummy that I am, I keep dragging her off to the polls and we keep voting, and crossing our fingers that it might just make a difference


think of it this way - you are asked which is your favorite cookie - Oreos or Fig Newtons, but you don't like either and there's no other choice, not even a "none of the above" check box -- which do vote for?

[Enrique]

30. it depends on the district

in some districts, it's a choice between a conservative dem and a republican, and the dem would be hugely better than the republican.

In other districts, like IL-03, which is becoming more liberal, a more liberal dem can win and obviously the liberal dem would be better than the conservative one.

That's the thing, things change, the electorate becomes more or less conservative or liberal and so blanket statements that don't take that into consideration don't mean very much.

[Mythsaje]

31. I'll bet that economic populism, if sold right,

could turn a LOT of these districts around... Dems don't have to pretend to be Republicans to get elected, they just have to speak to the things that matter. Jobs, security, and fair and open government.

[ProudDad]

36. Exactly

Leadership, real leadership not the bullshit kind in Congress, can CHANGE minds and win votes...

For instance, Linda Sanchez in Orange fucking Country for Dog's sake... 20 years ago it would have been IMPOSSIBLE to elect a liberal Dem like her from Orange County.... But the rich fucks brought in a few (thousands of) Chicano/Chicana "servants" and "service workers" and the demographic changes... Oooops...

[Enrique]

7. need to do both

the energy from the left is going to be there, and it's a good thing.

[MonkeyFunk]

9. There's not an infinite amount of resources

available for elections. I'd rather defeat a Republican.

[sandnsea]

24. Some areas need changing

South Dakota for starters. It's not enough to talk about defeating Republicans when you end up with people like Stephanie Herseth to take their place. We've got to do a better job getting a different message to these areas of the country. They are being lied to and they don't even know it.

[Maddy McCall]

6. Ooooo....that's brilliant!

Let's put our effort into supporting a challenger that has no congressional voting record, so that, hopefully, when he wins, we can tear him to shreds when he doesn't vote the way we think he should.

Absolutely BRILLIANT!!


DU is a fickle, fickle place.

[Enrique]

10. you're mocking the very concept of primary challenges?

I can hardly believe it.

[Maddy McCall]

13. Statement question mark?

No, I'm mocking your thread.

[MonkeyFunk]

14. No

she's mocking the childish idiocy on display here that insists we take our limited resources and try to defeat Democrats instead of defeating Republicans. And rightly so.

[Maddy McCall]

15. Thank you.

I'm kinda tired of expending time and energy to rebut these stupid threads. Thanks for saying so eloquently what I was too exhausted to say.

[Enrique]

18. I think my thread is relatively unusual

being "tired" is a pretty bad excuse for being a jerk, though a common one.

I think you might have misunderstood my post, based on your reaction. Why not have a cup of coffee and apologize to me.

[Maddy McCall]

20. Hmmm...

No, yours is par for today's course.

[Enrique]

21. kindly link to another one

aside from the one I linked to, which I obviously approve of. My whole point is that we need more of these, with specific action points. (I'd leave out the namecalling).

The terseness of your responses to me suggests you might be missing my point. I'm being straight, I don't think I deserve that. If you're tired, why not get some rest?

[Maddy McCall]

23. Plenty of similar drivel in today's GD and GD:P forums.

Not necessarily authored by you, but all striving for similar ends.

[Enrique]

25. why not simply link to one?

like I said, I think you might be misunderstanding me, and if you link to one example of "similar drivel", then I can point out the misunderstanding.

Don't you think that your use of the word "drivel" to characterize my thread obligates you to back it up? Or are you just to "tired" to be at all civil?

[zalinda]

33. Maybe I can sum it up for you

There has been a lot of knee jerk reaction to the FISA vote in the last 2 days. Some are to throw all the bums out, and yours is throw the bums out that didn't vote your way. Now to be honest, those who voted yes to the bill, may have heard from their constituents back home that they wanted a yes vote, or at the very least did not hear from any one to vote no. All those that you mentioned do not represent me, I do not live in their district, so while I don't agree with them, it is wasted energy for me to try to unseat them. My rep is a repub and he is hopefully going down this election, he barely won the last time.

This is where all should be spending their efforts. How many elections were close last time? You could spend as much money unseating an entrenched blue dog dem, as unseating 5 close election repubs. Which makes more sense? I'd rather have 5 more dems, than 1 more "progressive" dem (we wouldn't know if they are progressive until we see their actual votes). And, what if year after year, you couldn't get a progressive dem in that district, do you continue to throw money after a lost cause, or do you go after districts where winning is possible?

This is not to say that if a progressive is running against a blue dog that you should ignore the race, but look at the stats and see if it's a possible win. Tying every repub to Bush, should be an easier victory for every area except those that are crazy red.

Does this make any sense to you at all?

zalinda

[ProudDad]

35. There appear to only be two listed

(IL-3) Daniel Lipinski
Voted against McGovern Amendment (5/10/07), voted for Bush's demands for warrantless wiretapping (8/4/07)
Primary Challengers: MARK PERA

http://www.markperaforcongress.com/


(IL-8) Melissa Bean
Voted for Military Commissions Act (8/27/06), voted against McGovern Amendment (5/10/07), voted for Bush's demands for warrantless wiretapping (8/4/07)
Primary Challengers: RANDI SCHEURER

http://www.freethedemocrats.com/


At least pick out a couple or a few. There should be so many repuke seats changing hands in '08 that losing a couple of Dinos would be worth it -- pay them back for their treachery!!!

[onenote]

40. and what do you know about these opponents?

Let's start with Randi Scheuer. Her husband ran a third party campaign against Bean in 2006. He managed to get 8000 votes. Out of more than 165,000. Bean pulled in nearly 85,000 votes and her repub opponent picked up 72,000. His wife's campaign is not likely to be any more successful..she has no experience, no background in politics. Meanwhile, although Bean has cast a number of votes with which I disagree, she is solid on the environment (opposed ANWR, voted for clean air/clean water acts), solid on choice (100 percent from NARAL), supports stem cell research, voted for setting a timetable to bring home the troops (the bill chimpy vetoed) and she's electable in a district that could easily end up in the hands of the repubs if the Democratic vote was split.

Funny thing is that her husband apparently still plans on running a third party campaign, so I guess he's not counting on her winning either.