I remember when many wanted to primary my long serving Dem Representative.

[Kaleva]

It was back in 2010.

Lots of threads talking about liberal Connie Saltonstall, the incumbent's primary opponent, and there were a few who said they were going to donate to her campaign.

I tried to argue that Mz. Saltonstall stood no chance of winning in the general, assuming she was to win the primary, in this Republican leaning district where the incumbent was the only Dem since the Great Depression to win consecutive terms and only the second Dem since that time to win an election. And he won his elections in landslides.

Along with his stellar record regarding unions and workers rights, he voted NO on NAFTA, voted NO on Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, co-sponsored legislation to normalize relations with Cuba, voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman, Voted NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent, voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage, voted NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance, voted NO on banning gay adoptions in DC, voted YES on regulating the subprime mortgage industry, voted NO on restricting bankruptcy rules and numerous other votes that would be considered progressive, he still wasn't thought to be a good enough Dem and needed to be defeated in the 2010 primary.

Well, the incumbent decided to retire in April and the district went from "safe blue" to "leans Republican". Connie Saltonstall, despite getting considerable support from outside the district that included endorsements from NARAL and the National Organization of Women, couldn't gain support from within the district and the Michigan Democratic Party threw its' support for an establishment candidate who jumped into the race after the incumbent announced his retirement. Mz. Saltonstall withdrew from the race the following month. In the general, the Repub candidate won and it was that year when the Dems lost control of the House.

The Repubs have held this seat since 2010 and a retired marine general is the current office holder. He's expected to win re-election easily.

[Sophia4]

1. Democrats generally lost seats in 2010. Democrats have been losing contests all

over the country in years in which there is no presidential election.

We need to focus on winning this coming election this Fall.

[lapucelle]

2. Wait...was the incumbent Bart Stupak?

Was the district really "safe blue"?

https://web.archive.org/web/20120227002017/http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=E4E74633-18FE-70B2-A8A9DB20B86DD744

[Kaleva]

4. If you read the article you posted a link to

"“Without Stupak on the ticket, Democrats will be hard-pressed to defend a conservative-minded and heavily blue-collar Upper Peninsula district that favored George W. Bush by wide margins in 2000 and 2004 before breaking narrowly for Barack Obama in 2008.


"Bottom line is that with an incumbent like Stupak we would have won, but without an incumbent like him we will lose, and we will lose forever until the next incumbent there goes away,” said Mark Grebner, a longtime Democratic strategist in the state. ""

https://web.archive.org/web/20120227002017/http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=E4E74633-18FE-70B2-A8A9DB20B86DD744

And Stupak won his previous elections in landslides.

[lapucelle]

5. I did read it. I was just a bit puzzled by your glowing description of Stupak

and the assurances that the district was safely blue when it obviously wasn't. It was the pro-life Stupak who was safe, not the district itself.

It does go without saying that Saltonstall would have been a wonderful candidate and congresswoman and that she did not have the support of Democratic party strategists who wound up losing the race anyway. I just had a different picture of both the incumbent and the district based on your description.

[Kaleva]

6. "Without Stupak on the ticket, Democrats will be hard-pressed to defend a conservative-minded...

and heavily blue-collar Upper Peninsula district that favored George W. Bush by wide margins in 2000 and 2004 before breaking narrowly for Barack Obama in 2008. "

https://web.archive.org/web/20120227002017/http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=E4E74633-18FE-70B2-A8A9DB20B86DD744

Stupak on the ticket kept the district safely blue. There were no concerns about it going to the Repubs.

Much of your article talks about the situation in the district after Stupak announced his retirement.

"1992 general election

Bart Stupak (D), 53.93%
Philip Ruppe (R), 43.58%"

1994 general election

Bart Stupak (D), 56.86%
Gil Ziegler (R), 41.99%

1996 general election

Bart Stupak (D), 70.68%
Bob Carr (R), 27.24%

1998 general election

Bart Stupak (D), 58.67%
Michelle McManus (R), 39.51%

2000 general election

Bart Stupak (D), 58.39%
Chuck Yob (R), 40.37%

2002 campaign for Congress

Bart Stupak (D), 67.67%
Don Hooper (R), 31.10%

2004 general election

Bart Stupak (D), 65.57%
Don Hooper (R), 32.76%

2006 general election

Bart Stupak (D), 69.43%
Don Hooper (R), 27.99%

2008 general election

Bart Stupak (D), 65.04%
Tom Casperson (R), 32.74%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_Stupak#Electoral_history

In several of the above elections, the Repubs put a lot of money into the race in an attempt to beat Stupak and win back a seat they believe historically belongs to them. They lost badly every time.

[lapucelle]

7. That's my point. It was Stupak who was safe, not Democrats.

If anything, this is an argument for supporting blue dog incumbents when they are running.

[Kaleva]

8. We actually agree for the most part.

We are just having a debate about the definition of "safe".

"The nonpartisan Cook Political Report immediately moved Stupak’s seat, in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, from “solid Democratic” to “toss-up.” Stupak’s profile – social conservative, pro-labor – fit that of his district, and he is personally popular."

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0409/Rep.-Bart-Stupak-to-retire-casualty-of-health-care-reform-battle

As time went on, The Repub candidate, Benishek, gained a double digit advantage in the polls over Dem McDowell and continued on to win by double digits in the election.

[Snotcicles]

3. Yep Michigan use to be solid blue. Then the DLC came along and started shifting the party right.

Labor started losing ground. And look what we ended up with. Thugs and right to work. City Managers and poisoned water.

[bigtree]

9. +1