cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:17 AM
Original message |
Bart Stupak will almost certainly be replaced by a repub |
|
for those of you who say it doesn't matter because he's no different than a repub, let me correct you. Stupak opposed the Iraq War. That's not the only issue where Stupak is preferable to any puke who will replace him. Labor, civil liberties, the environment. http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=26912&type=category&category=13&go.x=12&go.y=7I'm not saying I like the guy. I am saying he's preferable to who's likely to replace him.
|
sufrommich
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:19 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Yep, he was the best we could do in that district. The |
|
people celebrating this are in for a rude awakening.
|
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. nah, they'll keep insisting that he's just as bad as any repuke who will replace him. |
sufrommich
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
7. But of course he's not bad at all. Wait till we get the new |
|
NRA/teaparty backed republican that takes his place.
|
michreject
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
18. Stupak had a A NRA rating |
sufrommich
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
20. I'm well aware that Stupak had an NRA rating. It helped him |
|
get elected in a conservative district.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
43. Some DUERS Love The NRA |
|
I am not a fan of theirs, not at all, but I won't go to the ramparts against DUERS that like the NRA.
|
NJmaverick
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
9. That's it too many naive people on the left that think the world shares their views |
Jokerman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:22 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I'm afraid that may happen with Bayh's seat as well. |
|
I'm disgusted by many things Bayh has done but his replacement isn't likely to be any better.
|
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. the truth is his replacement will almost certainly be worse- and I can't stand Bayh. |
hlthe2b
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:22 AM
Response to Original message |
4. That is my fear as well... |
lonestarnot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:24 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Ackety. Hate to see that happen, not that I will miss stupak. |
NJmaverick
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:26 AM
Response to Original message |
8. This is critical and is something so many on DU don't appreciate |
FSogol
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
trotsky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
Many DUers would apparently be OK with a House of Representatives that was 434 Republicans and Dennis Kucinich.
|
Toots
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:35 AM
Response to Original message |
|
If Democrats had any sort of real message maybe they could win some seats. Democrats allow the Right wing to dominate the airwaves and then stand around and wonder why people don't understand what they are trying to do..If we as a nation are so stupid that we elect Republicans to office then we deserve whatever they do to us...Democrats just don't seem to get the message...Appearance becomes reality...They need to have an appearance or they are history.
|
kctim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
13. That is blind politics |
|
Voters in these districts are not stupid or brainwashed, they understand the 'real message' and do not like it. That is why people like Stupak win in these districts.
Making excuses to justify rejection of ones ideas never works.
|
ieoeja
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
|
I grew up in that sort of district. I still visit it a lot. In 2000, my brother, a very Liberal Democrat, knew every pro-Bush/anti-Gore story I knew, but almost zero of the pro-Gore/anti-Bush stories.
And it was pretty easy to figure out why while I was there. Local TV, radio and newspapers provided the pro-Bush/anti-Gore stories, but none of the pro-Gore/anti-Bush stories. Even the local Democrats, following the DLC gameplan, were constantly bashing Gore and national Democrats.
So, no, they probably do NOT understand the 'real message'. They have probably never even heard the 'real message'. If they knew the real message, then every poll would not show Americans agree with Democrats overwhelmingly on almost every issue, while the country is still split evenly between the parties.
You can't know something that you have never heard of.
|
kctim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #21 |
|
My Republican friends say the EXACT opposite. Especially the part where Americans would agree with Republicans on almost every issue if not for the 'evil media.'
I live in "that sort of district" and I can assure you that we understand the 'real message' and it is not something we support in full. Our values, our culture, our life, is different and we do not want it ran like it is not.
Stupak is "retiring" because he knows he will lose.
|
ieoeja
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #27 |
28. What don't you support? |
kctim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
|
Off the top of my head, my area seems to not support higher taxes, intrusive government, anti 2nd Amendment legislation, single payer, gay-marriage, government paid abortions.
Conservative purple where the wrong position on any of those above can cost you the election.
|
ieoeja
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
36. Thanks for proving my point. |
|
Are they really against higher taxes on the wealthiest 2%? Or do they believe that they "understand" those taxes are on them?
Given that the Republican Party supports far more intrusive policies than the Democratic Party, they obviously do not understand this issue.
Given that there hasn't been any Democratic firearms regulation on the table in almost two decades, they obviously do not understand this issue.
Given that the vast overwhelming majority of elected Democrats do not support Single Payer, believing otherwise shows that you do not understand that issue.
Given that the national Democratic Party officially opposes Same Gender Marriage, they obviously do not understand this issue.
Given that there has NEVER, EVER been a proposal for government paid abortions, they are obviously completely clueless on that issue.
You have essentially proven my position. Clearly they do not understand the Democratic Party's position on these issues. Instead, they understand what the the Rightists accuse the Democrats of attempting.
|
kctim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #36 |
37. YOU proved your point to yourself |
|
You do understand that I said "support in full" and that "candidates can be seen as wrong on the issue if they go against what we believe," right? That doesn't mean we don't understand the party position, it means we either agree with it, or disagree with the party position, such as Stupak, or that we like it right where its at, like the 2nd Amendment.
The party position isn't to tax the wealthy at 99.9%, but we really don't care or worry about what they make. The high taxes that put them on the wrong side of our vote are the taxes that hit us personally.
The party position isn't to dictate what we can eat, but if they start, they are on the wrong side of our vote.
The party position isn't to further infringe on our 2nd Amendment right, but history shows what happens when they try.
The party position isn't single payer, but they would be on the wrong side of our vote if they forced it on us.
The party position isn't support of gay-marriage, but they would be on the side of our vote if they passed it. (I fully support it though, and I believe it is trending so that it will not be such a factor in the future)
The party position isn't support of govt paid abortions, but they would be on the wrong side of our vote each time they try to push that through.
Understand? You're position is only proven IF every Democrat agrees 100% with the Democratic Party platform and no Democrat ever proposes legislation that takes it one step further.
|
ieoeja
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #37 |
38. You said they don't like our message. Now you admit what they don't like are not part of our message |
kctim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
|
I should have said we do not always support it in full and that the biggest problem is when the party tries to go to far left.
My fault for not being clear. I apologize.
|
ieoeja
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #39 |
45. And I was just going to amend my reply because I didn't address a point you made. |
|
So I apologize as well.
You said it could be about the individual Democrat then I talked about the Party. I would say that too often the individual gets branded by incorrect impressions of the Party. But given that 7/8ths of the State House representatives for this district are Democrats, I would think the Party must not have an awful reputation.
Really, my complaint is that local Democrats in less liberal regions across the nation, particularly since Bill Clinton's success '92 run "against" the Democratic congress, end up parroting Rightist propaganda about the national party instead of pointing out the national party is not what the Rightists claim it is.
While the #1 reason (by a wide margin) for the '94 loss of the House after four decades of control was the Assault Weapons Ban, I believe the above every-Democrat-for-Demself strategy is the only reason the GOP still has the success they do. After all, what has the GOP *not* done wrong when they were in charge?
:toast:
|
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
15. yes, yes. it's really that simple. not. |
onehandle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:41 AM
Response to Original message |
11. Yeah, but we must stick to our values purity pact. |
RainDog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
22. what a stupid, whorish remark n/t |
Statistical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 08:42 AM
Response to Original message |
12. People (including on DU) seem to forget all politics is local. |
|
Just because 61% of country supports x doesn't mean crap when 80% of your district is OPPOSED to x.
Stupac district is very conservative. He was threading a fine line between bringing them to the center and losing his job (to be replaced by someone who will move the ball 80 yards to the right).
If Stupac had tried to adopt the policies of say a Kucinich he simply would have lost in a landslide.
|
Redbear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 09:20 AM
Response to Original message |
16. Obama won in Stupak's district |
|
so it can't be impossible for Connie Saltonstall to win it. http://www.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/24052
|
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
19. not impossible. just very, very difficult |
|
that was a dem year. this one? not so much.
|
Raineyb
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
23. So we're supposed to stick with the DINO because electing someone better is too hard. |
|
Exactly the problem with the party in the first place.
|
RainDog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
26. in addition to refusing to support candidates who are not blue dogs |
|
as per WillyT's thread.
if democrats want support, they earn it. progressives are not the trust fund bank for blue dogs.
|
Kaleva
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
31. Obama got 50% of the vote here. |
|
Bush easily won the district in 2000 and 2004. The district is often described as "pro-life, pro-gun and pro-working families". Connie Saltonstall is pro-choice, no one knows where she stands on gun issues and she didn't recieve any endorsements from unions in her 2008 run for the 105th state house seat.
|
LynneSin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 10:22 AM
Response to Original message |
24. I get a little bit annoyed when we label anti-choice politicians as moderates |
|
Edited on Fri Apr-09-10 10:24 AM by LynneSin
I've heard that about Bob Casey Jr. and yet he had one of the most liberal voting records for incoming freshman. Moderates are not single issue - they are many many issues that create that stance. Casey is very pro-union, against the war and supports many other progressive causes that we support. And even when it comes to choice he's not a purist in his anti-abortion stance - he is ok with birth control and funding family planning. To me Casey is pro-life because he puts more emphasis on taking care of the fetus after it is born. Most true anti-choicers don't really care about the baby after it is is born - just the fetus.
|
RainDog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #24 |
25. exactly. moderates are NOT anti-choice |
|
anti-choice is a RADICALLY RIGHT WING position.
only 14% of people in this nation are anti-choice, at most. less when their own daughter is raped.
|
suffragette
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
|
I feel the same. Add to that his C-Street connection. CREW's demand for an ethics probe of this was likely a strong factor in his retiring and I have the same questions they do about his having lived there.
|
grahamhgreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 12:24 PM
Response to Original message |
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
30. No matter how awesome you feel after saying slogans like that, Stupak wasn't a Republican. |
|
Edited on Fri Apr-09-10 12:29 PM by SemiCharmedQuark
The only people in the modern Republican party are hard right ideologues and that wasn't Stupak.
|
grantcart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
48. Did you notice that when he was saying the slogan he was also stomping his feet loudly |
|
Certainly that counts for something.
|
Kaleva
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
32. Can you name a Repub who is anti-war and pro-union? |
|
Stupak voted against the IWR and was endorsed by the following unions in 2008:
International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 324 Michigan State AFL-CIO Michigan Teamsters Joint Council No. 43 National Association of Social Workers National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) Service Employees International Union (SEIU) United Auto Workers (UAW)
|
grahamhgreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #32 |
46. OK, I take it back.... |
ieoeja
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 01:47 PM
Response to Original message |
34. 7 of 8 State House representatives from Stupak's district are ... Democrats? |
|
From another thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x264463State House Representatives within Federal House District MI-01: 110 - Mike Lahti - D 109 - Steve Lindsey - D 108 - Judy Nerat - D 107 - Gary McDowell - D 106 - Andy Newman - D 105 - Kevin Elsenhelmer (sp?) - R 104 - Wayne Schmidt - D, and 103 - Joe Sheltown - D
|
Kaleva
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
44. I believe they are all Stupak kind of Democrats. |
Whisp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 04:25 PM
Response to Original message |
40. thats what CNN keeps saying, so it must be true. |
n.michigan
(108 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 04:27 PM
Response to Original message |
41. So why are you starting this thread? To endorse a Republican instead or to thank Bart of Rome? |
|
Edited on Fri Apr-09-10 04:32 PM by n.michigan
Yeah, people actually vote Democrat in this district.
They voted for Obama too and now they have been deceived because it doesn't matter which party if the issues of poverty, justice, education, war and peace, the environment and financial security get addressed. You forget that Bush pillaged the nation. Thats how Obama won.
|
sufrommich
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #41 |
42. Talking about democrats ,politics and elections is pretty |
|
par for the course for this site. Believe me, not talking about something will not make it go away.
|
Kaleva
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 11:19 PM
Response to Original message |
47. CQ Politics now rates the MI-01 district race a tossup |
|
"The previous rating had been Safe Democratic." http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20100409/pl_cq_politics/politics3638342_1"With his retirement announcement, five Democratic state legislators – including Senate Democratic Leader Mike Prusi – say they may run for Stupak's seat. Kevin Elsenheimer, the state House GOP leader, also is showing interest." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/09/bart-stupak-retiring-tea-_n_531460.html
|
Enrique
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-09-10 11:23 PM
Response to Original message |
49. where do you get 'almost certainly'? |
|
did you mean he might get replaced by a republican? I'd agree with that.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 08th 2024, 12:30 AM
Response to Original message |