Neither Halter nor Lincoln had/has a chance to win in November....

[scheming daemons]

...and THAT is why it was a mistake for unions to spend $10 million there.

Arkansas is a state with only 4% of the population belonging to a union. If there's a state in this country in which a union endorsement has less of an effect than it does in Arkansas, I'd like to know what state that is.


To spend $10 million in a state where you wield almost no influence whatsoever, in a race in which the November outcome is pretty much already determined no matter who wins the Democratic nomination, is "throwing $10 million in the toilet".


It would have been a waste of money if they spent it on Lincoln too.


It was a piss-poor, not thought out decision. Paying $10 million to try to decide who is going to lose to the Republicans in November in a state with almost no union membership?


The "anonymous" White House commenter was right. It was stupid.


I would have rather had Halter win... but a Halter win would have meant nothing for November. It was stupid of Obama/Clinton to back Lincoln, and it was stupid of the unions to back Halter. Both sides should've saved their money and influence for races that they had a chance of influencing in November.




Lincoln is DOA in November. Halter would have been DOA in November. "Betting" on either one was an exercise in futility.


And a huge waste of money.

[bluestateguy]

1. This is the spin excuse that the Lincoln Establishmentarians will use the day after Election Day

I'm not accusing you of being in that category, but that is the spin they will use. Mark my words.

[scheming daemons]

2. That seat has been a lots cause for a while now....

Arkansas is one of the few states trending more conservative.

[bigdarryl]

4. We don't know that yet.As I said before donot UNDERESTIMATE a female running for office

[xchrom]

3. Dr. Dean here stands 'testimony' to what has happened

Since you are no longer in charge.

[DrToast]

27. Halter consistently outperformed her in general election polling

Halter would have been an underdog, but he would have had a much better shot of winning than Lincoln.

Edit: I posted this in the wrong spot, but I'm going to leave it here anway.

[joeybee12]

5. I disagree with your assessment of Halter, Lincoln was definitely DOA...

Halter might have had a chance...depends on how well/badly he ran his campaign.

Regardless of whether unions should have spent that money, the contempt this mis-administration shows for them is beyond the pale.

[Jennicut]

6. It was sort of a waste, but I suppose it was worth a try.

We had to primary Lincoln, she was a conservadem.

[treestar]

7. Yes, the "White House" is pretty smart this time around

Maybe people should consider the "White House's" opinions with more care.

[joeybee12]

8. Especially when they so arrogantly and contemptuously and cowardly

let people know they're right.

[treestar]

25. If you're right, it's not arrogant to say so

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

9. So the guy who already won statewide office and could have run an "anti Washington" campaign

had no chance. OK.

[zipplewrath]

10. Both have won state wide elections before

Halter and Lincoln have won state wide elections before. What's changed for either of them that makes it impossible now? It's an honest question.

[Jennicut]

12. Arkansas is turning more conservative?

Dems seem not well liked in that state.

[zipplewrath]

13. Musta happened fast

Halter was just elected within the last 4 years IIRC.

[Jennicut]

15. A Dem President that is not well liked there, I would say in the last two years

They don't like HCR reform there, not for liberal reasons.

[KingFlorez]

17. And all of Arkansas constitutional officers are Democrats

It's legislature is the fourth most Democratic behind Massachusetts, Hawaii and Connecticut. Most of the Democrats elected here are blue dogs, but lean more economically liberal most of the time, which is why they win.

[Jennicut]

19. I live in CT, no Dems in Arkansas are like Dems in CT. In fact, some

Republicans here would be like the blue dogs in Ark.

[Hippo_Tron]

28. Their poll numbers

Polls show them both getting their asses kicked by the Republicans in November.

[thereismore]

11. Like Reed? He did not have a chance, now he does. November is eons away! nt

[Kokonoe]

14. The primary gives the most bang for the buck.

And the union workers got their monies worth this time.

It is a lasting message that will forever stick

in the mind of corporate knee benders.

[KingFlorez]

16. The fact that Lincoln won her primary says a lot

In an anti-incumbent year, she survived a real challenge that she was not expected to survive. I'm not saying it will be easy, but Blanche has never lost an election, so she should not be counted out. She's chair of the Agriculture Committee and Arkansas has a large agricultural industry, many voters might count that as a plus. There are months left in this election, it's far from over.

[OHdem10]

18. Did we not understand.--This race was not about winning. This was

some Net Roots and Unions taking a stand. They are not
going to be taken for granted and thrown to the side\
of the road any longer.

The Net Roots and Unions can claim victory with Halter's
excellent showing.

[Turk 182]

20. Are you really

Dear Scheming,
R U really that dumb, or just trolling? This had nothing to do with November. It was meant to put the WH on notice that we WILL oppose corporate dems and fight for progressives. We proved our point in spades. Oh, and it would have been worth 20 million!

[Vincardog]

21. When an elected Democrat consistently violates the Democratic Party Platform and votes against your

interests, how is is wrong to primary them?

It is not a waste of anything to drive the FAUX 'centerfold' er I mean centrist democrats from our party.

[Broke In Jersey]

22. its better to try and fail to never try at all n/t

[UrbScotty]

23. Halter had a chance. Not sure about Lincoln.

[TheKentuckian]

24. Halter had better chance than Lincoln and she can't be counted out either

Also, the corporate Democrats must be challenged to keep them in line if nothing else.

Leadership opposing even the primary process is a real threat to break up the coalition, if grievances cannot be addressed then there is no plausible recourse and democracy is dead in the Democratic party and our membership is expected to just go along for the ride.

[ShadowLiberal]

26. Yes, but Halter, not having establishment baggage in an antiestablishment year, had more of a chance

There's always races that have late developments where it looked like a shoo in for a one candidate, and then suddenly they start to go down. Hagan vs Dole is a good recent example, it looked like Dole was certain to get another term in the senate in 2008, until Hagan ran an ad labeling Dole one of the least effective senators in the entire senate, supported by a group that ranked the effectiveness of each senator based on party, seniority, etc.

Halter, not having the baggage of an establishment figure, had more of a chance of catching fire by getting a powerful attack in that sticks against his GOP opponent. If you yourself have too much baggage you can waste an opportunity like that, see Jon Corzine, who too many people just thought was a bad governor. Everyone was all ready to vote for Christie, then suddenly he started to fall apart at the end by refusing to give specifics on all the important issues to voters (mainly the state's budget problems), which made his poll numbers start dropping like a rock. A democrat who didn't have the baggage of being the incumbent/establishment that people were sick of could have pulled off a last minute upset, but not a incumbent who over 50% of the voters have decided they'll take anyone over.